Coronavirus

[wilts rover]

Going off that the earliest they could of locked down was when the advice changed at the 16th March

And what did the government actually do?

They let Cheltenham Festival go ahead, they let Athletico Madrid fans travel to Liverpool even though football had stopped in Spain, they wanted matches over here to continue and schools to stay open. Johnson went on tv and said it was fine to shake hands with people in a hospital that had covid patients in it.

It was only parents keeping their kids of school and clubs cancelling matches that begun to shut down the country - not the government.

Herd immunity. Only a few old pensioners will die - Mr D Cummings.

[drfchound]

Going off that the earliest they could of locked down was when the advice changed at the 16th March

And if they had done BPool, the death toll would have been 60-80% lower and we'd be much further out of lockdown.

When an epidemic is doubling every 3-4 days (and WE in here knew it was by mid-March) it was criminal (literally) to delay lockdown as long as we did. It was tantamount to mass murder.

I am very surprised that if it was literally criminal to delay lockdown, that no one has tried to bring a case against the government.

[Donnywolf]

Going off that the earliest they could of locked down was when the advice changed at the 16th March

And what did the government actually do?

They let Cheltenham Festival go ahead, they let Athletico Madrid fans travel to Liverpool even though football had stopped in Spain, they wanted matches over here to continue and schools to stay open. Johnson went on tv and said it was fine to shake hands with people in a hospital that had covid patients in it.

It was only parents keeping their kids of school and clubs cancelling matches that begun to shut down the country - not the government.

Herd immunity. Only a few old pensioners will die - Mr D Cummings.

Yes - there have been many denials but here the Journo highlights the phrase "credibly reported" when attributing let a few old people die .

https://discoversociety.org/2020/03/23/herd-immunity-and-let-the-old-people-die-boris-johnsons-callous-policy-and-the-idea-of-genocide/

[Donnywolf]

Going off that the earliest they could of locked down was when the advice changed at the 16th March

And if they had done BPool, the death toll would have been 60-80% lower and we'd be much further out of lockdown.

When an epidemic is doubling every 3-4 days (and WE in here knew it was by mid-March) it was criminal (literally) to delay lockdown as long as we did. It was tantamount to mass murder.

I am very surprised that if it was literally criminal to delay lockdown, that no one has tried to bring a case against the government.

There are several cases where relatives of people who were in care homes and later died as a result (they say) of having had "infected" residents returned to that Care Home and so I would imagine maybe a class action might spring from that

Might lead to other legal challenges ?

[IDM]

U turn now on overseas travel with quarantine on return from select countries to be ended from 6 July.

So we didn’t apply quarantine for arrivals at the beginning of the crisis, only from 8 June after we had already imported the disease and when there was next to bugger all travel anyway.

The travel restrictions and returning quarantine should have been in place at the beginning of March, then it would be making sense to relax now.

It beggars the question what was the point of imposing the quarantine on 8 June in the first place.?

[ravenrover]

makes me laugh Portugal and Sweden on the so called red list so no holidays without quarantine but... surely we are on the red list too yet we can pack our buckets and spades and re infect the rest of Europe

[Not Now Kato]

According to Mogg, the weather is to blame....
 
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/coronavirus-uk-jacob-rees-mogg-death-toll-weather-a9585616.html

[bpoolrover]

Going off that the earliest they could of locked down was when the advice changed at the 16th March

And what did the government actually do?

They let Cheltenham Festival go ahead, they let Athletico Madrid fans travel to Liverpool even though football had stopped in Spain, they wanted matches over here to continue and schools to stay open. Johnson went on tv and said it was fine to shake hands with people in a hospital that had covid patients in it.

It was only parents keeping their kids of school and clubs cancelling matches that begun to shut down the country - not the government.

Herd immunity. Only a few old pensioners will die - Mr D Cummings.

I agree it was a stupid thing to do as I’ve said many times

[bpoolrover]

U turn now on overseas travel with quarantine on return from select countries to be ended from 6 July.

So we didn’t apply quarantine for arrivals at the beginning of the crisis, only from 8 June after we had already imported the disease and when there was next to bugger all travel anyway.

The travel restrictions and returning quarantine should have been in place at the beginning of March, then it would be making sense to relax now.

It beggars the question what was the point of imposing the quarantine on 8 June in the first place.? It is very strange what the point was to be fair but labour backed that as well as did the Lib Dem’s

[Not Now Kato]

More deaths in the UK yesterday than in the whole of the EU put together!
 
https://twitter.com/KevinPascoe/status/1276608854051172352

[BillyStubbsTears]

Going off that the earliest they could of locked down was when the advice changed at the 16th March

And if they had done BPool, the death toll would have been 60-80% lower and we'd be much further out of lockdown.

When an epidemic is doubling every 3-4 days (and WE in here knew it was by mid-March) it was criminal (literally) to delay lockdown as long as we did. It was tantamount to mass murder.

the Guardian has it as many as 20k lives saved if a week earlier which is still a huge amount, but going off them minutes they didn’t advise them to lock down a week earlier which is worrying do you not think?

Bpool.

This has been said dozens of times now.

If SAGE wasn't considering a hard lockdown, there are only 2 things that could have happened.

1) The Govt told SAGE not to consider a hard lockdown.

2) SAGE chose not to consider a hard lockdown and no-one in Govt said otherwise.

There is no possible alternative explanation.

Since everyone in SAGE and Govt knew that in the absence of a hard lockdown, 500,000 people would die by the summer, that raises some very tough questions for the Govt.

If it is scenario 1, why did Govt decide that?

If it is scenario 2, why did no-one in Govt say, "Hang on! Are you telling us there is no alternative to half a million people dying over the Spring?"

You CANNOT just say "Oh it's SAGE's fault". That is what Govt wants you to think. But it is wrong.

[bpoolrover]

I never said it was sages fault I said the blame has to be shared but you seem to only want to blame the goverment and it makes me wonder why? The sage meetings are for you there to see. Going off the guardian article at what point do you think they advised them to lockdown?

[IDM]

U turn now on overseas travel with quarantine on return from select countries to be ended from 6 July.

So we didn’t apply quarantine for arrivals at the beginning of the crisis, only from 8 June after we had already imported the disease and when there was next to bugger all travel anyway.

The travel restrictions and returning quarantine should have been in place at the beginning of March, then it would be making sense to relax now.

It beggars the question what was the point of imposing the quarantine on 8 June in the first place.? It is very strange what the point was to be fair but labour backed that as well as did the Lib Dem’s

Backed what.? The quarantine plan.?

Even if they did, it doesn’t necessarily make it right.

Not everything is a political issue bpool.

[bpoolrover]

Yes the quarantine plan, no your right idm but most things on off topic on here are

[IDM]

The government is the government regardless of party make up.

Criticising government action because the action warrants criticising isn’t in itself necessarily political.  People on here who raise such criticisms aren’t necessarily being political but are often labelled as such by others.

[bpoolrover]

Ok I will agree with you on that🍺 but criticising is fine but when it’s none stop even when there are facts proving otherwise it gets tedious and political

[IDM]

What about when the facts show that ministers have acted corruptly and go unpunished.?

When the PM blatantly lies and does U turns.?

Then the PM’s senior advisor claims to have driven to carry out an eye test (never mind anything else) and goes unpunished.

When the rest of Europe is clamping down on the virus outbreak and we can see what they are doing, but we don’t follow their example because it’s too important that Britain is seen to be able to do its own thing.?

Of course, there are the thousands of idiots crowding out beaches etc and holding street parties, but they are not the ones running the country..

[Glyn_Wigley]

I never said it was sages fault I said the blame has to be shared but you seem to only want to blame the goverment and it makes me wonder why? The sage meetings are for you there to see. Going off the guardian article at what point do you think they advised them to lockdown?

Going off the Guardian article at what point do you think the Government asked them to suggest different coping strategies? That is what a competent Government would do.

[bpoolrover]

I never said it was sages fault I said the blame has to be shared but you seem to only want to blame the goverment and it makes me wonder why? The sage meetings are for you there to see. Going off the guardian article at what point do you think they advised them to lockdown?

Going off the Guardian article at what point do you think the Government asked them to suggest different coping strategies? That is what a competent Government would do.

going off the guardian article at what point do you think they advised them to lockdown?

[Glyn_Wigley]

I never said it was sages fault I said the blame has to be shared but you seem to only want to blame the goverment and it makes me wonder why? The sage meetings are for you there to see. Going off the guardian article at what point do you think they advised them to lockdown?

Going off the Guardian article at what point do you think the Government asked them to suggest different coping strategies? That is what a competent Government would do.

going off the guardian article at what point do you think they advised them to lockdown?

I asked first.

[wilts rover]

Going off that the earliest they could of locked down was when the advice changed at the 16th March

And if they had done BPool, the death toll would have been 60-80% lower and we'd be much further out of lockdown.

When an epidemic is doubling every 3-4 days (and WE in here knew it was by mid-March) it was criminal (literally) to delay lockdown as long as we did. It was tantamount to mass murder.

the Guardian has it as many as 20k lives saved if a week earlier which is still a huge amount, but going off them minutes they didn’t advise them to lock down a week earlier which is worrying do you not think?

Bpool.

This has been said dozens of times now.

If SAGE wasn't considering a hard lockdown, there are only 2 things that could have happened.

1) The Govt told SAGE not to consider a hard lockdown.

2) SAGE chose not to consider a hard lockdown and no-one in Govt said otherwise.

There is no possible alternative explanation.

Since everyone in SAGE and Govt knew that in the absence of a hard lockdown, 500,000 people would die by the summer, that raises some very tough questions for the Govt.

If it is scenario 1, why did Govt decide that?

If it is scenario 2, why did no-one in Govt say, "Hang on! Are you telling us there is no alternative to half a million people dying over the Spring?"

You CANNOT just say "Oh it's SAGE's fault". That is what Govt wants you to think. But it is wrong.

These are the important clues in the public sphere to those questions.

On 3rd February Johnson gave a speech at Greenwich College that included this:

'Global growth is itself anaemic and the decline in global poverty is beginning to slow,” he said. “And in that context, we are starting to hear some bizarre autarkic rhetoric, when barriers are going up, and when there is a risk that new diseases such as Coronavirus will trigger a panic and a desire for market segregation that go beyond what is medically rational to the point of doing real and unnecessary economic damage, then at that moment humanity needs some government somewhere that is willing at least to make the case powerfully for freedom of exchange.'

So on 3rd February, with the scale of what was happening in China just becoming apparent he had no intention of locking the country down. Indeed he saw the introduction of lockdowns in other countries as an opportunity for the UK.

On 5th March he went on the tv and said

'...one of the theories is that perhaps you could take it on the chin, take it all in one go and allow the disease, as it were, to move through the population, without taking as many draconian measures..'

Are these the words of a Prime Minister considering a lockdown at any point?

https://bylinetimes.com/2020/04/17/the-coronavirus-crisis-boris-johnson-said-superman-brexit-britain-would-take-advantage-of-the-pandemic-and-go-its-own-way-seven-weeks-before-lockdown/

[wilts rover]

Blimey this will shake things up if true - possible case identified in Spain in March 2019

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-spain-had-covid-19-in-march-2019-scientists-claim-after-waste-water-test-12015612

[bpoolrover]

Going off that the earliest they could of locked down was when the advice changed at the 16th March

And if they had done BPool, the death toll would have been 60-80% lower and we'd be much further out of lockdown.

When an epidemic is doubling every 3-4 days (and WE in here knew it was by mid-March) it was criminal (literally) to delay lockdown as long as we did. It was tantamount to mass murder.

the Guardian has it as many as 20k lives saved if a week earlier which is still a huge amount, but going off them minutes they didn’t advise them to lock down a week earlier which is worrying do you not think?

Bpool.

This has been said dozens of times now.

If SAGE wasn't considering a hard lockdown, there are only 2 things that could have happened.

1) The Govt told SAGE not to consider a hard lockdown.

2) SAGE chose not to consider a hard lockdown and no-one in Govt said otherwise.

There is no possible alternative explanation.

Since everyone in SAGE and Govt knew that in the absence of a hard lockdown, 500,000 people would die by the summer, that raises some very tough questions for the Govt.

If it is scenario 1, why did Govt decide that?

If it is scenario 2, why did no-one in Govt say, "Hang on! Are you telling us there is no alternative to half a million people dying over the Spring?"

You CANNOT just say "Oh it's SAGE's fault". That is what Govt wants you to think. But it is wrong.

These are the important clues in the public sphere to those questions.

On 3rd February Johnson gave a speech at Greenwich College that included this:

'Global growth is itself anaemic and the decline in global poverty is beginning to slow,” he said. “And in that context, we are starting to hear some bizarre autarkic rhetoric, when barriers are going up, and when there is a risk that new diseases such as Coronavirus will trigger a panic and a desire for market segregation that go beyond what is medically rational to the point of doing real and unnecessary economic damage, then at that moment humanity needs some government somewhere that is willing at least to make the case powerfully for freedom of exchange.'

So on 3rd February, with the scale of what was happening in China just becoming apparent he had no intention of locking the country down. Indeed he saw the introduction of lockdowns in other countries as an opportunity for the UK.

On 5th March he went on the tv and said

'...one of the theories is that perhaps you could take it on the chin, take it all in one go and allow the disease, as it were, to move through the population, without taking as many draconian measures..'

Are these the words of a Prime Minister considering a lockdown at any point?

https://bylinetimes.com/2020/04/17/the-coronavirus-crisis-boris-johnson-said-superman-brexit-britain-would-take-advantage-of-the-pandemic-and-go-its-own-way-seven-weeks-before-lockdown/ no and that backs up what I said at no stage in that article in the guardian do sage advise him to lockdown, you would expect them to have done that really that’s what I don’t understand, yes it’s down to Johnson ultimately but I doubt very much he knows that much about corona virus and needed proper advice

[bpoolrover]

Anyway I’ve said my piece on it now and let’s just hope lessons are learned, have a good weekend everyone

[IDM]

Cheers bpool, you too..

[wilts rover]

If we haven't yet convinced you that imposing a lockdown was/is a a political decision then a guess we never will.

You have a good weekend too. I was just about to get the bike out and go for a spin before tea. Took one look at the sky and turned straight back round. Wise choice as its slinging it down now.

[scawsby steve]

If we haven't yet convinced you that imposing a lockdown was/is a a political decision then a guess we never will.

You have a good weekend too. I was just about to get the bike out and go for a spin before tea. Took one look at the sky and turned straight back round. Wise choice as its slinging it down now.

I'm the same Wilts, but I'm determined to get my walk even if I get wet through. It's all there is at the moment, and I'm feeling so depressed and pessimistic with all the news, that I'm beginning to wonder if any of us will ever get to the Keepmoat again.

This virus seems like it's never going to go away.

[BillyStubbsTears]

It'll go away SS. It's simply a question if whether we keep a lid on it for long enough for a vaccine to be developed. If not, there'll be half a million dead after all, just in slow time.

[drfchound]

That is a good way to cheers him up.

[scawsby steve]

It'll go away SS. It's simply a question if whether we keep a lid on it for long enough for a vaccine to be developed. If not, there'll be half a million dead after all, just in slow time.

Yes, but in the meantime, how are clubs like Rovers going to survive without crowds in the stadium?

That's our only sustainable source of revenue. We can't just rely on Terry and Andy's money.