When push comes to shove you ignore the question. Let's try again, would a mythical being gone against the advice ?
there is over 320 recognised countries in the world ….! they are doing a very good job if you level the playing field with "all" the mitigating factors. KS in parliament was shot to bits yesterday on his attacks on what the people of this country have done to fight the pandemic .. has nothing really to say so invents or spins things … he had no answer to Boris stating he did not reply to his [ KS letter ] when BORIS 3 TIMES HAD TO TELL HIM we spoke about it on phone for over 30 mins …!!! he [KS ] sits there like a zombie when chastised. Bad would be no one getting paid ..... peak was 3 times higher …. contaging rate would be 3 -5 ….hospitals at this point would be using 51% or more of available IC machines we would all be subject to curfew lock down ... i published a table a month or so ago it compared 3 defining factors on death rates … if you follow the daily briefing and watch the slides common sense would put you in a position to see the tables [ regions table ] gives a clue on what would be / could be compared to world wide country patterns. with some weighting applied to 3 or 4 countries that "experimented/gambled /"winged it" where DR was lower [ contained ].
Well seeing SAGE were saying on the 27th February that without action the NHS would not be able to cope with the demands placed on it and that Social distancing, when enacted early, was said to delay the peak of the virus between three to five weeks and reduce the peak by up to 60% then yes I think any mythical being would have thought twice before letting these events go ahead
Doing a very good job? When we are the worse hit country in Europe (we can't even use the excuse that we were first hit) and yesterday we declared more UK deaths that all 27 Eu countries combined. I hate to think of how you would rate doing a very bad job has
The government has been shown to have repeatedly ignored SAGE - even now they're saying schools shouldn't reopen and they're still going ahead. Point is I didn't ask about Corbyn. That wasn't the question mate, this isn't Tory v Labour, I honestly couldn't care less about that now. My question is to those who are believing the government are doing well. If this is a good job, what would a bad job look like? Third time asking!
But France had a police state total lock down, papers required if you went out......we didn't... We had nut cases flocking to the beaches & parks... The ultimate job was to keep the R rate down.....the NHS was not overwhelmed by the pandemic..
Not sure where you got Paris having a population of 11m from ? The city itself has a population of just over 2m unless you include the whole 'Ile De France' in which case it's over 12m London is among the largest metropolitan areas in Europe, as it covers an estimated area of 1,572 square kilometres On the other hand, Paris is also a large city but way less than London in terms of area coverage. Paris covers an estimated 105 square kilometres, which means London is around 15 times larger than Paris. Although Paris is smaller in terms of area coverage, the city happens to be one of the most densely populated cities in Europe. The greater Paris region is estimated to host 12.4 million people, while the inner Paris is home to 2.14 million. Paris has a population density of 20,700 people per square kilometres. London, on the other hand, is home to an average of 8.9 million people. It has a lesser population density of 5,518 people per square kilometre.
I haven't said the the government have done a good job - 3rd time replying. Have a look at how I started this thread 9 weeks ago. My 'point', as you put it, is could/would anyone have done better in an unprecedented situation. I'm not convinced.
Yeah fair enough, it was aimed at others in this thread who were sympathising with the government though. Could/would anyone have done better in an unprecedented situation? Yeah, I think every prime minister I've ever known before Boris, both Labour and Conservative, would have done better. Every one of them would have enforced lockdown earlier to stop the exponential growth, been clearer with the rules, supported the NHS and care homes properly, and not tried to fiddle the figures to make it look like they're doing a good job. It's impossible to stress just how badly they've handled this. We had 2 weeks' notice over Italy and Spain and somehow managed to do worse than both of them. And now even the previously pro-Boris papers are turning on him, that says something.
Could/would anyone have done better in an unprecedented situation? Yeah, I think every prime minister I've ever known before Boris, bothLabour and Conservative, would have done better. How can you possibly come to this conclusion? Where is your evidence for this assertion? Or is it just a random thought?
the interesting thing about stats is trying to base info on the level playing field agree [ish] with greater London area being around 1200 sq km would dispute [greater ]Paris though its about [ my reckoning ] 500 sq km, inner Paris is larger about35 sq km's London is 12 sq km ...but where do you put the boundaries??? however trying to compare the 2 is like comparing chalk and cheese the only thing they have in common is Ca …. hardly any of Paris is cramped, lots of parisein roads within the city are dual carriage ways very few are less than 30ft wide with 2 ample pavement... most of London manages with 20ft plus pavements and one ways are a must... PANDEMIC for London …..."hospitals death rate" most of the big hospitals for greater London are in it … and also cater for areas further out! so a bit of a false reading could be gleaned using "London "
Not sure any of this is fair whatsoever.....Where do you get this "every prime minister I've ever known before Boris, both Labour and Conservative, would have done better." from ?? Utter nonsense.I suppose The Tony Blair that took us into an illegal war would be on your list!! ..And had we had low numbers, you'd be having a go for locking down at all......it was all about balancing it out..It's like, most of the media kept asking, what are the plans to come out of all this....making a point of domestic abuse and how the kids were not being educated, how the Country is losing billions of pounds and the amount of jobs lost...(more had we locked down earlier).....It was always going to be a no win situation for the government.......Blame game!!
Well as an example the company I work for , a family owned firm with 350 staff, who had never bought PPE before, in March set up new supply chains, chartered planes and brought PPE to the UK from China. We supplied many national organisations including NHS trusts. How could we do it having never done it before and the UK Govt be unable to do so and sat with their thumbs up their a$$.
You’ve missed the point here. I have not claimed that the current Government has covered itself in glory. Clearly, with hindsight, different decisions would be made in a more timely manner. The point I was making is that there is no evidence that any other administration would have handled the pandemic as it affects the UK better than the current Government. We have to remember here that we elected them!
Yes of course they were, however we managed and have continued to source PPE. Do you not agree the UK government should be in a better position than us to do it?
I get your point RS, I am not in the slightest bit bothered whether one particular party could have done better than the other. My concern is whether our elected representatives could or should have done better. Yes on both accounts
The Government and others did set up new supply chains. The UK and other nations experienced supply not being large enough particularly fluid-repellent PPE. The NHS had a storage problem. It has a national storage facility housing PPE. The stock the NHS and other nations had was not large enough, and could not be.
