Jump to content

Coronavirus (COVID-19)


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, itzdrk said:

I heard from someone pretty reliable in the summer that Leitch had been sending 🍆 so nae wonder he was getting that deleted :lol:  

Would be a very funny part of an inquiry though

 

5 minutes ago, UsedToGoToCentralPark said:

Someone will have taken a few screenshots of some of these messages I reckon, just need to give it time. 

Hopefully we're spared these ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GTee said:

Jason Leitch will have undoubtedly prospered through the pandemic. Chris Whittty, Van Tam. Where are these millionaires now. Disgraceful.

Curious as to where you think they should be (other than jail obviously).

Quick Google has Whitty back in his day job with the NHS.

Van-Tam has landed a plum job at Moderna 🙄

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it just me or does the UK inquiry appear to only be asking “how much earlier and harder should we have locked down” rather than looking properly at everything from a cost/benefit angle? The Scottish one appears much more balanced so far.

For example, today it has become clear masks weren’t initially introduced because there was no scientific evidence for them (and there still isn’t in the real world) but eventually the pressure became too much from unions etc. Yet, still the discussion seems to be around why they weren’t just introduced straight away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Series 4 and episode 5 of In The Thick of It on iplayer explains the panic in Holyrood and Westminster going on at the moment, and probably ever since they found out that WhatsApp is no longer private. 

Edited by welshbairn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, KingswellsRed said:

Is it just me or does the UK inquiry appear to only be asking “how much earlier and harder should we have locked down” rather than looking properly at everything from a cost/benefit angle? The Scottish one appears much more balanced so far.

For example, today it has become clear masks weren’t initially introduced because there was no scientific evidence for them (and there still isn’t in the real world) but eventually the pressure became too much from unions etc. Yet, still the discussion seems to be around why they weren’t just introduced straight away.

This phase is about political governance and decision making, I assume they'll go into the consequences of their decisions and the merit and relevance of their scientific advice later on. There's evidence on masks listed on the enquiry website.

https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/documents/?{"taxonomies"%3A{"document_type"%3A{"parent"%3A0%2C"terms"%3A[[56%2C"Evidence"]]}}%2C"date_range"%3A{"from"%3A""%2C"to"%3A""}%2C"post_types"%3A["document"]%2C"query_post_types"%3Afalse%2C"search"%3A"masks"%2C"order"%3A"Date"%2C"page"%3A1}

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, sparky88 said:

Sturgeon is a lawyer so she would have known exactly the consequences of deleting the messages. So what must the messages have shown?

Scot Gov had no control over borrowing for furlough or borders so scope is fairly limited.

I can see why WhatsApp would be getting attention after Partygate, dodgy PPE contracts and 'Eat Out to Help Out' though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bula Bairn said:

Scot Gov had no control over borrowing for furlough or borders so scope is fairly limited.

I can see why WhatsApp would be getting attention after Partygate, dodgy PPE contracts and 'Eat Out to Help Out' though. 

How is your response relevant to the post you quoted? WhatsApp isn't getting attention, the deletion of official correspondence between public servants is getting attention.

Edited by strichener
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 27/10/2023 at 10:09, TheScarf said:

I think 'Business WhatsApp' is fairly new so all these government departments will want to be seen as early adopters on their shiny new work iPhone 15s.  I agree, it seems quite tinpot to not use the traditional tried and tested thing called 'email'.  You can guarantee the galaxy brains who come up with these new ways of doing stuff (who all belong on the Work Colleagues thread on here) will defend using WhatsApp to the hilt as it gives the user 'colleague at their fingertips'. 

The slogan at their presentation to the bosses would be along the lines of 'Why f**k about with email when you can 'ping' 'co-workers' in an instant to run the fact and figures past them, send memes in group chats, and send pictures of your cock to the newly engaged 22 year old secretary'.

Yes and Ho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, strichener said:

How is your response relevant to the post you quoted? WhatsApp isn't getting attention, the deletion of official correspondence between public servants is getting attention.

Are WhatsApp messages  'official correspondence' though?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...