I genuinely don't know. And that's not to be obtuse or obstructive but, as ever, it's complicated. I don't believe you will find anything like that written on a government website if that's what you mean, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's not part of any triage guidance for clinicians. If that means you can 'win' a semantic argument on the internet with someone, go ahead and claim your internet points if it serves a purpose, but individual clinicians at individual trusts may well have different guidance. Don't forget the conversation moved some time ago to one of protecting finite resources and away from care at the point of need. (Helped in no small part by the Lansley reforms but a discussion perhaps for a different time). Define 'policy'. Government advice provides a part of the framework.
What should be absolutely obvious to everyone is that people, primarily the elderly, but also those with underlying health conditions, those that ambulances didn't collect (for a myriad of reasons), those who decided to not bother the nhs and stay at home, as well as those that filled out forms to say don't waste time and resource on me. Have all died. Without receiving care at the point of need. And they've done so in their thousands. Somewhere along the line triage decisions have been made in some of those cases and they will have been made, in line with guidance led policy decisions be that at government level, trust level, hospital level etc.
What should also be obvious is that residents of care homes have indeed been left to fend for themselves en masse. It's borne out in the statistics as well as in individual accounts.
How this all started of course, both the national situation and indeed this conversation, was off the back of the government advice that was, freeing up capacity as @LondonLax said, and as I very much agreed with.
That's a strange logical conclusion to my mind.