[News] Matt Hancock.

[Wardy's twin]

Undoubtedly true that we were caught unprepared along with many other countries. Unfortunately, our pre-pandemic contingency planning seemed to be based on a different type of contagion, more 'flu' like.

The NSC man in the street may have come up with numerous seemingly common-sense options but none of them were putting forward their views being fully aware of all the available data or facts at the time. None of them were being briefed and advised by SAGE and other expert bodies as to the reasons why those options may not be suitable at any particular time. One example being SAGE not recommending a complete early travel ban as they thought it would have a very limited impact and negatively affect supply chains. Would all of NSC's finest (the very same people who usually say follow the science) really have simply ignored this advice and just closed all our borders anyway? There were tragic failings re care homes and the 'putting a shield around them' was obvious bollox, someone should be held to account for this but if the options to protect them were so obvious and easy to implement, I wonder why the devolved (Labour,SNP) governments didn't implement these 'obvious' solutions instead of making exactly the same errors as HMG.

I don't believe paralysis was the main problem, more trying to cope with an unprecedented situation with constantly changing data facing no good easy options meaning it was inevitable many tragic mistakes would be made, similar issues in all parts of the UK and further afield. Hopefully, the enquiry will identify the many failings, the reasons why they happened and where necessary people should be held to account.

For most of this time I have had my own saying - I don't need Boris to tell me what's right its really all about common sense so masks, lockdowns and closing borders were no brainers as far as i am concerned regards controlling the disease , that not hindsight that's common sense. Sometimes you have to go with gut feel rather than science and that is especially true once the situation in Italy was apparent. If we give the government benefit of the doubt for the first few months when it was not sure what it was dealing with they still made repeat mistakes.

 

[Eeyore]

Hmgov was caught like a rabbit in the headlights in March/April 2020. No hindsight needed. You only have to look at the main coronavirus thread from that period to see way more general common sense being shown by yer NSC man in the street than by hmgov in areas such as closing the borders, protecting care homes and arguing against herd immunity. Our elected representatives were shamefully paralysed by inaction

Indeed. I know nothing about medicine or viruses, but two months before the government made it mandatory I was asking why they were saying we didn't need face masks. Especially as research on the mainland had show that they were having an affect.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

I wouldn't have done any better. But then, I'm not responsible for the task and wouldn't have put myself up for it.

As regards what Labour would have done. Labour aren't in power and what they would have done is irrelevant. But to suggest they would have done worse, as some claim as a justifying distraction, has no foundation.

28.02.2020

Rebecca Long-Bailey said: “The first duty of any prime minister is to protect people, but whether it’s protecting the public from natural disasters like floods or public health emergencies like the coronavirus, Boris Johnson is consistently awol. Our NHS is already at breaking point. This government has to come up with an immediate plan to reassure us that it can cope.”


Starmer at the time said that COBRA needed to be meeting sooner and not delaying.

It struck me in the early days that things weren't being taken seriously enough by everyone (me included). Boris Johnson's own foolish actions spoke on their own.

In the Cummings stuff last week, he said that Johnson thought initially Covid was a scare story, which indicates he wouldn’t take it seriously.

But back to care homes. We have a friend whose father, who was in his 90s, was released from hospital during the first lock down last year. He had Covid. He died soon after, 6 other residents on his corridor caught it an died, and his daughter, our friend is still suffering with Long Covid.

And this was a “nice” care home in leafy Surrey.

 

[Randy McNob]

For most of this time I have had my own saying - I don't need Boris to tell me what's right its really all about common sense so masks, lockdowns and closing borders were no brainers as far as i am concerned regards controlling the disease , that not hindsight that's common sense. Sometimes you have to go with gut feel rather than science and that is especially true once the situation in Italy was apparent. If we give the government benefit of the doubt for the first few months when it was not sure what it was dealing with they still made repeat mistakes.

Even Priti Patel said we should have closed the borders back in March last year. Shows they are all clueless really

but as long as you keep imagining the worse alternative this is all okay....

[tweet]1351847709150425088[/tweet]

 

[Silverhatch]

Who set up the Vaccine task force? Who provided the funding for accelerated research and pre-ordering numerous vaccine types at the earliest opportunity? Who appointed Kate Bingham? Who signs off on their decisions? There wouldn't be much of a rollout success if we didn't have enough vaccines ..

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-launches-vaccine-taskforce-to-combat-coronavirus

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/kate-bingham-appointed-chair-of-uk-vaccine-taskforce

And before some numpty comes along to completely misrepresent this post, I am not claiming HMG is above criticism in numerous areas ... just trying to add a little balance.

Agree, there is some credit due for the machine of government to get behind this, but the idea came from Patrick Vallance and the operational success has been almost nothing to do with no.10 and the DOH.

 

[Wardy's twin]

Even Priti Patel said we should have closed the borders back in March last year. Shows they are all clueless really

but as long as you keep imagining the worse alternative this is all okay....

[tweet]1351847709150425088[/tweet]

I am not defending Boris or the government

 

[Leekbrookgull]

The OP says 'what would you have done?'. I would have told the truth about the situation.

As with Hillsborough, and numerous other public incidents - the best thing to do is tell the truth. It's the lies that make things so much worse, and end up causing bigger problems.

Thank-you and you can have all the inquiries you want but Bodian is right as we could all see for ourselves.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Agree, there is some credit due for the machine of government to get behind this, but the idea came from Patrick Vallance and the operational success has been almost nothing to do with no.10 and the DOH.

So the machinery of Government is responsible for all the good decisions and Boris is responsible for all the bad decisions.

 

[rogersix]

So the machinery of Government is responsible for all the good decisions and Boris is responsible for all the bad decisions.

boris' motivations are somewhat questionable for a public servant, and this compromises his decision making processes, imho

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I am not defending Boris or the government

I think he meant 'one' rather than 'you'.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Thank-you and you can have all the inquiries you want but Bodian is right as we could all see for ourselves.

I think you have misunderstood what [MENTION=24507]Bodian[/MENTION] meant. He can correct me but I think he means it was obvious from the start that Boris and chums were making the wrong decisions.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

So the machinery of Government is responsible for all the good decisions and Boris is responsible for all the bad decisions.

Boris has repeatedly been given good advice by scientists and medics, and he has repeatedly ingnored it (completely, or just for a bit - long enough to let a few more tens of thousands get ill - then do part of what he was advised when it was all far too late). So in this instance, yes - the good advice (and Boris' decision to follow it) came from the advisors and the bad decisions (to not follow advice) were Boris'.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Boris has repeatedly been given good advice by scientists and medics, and he has repeatedly ingnored it (completely, or just for a bit - long enough to let a few more tens of thousands get ill - then do part of what he was advised when it was all far too late). So in this instance, yes - the good advice (and Boris' decision to follow it) came from the advisors and the bad decisions (to not follow advice) were Boris'.

Not true, the 'scientists' (SAGE) advised that there would be little benefit to an early travel ban when this first kicked off and suggested a ban would cause supply chain issues (Boris followed that advice). Whereas government critics repeatedly say the government should follow 'expert' advice when it suits their argument but never seem to remember the times their view doesn't match with 'the science'. Scientists are fallible as well *shock*

 

[Randy McNob]

Not true, the 'scientists' (SAGE) advised that there would be little benefit to an early travel ban when this first kicked off and suggested a ban would cause supply chain issues (Boris followed that advice). Whereas government critics repeatedly say the government should follow 'expert' advice when it suits their argument but never seem to remember the times their view doesn't match with 'the science'. Scientists are fallible as well *shock*

oh really? what about the schools fiasco? Below is a concise chronology of events where it was purely Johnson and Johnson ALONE who decicded to send kids back to school (for 1 day). Let the bodies pile up....

 

[Audax]

127,000 UK deaths. 40,000 of which were in carehomes. The "ring of protection" Hancock banged on about was proved to be a complete myth.

This is a manslaughter charge of which the government should be held directly accountable to. No wonder that shambling blond "ruffle my hair" prick wants to kick the enquiry into the long grass till next year. What a disgusting shambles caused by a bunch of unaccountable charlatans. They truly are utter filth.

Only just catching up with this thread, so apologies if anyone else has picked this up already.

That 127k deaths figure. That figure is the one the government has chosen to focus on, because it makes them look better and because they can report it daily. Unfortunately, it's a figure based on completely arbitrary criteria (deaths within 28 days of a positive test) that on one hand filters out a large number of Covid-related deaths (in particular the large number who died of covid without ever being tested at the start of the pandemic, as well as those who die after the 28 day cutoff) and on the other includes some people it shouldn't (test positive for covid and get run over by a bus the next day? You're counted).

There's a far more accurate figure available. The only "problem" with it is that the reporting lags by a couple of weeks. That figure is the number of deaths where Covid is mentioned on the death certificate as one of the causes of death. As of the 14th May, that figure stood at just over 152,000. No idea how many in care homes, but given how hard hit the care homes were in the early pandemic and the lack of testing in care homes, I'd hazard a guess that 40k in care homes figure is a large underestimate if it's based on the "within 28 days of a positive test" metric.

 

[LamieRobertson]

Lovely weather past few days

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Lovely weather past few days

I see the beaches were rammed; were the Brits crapping in takeaway cartons again?

 

[LamieRobertson]

I see the beaches were rammed; were the Brits crapping in takeaway cartons again?

No idea..maybe councils provided toilets this time

 

[drew]

Only just catching up with this thread, so apologies if anyone else has picked this up already.

That 127k deaths figure. That figure is the one the government has chosen to focus on, because it makes them look better and because they can report it daily. Unfortunately, it's a figure based on completely arbitrary criteria (deaths within 28 days of a positive test) that on one hand filters out a large number of Covid-related deaths (in particular the large number who died of covid without ever being tested at the start of the pandemic, as well as those who die after the 28 day cutoff) and on the other includes some people it shouldn't (test positive for covid and get run over by a bus the next day? You're counted).

There's a far more accurate figure available. The only "problem" with it is that the reporting lags by a couple of weeks. That figure is the number of deaths where Covid is mentioned on the death certificate as one of the causes of death. As of the 14th May, that figure stood at just over 152,000. No idea how many in care homes, but given how hard hit the care homes were in the early pandemic and the lack of testing in care homes, I'd hazard a guess that 40k in care homes figure is a large underestimate if it's based on the "within 28 days of a positive test" metric.

Good post. There are a lot of deaths in ICUs where the person has been there for more than 4 weeks so their deaths don't appear in those massaged figures.

 

[Bry Nylon]

I see the beaches were rammed; were the Brits crapping in takeaway cartons again?

Probably an improvement on what came in them originally, tbf.