Tag Archives: julia buckingham

A week of incompetence, hypocrisy, revenge and corruption – life returns to normal in the UK

Posted on by
Reply

More on covid pandemic 2020-2?

A week of incompetence, hypocrisy, revenge and corruption – life returns to normal in the UK

The weekend of 4th – 5th July saw a big jump towards normality (or the ‘new normal’ as we are been encouraged to say) in England, especially with the opening of more business, including pubs and restaurants. But if the majority of the population have to get used to the ‘new normal’ we see no change in the old normal of the British ruling class.

As life has changed back to what it was pre-March 23rd, with the slowing down of the pandemic in the country (or not, depending on which scientific expert you wanted to listen to) we have seen signs that some things hadn’t changed at all in the country, especially when it comes to the attitudes of the cretins the population has chosen as its ‘rulers’.

I don’t condemn the Buffoon for what he says and does. He was born into the class that has been exploiting and oppressing the workers of this country (and many other parts of the world) for centuries. In many ways he’s the perfect person to represent his class – criticisms bounce off him as if he were wearing armour, scandal slips off him as if the armour was coated with Teflon, he does and says anything he likes with impunity as he knows that he will survive whatever happens, like many of his class he has had the arrogance bred into him that he can never do wrong and certainly never runs the risk of being held responsible for his actions.

Together with arrogance comes hypocrisy and a total lack of irony. He stood behind a board with the words ‘Protect the NHS’ and never once considered this was against all he has believed, treated with contempt and acted against all his miserable life. He expects the people to ‘abide by the guidelines’ (imprecise, muddled and contradictory much of the time) which were issued when the relaxation of restrictions on businesses was announced, implying that if it all goes tits up it would be our fault and not anything to do with the crass incompetence and lack of imagination of his government over the last four months – and of his class for the last four centuries.

No, it isn’t the Buffoon that’s at fault, it’s the forelock tugging British working class which constantly lacks the courage to take matters into its own hands and instead continues to vote for those who know where their class interests lie and who use the pusillanimity of the workers to suck the country of its resources and do whatever it suits.

Social care

One person who knew that the Tories would revert to norm once the height of the pandemic crisis had been reached was Sir Simon Stevens, head of NHS England. Looking at what had transpired in the last four months and the number of deaths that had occurred in care homes and the so-called ‘fault lines’ that had been exposed by the pandemic he stated that a complete reform of the social care structure was needed within a year. He made these calls in an interview on the Andrew Marr Show on BBC 2, on 5th July. To the best of my knowledge, neither the Buffoon nor any other member of his government have made a response to this demand for a radical improvement in social care provision in Britain.

Care homes – or a leopard never changes it’s spots

Care homes, and social care in general, came to dominate the early part of the week. The Tories sought to divert attention away from this by their characteristic drip feed of relaxations – so that issues of why all beauty salon treatments couldn’t be carried out would dominate the headlines and so push structural matters into the background.

It also came as no surprise that, at the first opportunity, the Buffoon started to apportion blame on others in an effort to divert attention from his own personal incompetence and that of the bunch of buffoonettes around him.

In place of agreeing with the head of NHS England the Buffoon, the day after Stevens had made his call on the Sunday morning television, attacked the very workers in the care sector – who had been declared ‘heroes’ over the last four months – by saying that ‘too many care homes didn’t follow procedures’.

Such comments, not surprisingly, created a nationwide, and angry, response.

The fact that this comment should be taken as planned and considered – and not a Buffoonism – was proven by the fact that ‘No 10’ (the term used in Britain to refer to the office of the Buffoon, Number 10 Downing Street, in London) refused to apologise. In fact the Tories have surrounded the Buffoon and defended his comments in the way they should have defended the residents and workers in care homes during the height of the pandemic – and in the future.

One comment from Downing Street;

‘… nobody knew what the correct procedures were because the extent of asymptomatic transmission was not known at the time.’

So why, apart from trying to steer blame and responsibility upon anyone else as long as it’s not the Buffoon and his Government, was the comment made? What use does it have in the fight against the virus?

And, of course, they didn’t refer to the matter of Dominic Cummins ignoring a clear ‘procedure’ not to travel nor to the fact of the Buffoon’s own father just jetting off to a holiday home in Greece when the rest of us were told to stay at home. Both stories which seem (but shouldn’t) to have been forgotten. Nothing new there. One law for them, one law for us.

Mark Adams, Chief Executive of Community Integrated Care, a national social care charity, accused the Buffoon of;

‘seeking to re-write history, for the mistake after mistake made by the Government.’

He wrote that the Buffoon’s comments were an insult to care home staff who had worked long and hard in extremely difficult circumstances.

Others responded by saying it was ‘a huge slap in the face’ for the sector and that the Buffoon was merely attempting to deflect blame for Government failings.

But the Buffoon has to be careful. When he makes statements which annoy so many people there will always be those who will look deeper for the dirt on the Government. Arrogance has a price.

It emerged that warnings about staff working in multiple care homes (due to the chaotic and desperate shortage of trained staff in the sector) were missed by Ministers as long ago as the beginning of April – long before the so-called ‘guidelines’ were produced.

And then, ‘coincidentally’, later in the week a report was published by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) of 50 care homes that were inspected where, it was alleged, procedures were not followed. The Buffoon fighting back. It’s always interesting, the timing of the release of such reports.

Imelda Redmond, National Director Healthwatch England, ‘champion’ of health and social care users, Radio 4, World at One, 7th July;

Q. Can you understand why people are angry about the Buffoon’s comments?

‘Yes and the issues underlying all of this have been there for a very long time. There’s been under-investment in social care for vary many years. There needs to be very significant amount of reform which has been talked about for many years but hasn’t been acted upon. Actually, all those fault lines have been laid bare during the pandemic.’

Q. Do you see this as a ‘positioning’ ahead of any future enquiry?

‘I don’t think it’s a matter of where blame lies but we do have to understand and learn lessons as quickly as we can before we enter winter so we can be ready to deal with the issues.

The care sector is a very complex sector and we didn’t have a real handle on it, when the pandemic hit, of the complexities of the sector. We know more now but we really need to get to grip with this before we enter winter and perhaps a ‘second wave’.’

Q. So what is your answer to why there are so many deaths in the care sector?

‘We talk to families all over the country all the time and the kinds of things they are saying is that care homes were instructed to receive people from hospitals, if you remember. There was Government pressure to get people out of hospital so we would have capacity to deal with people who were very ill. But those people coming out of hospital were not always tested, or were not tested in the early days. That’s part of the problem.

The other issues are around the lack of PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) that they had. To be frank it was a difficulty that the social care sector in general had in getting access to the right type of PPE. … Nobody had a handle on the sector. Also the data was poor. There’s no way of contacting all social care at the same time, some people pay for their own care, some are paid through local authorities. It’s really that complexity that wasn’t understood.’

Q. Is there sufficient grip on it now?

‘Under the leadership of David Pearson and senior people at the Department of Health and Social Care there’s a better grip on it now than there was.’

Q. Sufficient?

‘Really we won’t know until later. The Task Force has only been around for about three weeks. There’s a greater grip on it. Nurseries are getting tested and tracing, we’re beginning to see more data coming through so there’s a better grip than we had but the underlying problems are that we didn’t plan properly and we really need to get that in place now.’

Finally on the care home front, more ‘collateral’ damage, this time patients with dementia ‘deteriorating’ due to the lack of family visits – which will no doubt have an effect on mortality rates sooner rather than later.

Did covid-19 exist a long time before December 2019?

This idea has been around for a while but seems to be getting more attention now. Not really sure where this will lead – or whether it will entail a change in tactics of how to overcome the virus. If nothing else it starts to take the pressure off the Chinese as ‘being responsible’ for the pandemic. If there were cases of the virus way back in 2019 in a number of countries then either medical staff weren’t able to spot a pattern or hospital administrators and/or governments sat on the information. If it wasn’t causing deaths (and therefore potentially making itself known) then this would have an impact upon the numbers of people who, potentially, have some resistance to the virus if not being completely immune.

Dr Tom Jefferson, Senior Associate Tutor, Centre for Evidence-based Medicine, Oxford, Radio 4, World at One, July 6th;

‘We have had a series of reports of the presence of viral particles, complete or fragments, of them in sewage and waste water and this goes back, the earliest I’m aware of, in March 2019 in Barcelona.’

Q. That would suggest it came from Europe not China.

‘No, it would suggest it was being excreted, with people’s stools, and got into waste water and got into sewage sometime, at least, by March 2019 if the study findings are confirmed. As you know there are a lot of false positives and a lot of uncertainty about testing.

The other thing we should bear in mind is that tests that have been done are on sewage and samples of sewage that have been frozen and kept. These are tests that can’t tell us whether the virus was active or alive. It could have just been fragments but it suggests that the micro-organism had been around for some time.’

Q. It’s not just Spain. There was Milan, Turin in mid December, even in Brazil in November.

‘Indeed. Australia as well and I have just seem something from Korea so it’s possible in the next few weeks we’re going to have more and more information.

What you’ve got to bear in mind is that these are reports that need to be confirmed.’

Q. But we didn’t have deaths back in March 2019.

‘We don’t know that. The thing is you only recognise, really only identify, a micro-organism when it causes problems, causes disease or death. Now to identity disease or death you’ve got to have an eye for it, like our Chinese colleague in Wuhan who recognised there was a sequence, a series of deaths which were unexplained.’

Q. Are you suggesting that there were deaths from the virus in early 2019 or just spreading among the population and not causing deaths?

‘I think the latter is more possible, more probable because if the findings in the sewage samples are confirmed then that would suggest that people were excreting them in their stools.’

Q. All the present theories are that it started in China, related to bats, but you’re saying it could have originated anywhere?

‘I don’t see why it should have originated from any particular country. It manifested itself in epidemic form in that country [China] first, as far as we are aware of, but we are now discovering that there were other cases. We are now almost certain there was a case in France at the end of December. So we just need to be broad-minded and try not to box our ideas in too much.’

Jefferson also wrote an article at the beginning of March – which might be useful when considering what we know then and what we didn’t then.

Transmission routes increase

Sneezes, being touched by an infected person, touching a surface which might have the virus there just waiting for a foolish host. Now, airborne transmission can’ be ruled out, possibly, according the the World health Organisation (WHO). We are well and truly doomed and starts to make a mockery out of any distance in ‘social distancing’.

University students and rebates

There’s a great deal of uncertainty in the British University community at present. Although not specified thirteen British universities are possibly on the brink of bankruptcy. Added to that many of the others (even those in the Russell Group) will have problems as they have relied on the money provided by foreign students, especially from China, who are unlikely to be coming as first year students in the 2020-21 academic year. Also many UK students are considering deferring as the ‘university experience’ just won’t exist with ‘social distancing’.

But the universities haven’t given up on getting hands on that money. Education is a business now and education takes the back seat.

Julia Buckingham, President Universities UK, Radio 4, You and Yours, July 6th;

Q. How do universities respond to the suggestion they shouldn’t have a blanket refusal for demands for refunds?

‘Universities have had to adapt their approach to teaching and learning because of the covid crisis and the most important thing for all of us was the health and safety of our students and our staff.

So we needed, unfortunately, to very rapidly transition to online learning and the support of our students because it simply wasn’t safe to continue with face to face teaching.

We have done our very best to ensure that all teaching can be completed, all modules completed, all our learning resources accessed and that students can achieve the desired learning outcomes in this academic year. And we’ve gone to very great lengths to make sure that assessments can be delivered online to ensure that as many as possible of our students will graduate at the end of the academic year or they have got the qualifications they need to progress to the next year of study.’

Q. Students who are not happy with what they have received have been advised to go to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA) but they are told the Adjudicator doesn’t have the ability to make a decision on academic matters. You’re wasting students time by giving them that advice, aren’t you?

‘No. Every university has a very clear procedure for looking at complaints and concerns raised by students and we are recommending that if students are concerned by the level of support that they had then they should access that process and we will do our very best to make sure that things are moved forward as speedily as we possibly can do.’

Q. How many have you dealt with already?

‘Different students will complain at different times. The students have been very busy doing assessments and I don’t have the information across the sector of the number of complaints and appeals that have come. But the universities will handle these and in the event that the student is not satisfied with the outcome from the university then they have recourse to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator.’

Q. But not if it is about the quality of the academic provision. This is outside the remit of the OIA.

‘If the students feel they have not had adequate support, adequate learning then those things go through the the complaints process and the OIA will look to see if the university has followed the process properly.’

Q. Now that students pay for their education they regard it not as a service but as a commodity. Universities don’t seem to accept that they are then covered by consumer law and you’re not doing anything about that.

‘Universities are working very hard to provide students with the very best information that we can at this time. But we all have to recognise that covid has been exceptionally challenging and it’s not always possible to provide students immediately with the sort of information that they want. I think the Office for Students (OFS) has been very clear in making sure that we should be providing information in a timely way but recognising that we are continually working with a series of unknowns.’

Q. There will likely be very few foreign students starting this autumn and many UK students might defer. The OFS has said if new students starting in the autumn face significant changes to their courses that universities must inform them, secure their consent and explain what the options are if they don’t accept the changes. Have all your 137 members done that?

‘Our universities are working very hard to develop their teaching programmes next year. It’s a long and very detailed process. Of the universities we have surveyed 97% have said they are aiming to deliver face to face teaching on campus next year. This means a vast amount of work in making sure our campuses are safe – that is the top priority.

With social distancing as it is at the moment that means that in many places, a lecture theatre for example, could only have 20% of the normal number of students within it. There is very, very detailed planning ongoing to make sure we deliver the education. What many universities are saying is that education next year will be blended.

So lectures, for example, will be delivered online, in a virtual environment – and actually many students like that because it gives them the opportunity to re-run the lecture, over and over again, and really get to grips with it. That will be supplemented with face to face teaching which, wherever possible, will be done on campus.

But we have to be prepared that there could be a further lock down and we need to be prepared to switch back to digital learning only to make sure that our students get the support they need.’

Testing

A ‘world beating’ testing regime – not yet.

The Lighthouse Laboratories have ‘failed to deliver robust data’, according to the Institute of Biomedical Science.

Home tests are taking too long and ‘they render tracing scheme useless’.

And anti-body tests aren’t living up to expectations (or hopes).

The ever elusive tracing app

Continues to be elusive – and barely gets a mention now.

Is there such a things as ‘herd immunity’?

This is another topic that’s starting to get more space. Perhaps we need anti-body testing regimes in many other countries, who have adopted various strategies in dealing with the virus, to start to get any meaningful idea on a world scale. I would have thought the tighter the lock down, the more the restrictions, the less the ‘herd immunity’. If so we face the shock horror of the possibility of Trump and Bolsonaro being proven correct in their non-tactics.

No ‘herd immunity’, according to a Spanish study.

Yes, if you look at a New York based study.

But many of us might have had a level of natural immunity even before the pandemic was declared.

As a reminder, just what is immunity – and how can you get it.

What about a ‘second wave’?

Is a ‘second wave’ likely?

And when it comes to Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) is the UK ready?

The issue of masks

There is still no real consensus on the wearing of masks. The problem here is that the level of fear (at least in British society) is that the wearing of masks will become more general outside of the home as those not wearing a mask (or a face covering) will be seen as virtual ‘Typhoid Marys’ – not a way to establish policy.

The Buffoon is now saying that the scientific evidence is moving in favour of mask wearing on a greater scale and it’s likely it will be mandatory, in certain circumstances, in a few days – as always the Government lets speculation run rife before making a grandstanding statement.

However, in all this mad rush to conform with what other countries have instituted the downsides of masks/face coverings are being ignored. As has been the case since the very beginning the only ‘expert’ advice that the Buffoon follows is that in which he (or his master Cummins) is in agreement.

The future NHS

The NHS might have survived the pandemic to date but it seems, due to pre-existing staff shortages, only by the skin of its teeth. We might not be so lucky in the future if covid comes back with a vengeance later in the year, according to many organisations representing workers in all levels of the service.

On top of everything else there are now arising a whole raft of issues that are accompanied by contracting the virus and a special approach is being established to provide care over an extended period.

In yet another example of the Tories back-tracking on previous pledges, especially the one about providing the NHS with ‘whatever it needs’, the promises of financial support which are made with such fanfare (especially by the rich kid poster boy Chancellor) are coming with serious strings – once people analyse the small print.

And now that the Buffoon is out of hospital himself (he must have felt at risk going into a NHS hospital, probably the first time other than wanting to make a show of concern, normally he would have been using private facilities) and the ‘heroes’ are no longer needed in the immediate future, any concessions are being revoked. One of the first to go is free car parking of all NHS staff.

The timing of the release of reports into the NHS is always suspect and is often part of a political agenda. That doesn’t mean that shortcomings in the NHS shouldn’t be exposed and solutions found but they have to be taken in the context of what has been happening to the NHS structure since the 1980s. The way it was turned more into a business rather than a service a culture was created that has led to most of the scandals and malpractice of recent years.

The Cumberlege Inquiry, which looked at the issue of patients being put at risk from unsafe medicines and implants, has just published its findings where patients were ‘being exposed to a risk of harm when they do not need to be’. Jeremy Hunt, a previous Tory Health Minister said ‘we must not allow this seminal report to gather dust on a shelf’. However, when he has made statements about reviews of the present Government and its cack-handed handling of the pandemic he continually tries to push this as far as possible into the future.

One of the unintended consequences of the desperation to curb the spread of covid-19, especially in the early days when the knowledge base was low, is the (perhaps) over-use of antibiotics which could fuel a ‘superbug time bomb’ in the future.

After spending the last almost four months praising the NHS the Buffoon (no doubt just uttering the words that have been fed to him by the puppet master Cummins) is now planning on a major restructuring of the National Health Service (NHS).

This seems to be prompted by the fact that senior people in the NHS don’t always kowtow to government diktat.

Anyone who has lived through major reorganisations of large concerns such as the NHS knows that this never goes well – often changes being reversed to what they were before. But in the process there is huge damage to the organisation – financial, operationally and also in staff relations.

With already reported staff shortages and the possibility of a ‘second wave’ in the near future the reorganisation of the NHS now seems to be bordering on the criminal. So much for ‘Protect the NHS’ slogan.

And all this comes less than a week after the hypocrites were ‘celebrating’ the 72nd anniversary of the foundation of the NHS.

The collateral damage of the covid-19 shut down – not pandemic

The pandemic has put a halt to the vast majority of regular treatments for a number of reasons. Staff working elsewhere, people afraid to report problems to GPs and that fear also preventing patients attending testing and scanning appointments. A report has stated that could, over the course of the next year, lead up to 35,000 extras deaths from treatable cancers.

This matter was also discussed on Radio 4’s Inside Health on 8th July.

Also the climate emergency hasn’t gone away – even if for the last four to six months various countries throughout the world have been pumping less crap into the environment – yet the almost unbelievable amount of disposable plastic from PPE might have counteracted the poison pumped into the atmosphere.

Changes at the top – or the creation of a new committee

When a government such as that of the Buffoon finds that a structure no longer suits their political agenda then the response it to change that structure. This has happened with the arrangement which was praised so much over the last four months.

As part of these changes a new unit, Joint Biosecurity Centre, was to take charge of overall covid-19 response. A lot of people saw problems here.

A Government spokesman said a slimmed-down Sage would focus on longer-term concerns, such as the impact of winter.

‘Sage will continue to provide a single consensus view of scientific advice at the heart of government decision-making, to inform the national strategic response to the coronavirus epidemic.

As we move into the next phase of the coronavirus response, the JBC will complement the work of Sage, providing more operational focus including data analysis and epidemiological expertise, with the aim of ensuring that outbreaks of coronavirus are detected and brought under control quickly.’

Modern day slavery and the pandemic

Matt Hancock, Health Secretary, 5th July, when referring to the not relaxing of the lock down in Leicester;

‘Infection in Leicester was running at three times the rate in the next highest city. In stopping that the first priority is stopping the virus but there are clearly also other problems under the radar, that have been under the radar in the past in Leicester, that need action.’

Those ‘under the radar’ problems were many garment factories in Leicester which were functioning in conditions akin to modern slavery.

It was revealed that a major British fashion retailer, Boohoo, used these factories for much if its supply of clothing. This led to a number of well known (in the fashion world) stores dropping Boohoo like a red hot brick. An element of hypocrisy here as so much clothing these stores sell, mainly women’s clothing, is so cheap that some one had to be exploited – if not in this country then in sweat shops in Asia.

Then, only a few days later, it emerged that one of the founders of Boohoo has links to some of the factories at the centre of the scandal – so not really a surprise to them.

It will also be interesting if anything really happens here – and who will take the brunt of any closure. It’s highly likely that many of those working in these factories might well be ‘illegal immigrants’ (the reason the slave/gang masters are able to function without any news of the conditions being made public). The Tories haven’t shown themselves sympathetic to such groups in the past – and at the time of writing (11th July) the French riot police had just cleared away about 1,000 people from temporary encampments in Calais, at the request of the British.

Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)

At the beginning of April – and for a number of weeks after – the issue of PPE was rarely out of the news. Eventually, too late for some, this equipment was provided for those who needed it. But it came a cost – £15 billion. Someone saw the Buffoon coming – but will we ever know who and why.

Homeowners and renters – different treatment

When Tories talk about homes they mean homes to buy. Ever since Thatcher, in the 1980s, realised that she could use the selling off of council homes at a vastly reduced rate to buy herself votes and dig away at a system that had provided decent homes for working people this has been a principal plank in the Tories programme. No matter people have the risk of negative equity, never mind the fact that it was the housing policies, throughout the world, in various countries that was integral to the financial collapse of 2008.

And social housing has continued to be attacked and those unable, or unwilling, to get into home ownership are increasing forced to rely on the private renting market – one that is fraught with dangers, both financial and physical, due to the unregulated nature of the sector.

The Buffoon had to be forced to declare an eviction ‘holiday’ during the pandemic but that will end soon and there is bound to be a slew of eviction notices during the early autumn. Studies by Shelter, the housing charity, show that the numbers of those in arrears have doubled since March and the pandemic lock down. In England, Acorn, and in Scotland, Living Rent, are preparing to fight this injustice.

And when the Chancellor, Rishi Sunak, sought to ‘stimulate’ the economy he decided on handing more money to home owners (or rather many people caught in a lifelong cycle of struggling to pay their mortgage) rather than assistance and promotion of social housing. This came in the form of paying each house £5,000 for insulation and double glazing – attempting to build his ‘green’ credentials at the same time as giving money to those who least need it.

It wasn’t spelt out in his announcement on 8th July but the consequence of his proposed changes to stamp duty will benefit those wealthy people who are buying second homes or buying to let – and not the first time buyers it was pushed as helping. The biggest expansion in the revitalised British economy will, it seems, be in the production of bulldozers to shovel more pound coins into the bank accounts of the rich.

The Swedish experience

The analysis of the different approach from most countries in Europe followed by Sweden will be interesting when it is finally released. Unlike the Westminster government the Swedes are looking at what they did right, or wrong, now – not some indeterminate time in the future.

Britain and the world in figures

When it comes to ‘world beating’ the Buffoon is right – but not in the manner he would really like. Amongst the G7 nations (the most developed, ‘traditional’, pre ‘fall of Communism’ capitalist countries) the percentage excess death rate is the highest.

They don’t get any better a week later.

And why did Japan ‘do so well’ and the UK so badly?

This might be interesting for the cases and deaths on a local authority basis in the United Kingdom, as of the first days of July.

Changes using covid as an excuse

There will be many things that will change under the excuse that there was no alternative due to the covid crisis, from Government, local authority, business and even at social enterprise level. Some of it might be forced upon organisations others welcomed as a get out of potential problems that would have existed under ‘normal circumstances’.

As a result of the Buffoon’s call to ‘Build, Build, Build’ we are likely to get ‘Shoddy, Cheap, Nasty’.

Just over three years after the avoidable blaze at Grenfell Tower in London – which resulted in the death of 72 people – the ex-residents are not really any closer to getting ‘justice’ (whatever that might mean in capitalist Britain). Now the survivors can’t even attend the hearing to investigate what happened that night of the 14th June 2017. The reason given? Covid-19. Those still fighting for an answer to why things were allowed to get such a state are just brushed away.

They will be able to watch a live video recording but that’s not the same. In such circumstances you need to be read the body language of all the participants to really understand what is going on, also to look at the reactions to events by others on the room. By denying the survivors that right they are being denied ‘justice’.

‘Collateral damage’ in the south as a result of northern hemisphere centrism

There’s a problem with the knee jerk reactions that have been made in many countries since the start of the covid pandemic – very often the plans are not thought through and they don’t realise the consequences of their actions or decisions. Such is the case surrounding vaccination programmes in the southern hemisphere which were stopped following WHO ‘advice’. Now, in at least 68 countries, these very same experts are concerned of the long term implications of the suspension of these programmes.

When it comes to covid-19 the young are less likely to suffer serious consequences yet the diseases that vaccination can prevent have been proven to kill millions over time.

The pandemic has shown that most countries really don’t have a strategy to deal with it. The same is the case when decisions are taken which effect many other countries. If there is to be any real preparation for the next pandemic (the not if but when one) then there should also be consideration of the risks involved unless more lives are put at risk by hasty, unthought and poorly considered policies.

Corrupt and inept governments in some countries are so weak and care so little about their populations that gangsters are picking up the ‘social care’ provision that should be the duty of the state. In Mexico the drug cartels are having a field day in attracting mainly young people to help them in their ‘business’ as they are desperate for any source of income.

The cartels don’t care for these people and are just using them, as Pablo Escobar was successful in doing in Colombia in the 1980 and early 90s. But even in the short term life is better than any dependence upon the state. Apart from anything else this makes any war against these gangsters more difficult to pursue as the drug barons are seen as modern day ‘Robin Hoods’.

… and to finish …

Corruption at the highest level – or why they are in politics

It seems that the people who are responsible for giving out contracts are so arrogant they think they can do what they want that they don’t make much of an attempt to hide what they are doing. A sizeable contract was given, without tender, to a research company to which there are close links with Michael Gove and Dominic Cummins.

More on covid pandemic 2020-2?

When you thought the situation in Britain couldn’t get any worse – the Buffoon opens his mouth

Posted on by
Reply

More on covid pandemic 2020-2?

When you thought the situation in Britain couldn’t get any worse – the Buffoon opens his mouth

If you are unfortunate enough to be living in Britain in 2020 – during the covid-19 pandemic – you are used to waking up hoping you had seen the worse – and then you would see, hear or read the latest cock up of the Buffoon and his gang (and pinch yourself hoping it was all some surreal nightmare).

Every time the present Government is questioned or criticised about its ‘handling’ of the pandemic the stock answer is that we should concentrate on dealing with the crisis in a united manner and that any review of what was, or was not done, will be part of an investigation at some time in the indeterminate future. Obviously the Buffoon and his Government hope that at that time people would have forgotten what a pig’s ear they had made of the situation from the very beginning – a wish that, unfortunately, will probably turn out to be true.

However, a short ‘review’ just short of three months into Britain’s response to the pandemic;

  • the death toll is around 64,000 (as of the end of May) – that being the difference in the average number of deaths in the last five years in the same period and what has happened in 2020 (considered as being the most accurate estimation as many deaths, especially in the early days, were not being put down to covid-19)
  • the ‘world beating’ test and trace programme is an embarrassment (see below)
  • the situation in care homes continues to be dire (see below)
  • most (if not all) policy decisions are taken by the Government in an ad hoc manner surprising those who have to carry out these policies (see below)
  • there’s a ever growing major difference of opinion between the scientific advisors and the politicians (see below)
  • there’s seemingly no strategic plan to get as many children as possible back to school as soon as possible (see below)
  • the prospects for the economy in the coming years is predicted to be the worst in Europe

Fourteen day quarantine for anyone entering the United Kingdom

The plans are announced – and immediately people ask the question – why now?

Robert West, Professor Of Health Psychology, University College London, on Radio 4, World at One, 2nd June, talking about the plans to introduce a 14 day quarantine for all travellers coming into the United Kingdom from 8th June;

‘There is science behind it but of course the science is ambiguous here with regards to exactly what policy you adopt. …

It’s a cautious approach but the science would also support other chunks of measures such as those being adopted by other countries which might involve having more testing of people as they come into the country and other preventative type measures. ….

What’s puzzling a number of people is that this seems a particularly cautious approach for people coming into the country when we’re seeing a relaxing, to some degree against the scientific advice, with the approach we are adopting for the people already here.

It would be fine if the Government were to say …. there are reasons for doing so while other countries are taking a different approach.’

Q. The line ‘we owe it to victims to impose a quarantine’ [Priti Patel]. Is that how you see it?

West laughs. ‘It doesn’t make any sense. [Laughs again, then stutters looking for words to express his reply in the face of such a ludicrous statement.] That’s just a very generalised, emotive argument you could apply to anything.

We owe to the victims to apply appropriate cautious measures across the whole gamut of what we are doing and that includes getting a decent contact, testing, tracing and isolation system in place – which we should have started on a long time ago.

Talking about ‘we owe it to the victims’ is not a particularly helpful contribution.’

Universities opening in September

Julia Buckingham, Vice-Chancellor of Brunel University and President of Universities UK, on what situation students will possibly face at the beginning of the academic year in September 2020, Radio 4, World at One, 2nd June;

‘There are some wonderful examples of digital eduction now, techniques like virtual reality, so I do see this as a really exciting opportunity. If I’m honest it’s something I’ve been wanting to do for a long time and I think our students will actually embrace it.’

The reason for including this quote are twofold. The first is that this use of technology, especially when coupled with the ‘bubble approach’ being discussed at the moment, will change the whole ethos of attending University. If you can do all the work at a distance (which is the case for the majority of the students not involved in hands on practical courses) then why go in the first place.

With the cost of University fees and living costs this is a very expensive way of having a party – which you won’t be able to have because of the ‘bubble approach’ and social distancing. You might as well sign on to a university, go across the world where the sun shines most of the time and living costs are cheap and just pay for a good internet connection.

The second is what follows the phrase ‘if I’m honest’. This is just one example where different organisations and businesses will use the effects of the covid-19 ‘new normal’ to bring in practices they have wanted to introduce but couldn’t due to potential opposition. They will now make it a fait accompli and push the blame on a guiltless virus. It won’t be able to say that it wasn’t its idea.

To make the experience of being a students totally miserable (as well as expensive) it is being suggested they might have to stay in ‘protective bubble’.

Already universities are nervous – especially those which are over dependent upon foreign students, even more so those which have been cultivating the very lucrative Asian, mainly, Chinese ‘market’ – education is more of a business now and education seems to be a bit of a sideline. But even domestic students are thinking about their future and deferrals are certainly being considered by many. What to do if they don’t go to University might be what swings it – a ‘gap year’ travelling, finding a job for a year might not be viable alternatives.

The Buffoon and his Government inept and incompetent? – of course not

The Buffoon at Prime Minister’s Question Time in the Houses of Parliament, 3rd June, in response to a challenge on the ineptitude and incompetence of his Government’s approach to the covid-19 pandemic;

‘I really do not see the purpose of these endless attacks on public trust and confidence. What we’re trying to do is to …. [communicate] clear messages about how to defeat this virus.

Test and trace is a vital tool in our armoury and, contrary to what he [Starmer, leader of the Labour Party] says, actually we did, by the end of May [he meant April] get up to 100,000 [although that figure is generally accepted to have been ‘massaged’] tests a day and we got to 200,00 by the beginning of this month [another figure that has been extensively challenged].

That was an astonishing achievement, not by government but by tens of thousands of people working to support government. [Interesting how here the Buffoon turns a question of the truth of what Ministers have said and claims it as an attack on people carrying out the tests and the tracing. Also how those people are doing the job ‘to support the Government’ – as if they have faith in what it is doing.]

I think he [Starmer] should pay tribute to them and what they’ve achieved. [Here the Buffoon reiterates his ‘support’ for those who are being ‘questioned’ in the validity of the figures.]’

And this is the problem (one of many) of Parliamentary so-called ‘Democracy’. These characters aren’t concerned about dealing with the issues of the day, they are more concerned with playing to the gallery of their supporters. In Britain it’s played like a Public (in Britain that means private) school debating society. It’s not what is said but how it is said in order to win support – the solution to the problem doesn’t come into it.

If you can stomach it you can see a performance what is called PMQs (Prime Minister’s Questions) of the 10th June.

The mandatory use of face masks on public transport

The World Health Organisation doesn’t do itself any favour when faced by the cretins such a Trump. Now, seven, eight or even nine months (depending upon who you listen to about the actual first appearance of the virus) they reverse their policy on the general population wearing masks whenever they might have close contact with others outside of their immediate circle.

Devi Lalita Sridhar, Professor and Chair of Global Public Health at the University of Edinburgh, Radio 4, World at One, 5th June;

‘There’s emerging evidence [although no mention of what or from where] about the positive impact that mask usage can have in reducing transmissions. … it would have been nice to have had this done earlier.

I agree with the British Medical Association that the latest proposals don’t go far enough. What we need to be seeing is mandatory masks whenever distancing is not possible. This means in shops, on public transport, in work places, airports, train station. This is a first step but there’s a long way to go.’

Q. Has mask wearing worked elsewhere?

‘It’s difficult to say. A lot of countries introduced a package of measures at the same time. We also need to look at a package of measures, we need to look at the cumulative effect that they can have together, even if each alone has a weak evidence base.’

This is a matter that’s been really badly handled in Britain by both the politicians and the so-called ‘scientific experts’. Also the introduction of the mandatory use late (as is that of the 14 day quarantine for those entering the country) doesn’t help to inspire confidence.

The pros and cons as I understand it;

Pros.

If someone is infected with the virus, and especially if they are not aware of it, the wearing of a mask will capture some, but not all, of the virus if they were to cough or sneeze – or even talk to someone close to them. The figure varies widely, down to below 50% by some estimates, but that would still make for a reasonable lowering of risk. And that’s it.

Cons.

The wearing of a mask will not prevent the virus from infecting you if someone coughs or sneezes in the vicinity. The problem here is that most people believe it will protect them. That’s why you see people alone in vehicles wearing a mask. And the majority who wear them when they are outside, and alone, are not doing it in an effort to not spread the infection they don’t know they have on to others. It’s fear which drives this wearing of masks and creates a false sense of security, which itself can cause problems.

The biggest ‘con’ that was being ‘promoted’ weeks ago was the fact that if someone is infected and they are breathing into a mask, that mask will accumulate millions of spores of the virus. Any mask, especially in the heat of summer, will soon get sopping wet and an infected person (who doesn’t know they are infected) is supposed to take that mask off in a controlled manner, dispose of it safely (or bag it if it is to be used more than once), wash their hands with sanitiser without touching any surface at all, including their own face.

That’s not going to happen.

To actually breathe and feel comfortable people will be constantly touching the mask and – if infected – then spreading the virus on anything they touch. It is just not possible to go through any daily routine without touching anything, including the face which we touch hundreds of times a day due to evolution.

For those who are good with the sewing needle – or were brought up on Blue Peter – here’s what you should do to prepare for the 15th June.

The British Medical Association has asked for the wearing of masks to be extended beyond public transport to any potential contact between individuals – and that they should be provided free. However, although there are plenty of hints at how to make your own masks those to buy are in relatively short supply – and/or expensive. Other countries where masks wearing is mandatory supply them and have controlled the price. For example, to just less than a Euro each in Spain and they have even gone down in price in Holland, where a pack of ten was €10 but are now selling (in normal supermarkets) at less than €7.

A slightly different take on ‘mask wearing’ and as an example of the Buffoon and his Government’s inability to deal properly with those who have to implement their policies – seemingly thought of after cigars and brandy (copious amounts of) they decided that everyone that enters a NHS facility (either workers or visitors) should have to wear a mask. However, the Government ‘forgot’ to consult with the NHS trusts – those responsible for enforcing such a policy.

Schools – when or even if – they open

Mary Bousted, Joint General Secretary of the National Education Union, Radio 4, World at One, 8th June;

Q. What is different about September that will allow whole schools to open?

‘The joy must really be out about whole schools being able to open in September. It all depends where we are with the coronavirus at that point; whether the R rate is down, whether the number of cases is low enough and whether we’re confident that schools can operate. If you’ve got a whole school in there’s no way you can have social distancing. There’s much that is dependent on the spread of the virus, how well it’s controlled.’

Q. Isn’t there a point when certain children are more at risk not going to school than doing so?

‘Disadvantaged children, perhaps should be the priority. I was surprised when the Prime Minister said that first year groups should go back first. My union would have said that disadvantaged children should go back first because, you’re right, they need school the most, they benefit from school the most and they suffer when they can’t go to school. [If such a policy were adopted that would make the children feel good, wouldn’t it? There’s the whole rejects from society in one place at the same time. In a culture where bullying is rife surely such stigmatisation is the last thing that’s needed?]

We do know that in secondary schools there is a focus on disadvantaged children and vulnerable children being in school but the problem we’re got is that many of the families are extremely concerned. [For example] many Bangladeshi families won’t send their children back to school as they live in multi-generational households and they’re afraid they’ll bring the virus home.’

Anne Longfield, Children’s Commissioner for England, on the debacle and confusion around if/when/who on schools re-opening in 2020, on 9th June;

She accused ministers of ‘failing to prioritise schools and lacking the necessary will and ingenuity to overcome the difficulties that are involved in social distancing’. She also found the ‘delayed return deeply worrying’ and it was ‘a disruption not seen since World War Two’. Further that ‘a decade of catching up on the education gap may well be lost’.

Andrew Snape, Professor in General Paediatrics and Vaccinology, Radio 4, World at One, 9th June;

Q. Children don’t seem to be badly effected by the virus. Is that correct?

‘That’s right, as a paediatrician that’s really important. Children don’t seem to get sick from covid-19. There is a small number of cases of post-covid inflammatory syndrome but in the overall picture the risk to individual children is very small.’

Q. Do they spread it to adult?

‘Although children can carry the virus ….. perhaps 1 in 200 children, but they seem not to be the super-spreaders that they are for influenza. Children are fantastic at spreading influenza … but that’s not the case for covid-19. … It’s much more common that adults bring the virus into the household.’

Q. Are you confident to send your children back to school?

‘Yes, I’m confident of sending my children back to school. The risk as an individual would be very low. The bigger question is ‘does my children’s school re-opening increase the spread through the community?’ because it’s not just the children at school. It’s the teachers who are mixing in the staff room, it’s the parents mixing at the school gate and bringing their children to school. So there’s all the other elements that need to be very carefully looked at and managed to avoid the actual opening of the school creating a spread of the virus through the community.’

Q. How important is mitigation?

‘It’s really important. There’s not a lot of evidence that children are spreading it. … A lot of effort would need to go into ensuring there’s not a lot of mixing of parents and the teachers, to try and minimise their social interactions might even be more important in reducing the spread.’

David Blunkett, former Education Secretary in a Labour Government, Radio 4, World at One, 9th June;

Q. What’s the problem about schools not going back as was previously announced?

‘To be honest I think it’s a lack of will, it’s a lack of ‘can do’, it’s a failure to do what we’ve already done with the health service and the economy, which is to say ‘there are challenges, there are real problems but we are going, as a nation, to actually seek to overcome them’. It’s easier for Scotland, they go back much earlier in the summer anyway but for England and Wales it’s a different matter.

Why is it that other countries, not just in Europe but across the world, can have the ambition to get their children, in all kinds of creative ways, back into school and we can’t?

I can only conclude that the Government are losing the plot.’

Q. You are saying it’s a lack of will on the part of the Government, not that it’s the parents taking a precautionary approach?

‘Well, it’s a Catch 22. the less confident the Government is, the less clear they are about what steps they’ll take themselves to help those local authorities and education trusts to manage this transition, the more parents get worried,

This is an endeavour for all of us to work together. We have 600,000 people taken on as volunteers nationally to help with vulnerable people at home. We’ve got supply teachers who are not being paid anything. We’ve got excellent teachers doing their utmost to work with children at home.

We can take up the suggestion … of using other buildings, we can do what the Americans do … which is to close roads around schools to make space available. All of this could be done with a bit of thinking creatively and everyone working together.

Q. However much space you give them aren’t children going to break the 2m or 1m rules? And it’s six months, it’s not the end of the world. What price do you think will come with this?

‘If it’s not the end of the world why do we have the education systems we have here and in the rest of the world?

I spoke to someone who said her nephew, who is in his mid-teens, spends everyday until 12.30 in bed. That won’t be because teachers aren’t trying or parents aren’t actually encouraging it will be because a kind of lethargy comes out in teenagers if they don’t have a structure and they don’t have encouragement. … I just know that we’ve got to do this.

If we can set up the Nightingale hospitals in the time we did why on earth can’t we invest in the future of out children?

Q. Where does the initiative need to come from?

‘The Government should say to local authorities and education trusts – get together, come up with a plan which includes mentoring and recovery programmes in certain schools as well as staggered hours and new premises. Come up with that plan and we, as a nation, will fund it. The funding from the middle of June through into August, we’ll pick it up again in September if the scientific advice is that we can’t actually go back to complete normality. We’ll reduce the distancing for schools to a metre – which is being done across the rest of Europe and is the advice of the WHO – and above all we’ll say to people at local level use your initiative, have confidence to develop programmes locally.

Of course, take the advice of the directors of public health at local level but try and do it in a very positive way so that you can deal with any spikes, you can be confident there’s no infections at the present time … and then we can ensure that we not only give the confidence to parents and to teachers and children but we also allow those parents to go back to their jobs where they will be contributing to the recovery of our economy.’

Was the lock down worth it – and effective?

Sunetra Gupta, Professor of Theoretical Epidemiology at the University of Oxford, Radio 4, World at One, 9th June;

Q. Would you have argued for ‘herd immunity’ all along?

‘Yes, I would have said that but with the proviso that we put as much money as possible – and to make up for what hasn’t happened over the last 30 years – to support the vulnerable sectors of the population.

I think at that point we had enough information to know that there were certain sectors of the population that were particularly vulnerable and that we needed to protect them – and the word ‘protect’ carries with it all sorts of implications – but essentially it seemed to be that there was a real gap in the resources available to achieve that.

Let’s now try and divert as many of these resources as possible to protect the vulnerable population and to reduce their risk. And the way to reduce this risk to the vulnerable population – as we have done unwittingly in many cases with the pathogens that do kill us … is by having enough immunity ourselves such that the risk posed to the vulnerable population is low.’

Q. So the majority of the population carry on as normal and catch the virus and build up ‘herd immunity’?

‘That’s how we have traditionally dealt with the pathogens that do at the moment kill the elderly and the vulnerable.

It’s a terrible thing that that happens but it happens.

I guess we’ve made the decision that we need to balance out that problem against the problem of completely shutting down the economy or compromising out social interactions to the point of farce.’

Q. Has the lock down been a farce?

‘We are trying to wriggle out of this situation in a way that is quite farcical. We come up with rules that are arbitrary, to my mind.’

Q. The idea would be to change the strategy with the vulnerable staying indoors?

First of all we need to go out there and make a proper map of what their risk is. The risk to the elderly and frail is not just contingent upon how elderly or frail they are but how immune the rest of the population surrounding them is. We need to go out and test, to the best of out abilities, knowing now that some people are not going to register positive on these tests simply because they happen to be entirely resistant to the disease.

We need some clever statisticians and people who are disinterested in promoting any kind of sense of what they think is going on, to make proper, clear, best assessments about what the risks are to the vulnerable in every part of the country.

Just in the UK there is a huge variation in who has been exposed given the locality. There’s enormous heterogeneity and homogenising this data just to fit certain precepts or preconceptions is not helpful.

What we need to do is go out there, look at who’s been exposed in different regions and come up with a strategy, put public money into supporting the people who are vulnerable given the risks that they face. … We need to make sensible decisions about how to protect people.’

Q. Should we be relaxed about the R number, lift the lock down quickly and not be phased by the idea of a second wave?

‘There will be a resurgence of this like any other respiratory pathogen in the winter and we need to prepare for that.’

Q. We hear there’s some regret in Sweden due to the death toll. Would that not have happened here if we didn’t have lock down?

‘I think it’s unfortunate that people are focussing on that point. … What was said was that they could have done better to protect the care homes and indeed that’s what we should have done.

It’s unfortunate people are jumping on that [failing in Sweden] to say they should have had a lock down earlier.

What I don’t understand about the lock down is what is the exit strategy from it anyway?’

Q. Would you lift it as quickly as possible?

‘Yes, right now, absolutely.’

Q. Do you think the disease arose earlier in China than was suggested?

‘Absolutely, yes,’

Q. When did you think it appeared?

‘… In any normal system by the time it takes for deaths from the disease [to be recorded] it’s been around for at least a month.’

Q. So October rather than November?

‘Yes, something like that.’

Related to this idea is the uncertainty of how many people might, for whatever reason, already be (or have always been) resistant to covid-19.

Care Homes

This issue will run and run. This sector was in a dire state prior to covid-19 and the political philosophy and attitude of the Tories – which is to step back from any social welfare that benefits the general population – won’t just evaporate. And even when they make a big splash about giving to the sector it’s more giving with one hand and taking with the other.

More than 25,000 patients discharged to care homes in crucial 30 days before routine testing.

Even thought he care homes have become the epicentre of the disease in Britain they are still not getting the priority they need. And the stupidity of the Government is demonstrated by the fact that they are seemingly incapable of avoiding criticism by making sure care homes are at the top of the list for any developments in the battle against the virus. Instead of giving the impression they see that mistakes were made in the past (and will do their best to do better in the future) they continue to try to score political points – even when the facts stand in opposition. This was the case about testing kits – and the difference between being delivered and used. (Note how Hancock gets testy when challenged in the video clip.)

Another view on Hancock and numbers.

Test, track, trace – and isolate

Only 4 in 10 Covid-19 patients contacted at start of government’s ‘test and trace’ scheme.

The people of Britain were promised a ‘world beating’ test and tracing system. However, in the first days of June there was nothing for many of the staff employed to do this had a great deal to do.

Matt Hancock under fire over incomprehensible testing targets.

Sir David Norgrove, chairman of the UK Statistics Authority, sent a letter to Matt Hancock, the Health Secretary, on 2nd June where he stated that the figures being presented were ‘still far from complete and comprehensible’ and that many of the ‘key numbers make little sense’. This was partly in response to the Government’s ‘massaging’ of their testing ‘target’ numbers, mainly the 100,000 by the end of April and the 200,000 by the end of May – both of which were ‘met’ but with dubious counting.

But the ‘world beating’ system is not going to be with us soon. The autumn might be more likely.

The privacy issue also keeps on running.

Open Rights Group to challenge UK over test and trace data retention.

This might be academic. We still don’t know exactly when the magic app will be in general use.

And which app? There’s now the possibility that the NHSX will ditch their own, centralised app and revert to the ‘off the shelf’ system developed by Apple and Google and which is being used in other countries.

Watch this space.

For an interesting view on the ‘complications’ surrounding tests and how the figures we are told about and reality are not always in line listen to the first 15 minutes or so of the BBC Radio 4 programme, ‘More or Less‘ on Friday, 5th June.

Food Banks

The obscenity gets even worse.

The stories behind the statistics.

Two metres – or less

This has now become part of the debate.

Two-metre rule halves chances of catching coronavirus.

Although there is a push to reduce the social distancing rules – especially as in Britain the 2 metre rule is out of kilter with many other countries.

How did covid-19 land on the sceptred isle?

Through the ability of scientists to break down the genetic sequence of the virus – and with the sharing of information between countries of their particular outbreaks – it’s possible for scientists to identify from which part of the world those in Britain contracted the disease – normally by close contact from someone infected from those countries. And that happened on more than 1,300 occasions.

That puts the idea of instituting a quarantine for visitors to the UK from 8th June into context – stable doors and bolting horses come to mind.

And for the xenophobes the majority of those cases came from two countries – France and Spain. That shouldn’t come as any surprise as with the explosion in recent years of air travel with the budget airlines those are the two most popular countries for British travellers – and the UK for the French and Spanish

Asymptomatic spread of coronavirus

It has long been argued that it’s the asymptomatic individuals that were the biggest spreaders of the coronavirus – not out of Mary Mallon fear and ignorance – but because they don’t know they are infected. That seemed to be challenged somewhat by a statement from Dr Maria Van Kerkhove, the WHO’s technical lead for Covid-19. However, there was later some ‘clarification’ that she was arguing for emphasis to be placed on tracing contacts with anyone who was proven to have had the disease. But I still slightly confused.

Has the Dominic Cummins affair gone away?

Perhaps not. Reminiscent of Al Capone being imprisoned for tax evasion (and not the countless murders for which he was certainly responsible) Cummins – or his family – might have broken local government planning regulations when a farm building was converted for residential use. Haven’t heard any more of this so don’t know if it is just bubbling under the surface.

And as neither Cummins not the Buffoon are prepared to do the ‘right thing’ it is being left to private individuals to make the rich and powerful abide by the same rules that the majority of the population are expected to do with a private legal case being progressed to get the prosecution service to take the matter seriously.

Risk of getting severe case of covid-19

To the conditions that have become recognised as presenting a higher risk in the present pandemic (older than 70, being male, from a BAME community, suffering from ‘underlying health conditions’, diabetes, dementia/Alzheimer’s) can now be added another – baldness.

What we might learn to face the next pandemic more efficiently

The virus has been around long enough now – with hundreds of thousands of scientists trying to learn as much as possible about all of its hidden characteristics – for a fuller picture to be constructed which might make the next pandemic less traumatic.

Should the lock down had happened earlier?

Forgetting for the moment whether the lock down should have happened at all (see the section above arguing it wasn’t the right tactic if other provisions had been in place) there are scientists who are now arguing it was imposed too late – by about a week.

On Sunday 7th June, Professor John Edmunds, an epidemiologist at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and a member of Sage, told the BBC ‘We should have gone into lock down earlier’ and that by not doing so it ‘has cost a lot of lives’.

The response from Matt Hancock, the Health Secretary was ‘There’s a broad range on Sage of scientific opinion and we were guided by the science, which means guided by the balance of that opinion’.

I suppose we would have a better idea of what the ‘scientific advice’ was if the Government were to publish any of their reports in a timely fashion. Even though calls for the publication of, at least, summaries to these reports being published more or less at the same time as the decisions upon which they are ‘based’ have been made for months we seem to be no closer to a situation of openness.

On the 10th June, Neil Ferguson (remember him? He was one of the ‘naughty’ boys and girls who broke their own rules but at least had the good grace to fall on their own swords – unlike Dominic Cummins) weighed into the ‘controversy’.

At a meeting (virtual) of the Commons Science and Technology Committee he said ‘We knew the epidemic was doubling every three to four days before lock down interventions were introduced. … ‘So had we introduced lock down measures a week earlier, we would have reduced the final death toll by at least a half.’

Whilst not openly agreeing with this one of the other top scientific advisers, Professor Chris Whitty, the chief medical officer, said he had a long list of regrets – the most important being the stopping of the testing regime.

The Buffoon, on the other hand, whipped out a straw boater and cane and gave a rendition of Edith Piaf’s ‘Non, je ne regrette rien’.

More on covid pandemic 2020-2?