Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Mon Apr 13, 2020 1:55 pm  

If only the same leeway was applied to Labour. When Brown was PM he purchased a large supply of a pandemic vaccine and was ridiculed by the right wing press for doing so.
I have not seen the same criticism of the current government who purchased faulty tests from China without a sell back clause. This cost several millions, the reason was honourable but the contract was bad.
I have a question why did the Daughter of Gove receive a test which came back clear so he could return to exercising. He is not vital to the running of the country so I guess a little favouritism was used. It would be better if the test had been used for someone caring for the old because they are at least performing a useful task and deserve the protection.

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:17 pm  

dr_feelgood wrote:

Thought we'd had enough of experts according to Gove.

The Government dont like experts, unless they have "scapegoat" tattooed accross there foreheads.
The "excuse" was readied at the outset of the Coronavirus when Johnson said that "we're following the science" on this one, flaked either side by said scientists.

They were there ready to take the blame.

As for Johnson's recovery, I think it's marvelous that his two nurses were from outside the UK, sadly, Johnson and Patel can't wait to "send these people home".
They know the cost of everything and the value of nothing and dont deserve the help and support of the public service workers who we all seem to rely on so much at the moment.

Maybe to help the country recover, they could freeze or maybe even reduce their wages in the next round of austerity.

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:53 pm  

Cronus wrote:

If there's one thing we must learn from this, it's that reliance on globalisation and cheap but shoddy Chinese/Asian markets is damaging. We've shipped our industries and jobs over there, leaving us exposed when it matters.

What's this 'we'?

Plenty of us already knew that deindustrialisation and the trashing of manufacturing in favour of finance, services and leaving it to market forces was going to one day meet its match, but we were dismissed as Leftist, Marxist, Commies, or something or other. My old man has been bemoaning cheap Chinese crap, on an almost weekly basis, ever since he went through a string of textile industry redundancies in the 1980s, as it all started to move to the cheaper Far East, and what we got back in return fell to bits after a few wears and washes.

Maybe we can use £50 notes and share certificates as face masks?

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Mon Apr 13, 2020 4:12 pm  

King Street Cat wrote:

What's this 'we'?

Plenty of us already knew that deindustrialisation and the trashing of manufacturing in favour of finance, services and leaving it to market forces was going to one day meet its match, but we were dismissed as Leftist, Marxist, Commies, or something or other. My old man has been bemoaning cheap Chinese crap, on an almost weekly basis, ever since he went through a string of textile industry redundancies in the 1980s, as it all started to move to the cheaper Far East, and what we got back in return fell to bits after a few wears and washes.

Maybe we can use £50 notes and share certificates as face masks?

Well said, sir.

Leaving everything to market forces was straight out of Thatcher's little blue book.
Pure capitalism only works for very few and if ever the proverbial chickens were coming home to roost, it's now.

There will certainly need to be a rethink on overseas travel, which many have come to take for granted for so long and perhaps look again on why we outsource so much of of that which we consume from overseas, although raw materials would still be a problem.

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Mon Apr 13, 2020 9:39 pm  

King Street Cat wrote:

What's this 'we'?

Plenty of us already knew that deindustrialisation and the trashing of manufacturing in favour of finance, services and leaving it to market forces was going to one day meet its match, but we were dismissed as Leftist, Marxist, Commies, or something or other. My old man has been bemoaning cheap Chinese crap, on an almost weekly basis, ever since he went through a string of textile industry redundancies in the 1980s, as it all started to move to the cheaper Far East, and what we got back in return fell to bits after a few wears and washes.

Maybe we can use £50 notes and share certificates as face masks?

Not just deindustrialisation though, is it - for which there have been many reasons since the 60s, though I'm sure you and the rest blame the Tories - it's been the export of jobs from all sectors in favour of cheap labour and operating markets. It began with manufacturing, then since the 2000s we've seen almost any job that can be carried out via remote consumer contact similarly shipped overseas - call centres & helpdesks being the prime example.

But anyway, the 'We' would be heads of industry who favour cost savings over quality produce and UK jobs. It would be successive governments who have favoured 'globalisation' over everything else. Dare I say it: 'Britain First' henceforth?

Of course the quality aspect is a sweeping statement but whether it's cheap Chinese crap such as 'tech', plastic gadgets or other devices, poor quality steel, faulty COVID19 tests, third-party call centres/help desks, poor quality clothing, or a frustrating conversation with "Kevin" in 'customer support' with an Indian accent so thick you can barely understand one another - exporting jobs, manufacturing and services overseas has always been something I've been heavily opposed too - and I've received no end of abuse for those views on here - a left-wing dominated forum - in the past for that sentiment.

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Tue Apr 14, 2020 9:26 am  

Cronus wrote:

Not just deindustrialisation though, is it - for which there have been many reasons since the 60s, though I'm sure you and the rest blame the Tories - it's been the export of jobs from all sectors in favour of cheap labour and operating markets. It began with manufacturing, then since the 2000s we've seen almost any job that can be carried out via remote consumer contact similarly shipped overseas - call centres & helpdesks being the prime example.

But anyway, the 'We' would be heads of industry who favour cost savings over quality produce and UK jobs. It would be successive governments who have favoured 'globalisation' over everything else. Dare I say it: 'Britain First' henceforth?

Of course the quality aspect is a sweeping statement but whether it's cheap Chinese crap such as 'tech', plastic gadgets or other devices, poor quality steel, faulty COVID19 tests, third-party call centres/help desks, poor quality clothing, or a frustrating conversation with "Kevin" in 'customer support' with an Indian accent so thick you can barely understand one another - exporting jobs, manufacturing and services overseas has always been something I've been heavily opposed too - and I've received no end of abuse for those views on here - a left-wing dominated forum - in the past for that sentiment.

I agree with most of what you say regarding the outsourcing of work and jobs, but isn't that just capitalism and market forces working as they should? Entrepreneurial spirit in action? That's what the UK have been signed up to for the last 40+ years. Some have benefitted, hugely. Plenty have lost out. I'd like nothing more than to be able to buy things again that not only say Made in England on the label, but like one of my vintage tweed jackets, says Styled and Made in Hebden Bridge, Yorkshire, England. Ask why this can't return, and you get the same old "it's too expensive to make it in Britain". Expensive British manufacturing has become normalised.

In the early 2000s, I used to deal with a bloke who was made redundant from heavy industry and went into web design. Fair play to him for making such a radical change, but I had to ask him how he ended up making such a change. He knew nothing about design, had never touched a web design software package, and thought search engine optimisation involved higher octane petrol. His reply? "I just take a detailed brief, flesh it out with instructions, email it to India, then a few weeks later it goes live, and any changes get made once it's online". The same globalisation which made him redundant also helped him earn again in his last years of employment. No consolation for the thousands of web designers graduating around that time.

It's like anything, there has to be a balance. Unfortunately, the majority of people who preach 'Buy British' are the same people who cheerlead captains of industry, who have shipped their enterprises overseas, and the same people who proudly buy traditional British brands, not realising they are now owned by Spanish investment companies or Indian multinational corporations.

Now the Britannia Unchained crowd are at the levers of power, do you think globalisation and leaving it to market forces will be scaled back a bit, or do you think they'll 'ramp it up'? There Is No Alternative, apparently.

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Tue Apr 14, 2020 10:47 am  

Scarlet Pimpernell wrote:

If only the same leeway was applied to Labour. When Brown was PM he purchased a large supply of a pandemic vaccine and was ridiculed by the right wing press for doing so.
I have not seen the same criticism of the current government who purchased faulty tests from China without a sell back clause. This cost several millions, the reason was honourable but the contract was bad.
I have a question why did the Daughter of Gove receive a test which came back clear so he could return to exercising. He is not vital to the running of the country so I guess a little favouritism was used. It would be better if the test had been used for someone caring for the old because they are at least performing a useful task and deserve the protection.

So are suggesting those running the country are less valuable than someone working in a care home?

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Tue Apr 14, 2020 12:18 pm  

i think we all know the answer to this.

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Tue Apr 14, 2020 12:23 pm  

[list=][/list]

Scarlet Pimpernell wrote:

If only the same leeway was applied to Labour. When Brown was PM he purchased a large supply of a pandemic vaccine and was ridiculed by the right wing press for doing so.
I have not seen the same criticism of the current government who purchased faulty tests from China without a sell back clause. This cost several millions, the reason was honourable but the contract was bad.
I have a question why did the Daughter of Gove receive a test which came back clear so he could return to exercising. He is not vital to the running of the country so I guess a little favouritism was used. It would be better if the test had been used for someone caring for the old because they are at least performing a useful task and deserve the protection.

Yes, Brown was criticised in the press for purchasing swine flu vaccines - but not widely beyond the usual inflammatory press as far as I recall. It was largely seen as a sensible move thankfully rendered unnecessary. Remember, the press do not always reflect public opinion - as we've seen with their nit-picking criticism of police enforcement of the lockdown. The public are so overwhelmingly in support of the police and enforcing the lockdown, one wonders why the press would dare go on the attack.

Hard to comment on the purchase of faulty COVID19 tests without having been behind the scenes. Perhaps the Chinese insisted on a 'sold as seen' basis knowing the world's governments are desperate? Other countries are going through the exact same problem with Chinese test orders right now. Who knows. Perhaps instead we should be aiming any anger at the feckin con artists who sold us duff tests, and reconsidering our future relationships?

As for Gove - see, this is the sort of irrelevant crap the left bang on about. Gove is a member of the Cabinet. Like it or not, he has a far more senior standing in the running of the country than pretty much all of us, and things run better when the Cabinet is functioning and able to make decisions. I have no issue with his daughter being tested - or indeed family members of the Cabinet if they are displaying symptoms. Statistically it's an utterly insignificant number of tests in the grand scheme of things. Yes, in reality it's probably as much for Gove's peace of mind as it is to allow him to keep working but again - like it or not, seniority has its privileges. Whatever, move on, it really doesn't matter. He got the nod for the test from Whitty and that will do for me.

Re: PM in Intensive Care... : Tue Apr 14, 2020 2:47 pm  

Cronus wrote:

Like I said a few weeks ago, too many here are too biased or not paying attention.

In almost every briefing I've seen attended by Whitty and Vallance, they have openly and honestly referenced the global shortage of PPE and the difficulties in distribution and supply, as well as the difficulties faced by procurement. You must have somehow missed all of this. Yes, as you mention, China was in lockdown - but that's just part of the issue.

The initial issue wasn't supply, it was local distribution. We had plenty of stock but getting it out there effectively and efficiently was the challenge. Still, as of a few days ago 761 million items of PPE had been delivered to 58,000 different settings across the UK. Has it been perfect? No. Has any nation managed a perfect supply chain throughout this? No (except possibly those producing PPE en masse). Was this ever going to be perfectly managed, anywhere? No. But - not disregarding instances of shortages - have the vast majority of NHS staff had access to PPE equipment? Yes.

But let's also look at supply. The main producers of PPE - China, South Korea, Japan and others - were not only in lockdown, but they also blocked exports of PPE at various stages to protect their own interests (understandable). China even effectively nationalised the Shanghai 3M plant - and others - to prevent exports. Furthermore, China actually IMPORTED 2.5 billion pieces of PPE equipment in Feb/Mar from the EU, Australia and others - stockpiling. Add to that the billions of masks purchased by the public across Asia and later the world, and immediately available stocks are almost wiped out globally.

As an example of the challenges being faced, we have the current issue with gowns. Sufficient stock has been ordered (surprise, surprise - from China). But some has been mislabelled at source and others have failed safety tests and so supplies are low in some areas. Another example of the reliance on cheap but poor quality goods from China backfiring - as we have also seen with equipment and indeed tests across Europe, where millions of Chinese COVID19 tests had to be binned after being found to be useless.

Yes, in an ideal world every nurse, doctor, carer, etc, etc would have an unlimited supply of the very best PPE on tap - and by saying that in absolutely no way do I underestimate the challenges and dangers they are facing. Our NHS staff are outstanding and deserve every plaudit being sent their way (as well as a pay rise). But this is far from an ideal world; it's a feckin global pandemic and the entire planet is stretched. To expect everything to run perfectly is naive.

If there's one thing we must learn from this, it's that reliance on globalisation and cheap but shoddy Chinese/Asian markets is damaging. We've shipped our industries and jobs over there, leaving us exposed when it matters.

Dont know if this is the post that you wanted me to read.

You are letting Hancock and Patel off the hook completely.

As you suggest, the "story" that has been fed to us is that "there IS sufficient PPE to go round" and that any issues with lack of "equipment" is purely down to distribution and nothing at all to do with being a little slow out of the blocks or to do with not having sufficient.

There is an attempt to throw telephone numbers of total numbers of PPE is playground stuff and the bottom line is it doesn't matter how many boxes or pallets there are in a central warehouse, the equipment needs to be in the right place at the right time.
Of course, this cant all be controlled at government level, it's an absolutely huge task of procurement and distribution, made all the more difficult by both the urgency of the situation and world demand plus, problems in manufacture.
However, why not have some honesty instead of the "it's not our fault", which is all that the government ministers have said, deflecting all blame away from themselves.

As for being flanked by experts, you clearly aren't a cynical as me (probably a good thing) but, for all other government issues, they are usually happy to take their advice in private and then decide policy and while accepting that the current crisis is on a whole new level, given the crap that Johnson & Co have come up with of so many previous occasions, you can easily see that, given the gravity of the situation, they dont want any of the brown stuff sticking to them.