Former Health Secretary Matt Hancock has defended the controversial policy of discharging hospital patients during the early stages of Kovid -19 epidemic, stating the UK Kovid -19 inquiry that it was the “worst decision” at that time when despite the devastating death.
The policy implemented in early 2020 saw that patients rapidly prevent facilities taking care of facilities in an attempt to free the beds from hospitals and overwhelming the NHS from being overwhelmed as the spread of the virus.
The strategy has come under intensive investigation, especially as the investigation has heard that between March 2020 and July 2022, the viruses across the virus across the UK occurred over 43,000 deaths.
Earlier this week, a civil servant described the toll as “generational slaughter within Care Homes”.
Showing before questioning on Wednesday, Mr. Hancock admitted that the discharge policy was an “incredibly controversial issue”. However, he said: “Nobody has yet provided me with an option that was available at that time that saved more lives.”
The current attention of the investigation on the care sector comes in the form of bereaved people, whose loved ones died in the houses of care, the evidence continues to demand truth and accountability.
However, patients were not required to test before entering, or until mid-April, for touching patients to isolate.
It was capable of spreading the virus despite increasing awareness about risks of people without Covid-19 symptoms.
Mr. Hancock, who resigned from the government in 2021, has given evidence to inquiries several times after breaking the social distortion guidance by having a relationship with a colleague.
In particular, returning to a full day session to face questions about the care sector, he said that the discharge policy in the hospital was a government decision, but the then NHS Chief Executive Officer Sir Simon Stevens, was now “operated” by Lord Stevens.
Mr. Hancock said: “It was formally a government decision. It was signed by the Prime Minister. It was actually operated by NHS Chief Executive Simon Stevens, but was widely discussed.”
During the investigation, Mr. Hancock said in his witness statement that NHS England had “emphasized” the policy, and when he himself did not take a decision, he took responsibility for this as the then Health Secretary.
He said that this was an “incredibly controversial issue”, but he said “no one has given me an option yet that was available at the time that saved more lives”.
He said that there was no good option, saying: “This is the lowest worst decision that could be taken at that time.”
He further pressed, he said that he agreed with both and defended the decision at that time.
The High Court ruled in 2022 that government policies were “illegal” on discharging hospital patients in care houses at the beginning of the epidemic.
While the judges stated that it was necessary to discharge patients to preserve the ability of NHS “. They found that the government did not advise that it is not advisable that touching patients should separate from the existing residents for 14 days after entry.
When asked about March 17, 2020, when NHS owners were instructed to start the discharge process, Mr. Hancock said that the authorities were “pushing very hard” to get more PPEs in the care home. He said Care Holmes was not advised to separate the returning residents without symptoms, a “mistake”, but it was at that time in line with the clinical guidance.
In 2023, appearing for a separate module of inquiry, Mr. Hancock admitted the so -called protective ring that he had stated that the care was kept around the houses in the epidemic, which was not an unbreakable, and said that he understood the strength to feel people on the issue.
It is clearly ridiculous and derogatory that they say they tried to throw a protective ring around care houses when their department’s policies had to spread Kovid like a forest fire among the weakest loved ones of the society.
At a Downing Street Press Conference on 15 May 2020, Mr. Hancock said: “From the beginning, we have tried to throw a protective ring around our care houses.”
Mr. Hancock said from interrogation: “I will insist on that piece of rhetoric, what I said was that we had tried – it was not possible to protect as much as I wanted.”
He said: “Security, what at that time was clearly not as much as we liked, but the options were worse.
“We were trying to protect as much as possible.
“Everything I can do takes you back to real decisions and the resources that we had at that time.
He went away: “We were trying to do everything we could possibly do, we were in foggy circumstances.”
Advocate Jacqueline Kerry Casey highlighted the anonymous evidence given for questioning, saying: “One person specially said that he (Shri Hancock) had lied about the situation with the care houses, there was no security with security. We were left to raise our own ships. He did not. He now contributes to society.”
Mr. Hancock said that it was “not help” for questioning the “Exchange Brickbats”, but it went ahead: “Whatever I did as a department was done through the effort of a big team, and we were all drawn as much as we could probably to save life – saying that we tried to throw a safety fold.
“Of course, it was not correct. It was impossible – it was an unprecedented epidemic, and the context was exceptionally difficult.
“I care about what we did, the substance of what we impose, and most importantly what we can do in the future to ensure that the available options are better than last time.”
Condolences have earlier called this “sick lie” and a “joke”.
Nikola Brook, a lawyer representing more than 7,000 families from more than 7,000 families from the Covid-19–190 families for Justice-19 (CBFJ), said that the claim of Mr. Hancock said the discharge policy was the lowest decision “The worst decision was” humiliation to insult every and every person “.
She said: “She knew at the time that many care homes did not have the ability to separate those who would be discharged from the hospital and Kovid Airborne.
“It is clearly ridiculous and derogatory that they say they tried to throw a protective ring around the care houses when their department’s policies caused Kovid to spread like a wildfire among the weakest loved ones of the society.
“Mr. Hancock claims that the decision to discharge people in care homes was operated by NHS Chief Executive Simon Stevens, yet the investigation is not calling them. We will call him to review the decision immediately.”
The CBFJ Group had already written to the chairman of the investigation, Baron Hether Havlet,, to express their concern on some “major decision makers”, it was not expected to be called into the module, including former Prime Minister Boris Boris Johnson.
Underlining the status of the adult social care sector on the outbreak of epidemic, Mr. Hancock said that it was “needed, and badly improved, improvement”, but rejected its suggestion that it is a “cinderella service” for NHS.
He said that the epidemic contingent schemes prepared by local authorities for adult social care were “unique” at the time, and described “a hodge of accountability” between local councils and government departments.
He claimed that another epidemic hitting positioned the situation for care homes “is not better”, and suggested a series of recommendations, including the separation facilities in care homes and ensuring a store of individual safety equipment (PPE).
The interrogation module focuses on the influence of epidemic on both public and privately funded adult social care sector in six Britain.
Public hearing for care sector modules is expected to run by the end of July.
