Connect with us

Published

on

Boris Johnson has claimed he was forced to plunge the UK into lockdown because of NHS “bed blocking”.

In a section of his witness statement shared with the official COVID inquiry, the former prime minister said the “extreme measures” announced on 23 March 2020 were introduced because the health service had “failed to grip” the problem of delayed discharges.

Politics Live: Matt Hancock wanted to decide ‘who should live and who should die’

The term, also known as bed blocking, is used to describe patients – mostly elderly – who are occupying a hospital bed they do not strictly need, often because the next stage of their care has not been organised.

Mr Johnson said: “It was very frustrating to think that we were being forced to extreme measures to lock down the country and protect the NHS – because the NHS and social services had failed to grip the decades-old problem of delayed discharges, commonly known as bed blocking.

“Before the pandemic began I was doing regular tours of hospitals and finding that about 30% of patients did not strictly need to be in acute sector beds.”

A paramedic walks past a line of ambulances outside the Royal London Hospital, in London, during England's third national lockdown to curb the spread of coronavirus. Picture date: Wednesday January 20, 2021.
Image:
A line of ambulances outside the Royal London Hospital during England’s third national lockdown

The claim was rejected by former NHS chief executive Lord Stevens, who gave evidence to the inquiry on Thursday morning.

He said: “We, and indeed he, were being told that if action was not taken on reducing the spread of coronavirus, there wouldn’t be 30,000 hospital inpatients, there would be maybe 200,000 or 800,000 hospital inpatients.

“So you can’t say that you would be able to deal with 200,000 or 800,000 inpatients by reference to 30,000 blocked beds.

“Even if all of those 30,000 beds were freed up – for every one coronavirus patient who was then admitted to that bed, there would be another five patients who needed that care but weren’t able to get it.

“So no, I don’t think that is a fair statement in describing the decision calculus for the first wave.”

Hancock ‘wanted to decide who should live’

The inquiry also head on Thursday that former health secretary Matt Hancock wanted to decide who should live or die if hospitals became overwhelmed by coronavirus patients.

Lord Stevens said: “[Mr Hancock] took the position that in this situation he – rather than, say, the medical profession or the public – should ultimately decide who should live and who should die.

“Fortunately this horrible dilemma never crystallised.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Health secretary ‘wanted to decide who should live’

He added: “I certainly wanted to discourage the idea that an individual secretary of state, other than in the most exceptional circumstances, should be deciding how care would be provided.”

Lord Stevens further told the hearing that senior ministers “sometimes avoided” Cobra meetings in the early days of the pandemic chaired by Mr Hancock.

Read More:
Johnson ‘suggested COVID was nature’s way of dealing with old people
Analysis: The calm takedown of Johnson’s COVID Downing Street

PM ‘asked if blowing hairdryer up nose could kill COVID’

In his witness statement, he said the emergency meetings “usefully brought together a cross-section of departments, agencies and the devolved administrations.

“However, these meetings were arguably not optimally effective. They were very large, and when Cobra meetings were chaired by the health and social care secretary, other secretaries of state sometimes avoided attending and delegated to their junior ministers instead.”

Asked by Andrew O’Connor KC if that was a reflection on Mr Hancock, Lord Stevens said: “I am not saying that was cause and effect, but that was the fact of the matter. I just observed that those two coincided.”

Mr Hancock has previously come under criticism during the inquiry, with witnesses accusing him of telling untruths and displaying “nuclear levels” of overconfidence.

The inquiry is examining political and administrative decision-making during the pandemic, with a picture emerging of chaos, dysfunctionality, incompetence and backstabbing at the heart of government during the crisis.

This week has heard how Number 10 was “unbelievably bullish” in 2020 before the full effects of the pandemic were felt in Britain – with some senior figures allegedly “laughing” at the severity of the situation in Italy – one of the first European countries to be hit by the virus.

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

Witnesses, including Mr Johnson’s former chief adviser Dominic Cummings and ex communications chief Lee Cain, have described the government as being in “complete chaos” by early March.

Mr Johnson allegedly dithered over whether to announce a lockdown because he wanted to be like the mayor in the film Jaws, who kept beaches open despite the danger of shark attacks.

On Wednesday, former civil servant Helen McNamara described how on 13 March, 10 days before lockdown, she had learned there was “no plan” for the NHS to deal with a pandemic.

Ms NcNamara said she warned Mr Johnson’s top officials: “I think we’re absolutely f****d, I think this country is heading for a disaster, I think we’re going to kill thousands of people.”

Witnesses scheduled to appear at the inquiry next week include former cabinet secretary and head of the civil service Lord Sedwill, former Number 10 special adviser Dr Ben Warner and former home secretary Dame Priti Patel.

Continue Reading

Politics

Wolf Capital co-founder pleads guilty to $9.4M Ponzi, promised 547% returns

Published

on

By

Wolf Capital co-founder pleads guilty to .4M Ponzi, promised 547% returns

According to the US Department of Justice, Wolf Capital’s co-founder has pleaded guilty to wire fraud conspiracy for luring 2,800 crypto investors into a Ponzi scheme.

Continue Reading

Politics

Rachel Reeves lands in China amid pressure to cancel trip over market turmoil

Published

on

By

Rachel Reeves lands in China amid pressure to cancel trip over market turmoil

Making Britain better off will be “at the forefront of the chancellor’s mind” during her visit to China, the Treasury has said amid controversy over the trip.

Rachel Reeves flew out on Friday after ignoring calls from opposition parties to cancel the long-planned venture because of market turmoil at home.

The past week has seen a drop in the pound and an increase in government borrowing costs, which has fuelled speculation of more spending cuts or tax rises.

The Tories have accused the chancellor of having “fled to China” rather than explain how she will fix the UK’s flatlining economy, while the Liberal Democrats say she should stay in Britain and announce a “plan B” to address market volatility.

However, Ms Reeves has rejected calls to cancel the visit, writing in The Times on Friday night that choosing not to engage with China is “no choice at all”.

👉 Click here to follow Electoral Dysfunction wherever you get your podcasts 👈

The chancellor will be accompanied by Bank of England governor Andrew Bailey and other senior executives.

She will meet with her counterpart, Vice Premier He Lifeng, in Beijing on Saturday to discuss financial services, trade and investment.

She will also “raise difficult issues”, including Chinese firms supporting Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and concerns over constraints on rights and freedoms in Hong Kong, the Treasury said.

But it did not mention whether Ms Reeves would raise the treatment of the Uyghur community, which Downing Street said Foreign Secretary David Lammy would do during his visit last year.

Britain's Foreign Secretary David Lammy and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi shake hands before their meeting at the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse in Beijing. Pic: AP
Image:
Britain’s Foreign Secretary David Lammy and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Beijing. Pic: AP

On Friday, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy defended the trip, telling Sky News that the climbing cost of government borrowing was a “global trend” that had affected many countries, “most notably the United States”.

“We are still on track to be the fastest growing economy, according to the OECD [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development] in Europe,” she told Anna Jones on Sky News Breakfast.

“China is the second-largest economy, and what China does has the biggest impact on people from Stockton to Sunderland, right across the UK, and it’s absolutely essential that we have a relationship with them.”

Read more – Ed Conway analysis: The chancellor’s gamble with China

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Nandy defends Reeves’ trip to China

However, former prime minister Boris Johnson said Ms Reeves had “been rumbled” and said she should “make her way to HR and collect her P45 – or stay in China”.

While in the country’s capital, Ms Reeves will also visit British bike brand Brompton’s flagship store, which relies heavily on exports to China, before heading to Shanghai for talks with representatives across British and Chinese businesses.

It is the first UK-China Economic and Financial Dialogue (EFD) since 2019, building on the Labour government’s plan for a “pragmatic” policy with the world’s second-largest economy.

Sir Keir Starmer was the first British prime minister to meet with China’s President Xi Jinping in six years at the G20 summit in Brazil last autumn.

Relations between the UK and China have become strained over the last decade as the Conservative government spoke out against human rights abuses and concerns grew over national security risks.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

How much do we trade with China?

Navigating this has proved tricky given China is the UK’s fourth largest single trading partner, with a trade relationship worth almost £113bn and exports to China supporting over 455,000 jobs in the UK in 2020, according to the government.

During the Tories’ 14 years in office, the approach varied dramatically from the “golden era” under David Cameron to hawkish aggression under Liz Truss, while Rishi Sunak vowed to be “robust” but resisted pressure from his own party to brand China a threat.

The Treasury said a stable relationship with China would support economic growth and that “making working people across Britain secure and better off is at the forefront of the chancellor’s mind”.

Ahead of her visit, Ms Reeves said: “By finding common ground on trade and investment, while being candid about our differences and upholding national security as the first duty of this government, we can build a long-term economic relationship with China that works in the national interest.”

Continue Reading

Politics

US Bitcoin reserve would have ‘profound’ impact on adoption: CoinShares

Published

on

By

US Bitcoin reserve would have ‘profound’ impact on adoption: CoinShares

The Bitcoin Act’s passage could eventually send BTC’s price past $1 million per coin, industry executives say.

Continue Reading

Trending