We have no reason to be surprised when BBC Scotland does not talk truth to power. The programme last night had two fatal flaws. First it did not investigate the power and access to information differential between the UK and Scottish governments and it did not investigate the powerful global corporations milking the Scottish care sector and responsible for the massive failure there to staff properly and to control infection.
Daly does mention in passing, the SAGE meetings at which CMOs and chief scientific advisers from the devolved administrations could only listen in, could not ask questions and instead had to submit them in writing beforehand but does not explore what this suggests about the UK Government’s ability to control the first phase of the response.
Pressurised by a neo-liberal, free-market-obsessed cabal in the cabinet and on the Tory back-benches, with Dominic Cummings in attendance and with control over the financial resources that could be released to tackle the outbreak, is it in any way fair to implicate the devolved governments in the consequent delay to lock-down?
It seems very clear that the devolved administrations were excluded and bullied into complicity with a flawed herd-immunity strategy and did not have the confidence to resist until it was too late.
The unequal and bullying nature of the relationship has since been revealed more fully with UK government departments monopolising the flow of PPE from manufacturers and from overseas networks of suppliers, to favour English-only health trusts and care home owners.
There is none of this in Disclosure Scotland‘s report.
Second, Daly makes much of the deaths in care homes and casually implies the blame lies with the Scottish Government’s testing regime. He too, seems not to have heard the John Beattie interview with the HC-One CE, on BBC Drivetime, and does not go anywhere near either the inspection reports, with failures in infection control, or attempt to disclose the huge cost to the Scottish taxpayer of private care homes, owned by large corporations registered in Florida or the Cayman Islands, which pay millions in dividends to their owners and nothing in tax to the Treasury.
Overall, abysmal.
Talking-up Scotland 'Albatraz' 
If any further evidence is needed to show how the BBC and others in the MSMedia will react quickly to any potential threat from the SNP and Scot Gov that shows them perfectly capable. They have noted the rising popularity of the the FM in handling this pandemiuc in stark contrast to bumbling Bo-Jo and have acted in the only way they know. ‘Bring her down’.
LikeLiked by 5 people
What was also ignored by the BBC was the decision by the UK government to allow the importation from abroad without any checks whatever of covid 19 carriers. I put up the link from the Taipei Times before. This paragraph is damning of the UK government’s failure.
“From a statistical point of view, the probability of physically encountering the novel coronavirus or of being exposed to infected individuals in large international airports or in the cabins of airplanes is much higher than in homes, workplaces, schools or other public spaces.
These pandemic simulations show that large international airports and airplane cabins are major sources of risk, and are high on the list of reasons COVID-19 has spread so widely and quickly.
To protect the health of all individuals and their families, and to help the government delay the spread of COVID-19 in Taiwan, people must avoid all international air travel and airports during the pandemic.”
Why would the BBC fail to report this significant effect on Scotland’s experience of covid19? Stupidity? Journalistic incompetence? Malign intentions towards the Scottish government?
Nicola Sturgeon has made it clear that she had wanted for some time to be able to control the flow of people into the country, long before the lockdown had that effect.
The BMJ says this about the effects of air travel on the spread of covid 19 and the unwillingness of the UK government to control it.
“First is the quarantine for people arriving from other countries. Failure to introduce this in January to March was the primary reason for the pandemic on British isles. ”
Please note, the BMJ says that the pandemic in Scotland and elsewhere in British isles was caused by the UK government’s failure to permit the quarantine of those arriving from abroad though that is what Scotland wished to do. The BBC won’t report that, of course
Nor did the BBC say anything at all about the likely significance of Johnson’s decision to raise the lockdown at this time and how this might affect Scotland’s ability to control covid 19. Here is the prediction of Professor Hunter of Oxford university.
“Those defending the government’s Covid-19 response have reasonably pointed out that policy mistakes are always clearer in retrospect. So let me make a prediction. If we take the prime minister’s advice and return to work in large numbers now – and without the ability to test, trace and isolate – then virus spread will increase, there will be super-spreader events and local or regional lockdowns will have to be reconsidered. The prime minister implied in his speech that relapse will somehow be our fault – we were not sufficiently “alert”. The responsibility will lie, however, with a government that has encouraged a premature return to work before the epidemiologic conditions and interventions were in place to make it safe to do so.”
There is a greater likelihood now that England’s path will diverge further from that of the other UK nations. The UK government has decided to encourage people to work with an R number that may be just under 1.The lockdown in Wuhan was not lifted until the R number was below 0.3.
Schools in England are to re-open based on modelling that has not been tested and when a new and dangerous syndrome among some children has emerged and is little understood. We shall see how much or little BBC Scotland reports of this
LikeLiked by 3 people
The Coronavirus Act, which allowed Scottish Ministers to take action was only passed into law on 25th March. Lockdown actions happened a few days in advance of clearing the final, House of Lords, hurdle. Various folk on Twitter, including me, have pointed this out.
This is the relevant section for Scotland – http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/7/schedule/19/enacted?view=interweave
“
LikeLiked by 2 people
It starts –
“Health protection regulations
1(1)The Scottish Ministers may by regulations make provision for the purpose of preventing, protecting against, controlling or providing a public health response to the incidence or spread of infection or contamination in Scotland (whether from risks originating there or elsewhere).
(2)The power in sub-paragraph (1) may be exercised—
(a)in relation to infection or contamination generally or in relation to particular forms of infection or contamination, and
(b)so as to make provision of a general nature, to make contingent provision or to make specific provision in response to a particular set of circumstances.
(3)Regulations under sub-paragraph (1) may in particular include provision—
(a)imposing duties on registered medical practitioners or other persons to record and notify cases or suspected cases of infection or contamination,
(b)conferring on local authorities, health boards or other persons functions in relation to the monitoring of public health risks, and
(c)imposing or enabling the imposition of restrictions or requirements on or in relation to persons, things or premises in the event of, or in response to, a threat to public health.
(4)The restrictions or requirements mentioned in sub-paragraph (3)(c) include in particular—
(a)a requirement that a child is to be kept away from school,
(b)a prohibition or restriction relating to the holding of an event or gathering,
(c)a restriction or requirement relating to the handling, transport, burial or cremation of dead bodies or the handling, transport or disposal of human remains”
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’d like to agree and reinforce this: just posted the following btl on ‘Wee Ginger Dug’.
On the powers to introduce a ‘lockdown’ available to the Scottish Government and when:
Headline: ’The Lockdown is Lawful’ – published by UK CONSTITUTIONAL LAW ASSOCIATION
Source: https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2020/04/01/jeff-king-the-lockdown-is-lawful/
“The recently adopted Coronavirus Act 2020 DOES NOT CONFER NEW POWERS on UK and Welsh ministers to impose a lockdown on the people of England and Wales. It DOES CONFER such powers on Northern Ireland (specifically, the Northern Ireland Department of Health) in Schedule 18; and on Scottish ministers in Schedule 19. NEITHER NORTHERN IRELAND NOR SCOTLAND HAD THEM PREVIOUSLY.” (my emphasis)
So according to this article, the SG did NOT possess the same powers as Westminster already possessed for England and Wales to allow it to establish a lockdown such as the one we have experienced. The SG and NI governments were dependent on new powers being granted to them by Westminster.
Also, and by chance, I’ve just spotted this from The Scotsman on 1 April which is interesting given the charges against the SG aired by Disclosure Scotland.
Headline: ‘’Early lockdown’ means Scottish death rate will be lower: Scotland will have a lower death rate from coronavirus than the rest of the UK due to lockdown being introduced at an earlier stage of the country’s ‘epidemic curve’ experts have said.’
This is based on the view at the time of Professor Mark Woolhouse, chair of infectious disease epidemiology at Edinburgh University’s Deanery of Population Health Sciences. He noted that the UK-wide lockdown had been established when the spread of the virus in London was already about a week ahead of the epidemic in Scotland.
Source: https://www.scotsman.com/health/coronavirus/early-lockdown-means-scottish-death-rate-will-be-lower-2524987
But now the charge is that it was the SG that initiated lockdown too late – even if it lacked the powers prior to Royal Assent of the Coronavirus Act 2020 on 25 March – not the Westminster government!
If I and others here can research and provide such important context why not BBC Scotland? What does the BBC in Scotland think its ‘public service’ obligations mean, especially in a public health emergency?
LikeLiked by 2 people
This needs to be shared far and wide .
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geez wrong password again
LikeLike
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
Joseph Goebbels
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty”
Joseph Goebbels
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am watching the press conference with the First Minister – it seems that all the journalists are working hard to blame the First Minister for the Nike conference covid 19 participant .
I am utterly sick of these lying , manipulative toads .
I have yet to see one Westminster MP be asked about the too little , too late , approach. Not to mention the careless spreading by the P.M and others in the cabinet.
LikeLiked by 2 people
There’s a big audience watching the scribblers ask their questions. And hearing The FM’s responses. I know one NO voter who is now very impressed with the FM.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Having carefully observed N.S at all public broadcasts there is no doubt she has very carefully adjusted her demeanor and words slowly but surely almost like a King Cobra which has erected and spread its neck muscles
Those attacking her in their smugness of ill thought out methods and questions
Singularly fail to realise that the powerful
Venomous truth of the actual facts and recorded data Shall be injected into them
When the Cobra strikes
And that there in no antidote at their disposal
So my advice to them is you have 2 options
1.Run
Or
2.Stand your ground and fill the traitors grave that awaits you
LikeLiked by 3 people
I don’t have tv but I understand that it included material from an Edinburgh Uni simulation. The key word is “simulation”, ie like a “model” or in layman’s terms a “guesstimate”. It found that there could have been an 80% smaller number of deaths. Well, maybe. It depends on what assumptions were plugged into the simulation, how valid and reliable these assumptions were and whether there were any errors in the assumptions or the simulation. This not “hard” science, what people may think of as “facts”, but “best guesses”. Plug in a different set of assumptions and the result could be very different.
Has this been peer reviewed?
I don’t know what the assumptions were, but I can see one possible problem. If Scotland locked down earlier, while the UK, or rather England, carried on as per normal, led by the buffoon with the hair, how likely would it have been that the Scottish population would have complied with a lock down, given that people could still be arriving from other parts of the UK, regardless of being told not to, and more especially, given that it would have been unlikely that the Treasury would have stumped up the cash to furlough workers and support businesses that had to close down. And that’s without even mentioning the uproar from Unionist politicians and the media, no doubt led by the Boris Broadcasting Critins trashing the SG for daring to go its own way.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I agree. My (clumsy) take at the time, posted elsewhere was this:
If a government had introduced ‘something’ that has evidentially helped contain the pandemic – a day, a week, two weeks, a month – earlier than it actually did introduce this ‘something’ , is it likely that statistical modelling/extrapolation would be able to calculate a numerical outcome that shows (hypothetically) reduced mortality? Well blow me down, yes – it is possible to model such a hypothetical outcome for an earlier lockdown!
Is Scotland’s government somehow unique – uniquely ‘bad’ in causing unnecessary deaths (including the BBC’s shameful, implied responsibility for the deaths of named individuals) in the UK or in the world on this matter? No context, no comparator is provided to assist the viewer’s understanding of the significance of the news bulletin.
Could you model mortality data from anywhere experiencing the pandemic that had made a (any kind of) successful intervention and then construct a similar statistical outcome if its intervention has been made earlier? I suggest yes, statistically you probably could.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing – and BBC Scotland makes it look all so easy!
LikeLike
Like so many others I’m disgusted at the way the MSM, including the hypocritical bbc, continually seek out ways, usually strange to the truth, to do down Scotland and its government.
I boycott all MSM but I know it’s not enough in its own so I try to comment as much as I can about MSM lies, and donate when I can to sites like this one.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Much of the issue relates to lack of the Scottish government’s financial controls. i.e. they have very little control and zero power to maintain the financial schemes needed to stop folk returning to work.
This is going to become crucial and a fight is on the cards. Media are well aware but too UK centred to give us the proper information. Deaths will be on their hands too.
LikeLike
I’ll get something together from the evidence you provide for tomorrow.
LikeLike