Corona Virus main thread

[Bill 1,788]

23 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

It's a reasonable analogy.

However - as to the 5 missed 'early' cobra meetings.  

Whereas I fully understand why the 'Prime' Minister may not go to them all - if he doesn't attend it indicates that he believes he has higher priorities elsewhere - and that he is not 'focussed' on it (and hence the meeting may not get the attention it deserves). 

That may wash for say one or two but five ? Clearly his leadership, indeed understanding of the impending threat, was missing. He failed.

With failed unfocused leadership it's not unsurprising we then crashed into the first hurdle. 

There is no real leadership - other than staged photo opportunities set up to re-affirm the delusion that he is some kind of 'jolly fellow'. Just as Kim Young One and Putin have been shown riding a horse* in a very 'manly' way.

His time as London mayor was noted for the same with work left to others and a complete floundering when put under scrutiny at meetings. Even that shot of him stuck on the zip wire was staged.

So why is anyone surprised that this level of competence should not be the bench mark for his time as PM. After all he “didn’t work weekends”, and “there was a real sense that he didn’t do urgent crisis planning.  It was exactly like people feared he would be.”, "Aides were told to keep their briefing papers short and cut the number of memos in his red box if they wanted them to be read.

So was johnson missing in action' as is now being claimed. Well the sycophants would like you to believe that he was not, whereas

" Johnson vacated Downing Street after the half-term recess began on February 13. He headed to the country for a “working” holiday at Chevening with Symonds and would be out of the public eye for 12 days. Aides were told to keep their briefing papers short and cut the number of memos in his red box if they wanted them to be read. "

But as the apologists will claim, no one knew then how bad it would become, whereas " The Sunday newspapers that weekend would not have made comfortable reading. The Sunday Times reported on a briefing from a risk specialist that said Public Health England would be overrun during a pandemic as it could test only 1,000 people a day.

By the time Johnson departed for the countryside, however, there was mounting unease among scientists about the exceptional nature of the threat. Sir Jeremy Farrar, an infectious disease specialist who is a key government adviser, made this clear in a recent BBC interview.

“I think from the early days in February, if not in late January, it was obvious this infection was going to be very serious and it was going to affect more than just the region of Asia,” he said. “I think it was very clear that this was going to be an unprecedented event.”

The evidence now mounts up - an incompetent PM who shut himself away from the 'nerve centre' for 12 days during the crtical times and even when he had hauled his fat ar se back into the fray chose to have another weekend break before attending his first meeting on the Monday.

Shame on him, perhaps no. But greater shame on those crawling forelock tuggers who are trying even now to distract from this gross negligence of office.

 

[Barbe bleu 837]

I'm not sure I care how hard boris worked on this. 

I want to know that it was given importance in government, that it was resourced in accordance with that priority and that the power to make decisions was delegated to the most appropriate level.

 

  I couldn't give a damn what boris then did. As far as I can see this can be done with a 10 minute rocket down the phone just as easily as sitting through hours of technical detail in a meeting.

As I've said above sometimes clever and lazy is a perfect combination in a leader.

I care more about how hard working the guys with the subject matter expertise are

Edited April 20, 2020 by Barbe bleu

[Bill 1,788]

4 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

I'm not sure I care how hard boris worked on this. 

I want to know that it was given importance in government and that it was resourced at the appropriate level.  I couldn't give a damn what boris then did.

As I've said above sometimes clever and lazy is a perfect combination in a leader.

However stupid and lazy is never good leadership - something Johnson has demonstrated throughout his career.

Neither is it simply a matter of what importance is attached.  I'm sure the village idiot would see the importance of not having his home cut of from water and electricity, where his recognition would affect things his highly doubtful.

And as to not caring then that is your choice, but others are certainly not happy that this fat fraud has been drawing a PM's salary while neither doing the work required, or even being up to that taks.

[Kenny Foggo 1,121]

11 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

I'm not sure I care how hard boris worked on this. 

I want to know that it was given importance in government, that it was resourced in accordance with that priority and that the power to make decisions was delegated to the most appropriate level.

 

  I couldn't give a damn what boris then did. As far as I can see this can be done with a 10 minute rocket down the phone just as easily as sitting through hours of technical detail in a meeting.

As I've said above sometimes clever and lazy is a perfect combination in a leader.

I care more about how hard working the guys with the subject matter expertise are

I absolutely care how smart and competent our leaders are and have been.. All the evidence from Boris supporting papers like the Telegraph or the Times, is not very... I have zero confidence they will have a plan to keep us safe and get us back functioning being as they can not even get PPE to stop frontline workers dying.

[Kenny Foggo 1,121]

PS Boris makes the decisions not his advisers or experts

[Barbe bleu 837]

3 minutes ago, Kenny Foggo said:

I absolutely care how smart and competent our leaders are and have been.. All the evidence from Boris supporting papers like the Telegraph or the Times, is not very... I have zero confidence they will have a plan to keep us safe and get us back functioning being as they can not even get PPE to stop frontline workers dying.

No one doubts you want competency.  The allegation is that he is lazy and this has hindered us.  I was making the point that laziness can be a virtue if it means that you leave the details in the hands of those best placed to make decisions

 

[Yellow Fever 3,848]

29 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

No one doubts you want competency.  The allegation is that he is lazy and this has hindered us.  I was making the point that laziness can be a virtue if it means that you leave the details in the hands of those best placed to make decisions

 

BB this is madness.

Laziness can never be a virtue.

Yes good delegation but as PM he has to set the tone at least.That 'his' job.  He didn't.

Ergo he's not PM material. Never was.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

He has the feel of a George W Bush about him. He certainly isn't Trump because that idiot is just beyond words.

He cannot keep avoiding the issues. He had the majority of the voting age public behind him in December but personally I have already had to mention to people who are angry at him that they voted for him.

I think because of the way he was elected, there is a great deal of mistrust within his own party and he is going to need all his undoubted charm and wit to get away with the incompetence that will be challenged after this crisis abates.

[Barbe bleu 837]

46 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

BB this is madness.

Laziness can never be a virtue.

Yes good delegation but as PM he has to set the tone at least.That 'his' job.  He didn't.

Ergo he's not PM material. Never was.

I disagree but for the sake of the argument let's use the substitute the phrase  "keen to delegate to an appropriate level" for "laziness". Or perhaps by lazy we can say that we mean someone who naturally looks for the most efficient way of doing something

An intelligent and lazy leader will be naturally well equipped to work out how to delegate appropriately whereas a diligent and intelligent one will tend to hold onto too much power. 

An intelligent and lazy leader will always look for efficiencies, where as a diligent leader will question why everyone else has gone home.

A clever and lazy leader will however appoint clever and diligent people into positions where detail is everything. If they do not then they are not clever.

Dont under estimate the power of laziness.  Laziness is what has taken **** sapiens from  AN other newly evolved primate to spacefarers in the blink of a geological eye 

 

Edited April 20, 2020 by Barbe bleu

[Yellow Fever 3,848]

2 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

I disagree but for the sake of the argument let's use the substitute the phrase  "keen to delegate to an appropriate level" for "laziness". Or perhaps by lazy we can say that we mean someone who naturally looks for the most efficient way of doing something

An intelligent and lazy leader will be naturally well equipped to work out how to delegate appropriately whereas a diligent and intelligent one will tend to hold onto too much power. 

An intelligent and lazy leader will always look for efficiencies, where as a diligent leader will question why everyone else has gone home.

A clever and lazy leader will however appoint clever and diligent people into positions where detail is everything. If they do not then they are not clever.

Dont under estimate the power of laziness.  Laziness is what has taken **** sapiens from  AN other newly evolved primate to spacefarers in the blind of a geological eye 

 

Perhaps the best thing he could do then is delegate being PM permanently to Raab - or even Starmer. Then he can relax and have a jolly good party time at Chequers or wherever. After all now he's PM why bother to do anything ? That's the human nature that you arguing for after all. 

No - As humans, becoming more efficient at feeding ourselves etc. allowed us to do other things - art, better technology and progress. We didn't just sit back and do nought - we improved!

[sgncfc 1,262]

2 hours ago, Barbe bleu said:

I think that Germany and the uk had the same plan

That's clearly not the case at all. The UK specified it would initially follow a "herd immunity" strategy before changing its mind. Germany went immediately into test and trace mode. These statements are recorded for all posterity - how can you think we ever had the same plan?

[Barbe bleu 837]

2 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

That's clearly not the case at all. The UK specified it would initially follow a "herd immunity" strategy before changing its mind. Germany went immediately into test and trace mode. These statements are recorded for all posterity - how can you think we ever had the same plan?

Mainly because I have read our plan

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-action-plan

We tried to contain this thing. We failed.

The germans tried to contain it and got.much closer to success 

[sgncfc 1,262]

Incidentally, pretty much everything so far spoken by any Government minister has either been shown to be, at worst, untrue and, at best, unworkable. The only exception to date is the furlough scheme - but give that enough time and I suspect it will also fall over.

Are deliberately lying/misleading or are they incompetent? It has to be one or the other.

The scientists are at least telling the truth - but I suspect the data they are working from is manipulated by the thought police before it reaches them - hence the care home issue. The fact that no one (I repeat, no one) can actually tell us with certainty how many people have died so far is breathtaking. Why is no one in the media challenging?

 

[sgncfc 1,262]

2 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

Mainly because I have read our plan

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-action-plan

We tried to contain this thing. We failed.

The germans tried to contain it and got.much closer to success 

Look at the publication date - by the 3rd March it was already too late; that's been my point all along. The Asian experience with SARS would have told them that if anyone in the UK (including the scientists) had bothered to look at their data.

We were still going for herd immunity on 9th March. Germany started to roll out their test and isolate policy on 25th February. They already knew, almost 4 weeks before us apparently, that containment wouldn't work.

Germany is also starting a widespread antibody test this week using a test they feel is 98% accurate. Apparently none of the tests we have looked at are accurate enough for us.

Germany has 93m people compared to our 67m and they have about 10% of the cases and deaths we have. Is it possible therefore that they were indeed "more ready" than us and just maybe have handled everything rather better?

 

[sonyc 5,541]

26 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Perhaps the best thing he could do then is delegate being PM permanently to Raab - or even Starmer. Then he can relax and have a jolly good party time at Chequers or wherever. After all now he's PM why bother to do anything ? That's the human nature that you arguing for after all. 

No - As humans, becoming more efficient at feeding ourselves etc. allowed us to do other things - art, better technology and progress. We didn't just sit back and do nought - we improved!

Appearances in Parliament facing scrutiny is another 'low' since BJ took power. I must find the source but I found it incredible that it was reported to be 1 month out of the 9 since being PM

[Herman 9,852]

So many people, good and bad, spend a lot of time and effort making excuses, clearing up balls ups and generally covering for Boris Johnson. It would be much better if they just admitted that the Emperor is stark, **** naked. 

[CANARYKING 644]

So anyone think it would have been better with Corbyn in charge ?

[Barbe bleu 837]

 We are unquestionably the laziest species that has ever existed. Laziness is the absolute hallmark of humanity. So lazy are we that we are constantly thinking of new ways to be lazier. 

Isn't it great that one of out ancestors was so lazy he decided to invent the spear so he could spend more time painting cave walls?

We are the apex species not because we are quick or strong or resilient  but because we are looking for ways of getting stuff done as quickly and easily as possible. This obsession has got is to the moon. Let's not knock it too much

 

Edited April 20, 2020 by Barbe bleu

[Herman 9,852]

10 minutes ago, CANARYKING said:

So anyone think it would have been better with Corbyn in charge ?

No. 

[sonyc 5,541]

10 minutes ago, CANARYKING said:

So anyone think it would have been better with Corbyn in charge ?

No. Definite no.

But that isn't really relevant is it? It's about what is happening rather than what could have been.

[sonyc 5,541]

Very odd to hear the remarks by the Duke of Edinburgh today. Since when has he made many public comments? I believe (like the Queen's choice of words on who to praise) that it is a coded criticism. Just a belief.

[Barbe bleu 837]

21 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

Look at the publication date - by the 3rd March it was already too late; that's been my point all along. The Asian experience with SARS would have told them that if anyone in the UK (including the scientists) had bothered to look at their data.

We were still going for herd immunity on 9th March. Germany started to roll out their test and isolate policy on 25th February. They already knew, almost 4 weeks before us apparently, that containment wouldn't work.

Germany is also starting a widespread antibody test this week using a test they feel is 98% accurate. Apparently none of the tests we have looked at are accurate enough for us.

Germany has 93m people compared to our 67m and they have about 10% of the cases and deaths we have. Is it possible therefore that they were indeed "more ready" than us and just maybe have handled everything rather better?

 

A couple of points.  The strategy was published on 3 March but was our approach long before. If you want evidence look at when the plans to open up the quarantine centre in the wirral were made public.  This was long before the phrase 'herd immunity' was ever uttered.

I'll say it again we had the same plan as germany but they executed it better (or got luckier but more the former than the latter I suspect). 

On antibody testing look at 'phase four' in following document and look at the number of such tests undertaken on the .gov website. We are doing antibody testing (or thw government are lying in a very specific manner)

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-scaling-up-testing-programmes

 

[Indy 3,335]

30 minutes ago, CANARYKING said:

So anyone think it would have been better with Corbyn in charge ?

Can you imagine the numbers presented by Abbott! 30billion, million could be infected.........😂

[Indy 3,335]

As for those who have a chip on their shoulders regarding what the government has done right or wrong, you all have a brain, you all knew the virus was around, you could have self isolated way back.

Testing certainly appears to be the way forwards and those who look to the far east to show how to cope, China really the way they rule and release figures.....I’m not sure there’s really a best way to react, but to learn from each other and work to move forwards.

[Crafty Canary 511]

It never ceases to amaze me how people who never have to make key decisions are always ready to criticise those that do and how much better they would have handled it.

[PurpleCanary 5,601]

19 minutes ago, Crafty Canary said:

It never ceases to amaze me how people who never have to make key decisions are always ready to criticise those that do and how much better they would have handled it.

Yes, because nobody on this thread has ever criticised Smith and Jones, for example, for their ownership/running of the football club despite never having been in that position...

 

 

 

[sonyc 5,541]

1 hour ago, sgncfc said:

Incidentally, pretty much everything so far spoken by any Government minister has either been shown to be, at worst, untrue and, at best, unworkable. The only exception to date is the furlough scheme - but give that enough time and I suspect it will also fall over.

Are deliberately lying/misleading or are they incompetent? It has to be one or the other.

The scientists are at least telling the truth - but I suspect the data they are working from is manipulated by the thought police before it reaches them - hence the care home issue. The fact that no one (I repeat, no one) can actually tell us with certainty how many people have died so far is breathtaking. Why is no one in the media challenging?

 

No one is in charge of the UK's coronavirus response – and it shows

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/20/uk-coronavirus-response-nhs-local-government-care-homes-british-politicians?

The care homes issue is noted in this article 

One of the big things the government can start to do now is to really use its local government framework. I'm trying to be constructive here. It has the means to solve the PPE issue (like the "Co*k of the Walk" shop is doing for the Hull Hospital.....this fashion shop is about to make 250 gowns a day....directly delivered to the hospital each day but they have had to just go it alone via their MP because Whitehall couldn't respond). There are so many other SMEs that can support the NHS using a Dunkirk type analogy.

Anyway, the link is a sobering read.

Edited April 20, 2020 by sonyc

[dj11 378]

41 minutes ago, Indy said:

Can you imagine the numbers presented by Abbott! 30billion, million could be infected.........😂

Priti Patel is making a decent fist of the numbers game, which is more relevant than harping on about Abbott.

[ricardo 7,444]

Oil under $10 a barrel 

A shame nobody is allowed out for a drive.

[Indy 3,335]

Having seen how rich two people have got from care homes, I have a serious issue with this PPE for them, they have a duty of care and should have a process in place, they are independent and should have emergency plans for virus hitting their care homes. 
So for everyone to criticise the government for not covering the 84% of private care homes is ludicrous!

They have said if the care homes send a request they will deal with it!

PPE that can be cleaned and re-used safely in the short term should be.