Hobby

9 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Has anyone else started to read the verbatim testimony (probably not the right word, in that I don’t think it was given under oath) that is referenced in the report?

 

I’ve just read part of Dominic Cummings’s, and it is very, very interesting. He starts with an apology for not having done more to galvanise people into action sooner, and goes on to make clear that the threat really was not being viewed as at all serious by The PM throughout January and February. Assuming that he wasn’t making it all up, it’s damning stuff.

Yes, but I just can't believe a word he says, under oath or not, he's just there to protect his back and will say anything to do that. Remember that he was portrayed as the person who influenced the PM (too much according to many!), had too much power/sway over him, and, and now according to his latest testimony couldn't even persuade him that he needed to take the virus seriously! I don't trust a word he says, just like I never trusted Campbell and Mandelson.

15 minutes ago, Neil said:

Quite. I don't think it unreasonable to expect our government to be well informed, have foresight and to make the right decisions at the right time. If we seek to excuse a lack of awareness of the wider world, missed cobra meetings, dithering over decisions, a lack of preparedness and pursuing the wrong strategy then we perpetuate poor government.

If you'd read the report you'd have seen what Nearholmer neatly summarised, if anything your wrath is better directed at those experts if the report is to be believed:

14 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Having now read the “lockdown” part of the report, it does seem that things went very badly wrong in the advice to HMG, and that it took until mid-March to dawn on anyone that we were on track for truly gigantic numbers of deaths without a lockdown.

 

So, government hesitation seems to have played less part than I thought. It’s almost worse than hesitation: a complete bnggers muddle, with everyone, scientists and politicos alike, stumbling with eyes half-shut towards a disaster.

Monkey's post clearly shows that they were taking things far more seriously than Europe and the Americas, as someone else pointed out many posts ago they'd had experience of previous outbreaks of similar diseases and knew that they could cause major issues if they got loose. However over in Europe/Americas we'd hadn't seen this sort of thing close up and past experience showed that it hadn't spread over here and that when it had the effects had become much reduced.

I suspect, therefore, that whilst the UK (and other European Govs - I am fed up of people singling ours out when everyone else in Europe was doing the same) had the same information they thought that history would repeat itself. I also suspect that the Chinese grossly played down their infection and death figures so it didn't look as serious as it actually was. On that basis they didn't "dither" as they thought at that time that it would be controlled and/or would run itself out, as it happens it didn't. Clearly had they taken the same view as the Australians things would have been very different but even their experts weren't predicting what would actually happen with the virus back in January.

Once again hindsight is a wonderful thing.

I'd agree some of the smaller breweries do produce nice lagers, unlike the big ones. Of course you don't have to cool it down if you don't want to, it's well known that cooling a beer is the best way to hide the lack of taste, though punters still fall for it...

49 minutes ago, Bernard Lamb said:

I take it you are rather younger then me.

I remember the infamous three day week back in the 1970s.

Only a little Bernard, I do remember the three day week and the 70s in general very well, thanks. I don't feel they are directly comparable, though, as you intimated in your last paragraph we are a very different nation to what we were in those days, infinitely more complicated (perhaps not the best word,  suspect Alastair will have a more suitable one!)...

1 hour ago, Neil said:

 

I'm no public health expert, nor do I have an inside track to the statistics that governments do, but it was pretty obvious what was building and what would have to be done to keep ourselves safe. It's pretty clear from this thread that myself and Mrs R weren't alone in our assessment of the risks and the action we would need to take, at least a week in advance of the national lockdown on the 26th of March.  If many of us could see problems coming, then the government should have seen this earlier and should have acted earlier. Keeping the country safe is one of the prime objectives of government and if they fail they should be held to account.  Ignorance of what to do, is no defence.

 

There is a lot more to bringing in a lockdown than just making an announcement. I get the impression that you seem to think its a simple thing to do. The sorting out of things like the furlow scheme alone is not an overnight job, then there's sorting out who needs to be furlowed, who needs to continue working, continued delivery of goods, the list is endless. It would take a damn sight longer than a week to organise, I suspect it was being looked a long time before it happened. Keeping a country safe is not simply about health, there are lots of other considerations to take into account. 

Judging by the way the USA and France work I'm really glad we don't have a president!

4 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

It’s not a Government report; it’s a committee report.

OK Committee Report then... Produced by those we elect to govern us!

Just in case here it is again:

https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/7497/documents/78688/default/

Has any other Government of any other country done the same? Those of you who live or have connections in other countries (France, Germany and Australia spring to mind!) may know?

My gut feel is backed up by the fact that the experts of the day couldn't agree amongst themselves, we had one set saying one thing and others (mainly "independent" experts the Press brought in) saying entirely the opposite, when that happens the Gov is in a cleft stick. You clearly see that as no excuse, I don't.

I'd refer you to pages 40/1/2 on the report I linked to on the last page which covers the early decisions on lockdown and the problem the Government had with the advice it was getting. 

Care Homes and the discharge of patients from hospitals at the outset is covered in para 260 (page 85) onwards. Worth a read.

That's a gross over simplification, John, and I'm sure you know that, playing Devil's Advocate by any chance?

I would hold a Government responsible if it was a situation where they should have known better, but in this case I really don't think that applies. Back at the beginning of all this even the experts couldn't agree on the right way forward so how was the Gov supposed to know.

17 minutes ago, hayfield said:

 

Spot on with this comment, a decision had to be made on the known facts and advice being given at the time and which could change from day to day and the advice also varied dependant on the "expert" consulted. 

I think it's worth adding that to it, if only things were as simple as some people seem to think.

BTW this is the full report, not the edited bits seen in the Media:

https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/7497/documents/78688/default/

Much of the stuff they wanted to do couldn't be done overnight, though. I do wonder about the delay closing the borders which seemed unnecessarily long in most cases (especially India) but before I criticise I'd want to know the reasoning around it. Again it comes down to looking outside the simple explanation, as many scientists admitted at the time and since then medical reasons were not the only thing governments have to consider when taking any action, a complete overnight lockdown as many people wanted could cause even more issues such as distribution of food/goods, failures of businesses, etc., it isn't a simple thing to do.

I see they've copied the Maestro/Montego/SD1 belt line groove down the side of the body! Worked a little bit better on that car, though!

I agree they were let down but we have to be careful when playing the blame game, which is what you and much of the Media seem to enjoy doing, the Far Eastern countries got it largely right, though even they had issues, but it was the West that came up with the goods when it came to vaccines. 

Playing the blame game will never bring back those lives, acknowledging and learning from our mistakes will help us in the future. Unfortunately that will not appease those who seem to want their pound of flesh even though I seriously doubt they'd have done any better had they'd been in charge and had the same advice from the experts...

Yes you're right I should have included social media! 

The report was both critical and complementary but the media headlines suggest only the former.

As regards the Mail's political reporting its surprising just how critical they are of the Tories and they have lead several exposes of dubious dealings by their MPs. Sadly many people ignore or just don't see them judging by comments I've seen which just do blanket criticism of them. 

All the media has bias of one sort or another hence we need to read widely to get a more accurate picture. Unfortunately all too many people with leanings more to one side or the other don't do that and just believe what their favourite rag spouts. 

That won't stop him!

Today's local meet...

9 hours ago, Hobby said:

 

 

Max will be long gone by the first corner and if he isn't Vaterri will let him past like last time out... That's my prediction!

Got that wrong, well done Valterri! 

28 minutes ago, 2750Papyrus said:

Changing track (ouch), has anyone yet received their booster jab or an invitation thereto?

We've just had our Flu jab (I took SWMBO in for hers and nabbed mine at the same time!), we asked about the Covid booster and were told that it'll be along shortly.

On 08/10/2021 at 23:44, RJS1977 said:

(e.g. to record crossing abuse).

Well it worked there!

11 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

How long Bottas will fend off Max for is open to some conjecture, measured in corners or laps according to your belief in the Finn.

11 hours ago, Andrew P said:

If Max doesn't get VB before the first corner, then there could be a coming together I think. 

Max will be long gone by the first corner and if he isn't Vaterri will let him past like last time out... That's my prediction!

Done all three since July (the latter being our local NG Group)...

I'd add, though, that I don't feel any of them are high risk, certainly not compared with a football match or having a train full of fans, the first I haven't done, nore have any intention of doing, the second I had no choice in the matter. All three we can, as individuals, control the level of risk quite well. 

https://www.sciencefocus.com/news/coronavirus-not-going-to-be-a-disease-like-smallpox-which-could-be-eradicated-by-vaccination/