All governments were warned how serious this could become around the end of January - yet it was not until late March that a lockdown was announced in the UK - this was much later than many other European countries. By early March it was clear that Britain had taken a different course to other European nations in that the government, apparently, believed the fairy tale of so called 'herd immunity'. As if the object of the exercise was to allow as many people to get infected as possible, thus seeming to accept that the virus was unstoppable. Even on the question of testing Britain lagged behind everyone else - it wasn't that the testing kits were unavailable just that it wasn't the priority of the government to go down this course because Bojo believed that the aim was to infect 60% of the population !
Testing kits were purchased from China which were deemed unreliable and unsafe. There were several courses taken by various European nations according to the scientific and medical advice their government were given. It would have helped greatly if China had not lied and covered up the early stages of the pandemic. The communist state was guilty of disciplining those that tried to report the early stages of the virus. China's reputation has taken a severe knock which will be reflected in much loss of business in future. Germany's reputation in the EU has also suffered and continues to lessen as it refuses to offer financial support to those countries devastated by the pandemic. This really is a defining moment for the EU, the Southern countries and France want a pooled response not unaffordable loans with strings attached. They only have to look at Greece to see where that leads.
Slight shift of subject here SH. The truth is that Britain's response to the Corona crisis has been one of the worst in Europe, and this is very largely down to the government, initially, following the course of herd immunity - or do you deny that ? The fact is that whereas other countries were locked down and social distancing laws were in place, in Britain the images coming out were ones of crowded tubes in London and flights landing at Heathrow without any quarantine controls. As a result of this lax approach you are now having to play catch up. Whilst talking about 'countries devastated by the pandemic' it is worth realizing that very few are, actually, in this position - the numbers of active cases are falling in most of them, with the exception of Belgium, the Netherlands, the UK, Poland and Sweden (who also believed this herd immunity theory, and are now paying the cost). The country actually most devastated by the pandemic is the UK.
I was referring to financial devastation in which the Southern countries will suffer dreadfully unless Germany, Austria and Holland agree to the idea of sharing the cost of reconstruction. So far 52% of recovery funds have been allocated to Germany. If this imbalance continues it will increase the gap between Germany's productivity and the rest of the EU. There is rising euroscepticism in Europe, 60% of Italians want to leave the EU if no progress is made on mutuality of debt. Unemployment is already horrendous in several EU countries who never recovered from 2008, this is much worse this time. The relationship between France and Germany is at its lowest since the war. Normally problems between EU members are normally kicked down the road, that is not possible this time. I am confident the UK will bounce back quickly, we are good at creating business and jobs.
March 29th: "There were some countries who initially talked about herd immunity as a strategy. In New Zealand we never ever considered that as a possibility, ever. Herd immunity would’ve meant tens of thousands of New Zealanders dying and I simply would not tolerate that and I don’t think any New Zealander would" – Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister of New Zealand, on the initial UK strategy. Oh what a difference! How on earth can anyone still support a government that was prepared to see tens of thousands of Brits dying?
March 13th: “Communities will become immune to it and that’s going to be an important part of controlling this longer term,” says Chief Scientific Adviser Sir Patrick Vallance. “About 60 per cent is the sort of figure you need to get herd immunity.” The strategy would require 40 million Britons to become infected.
March 12th : The Government is presented with "shattering" findings from Imperial College modelling. Untrammelled, the virus could kill half a million people, while the Government's herd immunity plan is projected to kill a quarter of a million.
March 20th : The UK finally closes schools, cafes, pubs and restaurants. The move comes later than in any comparable European country. A senior cabinet source will later state: “We didn’t want to go down this route in the first place – public and media pressure pushed the lockdown, we went with the science." In reality, many scientists were urging a much earlier lockdown. (Telegraph) Why if the UK was the last to go into lockdown of sorts, is it still recording the highest number of new cases and deaths anywhere in Europe? Just explain what the policy was before the lockdown SH.
The policy was for the UK government to follow advice from leading scientists and top medical advisors.
Rather than whinging now you should leave the performance of the UK government during the pandemic to the Health and Social Care Committee led by the defeated Tory leadership candidate Jeremy Hunt. He is dying to kick the government in the undercarriage, knowing Boris and his chums will be in government, whatever happens, for years.
Didn't you read what the top medical advisors and leading scientists were saying? It was that the UK needed to enter a lockdown with loads of testing. Eventually the government took the advice, reluctantly. So are you happy to see that the UK is still seeing thousands more testing positive, and another 600 + dying? This has to be the most inept response to a crisis that has ever been seen anywhere in the world. Looking at the figures over here the UK is still seeing three times of many lives being lost as in France. Why might that be?
Hunt is covering his backside. He has said he pleaded for more funding, more supplies and a need to replace stocks that were out of date in 2016. He has sold off chunks of the NHS to his chums, so I have no love for him whatsoever. I can provide more dates and examples if required.
There is nowhere near as much private company involvement in the NHS as there is in the French and many other EU countries. The NHS needs to modernise to prevent current inefficiencies and overspend.
He is just upset he was not offered the opportunity to keep his post. The current UK government is ploughing record amounts into the NHS. Labour running out of money during their last shot at government resulted in necessary belt tightening and waste reduction by the coalition and Tory governments.
You clearly do not seem to understand that the NHS was set up as a service for all. Other countries didn't have the same ideas, so to say that one involves more private services than another is not actually relevant. My grandmother was in a care home before the NHS was formed, and I have seen the bills that were sent to my parents when she died. The people who can afford to pay for queue jumping are the very people who should be taxed more highly to provide a 21st century service for those who cannot afford it. Maybe if there were not so many on zero hours contracts, and paying little or no tax, then there would be more coming in to fund the service in a modern way.
People that pay for private medical insurance or pay for treatment privately are reducing pressure and cost for the NHS. They are often higher earners who pay substantially more in tax and council tax. The top 1% of earners pay more than a third of income tax paid to the government.The IFS recently confirmed the UK's tax revenues are ever more reliant on a small group of high-income taxpayers. The Tory government has substantially raised the minimum wage so taking many out of paying tax altogether. 42% of adults pay no income tax at all. Private involvement in health provision in many European countries is not seen as a negative, It is considered the norm. There needs to be more private involvement in the NHS bringing much needed financial accountability which will eventually provide a better service for patients.
People who take themselves off into tax exile do not contribute to the tax system. How much tax do the brothers living on their private island, who own the Telegraph contribute? How much does the Virgin contribute, but wants a cash handout? Of course they are not to blame as the system is set up in such a way that they can take advantage of it. The number of people paying tax in the UK has fallen quite clearly because so many are now not earning enough with their zero hours contracts. Drive the earnings down and the tax take will fall obviously. Other countries will have different health systems simply because they were set up differently. The system in the UK was designed to have everyone pay into an all encompassing service. The UK is now trying to sell off chunks because it is not taking in enough to pay for a basic system. Meanwhile Eustace had an absolute car crash on TV tonight. Two nights running seems unfair on a middle manager who is thrust into the limelight. Just who would take over if Johnson was taken poorly again? We have seen the array of talent, and they look like a bunch thrown out of Spoons on a Friday night.
