Boris Johnson- Prime Minister (Vol. 4)
Discussion
IforB said:
Sway said:
Agreed the "ring" was anything but.
However, Johnson's proposals yesterday were all about improvements at government not care home level.
Yet instead of just saying that, he attempted to pass the blame and brought the cares homes into it himself. There was no need to slag off care homes if all he was saying "we in Government need to do better on this." Take it on the chin, accept it and say what they are doing. Even I would have said "fair play" to that.However, Johnson's proposals yesterday were all about improvements at government not care home level.
However, he attempted to be slippery and divert attention from the appalling mess that he presided over and it has very rightly backfired.
Everyone can do better on anything as nobody and no organisation is perfect.
If self-flagellation is OK for government it's OK for care providers.
IforB said:
There are always lessons to be learned from any situation. Nothing is ever 100% perfect and anyone who is expecting any Government response to this crisis to not have mistakes in it, is an idiot.
However, This Government have made some spectacularly bad decisions and have been behind the curve all the way through.
Pulling apart poor Governmental decision making is absolutely part of the lessons learned process. All of us have to do our own simplified version of it too. In the future, when a ballot paper is in front of you, have a look at those on it and decide how they may respond in a similar crisis.
If they appear to be populist blowhards who talk a good game, but fall apart like a cheap suit at the first sign of trouble, then maybe, don't put a cross next to that person or party.
When you elect idiots, it is unreasonable to expect them not to be idiots.So it is contingent on all of us to make sure we do our best in the future to elect people who aren't useless.
From a lessons learned perspective, that is the big one I take away from it.
One test is to compare our response to that of other, similar countries. This isn't just a case of adding up deaths and dividing by the population. It does seem, at this time, that, as you say, some decisions were poor, made at the wrong time, and I think part of the reason might well be the single advisor rule. In such a situation, contrary ideas are as important as those that follow the corporate line. However, This Government have made some spectacularly bad decisions and have been behind the curve all the way through.
Pulling apart poor Governmental decision making is absolutely part of the lessons learned process. All of us have to do our own simplified version of it too. In the future, when a ballot paper is in front of you, have a look at those on it and decide how they may respond in a similar crisis.
If they appear to be populist blowhards who talk a good game, but fall apart like a cheap suit at the first sign of trouble, then maybe, don't put a cross next to that person or party.
When you elect idiots, it is unreasonable to expect them not to be idiots.So it is contingent on all of us to make sure we do our best in the future to elect people who aren't useless.
From a lessons learned perspective, that is the big one I take away from it.
You are right, of course; the solution lies with us. I flit from party to party and cannot see myself voting for a party that is led by Johnson. It's a bit late for some unfortunately. They can't vote now.
However, I can't see Johnson remaining as leader for the next GE. Maybe not beyond the next 18mths.
El stovey said:
"We discovered too many care homes didn't really follow the procedures in the way that they could have but we're learning lessons the whole time.“
It’s quite clearly early enough for him to blame care homes for not apparently following procedures but too early for him to be scrutinised for anything.
I genuinely don't know what you and Stewie want, except for an angry mob to descend right now.It’s quite clearly early enough for him to blame care homes for not apparently following procedures but too early for him to be scrutinised for anything.
Acknowledging that they have identified systemic problems in our response is surely a reasonable thing to do? That's not even laying blame on the care homes, is it? It's quite probable we're going to find out that regulation of care provision is going to have to improve - that's a government responsibility.
And who is stopping anyone from pointing out bad decisions made by the government?
There is a difference however between acknowledging problems and mistakes, and making grand leaps of judgement. I don't see any contradiction between saying that yes, care homes were handled badly, but we'll have to wait for some more sophisticated analysis than that to understand why that happened and how we can change things to avoid it happening in the future. "Because Boris" is not a useful contribution, is it?
And this constant framing of everything as blame is ridiculous.
Derek Smith said:
One test is to compare our response to that of other, similar countries.
A dangerous and misleading path to go down - diseases do not behave uniformly, nations are not constructed uniformly, and our situations are often anything other than uniform.At the moment we have anecdotes, not data.
Blue62 said:
Sway said:
We're not alone in this. The vast majority of developed world nations utterly f
ked up in a systemic way when it came to protecting care home residents - something that should have been absolutely avoidable considering the residents are by definition an increased risk for any virus.
There appear to be fairly clear examples to understand differences in approach - prevention of movement from clinical to residential care (or strict isolation of those moved under presumption of infection). Isolation around care homes. Isolation within care homes.
The question is how can this best be ensured moving forwards?
We are not alone in this, but as a wealthy, resource rich nation with the benefit of time how do you think we have performed? Germany stands out, but there are others. If you choose not to interpret Boris's remarks as apportioning blame, or at the very least setting the scene, then more fool you. ked up in a systemic way when it came to protecting care home residents - something that should have been absolutely avoidable considering the residents are by definition an increased risk for any virus.There appear to be fairly clear examples to understand differences in approach - prevention of movement from clinical to residential care (or strict isolation of those moved under presumption of infection). Isolation around care homes. Isolation within care homes.
The question is how can this best be ensured moving forwards?
Spain had people found dead in their beds where they'd been left. Italy didn't exactly do great. Sweden had issues. Belgium too. As for the US...
In fact, the only nation that seemed to do well at protecting care home residents that wasn't in the far East seems to be Germany - who have themselves said that a big part of that was a ready made decentralised testing capability within the private sector.
Helicopter123 said:
mx5nut said:
markyb_lcy said:
It’s going to be funny watching the usual Boris boot-licker, self-contortionists defend these comments from Boris blaming care homes that the govt are already trying to row back on.
But what was Corbyn doing to protect care homes? Boris is doing his best, he was sick and has a child, you know - it's offensive to hold him to account at work on top of that.Derek Smith said:
One test is to compare our response to that of other, similar countries. This isn't just a case of adding up deaths and dividing by the population. It does seem, at this time, that, as you say, some decisions were poor, made at the wrong time, and I think part of the reason might well be the single advisor rule. In such a situation, contrary ideas are as important as those that follow the corporate line.
You are right, of course; the solution lies with us. I flit from party to party and cannot see myself voting for a party that is led by Johnson. It's a bit late for some unfortunately. They can't vote now.
However, I can't see Johnson remaining as leader for the next GE. Maybe not beyond the next 18mths.
Plus some of those countries had less warning than the U.K. did. We had accurate data from them about rates of infection but kept restaurants and bars open whilst Boris was “urging people not to go there”. Seems extraordinary now but it was criticised widely at the time and the same posters like turbobloke defending Boris above defended that decision too. You are right, of course; the solution lies with us. I flit from party to party and cannot see myself voting for a party that is led by Johnson. It's a bit late for some unfortunately. They can't vote now.
However, I can't see Johnson remaining as leader for the next GE. Maybe not beyond the next 18mths.
In fact TB did accept that the government had made mistakes by not being tougher on the media.
IforB said:
gooner1 said:
IforB said:
There are always lessons to be learned from any situation. Nothing is ever 100% perfect and anyone who is expecting any Government response to this crisis to not have mistakes in it, is an idiot.
However, This Government have made some spectacularly bad decisions and have been behind the curve all the way through.
Pulling apart poor Governmental decision making is absolutely part of the lessons learned process. All of us have to do our own simplified version of it too. In the future, when a ballot paper is in front of you, have a look at those on it and decide how they may respond in a similar crisis.
If they appear to be populist blowhards who talk a good game, but fall apart like a cheap suit at the first sign of trouble, then maybe, don't put a cross next to that person or party.
When you elect idiots, it is unreasonable to expect them not to be idiots.So it is contingent on all of us to make sure we do our best in the future to elect people who aren't useless.
From a lessons learned perspective, that is the big one I take away from it.
I take it you won’t be exercising your right to vote at the next GE.However, This Government have made some spectacularly bad decisions and have been behind the curve all the way through.
Pulling apart poor Governmental decision making is absolutely part of the lessons learned process. All of us have to do our own simplified version of it too. In the future, when a ballot paper is in front of you, have a look at those on it and decide how they may respond in a similar crisis.
If they appear to be populist blowhards who talk a good game, but fall apart like a cheap suit at the first sign of trouble, then maybe, don't put a cross next to that person or party.
When you elect idiots, it is unreasonable to expect them not to be idiots.So it is contingent on all of us to make sure we do our best in the future to elect people who aren't useless.
From a lessons learned perspective, that is the big one I take away from it.
If Johnson and his cohort are still leading the Tory party at the next GE, then I sure as hell wouldn't put a cross next to a Tory candidate. That would be daft. However, if someone else who isn't an incompetent muppet is in the chair, then it is worth consideration.
The key is to not fall into the trap of assuming "all politicians are idiots" but to actually spend some time looking at candidates on a national and local level and seeing where your vote is best placed.
If there is no-one you trust, then get up there and represent yourself, don't just disenfranchise yourself.
For what it’s worth, I have previously voted Labour but in all honesty could not square the idea that they would have been the best
choice for our country. So voted for the least likely to damage it.
Tuna said:
El stovey said:
"We discovered too many care homes didn't really follow the procedures in the way that they could have but we're learning lessons the whole time.“
It’s quite clearly early enough for him to blame care homes for not apparently following procedures but too early for him to be scrutinised for anything.
I genuinely don't know what you and Stewie want, except for an angry mob to descend right now.It’s quite clearly early enough for him to blame care homes for not apparently following procedures but too early for him to be scrutinised for anything.
Acknowledging that they have identified systemic problems in our response is surely a reasonable thing to do? That's not even laying blame on the care homes, is it? It's quite probable we're going to find out that regulation of care provision is going to have to improve - that's a government responsibility.
And who is stopping anyone from pointing out bad decisions made by the government?
There is a difference however between acknowledging problems and mistakes, and making grand leaps of judgement. I don't see any contradiction between saying that yes, care homes were handled badly, but we'll have to wait for some more sophisticated analysis than that to understand why that happened and how we can change things to avoid it happening in the future. "Because Boris" is not a useful contribution, is it?
And this constant framing of everything as blame is ridiculous.
For people to ask themselves "is this what I really voted for?" rather than clapping like seals "because team".
He stood at a podium and told us that everything Dominic Cummings did was right and gave an interview yesterday telling us what many of what the care homes did was wrong.
And all the while when questions have been asked of him or the Government "now is not the time".
Why do people on this thread keep making excuses for his behaviour?
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: For our Prime Minister to act with a shred of respect and dignity.
For people to ask themselves "is this what I really voted for?" rather than clapping like seals "because team".
He stood at a podium and told us that everything Dominic Cummings did was right and gave an interview yesterday telling us what many of what the care homes did was wrong.
And all the while when questions have been asked of him or the Government "now is not the time".
Why do people on this thread keep making excuses for his behaviour?
Some are just too far gone down the rabbit hole i'm afraid.For people to ask themselves "is this what I really voted for?" rather than clapping like seals "because team".
He stood at a podium and told us that everything Dominic Cummings did was right and gave an interview yesterday telling us what many of what the care homes did was wrong.
And all the while when questions have been asked of him or the Government "now is not the time".
Why do people on this thread keep making excuses for his behaviour?
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: For our Prime Minister to act with a shred of respect and dignity.
For people to ask themselves "is this what I really voted for?" rather than clapping like seals "because team".
He stood at a podium and told us that everything Dominic Cummings did was right and gave an interview yesterday telling us what many of what the care homes did was wrong.
And all the while when questions have been asked of him or the Government "now is not the time".
Why do people on this thread keep making excuses for his behaviour?
Agreed.For people to ask themselves "is this what I really voted for?" rather than clapping like seals "because team".
He stood at a podium and told us that everything Dominic Cummings did was right and gave an interview yesterday telling us what many of what the care homes did was wrong.
And all the while when questions have been asked of him or the Government "now is not the time".
Why do people on this thread keep making excuses for his behaviour?
I’d also like to see some indication that the government have recognised their mistakes, accepted responsibility and more importantly made changes to stop it continuing through the rest of the crisis and economic recovery.
Seeing Boris blame carehomes and continue to avoid scrutiny himself, doesn’t make it look like any lessons have been learned at all.
Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 7th July 12:22
gooner1 said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:El stovey said:
You can’t honestly believe this?
If something went wrong in your workplace and someone said
“Sway didn't really follow the procedures in the way that he could have”
Would you feel like you were getting blamed in any way? That what went wrong was being attributed to you not “following procedures in the way that you could have”
If you’d followed procedures it wouldn’t have happened. It happened because YOU didn’t follow procedures in the way that you could have.
And if Sway simply asked "As you've just said I didn't follow the procedures would you mind telling me what the procedures are that I didn't follow please?" what would he expect the answer to be?If something went wrong in your workplace and someone said
“Sway didn't really follow the procedures in the way that he could have”
Would you feel like you were getting blamed in any way? That what went wrong was being attributed to you not “following procedures in the way that you could have”
If you’d followed procedures it wouldn’t have happened. It happened because YOU didn’t follow procedures in the way that you could have.
If the management had not explained to an employee the specific procedures to follow for a specific role, or any procedures attributable to the employment in general, then the fault lies with management and it’s agents that are employed to inform all employees. Guess who were mostly at fault with most work related injuries in my specific industry?
At what point in this crisis do you think the Government fit the role of "management" and if someone you were representing asked their management "which procedure didn't I follow?" do you think it's reasonable to expect an answer?
Especially if that management had just very publicly declared that person hadn't followed a procedure.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Gooner thank you I appreciate the explanation
At what point in this crisis do you think the Government fit the role of "management" and if someone you were representing asked their management "which procedure didn't I follow?" do you think it's reasonable to expect an answer?
Especially if that management had just very publicly declared that person hadn't followed a procedure.
Without knowing the specifics of care homes general procedures re contagious infections or more importantly Covid specificAt what point in this crisis do you think the Government fit the role of "management" and if someone you were representing asked their management "which procedure didn't I follow?" do you think it's reasonable to expect an answer?
Especially if that management had just very publicly declared that person hadn't followed a procedure.
instructions, I cannot in all honesty provide you with that information.
I can however point out that most safety rules are born of people’s misfortune, mistakes or deliberate actions.
Most rail workers would recognise the commonly used phrase that our rule book is written in blood, and understand the meaning.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:gooner1 said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:El stovey said:
You can’t honestly believe this?
If something went wrong in your workplace and someone said
“Sway didn't really follow the procedures in the way that he could have”
Would you feel like you were getting blamed in any way? That what went wrong was being attributed to you not “following procedures in the way that you could have”
If you’d followed procedures it wouldn’t have happened. It happened because YOU didn’t follow procedures in the way that you could have.
And if Sway simply asked "As you've just said I didn't follow the procedures would you mind telling me what the procedures are that I didn't follow please?" what would he expect the answer to be?If something went wrong in your workplace and someone said
“Sway didn't really follow the procedures in the way that he could have”
Would you feel like you were getting blamed in any way? That what went wrong was being attributed to you not “following procedures in the way that you could have”
If you’d followed procedures it wouldn’t have happened. It happened because YOU didn’t follow procedures in the way that you could have.
If the management had not explained to an employee the specific procedures to follow for a specific role, or any procedures attributable to the employment in general, then the fault lies with management and it’s agents that are employed to inform all employees. Guess who were mostly at fault with most work related injuries in my specific industry?
At what point in this crisis do you think the Government fit the role of "management" and if someone you were representing asked their management "which procedure didn't I follow?" do you think it's reasonable to expect an answer?
Especially if that management had just very publicly declared that person hadn't followed a procedure.
There are thousands of care homes in the UK.
Johnson mentioned that "some" hadn't followed procedures. This isn't a stretch of the imagination.
There's also nothing there for any specific care home to claim opprobrium for being blamed for anything.
gooner1 said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Gooner thank you I appreciate the explanation
At what point in this crisis do you think the Government fit the role of "management" and if someone you were representing asked their management "which procedure didn't I follow?" do you think it's reasonable to expect an answer?
Especially if that management had just very publicly declared that person hadn't followed a procedure.
Without knowing the specifics of care homes general procedures re contagious infections or more importantly Covid specificAt what point in this crisis do you think the Government fit the role of "management" and if someone you were representing asked their management "which procedure didn't I follow?" do you think it's reasonable to expect an answer?
Especially if that management had just very publicly declared that person hadn't followed a procedure.
instructions, I cannot in all honesty provide you with that information.
I can however point out that most safety rules are born of people’s misfortune, mistakes or deliberate actions.
Most rail workers would recognise the commonly used phrase that our rule book is written in blood, and understand the meaning.
He wants you to say - without evidence or understanding of the situation - that the blame lies solely with the person at the top.Sway said:
Germany does stand out.
Spain had people found dead in their beds where they'd been left. Italy didn't exactly do great. Sweden had issues. Belgium too. As for the US...
In fact, the only nation that seemed to do well at protecting care home residents that wasn't in the far East seems to be Germany - who have themselves said that a big part of that was a ready made decentralised testing capability within the private sector.
Italy and Spain do not have our resources and were hit earlier than us. Those who consider comparisons erroneous are hiding behind the line our failed leaders have been peddling. Spain had people found dead in their beds where they'd been left. Italy didn't exactly do great. Sweden had issues. Belgium too. As for the US...
In fact, the only nation that seemed to do well at protecting care home residents that wasn't in the far East seems to be Germany - who have themselves said that a big part of that was a ready made decentralised testing capability within the private sector.
Boris has continually used the term ‘world beating’ when referring to issues like testing, perhaps even the staunchest apologist can see the problem?
El stovey said:
Agreed.
I’d also like to see some indication that the government have recognised their mistakes, accepted responsibility and more importantly made changes to stop it continuing through the rest of the crisis and economic recovery.
Seeing Boris blame carehomes and continue to avoid scrutiny himself, doesn’t make it look like any lessons have been learned at all.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/care-home-support-package-backed-by-600-million-to-help-reduce-coronavirus-infectionsI’d also like to see some indication that the government have recognised their mistakes, accepted responsibility and more importantly made changes to stop it continuing through the rest of the crisis and economic recovery.
Seeing Boris blame carehomes and continue to avoid scrutiny himself, doesn’t make it look like any lessons have been learned at all.
Edited by El stovey on Tuesday 7th July 12:22
It looks like they saw where mistakes were being made and put extra measure in place back in May. Probably too late by then, anyway, as I suspect the damage had been done.
It's strange that Boris and the government aren't be praised for those care homes that had no infections or deaths? Presumably, their guidance had nothing to do with those successes, that was purely down to good managers and staff acting on their own initiative.
But any care home with infection or deaths is 100% the governments fault and can in no way be attributed the management or staff of each home.
Or is it that some care homes have done better because of better management and staff, and some might have done poorly because of the same. Asymptomatic spread certainly didn't help, along with agency staff working between homes.
Not to mention, I suspect a lot of the care home deaths are down to a lack of treatment, as the story at the time was most of them wouldn't survive ventilators, so no point in taking them to hospital. I suspect a lot of them could have been saved knowing that ventilators weren't the solution. And, as I have mentioned several times now, the treatments now seem to be more around treating a cardiovascular disease, not pneumonia, so a lot of them probably had a better change of recovery if they did get treatment.
I don't know who's responsible for that decision at the start, but if that was the information they had at the time, which is it was, then I can understand why that was the way.
The reality is, care homes will be the biggest problem, as they have been for pretty much every other country. If no other country had excess care home deaths, I'd think the government had done something especially wrong, but seeing as most countries have had the same problem, what does that suggest? And, no, that doesn't make it OK, but if most of Europe have made the same mistake, that makes it pretty obvious that no one really had a good strategy to protect them.
The biggest problem thus far seems to be a lack of testing capacity. That seems to be have been addressed, to an extent, but clearly needs some sort of long-term implementation if they don't want the same problem when the next one happens.
Sway said:
There are thousands of care homes in the UK.
Johnson mentioned that "some" hadn't followed procedures. This isn't a stretch of the imagination.
There's also nothing there for any specific care home to claim opprobrium for being blamed for anything.
He said that "too many" care homes didn't really follow the procedures.Johnson mentioned that "some" hadn't followed procedures. This isn't a stretch of the imagination.
There's also nothing there for any specific care home to claim opprobrium for being blamed for anything.
That isn't the same as "some".
gooner1 said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Gooner thank you I appreciate the explanation
At what point in this crisis do you think the Government fit the role of "management" and if someone you were representing asked their management "which procedure didn't I follow?" do you think it's reasonable to expect an answer?
Especially if that management had just very publicly declared that person hadn't followed a procedure.
Without knowing the specifics of care homes general procedures re contagious infections or more importantly Covid specificAt what point in this crisis do you think the Government fit the role of "management" and if someone you were representing asked their management "which procedure didn't I follow?" do you think it's reasonable to expect an answer?
Especially if that management had just very publicly declared that person hadn't followed a procedure.
instructions, I cannot in all honesty provide you with that information.
I can however point out that most safety rules are born of people’s misfortune, mistakes or deliberate actions.
Most rail workers would recognise the commonly used phrase that our rule book is written in blood, and understand the meaning.
I would be interested in your gut reaction if in your union days management had gone on the record after an incident and stated "too many staff weren't following procedures" whether you'd think that a wise thing for them to have done.
I think that's a reasonable question for anyone to ask themselves.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:Sway said:
There are thousands of care homes in the UK.
Johnson mentioned that "some" hadn't followed procedures. This isn't a stretch of the imagination.
There's also nothing there for any specific care home to claim opprobrium for being blamed for anything.
He said that "too many" care homes didn't really follow the procedures.Johnson mentioned that "some" hadn't followed procedures. This isn't a stretch of the imagination.
There's also nothing there for any specific care home to claim opprobrium for being blamed for anything.
That isn't the same as "some".
If as someone has already stated that some did follow the procedures, they obviously didn’t mean all homes did.
Stop with the pedantics chap.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff