Non-motoring > Covid Inquiry	Miscellaneous
Thread Author: Manatee	Replies: 44

Wed 8 Nov 23 18:43   Covid Inquiry - Manatee

So far, so unsurprising. But is anybody else struck by the uncanny resemblance of Lord Mark Sedwill, the former head of the civil service, to Sir Humphrey Appleby as played by Nigel Hawthorne in Yes Minister? Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 8 Nov 23 20:27   Covid Inquiry - Kevin

I haven't watched much of it but we did spot the resemblance. The only thing that's surprised me so far is how professional and mature everyone was in a time of crisis. I thought it would be like my old 6th Form common room but it wasn't. Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 8 Nov 23 20:48   Covid Inquiry - tyrednemotional

>> I thought it would be like my old 6th Form common room .... >> ....where cries of "Jaws mode w**k!" echoed from the rafters?.... Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 8 Nov 23 22:43   Covid Inquiry - Kevin

Oh no TnE! Our common room was a bastion of rational informed debate compared to the puerile bickering this inquest has revealed so far. (And if you got caught swearing you were scarred for life emotionally by being held up as an example of someone who 'shows a distinct lack of vocabulary') Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 8 Nov 23 22:48   Covid Inquiry - tyrednemotional

... wouldn't know about mine. Too busy playing 7 card brag to listen.., Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 8 Nov 23 20:57   Covid Inquiry - Zero

>> in a time of crisis. I thought it would be like my old 6th Form >> common room but it wasn't. Dont roast me Flashman. Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 8 Nov 23 21:08   Covid Inquiry - Terry

I have watched some of it. Clearly a bit of a shambles with a complete lack of preparedness at the outset - an observation for which a public enquiry is superfluous. Par for the course for witnesses seems to be: - apologise "sincerely" where actions and comments were undeniable misjudgements - protest that the deficiencies relate to the actions and behaviours of others - insist that they were entirely alert to the risks posed by covid and urged earlier action We have yet to hear from the other "side" - mainly Sunak, Hancock and Johnson. Will they (a) own up, (b) attack each other or (c) cast doubt on the testimony of those already cross examined. Ultimately Johnson and Hancock will be held responsible - justifiably or not. They may protest they were ill advised by senior civil servants, special advisors etc - but their political careers are over, they were top of the greasy pole, and a target all (but themselves) can agree upon. Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 30 Nov 23 11:42   Covid Inquiry - Kevin

If only everyone had listened to Matt Hancock much earlier we'd have been OK. Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 30 Nov 23 12:21   Covid Inquiry - Bromptonaut

>> If only everyone had listened to Matt Hancock much earlier we'd have been OK. Just heard his evidence about 13-14 (?) March broadcast on the radio while I was driving home from Kettrrin. When my Grandson is introduced to the word dissembling I'm playing that as an example..... Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 30 Nov 23 17:50   Covid Inquiry - Terry

Mea culpa is is a concept unfamiliar to all (AFAIK) to all those involved in the pandemic - politicians and civil servants alike. The common approach - express regret at the outcome and blame someone else for the shambles. Hancock is no exception! The key output from the enquiry is to "identify the lessons to be learned from the above, to inform preparations for future pandemics across the UK". The public simply want to blame somebody for their loss - the enquiry is right - it happened, get over it, fix it for the future. To me it exposes some fundamental weaknesses in leadership, accountability and democratic structures. That it would have been better had Corbyn prevailed in 2019 I seriously doubt. Johnson seems to have been completely deficient on leadership, but top notch on bx11sh1t. Last edited by: Terry on Thu 30 Nov 23 at 17:51 Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 30 Nov 23 18:18   Covid Inquiry - Bromptonaut

>> That it would have been better had Corbyn prevailed in 2019 I seriously doubt. In a lot of ways the die was cast institutionally and the lack of a real pandemic for >100yrs would have meant deaths etc would have been little different. However I think Corbyn himself, and his team, would have been more competent, or at least less incompetent. OTOH, while Seamus Milne isn't Dominic Cummings, there was scope for unelected chumps. The big difference though is I don't think Labour would have spaffed squillions if public money like Boris did. Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 30 Nov 23 18:54   Covid Inquiry - smokie

"The big difference though is I don't think Labour would have spaffed squillions if public money like Boris did." I thought that's what Labour were best at, even without a pandemic! :-) Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 6 Dec 23 10:16   Covid Inquiry - smokie

Boris is on today www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOkKmziko6o Does anyone, Bromps maybe, know who all the people in the background diligently staring at their screens and tapping away are, what their role is, and what they are doing, as they rarely seem to be listening? I'm guessing a mixture of civil servants and legal bods. Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 6 Dec 23 10:28   Covid Inquiry - sooty123

Those inquiry legal bills don't just rack all by themselves you know. Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 6 Dec 23 10:51   Covid Inquiry - Bromptonaut

I'd imagine they're either inquiry admin or support staff for the 'front of house' KCs. Big cases in the courts, back in my day when files were paper and the authority cases referred to were in bound books, there was an army of clerks from Chambers and the instructing Solicitors etc making sure this stuff was right place/right time. Protocols following the Lord Wolf's report on court procedures mean much more stuff being put together and circulated ahead of court day - initially onpaper. Those document bundles are now electronic and on screen. Somebody needs to be making sure what the Judge, Counsel, their Juniors and the witnesses see in front of them are all the same. If you watch/listen you will hear people ask for document 'XYZ257' or similar. Somebody has to make that happen. Since the phone hacking inquiry, and probably before, these things are livestreamed. Again, making that happen needs people. Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 6 Dec 23 11:26   Covid Inquiry - smokie

Thanks - when you see how many there are there, and they are, I'm sure, just the tip of the iceberg, you can see how the vast costs of these things stacks up. But it sometimes just feels to me like they aren't even really paying attention!! So Sooty is also correct :-) Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 6 Dec 23 11:31   Covid Inquiry - sooty123

Alexa, show me document 1234. Joking aside I did read legal admin would be one of the first places to be replaced/assisted by AI to reduce headcount for things like this. Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 6 Dec 23 12:05   Covid Inquiry - Kevin

>Joking aside... That isn't joking. That's how it should be. One controlled document. It's standard ISO Document QA stuff. Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 6 Dec 23 11:36   Covid Inquiry - Bromptonaut

>> Thanks - when you see how many there are there, and they are, I'm sure, >> just the tip of the iceberg, you can see how the vast costs of these >> But it sometimes just feels to me like they aren't even really paying attention!! >> >> So Sooty is also correct :-) You've given 'your man' the witness's proof and the copy of All ER he needed. You know that he's going to be expounding his argument (or tormenting the witness) for another 40 minutes before there's anything else. You'd see them passing notes between themselves. Not work. Either organising their social lives or playing virtual chess. The court's own clerk was also bored s***less. You'd get obseessed with the verbal tic one of the Barristers had and keep a five bar gate score of how often it occurred.... Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 6 Dec 23 11:57   Covid Inquiry - smokie

In some ways it's quite addictive to watch (yes, I'm having a slow day :-) ) but it strikes me that the verbal stuff is again, just the tip of the iceberg. There is just so much documentation and then on top of that the words of the witnesses I don't really understand who is going to read the lot, assimilate it and come up with whatever outcomes there may be. Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 6 Dec 23 12:02   Covid Inquiry - Bromptonaut

I had a similar addiction to the Leveson inquiry. Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 6 Dec 23 18:49   Covid Inquiry - Biggles

Could be the stenographers but I thought they are generally in their own room nowadays. Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 6 Dec 23 18:54   Covid Inquiry - smokie

Nah too many of them and not all actively typing. Reply to this message | Report message

Wed 6 Dec 23 23:32   Covid Inquiry - Terry

It is all becoming very predictable. Take the oath, express deep regret, with the benefit of hindsight acknowledge some mistakes were made, blame someone else. The purpose is to understand what happened so we may be better prepared for a repeat. Reality - it is fast becoming a public soap opera (drama is too kind a description). Following the pattern of previous public enquiries - a report (with a following wind) possibly before the decade is out. All key participants will long since have moved on, many may have died. It will cost £m to £bn. The media will get endless column inches. Everybody will have had an opportunity to input and blame someone for the untimely death of grandma. All very British - eg: Levinson, Iraq, b***** Sunday, contaminated blood, Grenfell, etc. Extended timescales neuter the conclusions rather than adding to the quality of the report. Bluntly - it's happened, if there is a real prospect of prosecution for fraud or corruption - get the police on the job, otherwise document and act on lessons learned. Should take no more than 6 months. Then move on. Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 08:38   Covid Inquiry - sooty123

I difficult one, make the inquiry statutory then people have to turn but it takes forever and people lawyer up. Plus it costs a ton of cash. Make it non-statutory much quicker, much cheaper however no one is required to turn up, so probably not much use in getting it very big complex issues. OK for smaller stuff though. Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 09:29   Covid Inquiry - Duncan

In the real world, a pointless exercise. We have done all these before. The only people who come out smiling are the lawyers. Waste of time. Takes too long. Costs too much. Serves no useful purpose. Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 10:06   Covid Inquiry - Manatee

The alternative to having an inquiry is not having one, which would be unacceptable. Galactic sums were wasted there was untold suffering and it could have been better without a doubt. And there will be another one. It's inefficient but it needs to be effective. The worry is it might not be. Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 10:17   Covid Inquiry - Bromptonaut

>> In the real world, a pointless exercise. We have done all these before. The only >> people who come out smiling are the lawyers. >> Waste of time. >> Takes too long. >> Costs too much. >> Serves no useful purpose. The only one of those I agree with is that it takes too long although I suppose costs too much follws on from time taken. I don't know how you solve that. I have the impression the Heather Hallett is running a pretty tight ship with parties timebound and not being permitted repeated bites at the cherry. Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 11:42   Covid Inquiry - Zero

At the end of the day, everyone involved sees it as a way to get noticed and get some sound bites in. Nothing will come of it, just like all the previous enquiries. Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 11:55   Covid Inquiry - Bromptonaut

>> At the end of the day, everyone involved sees it as a way to get >> noticed and get some sound bites in. Nothing will come of it, just like all >> the previous enquiries. Sorry Zero but that's...... Rhymes with R*******... Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 12:31   Covid Inquiry - Zero

Only for a civil servant who earns his corn being involved. For everyone else? tis fact. Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 12:38   Covid Inquiry - Bromptonaut

>> Only for a civil servant who earns his corn being involved. For everyone else? tis >> fact. Whatever!! Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 12:43   Covid Inquiry - Zero

Well so far, nothing has been revealed that we didn't already know or correctly surmise. Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 12:46   Covid Inquiry - Bromptonaut

>> Well so far, nothing has been revealed that we didn't already know or correctly surmise. You mean that Boris and Handcock are both dissembling liars? Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 12:52   Covid Inquiry - Zero

>> >> Well so far, nothing has been revealed that we didn't already know or correctly >> surmise. >> >> You mean that Boris and Handcock are both dissembling liars? And cummins is a piece of dirt? Yes all that. Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 13:11   Covid Inquiry - Duncan

The impression that I come away with from the Covid business is the number of people who think the rules are for ordinary people and don't apply to them - from Cummings to Kinnock. "You do know who I am, don't you?" Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 15:49   Covid Inquiry - Terry

I'll say it again - THE PURPOSE IS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WENT RIGHT AND WRONG TO BETTER INFORM THE PLANNING AND RESPONSE TO FUTURE PANDEMICS. Deliberately capitalised. It is not (or should not be) about blame, or grandstanding witnesses, or political point scoring, or finding closure etc. Effectiveness is about getting the job done quickly, efficiently, with adequate analysis to ensure appropriate conclusions are drawn and acted upon. Those who have nothing to add to the goal should not get involved. Public inquiries should be strictly time limited, with powers to call all witnesses as necessary to reach a conclusion. An initial report WITHOUT CAVEATS should be issued in the case of Covid within (say) 6 months. And pigs might fly!! Last edited by: Terry on Thu 7 Dec 23 at 15:50 Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 16:04   Covid Inquiry - Bromptonaut

Good luck with that Terry. How you could exclude those who lost relatives, businesses etc and who want closure (whatever that is) in way that's politically (small p) acceptable? I've not seen witnesses grandstanding and if they try then the Judge will pull them up. The inquiries terms of reference are here: covid19.public-inquiry.uk/documents/terms-of-reference/ Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 16:32   Covid Inquiry - Zero

>> Good luck with that Terry. >> >> How you could exclude those who lost relatives, businesses etc and who want closure (whatever >> that is) Exactly Closure varies to all involved, and invariably means being able to blame someone, anyone, for whatever reason* It has no place in an official inquiry. *Specially the Richard heads who wish to include the covid cures/jabs Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 16:29   Covid Inquiry - Manatee

I think we have to accept that it will be inefficient. Massive duplication with KC's asking near-identical questions on behalf of the different stakeholders, the need for transparency, the necessity for legal process, the inaccessibility of much of the evidence, the fact that much of the more interesting bits are red herrings, e.g. much has been made of Johnson's "let it rip", "they are going to die soon anyway" which in a different context sound bad but were perfectly valid IMO at the time. I'm pretty sure our own discussions here included the idea that if everyone was going to get it anyway, it might be better to let it spread provided it didn't crash the NHS (which of course it would have). The test will be when the next pandemic comes. Sadly the main lesson will be not to use WhatsApp. Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 16:35   Covid Inquiry - Zero

>> The test will be when the next pandemic comes. Sadly the main lesson will be >> not to use WhatsApp. I am not sure how whatsapp ever became part of policy/government process. Its use should be forbidden in government with a controlled alternative developed/used. Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 16:40   Covid Inquiry - sooty123

>> I am not sure how whatsapp ever became part of policy/government process. Its use should >> be forbidden in government with a controlled alternative developed/used. Familiarity. There are several gov options designed specifically for senior politicians but they don't like using them so don't. Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 8 Dec 23 at 10:44 Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 7 Dec 23 21:45   Covid Inquiry - Terry

In the good old days a conversation could be held, strong and unpopular opinions expressed, arguments, etc - all part of the process of arriving at a conclusion/decision. Communication is now frequently recorded by email, WhatsApp and text. This will limit clear and frank discussion. Politicians and public servants will be nervous that any (unwoke) utterance may ultimately end up in the public domain. Rather than improving governance and decision making, fear of future exposure will limit debate to the anodyne and trivial. Quality will be diminished, not improved. Reply to this message | Report message       1

Thu 23 May 24 14:19   Covid Inquiry - Bobby

I see Simon Case is in front of the committee today. Has went under the radar with election and PO coverage. And he is also disappointed that he lost his WhatsApp chats…. Reply to this message | Report message

Thu 23 May 24 14:23   Covid Inquiry - smokie

I had a watch during the Paula breaks but the bits I saw weren't very interesting really. He did see to get away with rambling a bit in his answers. Reply to this message | Report message