Forum Topic

Our rotten government

I thought I'd become inured to the incompetence, corruption and sheer stupidity of Johnson's chumocracy, but two things today show I shouldn't have been.1. The Public Accounts Committee has published a report on that is genuinely shocking:  "In May last year NHS Test and Trace (NHST&T) was set up with a budget of £22 billion. Since then it has been allocated £15 billion more: totalling £37 billion over two years." And the benefit we've derived from this massive expenditure, which would have given nurses and other care workers a handy boost? The “unimaginable” cost of Test & Trace failed to deliver central promise of averting another lockdown," the committee says.Meg Hillier, chair of the Committee, said: "The £22 billion for test and trace is about the annual budget of the Department for Transport. Test and Trace still continues to pay for consultants at £1000 a day. Yet despite the unimaginable resources thrown at this project Test and Trace cannot point to a measurable difference to the progress of the pandemic, and the promise on which this huge expense was justified - avoiding another lockdown – has been broken, twice."Details at https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/150988/unimaginable-cost-of-test-trace-failed-to-deliver-central-promise-of-averting-another-lockdown/2. Boris Johnson has set out what that same Department of Transport describes as his vision to build back better from coronavirus by boosting transport connectivity across and between the whole of the UK, as part of ambitions to level up across the country. So far, so good - but he went on to say that "the government will also consult on cutting Air Passenger Duty (APD) on internal UK flights." This is utter madness when we are facing a climate emergency caused by burning fossil fuels. What's more, it comes after the week in which the sainted Sunak refused to raise fuel duty generally and in which rail fares were raised at over the rate of inflation.     This will not impress at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26) later this year, which the government is hosting. Global Britain? I don't think so.Details at https://www.gov.uk/government/news/move-to-boost-transport-connections-across-the-whole-of-the-uk

Richard Carter ● 1875d34 Comments

Nick,Some sources say that the UK has done better than Italy which was hit early and has a higher average age than the UK. But the UK has done worse than France, Spain, Ireland, Germany etcOn other sources (WHO) the UK is worse than Italy.So I guess Andy's point is that the UK's expectation of itself is overrated. We should adjust our expectations downwards!https://www.health.org.uk/news-and-comment/charts-and-infographics/understanding-excess-mortality-the-fairest-way-to-make-international-comparisons?https://www.statista.com/statistics/1111779/coronavirus-death-rate-europe-by-country/

Ed Robinson ● 1870d

We have the highest death rate in Europe. To suggest that this incompetent government should be accepted because others have done almost as badly is very depressing. Why not compare with those who have done much better, such as Australia and New Zealand, for example?Nick

Nicholas Evans ● 1871d

Have any of the major European countries got it right ?

Andy Pike ● 1871d

It seems to have been suspended for the time being.Cumbria coal mine: Public inquiry after government U-turnhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56364306By the way, my previous post was in response to your comment:"Merely observing that in Germany (in the holy EU itself no less) they are building new coal fired power stations to seemingly no opprobrium in this forum, compared it seems to the UK being slagged off as usual for being outside." (12.3.21 at 8am)

Ivonne Holliday ● 1871d

Michael, I agree no harm in it being verified, but I suspect given the toxic level of political debate in this country that even if it were a good idea (and I suspect it could well be sensible in the detail but not on the government’s PowerPoint presentations), as there is too much nuance in explaining why it may be a sensible thing to do despite the decarbonisation agenda, it will likely be sacrificed to appease the green lobby for the sake of simplicity of message over rational consideration of underlying costs and benefits.We shall see as they report of course

Mike Warman ● 1871d

Whaaat??? Even more corrupt and incompetent than Johnson's useless mob? Try reading 'Failures of State: The Inside Story of Britain’s Battle with Coronavirus' by the Sunday Time journalists Jonathan Calvert and George Arbuthnott.

Richard Carter ● 1871d

Mike. It's not my field and I don't have the figures to do comparisons. It could be that it might make more economic sense to import from existing facilities than invest in an alternative mine that, because of the need to decarbonise, has a limited life, particularly when that investment might be better spent on investment for the future; also, there's the possibility that additional investments alongside new ideas could expedite technical developments and commercial viability of the new process. One needs to consider that any jobs created by the new mine will have a limited time span and it might be preferable to create alternative jobs which have better longevity and are healthier than mining? Really just throwing ideas in for a discussion, it could be there is sense in the new mine but no harm in that being verified?

Michael Ixer ● 1871d

With the right to protest being removed, immunity from state crimes, effectively a unity government in place, locking up journalist, cronyism even the what about China may be a thing of the past!

Ed Robinson ● 1871d

Hi Michael - indeed all for that.  Looks like that won’t be commercially viable for 10 years or so though from tha Forbes article“the firm says it could have the first fossil-free steel on the market by 2026, even if commercial production wouldn’t come until later. “So good for the future and support it, in the meantime can you explain why it is better to import coking coal from abroad rather than producing ourselves though?

Mike Warman ● 1871d

becausethey are a damned site worse

Andy Pike ● 1871d

usual case of 'whataboutism'

Matt Palmer ● 1871d

Perhaps the UK should be investing in the future and looking at the methods for making steel without carbon? Time to become a world leader in this chnology, although it lookalike some EU companies have already got a lead?https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottcarpenter/2020/08/31/swedish-steelmaker-uses-hydrogen-instead-of-coal-to-make-fossil-free-steel/

Michael Ixer ● 1871d

Hi IvonneMy understanding is that this would have produced coal/ coke for uk based steel works.  That coal is currently being imported (from Russia, US, Australia I believe).  The coal works would have provided jobs in a high unemployment area in the UK and if anything, given the reduction in long haul transit emissions possibly have lowered carbon emissions, as well as our reliance on imported coal.Or would you suggest that UK based steelworks should be shut down, although if you are that again would shift steel production elsewhere again at a cost to UK jobs, prosperity and balance of trade with no benefit to the climate.Are you keen to support American and Russian jobs over British jobs?

Mike Warman ● 1871d

"And Labour would be a Damned site worse!"Because ... ?

David Ainsworth ● 1871d

And Labour would be a Damned site worse!

Vic Condon ● 1871d

Hi DavidTrue - the right wing press would have given Corbyn a harder time than this forum gives Johnson I agree.  Not sure even the guardian was that keen on him, so over at the telegraph who knows how bad the commentary could have gottenRegarding could the COVID response have been any worse.  I think probably not the early part (may not have been much better but it may have been) and test and trace run properly through local public health could have been much much better I think.  Quite likely though that we would have been roped in with the EU vaccine programme and that element would therefore have been alit worse.  So maybe on balance a washOf course we would likely have seen huge capital outflows from the UK and the gbp would have been further depressed - I don’t think business and finance would be looking to invest while he was in power

Mike Warman ● 1873d

I don't recall ever saying the EU was utopia or perfect. Just the better option. Now we're no longer in it we've lost any ability to influence its policies and actions, or those of its members. I think Germany made a serious mistake in shutting down its nuclear power sources meaning it's had to look to non renewable sources to fill a gap. I wouldn't promoted nuclear power as the long term problem of the waste materials hasn't been resolved, however I don't see that leaving them running until there were adequate renewable sources would have been too much of a risk: as far as we know none are built on faulty lines and one assumes the German technical and management controls were better than Chernobyl  (although obviously I can't be certain of that).

Michael Ixer ● 1873d

"I doubt it would have been much better had st kier been in charge and I dread to think had it been st Jeremy.  Of course had it been under their august leadership the perception might have been a touch kinder than the title of this thread...."Here WE might have been gentler, but, if Corbyn had been elected (I know, didn't happen, couldn't have happened, but ...), could he have presided over a worse national Covid result than Johnson has? And, if he had, what Press would he be getting? Would his government have survived? Indeed, with all the pre-existing hate, would he have survived?

David Ainsworth ● 1873d

Mike, I think that the absence of opprobrium for the actions of Germany and elsewhere doesn't reflect any lack of concern, but more a realisation that we have little influence with other countries' governments but can, possibly, influence our own.But I certainly agree that offshoring our production to countries like China is just as wrong as generating the CO2 here.

Richard Carter ● 1873d

Mike W,What about this?Cumbria coal mine: "Increased controversy prompts public enquiry (published 10 hours ago)https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56364306

Ivonne Holliday ● 1873d

Hi EdNot at all - that is ancient history.  I was responding to Ivonne’s comment.  My point more around coal burning power stations.  Absolutely agree that dirtier power should be phased out, but given Ivonne’s comment about burning the Amazon (which is still ongoing and a crime against nature and the plant  I think many would agree on).Merely observing that in Germany (in the holy EU itself no less) they are building new coal fired power stations to seemingly no opprobrium in this forum, compared it seems to the UK being slagged off as usual for being outside.  I was also pointing out that the flawed approach here to net zero which is a recent commitment, will likely cause loss of jobs and income as heavy manufacturing will shift elsewhere (to for example Germany, India, China) where heavy industry can have access to cheaper power without the constraints for no benefit to the environment.As a world we need to move forward multilaterally.  Alternatively as a minimum for goods manufactured outside the UK using high carbon power and sold within we could look to impose duties in our market so manufacturers do not benefit from such practices,  I believe the US is starting to look into.  If we just offshore production to get around higher standards here if lower standards exist elsewhere what have we achieved?

Mike Warman ● 1873d

Mike are you suggesting that Margaret Thatcher was wrong to close the coal mines when she did?It seem to read it that way.Or perhaps you just forgot who closed the mines??

Ed Robinson ● 1873d

Meanwhile in EUtopia.....https://www.powermag.com/germany-brings-last-new-coal-plant-online/I can just imagine the outrage on this forum if the UK dared to open a new power station.  No surprise at all of course that no one complains when it happens in EUtopia - that must be for a “good” reason rather than a bad one associated with those nasty toriesHow about India or China if one wants to look at climate baddies....https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-worlds-coal-power-plantsThe counter productive effect of closing cheap power here ahead of the rest of the world including Germany will be to move heavy industry abroad not benefiting the environment at all.  Of course we should be transitioning as fast as is practical but to do so unilaterally while new technologies are so expensive will probably backfire on us, however good for virtue signalling.  Moving at the front of the pack is good, moving in the opposite direction hmmmmmm......On the original point re test and trace yes looks like they squandered an unfortunate amount of money with which I thoroughly disagree it seems poorly thought through without good results, but I doubt it would have been much better had st kier been in charge and I dread to think had it been st Jeremy.  Of course had it been under their august leadership the perception might have been a touch kinder than the title of this thread....

Mike Warman ● 1873d

What I find interesting is some of the rates being quoted. I've used a number of consultants over the years so while four figure daily rates aren't a surprise the apparent use of someone with a sustained daily rate of £6k is interesting. I remember using a few hours of the services of a top lawyer in their field and blinking at their rate - was that the hourly or daily rate? But in that instance the outcome was good so worth the money! But I have seen instances of consultants just burning off fees 'cause they can and the customer doesn't understand what they're doing so can't challenge it - one wonders ... 

Michael Ixer ● 1874d

I heard a quote on Radio 4 news (sorry, only caught part of it as I was multitasking, so can't attribute it or verify its accuracy) that the UK worked as a partner with vaccine suppliers rather than a customer. This gave the UK a contractual advantage and, while it carried financial risks, has worked well in terms of preferential supplies of vaccines. This was possible because of the knowledge acquired by the NHS from years of procuring large quantiles of drugs; for once the government backed the NHS rathger than a management consultancy or outsource supplier with limited  or no experience in what they're doing?

Michael Ixer ● 1874d

"According to the latest figures seen by the Guardian and accurate as of 9 March, of the 34,090,287 doses exported from the EU to 31 countries, 9,106,162 went to the UK, 3,917,640 to Canada, 3,134,204 to Mexico, 2,720,210 to Japan and 1,368,900 to Saudi Arabia. Other beneficiaries of EU exports included Hong Kong (1.3m), Singapore (967,030), the US (953,723), Chile (942,825) and Malaysia (751,140)."9 million exported TO the UK by the EU.Any exports of vaccines FROM the UK? No answers so far."In response to questions about exports, U.K. government officials directed POLITICO to vaccine manufacturers and repeated their insistence that the government has not issued any ban. But a review of the U.K.'s vaccine purchase contracts shows why a ban isn't necessary, because the agreements assure preference for domestic supply."https://www.politico.eu/article/michel-challenges-uk-to-show-vaccine-export-data/There surely must be some figures showing how good we are?

David Ainsworth ● 1874d

No Paul, your summary is not correct.The government made many, but many "errors" in fighting the Chinese virus at the beginning.  Firstly, it was too slow to react even when there was substantial amount of evidence of the virus being so dangerous and virulent.The myriad of contracts given left right and centre to chums (chumocracy became a recognized new addition to the English vocabulary since) supposedly to provide PPE which never materialized. The eye-wateringly figure of £255bn comes to mind - small change?The track-and-trace that never worked but the contract given to a friend of Boris' and wife of a Conservative MP even though she had no expertise on the matter.  It became Test and Trace to separate it from the initial attempt. And it seems it is rather hit-and-miss at the moment.The vaccines are not a triumph of the government, they are a triumph for the NHS and all the laboratories that worked together.The successful roll-out of the vaccine was done by the NHS, with government funding I agree, but organized by the NHS.  And what an amazing success that is!You say that Global Britain is a whingeathon (whatever that may mean) but who introduced Global Britain? Do you happen to remember?To say that climate change and burning fossil fuels is an anathema, is both naïve and dangerous.  Shall we start with the wilful burning of the jungle in the Amazon and in Indonesia, the extreme temperatures we are experiencing are just figments of the imagination.And yes, the Leave campaign won the referendum (not just Bojo but many others including the dreaded Farage).  All based on economies of the truth that are starting to materialize now...  Let us wait and see but "the gold at the end of the rainbow" seems to be evaporating at great pace.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1874d

Maybe we just think we deserve to have more of a clue how the gov spends our money?

Matt Palmer ● 1874d

The government may have made errors in fighting the Chinese virus but look where we are now. Vaccines for the EU anyone? No chance. Climate emergency, burning fossil fuels,Global Britain? What a whingeathon.Anyone would think you don't like Boris because he won the referendum & you've never got over it. Either that or lockdown has sent you up the wall.

Paul Rolink ● 1874d

The lack of transparency is the worrying aspect. It would be interesting to know the individual costs of the test, trace and isolate elements. (My perception is testing seems to be working reasonably well now but not sure the trace and isolate aspects.) Still, it's good to see Serco executives are maintaining their income and won't be on the streets - although I suspect no one will be clapping for them:https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/mar/10/sercos-top-two-executives-handed-74m-in-pay-for-2020

Michael Ixer ● 1874d

And, of course, in due time and all things considered a smidgeon or two will trickle down upon the rest of us.So, it's all good.

David Ainsworth ● 1874d

Part of the problem is extracting the information from the govt on how all that money was spent, who got paid, what the contract terms were, what penalty clauses were there, if any, etc.  Not even the Public Accounts Ctee got all the answers out of them, nor the Urgent Qs in the House.  Why the secrecy?

Jonathan Callaway ● 1874d

£37 BIllion over 2 years. Not sure what a test and lab assessment costs but average private cost is £60.So let's say we pay £30 with about 1.4m being done a day comes to about £15 billion plus the cost of trace over the next year.No doubt mistakes have been made and when under pressure bad deals have been done but lets not forget the funding is for 2 years .Not saying it's a great job but I dont think is as bad as the big number suggests.after all we did want a top test and trace  took a while but it seems to be there now as well as the extra tests that identify the variants.Hard hat in position. In looking at mistakes it will never be known what mistakes others may have made without the use of hindsight.

Andy Pike ● 1874d

I agree with you Richard.Did you hear that SERCO are very happy because finally they will be able to pay dividends to its shareholders? The news were published in 25 February 2021.https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-serco-criticised-for-paying-dividend-after-350m-test-and-trace-boost-12228789https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/942293/serco-brings-back-the-dividend-after-cashing-in-with-test--trace-942293.htmlAlso, apparently BoJo wants to be the modern-day Franklin Roosevelt, who spent or borrowed enormous sums to rebuild USA after the Great Depression.....    Mind boggling!!

Ivonne Holliday ● 1875d