The pressure that caused Hancock’s panicked response to grab the PPE for his England?

Regardless of what he says now or of any politeness from the Scottish Government, a sense of impending doom has triggered a panic in the Department of Health and Social Care [England] and its ‘leader’ Matt Hancock.

It happened because the ONS death statistics for last week, published two days ago, were anticipated:

An appalling flood of covid-related deaths outside of hospitals had become apparent and the lack of PPE in care homes and in other areas of non-hospital care had been identified by the English media as a weapon to beat Hancock with.

Suppliers of PPE based in England have been told to prioritise supplies to care homes in England. The emails and the adverts are all over social media demonstrating this truth.

A BBC UK report by Laura Kuenssberg, at 1 am this morning, has the evidence of the pressure on Hancock:

A leaked letter seen by the BBC has revealed an extensive list of concerns about how the social care sector is coping with the coronavirus crisis. The letter raises fears about funding, testing, personal protective equipment (PPE) and the shielding scheme for vulnerable people.

On protective equipment for care workers, the letter says the national handling has been “shambolic”. Early drops of equipment have been “paltry” and more recent deliveries have been “haphazard”, with some even being confiscated by border control for the NHS.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52304918

What on earth does that last line mean? ‘Border control for the NHS‘ but without speech marks?

A factor not yet apparent to the English media, it seems, is the pre-existing inadequacy in infection control, revealed in several recent inspection reports:

https://talkingupscotlandtwo.com/2020/04/15/infection-control-in-care-homes-81-english-care-homes-fail-inspections-in-last-month-but-all-in-scotland-pass/

13 thoughts on “The pressure that caused Hancock’s panicked response to grab the PPE for his England?”

  1. Mr Gompels may think his erstwhile Scottish clients are lovely but I bet there’s not many here will return the compliment.
    Now or in the future. He is helping to bring our own future closer.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  2. John
    When I read the report on the BBC site it seems clear to me that “seized by Border Control for the NHS” means that the WM Government confiscated supplies of PPE ordered (and paid, or to be paid, for) by Care Home companies, for use in the English? NHS. This begs the questions:
    ~ Were they acting legally in seizing the private property of companies?
    ~ Did they seize any PPE destined for Scottish Care Home companies (or Scottish NHS) for use in the English NHS?

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

      1. Would it not be PPE bound for export to other countries? Since the UK is short then they want the stuff kept here. Of course that is a double-edged sword because other countries may act in a similar way and the UK will not be able to import the stuff it needs

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

  3. Despite the reference to the ‘leaked letter’, only the Scotland pages on the BBC site are giving substantial emphasis to the problems in care homes. Almost all the main articles are related to it, and, looking at the newspaper headlines, everyScottish newspaper, except the National, have variations on the ‘25% of deaths are in care homes’.

    Because the data from Scotland have been significantly improved over the past 10 days, the care home data has become clearer.

    However, the unionist media appear to be using this information to hint at a problem in Scotland, because in the absence of similarly accurate data for the rest of the UK, being published no such care home data is available.

    It is clear from Ms Kuennsberg’s article that such data are becoming available and might have been available for some days. In addition, there have been reports on the various ‘regional’ pages for England of concerns in care homes and Channel 4 News has been running stories for some time.

    Good Morning Scotland devoted most of the programme to Care Homes, and the calls for close relatives to have some kind of access to relatives near the time of death. An interview with a Highland GP was both poignant and considered. However, we then had a long interview with a woman whose mother had died recently speaking of her experience. She spoke well and articulately and praised NHS and other staff. However, in the interview a fair amount of time was given to the fact that when the family had visited their mother on her birthday at the home the staff were not wearing PPE. The Care Home had been contacted and they indicated that they had plenty of PPE and, had been following the advice from the SCOTTISH health service in existence at the time, but, since guidelines were being continually reviewed staff now wore PPE in such circumstances. The bereaved woman spoke well, but, it seemed tome that the programme was using aspects of her interview to hint at ‘issues’ in Scotland. Earlier there had been a reference to changes to regulations in England with regard to families with dead or dying relatives.

    Care homes are a serious issue, not least because at my age I and family and friends might well have need of one in the future – not too near, I hope! – but let us have an informed discussion on this. Care homes are important, not just for elderly people and for people with disabilities, but, in the medium term will have to be adapted to receive patients who have had hospital treatment, but cannot yet be discharged, thus requiring hospital accommodation.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  4. This is a bit at variance with the theme of this article, but is in the context of Good Morning Scotland and my comment above.

    In the programme, there was a report regarding President Trump’s decision to withdraw US funding to WHO. The programme invited a Professor Karol Sikora of the University of Buckingham for interview about the ramifications of this decision. Since GMS tends to give consideration to the President’s decisions in ways which tend towards the ‘favourable’, often using spokespersons from “Republicans Overseas”, I thought I would Google Professor Sikora to check on background. It is worth looking at.

    Professor Sikora, who has worked with WHO was asked to give an overview of the organisation, which he did in a pretty objective manner, indicating areas in the developing world where it had made significant inputs. Towards the end of this phase he used the word ‘bureaucratic’ in relation to WHO. Now ‘bureaucratic’ has an academic meaning and an ‘everyday’ meaning, with the latter, generally implying criticism. I felt that Professor Sikora’s responses in this section of the interview were in the vein of criticism. He spoke at some length. At the end of the interview, he was asked if he thought the President’s decision was a wrong one and he agreed with that.

    Given my suspicions (paranoia?) about BBC Scotland, I wonder if the interview was a ‘nudge’ towards indicating a measure of support for President Trump’s position, which might gradually ‘firm up’ over a period of time, particularly as the Presidential elections become closer. As with the GE of 2019, it was clear that the BBC (and other broadcasters) were tending to the Tories (mainly by not examining their manifesto except for repeating ‘Get Brexit Done’) and expressing much time criticising of Mr Corbyn personally, highlighting ‘antisemitism’ and condemning the more redistributive parts of Labour’s Manifesto.

    Like

    Reply

  5. This on care homes prompted me to search for better ‘context’. On 15 April, on the BBC News web site, under the headline ‘Coronavirus: How big is the problem in care homes?‘, the BBC’s ‘Reality Check’ service provided this:

    “The most recent figures from the Office for National Statistics are for the week ending 3 April. At that point, there had been 217 Covid-19-related deaths in care homes in England and Wales. This means that about 5.3% of all COVID-19 deaths to that point had occurred in care homes – A HIGH PROPORTION, considering they house less than 1% of the country’s population.” (my emphasis)

    Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52284281

    Is it a high proportion? In the period to 3 April (Weeks 1-14), the ONS reports 155,749 deaths (all causes) registered in England. It also reports that of these deaths, 35,582 occurred in care homes. So taking all registered deaths in England over this period, 22.8% occurred in care homes. Did it not occur to the BBC Reality Checkers to ponder the significance of this?

    Apart from suspecting the proportion of COVID-19 related care home deaths to rise in subsequent ONS releases, for me this brings something else into sharp focus. It is the nature – week in week out, regardless of Coronavirus – of the role that care home staff perform at the end of many people’s lives. It should also bring concern for the families and friends of those dying in care homes in ways unrelated to Coronavirus for whom the response to the pandemic is severely limiting how they too are able say their farewells.

    Like

    Reply

  6. I suspect you are right, they know that smudging fatality figures was under increasing pressure, and with SG publishing detailed figures that pressure was only going to increase.
    The swiping of PPE is a worldwide problem with shortages, the FBI sting operation to seize a massive amount which didn’t exist in reality featured on US news channels, orders have been switched at airports due to higher bids mid-delivery, it’s pretty bad…
    The PHE stock storyline could be real or could equally be a concoction to cover arses, but the real distinction is that it is SOLD only to specific areas. I’m considering asking Ebay suppliers to whom I return goods (for resale) to only sell to Scots, but not holding much hope of success…

    Like

    Reply

  7. Whilst on the subject of care homes, we learned this week from the NRS that in the year to 12 April (Weeks 1-15), of the 962 COVID-19 related death registrations In Scotland, nearly a quarter occurred in care homes. Is this indicating a particular, severe ‘problem’ in Scotland’s care homes, especially when placed against the 5.3% (near) equivalent figure for England and Wales, albeit for one fewer week? Some context was sought in the statistics on death registrations over Weeks 1- 15 in Scotland:

    number of deaths (all causes): 19,526

    number of deaths (COVID-19 related only): 962 (= 4.9% of all deaths)

    number of deaths (all causes) occurring in care homes: 4,725 (= 24.2% of all deaths, all causes)

    number of deaths (COVID-19 related) occurring in care homes: 237 (= 24.6% of all COVID-19 deaths)

    To date c.5% of all registered deaths in care homes in Scotland have been COVID-19 related. So 95% of registered deaths in care homes this year so far have NOT been COVID-19 related and c. 24% of all deaths in Scotland this year have occurred in care homes.

    Notably, 187 of the 237 COVID-19 related deaths in care homes in Scotland were registered in the most recently reported week (i.e. Week 15). Whatever may be in store from the next release of NRS data, this suggests that the next ONS release for care home deaths in England may see a sharp rise.

    Again, as regrettable as COVID-19 related deaths are, and as urgent as it is to eliminate this virus as far and as quickly as possible, the majority of deaths, including in care homes, are unrelated to COVID-19. The loss felt by family and friends of all the deceased will be just as acute, and perhaps even harder to bear at this time because of COVID-19 related restrictions.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Stewartb
      Ch4 has had reports on the situation in Care homes in England and has referred in at least one of the reports to doctors in England coming under pressure to omit any mention of Covid-19 from death certificates. I think the Guardian has also had reports of this

      Like

      Reply

      1. Thanks for the info. If true, this could have a major impact on the statistics.

        There is no good reason it seems to me why the death rate in Scotland’s care homes due to the virus should be very much different from those in England’s homes. The present differences between the NRS and ONS data could be explained by the longer lag time in the latter’s release. But we’ll soon find out.

        I’m no expert but it has always seemed to me that once using stats that include deaths where there is a Covid-19 diagnosis as one of potentially several contributory factors – and without an accompanying positive test for the virus – details could get rather ‘subjective’!

        Like

        Reply

    2. The Covid figures are far from clear, and in the case of England, obscured by political interference as I suspect they are terrified of outrage were the public to become aware of the true impact.
      It is recognised that there is a sharp and significant rise in unexplained deaths occurring in parallel to known infection with this epidemic in all country stats, SG noted the same from their own published figures.
      Latest 12th April stats, total deaths 1,969, Covid attributed 608, 5 year average 1,100. That’s a hefty 753 increase in average deaths if it is unrelated to Covid in some way.
      There were several stories circulating that Coroners in England were being pressurised to leave any mention of Covid off death certificates even as a contributory or suspected entry unless backed up by lab analysis, and doctors have put on record that any mention of Covid triggers a series of enquiries making their work more time consuming.
      The focus of the media on deaths in scottish care-homes feels like yet another “look a squirrel” ploy by HMG, however dreadful these untimely deaths are, the England figures will undoubtedly be MUCH worse.
      I’m deeply uncomfortable with the narrative being dictated by HMG, we should be looking at changes to average death rates, and to hell with this deeply flawed Covid attribution.

      Like

      Reply

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.