Covid care home policy was 'least worst decision'
Mr Hancock was responsible for care services in England where more than 43,000 people died with Covid between March 2020 and January 2022, many of them in the early weeks of the pandemic.On Monday, the lawyer representing a bereaved families group quoted a civil servant who said the high number of deaths in care homes amounted to "generational slaughter".Responding to questions from the barrister to the inquiry Jacqueline Carey KC, Mr Hancock said: "You know there may be campaign groups and politically-motivated bodies that say other things."What I care about though is the substance, and frankly that's what this inquiry should care about after all the millions of pounds that have been spent on it."Inquiry chair Lady Hallett, responded: "And I can assure you, Mr Hancock, it is what I care about."The current section of the Covid inquiry is likely to be "emotive and distressing", Ms Carey has warned.
'Easy to say in hindsight'
Questioned by Ms Carey, Mr Hancock acknowledged the discharge policy was an "incredibly contentious issue".But he added: "Nobody has yet provided me with an alternative that was available at the time that would have saved more lives."And he told the inquiry: "It's the least-worst decision that could have been taken at the time."When the pandemic hit early in 2020, hospital patients were rapidly discharged into care homes in a bid to free up beds and prevent the NHS from becoming overwhelmed.However, there was no policy in place requiring patients to be tested before admission, or for asymptomatic patients to isolate, until mid-April.This was despite growing awareness of the risks of people without Covid-19 symptoms being able to spread the virus.As his seventh and likely final appearance at the inquiry drew to a close, Mr Hancock admitted his overstretched department was "unbelievably busy, responding to the biggest civil emergency in 100 years".In sometimes tense exchanges, he fielded questions from Kate Beattie representing disabled people's organisations and Pete Weatherby, barrister for Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice UK.Mr Weatherby asked whether Mr Hancock had used the lack of "levers" available to him to act on Covid at the start of the pandemic as "an excuse for things when they went wrong"."This is a very easy thing to say with hindsight," Mr Hancock responded."The reality of the situation is that I had to act with the tools that I had and that's what I did, and drove the life-saving effort to make sure things weren't even worse than they were."Elsewhere, in response to wide-ranging questioning, Mr Hancock described the concept of blanket 'do not attempt resuscitation' orders as "abhorrent".He said he only saw this happen once "and we jumped on it".If that policy was more widespread, he said: "It did not come to my attention and, if it did happen, it's totally unacceptable."Mr Hancock said the social care sector "was badly in need of and remains badly in need of reform", adding that in the event of another pandemic, he feared the situation had become "worse not better".Lawyer Nicola Brook said Mr Hancock knew at the time that many care homes did not have the ability to isolate people who would be discharged from hospital, and that Covid was airborne."It's frankly ridiculous and insulting that he says they tried to throw a protective ring around care homes when his department's policies caused Covid to spread like wildfire amongst society's most vulnerable loved ones," she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
7 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Are you drinking too much for your age and gender? Use our interactive alcohol tracker to find out if you need to cut down on boozing
Last year, the UK hit a grim milestone: More than 10,000 people died as a result of heavy drinking, the largest number on record. The figure is not only tragic but also, on the surface, surprising. Your browser does not support iframes.
The Independent
8 minutes ago
- The Independent
No-fault evictions by bailiffs up 8% in Labour's first year in Government
No-fault evictions by bailiffs in England have risen by 8% in the 12 months since Labour came into Government, new data shows. The party has pledged to end no-fault evictions under its Renters' Rights Bill, which is in the final stages of going through Parliament. Shelter branded it 'unconscionable' that renters 'continue to be marched out of their homes by bailiffs' a year after Labour came to power. There were 11,402 repossessions by county court bailiffs following a Section 21 notice – known as a no-fault eviction – between July last year and June, according to data published by the Ministry of Justice. This was up 8% from 10,576 for the previous 12-month period. There were 2,679 in the three months to June, which was down from 2,931 the previous quarter and down from 2,915 for the same April to June period last year. The latest Government data also showed 30,729 claims had been issued to households under the accelerated procedure in the year to June. Landlords can apply for an accelerated possession order if the tenants have not left by the date specified in a Section 21 notice. The current figure was down 4% from 32,103 for the previous 12-month period. Mairi MacRae, director of campaigns and policy at Shelter, said: 'It is unconscionable that more than a year after the Government came to power, thousands of renters continue to be marched out of their homes by bailiffs because of an unfair policy that the Government said would be scrapped immediately. 'For far too long, tenants' lives have been thrown into turmoil by the rank injustice of no-fault evictions. At the whim of private landlords, thousands of tenants are being left with just two months to find a new home, plunging them into a ruthless rental market and leaving many exposed to the riptide of homelessness. 'The Renters' Rights Bill will overhaul a broken system and usher in a long-overdue era of stability and security for tenants. To curb record homelessness and ensure renters can live free from the threat of no-fault eviction, the Government must deliver on this commitment, pass the Bill, and name an implementation date when Section 21 will finally be scrapped.' Shelter described no-fault evictions as one of the leading causes of homelessness, giving landlords the power to evict tenants without any reason given. The charity said its analysis of the latest figures suggested that for every month a ban on no-fault evictions is delayed, around 950 households could be removed from their homes by bailiffs. Echoing the call for an urgent ban, homelessness charity Crisis said many are at risk of homelessness if faced with eviction. The charity's chief executive, Matt Downie, said: 'Despite good intentions from the Westminster Government, thousands of people are still being unjustly evicted from their homes and threatened with – or even forced into – homelessness. 'We know the UK Government has had a packed agenda, but we now need ministers to rebuff efforts to weaken the Renters' Rights Bill and get this new legislation onto the statute book as soon as possible when Parliament returns. Unfreezing housing benefit in the autumn would also ensure that more people in England can afford a safe and stable home.' The Renters' Reform Coalition, said the year-on-year fall in accelerated procedure claims 'blows apart the myth of a 'landlord exodus' and eviction surge caused by the Renters' Rights Bill' and urged the Government to 'press on and abolish section 21 immediately once the Bill is passed'. The new data comes a week after Rushanara Ali resigned her role as homelessness minister following a report that she gave tenants at a property she owned in east London four months' notice to leave before relisting the property with a £700 rent increase within weeks. Ms Ali's house, rented on a fixed-term contract, was put up for sale while the tenants were living there, and it was only relisted as a rental because it had not sold, according to the i newspaper. Such a move would likely be prohibited under the Renters' Rights Bill, which is set to introduce new protections for tenants including banning landlords who evict tenants in order to sell their property from relisting it for rent for six months. In her resignation letter Ms Ali insisted she had 'at all times' followed 'all legal requirements' and taken her responsibilities 'seriously', but added that continuing in her role would be 'a distraction from the ambitious work of the Government' and therefore was stepping down.
The Independent
8 minutes ago
- The Independent
Warning over taking certain medication with you on holiday
As summer holidays begin, many travellers are packing more than just swimsuits and sunscreen – for millions, medicines are essential. But taking them abroad isn't always simple. From legal pitfalls to temperature-sensitive drugs, here's how to travel safely and legally with your medication. Know the law Medicines that are legal in the UK can be restricted or even banned in other countries. Having a valid prescription doesn't guarantee you can take a medicine into another country. For example, Nurofen Plus, which contains codeine (an opioid painkiller), is prohibited in countries like Egypt, Indonesia and the UAE. Even common cold remedies containing decongestants like pseudoephedrine can land you in trouble in places like Japan and South Korea. This is because pseudoephedrine can be used to make methamphetamine ('speed'). Likewise, many stimulant ADHD drugs are also banned from these countries. Some countries have restrictions on the amount of medication that you are allowed to bring into the country, usually a maximum of a three-month supply. Travellers often overlook how strict customs regulations can be regarding medications. Even if prescribed for a valid medical reason, carrying a prohibited drug can lead to confiscation (leaving you without essential treatment), fines (especially in countries with tough drug laws) and detention or arrest in rare but serious cases. If you're travelling with certain controlled drugs – such as opioids, stimulants or psychotropic substances – you may need to apply for an export licence from the UK Home Office. This is typically required when carrying a supply of three months or more. Examples of controlled drugs include diazepam (for anxiety and muscle spasms), codeine and morphine (for pain), amphetamines (for ADHD) and temazepam (for insomnia). Before you travel, check whether your medicine is affected by any of these restrictions. Use the country's embassy website or the UK government's travel advice to check the rules of your destination country. This should provide guidance on whether you simply need a copy of your prescription, a doctor's letter or a special import certificate (some countries require official documentation even for personal use). The UK government advises carrying controlled drugs or any drugs that might be restricted in your hand luggage. You should take along a prescription or a signed letter from your doctor detailing your medication, dosage and travel dates. Ensure you take sufficient supplies for the duration of your trip and include extras for unexpected delays, damage or loss. Store your medication properly It might be tempting to save space by transferring pills or liquids into smaller containers or pill organisers. While this can be convenient, it's not always advisable. Customs officials may not recognise unlabelled containers, increasing the chance of delays or confiscation. Some medications are sensitive to light, air or temperature, and must remain in their original packaging to stay effective. For example, HRT (hormone replacement therapy) sprays like Lenzetto must not be decanted. These products rely on precise metered dosing and specialised packaging to deliver the correct amount of hormone. Transferring them to another container could result in incorrect dosing or loss of potency. Similarly, GTN (glyceryl trinitrate) tablets, used to treat angina, should always be stored in their original glass bottle. The active ingredient can evaporate if exposed to air, reducing the tablets' effectiveness. You might be worried about the 100ml liquid in hand luggage restriction – with a doctor's letter certifying the need for this medicine, you should be able to take larger amounts of liquid medicine through security. Medicines should always be kept in their original packaging with labels intact. When in doubt, ask your pharmacist whether your medication can be safely repackaged for travel. It's also important to split your supply of medicines between bags (if more than one is used) in case one is lost. Tablets and capsules can sometimes be placed in a pill organiser for daily use, but always carry the original box or prescription label as backup. Some medicines require refrigeration – like Wegovy and Ozempic (semaglutide) injections for weight loss or insulin. Usually, unopened Wegovy pens and insulin preparations should be stored between 2°C and 8°C in a fridge. Once out of the fridge, they can be kept at room temperature (up to 25°C) for up to 28 days, but must be protected from heat and sunlight. High temperatures, such as in direct sunlight or a hot car, can damage insulin. When travelling, use an insulated travel case or cool pack, but avoid placing pens or other medicines directly next to ice packs to prevent freezing. Airlines generally do not provide refrigeration or freezer storage for passenger items, including medicines, due to space and liability concerns, but it's worth contacting them to see if they can help with arrangements for storage. Inspect insulin for crystals after flying – if any are present, it should be discarded. You can bring needles and injectable medicines like EpiPens (for allergies), insulin or Wegovy in your hand luggage. But it's important to carry a doctor's note stating your medical condition and the necessity of the medication, and a copy of your prescription. You should also declare them at airport security. Security officers may inspect these items separately, so allow for extra time going through security. Contact your airline for any specific rules on needles and injectable medicines. Always carry such medicines and medical devices in your hand luggage – checked bags can be lost or exposed to extreme temperatures. Don't skip doses Tempting as it may be to leave your medication behind for a short trip, doing so can be risky. Stopping treatment – even temporarily – can lead to relapse or worsening of symptoms (especially for chronic conditions like diabetes, hypertension or depression). For medicines like antidepressants or opioids, people may start feeling withdrawal effects. You're also at risk of reduced effectiveness if you miss doses of medicines that require consistent levels in your bloodstream. If you're considering a break from your medication, consult your doctor first. They can advise whether a short pause is safe or help you plan a travel-friendly regimen. Take the right documents While showing your NHS app to border officials may help demonstrate that a medicine is prescribed to you, it's not always sufficient, especially when travelling with restricted or controlled drugs and injectable medicines. Most countries require a copy of your prescription and a doctor's letter confirming the medication is for personal use. Your doctor is not legally obliged to issue this letter, but most will do so upon request. It's best to ask at least one to two weeks in advance, as some practices may charge a fee or require time to prepare the documentation. Travelling with medication doesn't have to be stressful, but it does require planning. With the right preparation, you can enjoy your holiday without compromising your health or running afoul of foreign laws.
