You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
The only part of it done well was the vaccine rollout. Everything else was cack.
Not quite, the treasury IT roll-out for working from home for HMRC and the income support, was an object lesson in getting things right first time (or right enough to have a functioning work-force). From memory it was all going very well after a month, the first couple of weeks had some wrinkles to be ironed out.
I believe TiRed on the R number calculations around the beginning as there must have been absolutely huge political pressure from the top to play those down, keep events like Cheltenham Races etc going and for Johnson, Sunak and Co to try and ride it out to come out of the other side looking like heroes. There was lots of talk in the press of the vagaries of everything at that time and also an immediate resistance to Following the Science until it was obvious that the experts were on the right track. It's quite possible that the R range was 3-5 days across a few reports, leading to two different answers to the same question at the time. Just go look back at the original thread and TiRed explaining the vagaries of existing models with the limited data even a few weeks later and you can see how this situation would arise.
Whitty was specifically worried that people wouldn’t follow the advice or would only do so for a limited time.
This is the only positive part so far, hitty and the govt didn't think the general public would adhere to any lockdown rules for very long and we all proved them very wrong on this. I remember the adherence for the first few weeks of lockdown one being incredibly well obeyed by nearly everyone. It was the one beacon of hope for a lot of people that following the rules would keep us safer than other countries like Italy and gave rise the NHS pan banging etc.
Don't forget that Atletico Madrid played Liverpool around the sma etime as Cheltenham and over 5000 fans came here from Spain which was many weeks ahead of us. They were touting herd immunity early on too. I think that Vallance was involved early on too.
Not quite, the treasury IT roll-out for working from home for HMRC and the income support, was an object lesson in getting things right first time (or right enough to have a functioning work-force). From memory it was all going very well after a month, the first couple of weeks had some wrinkles to be ironed out.
I wasn’t with HMRC at the time, but it was a heck of an achievement.
.
explicitly describing a 5 day doubling on the 16th March, which according to his recent testimony was *after* he had seen the data that convinced him that the doubling time was 3 days
He had two roles, surely. One was a spokesperson delivering a consensus position to the public, the other was seeking and evaluating the best new evidence available and working with others to constantly improve that consensus. That the very public role would be falling behind the private role is no surprise.
What happened today at the inquiry?
Prof JVT went into great detail about the death threats he and his family received while he tried to save lives. Conspiracy theory nut jobs can get in the sea.
We were informed by Jonathan Van-Tam that the first time anyone outside numbers 10 & 11 Downing Street heard about Rishi’s Eat Out To Kill Everyone scheme was when they saw it on the news.
As Chris Whitty volunteered yesterday, Rishi didn’t think he’d like the answers he’d get if he asked the questions, so he just never bothered and went ahead anyway, just like Truss with the OBR and her mini-budget.
When they said they’d had enough of experts, they really meant it
We've now had Patrick Vallance, Chris Whitty and Jonathan Van-Tam all state categorically they were neither consulted nor told about sunak's Eat Out scheme.
Can't wait to see lil rish! attempt to talk his way out of that one.
It is, of course, perfectly possible that 3 eminent scientific and medical leaders got together and agreed to lie and shift the responsibility when it was clear they would be asked about this.
In fact, as I think about it that's what must have happened...
Sunaks a politician with slightly more brain than BOJO, so he didnt downright lie in his written statement. He wrote that nobody had voiced any concerns to him about EOTHO. Which I guess is true, because none of the scientists knew anything about it!!
He had two roles, surely. One was a spokesperson delivering a consensus position to the public, the other was seeking and evaluating the best new evidence available and working with others to constantly improve that consensus. That the very public role would be falling behind the private role is no surprise.
Do you seriously think he stood up there and said something purely scientific (not policy-related) that he, and the other scientists in SAGE, believed to be false, and that SAGE was pressurised (by whom?) into writing something that the scientists present believed to be false into their minutes, and he didn't think to mention this at any stage in his written or spoken testimony to either the current inquiry or the select committee back in 2020, or in any other interview? And none of the other scientists involved have mentioned this complete breakdown of normal ethics and behaviour either? If you think SAGE weren't prepared to speak the scientific truth about the doubling time, how on earth can you believe that they were nevertheless asking for lockdown (a highly political statement)?
It's a hell of a conspiracy theory, but also completely absurd, especially when there is a very simple explanation for the contradiction, which is that he's confused the two weekends in his mind, and managed to misread (selectively read) the SAGE minutes in such a way as to obscure the contradiction. SAGE changed its mind over the weekend of 21-22 March, as is very clearly documented in the minutes of 16, 18, 20 and 23 March. There was surely some debate about the doubling time earlier than that (as @TiReD mentions, but lots people up and down the country were shaking their heads at this point), but the arguments for 3d doubling were very firmly rejected by SAGE on both the 16th and 18th of March. They didn't credit this value with the hint of a possibility, even saying on the 18th that actions already recently taken (such as the measures announced on the 16th) would likely be slowing the doubling time beyond the 5-7 day estimate they quote. 5-7 days! They even had an uncertainty range!
Vallance has not produced a single document, email, WhatsApp or anything else to back up his claim to have changed his mind over the weekend of 14-15 March. There are numerous documents demonstrating the converse, that the belief in 5 day doubling persisted at least though the 16-18 March (SAGE meetings on those days) and was first changed by SAGE on the 23rd, following the SPI-M meeting on the 20th. He doesn't try to put so much as a fag-paper between his views and SAGE's views, BTW, considering them broadly interchangeable, using "we" to mean the scientists generally etc. If SAGE had imposed views on him that he strongly disagree with, he'd hardly have kept that a secret, it would be an important part of explaining his actions.
I know no-one else is really interested in getting at the truth, but I've now written to the inquiry outlining the repeated discrepancies between Vallance's testimony, and what the contemporaneous records actually show (ie, the SAGE and SPI-M-O minutes around that time, together with the press conference on the 16th where he directly refers to the 5 day doubling time that SAGE was continuing to assume).
Good for you. In fact I suggested you do it a week ago.
Have you sent any of this [edit – your blog info which I have read for the first time] to the enquiry? Seems reasonable to be asking them directly?
and
I assume there’s opportunity to call them again once evidence is gathered and inconsistencies identified?
which makes
I know no-one else is really interested in getting at the truth
not the truth 😉
not the truth
It's essential to always remember that no-one is infallible, not even me, which is why the documentary evidence is so important. The way in which scientists' statements have been taken as gospel truth (by journalists reporting on the inquiry), without any rudimentary fact-checking, is quite alarming.
I have just searched for the SAGE minutes on the inquiry website. You might think they would be considered are an important part of the evidence base, and they are frequently but selectively quoted from by various participants in their written and spoken submissions
The SAGE minutes of the 13th March are there, as are the SAGE minutes of the 23rd March.
The SAGE minutes of the 16th and 18th March are not on the inquiry website, ie they have not been submitted into evidence, and therefore will not have been read by the inquiry team. It's almost like no-one wants them to be read in full. Given the specific focus of this part of the inquiry on that specific week, and the presence of minutes either side of that week, this seems a remarkable omission, but I realise that drawing attention to this makes me sound like a conspiracy theorist. The minutes are available from the SAGE website itself, fortunately.
London Mayor Sadiq Khan and Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham up today.
Khan already saying that the Government completely sidelined him in the early days.
That was surely the issue from day one though?
Pretty much everyone was sidelined by the real PM, Dominic Cummings, and his 'I know best' philosophy on pretty much everything as he centralised control and decision-making.
Its the same story with everyone. I doubt Andy Burnham is going to be very complimentary. It was obvious that by the time the second lockdown was approaching, relationships with Number 10 hadn't just broken down as entered a war footing. You could probably say the same about all the devolved assemblies, who weren't consulted at all and just received dictats fired out by Cummings
I doubt Andy Burnham is going to be very complimentary.
https://twitter.com/implausibleblog/status/1729173629127237720
A 'punishment beating' for Greater Manchester proposed because Andy Burnham opposed Tier 3 without additional financial support for the lowest paid.
I knew it was bad, but I am staggered by the incompetence, the pettiness, the political games. The opposite of decent government at a time of crisis. Imagine threatening to impose additional restrictions on an entire city's population out of pure spite at its elected mayor...
That sums up the whole levelling up agenda. Vote Blue and we'll give you funds. Vote for anyone else and we will give you nowt, then blame the opposition for your lack of money.
Exactly - the priority is mot serving the people and place that is the United Kingdom, it is holding on to power and personal gain in any way you can. Horrid.
A ‘punishment beating’ for Greater Manchester proposed because Andy Burnham opposed Tier 3 without additional financial support for the lowest paid.
JC.
That sums up the whole levelling up agenda. Vote Blue and we’ll give you funds. Vote for anyone else and we will give you nowt, then blame the opposition for your lack of money.
That's been the agenda for years. Why do you think the Red Wall went Blue?
Life is shit, everything is closing down, the town is on its arse, there's a Labour council (starved of funds).
Government says "oh, look at your council, they're a bit shit!"
Also they love small boats and the EU like a bunch of woke communist bastards. Vote for us!
Meanwhile all the money has been redirected to nice leafy Kent and Surrey.
Covid just helped all that along a bit.
Raab this afternoon. Should be enlightening...
Raab this afternoon.
I'm sure we'll all be overwhelmed by the empathy and compassion that pours forth
His only regret is that he didn't get to kill them all personally.
He always has the air of of a man who's just been disturbed while cutting up the body of a dead prostitute in his bath
Can't see any feedback here on Gove yesterday?
From the highlights I read, he seems to have made all the right noises apologising for mistakes and their consequences, without trying to upset anyone he may want to support him going forwards.
So just his slimly little ****er act?
It’s on YouTube, and yes.
Matt Hancock about to start his evidence this morning.
This should be the greatest work of fiction since the last time Boris opened his gob
I hate myself for this, but from the 'highlights' I heard on the radio he actually came across 'OK'
Nuclear levels of self-confidence - yes, he said, I was fighting hard for what we believed at the DoH and I can see how that came across
Ring around Care Homes. Yes, we failed in that and it wasn't an unbroken circle
Called for lockdown sooner - can't seem to prove he did this but admits that in hindsight they were 2 weeks too late and cost lives as a result.
Clearly got stuff wrong as we know they did, but actually seems willing to admit it.
Suspect normal service to be resumed next week when Boris is up.
I listened to parts of it and thought he was more honest than other politicians who preceded him.
As jonv says, normal service will be resumed when johnson takes the stand to perform; then we'll have sunak - put on sincere face, lie.
Hancock actually sounded better than any of the other politicians so far, which is hardly a high watermark
He stuck the boot into Johnson and Cummings, again telling us what we all already know… Cummings was effectively running the country because Boris couldn’t be arsed
It is however incredible to know that they’d centralised decision making to such a narrow little cabal that the first thing the health Secretary knew about Rishi’s ‘Eat Out To Kill Everyone’ scheme was when he saw it on the news
Think about that. Absolutely insane!
When Hancock left the building after the grilling it was pretty poignant to see the families of people that lost loved ones standing there in complete silence.
Far more profound than shouting abuse at him.
Tell me, what are all the people in the background doing at the enquiry?
Reporters, relatives, interested onlookers, court officials, etc.
self-serving, entitled, narcissistic, sociopathic
Yep, the whole thing was handled on the basis on how it would affect them personally. they really didn't give a crap about anything else, not the economy or the health of the nation it was all about them and whether it impinged on their personnal freedoms to live the life of Riley on the public purse.
Current feeling... so much of Hancock's past lies were to politically protect Johnson and Sunak... much as I dislike the man, it really does feel like the biggest problems started at the top, and not with him. Totally complicit in the deceits, but not the main "culprit" when it comes to the extra deaths amongst our families, friends and neighbours.
Far more profound than shouting abuse at him.
Agreed. I don't know how they've been so strong and restrained. Amazing people. Very stirring.
Who knows, maybe the brush with reality (TV) has actually had some impact. Being yelled at by that interrogator while just stood there in his pants - maybe it could form part of the new MP induction?
All the people behind/ alongside the KC typing etc… what are they all doing?
they are all dicking about on STW
You’re probably right! Perhaps I’m there in the background myself!
He appeared both humble and truthful
I'd agree that he seems more contrite than most who've sat in that chair before him. But like everyone else so far, I think he's telling either a very curated version of "a truth" or more or less a continuous stream of half-truths, and straight outright whoppers. All these men are too invested in protecting their images and legacies - to ever be completely honest - especially in this public forum. Doubtless some have even convinced themselves that what they're saying is truthful.
Doubtless some have even convinced themselves that what they’re saying is truthful.
Ad far as the public health decisions go at the start, I think they do genuinely believe they made the least worst choices in a difficult situation, balancing the economy, wider public health and Covid, and i have some sympathy for that.
PPE for mates and repeating the same mistakes, no excuse.
I find it terrifying that all these individuals managed to, between themselves, create such an obviously dysfunctional system
It’s obvious that they were all having their own little personal power-plays, with little or no thought as to the real-world consequences for everyone else.
The total lack of communication and cooperation is staggering, given the circumstances.
Hancock looked more contrite and seems to have some realisation of how badly they failed the country, but his ‘evidence’ was pretty dubious
When Johnson appears on Wednesday, they’ll need someone stood there with one of those big red ‘bullshit’ buttons that they have on The Last Leg
Hancock certainly seems to be coming out of this better than many of the slimebags. He appeared both humble and truthful
Standard tactic for when you've been caught.
Its hardly a high bar for the politicians at this inquiry to appear the least scumbaggish of them
conversely, to appear the most scumbaggish takes real scumbaggery. Who's currently in that position, and who's next in line to have a tilt at it.
Oh.....
Hancock certainly seems to be coming out of this better than many of the slimebags. He appeared both humble and truthful
Gotcha… hook , line and sinker…😉
IMO the scientists who have blatantly misled the inquiry in an attempt to sidestep any blame are scumbags.
That doesn't absolve the politicians for their share of the blame of course.
You said not to comment on your style, but I feel I have to. Your commentary dilutes any objectivity you have and comes across as being more personal than fact based
My opinion
IMO the scientists who have blatantly misled the inquiry in an attempt to sidestep any blame are scumbags.
How do you know they have misled the inquiry?
I accept this may need me to check which local supermarket is 24h so I can pick up some tinfoil.
Because as he has pointed out their evidence is inconsistent with what they were saying at the time - often on TV - or as reported in the minutes of SAGE - and frankly the captain's tone is pretty much standard for talking about Conservative politicians - the captain has quite clearly illustrated his position with links to evidence etc.
I agree there are questions, as I said the tone dilutes the objectivity.
I see what you say that the same tone is used when talking about Tory politicians - but honestly, do you dispute that they are scumbags.
Yes
Really? Jpohnsons behaviour partying in no10 while the rest of us tried to obey the rules? the actions of a complete scumbag
wrong thread, ignore..
Well it's your opinion and you're entitled to it. You're wrong though. IMO.
To compare scientists misremembering key dates, and yes, potentially deliberately to avoid criticism, with those that spent more than 25bn on a failed T&T system and then refused FOI requests on where it went. That partied while the public died. That channelled lord knows how much into non-existent companies owned by their mates and donors for unusable PPE.
Not even close.
And for the third time - the discrepancies in the scientists accounts should be explained. I don't have a problem with calling for that. It's the tone that draws criticism, and leads to people reaching for the tin foil hats.
How many tests did you use? People on thia site were frankly incontinent with their need to test themselves - what do you think paid for that? Yes the tracing side never really worked but by george we didn't half test and that is where the money went.
YOu really believe that? Not a large % of it siphoned off into Harding and her mates pockets? People got very rich out of that and the tories sidelined expertise in local authorities leaving experts in this sort of thing sitting on their hands and leaving T&T in the hands of folk without expertise. Centralising T&T and using folk with no expertise to run it cost lives.
the discrepancies in the scientists accounts should be explained. I don’t have a problem with calling for that. It’s the tone that draws criticism, and leads to people reaching for the tin foil hats.
I'm inclined to agree. You've raised serious concerns, and more concerning in some ways that their evidence wasn't challenged when they were giving it, but I can see the deniers jumping on to your comments and using the tone to support their weird conspiracy claims.
With power and knowledge comes responsibility.
I recommend this podcast generally, but the latest episode is an interesting analysis of Hancock's performance.
https://pca.st/episode/fd71635e-1662-4720-a910-b999e368ce7e
the tories sidelined expertise in local authorities leaving experts in this sort of thing sitting on their hands and leaving T&T in the hands of folk without expertise
Andy Burnham said in his evidence last week that everybody was absolutely incredulous that their local T&T teams throughout greater Manchester were stood down. Their extensive knowledge and experience were deemed as no longer required and the task handed over to Didi Harding and other clowns who had about the same experience in this field as Boris Johnson himself
It was a frankly criminal as well as utterly nonsensical decision, doomed to failure from the off
But hey… some people made an awful lot of money, so… kerching
When Johnson appears on Wednesday, they’ll need someone stood there with one of those big red ‘bullshit’ buttons that they have on The Last Leg
He will not prepare, because preparation is for 'little' people and it's questioning by 'grown-ups' not client journalists who need to maintain contacts and access. The KC's will press for an answer and the ex-PM will bluster and they will not be deflected. It has the potential to be an horrific car crash for Mr Johnson. (I really hope it is and we can refer to it in future whenever he attempts a comeback).
I can see an awful lot of “I can’t really recall….” Going on
it can’t be anything else but a car crash. He’s never been held properly to account and as you said, those KC’s aren’t going to be fobbed off with his blustering.
Its not like they’ll be short of ammunition, is it? The dysfunction, disinterest, dishonesty and total incompetence shown by him are now on repeated public records
i expect he’ll go with playing the victim, as he always does in these situations, and making it all about ‘poor me’. Then when people don’t buy it and press him further we’ll see the real ‘Boris’ when he gets really entitled and irritable and all ‘how dare you?! Don’t you know who I am?!”. At that point he’ll start trying to blame pretty much everybody except himself
It's Sunak I'm really looking forward to.
He's really feeling the pressure of being PM at the moment and seems to just meltdown when anyone questions him.
He can't just repeat his mantra when questioned at the inquiry.
I hope he really shows his true, petulant, teenager colours.
He’s really feeling the pressure of being PM at the moment and seems to just meltdown when anyone questions him.
He’s a huffy little shit who takes offence at being questioned so I’m looking forward to his strops being televised
Exactly! He’s an entitled little prince who’s never heard the word ‘no’
You can tell by his manner that he genuinely believes he’s doing us all a favour by lowering himself to govern us and we, the common peasantry, should all be showing him a bit more bloody gratitude
I can’t wait to see a KC getting underneath his incredibly thin skin
That smarmy, gameshow-host grin and unbelievably condescending tone won’t last long
@theotherjonv, I'm not excusing the mistakes that politicians made, of which there were plenty.
It is plausible that Vallance doesn't remember saying either that the doubling time was 5 days live on TV on the 16th March, or that it was written into the PM's statement on that day (which is also published on-line, it was not a slip of the tongue). But Vallance read the minutes. He quoted directly (albeit selectively) from them in his testimony. It is not remotely plausible that he didn't see that they flatly contradict his story. They are only 3-4 page pdfs of bullet points - I assume by now you've looked at them.
Not addressing this discrepancy is fundamentally dishonest. That's true whether or not he has some miraculous explanation as to how this discrepancy can exist without either him telling porkies or the minutes being corrupted in some way. Either of which should most certainly be addressed by an inquiry that seeks to investigate (among other things) the process of scientific advice.
The scientific peer-review process works pretty well at correcting errors that people make in experimentation, analysis and interpretation. Scientists are human and make mistakes along with their moments of inspiration. What it cannot cope with is people just making up shit that isn't true, or refusing to report any data that contradicts their theory.
BTW as for politicians partying and breaking the rules, you may recall Ferguson also seemed to assume the rules didn't apply to him either. The descriptions I've heard of some scientists on the panel, from those acquainted from them, is not particularly flattering in terms of their behaviour. That doesn't necessarily matter insofar as SAGE performance is concerned, so long as they are honest and competent at addressing evidence, which was patently not the case in mid-March when people like TiReD were showing them solid evidence for a 3 day doubling time and SAGE was basically dismissing it. I once plotted a picture of deaths and cases for Spain, France, Italy up to 14th March (and I think just cases for the UK - there weren't really sufficient deaths in the UK at that time for that to be very clear). The evidence was completely overwhelming to anyone who looked at it with a half-open mind, which is why there was such widespread incredulity at what we were hearing from SAGE at that time. All the "4 weeks behind Italy" stuff they came out with was the same error expressed in a different way. We were baffled at the time, as we didn't realise the origin of that error.
That might all be true but doesn't address the point I made.
My advice, fwiw, is you should dial down the rhetoric (you accuse the scientists also of being scumbags, telling porkies, making shit up, etc.) and present the facts as you would in a paper. The rhetoric dilutes the seriousness of the points you make.
All imho
I can see an awful lot of “I can’t really recall….” Going on
Excess cocaine use is a terrible thing!
He will not prepare, because preparation is for ‘little’ people and it’s questioning by ‘grown-ups’ not client journalists who need to maintain contacts and access.
He was apparently being briefed by some senior KC - according to a newspaper article I read which I can't find now. Lots of speculation in the press about what he'll say at the inquiry, he's expected to apologise.
How long he can keep up that pretence is another matter...
You'll hear the words "sorry", and "heartfelt apologies" without any real acceptance of his own failings, I suspect.
He will not prepare, because preparation is for ‘little’ people and it’s questioning by ‘grown-ups’ not client journalists who need to maintain contacts and access
Various people are reporting he has put a lot of time into preparing including undergoing mock questioning.
Given how narcissistic he is it does make sense since it will be his chance to try and repair his legacy.
HIs problem will remain in that he will be facing folk who are far better at this than him and will be able to pin him down to real answers - and they will have done their research as well I hope. Waffle answers are not going to cut it.
Not addressing this discrepancy is fundamentally dishonest.
I don't fundamentally disagree with that, but at the same time, It's not the central point of the inquiry. At best; you've uncovered the fact that there's a discrepancy between when now he says he started to change his mind about the doubling time, and when the official record says that the committee he was chair of says they did, isn't as important as the fact that regardless of the advice that Vallance (and others) gave, there was a reluctance to accept it, to deal with it and to plan a response to it by the folks who's job it was to do that.
It's like blaming Prof Linderman for the blitz because he was part of the reason for the delay in developing a response to the Germans use of radio direction guidance in WW2. He was advising Churchill certainly; but it's Churchill's job to take the decisions
It's undoubted that scientific advisors made mistakes during that period, and being human, may even be doing a bit of arse-covering for it now. Frequent contact with the reflexive liars of the political world can be ethically corrosive for those attempting to keep a foot in each camp, and politicians will tend to appoint those who they feel may be more pliable.
The inquiry for me is painting a picture of folk like Vallance trying to find a way to present a palatable version of the message to a resistant audience, the head of which thought that bluster and bullshit was a substitute for listening and learning.
The culture of no.10 at that point was dismissive of experts and hardwired to ignore the experience of other countries at the very moment when they should have been most receptive. Unfortunately the scientific advisors to some extent played along with that rather than flat-out challenged it.