Bereaved urge ‘truth' as Covid inquiry shifts focus to care homes
Grieving relatives will give evidence this week as the module looking at the adult social care sector begins.
The first week of what is to be a five-week module will also hear from former health secretary Matt Hancock.
Mr Hancock, who resigned from government in 2021 after admitting breaking social distancing guidance by having an affair with a colleague, has given evidence to the inquiry multiple times.
He will return on Wednesday for a full-day session to face questions specifically about the care sector.
In 2023 he admitted the so-called protective ring he said had been put around care homes early in the pandemic was not an unbroken one, and he understood the strength of feeling people have on the issue.
At a Downing Street press conference on May 15 2020, Mr Hancock said: 'Right from the start, we've tried to throw a protective ring around our care homes.'
Bereaved families have previously called this phrase a 'sickening lie' and a 'joke'.
When the pandemic hit in early 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.
The Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice (CBFFJ) campaign group said people want answers about decisions made 'at the highest levels of government'.
From Monday, module six of the inquiry will look at the effect the pandemic had on both the publicly and privately funded adult social care sector across the UK.
Among the issues to be examined will be decisions made by the UK Government and devolved administrations on moving people from hospitals into adult care and residential homes in the early stages of the pandemic.
The module will also consider how the pandemic was managed in care and residential homes, including infection prevention and control measures, testing for the virus, the availability and adequacy of personal protective equipment (PPE), and the restrictions on access to such locations by healthcare professionals and loved ones.
Charlie Williams' 85-year-old father, Vernute, died at a care home in April 2020.
Mr Williams, a member of CBFFJ, said: 'We have been waiting years for this moment. What happened in care homes during the pandemic was not a tragic accident, it was the result of decisions made at the highest levels of government.
'Covid-positive patients were knowingly discharged from hospitals into care homes. There was no testing, no PPE, and no plan to protect the most vulnerable.
'Those in care were left to die. Bereaved families deserve to know who made those decisions and why.'
The CBFFJ group has written to inquiry chairwoman Baroness Heather Hallett, to express their concern at some 'key decision-makers' not expected to be called in this module, including former prime minister Boris Johnson.
Mr Williams said not calling Mr Johnson and other senior figures was 'shocking', adding: 'They were at the centre of government when these choices were made, and the inquiry's decision to exclude them is baffling and deeply damaging to any sense of justice.'
He said: 'This is the moment for those responsible to finally tell the truth. We want answers. We want accountability. We want justice.'
Members of bereaved groups from across the UK will give evidence on Tuesday, while representatives of the National Care Forum and Royal College of Nursing will give evidence on Thursday.
Public hearings for the care sector module are expected to run until the end of July.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ITV News
23 minutes ago
- ITV News
New health standards and labelling rules to be introduced for baby food
New government guidelines are being introduced to reduce the amount of sugar and salt in baby foods. Manufacturers will be given 18 months to implement the new rules for baby foods aimed at children up to 36 months old. They will be required to change recipes to reduce sugar and salt, without the use of sweeteners. High sugar intake in children's diets is a major contributor to rates of childhood obesity in the UK, which is among the highest in Western Europe. Obesity currently costs the NHS around £11.4 billion a year. There will also be new rules about labelling on baby food to try and clamp down on misleading claims about ingredients. For example, some products labelled as snacks for babies from seven months onwards contradict government recommendations that children aged 6-12 months do not need snacks between meals, only milk. Manufacturers will also be told to cease using marketing claims that make products appear healthier than they are - for example, products with labels such as 'contains no nasties' - when products may be high in sugar. Minister for Public Health, Ashley Dalton, said that babies' development is being harmed by poor diets and unhealthy food. 'Too often, parents are bombarded with confusing labels, disguising unhealthy foods packed with hidden sugars and salt," she said. 'Our Plan for Change will tackle this, giving parents the information they need and providing children with good nutritious food. "I'm determined to make it far easier for parents to keep their children healthy. "From working with influencers to get children exercising, to banning junk food ads near schools – our 10 Year Health Plan will help kids today be part of the healthiest generation of children ever.'
North Wales Chronicle
34 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Manufacturers given 18 months to cut sugar and salt in baby food products
Accompanying new guidelines to clarify labelling on baby food will help parents make informed choices about what they feed their children, the Department of Health and Social Care said. Manufacturers will be challenged to change the recipes for their products to reduce levels of salt and sugar, without the use of sweeteners, which are not permitted for use in commercial baby food. For example, baby desserts and breakfasts such as rice pudding, custard and ready-to-eat fruity porridge should contain less than 10g of total sugar per 100g, while baby meals should have no more than 60mg of salt per 100 calories or 100mg per 100 calories if cheese is included in the recipe. The guidelines will also tackle misleading labelling that often conflicts with official feeding advice. For example, some products labelled as snacks for babies from seven months on directly contradict government recommendations that children aged between six and 12 months do not need snacks between meals, only milk. Manufacturers will also be told to stop using misleading marketing claims that make products appear healthier than they are, for example products with labels such as 'contains no nasties' when they may be high in sugar. The move comes as data from the National Diet and Nutrition Survey, published in June, shows that more than two thirds of children aged 18 months to three years are eating too much sugar, while more than a fifth of children aged four to five years are overweight or living with obesity in England. High sugar intake in children's diets is a significant factor contributing to high rates of childhood obesity in the UK, which is among the highest in western Europe. Obesity rates have doubled since the 1990s, including among children. Obesity costs the NHS £11.4 billion a year and is one of the root causes of diabetes, heart disease and cancer. Public health minister Ashley Dalton said: 'Every child deserves a healthy, happy start to life. But babies' development is being harmed by poor diets and unhealthy food, holding them back and piling up pressure on the NHS. 'Too often, parents are bombarded with confusing labels, disguising unhealthy foods packed with hidden sugars and salt. 'Our plan for change will tackle this, giving parents the information they need and providing children with good nutritious food. 'I'm determined to make it far easier for parents to keep their children healthy. 'From working with influencers to get children exercising, to banning junk food ads near schools, our 10-year health plan will help kids today be part of the healthiest generation of children ever.' Katharine Jenner, director of the Obesity Health Alliance, said: 'For too long, commercial baby foods have been promoting high-sugar products disguised as 'healthy options', using misleading packaging. 'These new guidelines put the industry on notice: this practice must end. 'Making it easier for parents to buy healthier products is a baby step in the right direction – but what's really needed is a giant leap. 'It should not even be possible to sell baby food that goes against official feeding guidance, and the public agrees, with three in four people supporting a ban on high-sugar baby foods. 'If the industry fails to act quickly, the Government must step in with mandatory rules to set children up for a lifetime of good health.' Dr Kawther Hashem, head of research and impact at Action on Sugar, said: 'Our research has consistently shown excessive levels of sugars in commercial baby foods. 'These long-overdue voluntary guidelines are a step in the right direction, but they must not be the final word. 'Consuming too much sugar on a regular basis means children are taking in excess calories that, if not used for energy, are stored as fat. 'This increases the risk of weight gain and, if it starts early, that excess weight is often carried into adolescence and adulthood, raising the risk of overweight, obesity and agonising tooth decay. 'If we're serious about protecting our youngest children, these guidelines must be made mandatory. 'We urge the Government to closely monitor progress and act swiftly if companies fail to change.' Professor Simon Kenny, NHS England's national clinical director for children and young people, said: 'I can't overstate just how important good nutrition is during these formative months for babies' health in the long term, and you can't beat fresh foods. 'Reducing the salt and sugar levels in shop-bought baby food is a really important step, and these new guidelines alongside clearer labelling will help empower busy parents to make nutritious choices that give their children the best possible start in life.' Dr Hannah Brisden, head of policy and advocacy at the Food Foundation, said: 'Giving every child the best start in life begins with good nutrition. 'Today's announcement on commercial baby foods highlights the need to protect families from aggressive marketing and end misleading claims on sugary products. 'Our research found up to 43 claims on a single baby snack, despite many being high in sugar. 'The industry has been warned to clean up their act with voluntary guidelines, but to truly protect children, mandatory standards are needed. 'We urge the Government to monitor progress closely and be ready to step in if companies don't act.'
Glasgow Times
34 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Manufacturers given 18 months to cut sugar and salt in baby food products
Accompanying new guidelines to clarify labelling on baby food will help parents make informed choices about what they feed their children, the Department of Health and Social Care said. Manufacturers will be challenged to change the recipes for their products to reduce levels of salt and sugar, without the use of sweeteners, which are not permitted for use in commercial baby food. For example, baby desserts and breakfasts such as rice pudding, custard and ready-to-eat fruity porridge should contain less than 10g of total sugar per 100g, while baby meals should have no more than 60mg of salt per 100 calories or 100mg per 100 calories if cheese is included in the recipe. The guidelines will also tackle misleading labelling that often conflicts with official feeding advice. For example, some products labelled as snacks for babies from seven months on directly contradict government recommendations that children aged between six and 12 months do not need snacks between meals, only milk. Manufacturers will also be told to stop using misleading marketing claims that make products appear healthier than they are, for example products with labels such as 'contains no nasties' when they may be high in sugar. The move comes as data from the National Diet and Nutrition Survey, published in June, shows that more than two thirds of children aged 18 months to three years are eating too much sugar, while more than a fifth of children aged four to five years are overweight or living with obesity in England. High sugar intake in children's diets is a significant factor contributing to high rates of childhood obesity in the UK, which is among the highest in western Europe. Obesity rates have doubled since the 1990s, including among children. Obesity costs the NHS £11.4 billion a year and is one of the root causes of diabetes, heart disease and cancer. Public health minister Ashley Dalton said: 'Every child deserves a healthy, happy start to life. But babies' development is being harmed by poor diets and unhealthy food, holding them back and piling up pressure on the NHS. 'Too often, parents are bombarded with confusing labels, disguising unhealthy foods packed with hidden sugars and salt. 'Our plan for change will tackle this, giving parents the information they need and providing children with good nutritious food. 'I'm determined to make it far easier for parents to keep their children healthy. 'From working with influencers to get children exercising, to banning junk food ads near schools, our 10-year health plan will help kids today be part of the healthiest generation of children ever.' Katharine Jenner, director of the Obesity Health Alliance, said: 'For too long, commercial baby foods have been promoting high-sugar products disguised as 'healthy options', using misleading packaging. 'These new guidelines put the industry on notice: this practice must end. 'Making it easier for parents to buy healthier products is a baby step in the right direction – but what's really needed is a giant leap. 'It should not even be possible to sell baby food that goes against official feeding guidance, and the public agrees, with three in four people supporting a ban on high-sugar baby foods. 'If the industry fails to act quickly, the Government must step in with mandatory rules to set children up for a lifetime of good health.' Dr Kawther Hashem, head of research and impact at Action on Sugar, said: 'Our research has consistently shown excessive levels of sugars in commercial baby foods. 'These long-overdue voluntary guidelines are a step in the right direction, but they must not be the final word. 'Consuming too much sugar on a regular basis means children are taking in excess calories that, if not used for energy, are stored as fat. 'This increases the risk of weight gain and, if it starts early, that excess weight is often carried into adolescence and adulthood, raising the risk of overweight, obesity and agonising tooth decay. 'If we're serious about protecting our youngest children, these guidelines must be made mandatory. 'We urge the Government to closely monitor progress and act swiftly if companies fail to change.' Professor Simon Kenny, NHS England's national clinical director for children and young people, said: 'I can't overstate just how important good nutrition is during these formative months for babies' health in the long term, and you can't beat fresh foods. 'Reducing the salt and sugar levels in shop-bought baby food is a really important step, and these new guidelines alongside clearer labelling will help empower busy parents to make nutritious choices that give their children the best possible start in life.' Dr Hannah Brisden, head of policy and advocacy at the Food Foundation, said: 'Giving every child the best start in life begins with good nutrition. 'Today's announcement on commercial baby foods highlights the need to protect families from aggressive marketing and end misleading claims on sugary products. 'Our research found up to 43 claims on a single baby snack, despite many being high in sugar. 'The industry has been warned to clean up their act with voluntary guidelines, but to truly protect children, mandatory standards are needed. 'We urge the Government to monitor progress closely and be ready to step in if companies don't act.'
