Brian Kirby Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 747 - 2020-05-17 9:57 PM Just one tiny flaw in the argument. Who discharged the elderly from Hospital and into Care Homes? Was it the Conservative Government or was it the NHS? The NHS is, in effect, a government department. Here you go: https://tinyurl.com/zlznw65 The right-hand column of the Wiki says Minister responsible: Matt Hancock. Hancock is Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, a Cabinet post and a government minister. The regulator is the CQC whose board is appointed by the Department of Health and Social Care, in effect by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care of the day. So, who, really, was responsible for those discharges if not Secretary of State for Health and Social Care of the day? The discharges could have been stopped by Secretary of State for Health and Social Care in a trice as soon as the fact that they were taking place was revealed. That is the system. It may have been the unthinking continuance of pre-Covid practise, but the ultimate responsibility lies with government. Whether that government is Conservative, Labour, or whatever, is not relevant to who is responsible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 1:06 PM 747 - 2020-05-17 9:57 PM Just one tiny flaw in the argument. Who discharged the elderly from Hospital and into Care Homes? Was it the Conservative Government or was it the NHS? The NHS is, in effect, a government department. Here you go: https://tinyurl.com/zlznw65 The right-hand column of the Wiki says Minister responsible: Matt Hancock. Hancock is Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, a Cabinet post and a government minister. The regulator is the CQC whose board is appointed by the Department of Health and Social Care, in effect by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care of the day. So, who, really, was responsible for those discharges if not Secretary of State for Health and Social Care of the day? The discharges could have been stopped by Secretary of State for Health and Social Care in a trice as soon as the fact that they were taking place was revealed. That is the system. It may have been the unthinking continuance of pre-Covid practise, but the ultimate responsibility lies with government. Whether that government is Conservative, Labour, or whatever, is not relevant to who is responsible. So Brian ;-) ....... Step up to the plate :-| ....... Who would you have put our resources into?....... NHS or Care homes?....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 pelmetman - 2020-05-20 4:09 PM Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 1:06 PM 747 - 2020-05-17 9:57 PM Just one tiny flaw in the argument. Who discharged the elderly from Hospital and into Care Homes? Was it the Conservative Government or was it the NHS? The NHS is, in effect, a government department. Here you go: https://tinyurl.com/zlznw65 The right-hand column of the Wiki says Minister responsible: Matt Hancock. Hancock is Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, a Cabinet post and a government minister. The regulator is the CQC whose board is appointed by the Department of Health and Social Care, in effect by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care of the day. So, who, really, was responsible for those discharges if not Secretary of State for Health and Social Care of the day? The discharges could have been stopped by Secretary of State for Health and Social Care in a trice as soon as the fact that they were taking place was revealed. That is the system. It may have been the unthinking continuance of pre-Covid practise, but the ultimate responsibility lies with government. Whether that government is Conservative, Labour, or whatever, is not relevant to who is responsible. Who would you have put our resources into, NHS or Care homes?....... False dichotomy! There is no necessity to choose between the two. The discharge of elderly patients to care homes was an NHS decision. So was discharging them without first testing them for Covid. Those who passed the test could have been discharged to a period of quarantine in a care home - providing it was first verified that a) the home could cope with Covid patients, b) that the care home had access to a clinician (a number of doctors apparently having withdrawn their services) and c that the home already had, or was to be provided with, appropriate PPE for its staff (to prevent them becoming infected and to prevent them infecting others). Those who failed the test to remain in hospital to be discharged when clear. Oversight of care homes lies with the CQC, and both it and National Health England (etc) are answerable to the DoH, so both ends of the problem fell under the same roof. The DoH initially assessed the risk of Covid getting into care homes as very low (so someone had considered the risk), but then encouraged patients to be discharged to care homes without testing - overnight raising the risk of Covid getting into care homes from very low, to a virtual certainty. How was that an advantage to care homes, the NHS, or the patients? But if you'd been paying proper attention to the proper news you'd already know all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 6:33 PM pelmetman - 2020-05-20 4:09 PM Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 1:06 PM 747 - 2020-05-17 9:57 PM Just one tiny flaw in the argument. Who discharged the elderly from Hospital and into Care Homes? Was it the Conservative Government or was it the NHS? The NHS is, in effect, a government department. Here you go: https://tinyurl.com/zlznw65 The right-hand column of the Wiki says Minister responsible: Matt Hancock. Hancock is Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, a Cabinet post and a government minister. The regulator is the CQC whose board is appointed by the Department of Health and Social Care, in effect by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care of the day. So, who, really, was responsible for those discharges if not Secretary of State for Health and Social Care of the day? The discharges could have been stopped by Secretary of State for Health and Social Care in a trice as soon as the fact that they were taking place was revealed. That is the system. It may have been the unthinking continuance of pre-Covid practise, but the ultimate responsibility lies with government. Whether that government is Conservative, Labour, or whatever, is not relevant to who is responsible. Who would you have put our resources into, NHS or Care homes?....... False dichotomy! There is no necessity to choose between the two. The discharge of elderly patients to care homes was an NHS decision. So was discharging them without first testing them for Covid. Those who passed the test could have been discharged to a period of quarantine in a care home - providing it was first verified that a) the home could cope with Covid patients, b) that the care home had access to a clinician (a number of doctors apparently having withdrawn their services) and c that the home already had, or was to be provided with, appropriate PPE for its staff (to prevent them becoming infected and to prevent them infecting others). Those who failed the test to remain in hospital to be discharged when clear. Oversight of care homes lies with the CQC, and both it and National Health England (etc) are answerable to the DoH, so both ends of the problem fell under the same roof. The DoH initially assessed the risk of Covid getting into care homes as very low (so someone had considered the risk), but then encouraged patients to be discharged to care homes without testing - overnight raising the risk of Covid getting into care homes from very low, to a virtual certainty. How was that an advantage to care homes, the NHS, or the patients? But if you'd been paying proper attention to the proper news you'd already know all that. Yet more hindsh*te *-) .......... Do you really think the government could have prepared not only the NHS for Chinky Flu but the 20,000+ care homes in the UK which are mostly privately owned? 8-) ........ In just a few weeks????............ If so you really are quite deluded of East Sussex *-) ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted May 20, 2020 Author Share Posted May 20, 2020 pelmetman - 2020-05-20 6:47 PM Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 6:33 PM pelmetman - 2020-05-20 4:09 PM Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 1:06 PM 747 - 2020-05-17 9:57 PM Just one tiny flaw in the argument. Who discharged the elderly from Hospital and into Care Homes? Was it the Conservative Government or was it the NHS? The NHS is, in effect, a government department. Here you go: https://tinyurl.com/zlznw65 The right-hand column of the Wiki says Minister responsible: Matt Hancock. Hancock is Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, a Cabinet post and a government minister. The regulator is the CQC whose board is appointed by the Department of Health and Social Care, in effect by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care of the day. So, who, really, was responsible for those discharges if not Secretary of State for Health and Social Care of the day? The discharges could have been stopped by Secretary of State for Health and Social Care in a trice as soon as the fact that they were taking place was revealed. That is the system. It may have been the unthinking continuance of pre-Covid practise, but the ultimate responsibility lies with government. Whether that government is Conservative, Labour, or whatever, is not relevant to who is responsible. Who would you have put our resources into, NHS or Care homes?....... False dichotomy! There is no necessity to choose between the two. The discharge of elderly patients to care homes was an NHS decision. So was discharging them without first testing them for Covid. Those who passed the test could have been discharged to a period of quarantine in a care home - providing it was first verified that a) the home could cope with Covid patients, b) that the care home had access to a clinician (a number of doctors apparently having withdrawn their services) and c that the home already had, or was to be provided with, appropriate PPE for its staff (to prevent them becoming infected and to prevent them infecting others). Those who failed the test to remain in hospital to be discharged when clear. Oversight of care homes lies with the CQC, and both it and National Health England (etc) are answerable to the DoH, so both ends of the problem fell under the same roof. The DoH initially assessed the risk of Covid getting into care homes as very low (so someone had considered the risk), but then encouraged patients to be discharged to care homes without testing - overnight raising the risk of Covid getting into care homes from very low, to a virtual certainty. How was that an advantage to care homes, the NHS, or the patients? But if you'd been paying proper attention to the proper news you'd already know all that. Yet more hindsh*te *-) .......... Do you really think the government could have prepared not only the NHS for Chinky Flu but the 20,000+ care homes in the UK which are mostly privately owned? 8-) ........ In just a few weeks????............ If so you really are quite deluded of East Sussex *-) ...... Your Tory government had a pandemic preparedness strategy plan drawn up seven years ago during which time they allowed stocks of PPE to deplete. Three years back they were warned a pandemic would leave UK seriously ill equipped to deal with if government did not replace vital stocks. UK government ignored those warnings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 Bulletguy - 2020-05-20 7:00 PM pelmetman - 2020-05-20 6:47 PM Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 6:33 PM pelmetman - 2020-05-20 4:09 PM Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 1:06 PM 747 - 2020-05-17 9:57 PM Just one tiny flaw in the argument. Who discharged the elderly from Hospital and into Care Homes? Was it the Conservative Government or was it the NHS? The NHS is, in effect, a government department. Here you go: https://tinyurl.com/zlznw65 The right-hand column of the Wiki says Minister responsible: Matt Hancock. Hancock is Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, a Cabinet post and a government minister. The regulator is the CQC whose board is appointed by the Department of Health and Social Care, in effect by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care of the day. So, who, really, was responsible for those discharges if not Secretary of State for Health and Social Care of the day? The discharges could have been stopped by Secretary of State for Health and Social Care in a trice as soon as the fact that they were taking place was revealed. That is the system. It may have been the unthinking continuance of pre-Covid practise, but the ultimate responsibility lies with government. Whether that government is Conservative, Labour, or whatever, is not relevant to who is responsible. Who would you have put our resources into, NHS or Care homes?....... False dichotomy! There is no necessity to choose between the two. The discharge of elderly patients to care homes was an NHS decision. So was discharging them without first testing them for Covid. Those who passed the test could have been discharged to a period of quarantine in a care home - providing it was first verified that a) the home could cope with Covid patients, b) that the care home had access to a clinician (a number of doctors apparently having withdrawn their services) and c that the home already had, or was to be provided with, appropriate PPE for its staff (to prevent them becoming infected and to prevent them infecting others). Those who failed the test to remain in hospital to be discharged when clear. Oversight of care homes lies with the CQC, and both it and National Health England (etc) are answerable to the DoH, so both ends of the problem fell under the same roof. The DoH initially assessed the risk of Covid getting into care homes as very low (so someone had considered the risk), but then encouraged patients to be discharged to care homes without testing - overnight raising the risk of Covid getting into care homes from very low, to a virtual certainty. How was that an advantage to care homes, the NHS, or the patients? But if you'd been paying proper attention to the proper news you'd already know all that. Yet more hindsh*te *-) .......... Do you really think the government could have prepared not only the NHS for Chinky Flu but the 20,000+ care homes in the UK which are mostly privately owned? 8-) ........ In just a few weeks????............ If so you really are quite deluded of East Sussex *-) ...... Your Tory government had a pandemic preparedness strategy plan drawn up seven years ago during which time they allowed stocks of PPE to deplete. Three years back they were warned a pandemic would leave UK seriously ill equipped to deal with if government did not replace vital stocks. UK government ignored those warnings. So that's the previous Tory government ;-) ......... Not Boris's B-) ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted May 20, 2020 Author Share Posted May 20, 2020 pelmetman - 2020-05-20 7:03 PM Bulletguy - 2020-05-20 7:00 PM pelmetman - 2020-05-20 6:47 PM Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 6:33 PM pelmetman - 2020-05-20 4:09 PM Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 1:06 PM 747 - 2020-05-17 9:57 PM Just one tiny flaw in the argument. Who discharged the elderly from Hospital and into Care Homes? Was it the Conservative Government or was it the NHS? The NHS is, in effect, a government department. Here you go: https://tinyurl.com/zlznw65 The right-hand column of the Wiki says Minister responsible: Matt Hancock. Hancock is Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, a Cabinet post and a government minister. The regulator is the CQC whose board is appointed by the Department of Health and Social Care, in effect by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care of the day. So, who, really, was responsible for those discharges if not Secretary of State for Health and Social Care of the day? The discharges could have been stopped by Secretary of State for Health and Social Care in a trice as soon as the fact that they were taking place was revealed. That is the system. It may have been the unthinking continuance of pre-Covid practise, but the ultimate responsibility lies with government. Whether that government is Conservative, Labour, or whatever, is not relevant to who is responsible. Who would you have put our resources into, NHS or Care homes?....... False dichotomy! There is no necessity to choose between the two. The discharge of elderly patients to care homes was an NHS decision. So was discharging them without first testing them for Covid. Those who passed the test could have been discharged to a period of quarantine in a care home - providing it was first verified that a) the home could cope with Covid patients, b) that the care home had access to a clinician (a number of doctors apparently having withdrawn their services) and c that the home already had, or was to be provided with, appropriate PPE for its staff (to prevent them becoming infected and to prevent them infecting others). Those who failed the test to remain in hospital to be discharged when clear. Oversight of care homes lies with the CQC, and both it and National Health England (etc) are answerable to the DoH, so both ends of the problem fell under the same roof. The DoH initially assessed the risk of Covid getting into care homes as very low (so someone had considered the risk), but then encouraged patients to be discharged to care homes without testing - overnight raising the risk of Covid getting into care homes from very low, to a virtual certainty. How was that an advantage to care homes, the NHS, or the patients? But if you'd been paying proper attention to the proper news you'd already know all that. Yet more hindsh*te *-) .......... Do you really think the government could have prepared not only the NHS for Chinky Flu but the 20,000+ care homes in the UK which are mostly privately owned? 8-) ........ In just a few weeks????............ If so you really are quite deluded of East Sussex *-) ...... Your Tory government had a pandemic preparedness strategy plan drawn up seven years ago during which time they allowed stocks of PPE to deplete. Three years back they were warned a pandemic would leave UK seriously ill equipped to deal with if government did not replace vital stocks. UK government ignored those warnings. So that's the previous Tory government ;-) ......... Not Boris's B-) ....... Johnson has been part of the Tory government the past 10 years just as he is now. Becoming PM does not mean they govern alone. Why are you always looking for excuses to try defending the indefensible? The Tory government screwed up big time by ignoring the warnings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 pelmetman - 2020-05-20 6:47 PM Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 6:33 PM pelmetman - 2020-05-20 4:09 PM Who would you have put our resources into, NHS or Care homes?....... False dichotomy! There is no necessity to choose between the two. The discharge of elderly patients to care homes was an NHS decision. So was discharging them without first testing them for Covid. Those who passed the test could have been discharged to a period of quarantine in a care home - providing it was first verified that a) the home could cope with Covid patients, b) that the care home had access to a clinician (a number of doctors apparently having withdrawn their services) and c that the home already had, or was to be provided with, appropriate PPE for its staff (to prevent them becoming infected and to prevent them infecting others). Those who failed the test to remain in hospital to be discharged when clear. Oversight of care homes lies with the CQC, and both it and National Health England (etc) are answerable to the DoH, so both ends of the problem fell under the same roof. The DoH initially assessed the risk of Covid getting into care homes as very low (so someone had considered the risk), but then encouraged patients to be discharged to care homes without testing - overnight raising the risk of Covid getting into care homes from very low, to a virtual certainty. How was that an advantage to care homes, the NHS, or the patients? But if you'd been paying proper attention to the proper news you'd already know all that. Yet more hindsh*te *-) .......... Do you really think the government could have prepared not only the NHS for Chinky Flu but the 20,000+ care homes in the UK which are mostly privately owned? 8-) ........ In just a few weeks????............ If so you really are quite deluded of East Sussex *-) ...... The government had written a pandemic disaster plan years before, and had built stocks of equipment against it happening. They later decided to run down those stocks instead of maintaining them. Huge false economy! So, when disaster struck there was insufficient reserve, and much of what was there was out of date. The disaster plan should have enabled a much more coherent response, so reducing the total number of infections. That was purpose of the plan plus the reserve. Given that, and their late initial response, no, today's government could not have countered Covid in care homes. They were given a losing hand by the preceding governments, which they exacerbated with their initial delayed response. But that wasn't your question. You asked "Who would you have put our resources into, NHS or Care homes? That is the question I answered. Had they acted quicker, and not allowed the infected patients to be discharged to care homes, the number of those who died of Covid in care homes would have been significantly reduced. I don't think anyone who is aware of the facts says otherwise. That is where we are. The foresight of the disaster plan was trashed by bad earlier decisions and their own delay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 7:18 PM pelmetman - 2020-05-20 6:47 PM Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 6:33 PM pelmetman - 2020-05-20 4:09 PM Who would you have put our resources into, NHS or Care homes?....... False dichotomy! There is no necessity to choose between the two. The discharge of elderly patients to care homes was an NHS decision. So was discharging them without first testing them for Covid. Those who passed the test could have been discharged to a period of quarantine in a care home - providing it was first verified that a) the home could cope with Covid patients, b) that the care home had access to a clinician (a number of doctors apparently having withdrawn their services) and c that the home already had, or was to be provided with, appropriate PPE for its staff (to prevent them becoming infected and to prevent them infecting others). Those who failed the test to remain in hospital to be discharged when clear. Oversight of care homes lies with the CQC, and both it and National Health England (etc) are answerable to the DoH, so both ends of the problem fell under the same roof. The DoH initially assessed the risk of Covid getting into care homes as very low (so someone had considered the risk), but then encouraged patients to be discharged to care homes without testing - overnight raising the risk of Covid getting into care homes from very low, to a virtual certainty. How was that an advantage to care homes, the NHS, or the patients? But if you'd been paying proper attention to the proper news you'd already know all that. Yet more hindsh*te *-) .......... Do you really think the government could have prepared not only the NHS for Chinky Flu but the 20,000+ care homes in the UK which are mostly privately owned? 8-) ........ In just a few weeks????............ If so you really are quite deluded of East Sussex *-) ...... The government had written a pandemic disaster plan years before, and had built stocks of equipment against it happening. They later decided to run down those stocks instead of maintaining them. Huge false economy! So, when disaster struck there was insufficient reserve, and much of what was there was out of date. The disaster plan should have enabled a much more coherent response, so reducing the total number of infections. That was purpose of the plan plus the reserve. Given that, and their late initial response, no, today's government could not have countered Covid in care homes. They were given a losing hand by the preceding governments, which they exacerbated with their initial delayed response. But that wasn't your question. You asked "Who would you have put our resources into, NHS or Care homes? That is the question I answered. Had they acted quicker, and not allowed the infected patients to be discharged to care homes, the number of those who died of Covid in care homes would have been significantly reduced. I don't think anyone who is aware of the facts says otherwise. That is where we are. The foresight of the disaster plan was trashed by bad earlier decisions and their own delay. So we didn't have a huge stock of PPE that you Losers couldn't complain that were out of date? *-) ..... How long will it be before you start complaining about the money spent on the Nightingale hospitals? :-| ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 7:18 PM A government had written a pandemic disaster plan years before, Sorted your typo >:-) ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 It wasnt just that they let PPE stocks become depleted or that they ignored the recommendations of operation Cygnus, last year millions of pieces of PPE disappeared. The government knows where it went but refuses to say where. It will be filed next to the Russia Report I bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted May 21, 2020 Share Posted May 21, 2020 Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 7:18 PM pelmetman - 2020-05-20 6:47 PM Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 6:33 PM pelmetman - 2020-05-20 4:09 PM Who would you have put our resources into, NHS or Care homes?....... False dichotomy! There is no necessity to choose between the two. The discharge of elderly patients to care homes was an NHS decision. So was discharging them without first testing them for Covid. Those who passed the test could have been discharged to a period of quarantine in a care home - providing it was first verified that a) the home could cope with Covid patients, b) that the care home had access to a clinician (a number of doctors apparently having withdrawn their services) and c that the home already had, or was to be provided with, appropriate PPE for its staff (to prevent them becoming infected and to prevent them infecting others). Those who failed the test to remain in hospital to be discharged when clear. Oversight of care homes lies with the CQC, and both it and National Health England (etc) are answerable to the DoH, so both ends of the problem fell under the same roof. The DoH initially assessed the risk of Covid getting into care homes as very low (so someone had considered the risk), but then encouraged patients to be discharged to care homes without testing - overnight raising the risk of Covid getting into care homes from very low, to a virtual certainty. How was that an advantage to care homes, the NHS, or the patients? But if you'd been paying proper attention to the proper news you'd already know all that. Yet more hindsh*te *-) .......... Do you really think the government could have prepared not only the NHS for Chinky Flu but the 20,000+ care homes in the UK which are mostly privately owned? 8-) ........ In just a few weeks????............ If so you really are quite deluded of East Sussex *-) ...... The government had written a pandemic disaster plan years before, and had built stocks of equipment against it happening. They later decided to run down those stocks instead of maintaining them. Huge false economy! So, when disaster struck there was insufficient reserve, and much of what was there was out of date. The disaster plan should have enabled a much more coherent response, so reducing the total number of infections. That was purpose of the plan plus the reserve. Given that, and their late initial response, no, today's government could not have countered Covid in care homes. They were given a losing hand by the preceding governments, which they exacerbated with their initial delayed response. But that wasn't your question. You asked "Who would you have put our resources into, NHS or Care homes? That is the question I answered. Had they acted quicker, and not allowed the infected patients to be discharged to care homes, the number of those who died of Covid in care homes would have been significantly reduced. I don't think anyone who is aware of the facts says otherwise. That is where we are. The foresight of the disaster plan was trashed by bad earlier decisions and their own delay. True. What has made it far worse is the privatisation of care homes, with agency staff travelling round them, often on public transport, getting up close and personal with many different residents every day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 21, 2020 Share Posted May 21, 2020 Barryd999 - 2020-05-20 11:05 PM It wasnt just that they let PPE stocks become depleted or that they ignored the recommendations of operation Cygnus, last year millions of pieces of PPE disappeared. The government knows where it went but refuses to say where. It will be filed next to the Russia Report I bet. How is what happened before Boris became PM relevant? *-) .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted May 21, 2020 Share Posted May 21, 2020 pelmetman - 2020-05-21 8:04 AM Barryd999 - 2020-05-20 11:05 PM It wasnt just that they let PPE stocks become depleted or that they ignored the recommendations of operation Cygnus, last year millions of pieces of PPE disappeared. The government knows where it went but refuses to say where. It will be filed next to the Russia Report I bet. How is what happened before Boris became PM relevant? *-) .......... BoJo was part of the Government in power. Which makes it more relevant than your continued references to the ex leader of the opposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 21, 2020 Share Posted May 21, 2020 John52 - 2020-05-21 8:18 AM pelmetman - 2020-05-21 8:04 AM Barryd999 - 2020-05-20 11:05 PM It wasnt just that they let PPE stocks become depleted or that they ignored the recommendations of operation Cygnus, last year millions of pieces of PPE disappeared. The government knows where it went but refuses to say where. It will be filed next to the Russia Report I bet. How is what happened before Boris became PM relevant? *-) .......... BoJo was part of the Government in power. Which makes it more relevant than your continued references to the ex leader of the opposition. So did Ol Fishface who runs Scotlands NHS not have any PPE problem's? ;-) ........ https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/5508304/coronavirus-scotland-medical-staff-nhs-ppe-shortage/ Yep *-) ........... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-52079429 Labour hasn't managed any better in Wales either >:-) ........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted May 21, 2020 Share Posted May 21, 2020 pelmetman - 2020-05-20 7:27 PM Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 7:18 PM The government had written a pandemic disaster plan years before, Sorted your typo >:-) ....... No typo: government is indivisible. Each administration has to accept responsibility for the actions and inactions of previous administrations, or identify and correct them through parliament - which is sovereign. I thought you understood how the UK is governed - but maybe not! :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 21, 2020 Share Posted May 21, 2020 Brian Kirby - 2020-05-21 8:58 AM pelmetman - 2020-05-20 7:27 PM Brian Kirby - 2020-05-20 7:18 PM The government had written a pandemic disaster plan years before, Sorted your typo >:-) ....... No typo: government is indivisible. Each administration has to accept responsibility for the actions and inactions of previous administrations, or identify and correct them through parliament - which is sovereign. I thought you understood how the UK is governed - but maybe not! :-D So you accept that the Scottish and Welsh governments are responsible for their lack of PPE? ;-) ......... Yet you only seem bothered by the actions of past Tory governments and how to blame them on Boris *-) .......... Psst........Your Remoaner bias is showing again :D ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted May 21, 2020 Share Posted May 21, 2020 pelmetman - 2020-05-21 9:12 AM.....................… 1 So you accept that the Scottish and Welsh governments are responsible for their lack of PPE? ;-) ......... 2 Yet you only seem bothered by the actions of past Tory governments and how to blame them on Boris *-) .......... 3 Psst........Your Remoaner bias is showing again :D ......... 1 Insofar as they are responsible for sourcing their own PPE, of course. Why not? 2 I have not said whether the relevant past administrations were, or were not, Tory. They are simply past administrations. But, as a matter of fact, and since you've raised the issue, most do seem to have been Tory. However, I have not "blamed (their actions) on Boris". 3 Where does Brexit come into Covid? Are you now trying to claim that Covid is all some dastardly EU plot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted May 21, 2020 Share Posted May 21, 2020 pelmetman - 2020-05-21 8:04 AM Barryd999 - 2020-05-20 11:05 PM It wasnt just that they let PPE stocks become depleted or that they ignored the recommendations of operation Cygnus, last year millions of pieces of PPE disappeared. The government knows where it went but refuses to say where. It will be filed next to the Russia Report I bet. How is what happened before Boris became PM relevant? *-) .......... This sort of thing I find hilarious. Your as bad as all those baby Tories ooop North who voted Tory in December because they thought they wanted a change from Labour. *-) Thickety thick thicky mincer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted May 21, 2020 Author Share Posted May 21, 2020 Barryd999 - 2020-05-21 9:42 AM pelmetman - 2020-05-21 8:04 AM Barryd999 - 2020-05-20 11:05 PM It wasnt just that they let PPE stocks become depleted or that they ignored the recommendations of operation Cygnus, last year millions of pieces of PPE disappeared. The government knows where it went but refuses to say where. It will be filed next to the Russia Report I bet. How is what happened before Boris became PM relevant? *-) .......... This sort of thing I find hilarious. Your as bad as all those baby Tories ooop North who voted Tory in December because they thought they wanted a change from Labour. *-) Thickety thick thicky mincer! Pelmets peculiar obsession over Boris is as bats as his boyfriends fanatical devotion to Trump. Both swallowed the Kool-Aid. I see Sir Keir Starmer had Johnson on the ropes yet again at PMQ's yesterday.....ever likely Smuggy is desperate to call up the cavalry! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 22, 2020 Share Posted May 22, 2020 Brian Kirby - 2020-05-21 9:36 AM pelmetman - 2020-05-21 9:12 AM.....................… 1 So you accept that the Scottish and Welsh governments are responsible for their lack of PPE? ;-) ......... 2 Yet you only seem bothered by the actions of past Tory governments and how to blame them on Boris *-) .......... 3 Psst........Your Remoaner bias is showing again :D ......... 1 Insofar as they are responsible for sourcing their own PPE, of course. Why not? 2 I have not said whether the relevant past administrations were, or were not, Tory. They are simply past administrations. But, as a matter of fact, and since you've raised the issue, most do seem to have been Tory. However, I have not "blamed (their actions) on Boris". 3 Where does Brexit come into Covid? Are you now trying to claim that Covid is all some dastardly EU plot? 1.........So remind me of a post where you have slagged off the Welsh or Scottish governments? ;-) ....... 2.........I quote......"Each administration has to accept responsibility for the actions and inactions of previous administrations, or identify and correct them through parliament - which is sovereign. I thought you understood how the UK is governed"............Sounds like you're blaming Boris to me *-) ........ 3.........Boris won you lost.....Chinky Flu has given the Remoaners the opportunity for a bit of payback, which says far more about you Losers than it does Boris >:-) .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 22, 2020 Share Posted May 22, 2020 Bulletguy - 2020-05-21 4:02 PM I see Sir Keir Starmer had Johnson on the ropes yet again at PMQ's yesterday.....ever likely Smuggy is desperate to call up the cavalry! "Prime Minister’s Questions today featured odd, although clearly well rehearsed, questioning from Sir Keir, who again asked a question that had already been answered. Immediately after Boris said an effective contact tracing system would be running by 1 June, Sir Kier asked when the contact tracing system will be in place by… “Already we have recruited 24,000 trackers, and by the first of June, we will have 25,000. They will be capable of tracking the contacts of 10,000 new cases a day… Today new cases stand at 2,400… I have great confidence that by June 1st we will have a system that will help us very greatly to defeat this disease.” After fumbling, Sir Keir then asked as his next question… “Can the Prime Minister indicate that an effective test and trace system will be in place by 1st June Monday week?” To which Boris came back with… “The right honourable gentleman seems to be in the unfortunate position of having rehearsed his third or fourth question without having listened to my previous answer.” “Forensic”. Yeah......its pretty obvious which Dope was on the Ropes (lol) (lol) (lol) ............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted May 22, 2020 Share Posted May 22, 2020 Now even the Torygraph is running with a story which shows how different things would have been had we locked down just one or two weeks earlier. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved. They also claim this would have led to a shorter and less damaging economic lock down. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/20/earlier-lockdown-could-have-prevented-three-quarters-uk-coronavirus/?fbclid=IwAR27BNLywwqsZt167XSV-v6ovX9Bs6UXSc9obUeHrEXrcAHlZ3VEV_YWLaQ Huff Post version https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/uk-lockdown-coronavirus-deaths-avoided_uk_5ec76ad1c5b66686597a8129 You cannot say "with hindsight" either as we saw it coming, we heard the screams from Italy and the WHO to "Do something now!" but did nothing. FT now quoting the number of dead at over 60000 approaching the figure of the entire number of civilian dead from the whole of World War 2. Sobering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted May 22, 2020 Share Posted May 22, 2020 pelmetman - 2020-05-22 8:31 AM Brian Kirby - 2020-05-21 9:36 AM pelmetman - 2020-05-21 9:12 AM.....................… 1 So you accept that the Scottish and Welsh governments are responsible for their lack of PPE? ;-) ......... 2 Yet you only seem bothered by the actions of past Tory governments and how to blame them on Boris *-) .......... 3 Psst........Your Remoaner bias is showing again :D ......... 1 Insofar as they are responsible for sourcing their own PPE, of course. Why not? 2 I have not said whether the relevant past administrations were, or were not, Tory. They are simply past administrations. But, as a matter of fact, and since you've raised the issue, most do seem to have been Tory. However, I have not "blamed (their actions) on Boris". 3 Where does Brexit come into Covid? Are you now trying to claim that Covid is all some dastardly EU plot? 1.........So remind me of a post where you have slagged off the Welsh or Scottish governments? ;-) ....... 2.........I quote......"Each administration has to accept responsibility for the actions and inactions of previous administrations, or identify and correct them through parliament - which is sovereign. I thought you understood how the UK is governed"............Sounds like you're blaming Boris to me *-) ........ 3.........Boris won you lost.....Chinky Flu has given the Remoaners the opportunity for a bit of payback, which says far more about you Losers than it does Boris >:-) .......... 1. Irrelevant. I don't live in Scotland or Wales, so their decisions don't affect me. It is what the UK government does that affects me. I haven't criticised the Nepalese government either. So what? 2. There is only one government, and one parliament, in England. Go figure. 3. Only to your, paranoid, mind. What I look for is competent government - whoever leads it, from whichever party. You seem happy with what we have; I'm not. It is that simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 23, 2020 Share Posted May 23, 2020 Brian Kirby - 2020-05-22 1:01 PM pelmetman - 2020-05-22 8:31 AM Brian Kirby - 2020-05-21 9:36 AM pelmetman - 2020-05-21 9:12 AM.....................… 1 So you accept that the Scottish and Welsh governments are responsible for their lack of PPE? ;-) ......... 2 Yet you only seem bothered by the actions of past Tory governments and how to blame them on Boris *-) .......... 3 Psst........Your Remoaner bias is showing again :D ......... 1 Insofar as they are responsible for sourcing their own PPE, of course. Why not? 2 I have not said whether the relevant past administrations were, or were not, Tory. They are simply past administrations. But, as a matter of fact, and since you've raised the issue, most do seem to have been Tory. However, I have not "blamed (their actions) on Boris". 3 Where does Brexit come into Covid? Are you now trying to claim that Covid is all some dastardly EU plot? 1.........So remind me of a post where you have slagged off the Welsh or Scottish governments? ;-) ....... 2.........I quote......"Each administration has to accept responsibility for the actions and inactions of previous administrations, or identify and correct them through parliament - which is sovereign. I thought you understood how the UK is governed"............Sounds like you're blaming Boris to me *-) ........ 3.........Boris won you lost.....Chinky Flu has given the Remoaners the opportunity for a bit of payback, which says far more about you Losers than it does Boris >:-) .......... 1. Irrelevant. I don't live in Scotland or Wales, so their decisions don't affect me. It is what the UK government does that affects me. I haven't criticised the Nepalese government either. So what? 2. There is only one government, and one parliament, in England. Go figure. 3. Only to your, paranoid, mind. What I look for is competent government - whoever leads it, from whichever party. You seem happy with what we have; I'm not. It is that simple. 1........It's only irrelevant because they dont fit in with your Boris bashing agenda *-) ......... 2........Incorrect.......Wales, NI and Scotland have their own Governments/Parliament's/Assembly's ;-) ........ 3........I'd say it's your mind that has the problem 8-) .........As it's clearly unable to move on from Brexit (lol) (lol) (lol) ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.