Dominic Cummings Covid evidence

[Newtonianmechanics]

Is anyone going to watch this man give evidence today?

Apparently there is a vigil in Barnard Castle ahead of this.

The shopping trolleys emoji seems to mean they think Carrie was controlling Boris from the last few days. Wonder if this will feature.

There is nothing in the Save The Children report that wasn't widely said by loads of people

Not true.

Essential infrastructure was posed by an MP Cons iirc, and lambasted on here

Great to see as Covid fear passes it gets the go ahead on here now.

A higher cabinet level voice - great if you’re up for it, me too.

There is no ‘special lens’ it’s a clear reading of their conclusions which I agree with and will be pleased if they go ahead.

I don’t care which gov you want or STC really, I want their proposals in place for the next pandemic as I’ve said clearly.

If only it had been done during the last one and reduced damage, is the one addition

That part is a great shame and down to public fear as evidenced on here by those who opposed suggestions of the same or similar at the time

Thanks @minou123 @DuncinToffee

You get the point. I do think that the public element is important, and it's important for democracy. I am not at all convinced on the cost if no accountability results, and the rules of the game are set down by their terms. When I think about Hilsborough, Saville, Iraq, Undercover Policing, Child Sexual Abuse, all subject to detailed inquiry, the long term changes and accountability have been minimal. So the sturm and drang of this process is to me rather suspect.

Other countries do not play these deferential games after the fact. They get on with what is needed. I worry about the UK because we don't. It's a symptom of our decline.

It was not down to public fear, what a peculiar perspective.

It was down to government choice. Boris Johnson, leader of the Conservative government, chose the route this country took.

Are you simply anti-lockdown? In which case the inquiry is going to disappoint you I think. I think it highly unlikely they will conclude 'it was just a cold, we didn't need to do anything'.

That's not what I said.

I am engaging in a sensible conversation with bombastix about a specific poimt about prosecutions.

It's quite a nuanced conversation.

I worry about the UK because we don't. It's a symptom of our decline.

This reminds me of all the threads in same vein during pandemic.

Take NZ a country held up on here, has just voted out that gov

The idea that we’re different is mn talk. Of course a pandemic will strain politicians and the public and even for those that were said ‘to get on with it’ get voted out.

The electorate there were similarly dissatisfied.

My point is that other countries not so far away are doing accountability and inquiry better than the UK. There is electoral accountability which is one thing, but then there is this public process which to me looks rather toothless. I hope not. But prior inquiries suggest so.

But, for example, Sweden has already considered and completed theirs, and here we are with our bread and circus model.

I would favour some application of the criminal law to politicians; after all, one of issues is corruption and the spending of public money. But the inquiry won't get to that standard of evidence.

We have been round this circle several times on this thread, and at no point have I advocated for harsher restrictions.
In fact as far as I can tell there is only one poster on here is suggesting actions that would have lead to longer harsher restrictions.

In case you did not see my previous posts I think the government should have got on with contingency planning in detail in January and February of 2020, instead of writing books, going skiing and smozzing newpaper owners. I think based on the available evidence from the covid enquiry and elsewhere that if the UK had, of had a functioning competent government in 2020 restrictions would have been introduced sooner, so would have been less harsh and long lasting and those experts including teaching unions would have been listened to more, so some of the other harms of the restrictions would have been reduced.

Well I don’t particularly need to pay for the theatre of Cummings being asked again about his trip to test his eyesight either.

At whatever that costs an hour for KC and everyone present

Nor reams of WhatsApp swearing

I’d love it to be faster, whilst getting to the big question of damage v risk.

If people shouted down the same recommendations during the pandemic as STC are making, but now saying yes (and mistakenly thinking they were wanted earlier) then that’s worth it to me.

Those changes will help children and women and should be easy to get through.

On the other point I’m fine with the law as it is

Still not the correct assumptions here.

I don’t agree with your take.

Sweden was among the earliest to launch its Covid commission, which – led by a retired head of the country’s supreme administrative court, Mats Melin – produced interim reports in 2020 and 2021 and a final 1,700-page report in February 2022.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/02/covid-pandemic-response-countries-outside-uk-scrutiny

That is impressive from Sweden.

You make sense @jgw1 I think you do to
most posters on this thread.

Fortunately this skewed thread isn’t being presented at the inquiry, and @jgw1 push back doesn’t matter.

STC seen to be present and have a pretty good chance of representation with proposals.

It might helps us understand what the hell you are on about your thinking is if you explained what you think should have happened?

What is your take @EasternStandard ? Should we have ever had a lockdown or done as Sweden did? If we did do as Sweden did, what death toll would you have expected to see? Do you see COVID as 'just a virus' or something that needed a different response?

Should schools have ever shut or should we have restricted schools (some countries split into two cohorts for example) or should we have left things entirely unchanged? Should government have prirotised NPIs and shielding over general restrictions?

Exactly. And the UK is nowhere near that.

But then the Swedish government wasn't busy partying in 2020

Their inquiry was a whitewash, it was held behind closed doors and took evidence in secret.

I would not support such an approach. Inquiries should be public.

Although good to hear that religion was represented!! The panel of eight experts, including professors of economics and political science and a vicar, heard evidence behind closed doors from about 100 witnesses.

Thanks for that further information @MidnightOnceMore , I only did a quick search.

There weren't any assumptions in my post. There were conclusions based on evidence.

Although having said that, I expect what Sweden says they should have done - more restrictions in the early stages, more protection for care homes/vulnerable + what they say they got right - schools open and lots of voluntary measures, is potentially what our inquiry will conclude we should have done here? Would have been good to have avoided the draconian lockdowns for obvious reasons (we all bloody remember living through them).

"While the commission is often critical of the management of the pandemic in Sweden, they also underline that voluntary measures that were adopted, including keeping schools open, were appropriate and maintained Swedes' personal freedom during the pandemic," adds Ludvigsson. "However, they also conclude that more extensive and earlier measures should have been taken, especially during the first wave."

@MidnightOnceMore - but my point is the UK may have more "public" hearings but far less actual action than Sweden. Who is to say that the UK is doing better? In my lifetime I have seen many "important" inquiries but rather less delivery.

oh ignore me, it's all in the article I linked.

As far as i remember, schools were shut to protect older teachers/prevent spread from children to grandparents... thats what we were all told and vast majority went along with it.

That the Con govt made a political choice and decided NOT to listen to the voice of the Education Tsar at cabinet level and provide 15 billion of funding to help children most affected isn't down to public pressure on MN.... even after he quit in protest, few on here cared.

Who on earth would blame MN etters and not the Govt for this? i also wonder whether other opinions made by Save the Children on poverty in the UK are equally supported?

The key as I think almost all of us on this thread can agree to avoiding harsh lockdowns is having a clear plan, well articulated to the public that introduces some measures early on. Then absolute adherrence to that plan from as many people as possible but particularly those who are supposed to be leaders who made the rules.

I do not say the UK is doing better but a point of principle IMO is that inquiries should be public.

Obviously Sweden's political set up is chalk and cheese to ours. But who can tell what was not covered in their inquiry that should have been? A secret inquiry gives scope for those in power to ensure the conclusions drawn are the 'correct' ones.

The UK has a long way to go on democracy, as we are unmodernised. But I would not give up our openness in any change programme.