Yet more Tory sleaze….

[BoldonLad]

How could this enquiry work without those at the heart of the decision making process being called to give their accounts?

I never thought it could work, it most certainly is not going to uncover "the truth", in my opinion, or course.

 

[BoldonLad]

His "testimony" was quite interesting

Listening to his, it is a damn shame he was not in charge of everything - he clearly had the solution to the whole thing all sorted but people just WOULD NOT listen to him!

but if you took away the extensions to facts and the opinions - which was a lot of it - there was an interesting description of a total sh1t show of indecision
which is backed up by other people

things with Cummings is that you have to look at the actual facts he says and ignore the application of his genius and the solutions he comes up with - all of which would clearly have worked!

Of course - the best way of looking good is to put forward a different solution but the people making the decision go another route - then you can always say how much better than it would have been if you had done what they said

Pretty much why he makes me cringe, alongside his own rule breaking, and ridiculous excuses for doing so.

 

[newfhouse]

I never thought it could work, it most certainly is not going to uncover "the truth", in my opinion, or course.

You may be right. If so, why worry about the inquiry being enhanced or otherwise by the credibility of any particular witness?

 

[Rusty Nails]

I never thought it could work, it most certainly is not going to uncover "the truth", in my opinion, or course.

It is not a trial but a Public Inquiry. It is not as if there is one "truth", but its role is to look at the response to covid and to see how effective it was.
For that it is essential to hear evidence from those actively involved in that response and, at the time, Cummings was an influential part of it and a close observer of the planning/decision-making process at the top.
His participation was essential.

 

[BoldonLad]

You may be right. If so, why worry about the inquiry being enhanced or otherwise by the credibility of any particular witness?

Just because I don't expect it to be meaningful does not mean that other people/organisations may believe/claim it to be meaningful.

Apologies for having an opinion.

 

[BoldonLad]

It is not a trial but a Public Inquiry. It is not as if there is one "truth", but its role is to look at the response to covid and to see how effective it was.
For that it is essential to hear evidence from those actively involved in that response and, at the time, Cummings was an influential part of it and a close observer of the planning/decision-making process at the top.
His participation was essential.

Isn't the obvious conclusion that it could have been more effective?

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

 

[newfhouse]

Apologies for having an opinion.

Stop being such a tit. I was questioning your opinion, not your right to hold one.

 

[BoldonLad]

Stop being such a tit. I was questioning your opinion, not your right to hold one.

What, you were questioning my opinion that Cummings is a waste of fresh air, or, that the inquiry's findings are likely to be meaningful?

 

[newfhouse]

What, you were questioning my opinion that Cummings is a waste of fresh air, or, that the inquiry's findings are likely to be meaningful?

If you scroll up you will see my questions.

 

[Fab Foodie]

Isn't the obvious conclusion that it could have been more effective?

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

I don't think we need hindsight or an enquiry to determine that. There was plenty of evidence available in real time.
What's galling is that nobody will be brought to book for any of that shitshow. Johnson will still have his cushy job writing bollocks, Hancock will still be an alpha-twat and Cumming a 2 faced weasel who'd sell his own kids to boost his ego. Outside of the main players in Downing Street, senior Civil Servants and other 'staffers' realised how zarked this all was and could have stood-up and been counted at the time....

 

[Deleted member 49]

Apparently it's come as a surprise to some what a utter c@nt Johnson is....Journalists and the media acting shocked and surprised at what the enquiry is showing is a fecking joke ! They knew exactly what was going on.

 

[BoldonLad]

I don't think we need hindsight or an enquiry to determine that. There was plenty of evidence available in real time.
What's galling is that nobody will be brought to book for any of that shitshow. Johnson will still have his cushy job writing bollocks, Hancock will still be an alpha-twat and Cumming a 2 faced weasel who'd sell his own kids to boost his ego. Outside of the main players in Downing Street, senior Civil Servants and other 'staffers' realised how zarked this all was and could have stood-up and been counted at the time....

Quite.

No doubt, it will be the usual "lessons will be learned" bollocks

 

[qigong chimp]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

You'd expect the Govt of the day to have contingency plans in place for foreseeable public health crises.

 

[Fab Foodie]

Apparently it's come as a surprise to some what a utter c@nt Johnson is....Journalists and the media acting shocked and surprised at what the enquiry is showing is a fecking joke ! They knew exactly what was going on.

Did none of them know him when he was Mayor?
As a nation - we're screwed....

 

[Rusty Nails]

Isn't the obvious conclusion that it could have been more effective?

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Is it? Sitting at our keyboards we can too easily say this, but it is a meaningless, and possibly incorrect, statement unless there is supplementary information about what elements could have been more effective, the criteria for measuring effectivenessand and, most importantly, specifically how that effectiveness could be improved.