UK Lockdown

[Alistair20000]

Are you still completely sure about that? Only take a dozen or so Labour MPs to defy the whip (if applied) and it would be squeaky bum time for Johnson & Co.
Ten Tories who are furious at lockdown tiers as '70' MPs threaten to revolt (msn.com)
I'm now expecting a last-minute face saving u-turn even more.

A dozen Labour MP’s and even as many as 100 Tory rebels will not come close to inflicting a defeat on the government. The problem for Boris is that when he has to rely on opposition support the stench of rot and a loss of grip creeps in. As a Tory grandee is reported to have said: “A government that relies on opposition support is not likely to be the government for very long” Even in these exceptional times I think there is some force in that.

 

[Alistair20000]

If Labour start voting against, I agree. I just don't see it but we shall see.

If there is any watering down, I think Whitty and/or Valance will resign. They want tougher restrictions now, they wanted them weeks ago, they don't want xmas bubbles and they don't want anything relaxing until the clocks go forward.

Hancock and Jenrick are telling porkies about 'reviews', and well they know it.

I would be delighted if Glum and Glummer flounced. Not that it would change the Sage advice as it is packed with people who have only one view of the science. In a way though they are correct. If you buy into the principle of keeping the virus at bay until the Spring when in all probability it will ease off as we saw this summer then very harsh restrictions are needed. However, that is only one side of the balance sheet. The impact on non Covid health issues, jobs, the economy etc needs to be put on the other side. This is something the government has persistently refused to do. We end up with half measures that do as much harm as good. Maybe more harm.

Nor do I see them chucking in their huge salaries and pension rights that easily. More likely to hang on in and wring hands and issue blood curdling warnings. After all, they only advise. Politicians decide.

And yes Hancock and Jenrick should be ashamed of themselves. The Public will see through this though.

 

[Ashford Grecian]

......................

 

[RedPaul]

I would be delighted if Glum and Glummer flounced. Not that it would change the Sage advice as it is packed with people who have only one view of the science. In a way though they are correct. If you buy into the principle of keeping the virus at bay until the Spring when in all probability it will ease off as we saw this summer then very harsh restrictions are needed. However, that is only one side of the balance sheet. The impact on non Covid health issues, jobs, the economy etc needs to be put on the other side. This is something the government has persistently refused to do. We end up with half measures that do as much harm as good. Maybe more harm.

Nor do I see them chucking in their huge salaries and pension rights that easily. More likely to hang on in and wring hands and issue blood curdling warnings. After all, they only advise. Politicians decide.

And yes Hancock and Jenrick should be ashamed of themselves. The Public will see through this though.

I think we have been on the same page through much of this Al. Agree with you although whilst politicians decide, it is a brave politician that goes against 'the science' and we know that Johnson is not brave, except when it comes to sneaking out for an bit of extra-curricular.

The brutal fact is that the NHS is too unwieldly and runs at virtually full capacity every winter and therefore just cannot seemingly cope with anything more than a relative handful of Covid cases. Neither the CMO, the SoS for Health or the Chief Exec of NHS England want pictures of dead people in corridors on their CV and so the entire country has to suffer truly disproportionate restrictions to protect themselves from a virus that isn't overly dangerous to 85% of the population and has a mortality rate of all age groups at around 0.5%, for fear of the vulnerable catching it and being said people in corridors

If anything good and long lasting comes out of this pandemic, it will be a honest and wholesale cross-party review of the best way to fund medical and social care for the next 30 years. And if that means thinking the unthinkable, then it should be thought. We cannot just keep shovelling tax payers cash at it to prop up a patently creaking and not fit for purpose system.

 

[Alistair20000]

I think we have been on the same page through much of this Al. Agree with you although whilst politicians decide, it is a brave politician that goes against 'the science' and we know that Johnson is not brave, except when it comes to sneaking out for an bit of extra-curricular.

The brutal fact is that the NHS is too unwieldly and runs at virtually full capacity every winter and therefore just cannot seemingly cope with anything more than a relative handful of Covid cases. Neither the CMO, the SoS for Health or the Chief Exec of NHS England want pictures of dead people in corridors on their CV and so the entire country has to suffer truly disproportionate restrictions to protect themselves from a virus that isn't overly dangerous to 85% of the population and has a mortality rate of all age groups at around 0.5%, for fear of the vulnerable catching it and being said people in corridors

If anything good and long lasting comes out of this pandemic, it will be a honest and wholesale cross-party review of the best way to fund medical and social care for the next 30 years. And if that means thinking the unthinkable, then it should be thought. We cannot just keep shovelling tax payers cash at it to prop up a patently creaking and not fit for purpose system.

Yes all spot on RP.

Politically, a lot of dead people and pictures of people dying is utterly toxic. The longer terms figures for increases in non Covid deaths, health, social and economic damage are intangible at this stage and far less stark but in due course when all that becomes clearer a lot of people are going to be very angry.

Your last paragraph is of paramount importance. We really must stop looking at the NHS as a sacred cow. No other countries do it this way. As for thinking the unthinkable, I am not holding my breath. I recall Rev Blair tasking Frank Field to do exactly this over NHS reform. When Field duly thought the unthinkable he was rapidly given the The Elbow. Blair had the political capital to have changed the NHS for the better and it has always been my view that only a Labour Government can take this on. He lost the chance to have become a very great reforming Prime Minister.

 

[angelic upstart]

......................

It’s okay, you’re allowed to say what you like. I never take offence!

 

[tavyred]

I think we have been on the same page through much of this Al. Agree with you although whilst politicians decide, it is a brave politician that goes against 'the science' and we know that Johnson is not brave, except when it comes to sneaking out for an bit of extra-curricular.

You and Al have indeed been on the same page, it’s a pity its probably the wrong one.
You simply can’t argue around the very high hospitalisation rate of COVID, there is no health system in the world that could cope with the estimated amount of infections that would require hospital treatment if countries did not employ measures to suppress infections.
Do you have an example of a brave leader who second guessed the science and successfully alleviated the medical cost of rising infections on his/her people?

 

[RedPaul]

You and Al have indeed been on the same page, it’s a pity its probably the wrong one.
You simply can’t argue around the very high hospitalisation rate of COVID, there is no health system in the world that could cope with the estimated amount of infections that would require hospital treatment if countries did not employ measures to suppress infections.
Do you have an example of a brave leader who second guessed the science and successfully alleviated the medical cost of rising infections on his/her people?

I didn't say their shouldn't be measures, but they are in many cases illogical and inconsistent and none of their blunt cures take any account of anything else. In March, understandable. Now, not.

You have to take people with you and they are fundamentally failing to do that. In March, people were locking down before Johnson said you had to. Now the opposite is true because no-one has any faith in what they are being told such that people widely stick two fingers up to it, or stretch it to the limit.

Rates come down, yet restrictions go up?
Why don't they publish daily hospital capacity and admission stats if they want general buy in to the 'hospital capacity' argument?
If the infection rates are that bad, why are schools still open in very high areas and not moved to blended learning as per the DfE's planned roadmap?
Wny have they not sent everyone over 50 a box of Vitamin D supplements?
Why have non-essential shops shut such that more and more people are cramming into supermarkets which seem (Waitrose aside) to have turned into a non SD'd free-for-all?
Why can you not play golf or tennis outside with your household at the moment? But you can sit inside all day with them?
From next week 1,000 people can meet indoors for a business meeting/conference but 2 neighbours can't for a cup of tea? I know I have been banging the economic drum but that is patently ridiculous.
Pubs can open next week but the moment you finish the last chip on your plate, you legally have to leave even if you have half a pint to drink? Come on.

And as for the xmas bubble inconsistency. The virus is lethal so avoid everyone and you can't do this and that for 8 weeks but for 5 days we are going to allow people to criss-cross the country, pack on to a (reduced) train service, and spend up to 4 nights on top of each other. It seems specifically designed to encourage people to see people they haven't seen for 9 months and go nuts. But when you are there, don't play board games and don't share a spoon for the roast potatoes! Absolutely barmy.

I am sympathetic to the Gov's plight and difficult decisions but to me they are doing themselves absolutely no favours with shambolic and inconsistent messaging, false promises, illogical restrictions and half-truths. And don't even get me started on graphs.

And then there is the NHS. They built the Nightingales but had no staffing plan. Where has been the staffing plan for hospitals for the winter/ NHS staff self-isolatiing is a massive massive issue. Why are they not tested daily to reduce this, instead of pouring resources into a reluctant Liverpudlian public. Why has there not been a national effort to train people to help in hospitals? I don't mean turning me into a brain surgeon in 3 months but all those on endless furlough could be put to some use? Why are GP surgeries still empty and swathes of non-emergency / frontline hospital staff sat around twiddling their thumbs?

 

[Alistair20000]

I should gratefully like to say that RP has said everything I would have said, and a whole lot more, in this reply to Tavy.

 

[Spoonz Red E]

..... Do you have an example of a brave leader who second guessed the science and successfully alleviated the medical cost of rising infections on his/her people?

Tsai Ing-wen - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

How Taiwan beat Covid-19

The high-tech island nation has had a good pandemic, quickly squashing the virus without a national lockdown. What did Taiwan get right?

www.wired.co.uk