We know there was hesitancy and reluctance. We know why this was. We knew that it needed to be gently countered and the benefits explained. We knew some would be either so stupid or so stubborn that no amount of reasoning would convince them. All you are doing now is proving we were right.

I am calling a halt to this. There are more important things going on in the world than trying to convince a misinformed anti-vaxxer he is wrong.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

As the enquiry was set up by the government it’s hardly likely its purpose is to smear itself, is it?

The idea that just because lockdowns had consequences they were wrong is stupidity on steriods. We knew they would. Every choice we faced had consequences, all bad. The decision to be made was which was least bad. Letting people die because they were old and had already had a life is not something any government ought to contemplate, but ours did, until the political consequences hit them. We don’t know what the full consequences would have been if we had taken another route because we didn’t. However there is strong scientific belief that it would have been much worse, quite possibly not only a greater loss of life but also greater economic consequences. This idea that everything would be ok if only they had done what I said they should have done is the reasoning of the playground.

Wisbech - the Government had to set up and enquiry and rightly so.
However, many of those giving evidence just want to deflect from their own shortcomings and blame Boris, Hancock and Sunak.
They were in unchartered territory with a Civil Service working against them - actually thousands of them didn't work at all - and Scientists making it up and changing tack on a daily basis.
I am not surprised that Ministers were bamboozled by the evidence to be honest.
I absolutely think that everyone did their best - except Neil Ferguson - but that it was a tough time for all concerned.
The media use hindsight as do these so called experts and the likes of Cummings.
Stick the knife in and deflect the blame.
Absolute chinless cowards who will not accept responsibility for anything that they might have said or done - despicable!

Edited by The Dolphin (21 Nov 2023 10.07am)

The enquiry is a complete waste of time.
All we will get is unscientific conclusions that we should have locked down longer and harder.

In fact Boris had the scientific evidence to not lock down and bowed to pressure from covid zero zealots and the scare mongering media.

You are, at least, always good for a laugh!

Did you get your “unscientific” and “scientific” the wrong way around?

It’s the only way your response makes even the slightest sense. Mind you none of your attitudes over Covid make any sense to me.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

I hope that the enquiry, when it finally reports its conclusions will lay to rest all these conspiracy theories and assumptions about alternative strategies.

At least for most people. There are obviously some who reached their conclusions early on and haven’t wavered in their certitude, no matter what the evidence or opinions of others might be.

I though hope the enquiry identifies things we did well and areas which need improvement. In particular having plans in place with step by step actions documented, thus avoiding the need to make policy on the hoof.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

The IEA is a right wing pressure group posing as a think tank.

They have campaigned against lockdowns from the get go.

Nothing new to see here and even less to learn.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.