FabSwingers.com forum: The Coronavirus bill

By *litterbabe OP Woman
over a year ago

hiding from cock pics.

I wondered what you all sorts of the coronavirus bill that was passed I believe yesterday. I am led to believe it it has some details that might be somewhat restrictive to our human rights, but but it is so long and and I don't find it very easy to understand, I do hope human rights lawyers are looking into it to make sure it is how it should be.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-52004116

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *orwegian BlueMan
over a year ago

Iceland, but Aldi is closer..

What does it matter, the rules are simple and there to protect us..

The last thing we need is do gooder human rights people cowling all over this, picking holes in it just to make a name for themselves and maybe a few quid along the way..

This effects us all, we are all in the same boat and there are some who think the new laws don't apply to them..

Well tell that to someone who is high risk that WILL die if they contract it...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iverpool LoverMan
over a year ago

liverpool

"What does it matter, the rules are simple and there to protect us.. "

"Any society that will give up their freedom to gain a little security deserve neither and will lose both"

-benjamin franklyn.

The covid 19 bill that was passed from what ive seen people interpreting (as its 360 pages long and lot of jargon) is that this is bad news and we will be losing a lot of rights and freedom.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"What the fuck is the internet?" - jason mews 2001.

For a second there I thought coronavirus had changed is screen name to bill

Many Bill's get passed that could be perceived as infringing out human rights and freedoms, this one is no different except it's a talking point at the moment, I'm sure there'll be some legal teams picking it apart as we speak and as the dust settles on this virus there will no doubt be the ensuing finger pointing blame game, with high court cases brought against boris, much like the whole Brexit debacle.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I’m not so worried what it says, but more on the length of time it’s in force and that it gets repealed once this is over.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *fweonlymeettwiceMan
over a year ago

Madrid

"I’m not so worried what it says, but more on the length of time it’s in force and that it gets repealed once this is over. "

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *andyMinx_tvTV/TS
over a year ago

Leeds

"I’m not so worried what it says, but more on the length of time it’s in force and that it gets repealed once this is over.

And it could sit there without being repealed for a very long time. Along with the following:-

It is illegal to die in the Houses of Parliament

It could be regarded an act of treason to place a postage stamp bearing the British king or queen's image upside-down

Eating mince pies on Christmas Day is banned

It is illegal not to tell the tax man anything you do not want him to know, but legal not to tell him information you do not mind him knowing

It is illegal to enter the Houses of Parliament wearing a suit of armour

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I’m not so worried what it says, but more on the length of time it’s in force and that it gets repealed once this is over.

And it could sit there without being repealed for a very long time. Along with the following:-

It is illegal to die in the Houses of Parliament

It could be regarded an act of treason to place a postage stamp bearing the British king or queen's image upside-down

Eating mince pies on Christmas Day is banned

It is illegal not to tell the tax man anything you do not want him to know, but legal not to tell him information you do not mind him knowing

It is illegal to enter the Houses of Parliament wearing a suit of armour

Well done. You’ve picked out a bunch of trivial laws that weren’t repealed.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The Scottish version seems to have been passed yesterday. Within the draft of the Scottish version was the removal of jurys from trials. The reasoning being that you can't have 15 jurors come together with the virus about. In my opinion feeble reasoning at best.

Thankfully, after much protesting by the legal profession, apparently a well worded letter for a guy called Gove and strong opposition within the holyrood building the plan did not go ahead and an objection upheld.

We were within hours of being in a country that does not allow a person to be judged by their peers. A 600+ year old right.

I've not been able to follow any more of the goings on, but can only think the inclusion of such an abhorent item would be to divert from other nasty powers within the bill.

Take care and keep up the good work - as a nation of people we are doing extremely well.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"What does it matter, the rules are simple and there to protect us..

The last thing we need is do gooder human rights people cowling all over this, picking holes in it just to make a name for themselves and maybe a few quid along the way..

This effects us all, we are all in the same boat and there are some who think the new laws don't apply to them..

Well tell that to someone who is high risk that WILL die if they contract it...

This has gotta be a pisstake

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I wondered what you all sorts of the coronavirus bill that was passed I believe yesterday. I am led to believe it it has some details that might be somewhat restrictive to our human rights, but but it is so long and and I don't find it very easy to understand, I do hope human rights lawyers are looking into it to make sure it is how it should be.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-52004116"

they will be dont worry

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I’m not so worried what it says, but more on the length of time it’s in force and that it gets repealed once this is over.

And it could sit there without being repealed for a very long time. Along with the following:-

It is illegal to die in the Houses of Parliament

It could be regarded an act of treason to place a postage stamp bearing the British king or queen's image upside-down

Eating mince pies on Christmas Day is banned

It is illegal not to tell the tax man anything you do not want him to know, but legal not to tell him information you do not mind him knowing

It is illegal to enter the Houses of Parliament wearing a suit of armour

"
We know there's silly laws still running but who cares. Read the new bill no meeting outside of more than 2 people, great let's see if they use it to break up anyone protesting? Think on it's was your right not anymore.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ty31Man
over a year ago

NW London

The bit that I find a little concerning is why the govt feel the need to cling on to these additional powers for a whole two years?

Thankfully after opposition, mainly from Corbyn (I think), they are required to be reviewed every six months.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Haha The Scottish version puts a delay on Freedom of Information requests. Instead of one month to answer questions public bodies now have 5 months. With a review period of two further months.

The Scottish governmemt seem not to want to encourage questioning and transparency.

For those who haven't had the pleasure of Freedom of Information procedures it is frequently used to dampen legitimate questioning. This new ruling does that on steroids.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-52004116"

We as a people get the government we voted for. We danced in the streets when all the warning signs were there.

A very litteral case of be careful what you wish for.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-52004116

We as a people get the government we voted for. We danced in the streets when all the warning signs were there.

A very litteral case of be careful what you wish for."

To be fair there really isn't much of a choice.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-52004116

We as a people get the government we voted for. We danced in the streets when all the warning signs were there.

A very litteral case of be careful what you wish for.

To be fair there really isn't much of a choice. "

We had two choices. One party wanting to run public health services into the ground and another who wanted to rebuild our public health services.

We voted for the former because we did not see the need for a world class NHS.

Now we blame everyone except ourselves for voting for a compassionless clown.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

We need a military coup.

Hail el presidente

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The way I see it is there was plenty of cutting, public/private scamming and tricky agenda for change shenagigans going on in the days of cameron brown blair major and any others I've missed. To work in the NHS is to work in turmoil.

# Protect the NHS

From the government

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Why was there no outcry over the EU ventilator fiasco?

Why is there no outcry over the comment 'let the old people die'?

Because we would have to admit we were wrong. Let's face it that isn't in our nature. We will defend our poor decisions even it kills us, which it literally is.

When this government embarked on a policy of herd immunity they knew our NHS would be overwhelmed but didn't even care enough about them to arm them with PPE. How does one express sympathy for the dying doctors and nurses when one has deliberately caused the situation being as bad as it is?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"The way I see it is there was plenty of cutting, public/private scamming and tricky agenda for change shenagigans going on in the days of cameron brown blair major and any others I've missed. To work in the NHS is to work in turmoil.

# Protect the NHS

From the government

I think you need to revist Corbyn's plans for the NHS. The only argument against those plans was where the money was going to come from.

Strangely our current government is practising Corbynism, but not one single person has asked where this money is coming from.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago

upton wirral

"What does it matter, the rules are simple and there to protect us..

The last thing we need is do gooder human rights people cowling all over this, picking holes in it just to make a name for themselves and maybe a few quid along the way..

This effects us all, we are all in the same boat and there are some who think the new laws don't apply to them..

Well tell that to someone who is high risk that WILL die if they contract it...

"
Great post

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *rue_dirty_gentMan
over a year ago

Bentley

The government has already invoked the civil contingency act (formally the emergency powers act). This act ultimately gives the government the power to do whatever it needs to to protect the state.

Your civil liberties have already been restricted with no gatherings, staying at home etc

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"The government has already invoked the civil contingency act (formally the emergency powers act). This act ultimately gives the government the power to do whatever it needs to to protect the state.

Your civil liberties have already been restricted with no gatherings, staying at home etc"

Pity they weren't as efficient ordering PPE for our NHS as they were giving them selves more power.

At least we know what their priorities are.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There's a petition on change.org that had 100000+ signatures to change some bits of it

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If this whole situation says anything, it is that the government can make funds available (in the short term) when they deem it necessary.

I've heard so much complaining about people being isolated and stuck in lockdown, their human rights being ignored, how can anyone live on less tha £100 per week, etc.

Think about those who have terminal illnesses, long term chronic diseases, disabilities and conditions that have been living like that for as long as anyone can remember.

The sad point is that most will quickly forget and move on as normal as soon as they are no longer affected. People generally think about themselves and not others.

Sad but true?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *othardandfreeMan
over a year ago

# Protect the NHS

From the government

I think you need to revist Corbyn's plans for the NHS. The only argument against those plans was where the money was going to come from.

Strangely our current government is practising Corbynism, but not one single person has asked where this money is coming from."

Sadly thats because in our heart of hearts we know where the money is coming from...us till we die through the tax system.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

# Protect the NHS

From the government

I think you need to revist Corbyn's plans for the NHS. The only argument against those plans was where the money was going to come from.

Strangely our current government is practising Corbynism, but not one single person has asked where this money is coming from.

Sadly thats because in our heart of hearts we know where the money is coming from...us till we die through the tax system."

I understand what you are saying. My position is plans and doings are very different beasts. To be fair to you I'll say your discussing with someone who has no trust in anything our politicians say.

I respect your opinion entirely.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"We need a military coup.

Hail el presidente"

We need a military for-that

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ourgeMan
over a year ago

stourport nr kidderminster

There's slot in that new bill .that we all should be worried about .just really understand politics .but what I have read of it .something's we need to fight .some things in their will affect all of use .not just when viris is going on but after .

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *eddy and legsCouple
over a year ago

the wetlands

# Protect the NHS

From the government

I think you need to revist Corbyn's plans for the NHS. The only argument against those plans was where the money was going to come from.

Strangely our current government is practising Corbynism, but not one single person has asked where this money is coming from.

Sadly thats because in our heart of hearts we know where the money is coming from...us till we die through the tax system."

You .mean . there .. is.... no .

..... money ..... tree

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By * and M lookingCouple
over a year ago

Worcester

The ex police officer said it all on the TV this morning.

In India the police are beating people with canes and tipping over their food carts of they don't comply.

Here, they are firstly asking people to go back home then issuing a £30 fine for non compliance.

Maybe we should bring the police in from India for those that want their selfish behaviour to put everyone else at risk!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iverpool LoverMan
over a year ago

liverpool

"The ex police officer said it all on the TV this morning.

In India the police are beating people with canes and tipping over their food carts of they don't comply.

Here, they are firstly asking people to go back home then issuing a £30 fine for non compliance.

Maybe we should bring the police in from India for those that want their selfish behaviour to put everyone else at risk!

In india theres like 6 people to a tiny shack in the slums, asking them to stay in it for however many months is rediculous.

And no noone should be hit over the head with a cane for leaving their house.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"The ex police officer said it all on the TV this morning.

In India the police are beating people with canes and tipping over their food carts of they don't comply.

Here, they are firstly asking people to go back home then issuing a £30 fine for non compliance.

Maybe we should bring the police in from India for those that want their selfish behaviour to put everyone else at risk!

Have you seen any of the videos?

The Indian police that are doing that to people should be ashamed of themselves for behaving as they are.

Reason with people and educate them before going on a power trip with a stick... It'll only get them even more hated instead of supported, respected and listened to.

Most people who are ignoring thd rules either don't understand why thd rules are in place or just don't care. The ones who don't understand can be educated, the tiny minority of ones who don't care, in response, I don't really give a crap what happens to them, hit them with a stick if it really makes you feel better.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *uttyjonnMan
over a year ago

SEA

The Indian police that are doing that to people should be ashamed of themselves for behaving as they are.

Reason with people and educate them before going on a power trip with a stick... It'll only get them even more hated instead of supported, respected and listened to.

Plus people were given no notice to a 100% lock down

Many are so poor they've had to walk hundreds of miles to get back home from the cities where they worked

Plus the government is not helping out financially, a lot of these people have not got no money and will starve

And then theres the very large homeless community

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *moothdickMan
over a year ago

stoke

Think the bill will be very big

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I’m not so worried what it says, but more on the length of time it’s in force and that it gets repealed once this is over. "

With you on this xx

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The Indian police that are doing that to people should be ashamed of themselves for behaving as they are.

Reason with people and educate them before going on a power trip with a stick... It'll only get them even more hated instead of supported, respected and listened to.

Plus people were given no notice to a 100% lock down

Many are so poor they've had to walk hundreds of miles to get back home from the cities where they worked

Plus the government is not helping out financially, a lot of these people have not got no money and will starve

And then theres the very large homeless community"

Very good points, most of us in the UK are very lucky in comparison.

I saw this s day or so ago :-

'Social distancing is a privilege.

It means you live in a house large enough to practise it.

Hand washing is a privilege too. It means you have access to running water.

Hand sanitisers are a privilege. It means you have money to buy them.'

That was by an Indian Dr. and is very true, not only in India but all around the world, understand peoples individual circumstances instead oc blanket judging.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By * and M lookingCouple
over a year ago

Worcester

My point was as I am sure his was that we are privileged to live in a civilised society.

The point was if we are given all of these freedoms, why do people feel the need to put everyone else at risk with their selfish behaviour.

We are only being asked to keep apart.

It’s not hard really.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"My point was as I am sure his was that we are privileged to live in a civilised society.

The point was if we are given all of these freedoms, why do people feel the need to put everyone else at risk with their selfish behaviour.

We are only being asked to keep apart.

It’s not hard really.

Mainly because a lot of people are self entitled twats who think they are invincible or don't think rules apply to them.

I don't agree with all rules in society but I do try to respect the vast majority.

Before lockdown I was all for carrying on as normal with the stiff upper lip attitude, that was wrong and my opinion has changed, I'd hope others do too.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By * and M lookingCouple
over a year ago

Worcester

"My point was as I am sure his was that we are privileged to live in a civilised society.

The point was if we are given all of these freedoms, why do people feel the need to put everyone else at risk with their selfish behaviour.

We are only being asked to keep apart.

It’s not hard really.

Mainly because a lot of people are self entitled twats who think they are invincible or don't think rules apply to them.

I don't agree with all rules in society but I do try to respect the vast majority.

Before lockdown I was all for carrying on as normal with the stiff upper lip attitude, that was wrong and my opinion has changed, I'd hope others do too. "

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *unscot44Man
over a year ago

Stepps (Glasgow)

"My point was as I am sure his was that we are privileged to live in a civilised society.

The point was if we are given all of these freedoms, why do people feel the need to put everyone else at risk with their selfish behaviour.

We are only being asked to keep apart.

It’s not hard really.

Mainly because a lot of people are self entitled twats who think they are invincible or don't think rules apply to them.

I don't agree with all rules in society but I do try to respect the vast majority.

Before lockdown I was all for carrying on as normal with the stiff upper lip attitude, that was wrong and my opinion has changed, I'd hope others do too. "

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ionelhutzMan
over a year ago

liverpool

"What does it matter, the rules are simple and there to protect us..

The last thing we need is do gooder human rights people cowling all over this, picking holes in it just to make a name for themselves and maybe a few quid along the way..

This effects us all, we are all in the same boat and there are some who think the new laws don't apply to them..

Well tell that to someone who is high risk that WILL die if they contract it...

When did the phrase for helping other people actually become a derogatory term?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Are we given human rights or are do we have instrinsic natural rights?

Worth while thinking about.

Something that is given can be taken away. I consider I have rights that cannot be taken away.

These thoughts might boil down into the concept of policing by consent.

To police by consent needs education and communication. With the irresponsible actions of the lunatics in Derbyshire* and other areas and the unclear (deliberately?) guidelines it is fair to say communication has caused issues.

*Who has black non-toxic/toxic dye on hand to pollute beauty-spots. Who chose black to be the appropriate colour.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/350/made

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Haha The Scottish version puts a delay on Freedom of Information requests. Instead of one month to answer questions public bodies now have 5 months. With a review period of two further months.

The Scottish governmemt seem not to want to encourage questioning and transparency.

For those who haven't had the pleasure of Freedom of Information procedures it is frequently used to dampen legitimate questioning. This new ruling does that on steroids. "

From the other side dealing with FOI requests it has to be said that a lot come from people with little else to do with their time and junior reporters filling copy space with crap. The resources used up to respond is huge. People think it's simple but it's not it can take hours and hours of review which takes me away from my actual job and all because mr Bored in Bellshill wanted to know how many times staff use the bloody loo!

Yes transparency is super important but while you've got these sort of idiots out there, the important questions arent getting answered.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Why was there no outcry over the EU ventilator fiasco?

Why is there no outcry over the comment 'let the old people die'?

Because we would have to admit we were wrong. Let's face it that isn't in our nature. We will defend our poor decisions even it kills us, which it literally is.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Haha The Scottish version puts a delay on Freedom of Information requests. Instead of one month to answer questions public bodies now have 5 months. With a review period of two further months.

The Scottish governmemt seem not to want to encourage questioning and transparency.

For those who haven't had the pleasure of Freedom of Information procedures it is frequently used to dampen legitimate questioning. This new ruling does that on steroids.

Yes transparency is super important but while you've got these sort of idiots out there, the important questions arent getting answered."

Not sure how delaying the FOI process is going to help with the problem of Mr Belshill in the loo.

The concerned comments from the information commissioner about the bill show its not just mr bored in edinburgh who thinks there is an issue.

Your job is mighty tough. Wringing information out of organisations who laughingly harp on about transparency. I don't envy you, though you are paid to do so.

Might I suggest a new thing for FOI may be to back-stream review to establish the reason for FOI requests. Something along the lines off - Why hasn't officer Mrs AlwaysUsingTheLoo answered this as a matter of openess in her normal duties?

You'll know better than me but, 50% of your work load will be because 'frontline' officers have failed under the seven principles of public service. FOI is used to obsfuscate by those on the public pay-roll.

The bill, of course, just so happens to hamper the public right to transparency when it could have easily ed out organisational opaquness through such measures as applying a cause of request/office failing element FOI legislation.

Hope this point is dicussed by your colleagues. I've previously discussed this with the information officers I know - beyond their pay grade to implement obviously.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Well on the plus side we now have one of the countries top human rights lawyers as opposition leader. I wonder what Kier Starmer will have to say on the matter?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *heIcebreakersCouple
over a year ago

Cramlington

"I’m not so worried what it says, but more on the length of time it’s in force and that it gets repealed once this is over.

And it could sit there without being repealed for a very long time. Along with the following:-

It is illegal to die in the Houses of Parliament

It could be regarded an act of treason to place a postage stamp bearing the British king or queen's image upside-down

Eating mince pies on Christmas Day is banned

It is illegal not to tell the tax man anything you do not want him to know, but legal not to tell him information you do not mind him knowing

It is illegal to enter the Houses of Parliament wearing a suit of armour

"
Don't take this the wrong way, but that's a pile of bollocks you've just recited there. Illegal to die in the Houses of Parliament? Really? That would be a bit of a challenge for the prosecutor, to try and bring proceedings against a corpse....

Now, it has been custom and practice for many years that the Palace of Westminster isn't recorded as the place of death for anyone who kicks the bucket within its precincts, but to claim it's illegal to die there just betrays that you're not very sure what words like illegal actually mean.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

When did the phrase for helping other people actually become a derogatory term?"

Ive often thought the same thing. I suppose if you wanted to compliment someone now you'd have to call them a "do-badder"

"He's been a right horrible bastard today, he's great. A real do-badder..."

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Why was there no outcry over the EU ventilator fiasco?

Why is there no outcry over the comment 'let the old people die'?

Because we would have to admit we were wrong. Let's face it that isn't in our nature. We will defend our poor decisions even it kills us, which it literally is.

A FOI request might be employed to understand what planning was in place by government prior to this extraordinary time. Surely a government makes contingency plans while the sun is shining.

No, wait, it's now five months to get a FOI reply, likely to require an appeal too. Think I'll concentrate on enjoying life rather than getting to the bottom of things. That is the effect of how the Scottish version of the bill operates.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *heIcebreakersCouple
over a year ago

Cramlington

"I’m not so worried what it says, but more on the length of time it’s in force and that it gets repealed once this is over. "
let me give you one example that may reassure you. S.24 of tha act makes provision for the Secretary of State to extend the time limit for retention of biometric material in terrorism cases - essentially, it says that if the process of making a decision is going to take longer than usual, you can keep material for longer than usual. S.24(7) says "If the Secretary of State has not exercised the power under subsection (2) before the end of the period of 3 months beginning with the day on which this Act is passed, this section ceases to have effect." - so essentially, there are time limits on the exercise of the power to extend time limits created in S.24(2)

I haven't read all the act, but I think it does merit a forensic analysis rather than just a general throwing up of our hands or bad quotes from Benjamin Franklin, whose approach to human rights didn't extend (for instance) to those he owned as slaves.

mr Icebreaker

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *rue_dirty_gentMan
over a year ago

Bentley

You can’t blame the Goverment. Each NHS trust we’re supposed to maintain stocks of PPE and Ventilators in case of a pandemic following Swine flu in 2008. Most Trusts didn’t replace the gear as it went out of date or maintain the portable vents due to cost and the unlikelihood of them being used. That sits with hospital management not the goverment

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ionelhutzMan
over a year ago

liverpool

"You can’t blame the Goverment. Each NHS trust we’re supposed to maintain stocks of PPE and Ventilators in case of a pandemic following Swine flu in 2008. Most Trusts didn’t replace the gear as it went out of date or maintain the portable vents due to cost and the unlikelihood of them being used. That sits with hospital management not the goverment"

Who decides how much money the NHS trusts get?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

NHS Scotland have reissued 1.5 million out of date PPE masks found within the NHS stores.

They expired in June and August 2019. According to Nicola Sturgeon in press conference the out of date masks have been rigorously tested and found to work perfectly. Thusly they have been reissued to front line NHS Staff.

Ignoring the physcological aspect of recieving out of date masks during time of need a few questions are raised.

Masks over-bought by 1.5 million?

If perfectly adequate after use by date why declared out of date?

Why has no testing of passed the use by date masks been routinely taking place?

1.5 million masks is a lot of surplus wastage in a tightly pressed efficient NHS.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread