How would you rate the UK's handling of this pandemic?

[RobinBHM]

That's a platitude statement. Platitudes are easy to get buy-in on (like our nutballs here right now "everyone would approve of a review of the votes to make sure election integrity remains intact).

You literally cannot cover every possible event without increasing spending by some enormous amount and taking quid (what do you call them, quids, quiddies? quid piles?) away from current issues that are actually on peoples' door step.

Tell me how the news story would go if you had pandemic preparation for all of the different potential problems and someone started doing news reports on the stockpiles of materials as they expired and were thrown away. It would be in the tens of billions at least.

Platitudes don't anything for anyone unless you can actually lay out feasible plans to work toward them - but don't tell us about the events that have already happened (platitudes are great, because you can make up a specific plan of action for something in the past very easily), but the ones that could happen.

The first thing I'll be able to quickly do is point out a whole gaggle of other possibilities that aren't covered by your plan of action.

It isn't a platitude, the NHS is stripped to the bone.

I wasn't talking about pandemic contingency planning, I was talking about a real lack of capacity in the NHS system due to a decade of under investment.

 

[julianf]

It isn't a platitude, the NHS is stripped to the bone.

I wasn't talking about pandemic contingency planning, I was talking about a real lack of capacity in the NHS system due to a decade of under investment.

Underfund
State it's broke
Sell off cheap to your mates

"The NHS just haemorages money, so much wastage"

Vs

"Private health has very little waste, but costs more"

I think train tickets in the UK are somthing like 3x the world average? Some of the entities making profit from out train service are other countries nationalised services?

I've always thought - if a government can't run a nationalised train service, what on earth are they doing pretending they're fit for running the rest of the country?

 

[Jacob]

....

I've always thought - if a government can't run a nationalised train service, what on earth are they doing pretending they're fit for running the rest of the country?

They could run a train service but ideology prevents them. And not doing it makes loads of dosh for their mates, which is another ideological commitment.

 

[Artiglio]

They could run a train service but ideology prevents them. And not doing it makes loads of dosh for their mates, which is another ideological commitment.

In some ways it was worse when we had british rail, to keep suppliers going there were sytems where contracts were handed out on either “competitive“ or “allocated” basis , not surprisingly the allocated comtracts generally ran up bigger bills which in turn were used to justify the prices in competitive contracts. Hardly a system for getting best value.

 

[D_W]

It isn't a platitude, the NHS is stripped to the bone.

I wasn't talking about pandemic contingency planning, I was talking about a real lack of capacity in the NHS system due to a decade of under investment.

Unused capacity is contingency planning.

We have a lot of unused beds at hospitals here, too. Actually, we'd have been in the same position if not for profit health systems weren't in such a war for directing patients. That war has emerged over the last 15 or 20 years and gobs of older community hospitals have been torn down and surgery directed to "surgery centers" that have no inpatient beds to get away from the low negotiated reimbursements that hospitals agreed to (that's a little crooked, eh?. There's a new hospital built somewhere near me (within half an hour) at least once per year in the last 10 or 15 years, though.

 

[Sean33]

Hindsight is a perfect science! Leave NZ out the whole of Europe is in the dung., just different depths of it. So all the Governments are rubbish? Each country has different Geography (France twice as big but similar population) It does not matter when or what rules you introduce if some of the population ignore them. "Shouldn't have let students go back" - No, students should have followed the rules! How many of the population don't understand what +1 or 6 means.
How many actually stuck to the rules fully on Christmas Day. I have several "responsible" friends who were seeing more than two other households. Parents, Children, Grandchildren
My view is the Government has an impossible task and how many of those taking the moral high ground have ever had to make such massive decisions regarding health and the economy? None (apart from Tony Blaire spouting off - In the words of John Cleese "Don't mention the war!")
Right going to make some shelves

Couldn't agree more. One thing for sure is history will tell us what would have been the right course of action to take. Going forwards got to say i am amazed at how the government is doing at getting the vaccine out there, I can only compare this to what is going on in Europe but vaccinating more than the whole of Europe by a long margin and similar numbers to testing, dont often applaud the government but i will this time.

 

[julianf]

In some ways it was worse when we had british rail, to keep suppliers going there were sytems where contracts were handed out on either “competitive“ or “allocated” basis , not surprisingly the allocated comtracts generally ran up bigger bills which in turn were used to justify the prices in competitive contracts. Hardly a system for getting best value.

Again, there is all sorts of wastage in nationalised industries. But the cost to the tax payer / user is still lower even with the wastage. So i guess its how you define "a system for getting best value".

I cant be bothered to look up the numbers now to verify, but I've certainly heard it said that government (tax payer) contributions to the rail service are greater now then when the service was fully nationalised. The cost to the ticket buyer is larger. And foreign railways are even allowed to make a profit from our system, which, in the context of the wave of "coming over ere stealing our jobs"... Well it wasn't on the front page of the Daily Mail in the run up to the referendum, that's for sure.

My point is that simply removing waste by privatisation is often touted as a method to lower cost, but the actual, observed evidence does not really support that.

 

[Artiglio]

Julianf

The railway system is probably not a good example when it comes to costs and privatisation, to some extent its a victim of its own success, but to increase capacity on lines with the demand is nigh on impossible in any practical manner ( we’d effectively have to build other lines alongside existing ones but that still wouldn’t deal with the issues of finding additional terminus capacity in big cities.)
The NHS suffers similarly in that there are always new advances in medicine , which invariably are ever more expensive, yet at the same time as a nation we have for several years seen a decline in life expectancy, which rather suggests ,that despite ever better medical intervention , we don’t value the bodies that nature has bestowed upon us and abusenthem too much. So more people need ever more expensive medical interventions for longer. But in addition as a nation we are less efficient and so don’t generate the wealth needed to supply the services we’d like.
As a nation we’ve become too reliant on low skill low wage employment for too many people , we in turn supplement the incomes of those in such jobs ( as we should , not everyone can or will make a good living) , however this has tilted the economy the wrong way, creates demand for cheap labour and discourages investment in automation, skills etc.
Way off the OP, but it has all lead society to where it is today.

 

[Billy_wizz]

It isn't a platitude, the NHS is stripped to the bone.

I wasn't talking about pandemic contingency planning, I was talking about a real lack of capacity in the NHS system due to a decade of under investment.

Or decades of waist! It's funny how it's mostly the front line staff that have been reduced not the overbloated middle manager and non medical section! Or why it takes 4 people to assess that I need a gromit
1 doctor,1nurse,1 paper filler and someone to take me from the waiting room to an observation room that I could see from the waiting room!

 

[John Brown]

I don't know if the other lot would have done any better than the shower in power, but I always think being the government is a bit like playing pool when you're drunk. The skillful bit is taking credit when things go right, and blaming the cue/sloping table/distracting noise when things go badly.
Let's face it, politicians don't really have to do a great deal in "normal" times, so it's probably unfair and unrealistic to expect a bunch of privileged public school educated pratts to deal with a real crisis.

Cummings should have been kicked out immediately, though.
Ditto Jacob Rees-Mogg. Travelling between tiers because he has to attend Latin mass... What a thoroughly odious creep!

 

[rafezetter]

I believe that is a process called natural selection, very important if you want a good strong population.

Well yes, but apparently we have to protect "the stupid" who kicked off this second wave and are becoming super spreaders - "coz human rights", regardless of the human rights of those they infect and kill..

As was shown in NZ - it WAS possible to almost entirely eradicate covid from a community, if everyone adhered to the same behaviour as those who were / are at high risk of death after infection. It has a SHORT lifespan measured in days on surfaces, that were easily treated to kill it - it.. it really blows my mind the staggering levels of stupidity people have been displaying - THE PEOPLE not Whitehall.

Now it's mutated and the vaccine means people are being even less vigilant, so covid is here to stay in perpituity and be another yearly (or even bi-annual) problem like the flu, but even more deadly - thank you, stupid people, good work liberal lefties.

History WILL blame you all.

 

[rafezetter]

The point i sought clarity on was (lockdown v1) -

I have a friend with mental health issues. He is on the shielding list, with the appropriate letters from the government etc.
I, personally, was in hospital with lung xrays, pnumonia etc the year before last. In another life, I also happen to have a BSc in Biology, so am not totally clueless as to these things.

As my friend had been shielding, and, due to my own health history, we "locked down" from before it was compulsory, both of us would be considered low risk of being carriers.
My friends wife called me and told me that she was more worried that he would top himself than get the virus.

I went round his, at the peak of lockdown, and helped him render his house, in order to give him a break from his insanity.

Was this against the rules?

It marginally increased my risk of death, but decreased his risk of death.
As I say, I was unsure, so I sought advice from another friend who is a police man.

What would you have said? And would it have been your opinion or would it have been one of the "rules"?

Strictly? Yes. Morally, absolutely not, and I would have said to go as well but taking extra precautions (see below). I am one of those same people, but self manage in other non medicated ways.

However we both know that people have been bleating about "hazy rules" since last march, and that both of you are clearly not part of the "stupid" group to which I refer. There are always outliers and situations that can be properly managed with some forethought, even if you didn't go right away but told him you had to isolate for a week because the wife went shopping 2 days ago, that would probably have given him enough comfort until you could go there in person.

People didn't do this - they quoted the same reasons for a lockdown breach (often flat out lying as it became a good "loophole" excuse) and then visited right away, and passed the virus, because they didn't take extra precations - this is a fact.

There are ALWAYS ways to self manage poor mental health (even severe cases) for those who need it, trust me I know that of which I speak, I could write a book on it. Just a few months ago, between July (June?) and October I had a friend of 35 years living with me in my TWO ROOMS (I live in a HMO) sleeping on my sofa, who was supremely suicidal (and made what I referred to as his "death bag" full of pills and nytol and cough medicine), now he is back with his wife and according to him, "permanently stable, no longer a risk" and I can see that it's not a front, the danger has passed, I can see the man I knew before. (this can be independatly verified by another ex-forumite Eric the Viking.)

It was a general reply to all those whom have said as much directly and indirectly - like our very own rorshach, who seems to think my post above is funny and has openly said "let old people die as long as I can keep making money, my economic sitution is more important" [paraphrased but close] I've got screencaps - wanna see?

Has he been a spreader? probably not; does he share the mentality of those who have? Emphatic yes.

 

[D_W]

Well yes, but apparently we have to protect "the stupid" who kicked off this second wave and are becoming super spreaders - "coz human rights", regardless of the human rights of those they infect and kill..

As was shown in NZ - it WAS possible to almost entirely eradicate covid from a community, if everyone adhered to the same behaviour as those who were / are at high risk of death after infection. It has a SHORT lifespan measured in days on surfaces, that were easily treated to kill it - it.. it really blows my mind the staggering levels of stupidity people have been displaying - THE PEOPLE not Whitehall.

Now it's mutated and the vaccine means people are being even less vigilant, so covid is here to stay in perpituity and be another yearly (or even bi-annual) problem like the flu, but even more deadly - thank you, stupid people, good work liberal lefties.

History WILL blame you all.

We heard the NZ line here in the US, too. It's naive to think that you could lock down a gigantic economy that was already inundated with covid (be it britain or the US, or italy or whatever else) vs. NZ who had a couple of cases or australia who had a couple of cases and not much else. But if you're into pointing fingers at someone else, have at it.

Have you read the accounts of "all of the people" you're talking about re: the spanish flu? Are we villainizing them?

Covid was here to stay no matter what. it would take literally a couple of cases to make sure that it never went away - even without realizing that there are unstable parts of the globe where it would never be managed in the first place.

 

[D_W]

And foreign railways are even allowed to make a profit

The nerve!!! They should volunteer!!

 

[Rorschach]

"let old people die as long as I can keep making money, my economic sitution is more important" [paraphrased but close] I've got screencaps - wanna see?

Yeah I wanna see!

 

[Blackswanwood]

Or decades of waist! It's funny how it's mostly the front line staff that have been reduced not the overbloated middle manager and non medical section! Or why it takes 4 people to assess that I need a gromit
1 doctor,1nurse,1 paper filler and someone to take me from the waiting room to an observation room that I could see from the waiting room!

Waist or Waste?

 

[Misterdog]

I don't know if the other lot would have done any better than the shower in power,

Well over 20,000 died under the last Labour government from the flu in 1999.

A virus for which we have had a vaccine since the 1940's.

I would suggest that one shower is little better than another shower.
Though many are born under one colour of umbrella which prevents them from seeing beyond it. (Red or Blue)

 

[Amateur]

I don't think there have been obvious 'right' answers to the pandemic, as evidenced by the number of different strategies that have been tried worldwide.

It's very easy to look at everything that's happend with the benefit of hindsight and say 'They should have done this', 'Couldn't they see that...' or 'If only they'd <insert option here> before <something>' but I don't think that any alternative UK government would have handled things any better given the information that they had at the time.

I'm just thankful that I'm not one of the people who had/have to make the decisions that try to walk the tightrope between too many deaths and severe economic damage.

spot on.
I think Boris has done a good job.
The outcome is in the public's hands.
They know far more than anybody sat behind a key board complaining and moaning.
Anybody who runs a business knows how difficult it is to please everyone.
Boris didn't want to put folk under stringent rules and was relying on the public to be sensible.
Unfortunately that's not worked.

When you look at the rest of the world we have done pretty well.
Look at Europe.
It's a mess.
Even Germany, who were quoted by the same people attacking our governments as the way to do things, have now fallen into panic mode.
Where are these people now?
Still attacking our efforts.
I
Look at Japan
A state of emergency.
People need to understand logistics, medicine, how businesses work, litigation parameters before they start ragging this country, or roll up their sleeves and get stuck in to help.
Watching the BBC or reading any rag isn't going to give you enough Information to make an informed decision unless you've already joined conspirators anonymous, or the anarchists group.

 

[Cozzer]

It gets caught be visiting other houses.

Exactly!
So don't!
Don't visit other houses!
That means you. That means me.
That's what "Stay at home" means!

I am following the data and the data showed that covid "secure" places like pubs and restaurants were responsible for less than 3% of transmission. The more you stop people meeting in "safe" places the more they meet in their homes. It's not rocket surgery you know.

There is NO safe place.

 

[Jacob]

Well over 20,000 died under the last Labour government from the flu in 1999.

A virus for which we have had a vaccine since the 1940's.

I would suggest that one shower is little better than another shower.
Though many are born under one colour of umbrella which prevents them from seeing beyond it. (Red or Blue)

I can tell which shower you vote for!
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...deathsoccurringbetween1januaryand31august2020