Boris Johnson- Prime Minister (Vol. 4)
Discussion
mx5nut said:
Tuna demonstrating why it can't be Boris himself that delivers the retraction. His devotees heard the original message loud and clear and the spokesperson gave them their plausible deniability to shield Johnson with.
Care workers are to be blamed. Media covering them in a positive light is now the enemy.
Right out of Trump's dogwhistle playbook.
"I'm really not defending Johnson but his official spokesman made it clear what he meant and why are the BBC running politically motivated stories giving airtime to care home workers trying their hardest to keep their residents safe? You're all being led by the nose. Did I mention I'm not defending him?".Care workers are to be blamed. Media covering them in a positive light is now the enemy.
Right out of Trump's dogwhistle playbook.
It's quite remarkable seeing it unfold in front of your eyes.
skwdenyer said:
1. Managers who followed it aren't saying the guidance was unclear;
2. Many managers ignored official guidance in favour of stricter standards - their homes seem to have fared better;
As far as I am aware, the guidance does not set 'maximum standards' or demand care homes stick below certain levels of care. Discharges from hospitals are done with the advice of the Doctor in charge and on a case by case basis. The pretence on here that care homes were helplessly forced into poor standards of care are demeaning to the staff involved.2. Many managers ignored official guidance in favour of stricter standards - their homes seem to have fared better;
Now it's true that the advice and understanding of the disease was limited, particularly in the early days - this is a serious criticism of both the government, their advisors and the bodies who were meant to have been prepared for exactly this scenario. But let's not pretend that care homes don't have both a certain level of autonomy and a duty of care to vulnerable residents.
skwdenyer said:
3. Those who did question guidance reported at the time receiving no further assistance;
4. In general, care home operators expect sick residents to be treated in an appropriate setting (often hospital), not to be refused treatment and rely upon care home staff to implement infectious disease control measures - don't forget, these are not hospitals;
This is the most serious accusation. Genuinely, were patients refused treatment?4. In general, care home operators expect sick residents to be treated in an appropriate setting (often hospital), not to be refused treatment and rely upon care home staff to implement infectious disease control measures - don't forget, these are not hospitals;
The government policy here should come under the tightest scrutiny - the received wisdom at the time was that hospitals were about to be overwhelmed, that the disease spread fairly evenly through the population, and that the majority of those infected showed clear symptoms. We discovered all three of those assumptions to be false. The danger here is we start applying hindsight to decisions made at the time.
Whilst it's true that care homes are not hospitals(!) it's a bit of a myth to suggest that hospitals are automatically the best place to implement disease control measures. Hence the concerns over hospitals becoming overwhelmed, the cancellation of many additional services, and the sad fact that hospitals acted as sources of infection in the wider community.
Care homes certainly should be able to provide some level of disease control, and I expect there will be a focus on this at some point when they hysteria reduces. When you manage a community of vulnerable adults that are prone to illness, disease control and some level of isolation should be part of your capacity. Certainly not to idealised 'hospital' levels, but to a certain extent. This appears to be Johnsons' suggestion - that care homes did not limit staff turnaround in all cases, that community areas continued to be shared and that standards of hygiene may not have been appropriate given the known circumstances.
And here's the rub - I'm guessing Johnson has a better set of statistics and information on this than the armchair experts in here.
skwdenyer said:
5. The guidance on PPE use mandates the *extensive* use of single-use items, at levels far exceeding any previously-imagined rate - since even the NHS did not have a viable stockpile sufficient to meet the need, why do you suppose care homes would have held larger (relatively speaking) stocks?
They are largely private companies who are responsible for caring for the most vulnerable section of our community. It is actually their responsibility to meet that duty of care. There's no denying that PPE was hard to get hold of at a critical time, but as autonomous organisations, if they cannot meet some part of the guidelines, they are (should be) capable of asking further advice - from the Doctors they work with, from their own professional advisors and from the government. They are (should be) also capable of taking mitigating actions if they cannot follow guidelines for reasons of equipment shortage. We know that some did - and we also know that some did not.Note that none of this is "blaming" care homes - it's just the painful reality of a horrendous situation. We had incomplete information about a disease that specifically attacks the elderly. Everyone was asked to do their best given what we knew. Many did, and still are going above and beyond.
What sticks in the throat is the fight over blame here. Personally I didn't read Johnson's quote as an attempt to absolve himself or the government of blame, or finger pointing, but an acknowledgement of the situation - that care homes were a key factor in the spread of the disease, and that there appears to have been some inconsistency in the standards of care. That's not to defend Johnson, just how I read the remarks - but I'm not looking for the language of blame here.
Others clearly are, and they're overreaching when suddenly we're being asked to treat care homes as sacrosanct, blame free organisations. Equally, they're overreaching when they attempt to lay all the blame on a handful of individuals, and pretend that there was no autonomy or independent thought outside of the cabinet. Such behaviour is nakedly and cheaply political. Blame is as much about denying responsibility as apportioning it to others.
We are going to have to face up to our responsibilities though, and over time we'll understand better who was responsible for key decisions, and the implementation of those decisions. If we're adults, we should already be able to see that there is a collective responsibility here, and a hard limit on what it is possible to do in the face of limited information about a unique and deadly situation.
Perhaps the people on here who use language like "ultras", "Boris' bootboys" and deliberately divisive language of "teams" and "sides" could wind their necks in and understand that some of us don't see this complex situation in toy-town colours or crude black and white terms. The name calling and cheap politics are shameful in the circumstances.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: mx5nut said:
Tuna demonstrating why it can't be Boris himself that delivers the retraction. His devotees heard the original message loud and clear and the spokesperson gave them their plausible deniability to shield Johnson with.
Care workers are to be blamed. Media covering them in a positive light is now the enemy.
Right out of Trump's dogwhistle playbook.
"I'm really not defending Johnson but his official spokesman made it clear what he meant and why are the BBC running politically motivated stories giving airtime to care home workers trying their hardest to keep their residents safe? You're all being led by the nose. Did I mention I'm not defending him?".Care workers are to be blamed. Media covering them in a positive light is now the enemy.
Right out of Trump's dogwhistle playbook.
It's quite remarkable seeing it unfold in front of your eyes.
Pathetic behaviour, Stewie. Throw your towel in with nut, if you wish, but the company you keep speaks volumes.
El stovey said:
“ Mr Johnson replied: "One of the things the crisis has shown is we need to think about how we organise our social care package better and how we make sure we look after people better who are in social care."
Ironic that the usual suspects are now attacking the government for talking about improving social care. Sacred cows, eh?Tuna said:
This is the most serious accusation. Genuinely, were patients refused treatment?
The government policy here should come under the tightest scrutiny - the received wisdom at the time was that hospitals were about to be overwhelmed, that the disease spread fairly evenly through the population, and that the majority of those infected showed clear symptoms. We discovered all three of those assumptions to be false. The danger here is we start applying hindsight to decisions made at the time.
There have been anecdotal stories of an informal "triage" policy where care home residents were often not being taken to hospital for Covid-19 or for other reasons. As you say it was based on the assumption that hospitals were about to be overwhelmed based on faulty data and modelling. The government policy here should come under the tightest scrutiny - the received wisdom at the time was that hospitals were about to be overwhelmed, that the disease spread fairly evenly through the population, and that the majority of those infected showed clear symptoms. We discovered all three of those assumptions to be false. The danger here is we start applying hindsight to decisions made at the time.
Sometimes those in charge have to make tough decisions and they are inevitably going to prioritise those who aren't in god's waiting room already.
Tuna said:
El stovey said:
“ Mr Johnson replied: "One of the things the crisis has shown is we need to think about how we organise our social care package better and how we make sure we look after people better who are in social care."
Ironic that the usual suspects are now attacking the government for talking about improving social care. Sacred cows, eh?
almost as if he has no interest in improving policy but is just desperately seeking reasons to get rid of Boris......Tuna said:
Of course, my words mean only what you chose them to mean, eh? Truly Orwellian.
Pathetic behaviour, Stewie. Throw your towel in with nut, if you wish, but the company you keep speaks volumes.
I haven't thrown my towel in with anyone but I can read.Pathetic behaviour, Stewie. Throw your towel in with nut, if you wish, but the company you keep speaks volumes.
"The BBC coincidentally choosing today to have a news item about the emotional re-union of care home workers who sacrificed all to stay with their old folk during lockdown.
"You're actually having a go at the media accusing them of "politically driven" coverage of events for running a few minutes of care workers who sacrificed their family lives to keep their families and their patients safe.
That's what trying "not to defend Johnson" has reduced you to.
I don't know much Orwell but I do know "the party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears" and if ever it applied.
TheMal28 said:
gooner1 said:
Alucidnation said:
None of them seem capable of answering that question it seems.
Can’t see why that is tbh, I mean his accusers were/are so adamant as to what our PM actually said that it should be just a matterof seconds till the transcript was produced.
I’m beginning to come to the conclusion that some but by no means all of his detractors, and lord knows he has his faults, have heard what they actually wished he had said instead of what he actually said. Maybe one or two are actually fibbing, some have even started to suggest our PM was supposedly blaming the buildings, which has to be one of the weirdest ways to admit they
were wrong in the first instance.
His words were "too many care homes didn't really follow the procedures".
Which procedures is he referring to? Which government set procedure did they fail to follow?
Edit; Maybe The Government should focus on their failing, the WHO were banging the drum of "Test, Test, Test" in February, the same time we were shutting down our testing regime.
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 8th July 00:24
This is just another seed of diversion, there’ve been others and there’ll be more, so that when all the enquiries start the truth will be well hidden.
It will work with many of the dull minded and sycophants.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:Tuna said:
Of course, my words mean only what you chose them to mean, eh? Truly Orwellian.
Pathetic behaviour, Stewie. Throw your towel in with nut, if you wish, but the company you keep speaks volumes.
I haven't thrown my towel in with anyone but I can read.Pathetic behaviour, Stewie. Throw your towel in with nut, if you wish, but the company you keep speaks volumes.
"The BBC coincidentally choosing today to have a news item about the emotional re-union of care home workers who sacrificed all to stay with their old folk during lockdown.
"You're actually having a go at the media accusing them of "politically driven" coverage of events for running a few minutes of care workers who sacrificed their family lives to keep their families and their patients safe.
That's what trying "not to defend Johnson" has reduced you to.
I don't know much Orwell but I do know "the party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears" and if ever it applied.
There is enough sycophantic media coverage out there without demanding that the BBC follows suit.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: "The BBC coincidentally choosing today to have a news item about the emotional re-union of care home workers who sacrificed all to stay with their old folk during lockdown. "
You're actually having a go at the media accusing them of "politically driven" coverage of events for running a few minutes of care workers who sacrificed their family lives to keep their families and their patients safe.
Difficult to square being so sure that Johnson didn't mean front line care staff with his fanboys lashing out at the media for covering positive stories about front line care staff."You're actually having a go at the media accusing them of "politically driven" coverage of events for running a few minutes of care workers who sacrificed their family lives to keep their families and their patients safe.
JagLover said:
Tuna said:
El stovey said:
“ Mr Johnson replied: "One of the things the crisis has shown is we need to think about how we organise our social care package better and how we make sure we look after people better who are in social care."
Ironic that the usual suspects are now attacking the government for talking about improving social care. Sacred cows, eh? almost as if he has no interest in improving policy but is just desperately seeking reasons to get rid of Boris......Boris’s handling of the pandemic has been a disaster and directly led to tens of thousands of extra deaths. Obviously I want him replaced as soon as possible.
Why on earth would I want him still managing the pandemic?
What has he done during the pandemic that you actually support?
El stovey said:
I want both.
Boris’s handling of the pandemic has been a disaster and directly led to tens of thousands of extra deaths. Obviously I want him replaced as soon as possible.
Why on earth would I want him still managing the pandemic?
What has he done during the pandemic that you actually support?
Caught the virus to experience it first hand. Nothing like a bit of real-life knowledge to aid the situationBoris’s handling of the pandemic has been a disaster and directly led to tens of thousands of extra deaths. Obviously I want him replaced as soon as possible.
Why on earth would I want him still managing the pandemic?
What has he done during the pandemic that you actually support?
Tuna said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: mx5nut said:
Tuna demonstrating why it can't be Boris himself that delivers the retraction. His devotees heard the original message loud and clear and the spokesperson gave them their plausible deniability to shield Johnson with.
Care workers are to be blamed. Media covering them in a positive light is now the enemy.
Right out of Trump's dogwhistle playbook.
"I'm really not defending Johnson but his official spokesman made it clear what he meant and why are the BBC running politically motivated stories giving airtime to care home workers trying their hardest to keep their residents safe? You're all being led by the nose. Did I mention I'm not defending him?".Care workers are to be blamed. Media covering them in a positive light is now the enemy.
Right out of Trump's dogwhistle playbook.
It's quite remarkable seeing it unfold in front of your eyes.
Pathetic behaviour, Stewie. Throw your towel in with nut, if you wish, but the company you keep speaks volumes.
You’re constantly saying you’re not defending Boris but then constantly defending him, you’re saying it wasn’t criticism of the care homes but then saying the media are politicising his comments when the media show care home workers saying they’re upset Boris was blaming them.
If you’re not defending him and accept he’s made mistakes, what exactly do you think are the mistakes he’s responsible for during the crisis?
El stovey said:
robemcdonald said:
frisbee said:
Alucidnation said:
None of them seem capable of answering that question it seems.
Why bother? It could be written on the side of a bus and you blowjobbers would fervently deny it!
Next it will be “where did boris actually blame a care worker by name! Why can nobody answer that I wonder” !!!!
The contortions people are going to to defend his statement are hilarious. It’s perfectly clear he’s made a mistake by blaming care homes. The government have already had to do some damage limitation.
Why is anyone surprised Boris who’s a liar and doesn’t accept responsibility for anything is starting to blame everyone else for his government’s mishandling of the crisis. This is just the start and great to see he’s not going to get an easy ride each time he tries it.
Bless.
Tuna said:
El stovey said:
“ Mr Johnson replied: "One of the things the crisis has shown is we need to think about how we organise our social care package better and how we make sure we look after people better who are in social care."
Ironic that the usual suspects are now attacking the government for talking about improving social care. Sacred cows, eh?Who are the “usual suspects” and where are ‘they’ attacking the government for talking about improving social care?
Criticism of Boris’s comments is quite obviously about the bit where he blames care homes and says that care homes didn’t follow procedures, not criticism about trying to improve social care.
El stovey said:
Why is anyone surprised Boris who’s a liar and doesn’t accept responsibility for anything is starting to blame everyone else for his government’s mishandling of the crisis. This is just the start and great to see he’s not going to get an easy ride each time he tries it.
How can you call BJ a liar. He has made it clear in previous interviews that he does not lie. REALIST123 said:
The government, or at least Cummins and Johnson, is focussing on its own failings.
This is just another seed of diversion, there’ve been others and there’ll be more, so that when all the enquiries start the truth will be well hidden.
It will work with many of the dull minded and sycophants.
Well it certainly has you convinced for a start. This is just another seed of diversion, there’ve been others and there’ll be more, so that when all the enquiries start the truth will be well hidden.
It will work with many of the dull minded and sycophants.
gooner1 said:
frisbee said:
Alucidnation said:
None of them seem capable of answering that question it seems.
Why bother? It could be written on the side of a bus and you blowjobbers would fervently deny it!Another poster unable to answer.
Never mind, enjoy your day cottaging frisbee.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff