Good evening. My apologies for going off topic, but having watched Witch Hunt on All 4 over the last few days I'd recommend it to anyone who likes their tv drama to be about financial and political corruption, with some sexual harassment and alleged racism thrown in for good measure. It's topical in a number of ways, and not at all predictable.
Great to hear. Thanks - we like a good mini-series on here. Will check it out.
Margaret Thatcher when PM would have killed for these numbers mid term. I wonder what hapened at the elections she fought?
If you think Boris Johnson has half the ability of Margaret Thatcher you clearly have very little judgement. Are you one of those sad folks that also tries to compare him to Churchill?
Why on earth is Johnson doing this? I know he breaks promises all the time, but why this one? Where's the gain?
The only thing that makes sense is the Treasury have out manoeuvred him.
It would be interesting to see an independent study done comparing in detail the two plans. Hard to tell how much of the criticism is just automatic partisan bluster.
I can cope with that. But some things we do know: 1. However you try and frame this he personally pledged repeatedly to get this built 2. The new plan being spun as delivering faster, despite delivering less than the old plan on the same "by 2043" phasing 3. The new plan isn't even committed to thanks to "subject to treasury recommitment" and "subject to business plan" caveats to almost everything 4. The claimed numbers for things like journey times are being ripped apart in detail by industry commentators 5. The claimed numbers for things like journey times utterly miss the point that the project was about capacity which will now be cut as opposed to expanded.
So much of the "automatic partisan bluster" seems to be coming from red wall Tory MPs...
@rottenborough on your question as to why Johnson is doing this. I found the report of the National Infrastructure Commission published last year that might be informative. In it they recommend the prioritisation of the regional links over the HS2 leg.
Indeed. So would it not be good if said regional links were to be prioritised instead of delivered by 2043 providing the business case is made and the treasury of the time decides to spend the money?
Had a bit of a game at the walk-in vaccination centre today.
I took my 16 year old for her second vaccination and they sat her down, took her details, and on discovering her age said she wasn't eligible.
The nurse pulled her supervisor over (he was wearing NHS clothing) and he started spouting the rules that second jabs only allowed for vulnerable 16/17 year olds unless within three months of 18th bday. I pointed out that he was quoting the old rules which changed on Monday and that the new rules were affective immediately.
He hadn't a clue what I was talking about - Googled a bit and obviously found something and said "well we haven't been informed - come back after next Tuesday (??) our indemnity won't' cover etc etc ...".
So my daughter, who I had taken out of school to attend, rolled her sleeve back up and they cracked on with my booster jab instead.
On standing up to leave the supervisor motioned for us to sit down while he made a call and then back-tracked and gave her the jab.
Amazing that I knew more about vaccine eligibility than the staff in the vaccination centre.
I seem to be getting more and more useful, up-to-date information these days about all sorts of topics from a website I frequent called... PB.com!
Picked up plenty of good hints and tips from here, including the free flu jabs at Boots and the earliest I could book the Covid booster (today, done, yay!).
On that last point Mrs. P and I had Pfizer this time following 2 x AZ in the spring. I was surprised that others attending were also getting Pfizer even though some of them had already had 2 x Pfizer. I thought a mix and match was specified?
I had same as you, a Pfizer on top of two AZNs.
We ..... well, my wife ..... was told that was the most desirable procedure. She's has AZN/AZN/Pfizer. I've had Pfizer x 3.
It seems very strange to me that some people get awful side effects whereas others don't. I never even had a sore arm after either of my two AZNs and so far so good with the Pfizer booster.
Same combo here. 2 x AZ followed by the Pfizer just today. Bit worried, since it smacks of mixing drinks, which I try not to do, but thus far all is fine and here I am typing this. Do hope I'm not tempting fate because that's something else I try not to do. Anyway, it's done now.
Why on earth is Johnson doing this? I know he breaks promises all the time, but why this one? Where's the gain?
The only thing that makes sense is the Treasury have out manoeuvred him.
It would be interesting to see an independent study done comparing in detail the two plans. Hard to tell how much of the criticism is just automatic partisan bluster.
I can cope with that. But some things we do know: 1. However you try and frame this he personally pledged repeatedly to get this built 2. The new plan being spun as delivering faster, despite delivering less than the old plan on the same "by 2043" phasing 3. The new plan isn't even committed to thanks to "subject to treasury recommitment" and "subject to business plan" caveats to almost everything 4. The claimed numbers for things like journey times are being ripped apart in detail by industry commentators 5. The claimed numbers for things like journey times utterly miss the point that the project was about capacity which will now be cut as opposed to expanded.
So much of the "automatic partisan bluster" seems to be coming from red wall Tory MPs...
Yet the commission charged to investigate this issue recommended the approach of prioritising regional links over long-distance ones. Bloody experts.
Cases are up - mostly among the very young. In England (at least) 10-14 and 05-09 are up sharply. While 15-19 is solidly with the rest of the vaccinated groups.....
There is a rise in the over 40 groups, though, but much smaller.
Hospitalisations are still gong down.
Deaths are still heading down.
I've not been on here much this year so haven't seen your epic charts before - do you ever comment on how hospitalisations and deaths correlate to earlier reported cases? As cases were starting to drop 2-4 weeks ago, you'd expect the other two data series to be dropping now, but the good news would be if they are dropping faster than cases, I guess.
I did at one point - I suppose I could resurrect that.
@rottenborough on your question as to why Johnson is doing this. I found the report of the National Infrastructure Commission published last year that might be informative. In it they recommend the prioritisation of the regional links over the HS2 leg.
Indeed. So would it not be good if said regional links were to be prioritised instead of delivered by 2043 providing the business case is made and the treasury of the time decides to spend the money?
Did you read the report? It talks about delivery in the 2030s and 2040s throughout.
Well it looks like at least part of Austria is going back into a full lockdown, "just for a few weeks to flatten the curve". Much as I despise our government, at least we're not being subjected to this. Personally very annoying too because I'm booked into a martial arts camp near Salzburg in January.
That's them under house arrest until next Easter then.
As we know from last Winter's experience, once politicians embark on the path of lockdowns they really struggle to let them go. The nanosecond they do, the cases inevitably start going straight back up and the medics and scientists collectively scream that all the problems the lockdown was meant to solve will be upon us again in about five minutes flat. Only worse. The only relief seems to be warm weather, and that ain't returning to the Alps anytime soon.
As you say, our Government is pretty rotten but at least it has managed, so far, to resist the impulse to imprison the entire population of the country every Winter for the rest of time because the hospitals are busy - which is where, if the vaccine effect isn't considered sufficient, countries like Austria are headed. If they're going to start using lockdowns as a solution to suppressing annual Winter illnesses then how do they ever get out of that cycle?
It's an interesting one politically too. For example, if we were put back into lockdown I would vote for pretty much any party short of outright fascists that promised no more lockdowns whatever happens. At the level of impact on my life that a lockdown has, it overrides pretty much every other political consideration.
Austria has a strong far-right party, which I understand is making hay out of opposing vaccine mandates etc. It will be interesting to see how they do out of this.
I'm not locking down again unless there is a virus mutation that has full or near full vaccine escape.
I'm done.
It's quite possible that enough of the population is done with restrictions to render them largely ineffective, even if reimposed.
I was reading remarks the other day from a representative of the hospitality business in Scotland, who are terrified that the Holyrood vaccine passport scheme will be extended to pubs and restaurants - something that the Scottish Government has declined to do so far but has threatened to impose in early December. Businesses fear a mass cancellation of bookings from exhausted patrons, who are thoroughly sick of Covid everything and will simply buy supermarket food and booze and organise house parties instead.
Government can throttle businesses, which are sitting ducks, but this isn't a police state: they can plead with the ordinary citizen to stay at home yet again, but they lack the power to insist. If confronted with another lockdown I believe that there are an awful lot of people who listened to the Government and shut themselves off from their families last Christmas, but will tell ministers and their advisers where to stick their rules at the second time of asking.
Margaret Thatcher when PM would have killed for these numbers mid term. I wonder what hapened at the elections she fought?
They say this time, it's different
Do you say it's the same? Boris is a Maggie and SKS is a Foot/Kinnock? I don't think that is right. Boris is Humpty Dumpty.
Governments tend to have a mid term dip. It happens to Maggie, Blair & Camino before they won their next majority.
Current leaders are always claimed to be no match for those from the good old days.
Current events are always claimed to be huge turning points, when they usually aren’t.
Not to say this time it’s categorically not different, but these conversations must have happened when it turned out not to be before.
Yes but this current PM really ISN'T a match from even the worst of the old days. He hasn't got a fecking scooby. He is an embarrassment. He isn't *as bad* as I predicted a few years ago, he is massively worse! He has no leadership or managerial skills. He is a bumbling idiot who should not be left in charge of a box of matches, let alone a country.
RIP The Tory “Red Wall” 2019-2021. Funeral to be held at the next general election. No flowers: donations in lieu to the Boris Johnson “Crikey, I’m going to need a new job” Slush Fund.
None of the PM's since Macmillan (Douglas-Home was already) apart from Thatcher have been ennobled. I hope Mr Johnson doesn't have ambitions in that direction!
He will be off to America starting a campaign to be President and getting $$$$$. And it doesn't matter if he is eligible or not, he can still fundraise regardless. No court will rule on his eligibility until necessary (see Ted Cruz for example, factcheck.org only has him as "most likely" to be eligible) and significant proportions believe Trump won the last election, many even that JFK is coming back to anoint him, so getting them to believe someone born in the US is a natural citizen will be trivial for Bozo.
RIP The Tory “Red Wall” 2019-2021. Funeral to be held at the next general election. No flowers: donations in lieu to the Boris Johnson “Crikey, I’m going to need a new job” Slush Fund.
None of the PM's since Macmillan (Douglas-Home was already) apart from Thatcher have been ennobled. I hope Mr Johnson doesn't have ambitions in that direction!
He will be off to America starting a campaign to be President and getting $$$$$. And it doesn't matter if he is eligible or not, he can still fundraise regardless. No court will rule on his eligibility until necessary (see Ted Cruz for example, factcheck.org only has him as "most likely" to be eligible) and significant proportions believe Trump won the last election, many even that JFK is coming back to anoint him, so getting them to believe someone born in the US is a natural citizen will be trivial for Bozo.
I think he gave up his US citizenship for tax reasons.
Well it looks like at least part of Austria is going back into a full lockdown, "just for a few weeks to flatten the curve". Much as I despise our government, at least we're not being subjected to this. Personally very annoying too because I'm booked into a martial arts camp near Salzburg in January.
That's them under house arrest until next Easter then.
As we know from last Winter's experience, once politicians embark on the path of lockdowns they really struggle to let them go. The nanosecond they do, the cases inevitably start going straight back up and the medics and scientists collectively scream that all the problems the lockdown was meant to solve will be upon us again in about five minutes flat. Only worse. The only relief seems to be warm weather, and that ain't returning to the Alps anytime soon.
As you say, our Government is pretty rotten but at least it has managed, so far, to resist the impulse to imprison the entire population of the country every Winter for the rest of time because the hospitals are busy - which is where, if the vaccine effect isn't considered sufficient, countries like Austria are headed. If they're going to start using lockdowns as a solution to suppressing annual Winter illnesses then how do they ever get out of that cycle?
It's an interesting one politically too. For example, if we were put back into lockdown I would vote for pretty much any party short of outright fascists that promised no more lockdowns whatever happens. At the level of impact on my life that a lockdown has, it overrides pretty much every other political consideration.
Austria has a strong far-right party, which I understand is making hay out of opposing vaccine mandates etc. It will be interesting to see how they do out of this.
I'm not locking down again unless there is a virus mutation that has full or near full vaccine escape.
I'm done.
It's quite possible that enough of the population is done with restrictions to render them largely ineffective, even if reimposed.
I was reading remarks the other day from a representative of the hospitality business in Scotland, who are terrified that the Holyrood vaccine passport scheme will be extended to pubs and restaurants - something that the Scottish Government has declined to do so far but has threatened to impose in early December. Businesses fear a mass cancellation of bookings from exhausted patrons, who are thoroughly sick of Covid everything and will simply buy supermarket food and booze and organise house parties instead.
Government can throttle businesses, which are sitting ducks, but this isn't a police state: they can plead with the ordinary citizen to stay at home yet again, but they lack the power to insist. If confronted with another lockdown I believe that there are an awful lot of people who listened to the Government and shut themselves off from their families last Christmas, but will tell ministers and their advisers where to stick their rules at the second time of asking.
I mean I agree but the government has also achieved one aim, whether by luck or design, and that is to terrify the population. I am finding more hesitancy to go out and socialise from people until they have received a booster. Which of course will mean until they have received Jab Number 4 next year.
We are scared and as I have oft mentioned before on here, as Confucius noted, a scared population is one that is easy to rule.
Tim Loughton is right about China. However, can't listen to the detail cos he is pronouncing Xinjiang as Jinjan. A minor point, but absolutely nobody anywhere in the media or politics seems to find accurate Chinese transliteration as at all important. Didn't know where he was talking about at first
Why on earth is Johnson doing this? I know he breaks promises all the time, but why this one? Where's the gain?
The only thing that makes sense is the Treasury have out manoeuvred him.
It would be interesting to see an independent study done comparing in detail the two plans. Hard to tell how much of the criticism is just automatic partisan bluster.
I can cope with that. But some things we do know: 1. However you try and frame this he personally pledged repeatedly to get this built 2. The new plan being spun as delivering faster, despite delivering less than the old plan on the same "by 2043" phasing 3. The new plan isn't even committed to thanks to "subject to treasury recommitment" and "subject to business plan" caveats to almost everything 4. The claimed numbers for things like journey times are being ripped apart in detail by industry commentators 5. The claimed numbers for things like journey times utterly miss the point that the project was about capacity which will now be cut as opposed to expanded.
So much of the "automatic partisan bluster" seems to be coming from red wall Tory MPs...
Yet the commission charged to investigate this issue recommended the approach of prioritising regional links over long-distance ones. Bloody experts.
Reading it I don't think they are experts - the idea is that there can be major improvements on the ECML yet they then fail to highlight where the blocks that could be fixed actually are (yes I've looked at the appendices and references)
Likewise you then have things like adding additional tracks at the pinch points between York and Manchester - clearly they've never gone past them because anyone who has would be going - Nope, got any other ideas.
So it's a lovely report that is seemingly based on hopes, dreams and fantasy rather than reality.
@rottenborough on your question as to why Johnson is doing this. I found the report of the National Infrastructure Commission published last year that might be informative. In it they recommend the prioritisation of the regional links over the HS2 leg.
Indeed. So would it not be good if said regional links were to be prioritised instead of delivered by 2043 providing the business case is made and the treasury of the time decides to spend the money?
Did you read the report? It talks about delivery in the 2030s and 2040s throughout.
Yes. Did you? Its the exact same timescale as previous. To deliver less. Whilst promising more.
It takes a special kind of self-denial to support this.
Margaret Thatcher when PM would have killed for these numbers mid term. I wonder what hapened at the elections she fought?
They say this time, it's different
Do you say it's the same? Boris is a Maggie and SKS is a Foot/Kinnock? I don't think that is right. Boris is Humpty Dumpty.
Governments tend to have a mid term dip. It happens to Maggie, Blair & Camino before they won their next majority.
Current leaders are always claimed to be no match for those from the good old days.
Current events are always claimed to be huge turning points, when they usually aren’t.
Not to say this time it’s categorically not different, but these conversations must have happened when it turned out not to be before.
Yes of course. But to take the most recent case Miliband's lead over Cameron didn't strongly correlate with anything M had done right, or Cameron had done wrong. We had a constant droning duet in the background of BJO posting EICIPM every night and that bloke trying to be funny about squirrels moving goalposts, based on nothing more than a 5% difference in polling figures, and very boring it was. Boris is not having a polling car crash, he is having a real life car crash (several at once) which is reflected in the polls. Very different.
Why on earth is Johnson doing this? I know he breaks promises all the time, but why this one? Where's the gain?
The only thing that makes sense is the Treasury have out manoeuvred him.
It would be interesting to see an independent study done comparing in detail the two plans. Hard to tell how much of the criticism is just automatic partisan bluster.
I can cope with that. But some things we do know: 1. However you try and frame this he personally pledged repeatedly to get this built 2. The new plan being spun as delivering faster, despite delivering less than the old plan on the same "by 2043" phasing 3. The new plan isn't even committed to thanks to "subject to treasury recommitment" and "subject to business plan" caveats to almost everything 4. The claimed numbers for things like journey times are being ripped apart in detail by industry commentators 5. The claimed numbers for things like journey times utterly miss the point that the project was about capacity which will now be cut as opposed to expanded.
So much of the "automatic partisan bluster" seems to be coming from red wall Tory MPs...
Yet the commission charged to investigate this issue recommended the approach of prioritising regional links over long-distance ones. Bloody experts.
Reading it I don't think they are experts - the idea is that there can be major improvements on the ECML yet they then fail to highlight where the blocks that could be fixed actually are (yes I've looked at the appendices and references)
Likewise you then have things like adding additional tracks at the pinch points between York and Manchester - clearly they've never gone past them because anyone who has would be going - Nope, got any other ideas.
So it's a lovely report that is seemingly based on hopes, dreams and fantasy rather than reality.
You'd certainly hope they know more about the subject than commentators on PB. I don't know myself. It would be interesting to see another report by an independent group, but I certainly wouldn't dismiss this report as fantasy just because you disagree with the conclusions.
@rottenborough on your question as to why Johnson is doing this. I found the report of the National Infrastructure Commission published last year that might be informative. In it they recommend the prioritisation of the regional links over the HS2 leg.
Indeed. So would it not be good if said regional links were to be prioritised instead of delivered by 2043 providing the business case is made and the treasury of the time decides to spend the money?
Did you read the report? It talks about delivery in the 2030s and 2040s throughout.
Yes. Did you? Its the exact same timescale as previous. To deliver less. Whilst promising more.
It takes a special kind of self-denial to support this.
As you say, Red Wall voters are no fools. This won’t go down well up here.
So it seems Rafiq is now also now in the business of racist posts himself and having to say sorry for anti semitic messages. Is he going to get suitable disciplinary action then ?
@rottenborough on your question as to why Johnson is doing this. I found the report of the National Infrastructure Commission published last year that might be informative. In it they recommend the prioritisation of the regional links over the HS2 leg.
Indeed. So would it not be good if said regional links were to be prioritised instead of delivered by 2043 providing the business case is made and the treasury of the time decides to spend the money?
Did you read the report? It talks about delivery in the 2030s and 2040s throughout.
Yes. Did you? Its the exact same timescale as previous. To deliver less. Whilst promising more.
It takes a special kind of self-denial to support this.
My point is the delivery timescale is no different in this report than in the current proposals. The report doesn't say that the investments have to be front loaded to get the benefit, for example. Of course there is the issue about approval, and that is touched in on the report itself.
On Rafiq, it appears that he was banned from all cricket for a month in 2010 because of his offensive twitter messages. His halo is certainly slipping a little.
Why on earth is Johnson doing this? I know he breaks promises all the time, but why this one? Where's the gain?
The only thing that makes sense is the Treasury have out manoeuvred him.
It would be interesting to see an independent study done comparing in detail the two plans. Hard to tell how much of the criticism is just automatic partisan bluster.
I can cope with that. But some things we do know: 1. However you try and frame this he personally pledged repeatedly to get this built 2. The new plan being spun as delivering faster, despite delivering less than the old plan on the same "by 2043" phasing 3. The new plan isn't even committed to thanks to "subject to treasury recommitment" and "subject to business plan" caveats to almost everything 4. The claimed numbers for things like journey times are being ripped apart in detail by industry commentators 5. The claimed numbers for things like journey times utterly miss the point that the project was about capacity which will now be cut as opposed to expanded.
So much of the "automatic partisan bluster" seems to be coming from red wall Tory MPs...
Yet the commission charged to investigate this issue recommended the approach of prioritising regional links over long-distance ones. Bloody experts.
Reading it I don't think they are experts - the idea is that there can be major improvements on the ECML yet they then fail to highlight where the blocks that could be fixed actually are (yes I've looked at the appendices and references)
Likewise you then have things like adding additional tracks at the pinch points between York and Manchester - clearly they've never gone past them because anyone who has would be going - Nope, got any other ideas.
So it's a lovely report that is seemingly based on hopes, dreams and fantasy rather than reality.
Excitingly the recently completed power upgrades on the ECML made no provision for 140mph power draw. So I suspect the reason why the "we can do it faster" upgrades of the existing route are so far off into the distant future is because there is no way the business case can be made to replace stuff just replaced. And as the "plan" is entirely "subject to business case" (not yet made) thats a problem.
Well it looks like at least part of Austria is going back into a full lockdown, "just for a few weeks to flatten the curve". Much as I despise our government, at least we're not being subjected to this. Personally very annoying too because I'm booked into a martial arts camp near Salzburg in January.
That's them under house arrest until next Easter then.
As we know from last Winter's experience, once politicians embark on the path of lockdowns they really struggle to let them go. The nanosecond they do, the cases inevitably start going straight back up and the medics and scientists collectively scream that all the problems the lockdown was meant to solve will be upon us again in about five minutes flat. Only worse. The only relief seems to be warm weather, and that ain't returning to the Alps anytime soon.
As you say, our Government is pretty rotten but at least it has managed, so far, to resist the impulse to imprison the entire population of the country every Winter for the rest of time because the hospitals are busy - which is where, if the vaccine effect isn't considered sufficient, countries like Austria are headed. If they're going to start using lockdowns as a solution to suppressing annual Winter illnesses then how do they ever get out of that cycle?
It's an interesting one politically too. For example, if we were put back into lockdown I would vote for pretty much any party short of outright fascists that promised no more lockdowns whatever happens. At the level of impact on my life that a lockdown has, it overrides pretty much every other political consideration.
Austria has a strong far-right party, which I understand is making hay out of opposing vaccine mandates etc. It will be interesting to see how they do out of this.
I'm not locking down again unless there is a virus mutation that has full or near full vaccine escape.
I'm done.
It's quite possible that enough of the population is done with restrictions to render them largely ineffective, even if reimposed.
I was reading remarks the other day from a representative of the hospitality business in Scotland, who are terrified that the Holyrood vaccine passport scheme will be extended to pubs and restaurants - something that the Scottish Government has declined to do so far but has threatened to impose in early December. Businesses fear a mass cancellation of bookings from exhausted patrons, who are thoroughly sick of Covid everything and will simply buy supermarket food and booze and organise house parties instead.
Government can throttle businesses, which are sitting ducks, but this isn't a police state: they can plead with the ordinary citizen to stay at home yet again, but they lack the power to insist. If confronted with another lockdown I believe that there are an awful lot of people who listened to the Government and shut themselves off from their families last Christmas, but will tell ministers and their advisers where to stick their rules at the second time of asking.
My second experience of Wales in 2 months suggest that the mask mandate is honoured more in the breach than the observation at the moment.
Currently in a country house hotel on the Welsh side of the border, and exactly 1/30 of guests so far as been wearing one where they are supposedly obliged to by law.
Why on earth is Johnson doing this? I know he breaks promises all the time, but why this one? Where's the gain?
The only thing that makes sense is the Treasury have out manoeuvred him.
It would be interesting to see an independent study done comparing in detail the two plans. Hard to tell how much of the criticism is just automatic partisan bluster.
I can cope with that. But some things we do know: 1. However you try and frame this he personally pledged repeatedly to get this built 2. The new plan being spun as delivering faster, despite delivering less than the old plan on the same "by 2043" phasing 3. The new plan isn't even committed to thanks to "subject to treasury recommitment" and "subject to business plan" caveats to almost everything 4. The claimed numbers for things like journey times are being ripped apart in detail by industry commentators 5. The claimed numbers for things like journey times utterly miss the point that the project was about capacity which will now be cut as opposed to expanded.
So much of the "automatic partisan bluster" seems to be coming from red wall Tory MPs...
Yet the commission charged to investigate this issue recommended the approach of prioritising regional links over long-distance ones. Bloody experts.
Reading it I don't think they are experts - the idea is that there can be major improvements on the ECML yet they then fail to highlight where the blocks that could be fixed actually are (yes I've looked at the appendices and references)
Likewise you then have things like adding additional tracks at the pinch points between York and Manchester - clearly they've never gone past them because anyone who has would be going - Nope, got any other ideas.
So it's a lovely report that is seemingly based on hopes, dreams and fantasy rather than reality.
You'd certainly hope they know more about the subject than commentators on PB. I don't know myself. It would be interesting to see another report by an independent group, but I certainly wouldn't dismiss this report as fantasy just because you disagree with the conclusions.
I know a fair bit about the ECML, mainly because I've spent a lot of time reading all of Network Rails suggested projects for the next X years.
There is nothing in Network Rail's plans that would generate anything like the time savings required and Network Rail are the real experts here.
Well it looks like at least part of Austria is going back into a full lockdown, "just for a few weeks to flatten the curve". Much as I despise our government, at least we're not being subjected to this. Personally very annoying too because I'm booked into a martial arts camp near Salzburg in January.
That's them under house arrest until next Easter then.
As we know from last Winter's experience, once politicians embark on the path of lockdowns they really struggle to let them go. The nanosecond they do, the cases inevitably start going straight back up and the medics and scientists collectively scream that all the problems the lockdown was meant to solve will be upon us again in about five minutes flat. Only worse. The only relief seems to be warm weather, and that ain't returning to the Alps anytime soon.
As you say, our Government is pretty rotten but at least it has managed, so far, to resist the impulse to imprison the entire population of the country every Winter for the rest of time because the hospitals are busy - which is where, if the vaccine effect isn't considered sufficient, countries like Austria are headed. If they're going to start using lockdowns as a solution to suppressing annual Winter illnesses then how do they ever get out of that cycle?
It's an interesting one politically too. For example, if we were put back into lockdown I would vote for pretty much any party short of outright fascists that promised no more lockdowns whatever happens. At the level of impact on my life that a lockdown has, it overrides pretty much every other political consideration.
Austria has a strong far-right party, which I understand is making hay out of opposing vaccine mandates etc. It will be interesting to see how they do out of this.
I'm not locking down again unless there is a virus mutation that has full or near full vaccine escape.
I'm done.
It's quite possible that enough of the population is done with restrictions to render them largely ineffective, even if reimposed.
I was reading remarks the other day from a representative of the hospitality business in Scotland, who are terrified that the Holyrood vaccine passport scheme will be extended to pubs and restaurants - something that the Scottish Government has declined to do so far but has threatened to impose in early December. Businesses fear a mass cancellation of bookings from exhausted patrons, who are thoroughly sick of Covid everything and will simply buy supermarket food and booze and organise house parties instead.
Government can throttle businesses, which are sitting ducks, but this isn't a police state: they can plead with the ordinary citizen to stay at home yet again, but they lack the power to insist. If confronted with another lockdown I believe that there are an awful lot of people who listened to the Government and shut themselves off from their families last Christmas, but will tell ministers and their advisers where to stick their rules at the second time of asking.
I mean I agree but the government has also achieved one aim, whether by luck or design, and that is to terrify the population. I am finding more hesitancy to go out and socialise from people until they have received a booster. Which of course will mean until they have received Jab Number 4 next year.
We are scared and as I have oft mentioned before on here, as Confucius noted, a scared population is one that is easy to rule.
Some of us are scared. I'm uncertain as to the proportion of the population that has had enough of this crap versus those who are still feeling wobbly. Continuing to wear masks where it is no longer insisted upon might be a reasonable indicator.
@rottenborough on your question as to why Johnson is doing this. I found the report of the National Infrastructure Commission published last year that might be informative. In it they recommend the prioritisation of the regional links over the HS2 leg.
Indeed. So would it not be good if said regional links were to be prioritised instead of delivered by 2043 providing the business case is made and the treasury of the time decides to spend the money?
Did you read the report? It talks about delivery in the 2030s and 2040s throughout.
Yes. Did you? Its the exact same timescale as previous. To deliver less. Whilst promising more.
It takes a special kind of self-denial to support this.
My point is the delivery timescale is no different in this report than in the current proposals. The report doesn't say that the investments have to be front loaded to get the benefit, for example. Of course there is the issue about approval, and that is touched in on the report itself.
*sigh* The political justification for abandoning the plan is because this new plan can be delivered quicker. Except that when you read the document you notice two things. That it is not a plan - no business case done, not approved by the treasury - and that it is no faster.
Again - there is no benefit. When you run faster trains on congested lines you can run fewer trains. Some claimed journey time gains (Liverpool - Manchester) are net zero to now. Others (Manchester to York, Leeds to Bradford) are being torn apart by the rivet counters. And Birmingham to Nottingham moves Nottingham to Radcliffe-upon-Soar.
Why on earth is Johnson doing this? I know he breaks promises all the time, but why this one? Where's the gain?
The only thing that makes sense is the Treasury have out manoeuvred him.
It would be interesting to see an independent study done comparing in detail the two plans. Hard to tell how much of the criticism is just automatic partisan bluster.
I can cope with that. But some things we do know: 1. However you try and frame this he personally pledged repeatedly to get this built 2. The new plan being spun as delivering faster, despite delivering less than the old plan on the same "by 2043" phasing 3. The new plan isn't even committed to thanks to "subject to treasury recommitment" and "subject to business plan" caveats to almost everything 4. The claimed numbers for things like journey times are being ripped apart in detail by industry commentators 5. The claimed numbers for things like journey times utterly miss the point that the project was about capacity which will now be cut as opposed to expanded.
So much of the "automatic partisan bluster" seems to be coming from red wall Tory MPs...
Yet the commission charged to investigate this issue recommended the approach of prioritising regional links over long-distance ones. Bloody experts.
Reading it I don't think they are experts - the idea is that there can be major improvements on the ECML yet they then fail to highlight where the blocks that could be fixed actually are (yes I've looked at the appendices and references)
Likewise you then have things like adding additional tracks at the pinch points between York and Manchester - clearly they've never gone past them because anyone who has would be going - Nope, got any other ideas.
So it's a lovely report that is seemingly based on hopes, dreams and fantasy rather than reality.
You'd certainly hope they know more about the subject than commentators on PB. I don't know myself. It would be interesting to see another report by an independent group, but I certainly wouldn't dismiss this report as fantasy just because you disagree with the conclusions.
I know a fair bit about the ECML, mainly because I've spent a lot of time reading all of Network Rails suggested projects for the next X years.
There is nothing in Network Rail's plans that would generate anything like the time savings required and Network Rail are the real experts here.
But this report relied on evidence from, amongst others, Network Rail.
Margaret Thatcher when PM would have killed for these numbers mid term. I wonder what hapened at the elections she fought?
They say this time, it's different
Do you say it's the same? Boris is a Maggie and SKS is a Foot/Kinnock? I don't think that is right. Boris is Humpty Dumpty.
Governments tend to have a mid term dip. It happens to Maggie, Blair & Camino before they won their next majority.
Current leaders are always claimed to be no match for those from the good old days.
Current events are always claimed to be huge turning points, when they usually aren’t.
Not to say this time it’s categorically not different, but these conversations must have happened when it turned out not to be before.
Yes of course. But to take the most recent case Miliband's lead over Cameron didn't strongly correlate with anything M had done right, or Cameron had done wrong. We had a constant droning duet in the background of BJO posting EICIPM every night and that bloke trying to be funny about squirrels moving goalposts, based on nothing more than a 5% difference in polling figures, and very boring it was. Boris is not having a polling car crash, he is having a real life car crash (several at once) which is reflected in the polls. Very different.
One difference I would say - and we won’t see the effect on polling for several days - is that he has said sorry relatively quickly. Most people know that people make mistakes. It’s often the failure to apologise that angers them more. Given BJ has said he was wrong, my gut feel is this will blow over (like Dom Cummings did) unless more explosive stuff comes out.
Ps this is also why Labour is still struggling - many of its ex-voters think Labour looked down on them but SKS has never come out with a forthright apology.
@rottenborough on your question as to why Johnson is doing this. I found the report of the National Infrastructure Commission published last year that might be informative. In it they recommend the prioritisation of the regional links over the HS2 leg.
Indeed. So would it not be good if said regional links were to be prioritised instead of delivered by 2043 providing the business case is made and the treasury of the time decides to spend the money?
Did you read the report? It talks about delivery in the 2030s and 2040s throughout.
Yes. Did you? Its the exact same timescale as previous. To deliver less. Whilst promising more.
It takes a special kind of self-denial to support this.
My point is the delivery timescale is no different in this report than in the current proposals. The report doesn't say that the investments have to be front loaded to get the benefit, for example. Of course there is the issue about approval, and that is touched in on the report itself.
*sigh* The political justification for abandoning the plan is because this new plan can be delivered quicker. Except that when you read the document you notice two things. That it is not a plan - no business case done, not approved by the treasury - and that it is no faster.
Again - there is no benefit. When you run faster trains on congested lines you can run fewer trains. Some claimed journey time gains (Liverpool - Manchester) are net zero to now. Others (Manchester to York, Leeds to Bradford) are being torn apart by the rivet counters. And Birmingham to Nottingham moves Nottingham to Radcliffe-upon-Soar.
OK, so when the report says "Prioritising regional links is likely to deliver the most benefits", they were just making it up?
Had a bit of a game at the walk-in vaccination centre today.
I took my 16 year old for her second vaccination and they sat her down, took her details, and on discovering her age said she wasn't eligible.
The nurse pulled her supervisor over (he was wearing NHS clothing) and he started spouting the rules that second jabs only allowed for vulnerable 16/17 year olds unless within three months of 18th bday. I pointed out that he was quoting the old rules which changed on Monday and that the new rules were affective immediately.
He hadn't a clue what I was talking about - Googled a bit and obviously found something and said "well we haven't been informed - come back after next Tuesday (??) our indemnity won't' cover etc etc ...".
So my daughter, who I had taken out of school to attend, rolled her sleeve back up and they cracked on with my booster jab instead.
On standing up to leave the supervisor motioned for us to sit down while he made a call and then back-tracked and gave her the jab.
Amazing that I knew more about vaccine eligibility than the staff in the vaccination centre.
I seem to be getting more and more useful, up-to-date information these days about all sorts of topics from a website I frequent called... PB.com!
Picked up plenty of good hints and tips from here, including the free flu jabs at Boots and the earliest I could book the Covid booster (today, done, yay!).
On that last point Mrs. P and I had Pfizer this time following 2 x AZ in the spring. I was surprised that others attending were also getting Pfizer even though some of them had already had 2 x Pfizer. I thought a mix and match was specified?
I had same as you, a Pfizer on top of two AZNs.
We ..... well, my wife ..... was told that was the most desirable procedure. She's has AZN/AZN/Pfizer. I've had Pfizer x 3.
It seems very strange to me that some people get awful side effects whereas others don't. I never even had a sore arm after either of my two AZNs and so far so good with the Pfizer booster.
Same combo here. 2 x AZ followed by the Pfizer just today. Bit worried, since it smacks of mixing drinks, which I try not to do, but thus far all is fine and here I am typing this. Do hope I'm not tempting fate because that's something else I try not to do. Anyway, it's done now.
Many of the causes of inflation are factors outside the UK’s control. The root cause of many of them lie in China or the US (semis, logistical / transport costs, commodity costs) or other external factors (Russia and energy prices).
The only one you could arguably say is causing wage inflation is the exit of cheap labour post Brexit but (1) that impacts certain industries only (2) 5m have applied for permanent residence here which doesn’t point to a collapse in supply (3) Covid arguably had more an effect as hospitality etc workers lost jobs at the start, went home and haven’t come back.
As for economists, the fact they are calling for interest rate rises shows their dogmatic approach. Anyone who thought for a second re raising interest rates would know it would have not much impact on inflation but would hit the economy severely hard
@rottenborough on your question as to why Johnson is doing this. I found the report of the National Infrastructure Commission published last year that might be informative. In it they recommend the prioritisation of the regional links over the HS2 leg.
Indeed. So would it not be good if said regional links were to be prioritised instead of delivered by 2043 providing the business case is made and the treasury of the time decides to spend the money?
Did you read the report? It talks about delivery in the 2030s and 2040s throughout.
Yes. Did you? Its the exact same timescale as previous. To deliver less. Whilst promising more.
It takes a special kind of self-denial to support this.
My point is the delivery timescale is no different in this report than in the current proposals. The report doesn't say that the investments have to be front loaded to get the benefit, for example. Of course there is the issue about approval, and that is touched in on the report itself.
*sigh* The political justification for abandoning the plan is because this new plan can be delivered quicker. Except that when you read the document you notice two things. That it is not a plan - no business case done, not approved by the treasury - and that it is no faster.
Again - there is no benefit. When you run faster trains on congested lines you can run fewer trains. Some claimed journey time gains (Liverpool - Manchester) are net zero to now. Others (Manchester to York, Leeds to Bradford) are being torn apart by the rivet counters. And Birmingham to Nottingham moves Nottingham to Radcliffe-upon-Soar.
OK, so when the report says "Prioritising regional links is likely to deliver the most benefits", they were just making it up?
Again, have you actually read the report? Show me where it prioritises them when it is building *less* than previously proposed but as far off into the future.
Its like your stuff on journey times. It uses sources "including" Network Rail. That doesn't mean that NR backs up some of the funnier claims like ECML journey times - the opposite is true when the rivet counters pull out previous reports which showed how the latest stuff is unachieveable.
The caveats are there throughout. "Subject to business case" - so this is not a plan just a list of aspirations - and "subject to reapproval by the treasury". So no plan and no money.
@rottenborough on your question as to why Johnson is doing this. I found the report of the National Infrastructure Commission published last year that might be informative. In it they recommend the prioritisation of the regional links over the HS2 leg.
Indeed. So would it not be good if said regional links were to be prioritised instead of delivered by 2043 providing the business case is made and the treasury of the time decides to spend the money?
Did you read the report? It talks about delivery in the 2030s and 2040s throughout.
Yes. Did you? Its the exact same timescale as previous. To deliver less. Whilst promising more.
It takes a special kind of self-denial to support this.
My point is the delivery timescale is no different in this report than in the current proposals. The report doesn't say that the investments have to be front loaded to get the benefit, for example. Of course there is the issue about approval, and that is touched in on the report itself.
*sigh* The political justification for abandoning the plan is because this new plan can be delivered quicker. Except that when you read the document you notice two things. That it is not a plan - no business case done, not approved by the treasury - and that it is no faster.
Again - there is no benefit. When you run faster trains on congested lines you can run fewer trains. Some claimed journey time gains (Liverpool - Manchester) are net zero to now. Others (Manchester to York, Leeds to Bradford) are being torn apart by the rivet counters. And Birmingham to Nottingham moves Nottingham to Radcliffe-upon-Soar.
OK, so when the report says "Prioritising regional links is likely to deliver the most benefits", they were just making it up?
Again, have you actually read the report? Show me where it prioritises them when it is building *less* than previously proposed but as far off into the future.
Its like your stuff on journey times. It uses sources "including" Network Rail. That doesn't mean that NR backs up some of the funnier claims like ECML journey times - the opposite is true when the rivet counters pull out previous reports which showed how the latest stuff is unachieveable.
The caveats are there throughout. "Subject to business case" - so this is not a plan just a list of aspirations - and "subject to reapproval by the treasury". So no plan and no money.
I'm just going on what the report actually says, that prioritising regional links over long-distance ones is likely to give a bigger benefit. As I have said earlier, the report does touch on the problem of approvals, but it doesn't rely on such caveats. Rather, it gives the cost/benefit analysis that the government used to make their decision.
HS2 Northern Powerhouse Rail 40 new hospitals No border on the Irish Sea Nobody needs to sell their house for social care No tax rises Cheaper food Protect the fisherpeople
No, he has confirmed it is, and is ashamed of his behaviour. What more do you want him to do?
A good apology too.
There's a difference between bad remarks made by people years ago that they apologise for when brought up - and doing racist stuff today and covering it up when people complain.
Sure, but isn't this whole story about what people did years ago?
No, the Rafiq stuff is about now.
You've got people in charge at Yorkshire right now who think using Zimbo for Zimbabwe is racist and worth of disciplinary action but calling someone a Paki isn't.
The problem with this 'find the racist game' is that it's open to any number of players and can veer in unexpected directions as Rafiq is now finding out. His testimony has effectively wrecked the career of an ex England captain and exposed himself as not only a racist but a hypocrite so will probably wreck his own future career as well.
These witch hunts are extremely ugly and should be stopped before they get out of hand. An unpopular cricketer was bullied under the noses of his employers and for this they have questions to answer. But leave the racism out of it.
No, he has confirmed it is, and is ashamed of his behaviour. What more do you want him to do?
A good apology too.
There's a difference between bad remarks made by people years ago that they apologise for when brought up - and doing racist stuff today and covering it up when people complain.
Sure, but isn't this whole story about what people did years ago?
No, the Rafiq stuff is about now.
You've got people in charge at Yorkshire right now who think using Zimbo for Zimbabwe is racist and worth of disciplinary action but calling someone a Paki isn't.
The problem with this 'find the racist game' is that it's open to any number of players and can veer in unexpected directions as Rafiq is now finding out. His testimony has effectively wrecked the career of an ex England captain and exposed himself as not only a racist but a hypocrite so will probably wreck his own future career as well.
These witch hunts are extremely ugly and should be stopped before they get out of hand. An unpopular cricketer was bullied under the noses of his employers and for this they have questions to answer. But leave the racism out of it.
Blimey Roger, one of your posts with which I agree 100%
Why on earth is Johnson doing this? I know he breaks promises all the time, but why this one? Where's the gain?
The only thing that makes sense is the Treasury have out manoeuvred him.
It would be interesting to see an independent study done comparing in detail the two plans. Hard to tell how much of the criticism is just automatic partisan bluster.
Why on earth is Johnson doing this? I know he breaks promises all the time, but why this one? Where's the gain?
The only thing that makes sense is the Treasury have out manoeuvred him.
It would be interesting to see an independent study done comparing in detail the two plans. Hard to tell how much of the criticism is just automatic partisan bluster.
From a general read around the media, it does appear that people who were always against HS2, are now complaining that there’s been changes made to the proposals. Sounds like unthinking government-bashing, rather than reasoned analysis of today’s actual proposals. Yes, it would be good to see some decent impartial analysis of the various options.
No, he has confirmed it is, and is ashamed of his behaviour. What more do you want him to do?
A good apology too.
There's a difference between bad remarks made by people years ago that they apologise for when brought up - and doing racist stuff today and covering it up when people complain.
Sure, but isn't this whole story about what people did years ago?
No, the Rafiq stuff is about now.
You've got people in charge at Yorkshire right now who think using Zimbo for Zimbabwe is racist and worth of disciplinary action but calling someone a Paki isn't.
The problem with this 'find the racist game' is that it's open to any number of players and can veer in unexpected directions as Rafiq is now finding out. His testimony has effectively wrecked the career of an ex England captain and exposed himself as not only a racist but a hypocrite so will probably wreck his own future career as well.
These witch hunts are extremely ugly and should be stopped before they get out of hand. An unpopular cricketer was bullied under the noses of his employers and for this they have questions to answer. But leave the racism out of it.
Blimey Roger, one of your posts with which I agree 100%
And by that same token a rare one of Roger's that I 100% disagree with.
No, he has confirmed it is, and is ashamed of his behaviour. What more do you want him to do?
A good apology too.
There's a difference between bad remarks made by people years ago that they apologise for when brought up - and doing racist stuff today and covering it up when people complain.
Sure, but isn't this whole story about what people did years ago?
No, the Rafiq stuff is about now.
You've got people in charge at Yorkshire right now who think using Zimbo for Zimbabwe is racist and worth of disciplinary action but calling someone a Paki isn't.
The problem with this 'find the racist game' is that it's open to any number of players and can veer in unexpected directions as Rafiq is now finding out. His testimony has effectively wrecked the career of an ex England captain and exposed himself as not only a racist but a hypocrite so will probably wreck his own future career as well.
These witch hunts are extremely ugly and should be stopped before they get out of hand. An unpopular cricketer was bullied under the noses of his employers and for this they have questions to answer. But leave the racism out of it.
How about not making clearly racists statements to people?
HS2 Northern Powerhouse Rail 40 new hospitals No border on the Irish Sea Nobody needs to sell their house for social care No tax rises Cheaper food Protect the fisherpeople
Comments
1. However you try and frame this he personally pledged repeatedly to get this built
2. The new plan being spun as delivering faster, despite delivering less than the old plan on the same "by 2043" phasing
3. The new plan isn't even committed to thanks to "subject to treasury recommitment" and "subject to business plan" caveats to almost everything
4. The claimed numbers for things like journey times are being ripped apart in detail by industry commentators
5. The claimed numbers for things like journey times utterly miss the point that the project was about capacity which will now be cut as opposed to expanded.
So much of the "automatic partisan bluster" seems to be coming from red wall Tory MPs...
Think of AZ as Tanqueray and Pfizer as Noilly Prat.
Barclays economist Fabrice Montagne says clients weren't interested in Brexit until last week - now they're worried.
A thread...
Full story with @PhilAldrick via @economics 👇
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-18/brexit-dispute-risks-fanning-inflation-and-pushing-boe-rate-rise
Current leaders are always claimed to be no match for those from the good old days.
Current events are always claimed to be huge turning points, when they usually aren’t.
Not to say this time it’s categorically not different, but these conversations must have happened when it turned out not to be before.
I was reading remarks the other day from a representative of the hospitality business in Scotland, who are terrified that the Holyrood vaccine passport scheme will be extended to pubs and restaurants - something that the Scottish Government has declined to do so far but has threatened to impose in early December. Businesses fear a mass cancellation of bookings from exhausted patrons, who are thoroughly sick of Covid everything and will simply buy supermarket food and booze and organise house parties instead.
Government can throttle businesses, which are sitting ducks, but this isn't a police state: they can plead with the ordinary citizen to stay at home yet again, but they lack the power to insist. If confronted with another lockdown I believe that there are an awful lot of people who listened to the Government and shut themselves off from their families last Christmas, but will tell ministers and their advisers where to stick their rules at the second time of asking.
We are scared and as I have oft mentioned before on here, as Confucius noted, a scared population is one that is easy to rule.
A minor point, but absolutely nobody anywhere in the media or politics seems to find accurate Chinese transliteration as at all important. Didn't know where he was talking about at first
Likewise you then have things like adding additional tracks at the pinch points between York and Manchester - clearly they've never gone past them because anyone who has would be going - Nope, got any other ideas.
So it's a lovely report that is seemingly based on hopes, dreams and fantasy rather than reality.
It takes a special kind of self-denial to support this.
However, could a short, sharp war for the liberation of HELIGOLAND be in the cards?
In order to redress the wrongs done by Britain (betrayal & bombing) to fellow subjects of the Queen (Victoria)?
With casus belli being to help heroic Heligolanders curb COVID now devastating Deutschland, by bestowing boon of Boris's boundless beneficence?
Currently in a country house hotel on the Welsh side of the border, and exactly 1/30 of guests so far as been wearing one where they are supposedly obliged to by law.
There is nothing in Network Rail's plans that would generate anything like the time savings required and Network Rail are the real experts here.
Again - there is no benefit. When you run faster trains on congested lines you can run fewer trains. Some claimed journey time gains (Liverpool - Manchester) are net zero to now. Others (Manchester to York, Leeds to Bradford) are being torn apart by the rivet counters. And Birmingham to Nottingham moves Nottingham to Radcliffe-upon-Soar.
Ps this is also why Labour is still struggling - many of its ex-voters think Labour looked down on them but SKS has never come out with a forthright apology.
Denmark reports 4,013 new coronavirus cases, the biggest one-day increase since December 2020
Of course, you probably want AZ followed by Pfizer followed by Moderna to absolutely maximise protection, but that might be a little bit of a hassle.
The only one you could arguably say is causing wage inflation is the exit of cheap labour post Brexit but (1) that impacts certain industries only (2) 5m have applied for permanent residence here which doesn’t point to a collapse in supply (3) Covid arguably had more an effect as hospitality etc workers lost jobs at the start, went home and haven’t come back.
As for economists, the fact they are calling for interest rate rises shows their dogmatic approach. Anyone who thought for a second re raising interest rates would know it would have not much impact on inflation but would hit the economy severely hard
Its like your stuff on journey times. It uses sources "including" Network Rail. That doesn't mean that NR backs up some of the funnier claims like ECML journey times - the opposite is true when the rivet counters pull out previous reports which showed how the latest stuff is unachieveable.
The caveats are there throughout. "Subject to business case" - so this is not a plan just a list of aspirations - and "subject to reapproval by the treasury". So no plan and no money.
Northern Powerhouse Rail
40 new hospitals
No border on the Irish Sea
Nobody needs to sell their house for social care
No tax rises
Cheaper food
Protect the fisherpeople
Ever get a feeling you’ve been had?
These witch hunts are extremely ugly and should be stopped before they get out of hand. An unpopular cricketer was bullied under the noses of his employers and for this they have questions to answer. But leave the racism out of it.