Government advisor steps down

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted Member 1156
  • Start date Start date
D

Deleted Member 1156

Guest
In the news this morning that Prof Neil Ferguson has stood down from his role as scientific advisor to the Government due to breaking the lockdown guidelines. OK, so he has been a silly boy and should be reprimanded but he is in his position because he is able to provide the best advice to protect our lives. Should he step down or should he hold his hands up, apologise and continue with his work which protects millions of people?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52553229
 
drive4show said:
In the news this morning that Prof Neil Ferguson has stood down from his role as scientific advisor to the Government due to breaking the lockdown guidelines. OK, so he has been a silly boy and should be reprimanded but he is in his position because he is able to provide the best advice to protect our lives. Should he step down or should he hold his hands up, apologise and continue with his work which protects millions of people?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52553229
Click to expand...

If he simply apologised and carried on, people would think, if it's OK for him, then it's OK for me, and compliance with the lockdown would suffer.

He had to go.
 
I think replies #2 & #3 sum it all up perfectly, could be the shortest thread in history as can't see how anyone can disagree with them or find an excuse for him not to walk.
 
Silly, silly boy - had to go. BBC (yes again) banging on about it to a minister today "what does it say to the public that he broke the rules...." etc etc.

It says the silly sod was horny and thought with a body part other than his brain. He's resigned - enough said. To be fair not quite as bad as the Scottish Medical woman's error of travel with family etc but a rule break all the same.

We're all human - of flesh and blood we're made.
 
Playing devils advocate, if Prof Ferguson has knowledge and experience that others do not have that could save lives, is it not more important that he stays?
 
I don't see what it actually achieves apart from people feeling like they have their pound of flesh. He's not an elected official but an expert who has donated a lot of time to advising the government through this crisis and has been integral. Instead of a scoop the newspapers could have told senior members of the government, he could have received a slap on the wrist and got on with his important work.
Once it's out there he had to resign.
 
funkycoldmedina said:
I don't see what it actually achieves apart from people feeling like they have their pound of flesh. He's not an elected official but an expert who has donated a lot of time to advising the government through this crisis and has been integral. Instead of a scoop the newspapers could have told senior members of the government, he could have received a slap on the wrist and got on with his important work.
Once it's out there he had to resign.
Click to expand...

Ahh but the newspapers and other press believe they have some sort of divine right to have their pound of flesh when they expose a misdemeanour on the part of officials, elected or otherwise. Justifies their existence in their own eyes.
 
important to note that he has stepped down from the SAGE group but I believe this was only a part of his overall job.

Personally I do believe in second chances, but without knowing him or working with him it is tough to say that he should be kept on, is genuinely remorseful, is arrogant and would do similar again if he thought he wouldn't get caught etc.

Obviously not dissimilar to the Catherine Calderwood incident, when she was caught visiting a second home at the weekend. Looked like she would survive for a while, mainly due to her expertise and ability - but then it emerged she had visited the house on 2 weekends and the game was up. So second chance burnt on the same day, effectively.
 
AmandaJR said:
Silly, silly boy - had to go. BBC (yes again) banging on about it to a minister today "what does it say to the public that he broke the rules...." etc etc.

It says the silly sod was horny and thought with a body part other than his brain. He's resigned - enough said. To be fair not quite as bad as the Scottish Medical woman's error of travel with family etc but a rule break all the same.

We're all human - of flesh and blood we're made.
Click to expand...
That depends on your moral compass.
 
AmandaJR said:
Silly, silly boy - had to go. BBC (yes again) banging on about it to a minister today "what does it say to the public that he broke the rules...." etc etc.

It says the silly sod was horny and thought with a body part other than his brain. He's resigned - enough said. To be fair not quite as bad as the Scottish Medical woman's error of travel with family etc but a rule break all the same.

We're all human - of flesh and blood we're made.
Click to expand...
Please Amanda - every media outlet would be doing exactly the same as the BBC - in fact I believe it is the frontpage headline of most newspapers.

Do you think the BBC are wrong in asking the question of the minister - I don't.

Look at the hassle the Scottish FM endured when she didn't immediately sack or ask for the resignation of her Chief Medical Officer.

And so when we have a similar scenario facing the Westminster government it is absolutely valid to ask the question in order to understand whether the government has learned from the Scottish FMs mistake - and to ascertain what the government's attitude is to absolute adherence to the rules they are requiring of us - regardless of the individual and their place in the decision making process...
 
One worrying aspect of this.

The Telegraph have had this story since 8th April. Why was it chosen for release yesterday? To displace the headlines about the worst death toll in Europe? Or, worse, are we now going to see him getting slaughtered and his data model discredited as the push to scrap lockdown intensifies?
 
drive4show said:
In the news this morning that Prof Neil Ferguson has stood down from his role as scientific advisor to the Government due to breaking the lockdown guidelines. OK, so he has been a silly boy and should be reprimanded but he is in his position because he is able to provide the best advice to protect our lives. Should he step down or should he hold his hands up, apologise and continue with his work which protects millions of people?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52553229
Click to expand...
Didnt we have this when the Scottish chief medical officer did the same.

We cant have one rule for one and then the people giving all this advice do exactly the same.

He should go and for anyone else who keeps breaking the rules the fines need to be bigger.
 
I think the bigger aspect is that ultimately people are getting fed up with lockdown and more and more people are likely to be breaking these rule in various ways.

For the vast majority, life goes on and people are now putting relationships, jobs, holidays, property development, education etc. on hold for 3 months with not much of an end in sight or a timetable for relaxing things.

I'm sure when the virus was spreading in early March, Italy was deserted and people in the UK were asking why lockdown wasn't implemented immediately. The argument was that we can only do it once, so for it to be most effective we have to wait until it can stop most transmissions. i.e. no point doing it when there's only a few hundred cases, because 3 weeks later you open it up and the spread happens faster than ever.

Well they've used their bullet now and any further bullets will not be anywhere near as effective.

Ultimately without a vaccine, herd immunity is the only way to get back to some kind of normal life. My guess is that we are still a long way away from that.
Total cases in the UK of 200,000. Even if you assumed it was 5 or 6 times that number, it's still well under 2 million.
Would probably need cases to reach 40 million plus for any kind of herd immunity to be meaningful.
 
Grant85 said:
I think the bigger aspect is that ultimately people are getting fed up with lockdown and more and more people are likely to be breaking these rule in various ways.

For the vast majority, life goes on and people are now putting relationships, jobs, holidays, property development, education etc. on hold for 3 months with not much of an end in sight or a timetable for relaxing things.

I'm sure when the virus was spreading in early March, Italy was deserted and people in the UK were asking why lockdown wasn't implemented immediately. The argument was that we can only do it once, so for it to be most effective we have to wait until it can stop most transmissions. i.e. no point doing it when there's only a few hundred cases, because 3 weeks later you open it up and the spread happens faster than ever.

Well they've used their bullet now and any further bullets will not be anywhere near as effective.

Ultimately without a vaccine, herd immunity is the only way to get back to some kind of normal life. My guess is that we are still a long way away from that.
Total cases in the UK of 200,000. Even if you assumed it was 5 or 6 times that number, it's still well under 2 million.
Would probably need cases to reach 40 million plus for any kind of herd immunity to be meaningful.
Click to expand...
Back on 30th March, Imperial College were estimating that somewhere in the region of 2-3 million had been infected in the UK.
Given that we're now over a month on from that, and assuming their estimates are reasonable, who knows, we could be well over then10 million mark by now
The true number may never be known as asymptomatic cases will never be recorded.
 
Lincoln Quaker said:
Didnt we have this when the Scottish chief medical officer did the same.

We cant have one rule for one and then the people giving all this advice do exactly the same.

He should go and for anyone else who keeps breaking the rules the fines need to be bigger.
Click to expand...

Erm, not exactly the same...….:love:
I initially supported the SCMO but when it came about that it was her second visit to her holiday home in 7 days all credibility flew oot the windae.
 
Imurg said:
Back on 30th March, Imperial College were estimating that somewhere in the region of 2-3 million had been infected in the UK.
Given that we're now over a month on from that, and assuming their estimates are reasonable, who knows, we could be well over then10 million mark by now
The true number may never be known as asymptomatic cases will never be recorded.
Click to expand...

I'd be surprised if it was as many as that back then.

New York state did a large number of sampling and random testing and last week estimated around 14% of the population were infected and the virus is probably worse in NY than in UK in terms of cases, deaths as a %age of the population.

Although big limitation is that I don't believe they have an effective test to determine if someone has had the virus. So very possible that 3 million were infected in the UK as at 30th March but that number has remained reasonably constant.

Ultimately I think we have missed a huge trick here by not doing a controlled random sampling of 1,000 or so people each week in order to make a reasonable estimate of the numbers. Especially the numbers who are asymptomatic. I can only assume the academics and scientists were screaming out for this and the government didn't make it happen.

Even now, people with mild symptoms are unlikely to get tested and the only reliable info we have for determining the state of things is deaths.
 
I fully understand the views about setting an example, should know better etc etc etc. But if this guy has the knowledge/experience to save my life that others don't have then I for one am happy for him to publicly apologise and get on with the job of saving lives.
 
Idiotic! Had to go!

There'll almost certainly be an equally qualified alternative who can step in, though given the size of the body, I'd question whether one is really needed.
 
Should anyone who breaks the rules go?
Robert Jenrick for example?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top