Re lack of science in cabinet. My understanding is there a similar dearth across the civil service and it is something Patrick Valence in particular has been raising for ages. In a modern economy having sufficient expertise in science is crucial.
I guess the problem is say a STEM PhD from a top tier university is going to have a range of well paid opportunities, i doubt the civil service ranks very highly on that.
It’s something that Cummings identified very early on in government. There’s a total lack of timely and accurate data reaching the decision-makers.
Yes, they probably need to dig deep into their pockets for a bunch of STEM PhDs, who have the opportunity to go into the City or tech company where £200k salaries are the norm.
Why the heck do they need PhDs? Just compete with the audit/consulting/non-banking financial services firms for ordinary maths/econ/natsci bachelors, rather than the current situation of everyone having PPE from Oxford/Durham (uninformed stereotype alert). Starting salaries 25k-40k, rising to 50k-100k within ~5 years. Or is even that pricing themselves out the game?
The lack of Cambridge and promotion of Durham is going to put you in @TSE 's bad books.
But in reality if you want great people you need to pay them and the civil service isn't structured in a way that makes that possible - general IT has similar issues...
"Starting salaries for the three agencies - GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 - are in the region of £25,000 to £35,000, plus benefits. There are opportunities to progress to higher grades, with salaries reaching around £40,000 after five to ten years' service."
This isn't exactly going to attract the best and the brightest.....
How on earth does 007 afford his Savile Row suits and Omega watches then? He must have a heck of an expense account...
Only child, parents both deceased, went to Eton, Rolex (not omega) supplied by q branch
Ah, Bond has been an Omega man since the 90s. Perhaps expensive product placement deals are how he supplements his income
Re lack of science in cabinet. My understanding is there a similar dearth across the civil service and it is something Patrick Valence in particular has been raising for ages. In a modern economy having sufficient expertise in science is crucial.
I guess the problem is say a STEM PhD from a top tier university is going to have a range of well paid opportunities, i doubt the civil service ranks very highly on that.
It’s something that Cummings identified very early on in government. There’s a total lack of timely and accurate data reaching the decision-makers.
Yes, they probably need to dig deep into their pockets for a bunch of STEM PhDs, who have the opportunity to go into the City or tech company where £200k salaries are the norm.
Why the heck do they need PhDs? Just compete with the audit/consulting/non-banking financial services firms for ordinary maths/econ/natsci bachelors, rather than the current situation of everyone having PPE from Oxford/Durham (uninformed stereotype alert). Starting salaries 25k-40k, rising to 50k-100k within ~5 years. Or is even that pricing themselves out the game?
The lack of Cambridge and promotion of Durham is going to put you in @TSE 's bad books.
But in reality if you want great people you need to pay them and the civil service isn't structured in a way that makes that possible - general IT has similar issues...
"Starting salaries for the three agencies - GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 - are in the region of £25,000 to £35,000, plus benefits. There are opportunities to progress to higher grades, with salaries reaching around £40,000 after five to ten years' service."
This isn't exactly going to attract the best and the brightest.....
If you want higher salaries for civil servants and government agents who pays for them? Taxpayers.
However even if salaries at the top level are higher in the private sector, salaries on average are higher in the public sector now
The issue isn’t necessarily the salaries, but the inflexible pay grades and unwillingness to bring in exceptional talent at an appropriate grade. The competitors for the STEM PhDs, are going to be offering £100k starting salaries, to 25-year-olds, rising quickly to £200k.
@eek and I had a conversation on this last week, from the viewpoint of the police looking to hire specific skills to investigate cyber-crime. He and I could do this sort of work, but would be looking for what’s usually an Inspector’s salary, rather than an Constable’s.
Those £200k salaries would have to be paid by taxpayers. The private sector will always outbid the public sector for the top talent anyway. If you really need an expert on something who is in demand just higher them on a temporary contract on a high fee for the period you need them
Re lack of science in cabinet. My understanding is there a similar dearth across the civil service and it is something Patrick Valence in particular has been raising for ages. In a modern economy having sufficient expertise in science is crucial.
I guess the problem is say a STEM PhD from a top tier university is going to have a range of well paid opportunities, i doubt the civil service ranks very highly on that.
It’s something that Cummings identified very early on in government. There’s a total lack of timely and accurate data reaching the decision-makers.
Yes, they probably need to dig deep into their pockets for a bunch of STEM PhDs, who have the opportunity to go into the City or tech company where £200k salaries are the norm.
No, it is rubbish. What government needs is data visualisation, which basically means some Python library or other. PhD astrophysicists will process and graph terabytes of data from telescopes. PhD most other STEM subjects, not so much. And the astrophysicists probably do not worry about statistics or normalisation. Though tbh, you don't need a PhD at all. There are PBers who post covid data here in various forms daily.
The hard part is getting access to medical data in the first place, which despite the best efforts of this government is still often confidential, and combining data stored in different formats on different systems. Once you've got access to the data, the rest is trivial scripting with off-the-shelf libraries. Even I used to do it when I had a day job, producing ad hoc analyses on request.
As often, Dominic Cummings was right-ish about the problem but wrong-ish about the solution.
Re lack of science in cabinet. My understanding is there a similar dearth across the civil service and it is something Patrick Valence in particular has been raising for ages. In a modern economy having sufficient expertise in science is crucial.
I guess the problem is say a STEM PhD from a top tier university is going to have a range of well paid opportunities, i doubt the civil service ranks very highly on that.
It’s something that Cummings identified very early on in government. There’s a total lack of timely and accurate data reaching the decision-makers.
Yes, they probably need to dig deep into their pockets for a bunch of STEM PhDs, who have the opportunity to go into the City or tech company where £200k salaries are the norm.
Why the heck do they need PhDs? Just compete with the audit/consulting/non-banking financial services firms for ordinary maths/econ/natsci bachelors, rather than the current situation of everyone having PPE from Oxford/Durham (uninformed stereotype alert). Starting salaries 25k-40k, rising to 50k-100k within ~5 years. Or is even that pricing themselves out the game?
The lack of Cambridge and promotion of Durham is going to put you in @TSE 's bad books.
But in reality if you want great people you need to pay them and the civil service isn't structured in a way that makes that possible - general IT has similar issues...
"Starting salaries for the three agencies - GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 - are in the region of £25,000 to £35,000, plus benefits. There are opportunities to progress to higher grades, with salaries reaching around £40,000 after five to ten years' service."
This isn't exactly going to attract the best and the brightest.....
How on earth does 007 afford his Savile Row suits and Omega watches then? He must have a heck of an expense account...
Only child, parents both deceased, went to Eton, Rolex (not omega) supplied by q branch
Ah, Bond has been an Omega man since the 90s. Perhaps expensive product placement deals are how he supplements his income
We're told that the more likely scenario - as disclosed by The Times at the weekend - is a two-week circuit breaker after Christmas
The 28th has been pencilled in by officials as the starting point for the new curbs - again taking into account the 48 hours needed for recall
What an utter shitshow
I think we can expect widespread disobedience this time around. Maybe enough to make the efforts entirely futile.
There won't be, though. My patents will follow it. So I won't be able to see them. And there will be the issue from last time of 'does family x feel the same way or will they be horrified if we suggest the children see their friends'? Some people will be able to break it with impunity, but most will just sit inside and seethe.
I think that's overly optimistic/pessimistic. Talking to people in my own group (I am of course aware that they may not be representative, but I don't have much else to go on):
- My parents are in their 60s, one of them quite vulnerable, they've been pretty obedient, now saying they won't follow it. - Friend in his late 50s, diabetic, has been off out almost every night for the last week. He was very careful pre-vaccination and has said he won't lock himself down against post-vaccination. - Friends more my age (late 20s and 30s), pretty much regardless of where they sat on the compliance spectrum for past restrictions have said not a chance in hell this time.
All triple vaxxed or about to be for what it's worth.
Well, because people value socialising on Christmas Day more highly than they value immediate impacts on health outcomes, but don't value socialising in late December/early January more than they value immediate impacts on health outcomes. Simple. I'm not saying it's correct - I would have no restrictions at all - but nor is it stupid. We're not, contrary to appearances, all about immediate health outcomes at all costs: it's always a balance. I would argue that the balance is too far in the interests of the DoH and too little in the interests of the individual, the treasury and the hospitality sector, but it is still about striking a balance.
There is more chance of a snowstorm in hades than people following the second point down. The ban on indoor mixing is to many the true “lockdown.”
No holidays is just going to annoy people, no indoor entertainment - well that's the west end completely and permanently f***ed.
Perhaps they could do some outdoor shows if people wrapped up warm and had heaters and hot chocolate? You could have more outdoor cinemas too watched from your car
HYUFD, you seemed to think there would be a VONC if there was a lockdown - this seems like a lockdown to me - do you think there will be a VONC?
It seems like a semi lockdown not a full lockdown. I expect there will be a VONC in 2022 but likely only after the local elections, if the polls are still bad and the Tories have lost a lot of council seats then would be the move. Rebel Tory MPs only get one shot to get 51% of their colleagues to no confidence Boris or he is safe for a full year
I agree. Ousting him now is out of the question. Leadership change, if you're doing it, in the summer. But if the polls first stop rotting and then recover, no change at all, BJ leads into the GE.
726k third doses done in England I think. That'a a huge record for a Monday reporting. More than double what we had last week. I think we will get over the big 1m this week for Wed/Thu.
Re lack of science in cabinet. My understanding is there a similar dearth across the civil service and it is something Patrick Valence in particular has been raising for ages. In a modern economy having sufficient expertise in science is crucial.
I guess the problem is say a STEM PhD from a top tier university is going to have a range of well paid opportunities, i doubt the civil service ranks very highly on that.
It’s something that Cummings identified very early on in government. There’s a total lack of timely and accurate data reaching the decision-makers.
Yes, they probably need to dig deep into their pockets for a bunch of STEM PhDs, who have the opportunity to go into the City or tech company where £200k salaries are the norm.
No, it is rubbish. What government needs is data visualisation, which basically means some Python library or other. PhD astrophysicists will process and graph terabytes of data from telescopes. PhD most other STEM subjects, not so much. And the astrophysicists probably do not worry about statistics or normalisation. Though tbh, you don't need a PhD at all. There are PBers who post covid data here in various forms daily.
The hard part is getting access to medical data in the first place, which despite the best efforts of this government is still often confidential, and combining data stored in different formats on different systems. Once you've got access to the data, the rest is trivial scripting with off-the-shelf libraries. Even I used to do it when I had a day job, producing ad hoc analyses on request.
As often, Dominic Cummings was right-ish about the problem but wrong-ish about the solution.
The trouble being that when it comes to Government and the Civil Service all the solutions are wrong-ish in some form or another. At least he was right-ish about identifying the problems which is more than can be said for 99% of the people making decisions either as politicians or civil servants.
Re lack of science in cabinet. My understanding is there a similar dearth across the civil service and it is something Patrick Valence in particular has been raising for ages. In a modern economy having sufficient expertise in science is crucial.
I guess the problem is say a STEM PhD from a top tier university is going to have a range of well paid opportunities, i doubt the civil service ranks very highly on that.
It’s something that Cummings identified very early on in government. There’s a total lack of timely and accurate data reaching the decision-makers.
Yes, they probably need to dig deep into their pockets for a bunch of STEM PhDs, who have the opportunity to go into the City or tech company where £200k salaries are the norm.
Why the heck do they need PhDs? Just compete with the audit/consulting/non-banking financial services firms for ordinary maths/econ/natsci bachelors, rather than the current situation of everyone having PPE from Oxford/Durham (uninformed stereotype alert). Starting salaries 25k-40k, rising to 50k-100k within ~5 years. Or is even that pricing themselves out the game?
The lack of Cambridge and promotion of Durham is going to put you in @TSE 's bad books.
But in reality if you want great people you need to pay them and the civil service isn't structured in a way that makes that possible - general IT has similar issues...
"Starting salaries for the three agencies - GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 - are in the region of £25,000 to £35,000, plus benefits. There are opportunities to progress to higher grades, with salaries reaching around £40,000 after five to ten years' service."
This isn't exactly going to attract the best and the brightest.....
If you want higher salaries for civil servants and government agents who pays for them? Taxpayers.
However even if salaries at the top level are higher in the private sector, salaries on average are higher in the public sector now
Don't properly reward the good, never sack the crap... massive structural selection pressure for shit people.
The public sector generally offers more security than the private sector and a slightly higher average wage and a better pension but if you want to be rich then you are better off working in the private sector, that has always and likely always will be the case
Can you give some examples? That's not my experience when comparing Civil Service salaries with private sector equivalents, even after making allowance for better pensions (note that final salary schemes have now mostly been replaced). However I'm out of the loop on local government and teaching so don't know for sure.
Re lack of science in cabinet. My understanding is there a similar dearth across the civil service and it is something Patrick Valence in particular has been raising for ages. In a modern economy having sufficient expertise in science is crucial.
I guess the problem is say a STEM PhD from a top tier university is going to have a range of well paid opportunities, i doubt the civil service ranks very highly on that.
It’s something that Cummings identified very early on in government. There’s a total lack of timely and accurate data reaching the decision-makers.
Yes, they probably need to dig deep into their pockets for a bunch of STEM PhDs, who have the opportunity to go into the City or tech company where £200k salaries are the norm.
Why the heck do they need PhDs? Just compete with the audit/consulting/non-banking financial services firms for ordinary maths/econ/natsci bachelors, rather than the current situation of everyone having PPE from Oxford/Durham (uninformed stereotype alert). Starting salaries 25k-40k, rising to 50k-100k within ~5 years. Or is even that pricing themselves out the game?
The lack of Cambridge and promotion of Durham is going to put you in @TSE 's bad books.
But in reality if you want great people you need to pay them and the civil service isn't structured in a way that makes that possible - general IT has similar issues...
"Starting salaries for the three agencies - GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 - are in the region of £25,000 to £35,000, plus benefits. There are opportunities to progress to higher grades, with salaries reaching around £40,000 after five to ten years' service."
This isn't exactly going to attract the best and the brightest.....
If you want higher salaries for civil servants and government agents who pays for them? Taxpayers.
However even if salaries at the top level are higher in the private sector, salaries on average are higher in the public sector now
Don't properly reward the good, never sack the crap... massive structural selection pressure for shit people.
The public sector generally offers more security than the private sector and a slightly higher average wage and a better pension but if you want to be rich then you are better off working in the private sector, that has always and likely always will be the case
Can you give some examples? That's not my experience when comparing Civil Service salaries with private sector equivalents, even after making allowance for better pensions (note that final salary schemes have now mostly been replaced). However I'm out of the loop on local government and teaching so don't know for sure.
HYUFD's just parroting a right-wing modern version of "why give the poor baths in council houses? they'd put coal in them."
When I started in a government quango ca 1992 I looked into salaries and pensions (Civil Service) and found that the salary comparators with the private sector were used to reduce the actual salary quite significantly so as to compensate for the pension element. (The Treasury weren't going to let anyone get away with doing otherwise.) They never increased when the pension element was steadily reduced.
Edit: There were of course cost of living elements. But no compensation for reduction of pension that I can recall.
Re lack of science in cabinet. My understanding is there a similar dearth across the civil service and it is something Patrick Valence in particular has been raising for ages. In a modern economy having sufficient expertise in science is crucial.
I guess the problem is say a STEM PhD from a top tier university is going to have a range of well paid opportunities, i doubt the civil service ranks very highly on that.
It’s something that Cummings identified very early on in government. There’s a total lack of timely and accurate data reaching the decision-makers.
Yes, they probably need to dig deep into their pockets for a bunch of STEM PhDs, who have the opportunity to go into the City or tech company where £200k salaries are the norm.
Why the heck do they need PhDs? Just compete with the audit/consulting/non-banking financial services firms for ordinary maths/econ/natsci bachelors, rather than the current situation of everyone having PPE from Oxford/Durham (uninformed stereotype alert). Starting salaries 25k-40k, rising to 50k-100k within ~5 years. Or is even that pricing themselves out the game?
The lack of Cambridge and promotion of Durham is going to put you in @TSE 's bad books.
But in reality if you want great people you need to pay them and the civil service isn't structured in a way that makes that possible - general IT has similar issues...
"Starting salaries for the three agencies - GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 - are in the region of £25,000 to £35,000, plus benefits. There are opportunities to progress to higher grades, with salaries reaching around £40,000 after five to ten years' service."
This isn't exactly going to attract the best and the brightest.....
If you want higher salaries for civil servants and government agents who pays for them? Taxpayers.
However even if salaries at the top level are higher in the private sector, salaries on average are higher in the public sector now
Don't properly reward the good, never sack the crap... massive structural selection pressure for shit people.
The public sector generally offers more security than the private sector and a slightly higher average wage and a better pension but if you want to be rich then you are better off working in the private sector, that has always and likely always will be the case
Can you give some examples? That's not my experience when comparing Civil Service salaries with private sector equivalents, even after making allowance for better pensions (note that final salary schemes have now mostly been replaced). However I'm out of the loop on local government and teaching so don't know for sure.
The final salary schemes have mostly been replaced with average salary schemes, which still count as Defined Benefit (DB) rather than Defined Contribution (DC) and hence are still much better than anything available in the private sector, with the key difference being the weight of investment risk falling on the scheme sponsor, not the employee.
Re lack of science in cabinet. My understanding is there a similar dearth across the civil service and it is something Patrick Valence in particular has been raising for ages. In a modern economy having sufficient expertise in science is crucial.
I guess the problem is say a STEM PhD from a top tier university is going to have a range of well paid opportunities, i doubt the civil service ranks very highly on that.
It’s something that Cummings identified very early on in government. There’s a total lack of timely and accurate data reaching the decision-makers.
Yes, they probably need to dig deep into their pockets for a bunch of STEM PhDs, who have the opportunity to go into the City or tech company where £200k salaries are the norm.
Why the heck do they need PhDs? Just compete with the audit/consulting/non-banking financial services firms for ordinary maths/econ/natsci bachelors, rather than the current situation of everyone having PPE from Oxford/Durham (uninformed stereotype alert). Starting salaries 25k-40k, rising to 50k-100k within ~5 years. Or is even that pricing themselves out the game?
The lack of Cambridge and promotion of Durham is going to put you in @TSE 's bad books.
But in reality if you want great people you need to pay them and the civil service isn't structured in a way that makes that possible - general IT has similar issues...
"Starting salaries for the three agencies - GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 - are in the region of £25,000 to £35,000, plus benefits. There are opportunities to progress to higher grades, with salaries reaching around £40,000 after five to ten years' service."
This isn't exactly going to attract the best and the brightest.....
If you want higher salaries for civil servants and government agents who pays for them? Taxpayers.
However even if salaries at the top level are higher in the private sector, salaries on average are higher in the public sector now
The issue isn’t necessarily the salaries, but the inflexible pay grades and unwillingness to bring in exceptional talent at an appropriate grade. The competitors for the STEM PhDs, are going to be offering £100k starting salaries, to 25-year-olds, rising quickly to £200k.
@eek and I had a conversation on this last week, from the viewpoint of the police looking to hire specific skills to investigate cyber-crime. He and I could do this sort of work, but would be looking for what’s usually an Inspector’s salary, rather than an Constable’s.
Those £200k salaries would have to be paid by taxpayers. The private sector will always outbid the public sector for the top talent anyway. If you really need an expert on something who is in demand just higher them on a temporary contract on a high fee for the period you need them
Which is why you we have track and trace spending £100k+ a day for a few experts. Hiring people in really doesn't work
Want some decent data experts pay them directly as its cheaper than paying the firms they worth through.
One consultancy I know does a lot of work with HMRC paying their contractors £1200 or so a day. Given that these people will be at HMRC for years why is HMRC paying £300,000 a year for them when they would be there for £100,000 or so if HMRC could legitimately employ them (they can't because that wage is director level and there can only be so many directors).
Edit - corrected figures as I had the consultancies margin wrong - basically if HMRC could employ them (and HMRC would love to) it would save HMRC £150,000 or so per contractor.
Re lack of science in cabinet. My understanding is there a similar dearth across the civil service and it is something Patrick Valence in particular has been raising for ages. In a modern economy having sufficient expertise in science is crucial.
I guess the problem is say a STEM PhD from a top tier university is going to have a range of well paid opportunities, i doubt the civil service ranks very highly on that.
It’s something that Cummings identified very early on in government. There’s a total lack of timely and accurate data reaching the decision-makers.
Yes, they probably need to dig deep into their pockets for a bunch of STEM PhDs, who have the opportunity to go into the City or tech company where £200k salaries are the norm.
Why the heck do they need PhDs? Just compete with the audit/consulting/non-banking financial services firms for ordinary maths/econ/natsci bachelors, rather than the current situation of everyone having PPE from Oxford/Durham (uninformed stereotype alert). Starting salaries 25k-40k, rising to 50k-100k within ~5 years. Or is even that pricing themselves out the game?
The lack of Cambridge and promotion of Durham is going to put you in @TSE 's bad books.
But in reality if you want great people you need to pay them and the civil service isn't structured in a way that makes that possible - general IT has similar issues...
"Starting salaries for the three agencies - GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 - are in the region of £25,000 to £35,000, plus benefits. There are opportunities to progress to higher grades, with salaries reaching around £40,000 after five to ten years' service."
This isn't exactly going to attract the best and the brightest.....
If you want higher salaries for civil servants and government agents who pays for them? Taxpayers.
However even if salaries at the top level are higher in the private sector, salaries on average are higher in the public sector now
I would need some evidence to back that up
But here we are talking about technical jobs and how quality decision makers. You need to pay them decent money as otherwise the private sector will pay them more.
It's little different from BBC presenters looking at what ITV pay and asking for something vaguely similar rather than an insult.
Yes it turns out the gold-plated public sector pensions are not gold-plated enough to offset higher salaries in the private sector.
Rumours on Twitter that a return to Step 2 for 28 days after Xmas is going to be announced
Do the rumours say when it is likely to be announced ?
Vote on the 27th supposedly, but that's a week from now, a week in which we will be able to see what effect this has on the hospitalisations from Omicron. If there's no big explosion as they seem to think then it would be very difficult to proceed.
I was thinking about this only yesterday. A fair number of the teachers at my school were quite wealthy. Why?Certainly not the salary - one teacher described the Trust who ran the school as the stingiest organisation he'd ever worked for.
I thin, like Bond, they came from quite affluent backgrounds and could afford a fairly meagre teacher's salary. Not that they were very like Bond in other ways......
Rumours on Twitter that a return to Step 2 for 28 days after Xmas is going to be announced
Do the rumours say when it is likely to be announced ?
Vote on the 27th supposedly, but that's a week from now, a week in which we will be able to see what effect this has on the hospitalisations from Omicron. If there's no big explosion as they seem to think then it would be very difficult to proceed.
Won't stop them though, will it? Because the point isn't public health; lockdown is the point; a way will be found to justify it. It always is.
26 is dreadful for the Tories, especially considering the supposed former Brexit dividend, in the ex-industrial regions particularly. I was somehow imagining a poll like this this mornng, but UK-wide.
Rumours on Twitter that a return to Step 2 for 28 days after Xmas is going to be announced
Do the rumours say when it is likely to be announced ?
Vote on the 27th supposedly, but that's a week from now, a week in which we will be able to see what effect this has on the hospitalisations from Omicron. If there's no big explosion as they seem to think then it would be very difficult to proceed.
Not on the 22nd - Wednesday would make sense - it's not a bank holiday and it's before the figures reveal a lockdown is completely pointless.
There is more chance of a snowstorm in hades than people following the second point down. The ban on indoor mixing is to many the true “lockdown.”
No holidays is just going to annoy people, no indoor entertainment - well that's the west end completely and permanently f***ed.
Perhaps they could do some outdoor shows if people wrapped up warm and had heaters and hot chocolate? You could have more outdoor cinemas too watched from your car
Would you be in favour if that was what is announced.
Having worked across private and public sectors, I’ve seen no noticeable competence differential.
The public sector is encumbered by its process and attitude to risk, that’s all, both of which are there for reasons.
Yes, I agree. Having worked in both, I'd say the public sector is just as competent and just as hard working, if not more so. The difference is in the ability to make a decision (and, as gardenwalker says, in risk). Public sector organisations have so many layers of approval to go through that the most mundane of decisions can take weeks.
Well that would ruin my holiday. While I, of course, wouldn't advocate breaking the law, I think it would be fair to say many people would not feel any moral obligation to restrict their socialising at this point and short of full on parties I can't see any realistic enforcement.
Indeed, and some of us may have planned our family/friends gatherings around the Bank Holidays of 27/28th. I can see lots of people carrying on regardless. I shall.
This is basically the problem. The 27th/28th is not business as usual for a lot of people. All the way up to NYE/NYD people have plans.
Yep bonkers. Manage to piss off everyone. Those who want tough restrictions Christmas is going ahead and those who want no restrictions NYE isn't.
I was thinking about this only yesterday. A fair number of the teachers at my school were quite wealthy. Why?Certainly not the salary - one teacher described the Trust who ran the school as the stingiest organisation he'd ever worked for.
I thin, like Bond, they came from quite affluent backgrounds and could afford a fairly meagre teacher's salary. Not that they were very like Bond in other ways......
There used to be a headteacher round here called Jim Bond. He did not drive his Aston Martin to work though.
There is more chance of a snowstorm in hades than people following the second point down. The ban on indoor mixing is to many the true “lockdown.”
No holidays is just going to annoy people, no indoor entertainment - well that's the west end completely and permanently f***ed.
Perhaps they could do some outdoor shows if people wrapped up warm and had heaters and hot chocolate? You could have more outdoor cinemas too watched from your car
HYUFD, you seemed to think there would be a VONC if there was a lockdown - this seems like a lockdown to me - do you think there will be a VONC?
It seems like a semi lockdown not a full lockdown. I expect there will be a VONC in 2022 but likely only after the local elections, if the polls are still bad and the Tories have lost a lot of council seats then would be the move. Rebel Tory MPs only get one shot to get 51% of their colleagues to no confidence Boris or he is safe for a full year
I agree. Ousting him now is out of the question. Leadership change, if you're doing it, in the summer. But if the polls first stop rotting and then recover, no change at all, BJ leads into the GE.
Come off it, HYUFD, this is lockdown. No indoor socialising = lockdown.
OT, but there may be people who can advise, given the collective knowledge round here.
I'm getting married next May, and thus need to give notice at my local registry office.
I was born in Australia to two married British nationals in 1987, who returned with me aged 7 months, travelling on my mums passport.
I'm a British national, and don't hold dual citizenship (nor do either of my parents)
I don't hold, and have never held a passport, but do have a full Australian birth certificate, also my both my parent's birth certificate's and marriage certificate. I have a current photocard driving licence which is correctly addressed.
The registry office is insistant that the only possible way I can give notice is to first obtain a passport. I don't want or need a passport (indeed I have a specific reason to not want to have a passport). It seems to completely unreasonable to me that I'm required to provide a passport to get married, with no alternative being available.
Any suggestions (I'm going to try my local MP - it's a good way to find out if his caseworker is any good)?
I have to ask - what are you asked to provide to confirm you have the right to work in the UK - as that would have the same issue...
I'm not sure I've ever been asked - I've only ever worked for small businesses without HR departments, currently run my own company.
I've a UK driving licence, NI number etc - I've just never had or needed a passport (and really don't want one - not having one has got me out of going to loads of difficult meetings with irritating French clients).
Re lack of science in cabinet. My understanding is there a similar dearth across the civil service and it is something Patrick Valence in particular has been raising for ages. In a modern economy having sufficient expertise in science is crucial.
I guess the problem is say a STEM PhD from a top tier university is going to have a range of well paid opportunities, i doubt the civil service ranks very highly on that.
It’s something that Cummings identified very early on in government. There’s a total lack of timely and accurate data reaching the decision-makers.
Yes, they probably need to dig deep into their pockets for a bunch of STEM PhDs, who have the opportunity to go into the City or tech company where £200k salaries are the norm.
No, it is rubbish. What government needs is data visualisation, which basically means some Python library or other. PhD astrophysicists will process and graph terabytes of data from telescopes. PhD most other STEM subjects, not so much. And the astrophysicists probably do not worry about statistics or normalisation. Though tbh, you don't need a PhD at all. There are PBers who post covid data here in various forms daily.
The hard part is getting access to medical data in the first place, which despite the best efforts of this government is still often confidential, and combining data stored in different formats on different systems. Once you've got access to the data, the rest is trivial scripting with off-the-shelf libraries. Even I used to do it when I had a day job, producing ad hoc analyses on request.
As often, Dominic Cummings was right-ish about the problem but wrong-ish about the solution.
Yes, the actual visualisation part of the data is easy. The difficult bits are knowing what to visualise, and assembling the data, or a useful subset of the data, in the first place.
Add that to the layers of time-consuming bureaucracy between the decision-makers and the front line, and you can see why Mr Cummings quickly got very frustrated.
26 is dreadful for the Tories, especially considering the supposed former Brexit dividend, in the ex-industrial regions particularly. I was somehow imagining a poll like this this mornng, but UK-wide.
I'm more surprised that Labour is 'only' on 39% in Wales TBH. I'd expect them to be comfortably above 40% there.
Re lack of science in cabinet. My understanding is there a similar dearth across the civil service and it is something Patrick Valence in particular has been raising for ages. In a modern economy having sufficient expertise in science is crucial.
I guess the problem is say a STEM PhD from a top tier university is going to have a range of well paid opportunities, i doubt the civil service ranks very highly on that.
It’s something that Cummings identified very early on in government. There’s a total lack of timely and accurate data reaching the decision-makers.
Yes, they probably need to dig deep into their pockets for a bunch of STEM PhDs, who have the opportunity to go into the City or tech company where £200k salaries are the norm.
Why the heck do they need PhDs? Just compete with the audit/consulting/non-banking financial services firms for ordinary maths/econ/natsci bachelors, rather than the current situation of everyone having PPE from Oxford/Durham (uninformed stereotype alert). Starting salaries 25k-40k, rising to 50k-100k within ~5 years. Or is even that pricing themselves out the game?
The lack of Cambridge and promotion of Durham is going to put you in @TSE 's bad books.
But in reality if you want great people you need to pay them and the civil service isn't structured in a way that makes that possible - general IT has similar issues...
"Starting salaries for the three agencies - GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 - are in the region of £25,000 to £35,000, plus benefits. There are opportunities to progress to higher grades, with salaries reaching around £40,000 after five to ten years' service."
This isn't exactly going to attract the best and the brightest.....
If you want higher salaries for civil servants and government agents who pays for them? Taxpayers.
However even if salaries at the top level are higher in the private sector, salaries on average are higher in the public sector now
Don't properly reward the good, never sack the crap... massive structural selection pressure for shit people.
The public sector generally offers more security than the private sector and a slightly higher average wage and a better pension but if you want to be rich then you are better off working in the private sector, that has always and likely always will be the case
Can you give some examples? That's not my experience when comparing Civil Service salaries with private sector equivalents, even after making allowance for better pensions (note that final salary schemes have now mostly been replaced). However I'm out of the loop on local government and teaching so don't know for sure.
Thank you. I would question the raw figures you quoted - as somebody else pointed out upthread, most public sector Minimum Wage-level jobs have been privatised (and there are a lot of them), which will skew the numbers. I'm surprised the BBC article referenced shows it about equal, perhaps there are some wide fluctuations between sector and region. It's probably quite hard to compare like-for-like. Perhaps my view is distorted by being a London/SE-centric one, and in the north it is the other way round.
Hmm. I've been bouncing around between 90 and 95 per cent since the start of the pandemic (ie since @Foxy told us to buy those pulse oximeter thingies) so am firmly in the amber zone with occasional visits to red. I did buy a second gadget from a different maker to check but no improvement. Otoh, I'm not dead yet.
Not trying to mislead anyone here, Labour MPs have been told to be in on Wednesday and this has not yet been cancelled but it looks as if the chaos in the Government means the previous plan of a recall on Wednesday has been dropped.
PR at the local level sounds even worse than at the national level. Given the lack of media scrutiny locally, it means there would be a handful of local politicians that can never be voted out of power, because they will always be first on the party list. You end up with Junckers in miniature controlling everything, focused on keeping the other permanent politicians happy than caring about the voters.
Not trying to mislead anyone here, Labour MPs have been told to be in on Wednesday and this has not yet been cancelled but it looks as if the chaos in the Government means the previous plan of a recall on Wednesday has been dropped.
Thanks - Wednesday makes sense if the Government actually wants to lockdown. I can't see your average MP willing traipsing back to Westminster on the 27th/28th. That will just annoy them more.
The hospital where my wife works saw COVID patients walk in under their own steam with blood oxygen levels that would normally mean they were dead. Very low blood oxygen levels at point of presentation to medical staff is a prime indicator of poor outcomes. Get there before levels get too low, and your chances of survival with appropriate care are greatly enhanced.
Knowing your baseline blood oxygen level and monitoring it is a key thing we can do for ourselves. Along with staying hydrated and eating even if we don't feel like it. A COVID-infected body needs energy and to be hydrated in order to fight off the virus and cope with the effects of our immune system.
Not trying to mislead anyone here, Labour MPs have been told to be in on Wednesday and this has not yet been cancelled but it looks as if the chaos in the Government means the previous plan of a recall on Wednesday has been dropped.
Thanks, but isn't it just because no decision has been made yet because the cabinet is still meeting?
If Johnson stays on indefinitely, I wouldn't be over-surprised to see high 20's figures nationally at some point, as I initially thought that one was too.
Hmm. I've been bouncing around between 90 and 95 per cent since the start of the pandemic (ie since @Foxy told us to buy those pulse oximeter thingies) so am firmly in the amber zone with occasional visits to red. I did buy a second gadget from a different maker to check but no improvement. Otoh, I'm not dead yet.
Please get checked out. Even if there is no immediate risk, it can cause things like dementia longer term.
Not trying to mislead anyone here, Labour MPs have been told to be in on Wednesday and this has not yet been cancelled but it looks as if the chaos in the Government means the previous plan of a recall on Wednesday has been dropped.
The only place this government couldn't organise a fuckup is a whorehouse.
Even if Genghis Khan, Georges Simenon and Richard Burton were in attendance.
Not trying to mislead anyone here, Labour MPs have been told to be in on Wednesday and this has not yet been cancelled but it looks as if the chaos in the Government means the previous plan of a recall on Wednesday has been dropped.
LOL!
Tip something that nobody, even on Twitter, is reporting. Then when it doesn't happen its due to 'chaos in the government'.
If all Labour MPs knew about this, then why are none of them saying so on Twitter?
And how would the Labour Party even know what the Government is or isn't planning. The Cabinet don't even seem to know half the time, let alone the the Labour Party!
PR at the local level sounds even worse than at the national level. Given the lack of media scrutiny locally, it means there would be a handful of local politicians that can never be voted out of power, because they will always be first on the party list. You end up with Junckers in miniature controlling everything, focused on keeping the other permanent politicians happy than caring about the voters.
The opposite. It would mean Bootle Tories would be on the council and Lab in True blue shires. It would give more scrutiny, not less.
PR at the local level sounds even worse than at the national level. Given the lack of media scrutiny locally, it means there would be a handful of local politicians that can never be voted out of power, because they will always be first on the party list. You end up with Junckers in miniature controlling everything, focused on keeping the other permanent politicians happy than caring about the voters.
There are different forms, obvs. Here in Scotland we have several seats in an area amalgamated into one, with candidates rather than party lists.
Suspect if the polls asked something like 'would you support lockdown if it meant an additional 5% on income tax to pay for it for the duration' we might get different levels of support for it.
Not trying to mislead anyone here, Labour MPs have been told to be in on Wednesday and this has not yet been cancelled but it looks as if the chaos in the Government means the previous plan of a recall on Wednesday has been dropped.
Thanks - Wednesday makes sense if the Government actually wants to lockdown. I can't see your average MP willing traipsing back to Westminster on the 27th/28th. That will just annoy them more.
If they're going to get to decide whether or not to ruin our lives for some undefined period of time, they can bloody well traipse back.
Hmm. I've been bouncing around between 90 and 95 per cent since the start of the pandemic (ie since @Foxy told us to buy those pulse oximeter thingies) so am firmly in the amber zone with occasional visits to red. I did buy a second gadget from a different maker to check but no improvement. Otoh, I'm not dead yet.
It is important to know you baseline. Seems your reading is lower than the average, for whatever reason (actual baseline, equipment, method of measuring, whatever).
Re lack of science in cabinet. My understanding is there a similar dearth across the civil service and it is something Patrick Valence in particular has been raising for ages. In a modern economy having sufficient expertise in science is crucial.
I guess the problem is say a STEM PhD from a top tier university is going to have a range of well paid opportunities, i doubt the civil service ranks very highly on that.
It’s something that Cummings identified very early on in government. There’s a total lack of timely and accurate data reaching the decision-makers.
Yes, they probably need to dig deep into their pockets for a bunch of STEM PhDs, who have the opportunity to go into the City or tech company where £200k salaries are the norm.
Why the heck do they need PhDs? Just compete with the audit/consulting/non-banking financial services firms for ordinary maths/econ/natsci bachelors, rather than the current situation of everyone having PPE from Oxford/Durham (uninformed stereotype alert). Starting salaries 25k-40k, rising to 50k-100k within ~5 years. Or is even that pricing themselves out the game?
The lack of Cambridge and promotion of Durham is going to put you in @TSE 's bad books.
But in reality if you want great people you need to pay them and the civil service isn't structured in a way that makes that possible - general IT has similar issues...
"Starting salaries for the three agencies - GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 - are in the region of £25,000 to £35,000, plus benefits. There are opportunities to progress to higher grades, with salaries reaching around £40,000 after five to ten years' service."
This isn't exactly going to attract the best and the brightest.....
If you want higher salaries for civil servants and government agents who pays for them? Taxpayers.
However even if salaries at the top level are higher in the private sector, salaries on average are higher in the public sector now
The issue isn’t necessarily the salaries, but the inflexible pay grades and unwillingness to bring in exceptional talent at an appropriate grade. The competitors for the STEM PhDs, are going to be offering £100k starting salaries, to 25-year-olds, rising quickly to £200k.
@eek and I had a conversation on this last week, from the viewpoint of the police looking to hire specific skills to investigate cyber-crime. He and I could do this sort of work, but would be looking for what’s usually an Inspector’s salary, rather than an Constable’s.
Those £200k salaries would have to be paid by taxpayers. The private sector will always outbid the public sector for the top talent anyway. If you really need an expert on something who is in demand just higher them on a temporary contract on a high fee for the period you need them
If you contract them, they’ll be closer to £400k each, especially if IR35 comes into play.
The whole point is that you are not hiring them for a project, you have an urgent need for a permanent team of top-level data analysts. If Google and Goldman are offering them £200k, you need to offer £150k plus a pension, otherwise you’re not getting the right people.
Suspect if the polls asked something like 'would you support lockdown if it meant an additional 5% on income tax to pay for it for the duration' we might get different levels of support for it.
It would be on NI again to make sure the state client vote are not impacted.
Suspect if the polls asked something like 'would you support lockdown if it meant an additional 5% on income tax to pay for it for the duration' we might get different levels of support for it.
Would you rather like to 90 with 6 months a year of lockdown, or live to 80 without.
Not trying to mislead anyone here, Labour MPs have been told to be in on Wednesday and this has not yet been cancelled but it looks as if the chaos in the Government means the previous plan of a recall on Wednesday has been dropped.
Thanks - Wednesday makes sense if the Government actually wants to lockdown. I can't see your average MP willing traipsing back to Westminster on the 27th/28th. That will just annoy them more.
Maybe Boris is hoping that by the 27th/28th they’ll have accidentally thrown out their 1922 letters with the wrapping paper?
That’s just Wales Dr Y, not GB or UK picture. Surely Tories been in worse positions in Wales.
I was actually born in Wales, by mistake 🙂
You were born by mistake, or born in Wales by mistake?
If the first, it is a fortunate mistake for us on PB who can now enjoy your company.
If it's the second, it was a fortunate mistake for you as you now get to support a decent rugby team.
You are on fine form today, that sounds like Gandalf the Grey 😀
I support English Rugby! Though with a nod of respect to Wales rugby for a little provincial place punching above its weight amongst the big boys sometimes.
I was only in wales a few days after birth, I don’t remember much about it. One parent grew up in Hong Kong, another with some German ancestors (bit like the royal family but not nearly as rich!) raised in Yorkshire, living in London - you don’t need to elect a World Government just appoint me 🙂
Just like FFP3 masks and trying to not be a fatty, this is just simple but crucial info. These meters are £15-20 on Amazon. Even if you don't have one before you test positive nor a watch that does it (albeit they are very dodogy), it should be part of the standard advice, as soon as you do, order one, measure regularly, if it drops go to hospitals regardless of how you feel.
I think Labour would be much more likely to favour PR for Westminster for GE2028/9 if Tories retain their majority at GE2024 as that would be 5 consecutive defeats.
If Labour were to go for AMS, I think LDs would reluctantly agree instead of insisting on STV. Any thoughts please? Thanks
Pamela
Additional member system as practised in this country is a joke. It's the reason why Labour wins every election in Wales despite frequently having quite low vote shares. If it were the New Zealand AMS that would be different, but you can bet it wouldn't be.
All voting systems can be rigged to be completely useless - so for example Scotland where the ideal approach would be for the SNP to have a sister list only party to really grab all the seats (thankfully they don't have that and Alba just proved how toxic Alex Salmond was).
Suspect if the polls asked something like 'would you support lockdown if it meant an additional 5% on income tax to pay for it for the duration' we might get different levels of support for it.
Would you rather like to 90 with 6 months a year of lockdown, or live to 80 without.
Live til 80. The last ten years are the shitty ones.
PR at the local level sounds even worse than at the national level. Given the lack of media scrutiny locally, it means there would be a handful of local politicians that can never be voted out of power, because they will always be first on the party list. You end up with Junckers in miniature controlling everything, focused on keeping the other permanent politicians happy than caring about the voters.
Implemented with candidate choice, rather than party lists, might actually be an improvement on the current system - where councils can be more than 90% controlled by a single party, and you need to spend a lot of time brown-nosing to get nominated for a seat in the first place, but that seat is pretty much for life once you get it.
We're told that the more likely scenario - as disclosed by The Times at the weekend - is a two-week circuit breaker after Christmas
The 28th has been pencilled in by officials as the starting point for the new curbs - again taking into account the 48 hours needed for recall
What an utter shitshow
I think we can expect widespread disobedience this time around. Maybe enough to make the efforts entirely futile.
There won't be, though. My patents will follow it. So I won't be able to see them. And there will be the issue from last time of 'does family x feel the same way or will they be horrified if we suggest the children see their friends'? Some people will be able to break it with impunity, but most will just sit inside and seethe.
I think that's overly optimistic/pessimistic. Talking to people in my own group (I am of course aware that they may not be representative, but I don't have much else to go on):
- My parents are in their 60s, one of them quite vulnerable, they've been pretty obedient, now saying they won't follow it. - Friend in his late 50s, diabetic, has been off out almost every night for the last week. He was very careful pre-vaccination and has said he won't lock himself down against post-vaccination. - Friends more my age (late 20s and 30s), pretty much regardless of where they sat on the compliance spectrum for past restrictions have said not a chance in hell this time.
All triple vaxxed or about to be for what it's worth.
FWIW the people I know are mostly planning to see family at Xmas, though a few with very elderly relatives have cancelled. Everyone has cancelled any events this week, and everyone is postponing decision after Xmas to see what the disease is doing. General feeling is that the rules are too lax so they need to err on the side of caution. Like Cookie, though, I think a post-Xmas lockdown will be seen by most as an acceptable compromise.
The contrasting experiences show we can't really generalise. But I agree that a ban on Christmas meetings would have had real resistance.
Re lack of science in cabinet. My understanding is there a similar dearth across the civil service and it is something Patrick Valence in particular has been raising for ages. In a modern economy having sufficient expertise in science is crucial.
I guess the problem is say a STEM PhD from a top tier university is going to have a range of well paid opportunities, i doubt the civil service ranks very highly on that.
It’s something that Cummings identified very early on in government. There’s a total lack of timely and accurate data reaching the decision-makers.
Yes, they probably need to dig deep into their pockets for a bunch of STEM PhDs, who have the opportunity to go into the City or tech company where £200k salaries are the norm.
Why the heck do they need PhDs? Just compete with the audit/consulting/non-banking financial services firms for ordinary maths/econ/natsci bachelors, rather than the current situation of everyone having PPE from Oxford/Durham (uninformed stereotype alert). Starting salaries 25k-40k, rising to 50k-100k within ~5 years. Or is even that pricing themselves out the game?
The lack of Cambridge and promotion of Durham is going to put you in @TSE 's bad books.
But in reality if you want great people you need to pay them and the civil service isn't structured in a way that makes that possible - general IT has similar issues...
"Starting salaries for the three agencies - GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 - are in the region of £25,000 to £35,000, plus benefits. There are opportunities to progress to higher grades, with salaries reaching around £40,000 after five to ten years' service."
This isn't exactly going to attract the best and the brightest.....
If you want higher salaries for civil servants and government agents who pays for them? Taxpayers.
However even if salaries at the top level are higher in the private sector, salaries on average are higher in the public sector now
Don't properly reward the good, never sack the crap... massive structural selection pressure for shit people.
The public sector generally offers more security than the private sector and a slightly higher average wage and a better pension but if you want to be rich then you are better off working in the private sector, that has always and likely always will be the case
Can you give some examples? That's not my experience when comparing Civil Service salaries with private sector equivalents, even after making allowance for better pensions (note that final salary schemes have now mostly been replaced). However I'm out of the loop on local government and teaching so don't know for sure.
Thank you. I would question the raw figures you quoted - as somebody else pointed out upthread, most public sector Minimum Wage-level jobs have been privatised (and there are a lot of them), which will skew the numbers. I'm surprised the BBC article referenced shows it about equal, perhaps there are some wide fluctuations between sector and region. It's probably quite hard to compare like-for-like. Perhaps my view is distorted by being a London/SE-centric one, and in the north it is the other way round.
It is spectacularly distorted because as you say there are very few cleaners in the public sector any more but still fuck loads of doctors.
Once you stratify for similar positions the private sector comes out well ahead - at management levels it is pretty stark.
Not trying to mislead anyone here, Labour MPs have been told to be in on Wednesday and this has not yet been cancelled but it looks as if the chaos in the Government means the previous plan of a recall on Wednesday has been dropped.
Thanks - Wednesday makes sense if the Government actually wants to lockdown. I can't see your average MP willing traipsing back to Westminster on the 27th/28th. That will just annoy them more.
Maybe Boris is hoping that by the 27th/28th they’ll have accidentally thrown out their 1922 letters with the wrapping paper?
If Parliament is recalled next week, there will be a fair few MPs bringing letters with them.
26 is dreadful for the Tories, especially considering the supposed former Brexit dividend, in the ex-industrial regions particularly. I was somehow imagining a poll like this this mornng, but UK-wide.
I'm more surprised that Labour is 'only' on 39% in Wales TBH. I'd expect them to be comfortably above 40% there.
The losses in poll share are double the gains, (-8 vs plus 4) so goodness knows where those votes are going !
Christopher Snowdon @cjsnowdon The UK government has a choice between believing in vaccines and believing in quack modelling. No country with such a high % of antibodies from vaccines and prior infection should be considering any restrictions on freedom.
Except the vaccines weren't designed to counter Omicron. Such a ridiculous dichotomy is a bigger sign of quackery than any modeling.
Not trying to mislead anyone here, Labour MPs have been told to be in on Wednesday and this has not yet been cancelled but it looks as if the chaos in the Government means the previous plan of a recall on Wednesday has been dropped.
Thanks - Wednesday makes sense if the Government actually wants to lockdown. I can't see your average MP willing traipsing back to Westminster on the 27th/28th. That will just annoy them more.
Maybe Boris is hoping that by the 27th/28th they’ll have accidentally thrown out their 1922 letters with the wrapping paper?
If Parliament is recalled next week, there will be a fair few MPs bringing letters with them.
Won't somebody think of potential for Graham Brady to do a hernia.....
Hmm. I've been bouncing around between 90 and 95 per cent since the start of the pandemic (ie since @Foxy told us to buy those pulse oximeter thingies) so am firmly in the amber zone with occasional visits to red. I did buy a second gadget from a different maker to check but no improvement. Otoh, I'm not dead yet.
Not trying to mislead anyone here, Labour MPs have been told to be in on Wednesday and this has not yet been cancelled but it looks as if the chaos in the Government means the previous plan of a recall on Wednesday has been dropped.
If one were cynical it could be thought that starting a rumour that HoC is being recalled on Wednesday to vote on restrictions and then following up with suggesting that this might not now happen because the cabinet is in chaos would be a useful political attack line for Labour…..
Imagine if Labour spinners went on twitter or even political websites saying something (made up) was happening but then it’s not happening (the thing that was never happening) because the Tories are a mess.
Would feed into the narrative beautifully and most likely be a line of questioning for the BBC etc -
Nick Robinson “you were going to recall parliament weren’t you but you hat to back out because you can’t make your minds up”
Hapless Tory being interviewed “no we were never recalling parliament Wednesday”
NR “ we have it on good authority that Labour MPs were warned to be in parliament and now you are trying to claim this never happened” etc etc…..
Especially if from say a new account - but that would be a very cynical interpretation surely.
I think Labour would be much more likely to favour PR for Westminster for GE2028/9 if Tories retain their majority at GE2024 as that would be 5 consecutive defeats.
If Labour were to go for AMS, I think LDs would reluctantly agree instead of insisting on STV. Any thoughts please? Thanks
Pamela
Additional member system as practised in this country is a joke. It's the reason why Labour wins every election in Wales despite frequently having quite low vote shares. If it were the New Zealand AMS that would be different, but you can bet it wouldn't be.
Yes. This is one of my little hobby-horses. The Welsh and Scottish systems are stitch-ups. Potemkin PR.
According to a previous FM for Wales, Carwyn Jones the AMS system was specifically designed to retain the Labour majority. I remember him mentioning it in his retirement interview on TV. Only having 20 extra seats on top of 40 does not introduce proportionality. The Scottish system has 56 extra seats on top of 73, which is a little more proportional I suppose. The German AMS system actually has 50/50 to start with the second vote dictates the share out of seats.
Not trying to mislead anyone here, Labour MPs have been told to be in on Wednesday and this has not yet been cancelled but it looks as if the chaos in the Government means the previous plan of a recall on Wednesday has been dropped.
Thanks - Wednesday makes sense if the Government actually wants to lockdown. I can't see your average MP willing traipsing back to Westminster on the 27th/28th. That will just annoy them more.
Maybe Boris is hoping that by the 27th/28th they’ll have accidentally thrown out their 1922 letters with the wrapping paper?
If Parliament is recalled next week, there will be a fair few MPs bringing letters with them.
Won't somebody think of potential for Graham Brady to do a hernia.....
Re lack of science in cabinet. My understanding is there a similar dearth across the civil service and it is something Patrick Valence in particular has been raising for ages. In a modern economy having sufficient expertise in science is crucial.
I guess the problem is say a STEM PhD from a top tier university is going to have a range of well paid opportunities, i doubt the civil service ranks very highly on that.
It’s something that Cummings identified very early on in government. There’s a total lack of timely and accurate data reaching the decision-makers.
Yes, they probably need to dig deep into their pockets for a bunch of STEM PhDs, who have the opportunity to go into the City or tech company where £200k salaries are the norm.
Why the heck do they need PhDs? Just compete with the audit/consulting/non-banking financial services firms for ordinary maths/econ/natsci bachelors, rather than the current situation of everyone having PPE from Oxford/Durham (uninformed stereotype alert). Starting salaries 25k-40k, rising to 50k-100k within ~5 years. Or is even that pricing themselves out the game?
The lack of Cambridge and promotion of Durham is going to put you in @TSE 's bad books.
But in reality if you want great people you need to pay them and the civil service isn't structured in a way that makes that possible - general IT has similar issues...
"Starting salaries for the three agencies - GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 - are in the region of £25,000 to £35,000, plus benefits. There are opportunities to progress to higher grades, with salaries reaching around £40,000 after five to ten years' service."
This isn't exactly going to attract the best and the brightest.....
If you want higher salaries for civil servants and government agents who pays for them? Taxpayers.
However even if salaries at the top level are higher in the private sector, salaries on average are higher in the public sector now
Don't properly reward the good, never sack the crap... massive structural selection pressure for shit people.
The public sector generally offers more security than the private sector and a slightly higher average wage and a better pension but if you want to be rich then you are better off working in the private sector, that has always and likely always will be the case
Can you give some examples? That's not my experience when comparing Civil Service salaries with private sector equivalents, even after making allowance for better pensions (note that final salary schemes have now mostly been replaced). However I'm out of the loop on local government and teaching so don't know for sure.
Thank you. I would question the raw figures you quoted - as somebody else pointed out upthread, most public sector Minimum Wage-level jobs have been privatised (and there are a lot of them), which will skew the numbers. I'm surprised the BBC article referenced shows it about equal, perhaps there are some wide fluctuations between sector and region. It's probably quite hard to compare like-for-like. Perhaps my view is distorted by being a London/SE-centric one, and in the north it is the other way round.
It is spectacularly distorted because as you say there are very few cleaners in the public sector any more but still fuck loads of doctors.
Once you stratify for similar positions the private sector comes out well ahead - at management levels it is pretty stark.
And as mentioned, a lot of the pay packet in the public sector is down to pensions. People should anchor on that, but they don't, meaning the private sector attracts more talent.
Not trying to mislead anyone here, Labour MPs have been told to be in on Wednesday and this has not yet been cancelled but it looks as if the chaos in the Government means the previous plan of a recall on Wednesday has been dropped.
Thanks for following up, that to me sounds like Boris couldn't get Cabinet sign off for whatever he wants to push through so had to back off.
FWIW my wife doesn't seem the least bit bothered - "well, we've already cancelled our holiday, we've already seen the extended family; we've got no plans for January. We can go on some walks. As long as schools stay open." Not everyone gets as bothered about general principles as me! Theonly thing which she could get the least bit peevish about was having been told that vaccines were the way out of this, and then it turning out that they're not. Made me think of @contrarian .
Not trying to mislead anyone here, Labour MPs have been told to be in on Wednesday and this has not yet been cancelled but it looks as if the chaos in the Government means the previous plan of a recall on Wednesday has been dropped.
Thanks - Wednesday makes sense if the Government actually wants to lockdown. I can't see your average MP willing traipsing back to Westminster on the 27th/28th. That will just annoy them more.
Maybe Boris is hoping that by the 27th/28th they’ll have accidentally thrown out their 1922 letters with the wrapping paper?
If Parliament is recalled next week, there will be a fair few MPs bringing letters with them.
If Parliament is recalled next week - I suspect there will be a VoNC being held at the same time.
Remember that Brady announced that he would accept letters via email over Christmas. He may be very close to getting them this week.
Gas futures near all time highs £3.70/therm ~12p/kWh
Is this just covid bump in road or are there other long termist reasons for this? Lots of talk covid bad for business, rocketing energy costs can unfairly kill lovely businesses too 😕
Christopher Snowdon @cjsnowdon The UK government has a choice between believing in vaccines and believing in quack modelling. No country with such a high % of antibodies from vaccines and prior infection should be considering any restrictions on freedom.
Except the vaccines weren't designed to counter Omicron. Such a ridiculous dichotomy is a bigger sign of quackery than any modeling.
Three doses of vaccine give a 93-95% reduction in severe symptoms. The vaccines may not have been designed for Omicron, but they do work against it anyway.
Christopher Snowdon @cjsnowdon The UK government has a choice between believing in vaccines and believing in quack modelling. No country with such a high % of antibodies from vaccines and prior infection should be considering any restrictions on freedom.
Except the vaccines weren't designed to counter Omicron. Such a ridiculous dichotomy is a bigger sign of quackery than any modeling.
They weren't designed to counter delta either, but they do, and triple dose gives better protection against severe Omicron than a double dose did against severe delta (which was at it's peak when we unlocked).
Could the Scottish Government please state if it aims to or is developing a eugenics policy to be rolled out across Scotland. If 'no', could the Scottish Government please state why it has no plans to implement an eugenics policy.
The Fabian Society commissioned a GB-wide poll from YouGov with a specially-commissioned sub-group of the 125 seats in England and Wales where Labour came closest to winning in 2019. The survey was conducted on 8 to 13 December before the North Shropshire byelection and 668 people living in the Labour target seats took part. We found that Labour leads the Conservatives by nine percentage points in the 125 seats (Labour 43, Conservative 34). By contrast, at the 2019 election the Conservatives led in these seats by 12 points (Labour 37, Conservative 49).
The Tories are in big big trouble
Can some polling nerd help me here?
A sample of 668 across 125 seats - 5 samples per seat on average - gives a result accurate to within a % or three.
What are the error margins here?
Why does the number of seats matter?
Depends if the seats are reasonably homogenous. If they vary wildly, then there may be big discrepancies within the group, in both directions. Overall, 668 is light but large enough to give the general idea, assuming it's demographically balanced (the usual problem with constituency polls)..
Comments
The hard part is getting access to medical data in the first place, which despite the best efforts of this government is still often confidential, and combining data stored in different formats on different systems. Once you've got access to the data, the rest is trivial scripting with off-the-shelf libraries. Even I used to do it when I had a day job, producing ad hoc analyses on request.
As often, Dominic Cummings was right-ish about the problem but wrong-ish about the solution.
- My parents are in their 60s, one of them quite vulnerable, they've been pretty obedient, now saying they won't follow it.
- Friend in his late 50s, diabetic, has been off out almost every night for the last week. He was very careful pre-vaccination and has said he won't lock himself down against post-vaccination.
- Friends more my age (late 20s and 30s), pretty much regardless of where they sat on the compliance spectrum for past restrictions have said not a chance in hell this time.
All triple vaxxed or about to be for what it's worth.
I'm not saying it's correct - I would have no restrictions at all - but nor is it stupid. We're not, contrary to appearances, all about immediate health outcomes at all costs: it's always a balance. I would argue that the balance is too far in the interests of the DoH and too little in the interests of the individual, the treasury and the hospitality sector, but it is still about striking a balance.
Public sector £579
Private sector £536
Though the private sector pays 0.9% more based on workers' skills and characteristics
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/55089900
When I started in a government quango ca 1992 I looked into salaries and pensions (Civil Service) and found that the salary comparators with the private sector were used to reduce the actual salary quite significantly so as to compensate for the pension element. (The Treasury weren't going to let anyone get away with doing otherwise.) They never increased when the pension element was steadily reduced.
Edit: There were of course cost of living elements. But no compensation for reduction of pension that I can recall.
Westminster Voting Intention (Wales):
LAB: 39% (+2)
CON: 26% (-5)
PLC: 13% (-2)
RFM: 7% (+1)
GRN: 6% (+1)
LDM: 3% (-1)
Via @YouGov, 13-16 Dec.
Changes w/ 13-16 Sep.
Bye bye
Want some decent data experts pay them directly as its cheaper than paying the firms they worth through.
One consultancy I know does a lot of work with HMRC paying their contractors £1200 or so a day. Given that these people will be at HMRC for years why is HMRC paying £300,000 a year for them when they would be there for £100,000 or so if HMRC could legitimately employ them (they can't because that wage is director level and there can only be so many directors).
Edit - corrected figures as I had the consultancies margin wrong - basically if HMRC could employ them (and HMRC would love to) it would save HMRC £150,000 or so per contractor.
The public sector is encumbered by its process and attitude to risk, that’s all, both of which are there for reasons.
Chilean Presidents can only serve 1 term with immediate re-election prohibited
I thin, like Bond, they came from quite affluent backgrounds and could afford a fairly meagre teacher's salary. Not that they were very like Bond in other ways......
Covid rates are increasing rapidly - if you test positive, use an oximeter to monitor yourself at home. Clear @nhs guidance in the link below. NB- readings may be less accurate in people with darker skin, so if you feel unwell- seek help! https://england.nhs.uk/coronavirus/wp-content/uploads/sites/52/2020/12/C1370-Suspected-Coronavirus-COVID-19-important-information-to-keep-you-safe-at-home-leaflet-August-2021.pdf
https://twitter.com/sairaghafur/status/1472914666267492359?s=20
I was actually born in Wales, by mistake 🙂
According to Twitter, though.....
I've a UK driving licence, NI number etc - I've just never had or needed a passport (and really don't want one - not having one has got me out of going to loads of difficult meetings with irritating French clients).
If the first, it is a fortunate mistake for us on PB who can now enjoy your company.
If it's the second, it was a fortunate mistake for you as you now get to support a decent rugby team.
Add that to the layers of time-consuming bureaucracy between the decision-makers and the front line, and you can see why Mr Cummings quickly got very frustrated.
At least if they wait for next week to make the decision, it'll be a lot clearer whether it's mainly too late, or too much.
Knowing your baseline blood oxygen level and monitoring it is a key thing we can do for ourselves. Along with staying hydrated and eating even if we don't feel like it. A COVID-infected body needs energy and to be hydrated in order to fight off the virus and cope with the effects of our immune system.
Even if Genghis Khan, Georges Simenon and Richard Burton were in attendance.
Tip something that nobody, even on Twitter, is reporting. Then when it doesn't happen its due to 'chaos in the government'.
If all Labour MPs knew about this, then why are none of them saying so on Twitter?
And how would the Labour Party even know what the Government is or isn't planning. The Cabinet don't even seem to know half the time, let alone the the Labour Party!
£3.70/therm
~12p/kWh
The whole point is that you are not hiring them for a project, you have an urgent need for a permanent team of top-level data analysts. If Google and Goldman are offering them £200k, you need to offer £150k plus a pension, otherwise you’re not getting the right people.
I support English Rugby! Though with a nod of respect to Wales rugby for a little provincial place punching above its weight amongst the big boys sometimes.
I was only in wales a few days after birth, I don’t remember much about it. One parent grew up in Hong Kong, another with some German ancestors (bit like the royal family but not nearly as rich!) raised in Yorkshire, living in London - you don’t need to elect a World Government just appoint me 🙂
The contrasting experiences show we can't really generalise. But I agree that a ban on Christmas meetings would have had real resistance.
Once you stratify for similar positions the private sector comes out well ahead - at management levels it is pretty stark.
Imagine if Labour spinners went on twitter or even political websites saying something (made up) was happening but then it’s not happening (the thing that was never happening) because the Tories are a mess.
Would feed into the narrative beautifully and most likely be a line of questioning for the BBC etc -
Nick Robinson “you were going to recall parliament weren’t you but you hat to back out because you can’t make your minds up”
Hapless Tory being interviewed “no we were never recalling parliament Wednesday”
NR “ we have it on good authority that Labour MPs were warned to be in parliament and now you are trying to claim this never happened” etc etc…..
Especially if from say a new account - but that would be a very cynical interpretation surely.
Not everyone gets as bothered about general principles as me!
Theonly thing which she could get the least bit peevish about was having been told that vaccines were the way out of this, and then it turning out that they're not. Made me think of @contrarian .
Remember that Brady announced that he would accept letters via email over Christmas. He may be very close to getting them this week.
https://www.gov.scot/publications/foi-202100251818/
Could the Scottish Government please state if it aims to or is developing a eugenics policy to be rolled out across Scotland.
If 'no', could the Scottish Government please state why it has no plans to implement an eugenics policy.