Coronavirus Thread

[CosbehFox]

20 minutes ago, Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot said:

Obviously the whole thing isn't a conspiricy but I've found myself really questioning just how absolutely, hideously incompetent the government have been, there comes a point where you find yourself thinking they can't be this thick and absolutely unprepared at every turn as this virus continues to cripple lives and livelihoods. I get it's not an easy job but they've made so many absolute balls ups at every turn I've found myself thinking are they doing it on purpose? There's only so much continued incompetence I can find believable. 

Well they aren’t returning to Parliament until 11th January. The reasoning is precise and fair - it’s to ensure that Covid transmission is kept low and that there is a decent period from Xmas Day mixing, self isolation. 
 

However on the exact same reasoning, they wouldn’t allow schools to close earlier or open later. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

2 hours ago, ajthefox said:

You'd have to be blind not to see it or know of it first hand at this point, but I think if you are so inclined as to go down certain rabbit holes then all of can feed into that agenda quite easily.

 

And whilst I don't believe there is any such great conspiracy, I can certainly see how elements of what has happened over the last year feeds into what isn't even a conspiracy but just the way of life, that is how the ruling classes are exerting ever more oversight and control over the common person for their own financial gain.

 

This isn't really linked to covid, but if you (generally, not you specifically, Col) aren't questioning the powers that be and the actions that they are taking in 2020, then you are as naive as those who think Covid is a complete hoax are foolish.

As you say, this has been happening since the dawn of history. The pandemic was created by the ruling classes or the wealthy, but it's certainly been an opportunity for them.

 

As you say, doesn't make what's happening any less real unfortunately.

[fuchsntf]

55 minutes ago, Izzy said:

Here's another real life example...

 

I've just received yet another letter from the Dept of Health & Social care - I reckon it's the 7th letter I've received from them this year. This letter gives me more important guidance as an extremely vulnerable person - this time about tier 4 restrictions.  

 

All the information enclosed in this 7 page letter has been widely publicized recently on the news and on the Gov.UK website - there's nothing new in it.

 

Now I appreciate that some elderly folk still rely on letters through the post, but I'd imagine most people would be OK with an automatically generated e-mail these days - I know I would. 

 

Of the 2.2 million extremely vulnerable amongst us, say 10% don't have e-mail so that leaves 2 million letters x 7 times this year = 14 million letters.

 

I've no idea the cost of paper, ink, labour and postage to send all this out, but personally I'd much rather it was spent on front line staff instead.

 

I know I belong to the Extreme vulnerable, I Think it would be a total Waste to Keep reminding me.

We have been informed has a Nation how the vaccine priority steps will be taken, if individual doubts then where and whom to go to.

plus our health-Insurance platforms,( krankenkasse) will inform and tell us when we should ( be advised) to Take the vaccine and at what priority level..

[Super_horns]

Are all those vulnerable shielding?

 

Maybe that is part of the problem with these increased levels...

 

I did read before Christmas people commenting that their elderly parents would be coming around as it "might be their last Christmas" and they'd rather risk it than be alone.

 

Apparently the highest numbers of cases have been near areas with big shopping centres - wonder why!?

 

 

 

 

[Leicester_Loyal]

Piers Morgan son just put on Twitter that there’s going to be a 6 week lockdown announced tomorrow, ‘Tier 5’. 

[Crinklyfox]

Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine approved.  Now we can really move the vaccination program on.

Edited 30 December 2020 by Crinklyfox

[Sol thewall Bamba]

8 minutes ago, Crinklyfox said:

Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine approved.  Now we can really move the vaccine program on.

The end is in sight.

[stripeyfox]

55 minutes ago, Crinklyfox said:

Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine approved.  Now we can really move the vaccination program on.

great news. it feels like a big moment (even if we still might be in for a few months of pain)

 

 

May they win every boat race for the next 100 years!

 

 

 

 

[Finnaldo]

Hancock said that the AstraZeneca vaccine is showing signs of immunisation a fortnight after the first jab.

[CosbehFox]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-chris-whitty-london-uclh-christmas-b1780017.html
 

This poor bloke has been vilified throughout but he still had the balls to work over Christmas as an acting doctor. 

[Buce]

NHS could face 'horrendous choices' over who gets coronavirus care

Decisions about which patients receive life-saving treatment could be imminent, doctors warn

 

Hospitals could soon face “horrendous choices” about which Covid-19 patients receive potentially life-saving treatment because the NHS is so dangerously overloaded, doctors fear.

The warning came as calls grew for the whole of the UK to be put into a new lockdown, and for a delayed return for schools after the Christmas holidays by up to a month to help stem the massive rise in coronavirus infections.

The health service is struggling to cope with record numbers of Covid cases to such an extent that some patients may be denied access to an intensive care unit or the chance to go on a mechanical ventilator, the Hospital Consultants and Specialists Association (HCSA) said on Tuesday.

Pressure for a toughening of the government’s tactics against Covid comes as Matt Hancock prepares to update MPs on Wednesday about how well the tiers system of restrictions on everyday life in England are helping to contain the disease’s resurgence.

 

The health secretary may announce the creation of a new tier 5 in England – which would be tougher than tier 4, the category London and much of southern England are already in – and put areas now in tier 3 into tier 4 in an effort to halt the rapid escalation in infections, which on Tuesday hit a new record of 53,135. Scotland already has a five-tier system.

 

Increasing numbers of hospitals are moving closer to being overwhelmed by the number of patients needing emergency care because of Covid.

In a stark illustration of the growing crisis, some ICUs in London – which is once again the worst affected part of England – are now so overloaded that doctors have asked for some patients to be transferred hundreds of miles away to Yorkshire to get a bed and help reduce the pressure on their services, the Health Service Journal reported.

In another vivid example the Royal Free hospital in London is planning to move its children’s inpatient facilities to another hospital so it can use the space freed up to house adults suffering from Covid and non-Covid illnesses. It has also decided to turn the acute admissions unit at Barnet general hospital, which it runs, into extra capacity for Covid, staff were told in an email on Tuesday.

 

A senior manager at the trust, which now has 424 inpatients with Covid, said: “London Gold call has indicated that this position is expected to escalate for the next two weeks with 4 January potentially the zenith of critical care capacity needed.”

The Independent Sage committee of scientific and medical experts is urging ministers to instigate an immediate further UK-wide lockdown to try to prevent an imminent “catastrophe”. Any delay will result in tens of thousands of lives people who could otherwise have been saved, it said.

The committee, headed by the government’s former chief scientific adviser Sir David King, also said schools should remain shut until the start of February because their planned reopening from next week risked worsening the already fast-deteriorating situation, especially given the new variant that has emerged that is more transmissable and appears to be more readily infect under-18s.

“Things are as bad as they have ever been. The frightening thing is that they are going to continue to get worse. Action is needed now to avoid the collapse of the NHS in a few weeks. It is that serious”, said Christina Pagel, a member of Independent Sage and professor of operational research at University College London

NHS Providers, which represents hospital trusts in England, also demanded more robust action. Referring to the Tiers review, Saffron Cordery, its deputy chief executive, said: “It will require difficult decisions, moving millions more people to the highest level.” A toughening is needed urgently because pressures on the NHS in some places is “rising at an unsustainable rate”, she said.

Keir Starmer sounded a stark warning about the crisis facing the NHS and schools over the next month. The Labour leader told the Guardian that the UK was “staring down the barrel” of a third lockdown in January.

Dr Claudia Paoloni, a consultant anaesthetist in the NHS and president of the HCSA, said ICU staff may end up having to in effect ration who received care that could help them survive.

“Our NHS just doesn’t have the beds to cope. Some areas will be overwhelmed in days. If ventilation capacity is exceeded, horrendous choices will have to be made over those who live and die.

“The choices will be things like: which patients to admit to intensive care and which can only have limited care, excluding intensive care; how long to keep trying all stops maximum therapy on someone who appears to be making little progress when someone else comes into the intensive care unit and needs a haemodialysis machine when there are only limited numbers of machines; and who gets an intensive care or ventilatory support bed if all are being used,” she said.

Paoloni also warned that hospitals may have to stop providing non-Covid care, even including cancer surgery, despite NHS England’s promises to try to protect such treatment during the second wave. A hospital may have to ask itself ‘can we do the cancer surgery today or not, as we only have limited beds and no spare intensive care capacity for emergencies if we use the last bed for a major cancer operation?’,” she said.

 

Screening for diseases such as cancer may also have to halt and patients have to wait longer for an ambulance to respond to a 999 call, she added.

With the NHS facing the most serious emergency in its 72-year history, some hospitals are considering setting up tents outside in which to triage patients. This is in response to the long queues of ambulances that are building up outside many A&E departments, containing patients who sometimes spend hours in the vehicles waiting admission.

Ambulances were seen queueing on Tuesday outside hospitals including the Royal London hospital in Whitechapel and Queen’s hospital in Romford, both in east London, and Queen Elizabeth hospital, Birmingham.

The tent plan was revealed by A&E consultant Dr Simon Walsh, the deputy chairman of the British Medical Association’s consultants committee, who said it was the sort of measure usually used after a major incident such as a terror attack or industrial disaster.

 

NHS staff were preparing for a “worsening, increasing number of admissions” with Covid in the next few weeks as the number of infections continues to spiral, he said. Walsh urged the government produce a plan to respond to the increasing chaos in the service.

The Doctors’ Association UK said Covid had led to “a cataclysmic escalation” in the strain the NHS was under in recent days. “The NHS in the south-east is in meltdown. ICUs in the south-east are overflowing, with doctors telling us that their hospitals are running out of non-invasive ventilators and even basics like oxygen”, it stated.

Richard Mitchell, chief executive of the Sherwood Forest group of hospitals in Nottinghamshire, tweeted that: “Today will be a difficult day, tomorrow may be tougher and the next couple of weeks are likely to be the busiest and most challenging we have ever faced in the NHS.”

The Department of Health and Social Care said: “There is no shortage of ventilators and we have enough oxygen to meet demand.

“Throughout this global pandemic we have done whatever it takes to protect the NHS and save lives, including ensuring everyone who needed a ventilator had access to one.”

 

TLDR: we're fvcked.

[WigstonWanderer]

26 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

TLDR: we're fvcked.

I thought according to our Irish friend with the silky smooth voice that the UK had reached herd immunity sometime ago  Obviously an MSM conspiracy.

Edited 30 December 2020 by WigstonWanderer

[Col city fan]

32 minutes ago, Buce said:

NHS could face 'horrendous choices' over who gets coronavirus care

Decisions about which patients receive life-saving treatment could be imminent, doctors warn

 

Hospitals could soon face “horrendous choices” about which Covid-19 patients receive potentially life-saving treatment because the NHS is so dangerously overloaded, doctors fear.

The warning came as calls grew for the whole of the UK to be put into a new lockdown, and for a delayed return for schools after the Christmas holidays by up to a month to help stem the massive rise in coronavirus infections.

The health service is struggling to cope with record numbers of Covid cases to such an extent that some patients may be denied access to an intensive care unit or the chance to go on a mechanical ventilator, the Hospital Consultants and Specialists Association (HCSA) said on Tuesday.

Pressure for a toughening of the government’s tactics against Covid comes as Matt Hancock prepares to update MPs on Wednesday about how well the tiers system of restrictions on everyday life in England are helping to contain the disease’s resurgence.

 

The health secretary may announce the creation of a new tier 5 in England – which would be tougher than tier 4, the category London and much of southern England are already in – and put areas now in tier 3 into tier 4 in an effort to halt the rapid escalation in infections, which on Tuesday hit a new record of 53,135. Scotland already has a five-tier system.

 

Increasing numbers of hospitals are moving closer to being overwhelmed by the number of patients needing emergency care because of Covid.

In a stark illustration of the growing crisis, some ICUs in London – which is once again the worst affected part of England – are now so overloaded that doctors have asked for some patients to be transferred hundreds of miles away to Yorkshire to get a bed and help reduce the pressure on their services, the Health Service Journal reported.

In another vivid example the Royal Free hospital in London is planning to move its children’s inpatient facilities to another hospital so it can use the space freed up to house adults suffering from Covid and non-Covid illnesses. It has also decided to turn the acute admissions unit at Barnet general hospital, which it runs, into extra capacity for Covid, staff were told in an email on Tuesday.

 

A senior manager at the trust, which now has 424 inpatients with Covid, said: “London Gold call has indicated that this position is expected to escalate for the next two weeks with 4 January potentially the zenith of critical care capacity needed.”

The Independent Sage committee of scientific and medical experts is urging ministers to instigate an immediate further UK-wide lockdown to try to prevent an imminent “catastrophe”. Any delay will result in tens of thousands of lives people who could otherwise have been saved, it said.

The committee, headed by the government’s former chief scientific adviser Sir David King, also said schools should remain shut until the start of February because their planned reopening from next week risked worsening the already fast-deteriorating situation, especially given the new variant that has emerged that is more transmissable and appears to be more readily infect under-18s.

“Things are as bad as they have ever been. The frightening thing is that they are going to continue to get worse. Action is needed now to avoid the collapse of the NHS in a few weeks. It is that serious”, said Christina Pagel, a member of Independent Sage and professor of operational research at University College London

NHS Providers, which represents hospital trusts in England, also demanded more robust action. Referring to the Tiers review, Saffron Cordery, its deputy chief executive, said: “It will require difficult decisions, moving millions more people to the highest level.” A toughening is needed urgently because pressures on the NHS in some places is “rising at an unsustainable rate”, she said.

Keir Starmer sounded a stark warning about the crisis facing the NHS and schools over the next month. The Labour leader told the Guardian that the UK was “staring down the barrel” of a third lockdown in January.

Dr Claudia Paoloni, a consultant anaesthetist in the NHS and president of the HCSA, said ICU staff may end up having to in effect ration who received care that could help them survive.

“Our NHS just doesn’t have the beds to cope. Some areas will be overwhelmed in days. If ventilation capacity is exceeded, horrendous choices will have to be made over those who live and die.

“The choices will be things like: which patients to admit to intensive care and which can only have limited care, excluding intensive care; how long to keep trying all stops maximum therapy on someone who appears to be making little progress when someone else comes into the intensive care unit and needs a haemodialysis machine when there are only limited numbers of machines; and who gets an intensive care or ventilatory support bed if all are being used,” she said.

Paoloni also warned that hospitals may have to stop providing non-Covid care, even including cancer surgery, despite NHS England’s promises to try to protect such treatment during the second wave. A hospital may have to ask itself ‘can we do the cancer surgery today or not, as we only have limited beds and no spare intensive care capacity for emergencies if we use the last bed for a major cancer operation?’,” she said.

 

Screening for diseases such as cancer may also have to halt and patients have to wait longer for an ambulance to respond to a 999 call, she added.

With the NHS facing the most serious emergency in its 72-year history, some hospitals are considering setting up tents outside in which to triage patients. This is in response to the long queues of ambulances that are building up outside many A&E departments, containing patients who sometimes spend hours in the vehicles waiting admission.

Ambulances were seen queueing on Tuesday outside hospitals including the Royal London hospital in Whitechapel and Queen’s hospital in Romford, both in east London, and Queen Elizabeth hospital, Birmingham.

The tent plan was revealed by A&E consultant Dr Simon Walsh, the deputy chairman of the British Medical Association’s consultants committee, who said it was the sort of measure usually used after a major incident such as a terror attack or industrial disaster.

 

NHS staff were preparing for a “worsening, increasing number of admissions” with Covid in the next few weeks as the number of infections continues to spiral, he said. Walsh urged the government produce a plan to respond to the increasing chaos in the service.

The Doctors’ Association UK said Covid had led to “a cataclysmic escalation” in the strain the NHS was under in recent days. “The NHS in the south-east is in meltdown. ICUs in the south-east are overflowing, with doctors telling us that their hospitals are running out of non-invasive ventilators and even basics like oxygen”, it stated.

Richard Mitchell, chief executive of the Sherwood Forest group of hospitals in Nottinghamshire, tweeted that: “Today will be a difficult day, tomorrow may be tougher and the next couple of weeks are likely to be the busiest and most challenging we have ever faced in the NHS.”

The Department of Health and Social Care said: “There is no shortage of ventilators and we have enough oxygen to meet demand.

“Throughout this global pandemic we have done whatever it takes to protect the NHS and save lives, including ensuring everyone who needed a ventilator had access to one.”

 

TLDR: we're fvcked.

Kinda puts the Critical care suites not being over stretched theory to bed doesn’t it 

 

[Guest Harrydc]

1 hour ago, Finnaldo said:

Hancock said that the AstraZeneca vaccine is showing signs of immunisation a fortnight after the first jab.

How can they say 'showing signs'. . It either provides immunisation or it doesnt after the first jab. I thought this has been trialled and vigorously been tested.. 

[Lionator]

3 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

How can they say 'showing signs'. . It either provides immunisation or it doesnt after the first jab. I thought this has been trialled and vigorously been tested.. 

Basically the body takes a short while to build up immunity so that if it encounters the virus again, it recognises it before you become infected. The 'signs' of this process take place after two weeks, not straight away, therefore you are 'immune' two weeks after the first jab. Hancock is a terrible scientific communicator so many others will have the same issues. 

 

The trials and tests show that it's safe and that it works, but they'll always be studying the mechanisms behind this as we learn more about the virus. It's nothing to worry about. 

Edited 30 December 2020 by Lionator

[Finnaldo]

9 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

How can they say 'showing signs'. . It either provides immunisation or it doesnt after the first jab. I thought this has been trialled and vigorously been tested.. 

 

Science almost never works on absolute certainties. ‘Does or doesn’t’ or any similar kind of binary sentiment is never used in scientific literature and a scientist or, in this case, a politician briefed by scientists would rarely use such language when addressing it. 

 

6 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Basically the body takes a short while to build up immunity so that if it encounters the virus again, it recognises it before you become infected. The 'signs' of this process take place after two weeks, not straight away, therefore you are 'immune' two weeks after the first jab. Hancock is a terrible scientific communicator so many others will have the same issues. 

 

The trials and tests show that it's safe and that it works, but they'll always be studying the mechanisms behind this as we learn more about the virus. It's nothing to worry about. 

This as well. 
 

Honestly Harry I don’t get your sentiment at all. For months you’ve argued against any and all restrictions and now we’re seeing promising signs of vaccines you’ve found something to complain about in that as well. What’s your solution? 

Edited 30 December 2020 by Finnaldo

[Guest Harrydc]

7 minutes ago, Finnaldo said:

 

Science almost never works on absolute certainties. ‘Does or doesn’t’ or any similar kind of binary sentiment is never used in scientific literature and a scientist or, in this case, a politician briefed by scientists would rarely use such language when addressing it. 

 

This as well. 
 

Honestly Harry I don’t get your sentiment at all. For months you’ve argued against any and all restrictions and now we’re seeing promising signs of vaccines you’ve found something to complain about in that as well. What’s your solution? 

I'm simply questioning something which will be having a huge impact on my life. Surely that's an acceptable behaviour? I'm not just going to say "OK" to every little thing without asking questions - especially with something as huge as this. 

[Alf Bentley]

13 hours ago, Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot said:

Obviously the whole thing isn't a conspiricy but I've found myself really questioning just how absolutely, hideously incompetent the government have been, there comes a point where you find yourself thinking they can't be this thick and absolutely unprepared at every turn as this virus continues to cripple lives and livelihoods. I get it's not an easy job but they've made so many absolute balls ups at every turn I've found myself thinking are they doing it on purpose? There's only so much continued incompetence I can find believable. 

 

I think a large part of it is due to ideology, party politics & the leader's personality rather than just breathtaking incompetence. 

 

Since the 80s, the dominant ideology has been that the private sector is better than the public and that the state should intervene as little as possible - particularly under the Tories, but with New Labour, too, to a lesser extent.

Hence, partly, the preference for handing megabucks contracts to private companies, some with no experience in the field - "bound to be more efficient" than experienced public health officials with local knowledge, says the ideology. 

 

There is also a sizeable minority of right-wing libertarians among the Tory contingent, people whose instinct is anti-lockdown, anti-restrictions unless there's clear proof such measures are essential.

Under those circumstances, if the Govt intervenes hard and/or early, it risks internal party divisions and potentially losing votes in parliament or, more likely, depending on the more state-friendly Labour to get measures through.

So, ideological instinct and Tory party politics leads the Govt to delay and minimise state intervention until the need is staring everyone in the face.....leading to longer lockdowns, more deaths, more economic damage etc.

 

Also, Johnson is not only libertarian & anti-interventionist by political preference, he's also a "good news guy" by personality.

He got where he is by entertaining people and by painting a golden vision of a great future - a completely unsuitable personality for a PM during such a crisis, when tough decisions have to be taken and news needs to be announced that the public won't like re. restrictions and early lockdowns to avoid longer, harder lockdowns & more damage. I loathed Thatcher's politics, but by personality she'd have been much better suited to this crisis - prepared to take hard decisions & give bad news.

It's like a football club that is leaking 4 goals every match appointing the entertainer Kevin Keegan as manager, when they needed a short burst of Pulis, Warnock or Big Sam! 

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, Harrydc said:

I'm simply questioning something which will be having a huge impact on my life. Surely that's an acceptable behaviour? I'm not just going to say "OK" to every little thing without asking questions - especially with something as huge as this. 

Of course it's acceptable behaviour.

 

However, it's also acceptable for other people to likewise question that, too.

 

Actually answering the question from @Finnaldo
 about your own ideas for a solution might be helpful here.

[BenTheFox]

Does anyone know the number of people who have received the vaccine in the UK? The figure on here hasn't changed in about a week. https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare

[Leicester_Loyal]

20 December 2020 (last date data is available for): 3,304 acute beds taken out of 4,441
22 December 2019: 2,909 taken out of 3,631

 

Critical care bed figures, as numbers rather than percentages.

 

 

*Stolen from another forum*

Edited 30 December 2020 by Leicester_Loyal

[Col city fan]

50 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I think a large part of it is due to ideology, party politics & the leader's personality rather than just breathtaking incompetence. 

 

Since the 80s, the dominant ideology has been that the private sector is better than the public and that the state should intervene as little as possible - particularly under the Tories, but with New Labour, too, to a lesser extent.

Hence, partly, the preference for handing megabucks contracts to private companies, some with no experience in the field - "bound to be more efficient" than experienced public health officials with local knowledge, says the ideology. 

 

There is also a sizeable minority of right-wing libertarians among the Tory contingent, people whose instinct is anti-lockdown, anti-restrictions unless there's clear proof such measures are essential.

Under those circumstances, if the Govt intervenes hard and/or early, it risks internal party divisions and potentially losing votes in parliament or, more likely, depending on the more state-friendly Labour to get measures through.

So, ideological instinct and Tory party politics leads the Govt to delay and minimise state intervention until the need is staring everyone in the face.....leading to longer lockdowns, more deaths, more economic damage etc.

 

Also, Johnson is not only libertarian & anti-interventionist by political preference, he's also a "good news guy" by personality.

He got where he is by entertaining people and by painting a golden vision of a great future - a completely unsuitable personality for a PM during such a crisis, when tough decisions have to be taken and news needs to be announced that the public won't like re. restrictions and early lockdowns to avoid longer, harder lockdowns & more damage. I loathed Thatcher's politics, but by personality she'd have been much better suited to this crisis - prepared to take hard decisions & give bad news.

It's like a football club that is leaking 4 goals every match appointing the entertainer Kevin Keegan as manager, when they needed a short burst of Pulis, Warnock or Big Sam! 

Superb post 

What I would add though (my own political bias) is that farming out of contracts to so-called experts in the various fields has almost become a necessity, not only an ideology, due to completely inefficient and badly run public sector local services. 
I don’t like how the tories did this with test and trace however. Multi-billion contracts to their Tory pals to result in what has been, ostensibly, a complete waste of time and money. That stinks

But state control over contracts, buildings, employees etc doesn’t always make for a better situation either

I hadn't thought of Boris as being a 'good news guy' but of course, you're right..he is

And I so agree with the comment about Mrs Thatch (bit of political innuendo there). Love her or loathe her, she'd have overseen a much more efficient managing of covid than the present lot

Edited 30 December 2020 by Col city fan

[Alf Bentley]

6 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

 

What I would add though (my own political bias) is that farming out of contracts to so-called experts in the various fields has almost become a necessity, not only an ideology, due to completely inefficient and badly run public sector local services. 
I don’t like how the tories did this with test and trace however. Multi-billion contracts to their Tory pals to result in what has been, ostensibly, a complete waste of time and money. That stinks

But state control over contracts, buildings, employees etc doesn’t always make for a better situation either

 

I largely agree with what you say. But to clarify, I wasn't pushing a "public good, private bad" line as an alternative to the dominant Tory (& even New Labour) ideology of "private good, public bad".

 

Back in the late 80s, I worked for 2 civil service departments. One produced good quality work, but was extremely inefficient and overstaffed - my job should have been P/T, not F/T for starters!

The other was extremely well-run and efficient, but hampered by inadequate staffing. Similarly, in the past I've worked for and with private-sector employers that were well-run and others that were a nightmare.

 

I reckon that some things work better in the private sector: e.g. where private firms have particular expertise or in markets that readily lend themselves to competition.

Even then, you'll often need regulatory oversight (hopefully light-touch, non-intrusive in most cases). Similarly, proper oversight by regulators and/or National Audit Office is needed for public-run services.

 

I don't claim expertise in health, but have read that local public health officials have a lot of relevant expertise (in both health issues and contacting local people) that has been under-used - and that has been beneficial when it has been used. 

 

Public (and private) services can be inefficient and offer poor quality because they're badly run, but this can also be due to underfunding (and local authority funding has been systematically cut for about 40 years).

The second (well-run) civil service office where I once worked could have been much more efficient with more resources. It was a VAT Office so better resourcing would also have generated more revenue.

 

Better leave it there, as I don't want to divert this thread into a "public v. private" debate, not least as I'm a mixed-economy man, anyway.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

49 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

20 December 2020 (last date data is available for): 3,304 acute beds taken out of 4,441
22 December 2019: 2,909 taken out of 3,631

 

Critical care bed figures, as numbers rather than percentages.

 

 

*Stolen from another forum*

So the hospitals here as less busy than average and yet I'll be heading into lockdown shortly. Fantastic.

[Col city fan]

4 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I largely agree with what you say. But to clarify, I wasn't pushing a "public good, private bad" line as an alternative to the dominant Tory (& even New Labour) ideology of "private good, public bad".

 

Back in the late 80s, I worked for 2 civil service departments. One produced good quality work, but was extremely inefficient and overstaffed - my job should have been P/T, not F/T for starters!

The other was extremely well-run and efficient, but hampered by inadequate staffing. Similarly, in the past I've worked for and with private-sector employers that were well-run and others that were a nightmare.

 

I reckon that some things work better in the private sector: e.g. where private firms have particular expertise or in markets that readily lend themselves to competition.

Even then, you'll often need regulatory oversight (hopefully light-touch, non-intrusive in most cases). Similarly, proper oversight by regulators and/or National Audit Office is needed for public-run services.

 

I don't claim expertise in health, but have read that local public health officials have a lot of relevant expertise (in both health issues and contacting local people) that has been under-used - and that has been beneficial when it has been used. 

 

Public (and private) services can be inefficient and offer poor quality because they're badly run, but this can also be due to underfunding (and local authority funding has been systematically cut for about 40 years).

The second (well-run) civil service office where I once worked could have been much more efficient with more resources. It was a VAT Office so better resourcing would also have generated more revenue.

 

Better leave it there, as I don't want to divert this thread into a "public v. private" debate, not least as I'm a mixed-economy man, anyway.

Top post Alf

So am I 

👍