The transformation of care home owners from money grubbing, greedy arseholes to modern saints who would never take shortcuts to save money certainly is interesting.
The original decision not to test patients before sending them back to care homes was obviously wrong, however, the different death rates within the care sector will definitely show which ones had proper procedures in place and which ones decided it was too expensive.
Private sector health businesses more interested in their profits than their patients?
Well knock me down with a feather, who could have anticipated that.
An interesting turnaround from the PB Tories...
Your dislike of the private sector in health is common within the sector but my dentist, chiropodist, optician and chemist are all private businesses. Indeed Boots have a huge involvement in the NHS as do other private suppliers
"Things have changed quickly in Hong Kong. From Monday, even nursery children were being taught about the new National Security Law (NSL) as part of a government directive to all schools in the city."
It's as though they've thrown a dead cat in order to distract from the build up to Sunak's economic recovery plan. I'll be surprised if care homes are not the focus of Wednesday's PMQs now. Utter genius, Baldrick style.
It could be an attempt to bury the chancellor...
What have they got against Alan Beith?
I struggled with the third character too - if us political obsessives can’t get it.....
Now Alok Sharma’s R4 interview on the green initiative derailed with the Care home comments.
While it's clearly true that some (nobody knows how many) patients were discharged from hospitals into care homes without being tested, are we not in danger of missing the bigger issue, which I suspect is care home staff?
I suspect much of the transmission in care homes was/is from staff, particularly those who are peripatetic, often agency workers, working on zero contract hours and, logically, in the poorer care homes. The failure here was in not testing staff, even more so than residents. And of course staff spread it within their communities as well, if C-19 positive.
I don't think there was any capacity to test staff on the scale necessary in the first couple of months of the crisis. When Hancock and the PM said they had thrown "a protective ring around care homes right from the start", this was clearly not true. Regardless of who is to blame, lack of testing of staff must have been a major factor in the spread.
While true is the Government going to pay the money that would be required?
NEWS UPDATE - La Maxwell transported to US Bureau of Prisons holding facility in Brooklyn. Federal prosecutors have requested judge to schedule her arraignment & bail hearing July 10.
One member of her NY legal team is leading attorney specializing in white collar crime, a former SDNY prosecutor himself with experience in complex frauds cases.
Sounds like just the guy you'd want IF you want to make a deal with the feds.
I suspect that some form of settlement was negotiated before the arrest. Maxwell does not come across as stupid or ill-advised and it seems unlikely that would start spilling the beans the moment she was arrested. Add in the fact that the FBI had apparently known where she was for some time, and comments regarding her cooperation and the likelihood of her naming names, and it all begins to sound like a deal has already been done.
Think deal is in process, she may say she's spilling all the beans, but prosecutors will NOT just take her word for it, will take their time questioning her and her story. Friday feds will argue she should be denied bail as obvious flight risk.
Working out the perimeters & parameters (or visa versa) & details of deal is something a former SDNY fraud prosecutor ought to be good at.
So how good is good? Reportedly Maxwell's liable to get 35 years if convictions & max sentences secured on all criminal counts so far announced. Note that in federal prison system very little time off for good behavior & etc., so most convicted serve full sentences.
SO maybe 10 years in prison would be a good deal for her? Not sure she'll be that fortunate. OR that His Foul Lowness will send her any gift boxes from Deal Old Blighty to cheer her up.
How long does she survive a deal, when members of the Aryan Brotherhood are hired to dispose of her?
Think that depends on quality of security - reckon it's better this time around. Though does appear at times like Barnie Fife is running Bureau of Prisons.
The transformation of care home owners from money grubbing, greedy arseholes to modern saints who would never take shortcuts to save money certainly is interesting.
The original decision not to test patients before sending them back to care homes was obviously wrong, however, the different death rates within the care sector will definitely show which ones had proper procedures in place and which ones decided it was too expensive.
Private sector health businesses more interested in their profits than their patients?
Well knock me down with a feather, who could have anticipated that.
An interesting turnaround from the PB Tories...
A false dichotomy. Dead patients = no profits. “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. We address ourselves not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities, but of their advantages.”
Perhaps the BBC 's attitude is being affected by the looming license fee abolition. Cannot come soon enough, then they can be as biased to the few who will bother to pay for the new woke BBC.
The transformation of care home owners from money grubbing, greedy arseholes to modern saints who would never take shortcuts to save money certainly is interesting.
The original decision not to test patients before sending them back to care homes was obviously wrong, however, the different death rates within the care sector will definitely show which ones had proper procedures in place and which ones decided it was too expensive.
At the height of the outbreak, there were lots of care homes demanding the government provide them with PPE. My parents kept making the point that if they are privately run, then they should pay for it themselves given the amount they charge.
The amount that they charge presumably doesn't cover the costs of pandemic levels of PPE though.
It seems reasonable for the government that is shouldering the cost of furlough etc to shoulder the cost of pandemic PPE too.
They charge an absolute fortune and the owners are minted.
They aren't angels - the care sector has been a Bad Thing since Waiting for God was on the Telly. That hasn't changed. What has changed is that this policy issued a policy to NHS trusts to discharge patients from hospital back to their care homes without testing. Which directly led to the epidemic in the care home system and unnecessary deaths of tens of thousands of people.
Obviously the government and especially shagger can't be held responsible for those deaths so the blame must sit with the care homes. Instead of criticising the govern,ent for the reign of death by means of government policy the care sector and relatives of the dead should instead be supporting the government which is spending an awful lot of money on other things and aren't the care homes run by communist unions related to Kier Starmer? Look! A squirrel!
On Johnson's first (or second) speech back after Covid he referred to the care homes scandal in Scotland and Wales (no mention of anywhere else) so clearly, if only as a distraction from their role, Johnson or someone else detected there was political mileage to be made in criticising a failing sector run by socialist cabals lead by Starmer allies.
I think initially, the thought was we can blame Edinburgh and Cardiff for this, and perhaps no one will notice what has happened in England. As that ruse failed to gain traction, the thought wasperhaps we can distance the government by blaming the institutions and their staff instead. In the grand scheme, I am not sure how that works.
My own experience of care homes is that the well run ones (normally top end privately owned establishments) would probably have considered the implications and rejected hospital leavers. The more down market homes, privately owned but reliant on local authority money would have shovelled hospital leavers in on the whim of the hospitals and local authorities concerned. On arrival they would be "looked after" be underpaid, undertrained staff.
LAs are failing, hospital trusts are failing, care homes owners are failing, surely that reflects on government?
The transformation of care home owners from money grubbing, greedy arseholes to modern saints who would never take shortcuts to save money certainly is interesting.
The original decision not to test patients before sending them back to care homes was obviously wrong, however, the different death rates within the care sector will definitely show which ones had proper procedures in place and which ones decided it was too expensive.
At the height of the outbreak, there were lots of care homes demanding the government provide them with PPE. My parents kept making the point that if they are privately run, then they should pay for it themselves given the amount they charge.
The amount that they charge presumably doesn't cover the costs of pandemic levels of PPE though.
It seems reasonable for the government that is shouldering the cost of furlough etc to shoulder the cost of pandemic PPE too.
They charge an absolute fortune and the owners are minted.
They aren't angels - the care sector has been a Bad Thing since Waiting for God was on the Telly. That hasn't changed. What has changed is that this policy issued a policy to NHS trusts to discharge patients from hospital back to their care homes without testing. Which directly led to the epidemic in the care home system and unnecessary deaths of tens of thousands of people.
Obviously the government and especially shagger can't be held responsible for those deaths so the blame must sit with the care homes. Instead of criticising the govern,ent for the reign of death by means of government policy the care sector and relatives of the dead should instead be supporting the government which is spending an awful lot of money on other things and aren't the care homes run by communist unions related to Kier Starmer? Look! A squirrel!
On Johnson's first (or second) speech back after Covid he referred to the care homes scandal in Scotland and Wales (no mention of anywhere else) so clearly, if only as a distraction from their role, Johnson or someone else detected there was political mileage to be made in criticising a failing sector run by socialist cabals lead by Starmer allies.
I think initially, the thought was we can blame Edinburgh and Cardiff for this, and perhaps no one will notice what has happened in England. As that ruse failed to gain traction, the thought wasperhaps we can distance the government by blaming the institutions and their staff instead. In the grand scheme, I am not sure how that works.
My own experience of care homes is that the well run ones (normally top end privately owned establishments) would probably have considered the implications and rejected hospital leavers. The more down market homes, privately owned but reliant on local authority money would have shovelled hospital leavers in on the whim of the hospitals and local authorities concerned. On arrival they would be "looked after" be underpaid, undertrained staff.
LAs are failing, hospital trusts are failing, care homes owners are failing, surely that reflects on government?
I have had quite a lot of experience of care homes and hospices and it is a mixed picture. The hospices are excellent but care homes are across the spectrum. The idea they cannot be criticised is nonsense but the critic should be directed at the owners and managers not staff
As far as your last paragraoh is concerned it reflects on all the political class who fight every proposal for changevno more so than Theresa May's dementia tax. Furthermore the government have called for a cross party consensus and only Corbyn refused to co-operate. Let us be positive and hope under Starmer the whole complex matter can be resolved expeditiously
From my own experience the sector isn't just broken, it is beyond repair. That said there are a few excellent homes. They should be the beacon out of this mess. It is the fault of government in Wales and Scotland as Johnson rightly pointed out. But where does that leave his own role in England?
As for it being Corbyn's fault, whereas I am normally happy to leave the ordure at his door, this time, I would have to say, the government are in charge to hell with Corbyn.
My late sister experienced various levels of care but her last 12 months in the Convent of Mercy NH was exemplary
The care sector problem has been a sore over several governments and of course Corbyn was a barrier to progress in the last parliament
My anger here in Wales is not just in regard to the indifferent levels of care but the utter abymissal NHS service we receive from Betsi Cadwaladr Health Board including personally and in my family and friends
An apology might sometimes be appropriate, including here, but hes reacting as though the mere act of asking for an apology is proof one is justified and thus a repeated failure to do so is a shock and outrage.
While it's clearly true that some (nobody knows how many) patients were discharged from hospitals into care homes without being tested, are we not in danger of missing the bigger issue, which I suspect is care home staff?
I suspect much of the transmission in care homes was/is from staff, particularly those who are peripatetic, often agency workers, working on zero contract hours and, logically, in the poorer care homes. The failure here was in not testing staff, even more so than residents. And of course staff spread it within their communities as well, if C-19 positive.
I don't think there was any capacity to test staff on the scale necessary in the first couple of months of the crisis. When Hancock and the PM said they had thrown "a protective ring around care homes right from the start", this was clearly not true. Regardless of who is to blame, lack of testing of staff must have been a major factor in the spread.
Agree - IIRC Homes which relied on temporary staff had greater incidence of outbreaks than homes with dedicated staff - generally the less expensive ones, struggling with maintaining patient segregation on discharge from hospital.
Perhaps the BBC 's attitude is being affected by the looming license fee abolition. Cannot come soon enough, then they can be as biased to the few who will bother to pay for the new woke BBC.
What is woke about asking whether a minister agrees with the PM that the care homes are to blame for virus failings?
The multiple problems in meat processing plants bring to mind this book:
The Jungle is a 1906 novel by the American journalist and novelist Upton Sinclair (1878–1968).[1] Sinclair wrote the novel to portray the harsh conditions and exploited lives of immigrants in the United States in Chicago and similar industrialized cities. His primary purpose in describing the meat industry and its working conditions was to advance socialism in the United States.[2] However, most readers were more concerned with several passages exposing health violations and unsanitary practices in the American meat packing industry during the early 20th century, which greatly contributed to a public outcry which led to reforms including the Meat Inspection Act. Sinclair famously said of the public reaction, "I aimed at the public's heart, and by accident I hit it in the stomach."
The book depicts working-class poverty, the lack of social supports, harsh and unpleasant living and working conditions, and a hopelessness among many workers. These elements are contrasted with the deeply rooted corruption of people in power. A review by the writer Jack London called it "the Uncle Tom's Cabin of wage slavery."[3]
While it's clearly true that some (nobody knows how many) patients were discharged from hospitals into care homes without being tested, are we not in danger of missing the bigger issue, which I suspect is care home staff?
I suspect much of the transmission in care homes was/is from staff, particularly those who are peripatetic, often agency workers, working on zero contract hours and, logically, in the poorer care homes. The failure here was in not testing staff, even more so than residents. And of course staff spread it within their communities as well, if C-19 positive.
I don't think there was any capacity to test staff on the scale necessary in the first couple of months of the crisis. When Hancock and the PM said they had thrown "a protective ring around care homes right from the start", this was clearly not true. Regardless of who is to blame, lack of testing of staff must have been a major factor in the spread.
While true is the Government going to pay the money that would be required?
By “government” you mean “taxpayer” - and if so which? Heirs, for example?
An apology might sometimes be appropriate, including here, but hes reacting as though the mere act of asking for an apology is proof one is justified and thus a repeated failure to do so is a shock and outrage.
Or perhaps an understanding that there will be an inevitable apology for any offence caused given sometime late afternoon or tomorrow on about the sixth or seventh media interview, and he is merely counting until we get there.
Once again Cummings' genius plan of "never apologise" generates another day of crap headlines for BoZo
4D chess lads...
The only real question is what piece of crap Brexit or similar news is being hidden by these headlines...
It’s crowding out Rishi’s £3bn “Green investment” - Number 2 item on R4 8am news.
Fancy that, BBC running with a badly misquoted Guardian headline and the reaction to it, which is negative for the government, as opposed to the green investment story which might be positive for it.
...but your boy set the stone rolling with his crass comments last evening!
Ah right it's his fault he was deliberately misquoted by a dodgy newspaper with an axe to grind.
reminds me of a Trumpian report about CNN, "you are fake news..."
While it's clearly true that some (nobody knows how many) patients were discharged from hospitals into care homes without being tested, are we not in danger of missing the bigger issue, which I suspect is care home staff?
I suspect much of the transmission in care homes was/is from staff, particularly those who are peripatetic, often agency workers, working on zero contract hours and, logically, in the poorer care homes. The failure here was in not testing staff, even more so than residents. And of course staff spread it within their communities as well, if C-19 positive.
I don't think there was any capacity to test staff on the scale necessary in the first couple of months of the crisis. When Hancock and the PM said they had thrown "a protective ring around care homes right from the start", this was clearly not true. Regardless of who is to blame, lack of testing of staff must have been a major factor in the spread.
While true is the Government going to pay the money that would be required?
In fairness are the public ready to accept the tax implications to allow the government, any government, to pay the money required. Just look what happened to the dementia tax
Why can't we be honest about care homes, they are simply private hospices. Nobody comes out alive and the owner makes good money out of end of life care, quite often pretty poor care.
There is a significant difference between a care home and a hospice.
Once again Cummings' genius plan of "never apologise" generates another day of crap headlines for BoZo
4D chess lads...
The only real question is what piece of crap Brexit or similar news is being hidden by these headlines...
It’s crowding out Rishi’s £3bn “Green investment” - Number 2 item on R4 8am news.
Fancy that, BBC running with a badly misquoted Guardian headline and the reaction to it, which is negative for the government, as opposed to the green investment story which might be positive for it.
...but your boy set the stone rolling with his crass comments last evening!
Except that the Guardian headline doesn’t even come close to what the PM actually said.
Why can't we be honest about care homes, they are simply private hospices. Nobody comes out alive and the owner makes good money out of end of life care, quite often pretty poor care.
There is a significant difference between a care home and a hospice.
While it's clearly true that some (nobody knows how many) patients were discharged from hospitals into care homes without being tested, are we not in danger of missing the bigger issue, which I suspect is care home staff?
I suspect much of the transmission in care homes was/is from staff, particularly those who are peripatetic, often agency workers, working on zero contract hours and, logically, in the poorer care homes. The failure here was in not testing staff, even more so than residents. And of course staff spread it within their communities as well, if C-19 positive.
I don't think there was any capacity to test staff on the scale necessary in the first couple of months of the crisis. When Hancock and the PM said they had thrown "a protective ring around care homes right from the start", this was clearly not true. Regardless of who is to blame, lack of testing of staff must have been a major factor in the spread.
While true is the Government going to pay the money that would be required?
By “government” you mean “taxpayer” - and if so which? Heirs, for example?
Between Northern_Al and other posters it's clear that the issues are at the cheaper end of the market where costs are (by far) the biggest issue and where (I suspect) there is no plausible source of tax from which you could raise the money required.
Shall we just say that the North is a very different place..
The transformation of care home owners from money grubbing, greedy arseholes to modern saints who would never take shortcuts to save money certainly is interesting...
Is anyone making that argument ?
Yes, by absolving them of their portion of the blame. Where were their own infectious disease plans? Where was those reserve cash to handle it? Why were the shareholders so happy to take dividends in the good times suddenly claiming poverty?
As I said, I think the government deserves a huge proportion of the blame, the original policy was incorrect, but let's not pretend that care home owners don't share in it.
The transformation of care home owners from money grubbing, greedy arseholes to modern saints who would never take shortcuts to save money certainly is interesting.
The original decision not to test patients before sending them back to care homes was obviously wrong, however, the different death rates within the care sector will definitely show which ones had proper procedures in place and which ones decided it was too expensive.
At the height of the outbreak, there were lots of care homes demanding the government provide them with PPE. My parents kept making the point that if they are privately run, then they should pay for it themselves given the amount they charge.
The amount that they charge presumably doesn't cover the costs of pandemic levels of PPE though.
It seems reasonable for the government that is shouldering the cost of furlough etc to shoulder the cost of pandemic PPE too.
They charge an absolute fortune and the owners are minted.
They aren't angels - the care sector has been a Bad Thing since Waiting for God was on the Telly. That hasn't changed. What has changed is that this policy issued a policy to NHS trusts to discharge patients from hospital back to their care homes without testing. Which directly led to the epidemic in the care home system and unnecessary deaths of tens of thousands of people.
Obviously the government and especially shagger can't be held responsible for those deaths so the blame must sit with the care homes. Instead of criticising the govern,ent for the reign of death by means of government policy the care sector and relatives of the dead should instead be supporting the government which is spending an awful lot of money on other things and aren't the care homes run by communist unions related to Kier Starmer? Look! A squirrel!
On Johnson's first (or second) speech back after Covid he referred to the care homes scandal in Scotland and Wales (no mention of anywhere else) so clearly, if only as a distraction from their role, Johnson or someone else detected there was political mileage to be made in criticising a failing sector run by socialist cabals lead by Starmer allies.
I think initially, the thought was we can blame Edinburgh and Cardiff for this, and perhaps no one will notice what has happened in England. As that ruse failed to gain traction, the thought wasperhaps we can distance the government by blaming the institutions and their staff instead. In the grand scheme, I am not sure how that works.
My own experience of care homes is that the well run ones (normally top end privately owned establishments) would probably have considered the implications and rejected hospital leavers. The more down market homes, privately owned but reliant on local authority money would have shovelled hospital leavers in on the whim of the hospitals and local authorities concerned. On arrival they would be "looked after" be underpaid, undertrained staff.
LAs are failing, hospital trusts are failing, care homes owners are failing, surely that reflects on government?
The transformation of care home owners from money grubbing, greedy arseholes to modern saints who would never take shortcuts to save money certainly is interesting.
The original decision not to test patients before sending them back to care homes was obviously wrong, however, the different death rates within the care sector will definitely show which ones had proper procedures in place and which ones decided it was too expensive.
At the height of the outbreak, there were lots of care homes demanding the government provide them with PPE. My parents kept making the point that if they are privately run, then they should pay for it themselves given the amount they charge.
The amount that they charge presumably doesn't cover the costs of pandemic levels of PPE though.
It seems reasonable for the government that is shouldering the cost of furlough etc to shoulder the cost of pandemic PPE too.
They charge an absolute fortune and the owners are minted.
They aren't angels - the care sector has been a Bad Thing since Waiting for God was on the Telly. That hasn't changed. What has changed is that this policy issued a policy to NHS trusts to discharge patients from hospital back to their care homes without testing. Which directly led to the epidemic in the care home system and unnecessary deaths of tens of thousands of people.
Obviously the government and especially shagger can't be held responsible for those deaths so the blame must sit with the care homes. Instead of criticising the govern,ent for the reign of death by means of government policy the care sector and relatives of the dead should instead be supporting the government which is spending an awful lot of money on other things and aren't the care homes run by communist unions related to Kier Starmer? Look! A squirrel!
On Johnson's first (or second) speech back after Covid he referred to the care homes scandal in Scotland and Wales (no mention of anywhere else) so clearly, if only as a distraction from their role, Johnson or someone else detected there was political mileage to be made in criticising a failing sector run by socialist cabals lead by Starmer allies.
I think initially, the thought was we can blame Edinburgh and Cardiff for this, and perhaps no one will notice what has happened in England. As that ruse failed to gain traction, the thought wasperhaps we can distance the government by blaming the institutions and their staff instead. In the grand scheme, I am not sure how that works.
My own experience of care homes is that the well run ones (normally top end privately owned establishments) would probably have considered the implications and rejected hospital leavers. The more down market homes, privately owned but reliant on local authority money would have shovelled hospital leavers in on the whim of the hospitals and local authorities concerned. On arrival they would be "looked after" be underpaid, undertrained staff.
LAs are failing, hospital trusts are failing, care homes owners are failing, surely that reflects on government?
I have had quite a lot of experience of care homes and hospices and it is a mixed picture. The hospices are excellent but care homes are across the spectrum. The idea they cannot be criticised is nonsense but the critic should be directed at the owners and managers not staff
As far as your last paragraoh is concerned it reflects on all the political class who fight every proposal for changevno more so than Theresa May's dementia tax. Furthermore the government have called for a cross party consensus and only Corbyn refused to co-operate. Let us be positive and hope under Starmer the whole complex matter can be resolved expeditiously
From my own experience the sector isn't just broken, it is beyond repair. That said there are a few excellent homes. They should be the beacon out of this mess. It is the fault of government in Wales and Scotland as Johnson rightly pointed out. But where does that leave his own role in England?
As for it being Corbyn's fault, whereas I am normally happy to leave the ordure at his door, this time, I would have to say, the government are in charge to hell with Corbyn.
My late sister experienced various levels of care but her last 12 months in the Convent of Mercy NH was exemplary
The care sector problem has been a sore over several governments and of course Corbyn was a barrier to progress in the last parliament
My anger here in Wales is not just in regard to the indifferent levels of care but the utter abymissal NHS service we receive from Betsi Cadwaladr Health Board including personally and in my family and friends
I don't disagree. My mother died a shameful death at the hands of the Princess of Wales Hospital in 2011. But what happened after that scandal? Two nurses received custodial sentences when the scoundrels running the shitshow kept their jobs.
Yes, devolved governments overseeing these scandals should shoulder the blame, but I don't see how Conservative governments nationally should be exempt. The NHS in England is comparatively bad to Wales (eagerly anticipating Carlotta posting some carefully selected, spurious statistics to shoot that notion down in flames) and Scotland being ever so marginally slightly better, isn't an excuse to pop the champagne corks.
The transformation of care home owners from money grubbing, greedy arseholes to modern saints who would never take shortcuts to save money certainly is interesting.
The original decision not to test patients before sending them back to care homes was obviously wrong, however, the different death rates within the care sector will definitely show which ones had proper procedures in place and which ones decided it was too expensive.
Private sector health businesses more interested in their profits than their patients?
Well knock me down with a feather, who could have anticipated that.
An interesting turnaround from the PB Tories...
Your dislike of the private sector in health is common within the sector but my dentist, chiropodist, optician and chemist are all private businesses. Indeed Boots have a huge involvement in the NHS as do other private suppliers
Boots of course are now an American company and while they have some excellent PR and indeed do do some good things, sometimes their on-the-ground commitment to the NHS 'leaves something to be desired'.
Why can't we be honest about care homes, they are simply private hospices. Nobody comes out alive and the owner makes good money out of end of life care, quite often pretty poor care.
There is a significant difference between a care home and a hospice.
Exactly.
Hospices are end of life care, not so care or nursing homes where people can live for years in them
Why can't we be honest about care homes, they are simply private hospices. Nobody comes out alive and the owner makes good money out of end of life care, quite often pretty poor care.
There is a significant difference between a care home and a hospice.
The transformation of care home owners from money grubbing, greedy arseholes to modern saints who would never take shortcuts to save money certainly is interesting.
The original decision not to test patients before sending them back to care homes was obviously wrong, however, the different death rates within the care sector will definitely show which ones had proper procedures in place and which ones decided it was too expensive.
At the height of the outbreak, there were lots of care homes demanding the government provide them with PPE. My parents kept making the point that if they are privately run, then they should pay for it themselves given the amount they charge.
The amount that they charge presumably doesn't cover the costs of pandemic levels of PPE though.
It seems reasonable for the government that is shouldering the cost of furlough etc to shoulder the cost of pandemic PPE too.
They charge an absolute fortune and the owners are minted.
They aren't angels - the care sector has been a Bad Thing since Waiting for God was on the Telly. That hasn't changed. What has changed is that this policy issued a policy to NHS trusts to discharge patients from hospital back to their care homes without testing. Which directly led to the epidemic in the care home system and unnecessary deaths of tens of thousands of people.
Obviously the government and especially shagger can't be held responsible for those deaths so the blame must sit with the care homes. Instead of criticising the govern,ent for the reign of death by means of government policy the care sector and relatives of the dead should instead be supporting the government which is spending an awful lot of money on other things and aren't the care homes run by communist unions related to Kier Starmer? Look! A squirrel!
On Johnson's first (or second) speech back after Covid he referred to the care homes scandal in Scotland and Wales (no mention of anywhere else) so clearly, if only as a distraction from their role, Johnson or someone else detected there was political mileage to be made in criticising a failing sector run by socialist cabals lead by Starmer allies.
I think initially, the thought was we can blame Edinburgh and Cardiff for this, and perhaps no one will notice what has happened in England. As that ruse failed to gain traction, the thought wasperhaps we can distance the government by blaming the institutions and their staff instead. In the grand scheme, I am not sure how that works.
My own experience of care homes is that the well run ones (normally top end privately owned establishments) would probably have considered the implications and rejected hospital leavers. The more down market homes, privately owned but reliant on local authority money would have shovelled hospital leavers in on the whim of the hospitals and local authorities concerned. On arrival they would be "looked after" be underpaid, undertrained staff.
LAs are failing, hospital trusts are failing, care homes owners are failing, surely that reflects on government?
The transformation of care home owners from money grubbing, greedy arseholes to modern saints who would never take shortcuts to save money certainly is interesting.
The original decision not to test patients before sending them back to care homes was obviously wrong, however, the different death rates within the care sector will definitely show which ones had proper procedures in place and which ones decided it was too expensive.
At the height of the outbreak, there were lots of care homes demanding the government provide them with PPE. My parents kept making the point that if they are privately run, then they should pay for it themselves given the amount they charge.
The amount that they charge presumably doesn't cover the costs of pandemic levels of PPE though.
It seems reasonable for the government that is shouldering the cost of furlough etc to shoulder the cost of pandemic PPE too.
They charge an absolute fortune and the owners are minted.
They aren't angels - the care sector has been a Bad Thing since Waiting for God was on the Telly. That hasn't changed. What has changed is that this policy issued a policy to NHS trusts to discharge patients from hospital back to their care homes without testing. Which directly led to the epidemic in the care home system and unnecessary deaths of tens of thousands of people.
Obviously the government and especially shagger can't be held responsible for those deaths so the blame must sit with the care homes. Instead of criticising the govern,ent for the reign of death by means of government policy the care sector and relatives of the dead should instead be supporting the government which is spending an awful lot of money on other things and aren't the care homes run by communist unions related to Kier Starmer? Look! A squirrel!
On Johnson's first (or second) speech back after Covid he referred to the care homes scandal in Scotland and Wales (no mention of anywhere else) so clearly, if only as a distraction from their role, Johnson or someone else detected there was political mileage to be made in criticising a failing sector run by socialist cabals lead by Starmer allies.
I think initially, the thought was we can blame Edinburgh and Cardiff for this, and perhaps no one will notice what has happened in England. As that ruse failed to gain traction, the thought wasperhaps we can distance the government by blaming the institutions and their staff instead. In the grand scheme, I am not sure how that works.
My own experience of care homes is that the well run ones (normally top end privately owned establishments) would probably have considered the implications and rejected hospital leavers. The more down market homes, privately owned but reliant on local authority money would have shovelled hospital leavers in on the whim of the hospitals and local authorities concerned. On arrival they would be "looked after" be underpaid, undertrained staff.
LAs are failing, hospital trusts are failing, care homes owners are failing, surely that reflects on government?
I have had quite a lot of experience of care homes and hospices and it is a mixed picture. The hospices are excellent but care homes are across the spectrum. The idea they cannot be criticised is nonsense but the critic should be directed at the owners and managers not staff
As far as your last paragraoh is concerned it reflects on all the political class who fight every proposal for changevno more so than Theresa May's dementia tax. Furthermore the government have called for a cross party consensus and only Corbyn refused to co-operate. Let us be positive and hope under Starmer the whole complex matter can be resolved expeditiously
From my own experience the sector isn't just broken, it is beyond repair. That said there are a few excellent homes. They should be the beacon out of this mess. It is the fault of government in Wales and Scotland as Johnson rightly pointed out. But where does that leave his own role in England?
As for it being Corbyn's fault, whereas I am normally happy to leave the ordure at his door, this time, I would have to say, the government are in charge to hell with Corbyn.
My late sister experienced various levels of care but her last 12 months in the Convent of Mercy NH was exemplary
The care sector problem has been a sore over several governments and of course Corbyn was a barrier to progress in the last parliament
My anger here in Wales is not just in regard to the indifferent levels of care but the utter abymissal NHS service we receive from Betsi Cadwaladr Health Board including personally and in my family and friends
I don't disagree. My mother died a shameful death at the hands of the Princess of Wales Hospital scandal in 2011. But what happened after that scandal? Two nurses received custodial sentences when the scoundrels running the shitshow kept their jobs.
Yes, devolved governments overseeing these scandals should shoulder the blame, but I don't see how Conservative governments should be exempt. The NHS in England is comparatively bad to Wales (eagerly anticipating Carlotta posting some carefully selected, spurious statistics to shoot that notion down in flames) and Scotland being ever so marginally slightly better, isn't an excuse to pop the champagne corks.
So sorry to hear about your Mother and most distressing
I cannot really comment on England as I have no experience of their NHS, just ours here in Wales
Whenever the topic of care homes comes up the fact they're expensive is used as evidence they're profitable rather than simply considering that providing quality care is expensive.
The thing that always strikes me as remarkable is that for every staff member on 24/7 requires FIVE full time equivalent staff.
An apology might sometimes be appropriate, including here, but hes reacting as though the mere act of asking for an apology is proof one is justified and thus a repeated failure to do so is a shock and outrage.
The transformation of care home owners from money grubbing, greedy arseholes to modern saints who would never take shortcuts to save money certainly is interesting.
The original decision not to test patients before sending them back to care homes was obviously wrong, however, the different death rates within the care sector will definitely show which ones had proper procedures in place and which ones decided it was too expensive.
Private sector health businesses more interested in their profits than their patients?
Well knock me down with a feather, who could have anticipated that.
An interesting turnaround from the PB Tories...
Your dislike of the private sector in health is common within the sector but my dentist, chiropodist, optician and chemist are all private businesses. Indeed Boots have a huge involvement in the NHS as do other private suppliers
Boots of course are now an American company and while they have some excellent PR and indeed do do some good things, sometimes their on-the-ground commitment to the NHS 'leaves something to be desired'.
Boots are our chemist and optician and their service is excellent on both counts
Also, I'm pretty sure almost all of us on the right were calling for the government to stay out of private industry bail outs on a sector basis further than what was announced. Ultimately a bailout protects shareholders and bondholders, the care industry is owned and run from a bunch over offshore companies who sit and take profits and squirrel them overseas in spurious building management charges and dodgy rental agreements. The same shysters are now claiming poverty, pull the other one.
Whenever the topic of care homes comes up the fact they're expensive is used as evidence they're profitable rather than simply considering that providing quality care is expensive.
The thing that always strikes me as remarkable is that for every staff member on 24/7 requires FIVE full time equivalent staff.
Yes we went through this some time ago.
Interesting that at the time @eadric bemoaned that we were talking about fluff when the real story was C-19 itself. Interesting also that care homes are on their way to becoming perhaps the single most important element in the C-19 episode.
I learned everything I needed to know about Johnson and his ilk working as a waiter when I was a teenager, in a town with a university popular with English public school Oxbridge rejects. The casual rudeness to those considered their social inferiors is entirely familiar. It's no surprise to see him blaming the working class and immigrant workforce, mostly women, who've been risking their own health and wellbeing in minimum wage jobs in the care sector, for the mistakes of his government.
The transformation of care home owners from money grubbing, greedy arseholes to modern saints who would never take shortcuts to save money certainly is interesting.
The original decision not to test patients before sending them back to care homes was obviously wrong, however, the different death rates within the care sector will definitely show which ones had proper procedures in place and which ones decided it was too expensive.
Private sector health businesses more interested in their profits than their patients?
Well knock me down with a feather, who could have anticipated that.
An interesting turnaround from the PB Tories...
Your dislike of the private sector in health is common within the sector but my dentist, chiropodist, optician and chemist are all private businesses. Indeed Boots have a huge involvement in the NHS as do other private suppliers
Boots of course are now an American company and while they have some excellent PR and indeed do do some good things, sometimes their on-the-ground commitment to the NHS 'leaves something to be desired'.
Boots are our chemist and optician and their service is excellent on both counts
Glad to hear it. However, too often nowadays there are complaints from the staff, which were very rare 'once upon a time'. It's noteworthy that a few years ago the employee pharmacists 'union' won a case against Boots over recognition.
Blackford on R4 - ScotGov Policy is to “eliminate the virus” or alternatively “keep it as low as possible” - pick one matey, different objectives with different strategies.
Latest quote from the bunker, normal people understand exactly what he is saying.
Blackford on R4 - ScotGov Policy is to “eliminate the virus” or alternatively “keep it as low as possible” - pick one matey, different objectives with different strategies.
Well that explains where Nicola wants to close the border with the rest of the UK. Unless you are located like New Zealand and ban everyone from entering you are not going to eliminate it.
Even Guernsey (67 days no new cases) is not trying to “eliminate” the virus. In a world where the virus exists with no vaccine elimination is a fool’s errand. If this is indeed the strategy Sturgeon is pursuing she’s been badly advised.
Neil Oliver is mentioned down thread for parting company with National Trust Scotland following his comments regarding David Starkey.
I don't have much time for either of these gentlemen but I was recently surprised to hear Oliver passionately arguing about the dangers of shutting down every voice we disagree with. He essentially took the view that dissenting voices are unlikely to change their mind without debate, and that silencing unwelcome opinions did not make them go away.
Laudable sentiments, however I'm not sure describing the idea of a second Indy ref as a 'cancer' in Scotland as particularly conducive to debate.
The transformation of care home owners from money grubbing, greedy arseholes to modern saints who would never take shortcuts to save money certainly is interesting.
The original decision not to test patients before sending them back to care homes was obviously wrong, however, the different death rates within the care sector will definitely show which ones had proper procedures in place and which ones decided it was too expensive.
At the height of the outbreak, there were lots of care homes demanding the government provide them with PPE. My parents kept making the point that if they are privately run, then they should pay for it themselves given the amount they charge.
The amount that they charge presumably doesn't cover the costs of pandemic levels of PPE though.
It seems reasonable for the government that is shouldering the cost of furlough etc to shoulder the cost of pandemic PPE too.
They charge an absolute fortune and the owners are minted.
They aren't angels - the care sector has been a Bad Thing since Waiting for God was on the Telly. That hasn't changed. What has changed is that this policy issued a policy to NHS trusts to discharge patients from hospital back to their care homes without testing. Which directly led to the epidemic in the care home system and unnecessary deaths of tens of thousands of people.
Obviously the government and especially shagger can't be held responsible for those deaths so the blame must sit with the care homes. Instead of criticising the govern,ent for the reign of death by means of government policy the care sector and relatives of the dead should instead be supporting the government which is spending an awful lot of money on other things and aren't the care homes run by communist unions related to Kier Starmer? Look! A squirrel!
On Johnson's first (or second) speech back after Covid he referred to the care homes scandal in Scotland and Wales (no mention of anywhere else) so clearly, if only as a distraction from their role, Johnson or someone else detected there was political mileage to be made in criticising a failing sector run by socialist cabals lead by Starmer allies.
I think initially, the thought was we can blame Edinburgh and Cardiff for this, and perhaps no one will notice what has happened in England. As that ruse failed to gain traction, the thought wasperhaps we can distance the government by blaming the institutions and their staff instead. In the grand scheme, I am not sure how that works.
My own experience of care homes is that the well run ones (normally top end privately owned establishments) would probably have considered the implications and rejected hospital leavers. The more down market homes, privately owned but reliant on local authority money would have shovelled hospital leavers in on the whim of the hospitals and local authorities concerned. On arrival they would be "looked after" be underpaid, undertrained staff.
LAs are failing, hospital trusts are failing, care homes owners are failing, surely that reflects on government?
The transformation of care home owners from money grubbing, greedy arseholes to modern saints who would never take shortcuts to save money certainly is interesting.
The original decision not to test patients before sending them back to care homes was obviously wrong, however, the different death rates within the care sector will definitely show which ones had proper procedures in place and which ones decided it was too expensive.
At the height of the outbreak, there were lots of care homes demanding the government provide them with PPE. My parents kept making the point that if they are privately run, then they should pay for it themselves given the amount they charge.
The amount that they charge presumably doesn't cover the costs of pandemic levels of PPE though.
It seems reasonable for the government that is shouldering the cost of furlough etc to shoulder the cost of pandemic PPE too.
They charge an absolute fortune and the owners are minted.
They aren't angels - the care sector has been a Bad Thing since Waiting for God was on the Telly. That hasn't changed. What has changed is that this policy issued a policy to NHS trusts to discharge patients from hospital back to their care homes without testing. Which directly led to the epidemic in the care home system and unnecessary deaths of tens of thousands of people.
Obviously the government and especially shagger can't be held responsible for those deaths so the blame must sit with the care homes. Instead of criticising the govern,ent for the reign of death by means of government policy the care sector and relatives of the dead should instead be supporting the government which is spending an awful lot of money on other things and aren't the care homes run by communist unions related to Kier Starmer? Look! A squirrel!
On Johnson's first (or second) speech back after Covid he referred to the care homes scandal in Scotland and Wales (no mention of anywhere else) so clearly, if only as a distraction from their role, Johnson or someone else detected there was political mileage to be made in criticising a failing sector run by socialist cabals lead by Starmer allies.
I think initially, the thought was we can blame Edinburgh and Cardiff for this, and perhaps no one will notice what has happened in England. As that ruse failed to gain traction, the thought wasperhaps we can distance the government by blaming the institutions and their staff instead. In the grand scheme, I am not sure how that works.
My own experience of care homes is that the well run ones (normally top end privately owned establishments) would probably have considered the implications and rejected hospital leavers. The more down market homes, privately owned but reliant on local authority money would have shovelled hospital leavers in on the whim of the hospitals and local authorities concerned. On arrival they would be "looked after" be underpaid, undertrained staff.
LAs are failing, hospital trusts are failing, care homes owners are failing, surely that reflects on government?
I have had quite a lot of experience of care homes and hospices and it is a mixed picture. The hospices are excellent but care homes are across the spectrum. The idea they cannot be criticised is nonsense but the critic should be directed at the owners and managers not staff
As far as your last paragraoh is concerned it reflects on all the political class who fight every proposal for changevno more so than Theresa May's dementia tax. Furthermore the government have called for a cross party consensus and only Corbyn refused to co-operate. Let us be positive and hope under Starmer the whole complex matter can be resolved expeditiously
From my own experience the sector isn't just broken, it is beyond repair. That said there are a few excellent homes. They should be the beacon out of this mess. It is the fault of government in Wales and Scotland as Johnson rightly pointed out. But where does that leave his own role in England?
As for it being Corbyn's fault, whereas I am normally happy to leave the ordure at his door, this time, I would have to say, the government are in charge to hell with Corbyn.
My late sister experienced various levels of care but her last 12 months in the Convent of Mercy NH was exemplary
The care sector problem has been a sore over several governments and of course Corbyn was a barrier to progress in the last parliament
My anger here in Wales is not just in regard to the indifferent levels of care but the utter abymissal NHS service we receive from Betsi Cadwaladr Health Board including personally and in my family and friends
I don't disagree. My mother died a shameful death at the hands of the Princess of Wales Hospital scandal in 2011. But what happened after that scandal? Two nurses received custodial sentences when the scoundrels running the shitshow kept their jobs.
Yes, devolved governments overseeing these scandals should shoulder the blame, but I don't see how Conservative governments should be exempt. The NHS in England is comparatively bad to Wales (eagerly anticipating Carlotta posting some carefully selected, spurious statistics to shoot that notion down in flames) and Scotland being ever so marginally slightly better, isn't an excuse to pop the champagne corks.
So sorry to hear about your Mother and most distressing
I cannot really comment on England as I have no experience of their NHS, just ours here in Wales
I have a relative that regularly finds herself in Hereford County Hospital. In many respects I find that place to be even more poorly managed than the experience in Wales (Princess of Wales scandal years, not withstanding).
The Princess of Wales today, by the way appears significantly better run than it was in 2011.
Neil Oliver is mentioned down thread for parting company with National Trust Scotland following his comments regarding David Starkey.
I don't have much time for either of these gentlemen but I was recently surprised to hear Oliver passionately arguing about the dangers of shutting down every voice we disagree with. He essentially took the view that dissenting voices are unlikely to change their mind without debate, and that silencing unwelcome opinions did not make them go away.
He’s been on the Nat hit list since having the temerity to suggest Indy was a bad idea.
His 3 year contract ends in September, as planned.
His tweet in admiration of Starkey was BEFORE the “damn blacks” comment.
But, you know, Nats and facts...
Unionists Lady Haw Haw up early and on her soapbox. Unionist plan worked mind you as they are nearly bankrupt.
Whenever the topic of care homes comes up the fact they're expensive is used as evidence they're profitable rather than simply considering that providing quality care is expensive.
The thing that always strikes me as remarkable is that for every staff member on 24/7 requires FIVE full time equivalent staff.
Philip, if there was no money in it they wouldn't be doing it. Quite simply the owners are a bunch of shysters who use opaque property holding companies to siphon cash from the companies and then post nominal losses to claim poverty. If care home companies were required to directly own the property they were present in or rent from a non-beneficial landlord it would "solve" the money problems overnight.
The transformation of care home owners from money grubbing, greedy arseholes to modern saints who would never take shortcuts to save money certainly is interesting.
The original decision not to test patients before sending them back to care homes was obviously wrong, however, the different death rates within the care sector will definitely show which ones had proper procedures in place and which ones decided it was too expensive.
At the height of the outbreak, there were lots of care homes demanding the government provide them with PPE. My parents kept making the point that if they are privately run, then they should pay for it themselves given the amount they charge.
The amount that they charge presumably doesn't cover the costs of pandemic levels of PPE though.
It seems reasonable for the government that is shouldering the cost of furlough etc to shoulder the cost of pandemic PPE too.
They charge an absolute fortune and the owners are minted.
They aren't angels - the care sector has been a Bad Thing since Waiting for God was on the Telly. That hasn't changed. What has changed is that this policy issued a policy to NHS trusts to discharge patients from hospital back to their care homes without testing. Which directly led to the epidemic in the care home system and unnecessary deaths of tens of thousands of people.
Obviously the government and especially shagger can't be held responsible for those deaths so the blame must sit with the care homes. Instead of criticising the govern,ent for the reign of death by means of government policy the care sector and relatives of the dead should instead be supporting the government which is spending an awful lot of money on other things and aren't the care homes run by communist unions related to Kier Starmer? Look! A squirrel!
On Johnson's first (or second) speech back after Covid he referred to the care homes scandal in Scotland and Wales (no mention of anywhere else) so clearly, if only as a distraction from their role, Johnson or someone else detected there was political mileage to be made in criticising a failing sector run by socialist cabals lead by Starmer allies.
I think initially, the thought was we can blame Edinburgh and Cardiff for this, and perhaps no one will notice what has happened in England. As that ruse failed to gain traction, the thought wasperhaps we can distance the government by blaming the institutions and their staff instead. In the grand scheme, I am not sure how that works.
My own experience of care homes is that the well run ones (normally top end privately owned establishments) would probably have considered the implications and rejected hospital leavers. The more down market homes, privately owned but reliant on local authority money would have shovelled hospital leavers in on the whim of the hospitals and local authorities concerned. On arrival they would be "looked after" be underpaid, undertrained staff.
LAs are failing, hospital trusts are failing, care homes owners are failing, surely that reflects on government?
The transformation of care home owners from money grubbing, greedy arseholes to modern saints who would never take shortcuts to save money certainly is interesting.
The original decision not to test patients before sending them back to care homes was obviously wrong, however, the different death rates within the care sector will definitely show which ones had proper procedures in place and which ones decided it was too expensive.
At the height of the outbreak, there were lots of care homes demanding the government provide them with PPE. My parents kept making the point that if they are privately run, then they should pay for it themselves given the amount they charge.
The amount that they charge presumably doesn't cover the costs of pandemic levels of PPE though.
It seems reasonable for the government that is shouldering the cost of furlough etc to shoulder the cost of pandemic PPE too.
They charge an absolute fortune and the owners are minted.
They aren't angels - the care sector has been a Bad Thing since Waiting for God was on the Telly. That hasn't changed. What has changed is that this policy issued a policy to NHS trusts to discharge patients from hospital back to their care homes without testing. Which directly led to the epidemic in the care home system and unnecessary deaths of tens of thousands of people.
Obviously the government and especially shagger can't be held responsible for those deaths so the blame must sit with the care homes. Instead of criticising the govern,ent for the reign of death by means of government policy the care sector and relatives of the dead should instead be supporting the government which is spending an awful lot of money on other things and aren't the care homes run by communist unions related to Kier Starmer? Look! A squirrel!
On Johnson's first (or second) speech back after Covid he referred to the care homes scandal in Scotland and Wales (no mention of anywhere else) so clearly, if only as a distraction from their role, Johnson or someone else detected there was political mileage to be made in criticising a failing sector run by socialist cabals lead by Starmer allies.
I think initially, the thought was we can blame Edinburgh and Cardiff for this, and perhaps no one will notice what has happened in England. As that ruse failed to gain traction, the thought wasperhaps we can distance the government by blaming the institutions and their staff instead. In the grand scheme, I am not sure how that works.
My own experience of care homes is that the well run ones (normally top end privately owned establishments) would probably have considered the implications and rejected hospital leavers. The more down market homes, privately owned but reliant on local authority money would have shovelled hospital leavers in on the whim of the hospitals and local authorities concerned. On arrival they would be "looked after" be underpaid, undertrained staff.
LAs are failing, hospital trusts are failing, care homes owners are failing, surely that reflects on government?
I have had quite a lot of experience of care homes and hospices and it is a mixed picture. The hospices are excellent but care homes are across the spectrum. The idea they cannot be criticised is nonsense but the critic should be directed at the owners and managers not staff
As far as your last paragraoh is concerned it reflects on all the political class who fight every proposal for changevno more so than Theresa May's dementia tax. Furthermore the government have called for a cross party consensus and only Corbyn refused to co-operate. Let us be positive and hope under Starmer the whole complex matter can be resolved expeditiously
From my own experience the sector isn't just broken, it is beyond repair. That said there are a few excellent homes. They should be the beacon out of this mess. It is the fault of government in Wales and Scotland as Johnson rightly pointed out. But where does that leave his own role in England?
As for it being Corbyn's fault, whereas I am normally happy to leave the ordure at his door, this time, I would have to say, the government are in charge to hell with Corbyn.
My late sister experienced various levels of care but her last 12 months in the Convent of Mercy NH was exemplary
The care sector problem has been a sore over several governments and of course Corbyn was a barrier to progress in the last parliament
My anger here in Wales is not just in regard to the indifferent levels of care but the utter abymissal NHS service we receive from Betsi Cadwaladr Health Board including personally and in my family and friends
The NHS in England is comparatively bad to Wales
On what basis? Other than one has a Labour (obviously good) administration, the other an (obviously bad) Conservative one?
It does feel to me like Care Homes are a classic case of the British problem. Which is that we find a very expensive way of doing something. And then can't / won't pay for it. People don't want to be on the hook looking after their parents who thanks to expensive modern medicine can live for decades into retirement. So someone else needs to do it. But we don't want a national care system because booo taxes so instead we find ourselves in a place where people pay £lots to warehouse their supposedly loved ones in a box with imported carers on the minimum wage because its yet another job that Brits largely refuse to do.
We don't want to personally care for our parents. We don't want the job of caring for someone else's parents. We don't want the bloody foreigners who end up caring for our parents. And we don't want to pay for it but end up doing so in a system where seemingly nobody can get by. No wonder "just dump them back in the care homes virus or not" because government policy. Nobody seems to care.
Blackford on R4 - ScotGov Policy is to “eliminate the virus” or alternatively “keep it as low as possible” - pick one matey, different objectives with different strategies.
Latest quote from the bunker, normal people understand exactly what he is saying.
Blackford on R4 - ScotGov Policy is to “eliminate the virus” or alternatively “keep it as low as possible” - pick one matey, different objectives with different strategies.
Latest quote from the bunker, normal people understand exactly what he is saying.
Don't really see how that policy is different to the UK governments...
While it's clearly true that some (nobody knows how many) patients were discharged from hospitals into care homes without being tested, are we not in danger of missing the bigger issue, which I suspect is care home staff?
I suspect much of the transmission in care homes was/is from staff, particularly those who are peripatetic, often agency workers, working on zero contract hours and, logically, in the poorer care homes. The failure here was in not testing staff, even more so than residents. And of course staff spread it within their communities as well, if C-19 positive.
I don't think there was any capacity to test staff on the scale necessary in the first couple of months of the crisis. When Hancock and the PM said they had thrown "a protective ring around care homes right from the start", this was clearly not true. Regardless of who is to blame, lack of testing of staff must have been a major factor in the spread.
While true is the Government going to pay the money that would be required?
By “government” you mean “taxpayer” - and if so which? Heirs, for example?
Between Northern_Al and other posters it's clear that the issues are at the cheaper end of the market where costs are (by far) the biggest issue and where (I suspect) there is no plausible source of tax from which you could raise the money required.
Shall we just say that the North is a very different place..
The government review into Care Homes showed that the problem was with LA provided places which the LAs underfunded - the Care Homes charging self-funders more to make up the difference. Clearly LA funding needs to improve - but from where? General taxation or local taxation? I suspect Eastbourne and Camden might have different answers.
Neil Oliver is mentioned down thread for parting company with National Trust Scotland following his comments regarding David Starkey.
I don't have much time for either of these gentlemen but I was recently surprised to hear Oliver passionately arguing about the dangers of shutting down every voice we disagree with. He essentially took the view that dissenting voices are unlikely to change their mind without debate, and that silencing unwelcome opinions did not make them go away.
The BBC ruthlessly excludes pro-independence voices and slams down honest debate. It is now becoming increasingly clear that simply by silencing pro-Scottish voices, we do not go away.
If Unionists really are interested in the Union not merely surviving, but thriving and becoming popular, they need to move away from propaganda, censorship, exclusion, threat and fear and open up to honest debate and discussion. The reason they don’t is that they know that honest debate and discussion would lead to landslide in support of Scottish independence.
Comments
Now Alok Sharma’s R4 interview on the green initiative derailed with the Care home comments.
The care sector problem has been a sore over several governments and of course Corbyn was a barrier to progress in the last parliament
My anger here in Wales is not just in regard to the indifferent levels of care but the utter abymissal NHS service we receive from Betsi Cadwaladr Health Board including personally and in my family and friends
Many care homes will have acted irresponsibly as did the Moloch aspect of the NHS.
But the government also showed a lack of interest which mirrors the nation's overall attitude towards care homes.
The Jungle is a 1906 novel by the American journalist and novelist Upton Sinclair (1878–1968).[1] Sinclair wrote the novel to portray the harsh conditions and exploited lives of immigrants in the United States in Chicago and similar industrialized cities. His primary purpose in describing the meat industry and its working conditions was to advance socialism in the United States.[2] However, most readers were more concerned with several passages exposing health violations and unsanitary practices in the American meat packing industry during the early 20th century, which greatly contributed to a public outcry which led to reforms including the Meat Inspection Act. Sinclair famously said of the public reaction, "I aimed at the public's heart, and by accident I hit it in the stomach."
The book depicts working-class poverty, the lack of social supports, harsh and unpleasant living and working conditions, and a hopelessness among many workers. These elements are contrasted with the deeply rooted corruption of people in power. A review by the writer Jack London called it "the Uncle Tom's Cabin of wage slavery."[3]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jungle
Shall we just say that the North is a very different place..
As I said, I think the government deserves a huge proportion of the blame, the original policy was incorrect, but let's not pretend that care home owners don't share in it.
Yes, devolved governments overseeing these scandals should shoulder the blame, but I don't see how Conservative governments nationally should be exempt. The NHS in England is comparatively bad to Wales (eagerly anticipating Carlotta posting some carefully selected, spurious statistics to shoot that notion down in flames) and Scotland being ever so marginally slightly better, isn't an excuse to pop the champagne corks.
Hospices are end of life care, not so care or nursing homes where people can live for years in them
I cannot really comment on England as I have no experience of their NHS, just ours here in Wales
The thing that always strikes me as remarkable is that for every staff member on 24/7 requires FIVE full time equivalent staff.
Interesting that at the time @eadric bemoaned that we were talking about fluff when the real story was C-19 itself. Interesting also that care homes are on their way to becoming perhaps the single most important element in the C-19 episode.
PB leading the pack again.
The Princess of Wales today, by the way appears significantly better run than it was in 2011.
https://twitter.com/susie_dent/status/1280415002801975296
We don't want to personally care for our parents. We don't want the job of caring for someone else's parents. We don't want the bloody foreigners who end up caring for our parents. And we don't want to pay for it but end up doing so in a system where seemingly nobody can get by. No wonder "just dump them back in the care homes virus or not" because government policy. Nobody seems to care.
NEW THREAD
Elimination?
Or
Suppression?
Pick one.
It’s not clear Sturgeon has.
https://www.gov.uk/cma-cases/care-homes-market-study#government-responses-to-the-findings
On this the Scottish Administration does appear to be ahead of its English & Welsh counterparts.
If Unionists really are interested in the Union not merely surviving, but thriving and becoming popular, they need to move away from propaganda, censorship, exclusion, threat and fear and open up to honest debate and discussion. The reason they don’t is that they know that honest debate and discussion would lead to landslide in support of Scottish independence.