of course they did, just like the UK government allowing Cheltenham was a cluster ****, but you won't see criticism of Drakeford or Welsh Labour from many on here, like you do with Boris and chums.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heisenberg
Printable View
of course they did, just like the UK government allowing Cheltenham was a cluster ****, but you won't see criticism of Drakeford or Welsh Labour from many on here, like you do with Boris and chums.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heisenberg
Wait a second....
https://services.parliament.uk/bills...ronavirus.html
"Following agreement by both Houses on the text of the Bill it received Royal Assent on 25 March. The Bill is now an Act of Parliament (law)."
25th of March. Not the 8th of March.
Am I missing something glaring here or are you telling fibs Lisvaneblue?
Always happy to be corrected if I've got it wrong.
All teams should be criticised.Quote:
Originally Posted by Feedback
But I will remind you that the Prime Minister has admitted full responsibility for all the deaths in the UK. But thinks that being 'deeply sorry' is enough, and will continue in his job, no doubt dishing out more large contracts to Tory donors.
In July I was speaking to a Director at Sport Wales National Centre [Sophia Gardens]. In March he and several of his Co directors at other Bodies had sourced PPE from reliable sources but had to go through Procurement Wales to place orders. Procurement Wales refused as the suppliers were not on the approved suppliers list.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heisenberg
By almost every standard Wales is at the bottom of the UK list.
Are you kidding?! They all get a hammering on here ya soft git :hehe:Quote:
Originally Posted by Feedback
That's interesting... But did you believe him? I ask this question because you have continuously played down the seriousness of the pandemic and think there's been a massive overreaction to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Quiet Monkfish
I've literally just said that Drakeford and Sturgeon should get some blame too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Feedback
But the primeminister of the UK also needs to be held to account for this complete shambles. The majority of which is the making of the government in charge of the uk.
I'd list:Quote:
Originally Posted by Feedback
No decent track and trace for months
Frequent changing of rules
Lack of consistent enforcement of rules
No testing at airports, which may have led to the new strain coming in (just because it was detected in the UK doesn't mean it developed here)
If that had all been done properly, the numbers would be better.
Have you not been reading the board very much? They've been absolutely criticised non stop and rightly so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Feedback
Boris has not taken full responsibility for the deaths, he takes responsibility for his governments actions. the two are not the same. Of course the UK response has been lacking in parts, and of course it is correct that it takes its fair share of the blame. There are many factors at play, one of which is the UK government.Quote:
Originally Posted by lardy
why couldn't WG develop their own?Quote:
Originally Posted by lardy
agreed. This has probably been the biggest **** up of them allQuote:
Originally Posted by lardy
this is directly related to the point above, but the public also has to take its fair share of the blame here for flouting the rules.Quote:
Originally Posted by lardy
agreed, but again the WG could have ensured testing at Cardiff.Quote:
Originally Posted by lardy
and if everyone had stayed at home, the numbers would have been smaller again.Quote:
Originally Posted by lardy
The fact is some of the British people just di not understand what was going on and treated lockdown as something that only impacted other people
those posts must have been deleted before I got here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Croesy Blue
Feedy and Lisvaneblue,
You've both consistently said that the Welsh government had the same powers as the UK govt. to make all of these early decisions...
Even claiming the emergency bill was passed two weeks before it did.
Then please tell me why on earth the Coronavirus Bill was passed on the 25th March 2020 (not the 8th March) to grant powers to the devolved nations for enacting their own responses to the pandemic?
Don't shirk the question.
I'll reword some of that so you don't just give a pedantic answer...
"... please tell me why on earth the Coronavirus Bill was passed on the 25th March 2020 (not the 8th March) which granted powers to the devolved nations for enacting their own responses to the pandemic?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heisenberg
The lack of PPE stock in Wales was down to PHW/NHS Wales. The lack of PPE stock in England was down to PHE/ NHS England.
Wales could lockdown relatively effectively with or without border control and we do. Stay at home, shut shops, shut hospitality and when visitors cross the border they are subject to Wales lockdown rules. Where's the problem with that?
Emergency powers 8 March, the bill followed and the powers granted were tailored to react to the pandemic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heisenberg
There's a statement from Vaughan Gething on 8 March on line stating the granting of emergency powers
why are you asking me this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Heisenberg
anyway, here's a good article, have a read
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55757790
The Government has said that responding to a wider pandemic of coronavirus may require further emergency legislation. The Government announced on 8 March 2020 that it intended to introduce a “Covid-19 emergency bill”.Quote:
Originally Posted by lisvaneblue
https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/c...y-legislation/
The powers didn't come into place on the 8th March. The announcement that emergency powers were going to be granted was on that date.
I think you owe me an apology.
Because you said the WG had the same powers as the UK govt. when it came to locking down early etc... Or have you forgotten that already?Quote:
Originally Posted by Feedback
Why does the welsh government being useless get the U.K. government off the hook for being absolute shite and killing 100,000 people
Just picked up ITV news 8 March 2020 on lineQuote:
Originally Posted by Heisenberg
Welsh Government Granted emergency to tackle the coronavirus crisis
If you know better then of course I apologise
"Yep completely agree, I don't understand being so deep in support of a political party that anyone could defend this."
I was replying to this. I suggest you read the posts quoted to understand the point being made. And who was defending it? I suggest you re-read my post where I criticised the government on many occasions.
It's a bit lame to suggest that the argument has been lost when comparisons are being made. If you follow the thread you wouldn't say that.
I do, have known him years. RE. the pandemic my two bones of contention are the way the media - eg BBC have presented it, a non-stop assault on people's emotions, fears etc. It's got to the stage where the news items are getting more 'brutal' by the day because the Govt. believes some folk have become immune to what was being shown and presented. The public have been and are being treated like specimens in a tank. Secondly I do not think a Government has the right - morally or legally to instruct people to remain inside their homes. We've had scores of lockdowns of varying scope and yet we're worse off than ever. Lockdowns haven't worked. They've been counter-productive. Controls, precautions, yes, but shutting everything down has been a collective madness, a madness which seems to have no end in sight. In fact there's more precaution, doom and gloom now, than at any other time, even though we're getting to the point where most of the over 80's have 70% protection.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heisenberg
You only have to look at the number of cases to see that lockdowns work. Monkfish has said before there is no scientific evidence they work - it's nonsense to say that.
Are they fun? Do we want them? Do we want them for months on end? Obviously no.
Are they successful in reducing cases, which is the point? Yes.
Are there other, awful side effects of lockdowns? Yes.
But they absolutely work.
I saw that too but only on the ITV news site.. Did you bother reading anything further than the headline?Quote:
Originally Posted by lisvaneblue
Perhaps you will just take this as evidence instead?
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/g...ainst-covid-19
Notice the date: 8th March 2020
That's not what I said. however you make a valid point and its something that has contributed to the spread of Covid in the UK and the number of deaths. London is a travel hub, and the UK is quite densely populated. Apparently, there were 1300 separate cases of Covid entering the UK (according to genetic studies) so its hard to see how it could have been contained. Closing the borders may have helped, but hindsight is wonderful - back in March daily deaths were so low that closing the borders would have seemed outrageous. If only we knew then what we know now.Quote:
Originally Posted by lardy
We’re now at the stage it seems where it’s being said that Wales could have gone into a firebreak lockdown in the autumn without a furlough scheme after it was denied the money to operate such a plan by the UK Chancellor because the Government he was a member of were ignoring the advice of the SAGE committee to implement a UK lockdown.
What would’ve been the purpose of ordering a lockdown in Wales with no furlough scheme? As far as I can see it would be to show that opponents of Drakeford’s Government on a Cardiff City messageboard were right when they argued that it wasn’t a case of Welsh health policy being dictated by UK Government financial considerations.- how else would it have benefited anyone?
A lockdown without furlough would, as has already been remarked, been traumatic for those affected and it seems obvious to me that this would have led to the lockdown rules being poorly observed, thereby making the whole thing pretty pointless (by their actions over a period of almost a year, the UK Government know it would be electorally suicidal as well).
The WAG were denied the opportunity to have the lockdown they wanted to have at the time they wanted to have it, but, like so many others, they probably knew that the UK Government would have to succumb to the inevitable soon whereby they would have to announce a lockdown with furlough payments to all four nations.
the London economic is a leftist alternative news organisation. Of course they're going to be critical of this government no matter what they do. Putting that to one side, you'll be aware that all government contracts above a certain size are put before the parliamentary scrutiny committee made up of SNP and Labour MPs. I'd have thought that any malfeasance would have been highlighted by this committee, if there was indeed any wrongdoing. Likewise, all contracts are put before the minister by the civil service, who review the tenders according to pre-determined criteria. But all of this doesn't match the narrative so its ignored.Quote:
Originally Posted by lardy
do they work or do they just delay the inevitable? genuine question here, because after every lockdown, we've seen cases balloonQuote:
Originally Posted by lardy
https://gov.wales/bill-responds-wels...virus-covid-19Quote:
Originally Posted by lisvaneblue
'Bill responds to Welsh Ministers' requests for new emergency powers to tackle coronavirus (COVID-19)
Health Minister Vaughan Gething has welcomed confirmation that the emergency powers sought by Wales to tackle coronavirus (COVID-19) will be introduced by the UK government.'
The bill would grant them emergency powers... But they didn't get them until it passed through law.
Even Hancock said the bill would provide them with short-term powers once it passed.
Come on now.
What I'm taking from this is Mark Drakeford put finances over health. If Lockdown was so essential, then it should not matter whether we had furlough or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
and for the record, since you don't know, WG has been pumping money into Welsh business since March 2020 so there was no reason why it had to rely on the furlough scheme, when it has had several rates/grant schemes of its own. The money could have been given to business just through a different mechanism.
WG chose not to enter lockdown, citing HMT as the reason, but that just does not hold up when WG has been using its own funds to support Welsh business all through lockdown
this does not change the fact that WG had the same powers as the UK government both before and after the bill.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heisenberg
and before you go off on one, i have not made comment on this bill at all. My comment has always been about WG and UKG having the same powers, no what those powers were, or when they were granted.
"this does not change the fact that WG had the same powers as the UK government both before and after the bill"Quote:
Originally Posted by Feedback
What's the point of it then? I asked you this earlier but you ignored it.
That's my lot for the day. I don't know if I have been as productive as Feedback says he has been.
what is the point of what? I'm not being difficult, I really don't understand your question.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heisenberg
My earlier comment was about WG having the same powers as UKG but not being held accountable by the Tory bashers. WG should be held accountable in the same way ha UKG should be held accountable. Both have made mistakes, both could have done better
I'm not trying to diguise anything. That fact is that 100,000 people have not been directly killed by the virus. The majority would have died anyway sooner rather than later, given the figures on underlying health conditions. As I said what matters is the excess deaths and whilst these or some of them may be attributable to government acting too late, the figure is nowhere near the 100,000 that people are using as a stick to beat people with. And of those excess deaths some are certainly attributal to the acts or omissions of central government and some to devolved governments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Croesy Blue
Two other points: It was recorded in the summer when the first wave abated that there were less than normal numbers of deaths being recorded presumably because some poor folks had died earlier. So that adjusts the figure a little more.
the same will undoubtedly be true after this wave subsides.
I know a lot of people on here dont want to accept these things but it doesn't alter the fact that they remain true.
The seocod thing is when comparing UK's death trate to other countries we need to be careful that we compare like with like. We don't know how other countries may be gathering and collating their information nor how they may massage figures for domestic consumption
:hehe:talk about desperate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Feedback
if stating facts is desperate then so be it. you clearly were not aware that WG had been providing support to business using their own funds, they could have done the same to push through a firebreak but chose not to.Quote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
we don't know what the true Covid19 death count is, but this article has a good graphic that tries to explain various measurements of Covid19 deathsQuote:
Originally Posted by xsnaggle
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55814751
USA has just recently reached the tragic milestone of 200,000 Covid deaths. This in a country where the loony previous administration's mismanagement of the crisis has rightly attracted global distain. One wonders how many more would have succumbed had they taken the former President's advice and ingested disinfectant.
The USA has a population 5 times greater than the UK so in broad terms even if we had only suffered 40,000 deaths our Government should have been ashamed of their failure. Just what perspective does that put on losing 100k people? "Eat out to help out", "Get back to work if you're able", "Have yourselves a merry little Christmas'..... criminal?