Matt Hancock not only a donkey but sexist and deeply unpleasant

[Theduchessstill]

So following on from the thread last week about his ''donkiness/ineptitude' he gives us this appalling response to Dr Rosena Allin-Kahn today:

twitter.com/DrRosena/status/1257644583158251522

What a disgusting way to speak to someone who is actually working as a Dr in A & E during this crisis. Nasty, lacking in empathy, just wrong.Just when you think these people can't sink any lower they do just that.

@Genevieva I agree with you. To me it was less about the tone of voice she used, and more about the fact that she was trying to imply that he personally had blood on his hands for not getting the testing numbers increased earlier on. I feel he's done his best, and although he may have made mistakes along the way, that is due to being a human being under immense pressure during an unprecedented health crisis. We'll never know if someone else would have achieved better results, as we don't have a parallel universe where another planet earth is going through the same pandemic, with different people making the key decisions in the UK. I think that every government on this planet is in a huge learning curve right now, and we won't know which countries have handled the pandemic well until it's all over.

I saw another side of him this morning on Sky news (admittedly I didn't know much about him before the pandemic) and I immediately thought that he came across as sexist. It was really disappointing. It made me realise (even more so) how much of a show it is that they put up on that platform every night and it won't be long I'm sure, before I'm sickened by the lot of them.

@DianaT1969 Agreed, but we're probably going to get flamed soon for defending him, as it seems many people are gunning for him. Some people seem convinced that he's personally responsible for every Covid-19 death in the UK.

If people want to blame someone, perhaps they ought to point the finger at the country of origin where the virus emerged, due to either a) cruel and unsanitary practices at live meat markets and/or b) release of a virus from a laboratory.

I'm female. If she had spoken to me like that (implying as @Geneviva said - that I had blood on my hands) after I'd worked tirelessly for weeks, including having Coronavirus myself, there's no way I would have been as restrained as he was. And that has absolutely nothing to do with her being a woman.

I completely disagree. This is politics...in the House of Commons. If there's one thing you can guarantee it's that the opposition will try to throw grenades at you. The opposition are supposed to hold government to account for things, that's their job.

And when you have doctors borrowing PPE off their builder friends (in the case of someone I know), when the government is missing every single testing target and when we have the highest number of deaths in Europe then yes I think you have blood on your hands.

I know it has been taken to mean that he didn't like the tone of her voice, but at the time I thought he meant the tone of her question - ie very emotive and not as formal as he was expecting. He looked pretty shaken.

Gosh, the apologists are here.

Diana it wasn't me who started the other thread, but I did enjoy it. Being kind is important, but it shouldn't get in the way of calling out incompetency and poor leadership which do, in a role like his, have a direct impact on the lives of those affected by his decisions. Was he 'kind' to the woman who is working two roles - as an mp and a dr and who has had first hand experience of the impact of the shortages and PPE and lack of testing he has presided over? No he was downright rude and patronising.

To be honest, his triumphalism over 'meeting' his target on Saturday re testing, when he was more or less punching the air, though said target has not been met since and it is now obvious that they tweaked things to make ensure the target was met on the day itself even if it fell back on subsequent days, was utterly nauseating and not befitting the situation at all. If, and it's big if as far as I'm concerned, her speech was too emotive and inappropriate for the setting, the same can absolutely be said for his and his repulsive boss's demeanor at the briefings, when they seem to expect congratulations for 'straining every sinew' and 'working day and night, night and day,' despite the fact that it is becoming increasingly clear that awful mistakes have been made that have worsened what would always have been a grave situation, meaning that Britain looks likely to have a worse outcome to this than many, or even all, comparable countries.

I think this excellent piece by John Crace is about the kindest perspective on Hancock's performance that's possible at this point:

www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/05/matt-hancocks-career-continues-to-win-the-battle-with-his-conscience

Diana, it has absolutely everything to do with her being a woman, because he would never have said that to a man! Could you imagine a Male politician saying to a Male doctor "watch your tone". No.

I didn’t hear anything wrong with her tone. I think MH is probably feeling very defensive (and super-tired and stressed although I am not making excuses).

This government is at it’s very heart incompetent. The testing targets, the terrible response at the start, Boris ‘I will ignore expert advice and shake the hands of covid patients while they are sick enough to be in hospital’. We also have the example of New Zealand as the counter point. The complete contempt for care homes. Nothing about this government’s response surprises me. What does surprise me is how much support they still have.

Of course he is sexist, he would never have told a man he didn’t like the tone of a question. Holding a government to account is not political point scoring, it’s holding a government to account.

He didn't say "Watch your tone", he suggested she adopt the tone of the Shadow Secretary of State which has been more measured. Condescending yes but he would have said the same to a man. Obviously referring to content rather than style of delivery. It was a personal attack. I expect there will be a lot more to come of this but then the government need to answer for their strategy.

For clarity he said “I think she might do well to take a leaf out of the shadow secretary of state’s book in terms of tone.”

I can't take to him at all. It is seen as political suicide to admit you have made mistakes and could have done better.

But I think the British public want that.

It's obviously an attempt at a power play from him. He's a much bigger cheese than she is and the "consider your tone" comment is designed to be condescending. Like a teacher to a misbehaving pupil. Fortunately we have cameras in the House of Commons nowadays so these kinds of Billy big bollocks displays are available for everyone to see.

The truth is that Mr Hancock is struggling with this job. He took his frustrations out on a woman because he is a sexist pig
If he cannot cope, he needs to get out of the kitchen.

He needs to apologise

@Genevieva
Totally agree.

Yes he came across as extremely sexist, very condescending and dismissive.

He is usually like a walking sound byte but he revealed himself through that interaction.

To be honest, I think she used very emotive language to make sweeping generalisations that do not reflect the opinions of all frontline workers

You know this how? Do you think someone who is working on the frontline might have quite a good handle on it?

Condescending yes but he would have said the same to a man.

I seriously doubt that.

Obviously referring to content rather than style of delivery

"Tone" can only be about style of delivery. Unless he was misusing the word, in which case he should mind his vocabulary.

She was doing what many journalists have been doing, all that stressing words, making emphatic statements disguised as a question.

That's politicking, point scoring, flat out virtue signalling. If she wanted to make an impact she'd have been better off asking a real question.

And yes, he would have said it man, he did stood at the podium last week.

He pulled the same trick on GMB when he didn't like the question. He is a vile idiot who doesn't know what he is doing.

I get that he meant "tone of question" rather than "tone of voice" but that matters not one fuck! So patronising! It is a shame parliament wasn't full so the labour ministers could all boo at him (obviously I know why it isn't).

Slightly off topic but I am so far very impressed with Keir Starmer and his new shadow team... he is actually putting people into post based on their actual strengths.