Quizzes & Puzzles4 mins ago
Covid Inquiry
I have seen posts on this site (presumably from those who were living under a rock whilst the pandemic raged) saying how well the UK government handled the pandemic.
The ongoing Covid inquiry is receiving little media attention; our Tory supporting press does not want you to know how incompetent the Tories were.
UK well prepared - then
On 23 January 2020 then Health Secretary (Matt Hancock) said in the House of Commons ‘We are well prepared and well equipped to deal with any cases that arise in this country.....the public can be assured that the whole of the UK is always well prepared for these types of outbreaks’
Covid inquiry –now
As an inquiry witness on the 27 June 2023 (Matt Hancock) was asked in relation to the covid pandemic ‘....that the system was not fit for purpose, was it?’
Hancock replied ‘That’s absolutely right.’
Former Welsh health minister (Vaughan Gething) admitted that the first time he had read some of the pandemic preparation documents was when he was preparing to give evidence to the inquiry.
Scottish health secretary (Jean Freeman) said that the infrastructure in Scotland was not equipped to handle the crisis.
And Northern Ireland didn’t have a health secretary for three years prior to the pandemic.
(information courtesy of Private Eye)
The ongoing Covid inquiry is receiving little media attention; our Tory supporting press does not want you to know how incompetent the Tories were.
UK well prepared - then
On 23 January 2020 then Health Secretary (Matt Hancock) said in the House of Commons ‘We are well prepared and well equipped to deal with any cases that arise in this country.....the public can be assured that the whole of the UK is always well prepared for these types of outbreaks’
Covid inquiry –now
As an inquiry witness on the 27 June 2023 (Matt Hancock) was asked in relation to the covid pandemic ‘....that the system was not fit for purpose, was it?’
Hancock replied ‘That’s absolutely right.’
Former Welsh health minister (Vaughan Gething) admitted that the first time he had read some of the pandemic preparation documents was when he was preparing to give evidence to the inquiry.
Scottish health secretary (Jean Freeman) said that the infrastructure in Scotland was not equipped to handle the crisis.
And Northern Ireland didn’t have a health secretary for three years prior to the pandemic.
(information courtesy of Private Eye)
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Hymie. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
//The main reason being they ignored our Pandemic plan (which didn’t call for the ridiculous lockdown, furlough and all manner of other things) and instead they crapped themselves and pulled the trigger to well and truly screw the economy.//
Absolutely correct. The UK had a perfectly robust plan to deal with a pandemic which did not involve restrictions backed up by legislation which created criminal offences for everyday activities. Critics now say "it was prepared for 'flu and so wasn't suitable". Absolute cobblers. The rest of the world reacted to the authoritarian measures taken by China and to people who wanted the government to protect them from everything.
There are two saving graces:
● No UK government will attempt anything like it ever again. It is now apparent that many of the restrictions were ridiculous and pointless but more important than that they caused far more damage than they were ever likely to prevent. The long term damage to this country is now being exposed as immense and will take generations to repair.
● The restrictions would have been more stringent, imposed earlier, and lasted longer had a Labour government been in office. They supported all the measures taken and lobbied for stricter measures, and the only thing they objected to was their lifting.
Absolutely correct. The UK had a perfectly robust plan to deal with a pandemic which did not involve restrictions backed up by legislation which created criminal offences for everyday activities. Critics now say "it was prepared for 'flu and so wasn't suitable". Absolute cobblers. The rest of the world reacted to the authoritarian measures taken by China and to people who wanted the government to protect them from everything.
There are two saving graces:
● No UK government will attempt anything like it ever again. It is now apparent that many of the restrictions were ridiculous and pointless but more important than that they caused far more damage than they were ever likely to prevent. The long term damage to this country is now being exposed as immense and will take generations to repair.
● The restrictions would have been more stringent, imposed earlier, and lasted longer had a Labour government been in office. They supported all the measures taken and lobbied for stricter measures, and the only thing they objected to was their lifting.
//is there any proof of this?//
Yes lots. Particularly with respect to children's mental health as a result of school closures, to undiagnosed serious illnesses as a result of the NHS being largely closed except to treat Covid and to the nation's economy which was slaughtered by paying people to stay at home for the thick end of two years.
This thread began by referring to "...those who were living under a rock whilst the pandemic raged.". Well there are now many who have been living under a rock since it ended.
Yes lots. Particularly with respect to children's mental health as a result of school closures, to undiagnosed serious illnesses as a result of the NHS being largely closed except to treat Covid and to the nation's economy which was slaughtered by paying people to stay at home for the thick end of two years.
This thread began by referring to "...those who were living under a rock whilst the pandemic raged.". Well there are now many who have been living under a rock since it ended.
you assume that education and the economy would have been left untouched without lockdown. covid however is one of the only known viruses which depletes t-cells (the only other I believe is HIV though I might be mistaken) and therefore is capable of inflicting long-term damage on the immune system. i think it very likely that a higher death rate would have something of an impact on childrens' mental health and the economy.
//...you assume that education and the economy would have been left untouched without lockdown.//
No I don't. The assumption I do make is that they would not have been left with anywhere near so much damage as it has been with the closing of schools and much of the economy.
A fact that was known right from the very beginning was that preventing the spread of the disease was impossible (unless every human being remained isolated from every other human being). Everybody will be exposed to the SARS-Cov-2 virus multiple times in their lifetimes and most of us probably already have been. Whatever its effects (long or short term) those effects would have still been evident whether the virus was encountered in March 2020 or March 2021. The only people who needed specific protection were the very elderly and those vulnerable because of other medical conditions. The threat to everybody else was marginal at worst.
However, all these arguments were done to death during the pandemic and there’s little point in going over them again. But you don’t have to take my word for it. Very fortuitously, there was an article published last week, written by Professor Robert Dingwall. Professor Dingwall knows a thing or two about the plan that the UK had to combat a pandemic, mainly because he was one of the main authors of it:
https:/
It makes interesting reading in its entirety, but I’ll just pull out a few salient points:
“We looked at most social aspects of pandemic planning. We saw working papers from almost every government department detailing how a pandemic might affect their jurisdiction.”
We received papers from mathematical modellers and considered them. We did not have those modellers in the room — or on Zoom — shouting down the views of others. Medics were in a minority."
“I can say, then, that the official United Kingdom plan for dealing with a novel respiratory virus, even one as dangerous as Covid-19, was quite the opposite of negligent. Not only was it well thought through, it was admired across Europe. Throughout 2006-7 I spoke at international conferences, where leading public health officials told me as much.”
“A pandemic challenges a whole society not just its health system.”
“Children are much safer in school — provided there are enough teachers and volunteers to supervise them. Children's interests came first in our considerations. A study this week from the Institute for Fiscal Studies found the pandemic had a 'catastrophic' impact on children's emotional and social skills.”
“As far as I recall, masks were not even discussed. From my own reading, it was clear that cloth masks had not helped during any previous influenza pandemic.”
No other pandemic had ever been addressed by such Draconian measures. There is no doubt in my mind that the government panicked and lost its nerve. I said so in March 2020 when the ridiculous volte-face was announced. The eventual outcome for this country was severely compromised by this and it will take decades to recover from it. Of course the Covid enquiry – if it ever reports – will not say this. But there is ample evidence (which would not take three years to uncover) to support it.
We are left with a generation of children who saw two years of their education abandoned, an economy in tatters because of £400bn of money-printing, and a health service which is completely overwhelmed. All because politicians could not hold their nerve and implement a plan that had been devised and approved in a rigorous fashion, and instead implemented one which had been sketched out on the back of a cigarette packet.
No I don't. The assumption I do make is that they would not have been left with anywhere near so much damage as it has been with the closing of schools and much of the economy.
A fact that was known right from the very beginning was that preventing the spread of the disease was impossible (unless every human being remained isolated from every other human being). Everybody will be exposed to the SARS-Cov-2 virus multiple times in their lifetimes and most of us probably already have been. Whatever its effects (long or short term) those effects would have still been evident whether the virus was encountered in March 2020 or March 2021. The only people who needed specific protection were the very elderly and those vulnerable because of other medical conditions. The threat to everybody else was marginal at worst.
However, all these arguments were done to death during the pandemic and there’s little point in going over them again. But you don’t have to take my word for it. Very fortuitously, there was an article published last week, written by Professor Robert Dingwall. Professor Dingwall knows a thing or two about the plan that the UK had to combat a pandemic, mainly because he was one of the main authors of it:
https:/
It makes interesting reading in its entirety, but I’ll just pull out a few salient points:
“We looked at most social aspects of pandemic planning. We saw working papers from almost every government department detailing how a pandemic might affect their jurisdiction.”
We received papers from mathematical modellers and considered them. We did not have those modellers in the room — or on Zoom — shouting down the views of others. Medics were in a minority."
“I can say, then, that the official United Kingdom plan for dealing with a novel respiratory virus, even one as dangerous as Covid-19, was quite the opposite of negligent. Not only was it well thought through, it was admired across Europe. Throughout 2006-7 I spoke at international conferences, where leading public health officials told me as much.”
“A pandemic challenges a whole society not just its health system.”
“Children are much safer in school — provided there are enough teachers and volunteers to supervise them. Children's interests came first in our considerations. A study this week from the Institute for Fiscal Studies found the pandemic had a 'catastrophic' impact on children's emotional and social skills.”
“As far as I recall, masks were not even discussed. From my own reading, it was clear that cloth masks had not helped during any previous influenza pandemic.”
No other pandemic had ever been addressed by such Draconian measures. There is no doubt in my mind that the government panicked and lost its nerve. I said so in March 2020 when the ridiculous volte-face was announced. The eventual outcome for this country was severely compromised by this and it will take decades to recover from it. Of course the Covid enquiry – if it ever reports – will not say this. But there is ample evidence (which would not take three years to uncover) to support it.
We are left with a generation of children who saw two years of their education abandoned, an economy in tatters because of £400bn of money-printing, and a health service which is completely overwhelmed. All because politicians could not hold their nerve and implement a plan that had been devised and approved in a rigorous fashion, and instead implemented one which had been sketched out on the back of a cigarette packet.
Well I came on to add my two penneth, but I simply cant add any more to that NJ, very well presented.
For my bit I believe the Government were panicked by the commies in SAGE that all were on a high for a great social experiment in control. As I have said all along.
But then I lost count of the times I was called a covidiot by the covidians.
For my bit I believe the Government were panicked by the commies in SAGE that all were on a high for a great social experiment in control. As I have said all along.
But then I lost count of the times I was called a covidiot by the covidians.
