Coronavirus Impact

[T6 CFO]

One of the impacts was the postponement of the Election for Mayor in London which has forced Rory Stewart to withdraw.

I’ve read most of his books and followed his political career.

I was very disappointed when he was sidelined in the Tory leadership race and that a massive opportunity had been missed.

It will be interesting to see where he goes from here. It’s a sad state of affairs when there is no place for him in our politics.

Coronavirus has changed everything — I can no longer run for Mayor | Rory Stewart

Tomorrow was due to be the day of the London mayoral election — when I would have learned whether London was prepared to elect me as an independent Mayor. But it has been postponed because of coronavirus for another year. The election will now take place in May 2021, and I have decided not to...

www.standard.co.uk

A bit more about him and his campaign if your interested..

I’m running for Mayor — and together we can fix this great city | Rory Stewart

I am writing to tell you — the readers of the Evening Standard — first that I am running to be Mayor of London, as an independent candidate . And I would like your vote so that we can transform this great capital — the most intricate, diverse and astonishing city on the planet, the financial...

www.standard.co.uk

Mike

 

[ArunAlec]

One of the impacts was the postponement of the Election for Mayor in London which has forced Rory Stewart to withdraw.

I’ve read most of his books and followed his political career.

I was very disappointed when he was sidelined in the Tory leadership race and that a massive opportunity had been missed.

It will be interesting to see where he goes from here. It’s a sad state of affairs when there is no place for him in our politics.

Coronavirus has changed everything — I can no longer run for Mayor | Rory Stewart

Tomorrow was due to be the day of the London mayoral election — when I would have learned whether London was prepared to elect me as an independent Mayor. But it has been postponed because of coronavirus for another year. The election will now take place in May 2021, and I have decided not to...

www.standard.co.uk

Mike

Got to say he has always come across as being in a different league to most of today‘s politicians and he has a pretty impressive CV!

 

[Amarillo]

One of the impacts was the postponement of the Election for Mayor in London which has forced Rory Stewart to withdraw.

He comes across as a bit of an oddball - but I could have voted for him as an Independent Mayor of London.

 

[ArunAlec]

He comes across as a bit of an oddball - but I could have voted for him as an Independent Mayor of London.

Bit of modern day Lawrence of Arabia!

 

[Mickyb123]

My nephew quite by chance met his daughter walking her children. 2 year old Son sees grandad and run towards him and grandad not being a robot stretches out his arms and hugs grandson. All over in half a minute. Covid passes on.

jen, got to comment on this one, grandad not being a robot! That means grandad has the choice, being a human he can make the right or wrong decision!

 

[GrannyJen]

My nephew quite by chance met his daughter walking her children. 2 year old Son sees grandad and run towards him and grandad not being a robot stretches out his arms and hugs grandson. All over in half a minute. Covid passes on.

jen, got to comment on this one, grandad not being a robot! That means grandad has the choice, being a human he can make the right or wrong decision!

Exactly my point.

and many will make the wrong one regarding Covid restrictions but justify it as the right one in human terms. Precisely the point that the IPPS foresaw in a lockdown situation which is why we end up with draconian restrictions, although in fairness not as draconian as other countries have implemented.

Perhaps in being less draconian there is another agenda being followed which says "let people continue being human and lets keep the infection rate high but not high enough to overwhelm". If so it is a desperate balancing act without the testing to fully understand the infection rate and it's direction.

 

[Velma's Dad]

One of the impacts was the postponement of the Election for Mayor in London which has forced Rory Stewart to withdraw.

I’ve read most of his books and followed his political career.

I was very disappointed when he was sidelined in the Tory leadership race and that a massive opportunity had been missed.

It will be interesting to see where he goes from here. It’s a sad state of affairs when there is no place for him in our politics.

Coronavirus has changed everything — I can no longer run for Mayor | Rory Stewart

Tomorrow was due to be the day of the London mayoral election — when I would have learned whether London was prepared to elect me as an independent Mayor. But it has been postponed because of coronavirus for another year. The election will now take place in May 2021, and I have decided not to...

www.standard.co.uk

A bit more about him and his campaign if your interested..

I’m running for Mayor — and together we can fix this great city | Rory Stewart

I am writing to tell you — the readers of the Evening Standard — first that I am running to be Mayor of London, as an independent candidate . And I would like your vote so that we can transform this great capital — the most intricate, diverse and astonishing city on the planet, the financial...

www.standard.co.uk

Mike

I hadn't seen that, thanks Mike.

Like you I've 'followed' Rory Stewart for quite a while and read his books. I thought his one about his time as a provincial governor in post-war Iraq was absolutely fascinating. What a 'learning experience' that was!

I must admit the cynic in me can't help but ponder whether his sudden withdrawal from the London election is because he wants to untie his hands for the coming couple of years of potential Westminster political upheaval which seemed so unlikely even at the beginning of this year.

If he does decide to re-enter Westminster politics I wouldn't be totally stunned if he switched to Labour. As I recall, he did concede when he entered UK politics that he could have gone 'either way'. I bet Starmer would love to have him.

We are straying into party politics here Mike but I'm sure you and I at least can keep it balanced!

 

[T6 CFO]

I hadn't seen that, thanks Mike.

Like you I've 'followed' Rory Stewart for quite a while and read his books. I thought his one about his time as a provincial governor in post-war Iraq was absolutely fascinating. What a 'learning experience' that was!

I must admit the cynic in me can't help but ponder whether his sudden withdrawal from the London election is because he wants to untie his hands for the coming couple of years of potential Westminster political upheaval which seemed so unlikely even at the beginning of this year.

If he does decide to re-enter Westminster politics I wouldn't be totally stunned if he switched to Labour. As I recall, he did concede when he entered UK politics that he could have gone 'either way'. I bet Starmer would love to have him.

We are straying into party politics here Mike but I'm sure you and I at least can keep it balanced!

I think and hope that you are right that he may re-enter politics at some time in the future. I also agree that Starmer would love to have him unless he was after his job

Certainly be interesting to see what he does from here.




Mike

 

[westfalia]

Does it look like Sweden got it right not having a lockdown?
I am getting some mixed reports, but maybe a non lockdown
or a lockdown could give the same figures so maybe there shouldnt
have been any lockdowns.

 

[RodCouncil]

Does it look like Sweden got it right not having a lockdown?
I am getting some mixed reports, but maybe a non lockdown
or a lockdown could give the same figures so maybe there shouldnt
have been any lockdowns.

It’s difficult to say even now, our sampled immunity tests recently reported didn’t reveal the results Tegnel and co had hoped with less than 8% showing relevant antibodies to CV19, but we’ve really messed up with our elderly, it’s being investigated and that’s were the majority of the deaths have come from.

The price the UK and Sweden will both pay is exclusion from entry into countries who deem us too high risk right now.

 

[Keith Smith]

I've been told the immunity test isn't reliable and can give a false positive for those of us who had the horrific flu virus going round last autumn.

 

[Velma's Dad]

Well here we are and the joint parliamentary committee report is out. I've just had a skim read through it, focusing myself mainly on the chapters about the pandemic contingency planning (in effect, it was "the wrong kind of snow" and we hadn't tried to learn anything from countries where it actually snows a lot) and on the events and initiatives of the first half of 2020.

The report says that the government's policies didn't vary materially from the scientific advice which turned out to be wrong in several (catastrophic) respects. At the same time, the report skips over what seems to me an absolutely key point - acknowledged quietly in one single sentence in 150 pages - that while even the group-thinking SAGE recommendations belatedly but suddenly lurched on 15 March to the imperative for a full lockdown, the Cabinet didn't in fact implement that for a full week until 23 March.

The report also, even more quietly to my view and at arm's length, acknowledges that had LD1 been implemented a single week earlier, UK deaths would have been half what they actually were. That seems to be such a huge factor that explains the untimely deaths of tens of thousands of people that not highlighting it undermines, for me, the credibility of the report as a whole.

So I think we'll need to wait for the public enquiry to get to the bottom of the role played by our political leaders in the precise, crucial, decisions they took.

 

[LowMan]

Well here we are and the joint parliamentary committee report is out. I've just had a skim read through it, focusing myself mainly on the chapters about the pandemic contingency planning (in effect, it was "the wrong kind of snow" and we hadn't tried to learn anything from countries where it actually snows a lot) and on the events and initiatives of the first half of 2020.

The report says that the government's policies didn't vary materially from the scientific advice which turned out to be wrong in several (catastrophic) respects. At the same time, the report skips over what seems to me an absolutely key point - acknowledged quietly in one single sentence in 150 pages - that while even the group-thinking SAGE recommendations belatedly but suddenly lurched on 15 March to the imperative for a full lockdown, the Cabinet didn't in fact implement that for a full week until 23 March.

The report also, even more quietly to my view and at arm's length, acknowledges that had LD1 been implemented a single week earlier, UK deaths would have been half what they actually were. That seems to be such a huge factor that explains the untimely deaths of tens of thousands of people that not highlighting it undermines, for me, the credibility of the report as a whole.

So I think we'll need to wait for the public enquiry to get to the bottom of the role played by our political leaders in the precise, crucial, decisions they took.

The current 'hindsight' narrative I've noticed circulating post this report is gaslighting on a national scale. I remember exactly the situation we were in March. I remember the pressure the government were under to take serious action (all completely ignored). The company I worked for took its own unilateral action to implement serious measures, against government advice, in order to protect its workforce. There is a massive question of accountability being ducked by this current administration. "Let the bodies pile high"... we all know he said it and meant it...

 

[BeeBee]

Unfortunately still too many ‘numpties’ out there who still think the ‘Bafoon’ is great…. ask them why, “cause he keeps telling us he is” !

 

[Lambeth Cali]

Well here we are and the joint parliamentary committee report is out. I've just had a skim read through it, focusing myself mainly on the chapters about the pandemic contingency planning (in effect, it was "the wrong kind of snow" and we hadn't tried to learn anything from countries where it actually snows a lot) and on the events and initiatives of the first half of 2020.

The report says that the government's policies didn't vary materially from the scientific advice which turned out to be wrong in several (catastrophic) respects. At the same time, the report skips over what seems to me an absolutely key point - acknowledged quietly in one single sentence in 150 pages - that while even the group-thinking SAGE recommendations belatedly but suddenly lurched on 15 March to the imperative for a full lockdown, the Cabinet didn't in fact implement that for a full week until 23 March.

The report also, even more quietly to my view and at arm's length, acknowledges that had LD1 been implemented a single week earlier, UK deaths would have been half what they actually were. That seems to be such a huge factor that explains the untimely deaths of tens of thousands of people that not highlighting it undermines, for me, the credibility of the report as a whole.

So I think we'll need to wait for the public enquiry to get to the bottom of the role played by our political leaders in the precise, crucial, decisions they took.

I read that the one week delay wasn’t actually for anything specific. It was inertia. It just took them that long to decide to actually do it. I am no fan of Boris but I have some sympathy for that delay. I can remember talking to some neighbours who also have young kids and us all saying it seemed to be happening very fast.
The suggestion that the delay doubled the deaths seems entirely possible to me. I am genuinely no fan of the government but I can understand why it took a week for them to order a lockdown. At the time it seemed like an incredible thing to do. Almost unbelievable. The report is very clear that it is about learning lessons through hindsight.

 

[icic]

I think and hope that you are right that he may re-enter politics at some time in the future. I also agree that Starmer would love to have him unless he was after his job

Certainly be interesting to see what he does from here.




Mike

Rory leader of the Labour Party .. interesting

 

[Velma's Dad]

I read that the one week delay wasn’t actually for anything specific. It was inertia. It just took them that long to decide to actually do it. I am no fan of Boris but I have some sympathy for that delay. I can remember talking to some neighbours who also have young kids and us all saying it seemed to be happening very fast.
The suggestion that the delay doubled the deaths seems entirely possible to me. I am genuinely no fan of the government but I can understand why it took a week for them to order a lockdown. At the time it seemed like an incredible thing to do. Almost unbelievable. The report is very clear that it is about learning lessons through hindsight.

My viewpoint is that the report as it stands tends to imply that the indecision was due to differing interpretations solely of the epidemiological evidence and assumptions about the behaviour of the public, rather than at least acknowledging that there was - must have been - a political element in how the decision (initially, not to) lock down emerged.

I don't find it credible that there would not be a political dimension to the decision process, whether explicit/recognised or implicit/ideological. The report says that the PM's chief adviser (Cummings) was screaming for immediate action by mid-March, and as LowMan says above, he was hardly the only one at that stage. So the unanswered question has to be: why did the PM delay by a further week? The question of why perhaps 10,000 to 15,000 people died unnecessarily as a result hinges on that specific question.

If we are saying that no UK Cabinet could cope with making any similarly crucial decision in a national emergency without weeks of agonising and dither, then that surely points to a serious flaw in our ability to respond effectively next time - and there will be a next time.

I read the report this morning deliberately before I read any media analysis or debate. My view was and remains that it reads like a report on a road accident in which the blame is put on a brake warning light that flickered on a downhill road but completely ignores the fact that, having seen it, the driver then waited for half a minute before actually trying to stop.

 

[flying banana]

Yawn. We should have locked down sooner. Longer. Harder. For ever. I think lock down actually cost lives but we will never know. Not going well for Australia is it. Time to click ignore thread

 

[Velma's Dad]

Not going well for Australia is it

No, obviously not. Adjusted to UK's population size, they've had more than 2,000 people die of covid. (While the UK has lost... 138,000).

Australian undertakers must be distraught.

Meanwhile the UK has suffered the worst GDP loss (Q4 2019 to Q3 2021) of any of the G7 countries and still hasn't recovered. Meanwhile the Australian economy had recovered within a year.

 

[willwander]

Boring blame storming, typical politics. Unlikely to change anyone’s existing political views. What we really need is a scapegoat.

 

[Skylark2.0]

My viewpoint is that the report as it stands tends to imply that the indecision was due to differing interpretations solely of the epidemiological evidence and assumptions about the behaviour of the public, rather than at least acknowledging that there was - must have been - a political element in how the decision (initially, not to) lock down emerged.

I don't find it credible that there would not be a political dimension to the decision process, whether explicit/recognised or implicit/ideological. The report says that the PM's chief adviser (Cummings) was screaming for immediate action by mid-March, and as LowMan says above, he was hardly the only one at that stage. So the unanswered question has to be: why did the PM delay by a further week? The question of why perhaps 10,000 to 15,000 people died unnecessarily as a result hinges on that specific question.

If we are saying that no UK Cabinet could cope with making any similarly crucial decision in a national emergency without weeks of agonising and dither, then that surely points to a serious flaw in our ability to respond effectively next time - and there will be a next time.

I read the report this morning deliberately before I read any media analysis or debate. My view was and remains that it reads like a report on a road accident in which the blame is put on a brake warning light that flickered on a downhill road but completely ignores the fact that, having seen it, the driver then waited for half a minute before actually trying to stop.

Caught napping is the phrase...

 

[kave]

Yawn. We should have locked down sooner. Longer. Harder. For ever. I think lock down actually cost lives but we will never know. Not going well for Australia is it. Time to click ignore thread

So true. Never before scared people took over there have been anything like lock downs in WHO guidlines.