O/T:- ⚠️Impressed with the leadership [The UK Party Politics Thread]

[sidders]

If this is the best that care homes can do, how bad would it be with careless homes?

It's not just about the UK's mortality statistics, bad as they are. To those of us with long experience of how 'care' homes have been treated over the past generation, it is no surprise that deaths are occurring in them at such an awful rate.
How many Tory MP's have ever visited a Care home in their constituency? Why haven't 10 years of Tory rule seen any willingness to tackle social care at the end of people's lives?
This government will never learn, Disturbed, because they have no soul. Indeed, had Boris not been a victim of COVID-19 himself, things would have been dealt with even more callously.
Hancock's half hour? You're having a laugh. Even his own party have nicknamed him 'Hand job'.

[drillerpie]

IMO it’s worth seeing the end result rather than where we sit now before assessing the Government’s performance in all of this. It’s a bit like getting up/down on where Notts sit in the League when there are still games to play.

It'd be like assessing Notts performance before, during, after, and between games, like we all do all the time? Yes I suppose it would.

Ok so we can't comment on the actual government either at all, because it's unpatriotic, or until the Covid emergency is over.

Even then people who don't like the government (usual suspects) can't criticise it, because they always criticise it. Only people who never criticise it should be able to criticise it, but they never criticise it.

We can however comment on Diane Abbott's hypothetical management of the crisis in the parallel reality in which she is part of a hypothetical government led by Jeremy Corbyn.

The more I read these opinions the more I come to the conclusion they are just bizarre excuses designed to absolve Boris Johnson of blame at any cost.

[Notts78]

It'd be like assessing Notts performance before, during, after, and between games, like we all do all the time? Yes I suppose it would.

Ok so we can't comment on the actual government either at all, because it's unpatriotic, or until the Covid emergency is over.

Even then people who don't like the government (usual suspects) can't criticise it, because they always criticise it. Only people who never criticise it should be able to criticise it, but they never criticise it.

We can however comment on Diane Abbott's hypothetical management of the crisis in the parallel reality in which she is part of a hypothetical government led by Jeremy Corbyn.

The more I read these opinions the more I come to the conclusion they are just bizarre excuses designed to absolve Boris Johnson of blame at any cost.

Has anyone absolved Boris Johnson? I know I certainly haven’t and hope that Parliament looks at the handling of this pandemic to see what can be done when future pandemics occur.
Just out of curiosity, with what you now know (you have the benefit of hindsight), what would you have done differently?
Question extended to Elite as well.

[Elite_Pie]

Just out of curiosity, with what you now know (you have the benefit of hindsight), what would you have done differently?
Question extended to Elite as well.

What other countries who have tackled this issue far better than us have done.

Imposed the lockdown earlier instead of telling people to wash their hands a lot.
Followed the WHO advice to "test, test, test" instead of ignoring it.
Proactively sourced and distributed PPE early instead of letting other countries get in first.

[Notts78]

What other countries who have tackled this issue far better than us have done.

Imposed the lockdown earlier instead of telling people to wash their hands a lot.
Followed the WHO advice to "test, test, test" instead of ignoring it.
Proactively sourced and distributed PPE early instead of letting other countries get in first.

Driller pretty much agreed with you, and I pretty much agreed with Driller on 2 points that you raise. The one I discussed with him is the timing of lockdown. We will never know how Jo Public would have dealt with lockdown had it been done earlier, but IMO it would have been catastrophic (more so than what we are currently seeing).

[drillerpie]

Has anyone absolved Boris Johnson? I know I certainly haven’t and hope that Parliament looks at the handling of this pandemic to see what can be done when future pandemics occur.
Just out of curiosity, with what you now know (you have the benefit of hindsight), what would you have done differently?
Question extended to Elite as well.

The UK government actually had the benefit of hindsight, in as much as they had the advantage of seeing what the virus was doing in other countries before it hit the UK.

Leaving aside the whole issue of austerity, which I would've done differently, I would've:

Not ignored the findings of the report in 2016 which warned about the shortage of PPE in the event of a pandemic. The government instead took a conscious decision to rely on international supply chains, which in the event of a pandemic could only ever lead to the outcomes we have seen.

I wouldn't have disappeared off to Chequers for ten days and put a do-not-disturb sign on the door at the beginning of the crisis.

I wouldn't have shaken hands with people in a coronavirus hospital, then boasted about it. Then got ill, nearly died, infected my pregnant partner, and left the government without a leader during a crisis.

I would have imposed the lockdown quicker, in the hope that it would allow for a shorter lockdown. I wouldn't have waffled on so long about the inalienable right of an Englishman to go to the pub (which got alienated a few days afterwards anyway).

I wouldn't have promised a huge testing scheme, failed to deliver it, abolished testing altogether, restarted it again, failed to meet targets again, often due to the fact that the testing centres were in the middle of nowhere and couldn't be reached by public transport. I then wouldn't have sent tests through the post directly to people who didn't know how to use them, and which will undoubtedly result in a large number of false negatives, but which allow the government to say they are meeting targets.

I think you could argue the first one is being wise after the event, although I would disagree. The others are pretty much common sense.

[drillerpie]

Oh dear, typical whinging from the lefty losers.

Navy if you're reading this your account has been hacked by Soccerman.

[Notts78]

The UK government actually had the benefit of hindsight, in as much as they had the advantage of seeing what the virus was doing in other countries before it hit the UK.

Leaving aside the whole issue of austerity, which I would've done differently, I would've:

Not ignored the findings of the report in 2016 which warned about the shortage of PPE in the event of a pandemic. The government instead took a conscious decision to rely on international supply chains, which in the event of a pandemic could only ever lead to the outcomes we have seen.

Agreed. Personally I find it astonishing that the NHS doesn’t have PPE supplied by a UK ran factory as and when it’s needed. It is nigh on impossible to stockpile PPE as like all perishable items it has an expiry date and if we were slinging let’s say a million PPE away a year at whatever cost the public would have seen it as a waste.

I wouldn't have disappeared off to Chequers for ten days and put a do-not-disturb sign on the door at the beginning of the crisis.

Agree completely.

I wouldn't have shaken hands with people in a coronavirus hospital, then boasted about it. Then got ill, nearly died, infected my pregnant partner, and left the government without a leader during a crisis.

All political leaders do this. I suppose has he not then this would have been reported negatively. Personally I don’t think he should have been visiting hospitals full stop, but then he needed to be seen as being in the fight with the NHS.

I would have imposed the lockdown quicker, in the hope that it would allow for a shorter lockdown. I wouldn't have waffled on so long about the inalienable right of an Englishman to go to the pub (which got alienated a few days afterwards anyway).

Can’t agree. Not with how Jo Public are dealing with lockdown now despite nearly 30k deaths. In the early throws of this pandemic, many felt they wouldn’t be affected, it’s only the flu etc. The government needed to show the public this was serious. Imagine if we had locked everything down when there were ‘only’ a few hundred deaths. Many more would have ignored the lockdown and the potential long term death rate much higher.

I wouldn't have promised a huge testing scheme, failed to deliver it, abolished testing altogether, restarted it again, failed to meet targets again, often due to the fact that the testing centres were in the middle of nowhere and couldn't be reached by public transport. I then wouldn't have sent tests through the post directly to people who didn't know how to use them, and which will undoubtedly result in a large number of false negatives, but which allow the government to say they are meeting targets.

Yeah, the whole testing thing has been the Governments biggest cock up IMO. This has been there biggest flaw. I personally would have liked to have seen local surgeries used as testing centres. They know how many patients they have and could have ordered the number needed. I think the government got backed in to a corner by the media because of how Germany were handling the testing and threw out 100k tests.

I think you could argue the first one is being wise after the event, although I would disagree. The others are pretty much common sense.

I have put my thoughts in with yours Driller.

[navypie]

Oh dear, typical whinging from the lefty losers.

Navy if you're reading this your account has been hacked by Soccerman.

Wait till I get me 2m's long artificial hands on him.

[drillerpie]

I have put my thoughts in with yours Driller.

Couldn't agree more about domestic production of PPE.

About hand shaking and the timing of the lockdown, I agree that locking a country down, something which now seems normal, a couple of months ago was a massive, almost unimaginable step. But I would say that a good way to get people to take it seriously is to not carry on as normal, not shake hands with people, not tour a hospital without a mask.

I think (and it's just my opinion, mostly speculation as well) that politics played into both these decisions. If you look at which leaders have made a point of continuing to meet people, not wear masks etc, it's the populists: Trump, Bolsonaro, Johnson. I think Boris is superior to the other two in almost every conceivable way, but he does share a kind politics with them which is about gut feeling and emotion rather than facts. Better to inspire optimism than to invite prudence. Being the type of person he is I'm sure when he was visiting that hospital that he also saw himself as a bit of a Churchill smoking a cigar on the roof while sticking two fingers up at the Luftwaffe.

I think it's the same story with the lockdown. He probably knew it was inevitable, but didn't want to do it as it was unpopular. He's a populist - he can't take unpopular measures, even if they work out better in the long run. I think he waited until the clamour for a lockdown was so strong that he was seen as the good guy for doing it.

Anyway thanks for the refreshingly pleasant exchange of views.