40k UK cases today, so England 32k when it updates - falling again - expect front page cases to be green, and the media to go in to frenzy about a meaningless reported deaths figure after welsh and weekend catch up all converged.
Tony Idiot Livesy on R5 still cannot understand the weekly covid cycle - 'cases up today on yesterday' FFS. How, 18 months in, do we still have this shit?
To bw fair during the June to July rise quite a lot of people on PB didn't understand it either.
People on PB don't get paid to whip up panic buying comment sensibly on the news...
You say PBers don't get paid but there have been some newcomers here just in time for tomorrow's budget. Are they all humble – and amateur – seekers after truth, or is there the odd astroturfer for Rishi or Sir Keir?
Quinton de Kock looks to be the new Kaepernick, excluded for refusing to take part in a mandatory political statement
Will sport in 2022 be about players getting their Kocks out before kick off in support?
Rather undermines the whole process - now it's explicit that compliance is mandatory it's impossible to know if any other player believes in it at all or is just safeguarding their career by keeping their head (and knee) down.
It is mandatory for the South African cricket team, or was for that game, not sure if they will continue or not. Hopefully they will reflect that mandatory is a bad idea.
It is not mandatory generally, and quite a few teams and players don't partake in UK football where it is most widespread.
It seems clear we're gone past the peak of this mini-wave, but it's not yet obious whether we'll see a sustained fall or further peaks and troughs within the 25k-50k range.
My guess is the latter, which is still manageable. Even if we have to endure clamouring for Plan B / lockdown every time we're on an upwards trend.
My guess (and I will admit to being a bit of an optimist) is that so long as the government actually encourages everyone to get boosters, then we should see incidence drop to the sub 5k level, with occasional hotspots flaring up.
Not allowed if you're under 50 in the UK (for most people).
So electric chargers will be set to by default avoid peak (most expensive) hours but that can be overrode if required?
Seems sensible, what's your issue with that?
That peaks are peaks for a reason. How would a rule that light bulbs should only be lit during the hours of daylight sound?
Except there is no similarly good reason to be charging all cars at the same time. And the total demand will be many time greater.
Most people commute, shop and travel in daylight hours and sleep overnight.
So what's your issue with by-default charging overnight while sleeping?
With the default being able to be overrode if required.
Are we perhaps at cross purposes? How is overnight going to stay off peak if 97% of car owners want to/are constrained to charge their cars then? I assume without having a clue that a days worth of car charger is more then ones other electric consumption put together
In a smart grid environment, you would have the cars staggered through the night, so everyone would wake up with a full tank of electrons, but not every car was charging between 8pm and 11pm.
Also in a smart grid environment I imagine it would be adaptable so if the winds or waves were generating more energy today at 2am, with a lull in generation at 4am, then more vehicles could be charged at 2am.
If a fortnight later its the other way around, then vice-versa.
All sounds lovely, but also a putting a quart in a pint pot scenario.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
This may have been mentioned already but Prime video subscribers can watch Emma playing this afternoon. NB 16:00 but probs a bit later as match before wont be on court for a few mins yet.
And just for you all you Punsters out there, she is playing in Romania at the Transylvania Open. Got to be something for you to get your teeth into there. (and apologies if that's been done already too).
Nine minutes to kick-off, according to Betfair, which has Radicanu 1.21 vs Hercog 5.5.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves.
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
That's interesting. I guess constitutionally the budget speech is simply the sponsoring member introducing a bill, in this case the Finance Bill, and that can be done any time without any fanfare.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
Interesting piece on the ability of the super-rich to reduce their tax burden by realising income through capital gains. Apparently those with incomes over £9mn a year are paying an effective tax rate of just 21%. That's about half of mine. Not amused!
It needs to be addressed
This analysis (leaving aside that it's published by the turbo tax avoiders at the G) seems to leave out the non-existence of an indexation allowance.
So electric chargers will be set to by default avoid peak (most expensive) hours but that can be overrode if required?
Seems sensible, what's your issue with that?
That peaks are peaks for a reason. How would a rule that light bulbs should only be lit during the hours of daylight sound?
Except there is no similarly good reason to be charging all cars at the same time. And the total demand will be many time greater.
Most people commute, shop and travel in daylight hours and sleep overnight.
So what's your issue with by-default charging overnight while sleeping?
With the default being able to be overrode if required.
Are we perhaps at cross purposes? How is overnight going to stay off peak if 97% of car owners want to/are constrained to charge their cars then? I assume without having a clue that a days worth of car charger is more then ones other electric consumption put together
In a smart grid environment, you would have the cars staggered through the night, so everyone would wake up with a full tank of electrons, but not every car was charging between 8pm and 11pm.
Also in a smart grid environment I imagine it would be adaptable so if the winds or waves were generating more energy today at 2am, with a lull in generation at 4am, then more vehicles could be charged at 2am.
If a fortnight later its the other way around, then vice-versa.
All sounds lovely, but also a putting a quart in a pint pot scenario.
Why?
It's just filing in the underuse holes.
I suspect they were making the slightly different point that the common theory that battery power will remove the problem with intermittency wind and solar go away is utterly laughable - the largest battery storage facility in the world could currently power the UK for just over 2 minutes.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp While I expect cases to plateau or fall a bit due to half term breaking chains of transmission, the falls *right now* are likely due to less testing cos people are away / not at school. v rough calc: 10% +ve rate and 100K fewer tests ~ 10K cases shortfall. 1/2
So electric chargers will be set to by default avoid peak (most expensive) hours but that can be overrode if required?
Seems sensible, what's your issue with that?
That peaks are peaks for a reason. How would a rule that light bulbs should only be lit during the hours of daylight sound?
Except there is no similarly good reason to be charging all cars at the same time. And the total demand will be many time greater.
Most people commute, shop and travel in daylight hours and sleep overnight.
So what's your issue with by-default charging overnight while sleeping?
With the default being able to be overrode if required.
Are we perhaps at cross purposes? How is overnight going to stay off peak if 97% of car owners want to/are constrained to charge their cars then? I assume without having a clue that a days worth of car charger is more then ones other electric consumption put together
In a smart grid environment, you would have the cars staggered through the night, so everyone would wake up with a full tank of electrons, but not every car was charging between 8pm and 11pm.
Also in a smart grid environment I imagine it would be adaptable so if the winds or waves were generating more energy today at 2am, with a lull in generation at 4am, then more vehicles could be charged at 2am.
If a fortnight later its the other way around, then vice-versa.
Exactly. The grid would broadcast when it had excess generating capacity.
If you want to do it properly, you might have three different levels: super peak (i.e. we're approaching capacity), regular and peak, and off peak.
People could be paid by the grid to automatically turn down air conditioners, lights, etc., when the grid was in a super peak state.
I imagine it will be far more granular than just three different states. Some distributors and large consumption businesses can already operate on the basis of half-hourly tariffs that are varied.
A surprisingly large amount of energy can be distributed smartly. Fridges and freezers are another one, they can be set to switch off altogether at times of high cost (so long as the door's kept reasonably shut) and switch back on at times of low cost.
I imagine in the future a lot of electronics will be set to do stuff like this fairly automatically. Why couldn't Laptops etc switch to battery mode at high-cost times down to a threshold for instance?
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp While I expect cases to plateau or fall a bit due to half term breaking chains of transmission, the falls *right now* are likely due to less testing cos people are away / not at school. v rough calc: 10% +ve rate and 100K fewer tests ~ 10K cases shortfall. 1/2
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp While I expect cases to plateau or fall a bit due to half term breaking chains of transmission, the falls *right now* are likely due to less testing cos people are away / not at school. v rough calc: 10% +ve rate and 100K fewer tests ~ 10K cases shortfall. 1/2
As usual her calcs are indeed very rough. Current positive rate for all tests is 5%
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp While I expect cases to plateau or fall a bit due to half term breaking chains of transmission, the falls *right now* are likely due to less testing cos people are away / not at school. v rough calc: 10% +ve rate and 100K fewer tests ~ 10K cases shortfall. 1/2
Positivity is at 10%?
It's just under 10% for PCR, but given the reduction in number of tests she quotes is total tests, she's misleadingly conflating and should be using the total positivity rate which is 5%.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
Hope he does do something. Poor form by the government.
Cancelling the Budget would be a genuine
Sunak would not be looking so clever then would he?
It's not just Sunak. Too many Chancellors have been doing it for far too long.
It's really stupid politically as well. It gives them a couple of weeks of okayish headlines but then the only thing left for after budget day is the bad shit, and that's what everyone remembers as a result. Remember Osborne giving away (in both senses) all his goodies in advance so we had a fortnight of negative headlines about pasty taxes and changes to charitable donations? Or Hammond and his backtracking on NI?
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp While I expect cases to plateau or fall a bit due to half term breaking chains of transmission, the falls *right now* are likely due to less testing cos people are away / not at school. v rough calc: 10% +ve rate and 100K fewer tests ~ 10K cases shortfall. 1/2
So electric chargers will be set to by default avoid peak (most expensive) hours but that can be overrode if required?
Seems sensible, what's your issue with that?
That peaks are peaks for a reason. How would a rule that light bulbs should only be lit during the hours of daylight sound?
Except there is no similarly good reason to be charging all cars at the same time. And the total demand will be many time greater.
Most people commute, shop and travel in daylight hours and sleep overnight.
So what's your issue with by-default charging overnight while sleeping?
With the default being able to be overrode if required.
Are we perhaps at cross purposes? How is overnight going to stay off peak if 97% of car owners want to/are constrained to charge their cars then? I assume without having a clue that a days worth of car charger is more then ones other electric consumption put together
In a smart grid environment, you would have the cars staggered through the night, so everyone would wake up with a full tank of electrons, but not every car was charging between 8pm and 11pm.
Also in a smart grid environment I imagine it would be adaptable so if the winds or waves were generating more energy today at 2am, with a lull in generation at 4am, then more vehicles could be charged at 2am.
If a fortnight later its the other way around, then vice-versa.
All sounds lovely, but also a putting a quart in a pint pot scenario.
Quite the opposite. Its demand smoothing and entirely reasonable.
If the a very significant proportion of your electricity consumption doesn't need to be right now but can be in a couple of hours time then it makes load sharing without the end user seeing any problems much easier to handle.
It also makes the unreliability of wind etc much easier to handle too. Cars can be charged while the turbines are spinning.
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp While I expect cases to plateau or fall a bit due to half term breaking chains of transmission, the falls *right now* are likely due to less testing cos people are away / not at school. v rough calc: 10% +ve rate and 100K fewer tests ~ 10K cases shortfall. 1/2
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp While I expect cases to plateau or fall a bit due to half term breaking chains of transmission, the falls *right now* are likely due to less testing cos people are away / not at school. v rough calc: 10% +ve rate and 100K fewer tests ~ 10K cases shortfall. 1/2
Positivity is at 10%?
No, it isn't
Someone wouldn't lie on the internet to further their agenda, would they?
Seattle Times ($) - Report: Washington Secretary of State Kim Wyman will be named to Biden administration election-security post
Washington Secretary of State Kim Wyman is expected to be named to a key election-security position in the Biden administration, according to a report by CNN.
Wyman, a Republican, is set to be appointed to lead the Department of Homeland Security’s efforts to protect elections from foreign and domestic interference, CNN reported, citing anonymous sources.
Wyman’s office did not immediately dispute the CNN report.
“The Office of the Secretary of State cannot confirm the information included in the CNN article,” Wyman spokesperson Kylee Zabel said in an email.
Wyman didn’t respond to interview requests, and Zabel said she would not be available on Monday. Potential appointees in presidential administrations are often told not to talk until their role is formally announced.
If she does take the new position, Wyman would be charged with leading election-security efforts at DHS’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, CNN reported, saying the appointment would not be official until White House paperwork is completed.
The White House did not respond to a request for comment.
The reported appointment would put Wyman, a nationally regarded expert on mail-in balloting and security, in a position working with elections officials across the U.S. at a time when many of her fellow Republicans have followed former President Donald Trump in fanning baseless conspiracy theories about the 2020 election.
Wyman has pushed back forcibly against such fraud claims, publicly criticizing the recent “audit” of votes in Arizona’s Maricopa County as “political theater.” She has defended mail balloting as secure and rejected claims by Washington’s 2020 GOP gubernatorial candidate Loren Culp, who filed a lawsuit alleging fraud but dropped it after his attorney was threatened with legal sanctions.
Wyman served as Thurston County auditor for a decade before winning election as Secretary of State in 2012. She was reelected in 2016 and 2020. She is the sole remaining Republican to hold statewide office in Washington.
Her departure could give Democrats a leg up at claiming the secretary of state office that has eluded them for decades.
Upon Wyman’s resignation, a temporary successor would be named by Gov. Jay Inslee, a Democrat.
That appointee would serve until the next general election in November 2022, according to Inslee deputy general counsel Taylor Wonhoff, who cited a 2013 legal memo from the state attorney general’s office.
The winning candidate in the 2022 election would serve out the remainder of Wyman’s term through 2024.
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp While I expect cases to plateau or fall a bit due to half term breaking chains of transmission, the falls *right now* are likely due to less testing cos people are away / not at school. v rough calc: 10% +ve rate and 100K fewer tests ~ 10K cases shortfall. 1/2
Positivity is at 10%?
Nonsense. Her negativity is always 100%.
R started falling long before the half term. I am still trying to get the latest data from the API - bloody idiots ad DDOSing it - but the see yesterdays here
It seems clear we're gone past the peak of this mini-wave, but it's not yet obious whether we'll see a sustained fall or further peaks and troughs within the 25k-50k range.
My guess is the latter, which is still manageable. Even if we have to endure clamouring for Plan B / lockdown every time we're on an upwards trend.
My guess (and I will admit to being a bit of an optimist) is that so long as the government actually encourages everyone to get boosters, then we should see incidence drop to the sub 5k level, with occasional hotspots flaring up.
Not allowed if you're under 50 in the UK (for most people).
When there is no issue with vaccine availability, I find artificial barriers to demand very odd.
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp While I expect cases to plateau or fall a bit due to half term breaking chains of transmission, the falls *right now* are likely due to less testing cos people are away / not at school. v rough calc: 10% +ve rate and 100K fewer tests ~ 10K cases shortfall. 1/2
Positivity is at 10%?
No, it isn't
Someone wouldn't lie on the internet to further their agenda, would they?
I am on the internet to spread Revealed Truth You are furthering an Agenda He is spreading Extremism
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp While I expect cases to plateau or fall a bit due to half term breaking chains of transmission, the falls *right now* are likely due to less testing cos people are away / not at school. v rough calc: 10% +ve rate and 100K fewer tests ~ 10K cases shortfall. 1/2
Positivity is at 10%?
No, it isn't
Someone wouldn't lie on the internet to further their agenda, would they?
I am on the internet to spread Revealed Truth You are furthering an Agenda He is spreading Extremism
Not the best example.
I would steer a million miles clear of anyone spreading the Revealed Truth.
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp While I expect cases to plateau or fall a bit due to half term breaking chains of transmission, the falls *right now* are likely due to less testing cos people are away / not at school. v rough calc: 10% +ve rate and 100K fewer tests ~ 10K cases shortfall. 1/2
Positivity is at 10%?
No, it isn't
Someone wouldn't lie on the internet to further their agenda, would they?
I am on the internet to spread Revealed Truth You are furthering an Agenda He is spreading Extremism
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp While I expect cases to plateau or fall a bit due to half term breaking chains of transmission, the falls *right now* are likely due to less testing cos people are away / not at school. v rough calc: 10% +ve rate and 100K fewer tests ~ 10K cases shortfall. 1/2
Positivity is at 10%?
No, it isn't
Someone wouldn't lie on the internet to further their agenda, would they?
I am on the internet to spread Revealed Truth You are furthering an Agenda He is spreading Extremism
Not the best example.
I would steer a million miles clear of anyone spreading the Revealed Truth.
But I know the Revealed Truth.
God told me. Personally, and everything.
Note: My favourite character in the Bible is John the Baptist. A rare thing - the guy who shouts "God told me who your leader should be - *him*"
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
New: Government u-turns on sewage amendment. Says the Environment Bill will be further strengthened with an amendment that will see “a duty enshrined in law to ensure water companies secure a progressive reduction in the adverse impacts of discharges from storm overflows.” https://twitter.com/Laura_K_Hughes/status/1453039095387758597
New: Government u-turns on sewage amendment. Says the Environment Bill will be further strengthened with an amendment that will see “a duty enshrined in law to ensure water companies secure a progressive reduction in the adverse impacts of discharges from storm overflows.” https://twitter.com/Laura_K_Hughes/status/1453039095387758597
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
I see there has been some chatter earlier and yesterday regarding vaxports and other ways to nobble and sneer those who have chosen not to be vaccinated.
Here is an interesting piece from Nature, citing a recent study:
“People who become infected with the Delta variant are less likely to pass the virus to their close contacts if they have already had a COVID-19 vaccine than if they haven’t. But that protective effect is relatively small, and dwindles alarmingly at three months after the receipt of the second shot.”
The article goes on to say:
1) those infected with Delta have roughly the same levels of viral genetic materials in their noses regardless of whether they’d previously been vaccinated.
2) Though this shows that vaccinated and unvaccinated people might be infectious, studies also suggest that infected vaccinated people are less likely to spread the virus if they subsequently catch Delta because their nasal virus drop faster than do those of unvaccinated infected people and their nasal swabs contain smaller amounts of pathogen.
I’m concerned that it has taken hold that the chance of catching Covid from an unvaccinated person is very high indeed whereas the chance of catching it from a vaccinated person is very low indeed (nil even). This is wrong and is adding to:
a) the unreasonable demonisation of those people who have elected not to have the vaccine and
b) an inflated belief that vaxports and other life-hampering initiatives are the answer.
This is partly displacement activity, of course, to avoid the truth that we need to learn to live with a new endemic threat in life.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
I see there has been some chatter earlier and yesterday regarding vaxports and other ways to nobble and sneer those who have chosen not to be vaccinated.
Here is an interesting piece from Nature, citing a recent study:
“People who become infected with the Delta variant are less likely to pass the virus to their close contacts if they have already had a COVID-19 vaccine than if they haven’t. But that protective effect is relatively small, and dwindles alarmingly at three months after the receipt of the second shot.”
The article goes on to say:
1) those infected with Delta have roughly the same levels of viral genetic materials in their noses regardless of whether they’d previously been vaccinated.
2) Though this shows that vaccinated and unvaccinated people might be infectious, studies also suggest that infected vaccinated people are less likely to spread the virus if they subsequently catch Delta because their nasal virus drop faster than do those of unvaccinated infected people and their nasal swabs contain smaller amounts of pathogen.
I’m concerned that it has taken hold that the chance of catching Covid from an unvaccinated person is very high indeed whereas the chance of catching it from a vaccinated person is very low indeed (nil even). This is wrong and is adding to:
a) the unreasonable demonisation of those people who have elected not to have the vaccine and
b) an inflated belief that vaxports and other life-hampering initiatives are the answer.
This is partly displacement activity, of course, to avoid the truth that we need to learn to live with a new endemic threat in life.
And to be fair that comes through vaccination just as flu does
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
It seems clear we're gone past the peak of this mini-wave, but it's not yet obious whether we'll see a sustained fall or further peaks and troughs within the 25k-50k range.
My guess is the latter, which is still manageable. Even if we have to endure clamouring for Plan B / lockdown every time we're on an upwards trend.
My guess (and I will admit to being a bit of an optimist) is that so long as the government actually encourages everyone to get boosters, then we should see incidence drop to the sub 5k level, with occasional hotspots flaring up.
Not allowed if you're under 50 in the UK (for most people).
Scotland has a category called "16+ unpaid carer" which is so loosely defined it covers a metric fuck tonnne of the population.
I've now read the full Standards Committee report on Owen Paterson. Yes, I know I need to get a life, thanks. But it's quite interesting, honestly. In the interests of public service, there follows a very brief summary. Two things stand out:
1. His arrogance - essentially, without being explicit, he argues that he's too important and superior for the rules to apply to him.
2. The weakness of his defence. The rules allow for lobbying/paid advocacy in exceptional circumstances, where a "serious wrong or substantial injustice" is to be averted. However, in his 24 years as an MP he has only ever pointed to such an event twice: both in the interests of the two companies for which he was a ridiculously highly paid consultant.
Basically, he's guilty as charged, with knobs on.
If there are any other sad losers with too much time on their hands out there, here's the link:
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp While I expect cases to plateau or fall a bit due to half term breaking chains of transmission, the falls *right now* are likely due to less testing cos people are away / not at school. v rough calc: 10% +ve rate and 100K fewer tests ~ 10K cases shortfall. 1/2
Positivity is at 10%?
No, it isn't
How are you calculating positivity, are you able to break it down by region? As on the Covid dash board quite a few regions seem to be at or above 10%
I've now read the full Standards Committee report on Owen Paterson. Yes, I know I need to get a life, thanks. But it's quite interesting, honestly. Two things stand out:
1. His arrogance - essentially, without being explicit, he argues that he's too important and superior for the rules to apply to him.
2. The weakness of his defence. The rules allow for lobbying/paid advocacy in exceptional circumstances, where a "serious wrong or substantial injustice" is to be averted. However, in his 24 years as an MP he has only ever pointed to such an event twice: both in the interests of the two companies for which he was a ridiculously highly paid consultant.
Basically, he's guilty as charged, with knobs on.
If there are any other sad losers with too much time on their hands out there, here's the link:
I've now read the full Standards Committee report on Owen Paterson. Yes, I know I need to get a life, thanks. But it's quite interesting, honestly. In the interests of public service, there follows a very brief summary. Two things stand out:
1. His arrogance - essentially, without being explicit, he argues that he's too important and superior for the rules to apply to him.
2. The weakness of his defence. The rules allow for lobbying/paid advocacy in exceptional circumstances, where a "serious wrong or substantial injustice" is to be averted. However, in his 24 years as an MP he has only ever pointed to such an event twice: both in the interests of the two companies for which he was a ridiculously highly paid consultant.
Basically, he's guilty as charged, with knobs on.
If there are any other sad losers with too much time on their hands out there, here's the link:
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp While I expect cases to plateau or fall a bit due to half term breaking chains of transmission, the falls *right now* are likely due to less testing cos people are away / not at school. v rough calc: 10% +ve rate and 100K fewer tests ~ 10K cases shortfall. 1/2
Positivity is at 10%?
No, it isn't
How are you calculating positivity, are you able to break it down by region? As on the Covid dash board quite a few regions seem to be at or above 10%
Total positive results against total tests.
Yes, there are regions above 10%, also regions on a lot less.
Umph. There’s something we’re not being told, isn’t there?
Yes
It was always bound to start this way - precautionary hospitalisations, ordered to rest by doctors, etc. Plus I dunno what the stats are but there's a strong folk belief the demise of one of a long marriage happens the demise of the other.
Umph. There’s something we’re not being told, isn’t there?
Yeah.
I know it used to be impolite (and illegal) to talk about the death of a monarch but there's plenty of evidence out there when one half of a long standing couple dies the other one goes not so long afterwards.
There was a story in The Sunday Times saying for future events the Queen will be accompanied by one of her children or the Duke of Cambridge so if she has to cancel at the last moment there will be a senior royal on hand to ensure the event happens and the attendees aren't left disappointed.
Umph. There’s something we’re not being told, isn’t there?
Yes
It was always bound to start this way - precautionary hospitalisations, ordered to rest by doctors, etc. Plus I dunno what the stats are but there's a strong folk belief the demise of one of a long marriage happens the demise of the other.
I've now read the full Standards Committee report on Owen Paterson. Yes, I know I need to get a life, thanks. But it's quite interesting, honestly. In the interests of public service, there follows a very brief summary. Two things stand out:
1. His arrogance - essentially, without being explicit, he argues that he's too important and superior for the rules to apply to him.
2. The weakness of his defence. The rules allow for lobbying/paid advocacy in exceptional circumstances, where a "serious wrong or substantial injustice" is to be averted. However, in his 24 years as an MP he has only ever pointed to such an event twice: both in the interests of the two companies for which he was a ridiculously highly paid consultant.
Basically, he's guilty as charged, with knobs on.
If there are any other sad losers with too much time on their hands out there, here's the link:
If the process was flawed, as it's being argued by some, then he has grounds for appeal. We'll soon see if this is all bluster.
His argument that the process was flawed is covered comprehensively in the full report. It doesn't look to me like he has a leg to stand on. Remember, it's not an adversarial court hearing; it's a parliamentary inquiry. Paterson seems to think it should be the same as a criminal hearing, but it isn't. I'm not sure if he can appeal or not.
I've now read the full Standards Committee report on Owen Paterson. Yes, I know I need to get a life, thanks. But it's quite interesting, honestly. In the interests of public service, there follows a very brief summary. Two things stand out:
1. His arrogance - essentially, without being explicit, he argues that he's too important and superior for the rules to apply to him.
2. The weakness of his defence. The rules allow for lobbying/paid advocacy in exceptional circumstances, where a "serious wrong or substantial injustice" is to be averted. However, in his 24 years as an MP he has only ever pointed to such an event twice: both in the interests of the two companies for which he was a ridiculously highly paid consultant.
Basically, he's guilty as charged, with knobs on.
If there are any other sad losers with too much time on their hands out there, here's the link:
If the process was flawed, as it's being argued by some, then he has grounds for appeal. We'll soon see if this is all bluster.
His argument that the process was flawed is covered comprehensively in the full report. It doesn't look to me like he has a leg to stand on. Remember, it's not an adversarial court hearing; it's a parliamentary inquiry. Paterson seems to think it should be the same as a criminal hearing, but it isn't. I'm not sure if he can appeal or not.
The spaghetti-tree hoax was a three-minute hoax report broadcast on April Fools' Day 1957 by the BBC current-affairs programme Panorama, purportedly showing a family in southern Switzerland harvesting spaghetti from the family "spaghetti tree". At the time spaghetti was relatively unknown in the UK, so many British people were unaware that it is made from wheat flour and water; a number of viewers afterwards contacted the BBC for advice on growing their own spaghetti trees. Decades later, CNN called this broadcast "the biggest hoax that any reputable news establishment ever pulled" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaghetti-tree_hoax
I tried growing vegetable spaghetti on the allotment once.
Umph. There’s something we’re not being told, isn’t there?
Yeah.
I know it used to be impolite (and illegal) to talk about the death of a monarch but there's plenty of evidence out there when one half of a long standing couple dies the other one goes not so long afterwards.
There was a story in The Sunday Times saying for future events the Queen will be accompanied by one of her children or the Duke of Cambridge so if she has to cancel at the last moment there will be a senior royal on hand to ensure the event happens and the attendees aren't left disappointed.
When I hear heavy engines overhead, I look up to see how many helicopters. We are on the direct route from the White House to Camp David. If there are 3, we assume the President is travelling. Just now, I looked up. Not the usual 3 heavy helicopters, but 3 Ospreys. Quite a sight at only a couple of thousand feet.
Comments
It is not mandatory generally, and quite a few teams and players don't partake in UK football where it is most widespread.
The greatest crossover event in history.
Moved me to tears did that film and I'm curmudgeon.
It's just filing in the underuse holes.
MPs are suspicious that Lindsay Hoyle is up to something
Lindsay Hoyle is, to put it mildly, on the warpath. The Speaker is now giving almost daily statements in which he complains about the government's habit of making announcements to the media rather than in parliament.
Last week he was furious that Health Secretary Sajid Javid had held a Downing Street press briefing on Covid instead of coming to the Commons. Yesterday he granted four urgent questions as punishment for the latest round of briefings. Today he was back fulminating again, telling the chamber that the government was breaking its own ministerial code by giving Budget announcements to the press first. He continued:
“I want the House and especially the government to be clear if the government continues to treat this House in a discourteous manner, I will do everything in my power to ensure ministers are called here at the earliest opportunity to explain themselves."
This might, to an outsider, sound a bit like someone complaining about being NFI to a party, but it is important. Not only is it in the government's own code of practice for ministers, but it is also a principle that MPs are the most important representatives of the electorate rather than the press (as much as it pains a journalist to admit this). As one very annoyed senior Tory backbencher puts it, 'it sends a strong message that your MP doesn't matter unless they are a minister'. It is something that I understand Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg has had to repeatedly remind government colleagues of, particularly when the Commons wasn't functioning normally because of Covid restrictions. His argument has been that the government's entire mandate comes from having a majority in parliament.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/could-the-speaker-cancel-the-budget-
I don't mind the Thor series however
Income tax should only be levied when we're at war with France.
Sunak would not be looking so clever then would he?
Prof. Christina Pagel
@chrischirp
While I expect cases to plateau or fall a bit due to half term breaking chains of transmission, the falls *right now* are likely due to less testing cos people are away / not at school.
v rough calc: 10% +ve rate and 100K fewer tests ~ 10K cases shortfall. 1/2
A surprisingly large amount of energy can be distributed smartly. Fridges and freezers are another one, they can be set to switch off altogether at times of high cost (so long as the door's kept reasonably shut) and switch back on at times of low cost.
I imagine in the future a lot of electronics will be set to do stuff like this fairly automatically. Why couldn't Laptops etc switch to battery mode at high-cost times down to a threshold for instance?
It's really stupid politically as well. It gives them a couple of weeks of okayish headlines but then the only thing left for after budget day is the bad shit, and that's what everyone remembers as a result. Remember Osborne giving away (in both senses) all his goodies in advance so we had a fortnight of negative headlines about pasty taxes and changes to charitable donations? Or Hammond and his backtracking on NI?
If the a very significant proportion of your electricity consumption doesn't need to be right now but can be in a couple of hours time then it makes load sharing without the end user seeing any problems much easier to handle.
It also makes the unreliability of wind etc much easier to handle too. Cars can be charged while the turbines are spinning.
Nothing like it had ever been done before on the big screen.
Washington Secretary of State Kim Wyman is expected to be named to a key election-security position in the Biden administration, according to a report by CNN.
Wyman, a Republican, is set to be appointed to lead the Department of Homeland Security’s efforts to protect elections from foreign and domestic interference, CNN reported, citing anonymous sources.
Wyman’s office did not immediately dispute the CNN report.
“The Office of the Secretary of State cannot confirm the information included in the CNN article,” Wyman spokesperson Kylee Zabel said in an email.
Wyman didn’t respond to interview requests, and Zabel said she would not be available on Monday. Potential appointees in presidential administrations are often told not to talk until their role is formally announced.
If she does take the new position, Wyman would be charged with leading election-security efforts at DHS’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, CNN reported, saying the appointment would not be official until White House paperwork is completed.
The White House did not respond to a request for comment.
The reported appointment would put Wyman, a nationally regarded expert on mail-in balloting and security, in a position working with elections officials across the U.S. at a time when many of her fellow Republicans have followed former President Donald Trump in fanning baseless conspiracy theories about the 2020 election.
Wyman has pushed back forcibly against such fraud claims, publicly criticizing the recent “audit” of votes in Arizona’s Maricopa County as “political theater.” She has defended mail balloting as secure and rejected claims by Washington’s 2020 GOP gubernatorial candidate Loren Culp, who filed a lawsuit alleging fraud but dropped it after his attorney was threatened with legal sanctions.
Wyman served as Thurston County auditor for a decade before winning election as Secretary of State in 2012. She was reelected in 2016 and 2020. She is the sole remaining Republican to hold statewide office in Washington.
Her departure could give Democrats a leg up at claiming the secretary of state office that has eluded them for decades.
Upon Wyman’s resignation, a temporary successor would be named by Gov. Jay Inslee, a Democrat.
That appointee would serve until the next general election in November 2022, according to Inslee deputy general counsel Taylor Wonhoff, who cited a 2013 legal memo from the state attorney general’s office.
The winning candidate in the 2022 election would serve out the remainder of Wyman’s term through 2024.
https://i.imgur.com/9Y4tV5H.png
You are furthering an Agenda
He is spreading Extremism
I would steer a million miles clear of anyone spreading the Revealed Truth.
I am sitting outside.
In shorts and a T shirt.
At the end of October.
In England.
And I’m perfectly comfortable.
There is something very wrong here.
God told me. Personally, and everything.
Note: My favourite character in the Bible is John the Baptist. A rare thing - the guy who shouts "God told me who your leader should be - *him*"
Anyway, it was a while before I realised what was wrong - I was not freezing to death on the river, in November (nearly).
https://twitter.com/Laura_K_Hughes/status/1453039095387758597
Will someone sort out the data shambles in Wales FFS? Th numbers look good but who really knows?
The Drake is Baked. The Data is Fake.
*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Santa_Cruz_de_Tenerife_(1797)
You should be in Wales.
Dipping a bit now the sun’s setting.
Here is an interesting piece from Nature, citing a recent study:
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02689-y
“People who become infected with the Delta variant are less likely to pass the virus to their close contacts if they have already had a COVID-19 vaccine than if they haven’t. But that protective effect is relatively small, and dwindles alarmingly at three months after the receipt of the second shot.”
The article goes on to say:
1) those infected with Delta have roughly the same levels of viral genetic materials in their noses regardless of whether they’d previously been vaccinated.
2) Though this shows that vaccinated and unvaccinated people might be infectious, studies also suggest that infected vaccinated people are less likely to spread the virus if they subsequently catch Delta because their nasal virus drop faster than do those of unvaccinated infected people and their nasal swabs contain smaller amounts of pathogen.
I’m concerned that it has taken hold that the chance of catching Covid from an unvaccinated person is very high indeed whereas the chance of catching it from a vaccinated person is very low indeed (nil even). This is wrong and is adding to:
a) the unreasonable demonisation of those people who have elected not to have the vaccine and
b) an inflated belief that vaxports and other life-hampering initiatives are the answer.
This is partly displacement activity, of course, to avoid the truth that we need to learn to live with a new endemic threat in life.
One the other hand there have been a couple of family squabbles with the Germans, I believe.
1. His arrogance - essentially, without being explicit, he argues that he's too important and superior for the rules to apply to him.
2. The weakness of his defence. The rules allow for lobbying/paid advocacy in exceptional circumstances, where a "serious wrong or substantial injustice" is to be averted. However, in his 24 years as an MP he has only ever pointed to such an event twice: both in the interests of the two companies for which he was a ridiculously highly paid consultant.
Basically, he's guilty as charged, with knobs on.
If there are any other sad losers with too much time on their hands out there, here's the link:
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/290/committee-on-standards/news/158246/committee-on-standards-publish-report-on-the-conduct-of-rt-hon-owen-paterson-mp/
Yes, there are regions above 10%, also regions on a lot less.
It was always bound to start this way - precautionary hospitalisations, ordered to rest by doctors, etc. Plus I dunno what the stats are but there's a strong folk belief the demise of one of a long marriage happens the demise of the other.
I know it used to be impolite (and illegal) to talk about the death of a monarch but there's plenty of evidence out there when one half of a long standing couple dies the other one goes not so long afterwards.
There was a story in The Sunday Times saying for future events the Queen will be accompanied by one of her children or the Duke of Cambridge so if she has to cancel at the last moment there will be a senior royal on hand to ensure the event happens and the attendees aren't left disappointed.
That's a great big red flag for me.
In any case it's damned cold here in the Midlands. As it has been pretty much all summer, starting with a poor June:
https://mkweather.com/the-coldest-june-times-in-the-uk-in-30-years-scotland-33c-england-14c-only-23c-from-all-time-june-national-record/
Last time I went to Glasgow the food was so bad I'd rather eat the shavings from a ped egg.