Coronavirus - the political argument

boltonbonce wrote:

Cajunboy wrote:

boltonbonce wrote:Forget Covid. Kenneth Copeland has our back.

Thanks for that , we all need something to laugh at in these trying times.

The guy next to him needs to up his performance. He just doesn't do it for me.

The bastard sings as well!

Sluffy wrote:

xmiles wrote:More government lies.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8241937/Top-civil-servant-says-ministers-political-decision-DELIBERATELY-snub-EU-PPE-scheme.html

Seems the top Civil Servant misspoke!

We’ve just received this clarification from ⁦@SMcDonaldFCO⁩ after today’s ⁦@CommonsForeign⁩ hearing. pic.twitter.com/TuY9Wiid4J

— Tom Tugendhat (@TomTugendhat) April 21, 2020

Or did he? As Kuenssberg has pointed out "McDonald says that there was a 'misunderstanding' and ministers weren't briefed by UK mission in Brussels - but doesn't say whether ministers were briefed on it by anyone else."

Who to believe? A government led by a serial liar that repeatedly lies to us or a senior civil servant?

Anybody seen that PPE from Turkey that Jenrick promised was on its way on Saturday? He said it
would arrive in the UK from Turkey the following day. We have now learned that they didn't even ask for it until Sunday!

xmiles wrote:Or did he? As Kuenssberg has pointed out "McDonald says that there was a 'misunderstanding' and ministers weren't briefed by UK mission in Brussels - but doesn't say whether ministers were briefed on it by anyone else."

Who to believe? A government led by a serial liar that repeatedly lies to us or a senior civil servant?

Anybody seen that PPE from Turkey that Jenrick promised was on its way on Saturday? He said it
would arrive in the UK from Turkey the following day. We have now learned that they didn't even ask for it until Sunday!

It looks bad whatever it turns out to be.

To be fair to McDonald his answer to the Foreign Affairs Committee said Brussels briefed Ministers about what was on offer - he since correct that to say that Brussels did not actually do that.

He didn't say there was no Brussels briefing merely that the Procurement scheme offer was not part of it.

It's a rhetorical question from me but if the UK Mission in Brussels (don't forget we are no longer part of the EU 28 country's from 31st Jan - and so I guess the formal day to day working channels between the EU and UK is via the Mission?) then who would the EU have sent the 'offer' to if not our Brussels Mission?

If so - and the mission didn't pass it on - who does Kuenssberg suspect received the offer, briefed the Ministers and for it to have been discounted - presumably on a political decision that we were no longer part of the EU?

Maybe the political view prevailing at the time was look how the EU failed Italy -

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-52311263

...and we'd be better off on our own anyway?

Fwiw it seems that nothing catastrophic came out of not participating in the joint procurement but even if one life was lost because of it, it was one too many.

I've yet to hear about the Jenrick story yet but I doubt very much that Turkey had tons of PPE stocks just lying about in warehouses waiting for someone to ask for them, so Jenrick asking for them on Sunday expecting them to be delivered the same day/day after doesn't ring true to my mind?  I would imagine there quite a long lead in to procure stuff like this in normal times let alone how the world currently is.

The McDonald interview clip -

xmiles wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

xmiles wrote:More government lies.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8241937/Top-civil-servant-says-ministers-political-decision-DELIBERATELY-snub-EU-PPE-scheme.html

Seems the top Civil Servant misspoke!

We’ve just received this clarification from ⁦@SMcDonaldFCO⁩ after today’s ⁦@CommonsForeign⁩ hearing. pic.twitter.com/TuY9Wiid4J

— Tom Tugendhat (@TomTugendhat) April 21, 2020

Or did he? As Kuenssberg has pointed out "McDonald says that there was a 'misunderstanding' and ministers weren't briefed by UK mission in Brussels - but doesn't say whether ministers were briefed on it by anyone else."

Who to believe? A government led by a serial liar that repeatedly lies to us or a senior civil servant?

Anybody seen that PPE from Turkey that Jenrick promised was on its way on Saturday? He said it
would arrive in the UK from Turkey the following day. We have now learned that they didn't even ask for it until Sunday!

No matter how you cut it this stinks for the government. Either they missed the invitation (incompetent) or deliberately avoided joining based on their warped Brexit ideology (criminal).

Right now, I think Starmer needs to step up the pressure on the government - they’re bungling of this crisis is costing lives. The opposition needs to be all over them - not focussing on what’s happened, but what comes next.

Sluffy wrote:

xmiles wrote:Or did he? As Kuenssberg has pointed out "McDonald says that there was a 'misunderstanding' and ministers weren't briefed by UK mission in Brussels - but doesn't say whether ministers were briefed on it by anyone else."

Who to believe? A government led by a serial liar that repeatedly lies to us or a senior civil servant?

Anybody seen that PPE from Turkey that Jenrick promised was on its way on Saturday? He said it
would arrive in the UK from Turkey the following day. We have now learned that they didn't even ask for it until Sunday!

I've yet to hear about the Jenrick story yet but I doubt very much that Turkey had tons of PPE stocks just lying about in warehouses waiting for someone to ask for them, so Jenrick asking for them on Sunday expecting them to be delivered the same day/day after doesn't ring true to my mind?  I would imagine there quite a long lead in to procure stuff like this in normal times let alone how the world currently is.

Here is a link to the Jenrick lie:

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-only-formally-asked-turkey-for-ppe-shipment-after-it-said-it-was-already-on-its-way-11976238

T.R.O.Y. wrote:No matter how you cut it this stinks for the government. Either they missed the invitation (incompetent) or deliberately avoided joining based on their warped Brexit ideology (criminal).

Right now, I think Starmer needs to step up the pressure on the government - they’re bungling of this crisis is costing lives. The opposition needs to be all over them - not focussing on what’s happened, but what comes next.

Party politics don't work like that though, they are gladiatorial in nature, one trying to wrestle power from the other, with often one exploiting any weakness of the other due to the prevailing circumstances at the time - in other words political point scoring at every opportunity.

I would have hoped to see a coalition of parties to face the crisis together rather than have the divisive undermining of the government when it is least needed right now.  We are after all going through something unprecedented (the world is not the same as it was a 100 years ago when the last similar thing occurred) and the tsunami that has swept the world (together with apparent deliberate misinformation about how devastating the virus actually was) has clearly led to mistakes in dealing with it.

Kuenssberg seems to be making a mountain out of a molehill though.

What seems to have happened is that the 'political decision' of which seems to be central to the story, is that of the decision to leave the EU as quickly as possible and to therefore sever our ties with them as and when we could.

The narrative is looking more likely that the Mission in Brussels did receive the offer from the EU but did not pass it on as it was working to the already taken political decision to start to cut ties with the EU.

The Mission therefore didn't pass on the offer to Ministers in their (presumably) daily briefings to them thereafter.

The story given when asked as to why we didn't join the procurement was therefore true - in that we (the Mission) did receive the 'email' but the Civil Servants working to an already established 'political decision' to disconnect with the EU, simply didn't inform Ministers about it - why should they, they were already working in accordance with their wishes.

Instead of just saying this - it seems to have been spun somewhat to deflect blame where Ministers facing the question seem to have implied that the Civil Service was at fault by not informing them and McDonald yesterday trying to bat the ball back to the government by saying they (the Civil Service) merely complied with the political decision already set by the Conservative government to disengage with the EU as quickly as it could, which it acted in accordance with.

I thought McDonald as head of his department gave an appalling response on camera yesterday, certainly nothing like the benchmark set by one of his CS predecessors Sir Robert Armstrong.

As for Kuenssberg she's tried to manufacture a story that Ministers somehow knew about the procurement offer from a Cobra in her tweet last night but now has stepped back from that in her article today -

"Sources who were part of discussion at the government's emergency Cobra meetings around the time of the start of this crisis - and around the time of our departure from the EU - say there was a discussion involving Mr Hancock about the sensitivities of working with the EU.
One source said the health secretary had acknowledged the political delicacies of working with the EU in preparing for the crisis on a range of issues, and was urged to put the politics aside.
One minister present recalls the matter was discussed and, while there was no decision made during the conversations about preparations that could be made in conjunction with the EU, it was clear there was an "added dilemma" because of the unfolding politics of our departure from the bloc.
Sources close to the health secretary now strongly dispute the notion that there was any discussion of the specific procurement schemes at Cobra at that stage, and stress that ideology has never stood in the way of sourcing the equipment that's needed".

She goes on to confirm that the procurement orders on which the whole story is about hasn't even been delivered yet!

"In any case, the EU schemes are yet to deliver supplies of either ventilators or PPE, so the question of why the UK didn't take part is perhaps academic".

So all in all a NON STORY.

All that time and mud throwing, the government's credibility being daily chipped away, the media having a feeding frenzy and for what?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52377079

Such shit is completely unnecessary now and should be left to an official inquiry when this is all over but papers still need to be sold, advertisement income needed to keep them going and Labour needing to keep a high profile and not seen to be redundant at a time like this, so there is completely no chance the daily nit-picking/political point scoring will stop, whilst the government (any government) attempts to steer itself/the country through uncharted waters and unknown dangers - and mistakes/misjudgements will inevitably happen.

xmiles wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

xmiles wrote:Or did he? As Kuenssberg has pointed out "McDonald says that there was a 'misunderstanding' and ministers weren't briefed by UK mission in Brussels - but doesn't say whether ministers were briefed on it by anyone else."

Who to believe? A government led by a serial liar that repeatedly lies to us or a senior civil servant?

Anybody seen that PPE from Turkey that Jenrick promised was on its way on Saturday? He said it
would arrive in the UK from Turkey the following day. We have now learned that they didn't even ask for it until Sunday!

I've yet to hear about the Jenrick story yet but I doubt very much that Turkey had tons of PPE stocks just lying about in warehouses waiting for someone to ask for them, so Jenrick asking for them on Sunday expecting them to be delivered the same day/day after doesn't ring true to my mind?  I would imagine there quite a long lead in to procure stuff like this in normal times let alone how the world currently is.

Here is a link to the Jenrick lie:

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-uk-only-formally-asked-turkey-for-ppe-shipment-after-it-said-it-was-already-on-its-way-11976238

Thank you.

The way I've read that is that as I suspected an order for the supplies and it being manufactured had been sent weeks ago but seems to have fallen foul (at least in part) by not having the required paperwork ready for export (the article states that the Turkish government changed it rules on the exporting of such goods a month back) and I'm guessing that's been part of the glitch of the delay and why Jenrick asked the Turkish government to resolve.

This being the case I don't believe Jenrick or any other Minister told any lies in relation to this.

Again a non story that the media has made to fill column inches/air time needed to sell advertisements the media is funded by to survive.

All this is unnecessarily chipping away at public confidence in the government at a time we should all be working together to beat this virus. Plenty of time to point the finger when all this is over.

The plane has now returned with half the stuff with others waiting to collect the rest.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52378491

Sluffy wrote:

Such shit is completely unnecessary now and should be left to an official inquiry when this is all over but papers still need to be sold, advertisement income needed to keep them going and Labour needing to keep a high profile and not seen to be redundant at a time like this, so there is completely no chance the daily nit-picking/political point scoring will stop, whilst the government (any government) attempts to steer itself/the country through uncharted waters and unknown dangers - and mistakes/misjudgements will inevitably happen.

Sluffy you seem to have a touching faith in an official enquiry appointed by this government firstly finding out the truth and then it being published.

You only have to look at the non-appearance of the report into Russian involvement with our elections or the whitewash conducted by Nicky Morgan into Boris for which she was rewarded with a peerage to see how likely that is.

xmiles wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

Such shit is completely unnecessary now and should be left to an official inquiry when this is all over but papers still need to be sold, advertisement income needed to keep them going and Labour needing to keep a high profile and not seen to be redundant at a time like this, so there is completely no chance the daily nit-picking/political point scoring will stop, whilst the government (any government) attempts to steer itself/the country through uncharted waters and unknown dangers - and mistakes/misjudgements will inevitably happen.

Sluffy you seem to have a touching faith in an official enquiry appointed by this government firstly finding out the truth and then it being published.

You only have to look at the non-appearance of the report into Russian involvement with our elections or the whitewash conducted by Nicky Morgan into Boris for which she was rewarded with a peerage to see how likely that is.

I honestly believe that once Boris is back in the seat we'll see a more lively government, (at least I hope so), but I also think that things will be sorted out post-virus when parliament gets going. It was quite pleasant watching both Rees Mogg and his shadow opposite actually talking, and even having a joke here and there. Hopefully, once Keir Starmer gets moving today, this attitude will prevail, rather than the rancorous and vicious talks prior to the virus, and during Brexit.
i once thought Raab was a strong and determined MP, but he seems to have wilted under the limelight.

I think it’s shone a light on how incompetent a number of the front bench are. Not many have come through this with much credit.

Sunak probably the only one who has improved his standing?

Yes Sunak is the only one who looks like he knows what he is doing in very difficult circumstances.

Hancock is a lightweight who has been over promoted. Raab and Williamson look out of their depth. Patel is inevitably a car crash and Boris will be back lying to us in a month or two.

xmiles wrote:Sluffy you seem to have a touching faith in an official enquiry appointed by this government firstly finding out the truth and then it being published.

You only have to look at the non-appearance of the report into Russian involvement with our elections or the whitewash conducted by Nicky Morgan into Boris for which she was rewarded with a peerage to see how likely that is.

It's an 'inquiry' not 'enquiry' which means it is a formal investigation, usually with legal powers to go about them.

It's also not necessarily in the general interest to give full public disclosure in all cases either - which does sometimes lead to accusations of cover ups.

Inquiry's are also not necessarily 'witch hunts' to pin the blame on people for what might have gone wrong - I suggest already that mistakes have been made in how the government have dealt with the issue so far - but more to look into the context of why the wrong decisions were made - and to learn from them for the future. It's not uncommon for new legislation to be brought out following from such formal inquiry's.

I think it's fair to say people have already made up their minds about attributing blame already, without in all honesty knowing a fraction of what actually has gone on and why.

Any inquiry that comes to a decision contrary to the belief they hold will be deemed in their mind to be a 'cover-up' and a pointless exercise - it most certainly isn't either but you won't change people's minds about such.

As for Morgan she commissioned the Government's Internal Audit Agency to 'review' the process of how a grant was made and whether it was awarded improperly - the findings were that no rules were breached

Comprehensive details of everything is listed here -

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/csiif-hacker-house-ltd-grant-award

The bottom line is people believe what they want to believe often based solely on their own bias and beliefs and just won't change their minds no matter what.

I believe we still are one of the most honest and uncorrupted nations in the world and long may we remain so, which ever political party forms the government of the day.

xmiles wrote:Yes Sunak is the only one who looks like he knows what he is doing in very difficult circumstances.

Hancock is a lightweight who has been over promoted. Raab and Williamson look out of their depth. Patel is inevitably a car crash and Boris will be back lying to us in a month or two.

Feel a little bit sorry for Hancock, if you believe reports he was one of those against the herd immunity strategy and was counselling lockdown while most of the cabinet dithered. Also come out today that he advised against publicising the PPE delivery Jenrick ran with (that’s been denied officially but obviously needs a pinch of salt with that).

Clearly he’s out of his depth and doesn’t seem the strongest of characters, but from the outside looking in he appears to have been hamstrung by a delayed government reaction to the crisis. Not to mention an NHS and social care system badly underfunded over the last ten years.

Very bad if this is accurate:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/revealed-dominic-cummings-on-secret-scientific-advisory-group-for-covid-19?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

T.R.O.Y. wrote:Very bad if this is accurate:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/revealed-dominic-cummings-on-secret-scientific-advisory-group-for-covid-19?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Yes that is very disturbing news.

I await Sluffy's response with interest.

I doubt even the most ardent defender of the government will bother defending that.

xmiles wrote:

T.R.O.Y. wrote:Very bad if this is accurate:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/revealed-dominic-cummings-on-secret-scientific-advisory-group-for-covid-19?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Yes that is very disturbing news.

I await Sluffy's response with interest.

Don't know why you seek my response but I'd go along with the view taken by Whitty and Valance -

On Friday, England’s chief medical officer, Prof Chris Whitty, appeared to signal a change in direction, saying the public had a right to know who sat on Sage. He told a Commons science select committee that while it was important to consider security concerns, there was “absolutely no barrier” from him or Vallance. Asked if in the current climate revealing the names of who was on the group would boost public confidence in the scientific advice being given, Whitty replied: “Yes”.

I like to think I've always sought honesty and openness rather than having agenda's and prejudices like others often seem to have.  Of course not nailing my colours to any one particular political party makes life a great deal easier to do that than thinking/believing that one party is correct about everything and the other is just pure shite, all the time.

xmiles wrote:

T.R.O.Y. wrote:Very bad if this is accurate:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/revealed-dominic-cummings-on-secret-scientific-advisory-group-for-covid-19?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Yes that is very disturbing news.

I await Sluffy's response with interest.

I’d read this NYT article this morning, which makes the above revelation all the more pertinent.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/world/europe/uk-coronavirus-sage-secret.amp.html

Hiding behind the notion of ‘following scientific advice’ without revealing what the advice is, is just about acceptable if it’s coming from scientists. If it’s not, then there’s a real issue here.

Sluffy wrote:
I like to think I've always sought honesty and openness rather than having agenda's and prejudices like others often seem to have.  Of course not nailing my colours to any one particular political party makes life a great deal easier to do that than thinking/believing that one party is correct about everything and the other is just pure shite, all the time.

I don't believe anyone on this site thinks "that one party is correct about everything".