There’s lots of interesting information in there. NHS Test, track and trace is estimated to have brought the R number down by between .3 and .6. But this includes measures such as government guidance to self-isolate from the onset of developing symptoms. The report estimates that the trace element of this (ie, telling people to self-isolate for x days following a positive test and alerting their contacts) was responsible for only a .1 (or 10%) reduction in the R value.
Other aspects that I found interesting were the tacit acceptance that zero hours contracts were extremely useful in managing the varying numbers of human resources needed at any one time.
I’m glad to see that there is focus on ensuring that the amount spent on setting up such expensive operations ought not to leave a worthless legacy. There is pressure on the government to ensure that its National Institute for Health Protection (effective from 1 April 2021, let’s hope it’s not an April Fool’s joke) should make sure that it retains a lasting benefit from this huge investment taking place now.
Also positive was to see that greater collaboration between NHS test, track and trace, and local authorities and NHS trusts has occurred and that they will become more interconnected going forward. That was one of the main areas of criticism at the beginning of the roll out.
There remain concerns about adequate resources and funding at a local level though so these need to be addressed. There also remain concerns about how quickly the tests are being turned around. Recently the median time was 78 hours but the target time is between 48 and 72 hours. They have been tasked with trying to turn around all tests within 48 hours and they are still well short of this objective.
The main difficulty in getting the R number down remains public behaviour but that will remain the case unless Parliament decides to impose even more punitive/draconian sanctions for non-compliance. Notwithstanding that, more does clearly need to be done to improve the processes ancillary to that but at least its going in the right direction.
It would be an absolute scandal if this investment did not leave a legacy that benefits future health crises.
Cheers, sounds interesting and I hope to get into it but work is being a pig at the moment.
I think you’re right in that it needs to leave some kind of legacy. I fear it wont given the cost and will be binned at some point.
I do agree that public behavior remains a problem for track and trace. Only today the missus said one acquaintance through work has basically ignored the request to isolate. That’s criminal but for me I would be hoping to see within the report where the weaknesses are in the system and what they plan to do with their extra £15bn to improve it.
Meghan Markles wealth was estimated at 2 million USD prior to marrying Harry - she also had ongoing royalties (do you see what I did there?) from her time as an actress and as a YouTube influencer.
Harry ( son of one of Englands largest landowners and Grandson of one of the richest women in the world) was independently worth approx 50 million USD mainly derived from trust funds and inheritance.
As far as I can tell their biggest problems in life were :-
Archie not having Police protection
Please see above.
Some bumbling, probably older and less progressive, Royal half wit asked them what colour skin their baby would have? A question I was asked regularly when my wife was pregnant - I always replied “not white” - I did not take offence in the slightest - I wanted to know what colour skin, eyes, hair he would have.
She could not get counselling from the Palace HR department.-
She was not an employee in the real world sense of the Royal Family.
It is unlikely that employees of the HR Department have the correct training to deal with the “suicidal” family members of their direct employers.
Would the Royal HR Department have sufficient security clearances to deal with issues presented by their employers
The HR Department would probably have no powers to enforce action against any senior Royal.
The risk of any damaging conversations becoming public would be very high.
Any right-minded employee, who coveted their employment, would refuse to be privy to intimate secrets regarding the senior Royals. What an awful position that would be for the employee.
Her mental health was/is for qualified, experienced and no doubt expensive professionals to deal with - not an HR Department - Again see above.
Can’t help but wonder what Harry’s situation will be once the divorce happens. Welcomed back into the fold with open arms? Or banished to forever live amongst the Orange groves of California?
On the protection thing, I understand their issue.
The need for ongoing protection does not disappear when the retire from the Royal Family. I’m sure they would ideally like it to. They will always need that because of the very existence of the Royal Family as an institution.
I do have some questions about it all. I don’t think there’s any doubt that they can afford security for them and their son. Harry will also have army contacts and contacts from those who have provided royal protection for his whole life. Saying things like being “financially cut-off” when you’ve got millions in the bank and you’re in your 30s just comes across as entitled and out of touch with reality.
I also question the claims about not being able to get support for what she was going through. She mentions seeking help from HR (what HR?!) but being told it’s a no-go. What about support from someone closer to home? Like her husband? He, William and Kate spearheaded Heads Together from before he’d even met Meghan Heads Together | Mind He talked openly about how he’d sought help over many years. I don’t buy for one second that anyone would think it taboo for Meghan to seek help. And I have to wonder what was Harry doing?
I’m still less than impressed that a statement has been made based on hearsay that the original recipient then refused to give any details about and against someone they refuse to identify who cannot then defend themselves. That’s just poor. If you’re going to raise issues of racism you call it out properly otherwise what point does it serve other than to create a headline?
Yeh, not hugely accurate either but he is enunciating a view that is widely shared, like it or not…
I think he has a point about not actually naming the person alleged to have made the remark about skin tone. I’ve expressed a similar view.
RE the wedding and “fake” suggestions, I think that’s a bit much! However something that I did find amusing is that when someone approached Lancaster House about the claim that just the two of them were secretly married by the Archbishop of Canterbury in their garden 3 days before the response was, apparently, “Oh, you mean the rehearsal?”.
Me neither. Frankly I’d expect her to raise it with her husband and for him to have sorted it out. I haven’t seen the full interview. Did Oprah raise whether she did that or not and, if so, why Harry wasn’t able to resolve the issue either himself or by taking it up with members of his own family?
