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

Johnson repeatedly claimed they were “following the science” when a lot of the time they neither understood it or even considered it.

Reporting the chaos is an imperative if we are to perform better the next time. Ensuring that the politicians know their actions, and inaction, will later be subject to public scrutiny should produce a more objective outcome.

How you can claim “Boris was right” beats me when everything that’s being revealed demonstrates how wrong he was in delaying the necessary actions. If we had gone down harder and earlier we could have avoided some of the problems and released earlier.

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.

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.

Further responses should I guess go under Covid so I will move to that topic

They will not let facts get in the way of a headline!
It is now nearly 700 years ago but the museum and the BBC want to make that about racism.
The bloody thing killed 50% of all people in London.
You just could not make this crap up!

If there was the slightest evidence of that being true do you not think the enquiry and its lawyers would point it out?

Why would the scientists want to do anything other than try to improve the next response? They aren’t politicians worried about reelection. Their entire ethos is the pursuit of knowledge

This isn’t a dog eat dog corporate world. It’s an enquiry chaired by one of our most senior Judges. BS gets left outside because it wouldn’t survive long inside.

Edited by becky (21 Nov 2023 4.56pm)

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.

Of course the BBC is biased, you only have to look at its output to see that. The fact that the only people on here supporting it are the crypto-communists speaks volumes.

The BBC is biased. It’s just left wing and so all you left whingers see it as a prop to your left wing beliefs and way of 'thinking', like you do most things in this world. You all won’t be happy until you tear this country to the ground and make everyone who lives in it as miserable as you all are. Very selfish and very sad.