When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to is months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Sure the vaccines are working, but the government is undermining its own message on that by imposing new restrictions...?
Yes it is. Completely. Care homes have been instructed to limit visitation again.
100% staff vaccination, 100% resident vaccination, boosters, plus all visitors have to take a Covid test before entrance.
All this and still the backward step to limit visitation. I can't think of a better example of not trusting the vaccines.
Is this not just arithmetic?
My son, who is 18 has just had his booster. The chances of him getting seriously ill from Covid must be similar to the chances of being struck by lightning.
I have had my booster which will help enormously, at least in the short term, but as a 60 year old, overweight man with lung issues there is still a significant chance that I will become seriously ill if I get covid. Maybe 1 in 25? Maybe better than that. I am not sure.
My mother in law is 86 next week and increasingly frail. She had her booster nearly 2 months ago now. She is not in a home but that point might come. If she caught Covid the chances of being seriously ill will be much higher, maybe 1 in 5?
So, if you are going to a nursing home with very elderly and frail residents you are going into a high risk environment for them. That makes such restrictions and a requirement for LFTs before a visit, for example, entirely rational. It is not a question of not trusting the vaccines. It is simply recognising that they are not a complete protection.
No one ever said they were complete protection. Now my mother can't see her son (me) in her room again. Or her grandchildren. This is all she cares about. The right to quality of life (over quantity) for these people has been disregarded for far too long already. We all know this is to do with the government being knee-jerk frit following criticism of the care home deaths at the start if the pandemic.
The risk though is not just to your mum, but to other people's.
My Mother in Laws home lost a half dozen to covid in last winters wave.
Spent Christmas at my daughter's , they had all taken tests etc , she felt crap next day and just received the wonderful news that she has Covid. Wife is having kittens.
Covid is now an endemic disease, we need to get used to it and minimise the risk that when we catch it, it results in serious illness
And that means we ensure immunity remains high. When it starts to drop, this will happen again - as the studies have indicated
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to is months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Sure the vaccines are working, but the government is undermining its own message on that by imposing new restrictions...?
Yes it is. Completely. Care homes have been instructed to limit visitation again.
100% staff vaccination, 100% resident vaccination, boosters, plus all visitors have to take a Covid test before entrance.
All this and still the backward step to limit visitation. I can't think of a better example of not trusting the vaccines.
Is this not just arithmetic?
My son, who is 18 has just had his booster. The chances of him getting seriously ill from Covid must be similar to the chances of being struck by lightning.
I have had my booster which will help enormously, at least in the short term, but as a 60 year old, overweight man with lung issues there is still a significant chance that I will become seriously ill if I get covid. Maybe 1 in 25? Maybe better than that. I am not sure.
My mother in law is 86 next week and increasingly frail. She had her booster nearly 2 months ago now. She is not in a home but that point might come. If she caught Covid the chances of being seriously ill will be much higher, maybe 1 in 5?
So, if you are going to a nursing home with very elderly and frail residents you are going into a high risk environment for them. That makes such restrictions and a requirement for LFTs before a visit, for example, entirely rational. It is not a question of not trusting the vaccines. It is simply recognising that they are not a complete protection.
However if your son gets struck by lightning then that's a much greater tragedy.
The way that some care homes have abandoned all sense of proportion in the face of this virus is a tragedy. My nan spent her first Christmas in a care home this year after being admitted earlier this year. Its tragic, but if I'm honest I don't expect she'll see another one, Covid or no Covid.
This year has been very tough, especially on my grandad, but the restrictions have compounded the matter and made their tragedy even worse. The home she's in (which she's been put into by the NHS, who won't let her be discharged) has gone so far 'above and beyond' the official restrictions its ridiculous. For Christmas they were only allowing one visitor at a time - not one per resident, one total. My grandad had to do the LFT, PPE etc to get ten minutes with his wife and then be told he had to leave so someone else could have a turn.
I'm going to be sad when we inevitably lose my nan, and my grandad is going to be heartbroken, he already is, but what they're being put through in the name of these 'protections' is an inhumane torture. 😢
It' s barbaric. It's like visiting someone in prison. At a cost of £1000 pw.
For me care home residents have, along with international travellers and now the unvaxed, been a cohort to kick repeatedly with the security of the government knowing that it has popular opinion urging them on. Populism in practice again.
The PM repeatedly and loudly proclaimed for months that our world beating vaccine programme would solve the issue. It didn't. People notice.
They have had a undeniable positive impact and God forbid what sort of situation we would be in right now without the vaccines. They protect against serious disease and unquestionably reduce the severity of illness.
However they are not a Panacea, Covid is not the common Cold or Flu.
My hope is that these 2nd Gen vaccines along with better treatment and drugs in 2022 means that at some point we have an annual jab like Flu and we carry on.
Actually omicron may well turn out to be no more dangerous (to the individual, particularly the vaccinated individual) than “flu”. And no more transmissable than the common cold. The combination could be a problem - although that may ultimately be more due to the measures put in place as a result of its transmissibility and attempts to “control” it - time will tell.
I recently realised that my voting record wasn't that far away from the typical Red Waller. I voted Labour for the first thirty tears or so until Tony arrived, before dabbling with the LDs for a while. I voted Conservative for the first time in my seventies last time to get Brexit done.
BoJo is a very poor PM and I had no illusions, but his faults were thrown into focus by the recent events. Every tme I see him now, I want to throw something at the telly. Why then, isn't Starmer miles ahead? His problem isn't the echoes of Corbyn, or Brexit, it's dog shit.
He can't help being a middle-class metropolitan. He's not even particularly Woke, but that's the dogshit that sticks to his shoes. It's not him, but there's always one of his fellow-travellers who demands to go too far. The Rick from the Young Ones. Who, in an argument between the UK and China will automatically take the Chinese side. Even worse, will vocally take the North Korean side against the Brits. And he's the one who who will garner all the publicity.
Starmer won't step in the dogshit deliberately but the aroma will stick to his shoes. You can imagine him supporting it, because he has no interest having a go at them. Unfair? Of course, but politics is inherently unfair. He's too nice.
BoJo cocks up on a regular basis, but at least, we know he hasn't any principles to start with.
The PM repeatedly and loudly proclaimed for months that our world beating vaccine programme would solve the issue. It didn't. People notice.
They have had a undeniable positive impact and God forbid what sort of situation we would be in right now without the vaccines. They protect against serious disease and unquestionably reduce the severity of illness.
However they are not a Panacea, Covid is not the common Cold or Flu.
My hope is that these 2nd Gen vaccines along with better treatment and drugs in 2022 means that at some point we have an annual jab like Flu and we carry on.
Actually omicron may well turn out to be no more dangerous (to the individual, particularly the vaccinated individual) than “flu”. And no more transmissable than the common cold. The combination could be a problem - although that may ultimately be more due to the measures put in place as a result of its transmissibility and attempts to “control” it - time will tell.
Except, literally none of the actual evidence supports this. More wishful thinking
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
Gove is a marmite character, but he is a spectacularly productive and innovative cabinet minister. The contrast with Robert Jenrick, his predecessor (and a man once regarded as a rising star) is huge. Jenrick seemed to be just treading water, following orders from the treasury and No.10 and incapable of spotting the political catastrophes that would inevitably follow. Gove is quickly coming up with ideas of his own, some of them quite good.
And some (like this one) make as much sense as Boris's bridge to Belfast.
I don't agree. I can tell you from the bitter experience of Dundee that there are few things as depressing as a town centre that is boarded up and deserted. We need to save our town centres, both because of the employment they bring and the community they create.
We need to do a variety of things to achieve this. Firstly, and probably most importantly, we need to rebalance the playing field between the online and bricks and mortar retailer. At the moment this is heavily weighed in favour of the online supplier who pays a fraction of the business rates that the B&M retailer does because, historically, town centre shops have been seen as cash cows ready to be milked. We also need to improve transport into town, parking, the availability of charging points, a broader range of permitted uses for old retail and to increase the number of people actually living there. It is not a sufficient policy but it is a start. And it is going to be absolutely central to the levelling up agenda.
Almost certainly and we'd have been spared the catastrophe of Brexit. With Boris and Ed we've paid a heavy price for personal ambition.
As a younger brother, I don't see why primogeniture should have a place in a progressive party. Ed was the better of the 2 brothers.
Just imagine what life would have been like as Ed rolled out his Edstone promises via a Coalition of Chaos, rather the political tranquility of the last 6 years...
it can be argued that what swung it for Ed was the fact that he did not vote for the Iraq war, having conveniently only been elected as an MP in 2005.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to is months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Sure the vaccines are working, but the government is undermining its own message on that by imposing new restrictions...?
Yes it is. Completely. Care homes have been instructed to limit visitation again.
100% staff vaccination, 100% resident vaccination, boosters, plus all visitors have to take a Covid test before entrance.
All this and still the backward step to limit visitation. I can't think of a better example of not trusting the vaccines.
Is this not just arithmetic?
My son, who is 18 has just had his booster. The chances of him getting seriously ill from Covid must be similar to the chances of being struck by lightning.
I have had my booster which will help enormously, at least in the short term, but as a 60 year old, overweight man with lung issues there is still a significant chance that I will become seriously ill if I get covid. Maybe 1 in 25? Maybe better than that. I am not sure.
My mother in law is 86 next week and increasingly frail. She had her booster nearly 2 months ago now. She is not in a home but that point might come. If she caught Covid the chances of being seriously ill will be much higher, maybe 1 in 5?
So, if you are going to a nursing home with very elderly and frail residents you are going into a high risk environment for them. That makes such restrictions and a requirement for LFTs before a visit, for example, entirely rational. It is not a question of not trusting the vaccines. It is simply recognising that they are not a complete protection.
No one ever said they were complete protection. Now my mother can't see her son (me) in her room again. Or her grandchildren. This is all she cares about. The right to quality of life (over quantity) for these people has been disregarded for far too long already. We all know this is to do with the government being knee-jerk frit following criticism of the care home deaths at the start if the pandemic.
The risk though is not just to your mum, but to other people's.
My Mother in Laws home lost a half dozen to covid in last winters wave.
You are making my point for me. We have the vaccines now. Risk to other people's mums? - the home is 100% vaccinated and boosted and visitors are tested before entry without exception. This is political - it is nothing to do with risk mitigation.
Off topic, if anyone wants to watch some live steam train action, check out the Keighley and Worth Valley Railway webcam. Train due to depart at 10.50
I spent my birthday on that train many years ago - I had a friend who lived in Haworth and the train was able through a special system to serve draught real ale.
Steam trains and real ale - we want none of that filth here, thank you - this is a family show.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to is months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Sure the vaccines are working, but the government is undermining its own message on that by imposing new restrictions...?
Yes it is. Completely. Care homes have been instructed to limit visitation again.
100% staff vaccination, 100% resident vaccination, boosters, plus all visitors have to take a Covid test before entrance.
All this and still the backward step to limit visitation. I can't think of a better example of not trusting the vaccines.
Is this not just arithmetic?
My son, who is 18 has just had his booster. The chances of him getting seriously ill from Covid must be similar to the chances of being struck by lightning.
I have had my booster which will help enormously, at least in the short term, but as a 60 year old, overweight man with lung issues there is still a significant chance that I will become seriously ill if I get covid. Maybe 1 in 25? Maybe better than that. I am not sure.
My mother in law is 86 next week and increasingly frail. She had her booster nearly 2 months ago now. She is not in a home but that point might come. If she caught Covid the chances of being seriously ill will be much higher, maybe 1 in 5?
So, if you are going to a nursing home with very elderly and frail residents you are going into a high risk environment for them. That makes such restrictions and a requirement for LFTs before a visit, for example, entirely rational. It is not a question of not trusting the vaccines. It is simply recognising that they are not a complete protection.
However if your son gets struck by lightning then that's a much greater tragedy.
The way that some care homes have abandoned all sense of proportion in the face of this virus is a tragedy. My nan spent her first Christmas in a care home this year after being admitted earlier this year. Its tragic, but if I'm honest I don't expect she'll see another one, Covid or no Covid.
This year has been very tough, especially on my grandad, but the restrictions have compounded the matter and made their tragedy even worse. The home she's in (which she's been put into by the NHS, who won't let her be discharged) has gone so far 'above and beyond' the official restrictions its ridiculous. For Christmas they were only allowing one visitor at a time - not one per resident, one total. My grandad had to do the LFT, PPE etc to get ten minutes with his wife and then be told he had to leave so someone else could have a turn.
I'm going to be sad when we inevitably lose my nan, and my grandad is going to be heartbroken, he already is, but what they're being put through in the name of these 'protections' is an inhumane torture. 😢
One problem for such Homes is the 'danger' to the staff. Many are already working on dangerously thin staffing margins; if staff get sick they won't be able to provide any care. And you can't close a Home as you can a school (for example). Having said all that I know how delighted my wife and I, both in our eighties, were to actually see all our grandchildren this Christmas. First time since the middle of 2019, and how sad my sister and her family were at here isolation.
Off topic, if anyone wants to watch some live steam train action, check out the Keighley and Worth Valley Railway webcam. Train due to depart at 10.50
I spent my birthday on that train many years ago - I had a friend who lived in Haworth and the train was able through a special system to serve draught real ale.
Steam trains and real ale - we want none of that filth here, thank you - this is a family show.
The Watercress Line in Hampshire does that as well.
Exactly, the public want Sunak, Tory members it seems increasingly want Truss or even Steve Baker.
There is no guarantee if Boris goes you get Sunak
The ConHome surveys gauge only a general membership satisfaction in each politician. It doesn't necessarily follow that an individual who is highly regarded in the current role would be similarly touted as future PM material. Truss's high ratings, therefore, do not necessarily imply that she would be widely supported for leader. She might but might not.
No, today's ConservativeHome survey is a Tory leadership survey and has Truss first narrowly ahead of Sunak with Baker joint third with Mordaunt
Oh, thanks - missed that. I'm surprised. I would guess that a section of Tory membership is opposed to Sunak due to fiscal profligacy?
I often wonder whether resignation on the basis 'I'm not bankrolling SAGE's forecasts any more' might have been Sunak's best career move.
Too late now.
According to that Fraser Nelson Twitter discussion, SAGE is forecasting what the government has asked it to forecast.
That isn't a remotely reasonable interpretation of what was said. What they said is the Government asks SAGE "what happens if we do X" and SAGE models it. X in the most recent round ranged from "Nothing" to "Introduce lockdown now". The alternative - that SAGE guesses what policy decisions might be possible - is nonsensical.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to is months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Sure the vaccines are working, but the government is undermining its own message on that by imposing new restrictions...?
Yes it is. Completely. Care homes have been instructed to limit visitation again.
100% staff vaccination, 100% resident vaccination, boosters, plus all visitors have to take a Covid test before entrance.
All this and still the backward step to limit visitation. I can't think of a better example of not trusting the vaccines.
Is this not just arithmetic?
My son, who is 18 has just had his booster. The chances of him getting seriously ill from Covid must be similar to the chances of being struck by lightning.
I have had my booster which will help enormously, at least in the short term, but as a 60 year old, overweight man with lung issues there is still a significant chance that I will become seriously ill if I get covid. Maybe 1 in 25? Maybe better than that. I am not sure.
My mother in law is 86 next week and increasingly frail. She had her booster nearly 2 months ago now. She is not in a home but that point might come. If she caught Covid the chances of being seriously ill will be much higher, maybe 1 in 5?
So, if you are going to a nursing home with very elderly and frail residents you are going into a high risk environment for them. That makes such restrictions and a requirement for LFTs before a visit, for example, entirely rational. It is not a question of not trusting the vaccines. It is simply recognising that they are not a complete protection.
However if your son gets struck by lightning then that's a much greater tragedy.
The way that some care homes have abandoned all sense of proportion in the face of this virus is a tragedy. My nan spent her first Christmas in a care home this year after being admitted earlier this year. Its tragic, but if I'm honest I don't expect she'll see another one, Covid or no Covid.
This year has been very tough, especially on my grandad, but the restrictions have compounded the matter and made their tragedy even worse. The home she's in (which she's been put into by the NHS, who won't let her be discharged) has gone so far 'above and beyond' the official restrictions its ridiculous. For Christmas they were only allowing one visitor at a time - not one per resident, one total. My grandad had to do the LFT, PPE etc to get ten minutes with his wife and then be told he had to leave so someone else could have a turn.
I'm going to be sad when we inevitably lose my nan, and my grandad is going to be heartbroken, he already is, but what they're being put through in the name of these 'protections' is an inhumane torture. 😢
One problem for such Homes is the 'danger' to the staff. Many are already working on dangerously thin staffing margins; if staff get sick they won't be able to provide any care. And you can't close a Home as you can a school (for example). Having said all that I know how delighted my wife and I, both in our eighties, were to actually see all our grandchildren this Christmas. First time since the middle of 2019, and how sad my sister and her family were at here isolation.
The danger to the staff? You mean the staff who are all vaccinated and going about their daily lives when not working in the home?
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to is months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Sure the vaccines are working, but the government is undermining its own message on that by imposing new restrictions...?
Yes it is. Completely. Care homes have been instructed to limit visitation again.
100% staff vaccination, 100% resident vaccination, boosters, plus all visitors have to take a Covid test before entrance.
All this and still the backward step to limit visitation. I can't think of a better example of not trusting the vaccines.
Is this not just arithmetic?
My son, who is 18 has just had his booster. The chances of him getting seriously ill from Covid must be similar to the chances of being struck by lightning.
I have had my booster which will help enormously, at least in the short term, but as a 60 year old, overweight man with lung issues there is still a significant chance that I will become seriously ill if I get covid. Maybe 1 in 25? Maybe better than that. I am not sure.
My mother in law is 86 next week and increasingly frail. She had her booster nearly 2 months ago now. She is not in a home but that point might come. If she caught Covid the chances of being seriously ill will be much higher, maybe 1 in 5?
So, if you are going to a nursing home with very elderly and frail residents you are going into a high risk environment for them. That makes such restrictions and a requirement for LFTs before a visit, for example, entirely rational. It is not a question of not trusting the vaccines. It is simply recognising that they are not a complete protection.
No one ever said they were complete protection. Now my mother can't see her son (me) in her room again. Or her grandchildren. This is all she cares about. The right to quality of life (over quantity) for these people has been disregarded for far too long already. We all know this is to do with the government being knee-jerk frit following criticism of the care home deaths at the start if the pandemic.
The risk though is not just to your mum, but to other people's.
My Mother in Laws home lost a half dozen to covid in last winters wave.
Last winter there weren't vaccines rolled out yet. Surely quality of life now matters as much if not more than quantity?
The PM repeatedly and loudly proclaimed for months that our world beating vaccine programme would solve the issue. It didn't. People notice.
They have had a undeniable positive impact and God forbid what sort of situation we would be in right now without the vaccines. They protect against serious disease and unquestionably reduce the severity of illness.
However they are not a Panacea, Covid is not the common Cold or Flu.
My hope is that these 2nd Gen vaccines along with better treatment and drugs in 2022 means that at some point we have an annual jab like Flu and we carry on.
Actually omicron may well turn out to be no more dangerous (to the individual, particularly the vaccinated individual) than “flu”. And no more transmissable than the common cold. The combination could be a problem - although that may ultimately be more due to the measures put in place as a result of its transmissibility and attempts to “control” it - time will tell.
Except, literally none of the actual evidence supports this. More wishful thinking
Well the evidence says it is “milder”. The evidence does not yet confirm how much milder (particularly to the vaccinated individual - happy for you to point to any countervailing evidence). And presumably you accept that, if not omicron, then Covid will ultimately reach that point? People talk about “flu” as if it is harmless. It isn’t. Sometimes even to the extent that it creates noticeable spikes in annual death figures. “Mild” does not mean “harmless”.
You can call it “wishful thinking”. But if it is it is not wishful thinking without basis - it is, as a minimum, the current direction of travel.
Exactly, the public want Sunak, Tory members it seems increasingly want Truss or even Steve Baker.
There is no guarantee if Boris goes you get Sunak
The ConHome surveys gauge only a general membership satisfaction in each politician. It doesn't necessarily follow that an individual who is highly regarded in the current role would be similarly touted as future PM material. Truss's high ratings, therefore, do not necessarily imply that she would be widely supported for leader. She might but might not.
No, today's ConservativeHome survey is a Tory leadership survey and has Truss first narrowly ahead of Sunak with Baker joint third with Mordaunt
Oh, thanks - missed that. I'm surprised. I would guess that a section of Tory membership is opposed to Sunak due to fiscal profligacy?
I often wonder whether resignation on the basis 'I'm not bankrolling SAGE's forecasts any more' might have been Sunak's best career move.
Too late now.
According to that Fraser Nelson Twitter discussion, SAGE is forecasting what the government has asked it to forecast.
That isn't a remotely reasonable interpretation of what was said. What they said is the Government asks SAGE "what happens if we do X" and SAGE models it. X in the most recent round ranged from "Nothing" to "Introduce lockdown now". The alternative - that SAGE guesses what policy decisions might be possible - is nonsensical.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to is months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Sure the vaccines are working, but the government is undermining its own message on that by imposing new restrictions...?
Yes it is. Completely. Care homes have been instructed to limit visitation again.
100% staff vaccination, 100% resident vaccination, boosters, plus all visitors have to take a Covid test before entrance.
All this and still the backward step to limit visitation. I can't think of a better example of not trusting the vaccines.
Is this not just arithmetic?
My son, who is 18 has just had his booster. The chances of him getting seriously ill from Covid must be similar to the chances of being struck by lightning.
I have had my booster which will help enormously, at least in the short term, but as a 60 year old, overweight man with lung issues there is still a significant chance that I will become seriously ill if I get covid. Maybe 1 in 25? Maybe better than that. I am not sure.
My mother in law is 86 next week and increasingly frail. She had her booster nearly 2 months ago now. She is not in a home but that point might come. If she caught Covid the chances of being seriously ill will be much higher, maybe 1 in 5?
So, if you are going to a nursing home with very elderly and frail residents you are going into a high risk environment for them. That makes such restrictions and a requirement for LFTs before a visit, for example, entirely rational. It is not a question of not trusting the vaccines. It is simply recognising that they are not a complete protection.
However if your son gets struck by lightning then that's a much greater tragedy.
The way that some care homes have abandoned all sense of proportion in the face of this virus is a tragedy. My nan spent her first Christmas in a care home this year after being admitted earlier this year. Its tragic, but if I'm honest I don't expect she'll see another one, Covid or no Covid.
This year has been very tough, especially on my grandad, but the restrictions have compounded the matter and made their tragedy even worse. The home she's in (which she's been put into by the NHS, who won't let her be discharged) has gone so far 'above and beyond' the official restrictions its ridiculous. For Christmas they were only allowing one visitor at a time - not one per resident, one total. My grandad had to do the LFT, PPE etc to get ten minutes with his wife and then be told he had to leave so someone else could have a turn.
I'm going to be sad when we inevitably lose my nan, and my grandad is going to be heartbroken, he already is, but what they're being put through in the name of these 'protections' is an inhumane torture. 😢
I have huge sympathy for this and for @Stocky. The problem, as I see it, is that when you go into the home it is not just your nan that is taking the risk but the residents in the surrounding rooms, the common rooms and the dining room. These risks are materially increased by the infectivity of Omicron. How much risk should they take to allow you or your grandad to see your nan?
There are no easy answers to this but I can't deny its cruel.
The PM repeatedly and loudly proclaimed for months that our world beating vaccine programme would solve the issue. It didn't. People notice.
They have had a undeniable positive impact and God forbid what sort of situation we would be in right now without the vaccines. They protect against serious disease and unquestionably reduce the severity of illness.
However they are not a Panacea, Covid is not the common Cold or Flu.
My hope is that these 2nd Gen vaccines along with better treatment and drugs in 2022 means that at some point we have an annual jab like Flu and we carry on.
Actually omicron may well turn out to be no more dangerous (to the individual, particularly the vaccinated individual) than “flu”. And no more transmissable than the common cold. The combination could be a problem - although that may ultimately be more due to the measures put in place as a result of its transmissibility and attempts to “control” it - time will tell.
Except, literally none of the actual evidence supports this. More wishful thinking
Well the evidence says it is “milder”. The evidence does not yet confirm how much milder (particularly to the vaccinated individual - happy for you to point to any countervailing evidence). And presumably you accept that, if not omicron, then Covid will ultimately reach that point? People talk about “flu” as if it is harmless. It isn’t. “Mild” does not mean “harmless”.
You can call it “wishful thinking”. But if it is it is not wishful thinking without basis - it is, as a minimum, the current direction of travel.
There's no evidence it will get milder, not all viruses do. That again is wishful thinking
Exactly, the public want Sunak, Tory members it seems increasingly want Truss or even Steve Baker.
There is no guarantee if Boris goes you get Sunak
The ConHome surveys gauge only a general membership satisfaction in each politician. It doesn't necessarily follow that an individual who is highly regarded in the current role would be similarly touted as future PM material. Truss's high ratings, therefore, do not necessarily imply that she would be widely supported for leader. She might but might not.
No, today's ConservativeHome survey is a Tory leadership survey and has Truss first narrowly ahead of Sunak with Baker joint third with Mordaunt
Oh, thanks - missed that. I'm surprised. I would guess that a section of Tory membership is opposed to Sunak due to fiscal profligacy?
I often wonder whether resignation on the basis 'I'm not bankrolling SAGE's forecasts any more' might have been Sunak's best career move.
Too late now.
According to that Fraser Nelson Twitter discussion, SAGE is forecasting what the government has asked it to forecast.
That isn't a remotely reasonable interpretation of what was said. What they said is the Government asks SAGE "what happens if we do X" and SAGE models it. X in the most recent round ranged from "Nothing" to "Introduce lockdown now". The alternative - that SAGE guesses what policy decisions might be possible - is nonsensical.
That's not a remotely reasonable interpretation of what was said.
He explicitly said they were only forwarding on models showing a catastrophe. Models showing that doing nothing would be fine weren't included within the evidence as they were "not informative".
Surely a model showing that doing nothing won't result in any issues is definitely informative and should be included within the evidence?
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to is months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Sure the vaccines are working, but the government is undermining its own message on that by imposing new restrictions...?
Yes it is. Completely. Care homes have been instructed to limit visitation again.
100% staff vaccination, 100% resident vaccination, boosters, plus all visitors have to take a Covid test before entrance.
All this and still the backward step to limit visitation. I can't think of a better example of not trusting the vaccines.
Is this not just arithmetic?
My son, who is 18 has just had his booster. The chances of him getting seriously ill from Covid must be similar to the chances of being struck by lightning.
I have had my booster which will help enormously, at least in the short term, but as a 60 year old, overweight man with lung issues there is still a significant chance that I will become seriously ill if I get covid. Maybe 1 in 25? Maybe better than that. I am not sure.
My mother in law is 86 next week and increasingly frail. She had her booster nearly 2 months ago now. She is not in a home but that point might come. If she caught Covid the chances of being seriously ill will be much higher, maybe 1 in 5?
So, if you are going to a nursing home with very elderly and frail residents you are going into a high risk environment for them. That makes such restrictions and a requirement for LFTs before a visit, for example, entirely rational. It is not a question of not trusting the vaccines. It is simply recognising that they are not a complete protection.
However if your son gets struck by lightning then that's a much greater tragedy.
The way that some care homes have abandoned all sense of proportion in the face of this virus is a tragedy. My nan spent her first Christmas in a care home this year after being admitted earlier this year. Its tragic, but if I'm honest I don't expect she'll see another one, Covid or no Covid.
This year has been very tough, especially on my grandad, but the restrictions have compounded the matter and made their tragedy even worse. The home she's in (which she's been put into by the NHS, who won't let her be discharged) has gone so far 'above and beyond' the official restrictions its ridiculous. For Christmas they were only allowing one visitor at a time - not one per resident, one total. My grandad had to do the LFT, PPE etc to get ten minutes with his wife and then be told he had to leave so someone else could have a turn.
I'm going to be sad when we inevitably lose my nan, and my grandad is going to be heartbroken, he already is, but what they're being put through in the name of these 'protections' is an inhumane torture. 😢
I have huge sympathy for this and for @Stocky. The problem, as I see it, is that when you go into the home it is not just your nan that is taking the risk but the residents in the surrounding rooms, the common rooms and the dining room. These risks are materially increased by the infectivity of Omicron. How much risk should they take to allow you or your grandad to see your nan?
There are no easy answers to this but I can't deny its cruel.
I can assure you that my mother would be utterly appalled to think that people were being restricted to see their loved ones for her own protection.
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
Gove is a marmite character, but he is a spectacularly productive and innovative cabinet minister. The contrast with Robert Jenrick, his predecessor (and a man once regarded as a rising star) is huge. Jenrick seemed to be just treading water, following orders from the treasury and No.10 and incapable of spotting the political catastrophes that would inevitably follow. Gove is quickly coming up with ideas of his own, some of them quite good.
And some (like this one) make as much sense as Boris's bridge to Belfast.
I don't agree. I can tell you from the bitter experience of Dundee that there are few things as depressing as a town centre that is boarded up and deserted. We need to save our town centres, both because of the employment they bring and the community they create.
We need to do a variety of things to achieve this. Firstly, and probably most importantly, we need to rebalance the playing field between the online and bricks and mortar retailer. At the moment this is heavily weighed in favour of the online supplier who pays a fraction of the business rates that the B&M retailer does because, historically, town centre shops have been seen as cash cows ready to be milked. We also need to improve transport into town, parking, the availability of charging points, a broader range of permitted uses for old retail and to increase the number of people actually living there. It is not a sufficient policy but it is a start. And it is going to be absolutely central to the levelling up agenda.
If bricks and mortar shops dont feel they are getting an advantage by being on the high street then they can move themselves online instead. I fail to see why I should have to pay more for my goods for something as worthless as keeping places like john lewis functional.
Let the high streets cater to useful stuff that you don't want to do online, butchers , bakers, etc . Frankly most high streets are souless deserts of tat and have been for decades
I remember when Philip was telling us what a good idea the tunnel and bridge to NI was
I don't.
Why the deadname?
You've lost me.
This guy @Philip_Thompson was BoJo's biggest fan, he told us what a good idea the bridge was, even though we told him that it was a munitions dump and not safe
Exactly, the public want Sunak, Tory members it seems increasingly want Truss or even Steve Baker.
There is no guarantee if Boris goes you get Sunak
The ConHome surveys gauge only a general membership satisfaction in each politician. It doesn't necessarily follow that an individual who is highly regarded in the current role would be similarly touted as future PM material. Truss's high ratings, therefore, do not necessarily imply that she would be widely supported for leader. She might but might not.
No, today's ConservativeHome survey is a Tory leadership survey and has Truss first narrowly ahead of Sunak with Baker joint third with Mordaunt
Oh, thanks - missed that. I'm surprised. I would guess that a section of Tory membership is opposed to Sunak due to fiscal profligacy?
I often wonder whether resignation on the basis 'I'm not bankrolling SAGE's forecasts any more' might have been Sunak's best career move.
Too late now.
According to that Fraser Nelson Twitter discussion, SAGE is forecasting what the government has asked it to forecast.
That isn't a remotely reasonable interpretation of what was said. What they said is the Government asks SAGE "what happens if we do X" and SAGE models it. X in the most recent round ranged from "Nothing" to "Introduce lockdown now". The alternative - that SAGE guesses what policy decisions might be possible - is nonsensical.
That's not a remotely reasonable interpretation of what was said.
He explicitly said they were only forwarding on models showing a catastrophe. Models showing that doing nothing would be fine weren't included within the evidence as they were "not informative".
Surely a model showing that doing nothing won't result in any issues is definitely informative and should be included within the evidence?
SAGE produced a wide range of forecasts. If the government was too lazy or innumerable to understand them then it is no one's fault but it's own.
Very glad that politics is competitive. It’s entirely positive that the half of country that has no time for the Conservatives gets a look in.
How competitive is it though?
I read somewhere that the poll shifts were Tories moving to “don’t know” - not sure if that is right. If so it could be temporary and mask an underlying structural weakness for Labour
That is what I've seen in the polling data. I think that does make for a competitive situation. Many of these voters will be open to being persuaded by Starmer and the Labour party. Their votes are there to be competed over.
If it was just voters moving to don't know, Labour wouldn't be polling 40%, i.e. the 2017 figure? It's both surely
It looks like it is more a movement to don't knows than direct switching, though there is a little direct switching too. This increases the Labour share because they now have something like 200 voters out of 500 voters (so 40%) giving a preference, rather than 180 voters out of 600 voters (so 30%) giving a preference, to take extreme made up numbers to make the point.
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
Gove is a marmite character, but he is a spectacularly productive and innovative cabinet minister. The contrast with Robert Jenrick, his predecessor (and a man once regarded as a rising star) is huge. Jenrick seemed to be just treading water, following orders from the treasury and No.10 and incapable of spotting the political catastrophes that would inevitably follow. Gove is quickly coming up with ideas of his own, some of them quite good.
And some (like this one) make as much sense as Boris's bridge to Belfast.
I don't agree. I can tell you from the bitter experience of Dundee that there are few things as depressing as a town centre that is boarded up and deserted. We need to save our town centres, both because of the employment they bring and the community they create.
We need to do a variety of things to achieve this. Firstly, and probably most importantly, we need to rebalance the playing field between the online and bricks and mortar retailer. At the moment this is heavily weighed in favour of the online supplier who pays a fraction of the business rates that the B&M retailer does because, historically, town centre shops have been seen as cash cows ready to be milked. We also need to improve transport into town, parking, the availability of charging points, a broader range of permitted uses for old retail and to increase the number of people actually living there. It is not a sufficient policy but it is a start. And it is going to be absolutely central to the levelling up agenda.
The biggest problem is the pyramid that has been built on the back of town centre shops. Quite simply town centre shops are not worth *that* much money any more.
I had this conversation with an Abingdon town councillor, years ago. He literally could not accept that the river of money was gone.
This effects the landlords, the tenants, the councils and the government.
There are a few choices -
1) Recognise that due to the enormous pressures on hosing costs caused by planning limits, that turning town centres into more homes is infinitely more profitable than keeping the shops*. 2) Accept a massive reduction in taxation, rents etc to match the actual footfall/spend. This includes a lot of landlords going bust. 3) Increase the cost of other ways to shop by about 100%
*Where I live, the council insisted in retail units on the ground floor of new developments. Which, in some cases are now still empty after a *decade*.
Very glad that politics is competitive. It’s entirely positive that the half of country that has no time for the Conservatives gets a look in.
How competitive is it though?
I read somewhere that the poll shifts were Tories moving to “don’t know” - not sure if that is right. If so it could be temporary and mask an underlying structural weakness for Labour
That is what I've seen in the polling data. I think that does make for a competitive situation. Many of these voters will be open to being persuaded by Starmer and the Labour party. Their votes are there to be competed over.
If it was just voters moving to don't know, Labour wouldn't be polling 40%, i.e. the 2017 figure? It's both surely
It looks like it is more a movement to don't knows than direct switching, though there is a little direct switching too. This increases the Labour share because they now have something like 200 voters out of 500 voters (so 40%) giving a preference, rather than 180 voters out of 600 voters (so 30%) giving a preference, to take extreme made up numbers to make the point.
Exactly, the public want Sunak, Tory members it seems increasingly want Truss or even Steve Baker.
There is no guarantee if Boris goes you get Sunak
The ConHome surveys gauge only a general membership satisfaction in each politician. It doesn't necessarily follow that an individual who is highly regarded in the current role would be similarly touted as future PM material. Truss's high ratings, therefore, do not necessarily imply that she would be widely supported for leader. She might but might not.
No, today's ConservativeHome survey is a Tory leadership survey and has Truss first narrowly ahead of Sunak with Baker joint third with Mordaunt
Oh, thanks - missed that. I'm surprised. I would guess that a section of Tory membership is opposed to Sunak due to fiscal profligacy?
I often wonder whether resignation on the basis 'I'm not bankrolling SAGE's forecasts any more' might have been Sunak's best career move.
Too late now.
According to that Fraser Nelson Twitter discussion, SAGE is forecasting what the government has asked it to forecast.
That isn't a remotely reasonable interpretation of what was said. What they said is the Government asks SAGE "what happens if we do X" and SAGE models it. X in the most recent round ranged from "Nothing" to "Introduce lockdown now". The alternative - that SAGE guesses what policy decisions might be possible - is nonsensical.
That's not a remotely reasonable interpretation of what was said.
He explicitly said they were only forwarding on models showing a catastrophe. Models showing that doing nothing would be fine weren't included within the evidence as they were "not informative".
Surely a model showing that doing nothing won't result in any issues is definitely informative and should be included within the evidence?
SAGE produced a wide range of forecasts. If the government was too lazy or innumerable to understand them then it is no one's fault but it's own.
I remember when Philip was telling us what a good idea the tunnel and bridge to NI was
I don't.
Why the deadname?
You rather than CHB appear to have connected yourself to a deadname.
In any case I thought deadnaming concerned using the former name of a transgender or non-binary person without their consent? Is there something you want to tell us?
Exactly, the public want Sunak, Tory members it seems increasingly want Truss or even Steve Baker.
There is no guarantee if Boris goes you get Sunak
The ConHome surveys gauge only a general membership satisfaction in each politician. It doesn't necessarily follow that an individual who is highly regarded in the current role would be similarly touted as future PM material. Truss's high ratings, therefore, do not necessarily imply that she would be widely supported for leader. She might but might not.
No, today's ConservativeHome survey is a Tory leadership survey and has Truss first narrowly ahead of Sunak with Baker joint third with Mordaunt
Oh, thanks - missed that. I'm surprised. I would guess that a section of Tory membership is opposed to Sunak due to fiscal profligacy?
I often wonder whether resignation on the basis 'I'm not bankrolling SAGE's forecasts any more' might have been Sunak's best career move.
Too late now.
According to that Fraser Nelson Twitter discussion, SAGE is forecasting what the government has asked it to forecast.
That isn't a remotely reasonable interpretation of what was said. What they said is the Government asks SAGE "what happens if we do X" and SAGE models it. X in the most recent round ranged from "Nothing" to "Introduce lockdown now". The alternative - that SAGE guesses what policy decisions might be possible - is nonsensical.
Actually it’s in between. It’s actually “what happens if we do X assuming “Y” for inputs for a range of unknowns. Importantly they also tend to assume that if Govt does X then the population will comply. I think one important issue in all this is the extent to which introduction of new restrictions could have on public faith in vaccines and willingness to continue having them.
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
The Treasury will do everything they can to avoid business rate changes and exactly how does an online sales tax work?
Does it count if the good is delivered to a store rather than a home? How about delivery to the corner shop?
It's going to get utterly insane incredibly quickly.
I just don't see how this idea is going to level up the Red Wall, is the idea to discourage shopping online?
The damage to Red Wall town centres comes more from out of town shopping than online shopping - it doesn't help and shows how much Gove and co are clutching at straws.
Want to win Red Wall seats, spend money on them nowt else is going to work.
It seems to me that they basically don't have any ideas beyond the slogans. And this was obvious in GE19 to me
As a red wall town dweller what ideas does labour have ?
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
What a daft point. So they are 22 years old and unfair. So updating them so they are even more unfair is progress?
And Phil mentioned earlier that the Commission is independent, however didn't Cameron set the terms of reference, i.e. registered voters not general voting age population?
I'm not sure what's unfair about registered voters. The unregistered have disenfranchised themselves. And they are much easier to count than population.
It's an undisputed fact that people who are settled in one place (who tend to be older, which nowadays means more likely to be Tory) are more likely to be registered. People who move frequently (typically young people) will only regard electoral registration each time as a priority if they're political zealots like, er, us. So one can bring about a better Conservative result (without a single mind being changed) by requiring frequent re-registration. It's a subtle form of voter suppression, as conducted more energetically in the USA.
The cure, in my view, is to ask the Electoral Commission to define constituency boundaries according to the census (excluding foreign nationals where these are not eligible) rather than on who has currently registered.
I entirely agree with your concerns here Nick. The untested introduction of individual electoral registration in 2015 made an already bad problem of voter non-registration much worse in the UK. And applying it to the definition of new constituency boundaries will make it worse still.
Ironically, the solution you rightly advocate (for defining constituencies) is basically that in place in the USA, where all calculations of electorates for the purposes of defining boundaries have to use the official federal population estimates, ultimately defined by and updated from their census. In the UK, that would require the use of the mid-year adult population estimates broken down by constituency, these being the best official estimates of population in each part of the UK. They are informed by the census and updated using other population trends since, but crucially, in contrast to the electoral register, also contain detailed adjustments to correct for non-responses at the time of the census, adding in an imputed population. Anyone who claimed that the electoral register was a better estimate of the adult population would be laughed out of court by the ONS.
So, is voter suppression really greater in the US than here? Or is it just that it's built into our system by design, and goes under the radar in the UK?
Chill, man. Banning all the Labour student activists from voting at their parent's home as well as their term time address really isn't going to make all that much of a difference in the grand scheme of things.
Clearly, unlike me, you have never tried to canvass streets made up largely of HMOs and bedsits, only to discover that half the flats had no-one at all registered at those addresses (and that when someone did answer at one of the remaining properties, the name of the person registered was usually a long gone former tenant.) People who move house frequently in cheap private rented accommodation by and large don't bother to register. No, I'm not going to chill about it.
Interesting experience coming home from France yesterday.
We walked in Grenoble entrance to be greeted by no fellow travellers - none. Tumbleweed. A few airport staff looking at us. We thought we had the wrong day or something.
We checked in and then another family turned up - looking equally bemused. In the end there were 21 people on the flight and I'm impressed that the airline maintained the service to be honest.
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
The Treasury will do everything they can to avoid business rate changes and exactly how does an online sales tax work?
Does it count if the good is delivered to a store rather than a home? How about delivery to the corner shop?
It's going to get utterly insane incredibly quickly.
I just don't see how this idea is going to level up the Red Wall, is the idea to discourage shopping online?
The damage to Red Wall town centres comes more from out of town shopping than online shopping - it doesn't help and shows how much Gove and co are clutching at straws.
Want to win Red Wall seats, spend money on them nowt else is going to work.
It seems to me that they basically don't have any ideas beyond the slogans. And this was obvious in GE19 to me
As a red wall town dweller what ideas does labour have ?
I think genuine investment rather than cuts over the last decade would have done a lot more for the Red Wall.
New Labour did the most levelling up of any Government in recent memory
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
Gove is a marmite character, but he is a spectacularly productive and innovative cabinet minister. The contrast with Robert Jenrick, his predecessor (and a man once regarded as a rising star) is huge. Jenrick seemed to be just treading water, following orders from the treasury and No.10 and incapable of spotting the political catastrophes that would inevitably follow. Gove is quickly coming up with ideas of his own, some of them quite good.
And some (like this one) make as much sense as Boris's bridge to Belfast.
I don't agree. I can tell you from the bitter experience of Dundee that there are few things as depressing as a town centre that is boarded up and deserted. We need to save our town centres, both because of the employment they bring and the community they create.
We need to do a variety of things to achieve this. Firstly, and probably most importantly, we need to rebalance the playing field between the online and bricks and mortar retailer. At the moment this is heavily weighed in favour of the online supplier who pays a fraction of the business rates that the B&M retailer does because, historically, town centre shops have been seen as cash cows ready to be milked. We also need to improve transport into town, parking, the availability of charging points, a broader range of permitted uses for old retail and to increase the number of people actually living there. It is not a sufficient policy but it is a start. And it is going to be absolutely central to the levelling up agenda.
The biggest problem is the pyramid that has been built on the back of town centre shops. Quite simply town centre shops are not worth *that* much money any more.
I had this conversation with an Abingdon town councillor, years ago. He literally could not accept that the river of money was gone.
This effects the landlords, the tenants, the councils and the government.
There are a few choices -
1) Recognise that due to the enormous pressures on hosing costs caused by planning limits, that turning town centres into more homes is infinitely more profitable than keeping the shops*. 2) Accept a massive reduction in taxation, rents etc to match the actual footfall/spend. This includes a lot of landlords going bust. 3) Increase the cost of other ways to shop by about 100%
*Where I live, the council insisted in retail units on the ground floor of new developments. Which, in some cases are now still empty after a *decade*.
Yep. If they remain empty for a certain period they need converting to homes or demolishing and replacing with homes. The thing that will save the High Street is folk living there. And not in dingy bedsits over shops either. Because it isn't coming back.
It seems to me that they basically don't have any ideas beyond the slogans. And this was obvious in GE19 to me
As a red wall town dweller what ideas does labour have ?
I think the other side of the question is whether the Red Wall ex-Labour supporters are willing to give Starmer and Labour a hearing in a way they wouldn't for Jeremy Corbyn.
I remember when Philip was telling us what a good idea the tunnel and bridge to NI was
I don't.
Why the deadname?
You rather than CHB appear to have connected yourself to a deadname.
In any case I thought deadnaming concerned using the former name of a transgender or non-binary person without their consent? Is there something you want to tell us?
Paterson, Parties, gaffes, an improved Labour led by Starmer and overall government fatigue (Soon to be 12 years of government led by one Party) are all factors of why Johnson and his party are in the position they are in.
Add in a tough economic situation when the new financial year kicks in and I can see them getting a kicking at the locals no matter the leader.
I wouldn’t rule out part of the collapse in the red wall being due to the reneging on levelling up.
Yes, we've forgotten about the HS2 and Northern Poorhouse Rail Uturns with everything else that is going on.
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
Gove is a marmite character, but he is a spectacularly productive and innovative cabinet minister. The contrast with Robert Jenrick, his predecessor (and a man once regarded as a rising star) is huge. Jenrick seemed to be just treading water, following orders from the treasury and No.10 and incapable of spotting the political catastrophes that would inevitably follow. Gove is quickly coming up with ideas of his own, some of them quite good.
And some (like this one) make as much sense as Boris's bridge to Belfast.
I don't agree. I can tell you from the bitter experience of Dundee that there are few things as depressing as a town centre that is boarded up and deserted. We need to save our town centres, both because of the employment they bring and the community they create.
We need to do a variety of things to achieve this. Firstly, and probably most importantly, we need to rebalance the playing field between the online and bricks and mortar retailer. At the moment this is heavily weighed in favour of the online supplier who pays a fraction of the business rates that the B&M retailer does because, historically, town centre shops have been seen as cash cows ready to be milked. We also need to improve transport into town, parking, the availability of charging points, a broader range of permitted uses for old retail and to increase the number of people actually living there. It is not a sufficient policy but it is a start. And it is going to be absolutely central to the levelling up agenda.
The biggest problem is the pyramid that has been built on the back of town centre shops. Quite simply town centre shops are not worth *that* much money any more.
I had this conversation with an Abingdon town councillor, years ago. He literally could not accept that the river of money was gone.
This effects the landlords, the tenants, the councils and the government.
There are a few choices -
1) Recognise that due to the enormous pressures on hosing costs caused by planning limits, that turning town centres into more homes is infinitely more profitable than keeping the shops*. 2) Accept a massive reduction in taxation, rents etc to match the actual footfall/spend. This includes a lot of landlords going bust. 3) Increase the cost of other ways to shop by about 100%
*Where I live, the council insisted in retail units on the ground floor of new developments. Which, in some cases are now still empty after a *decade*.
Apart from a convenience store (and there are only so many Tesco Express, Sainsbury's local required) the only other thing suitable for most sites is another takeway / cafe / pub and most flat residents hate having those items below them.
Exactly, the public want Sunak, Tory members it seems increasingly want Truss or even Steve Baker.
There is no guarantee if Boris goes you get Sunak
The ConHome surveys gauge only a general membership satisfaction in each politician. It doesn't necessarily follow that an individual who is highly regarded in the current role would be similarly touted as future PM material. Truss's high ratings, therefore, do not necessarily imply that she would be widely supported for leader. She might but might not.
No, today's ConservativeHome survey is a Tory leadership survey and has Truss first narrowly ahead of Sunak with Baker joint third with Mordaunt
Oh, thanks - missed that. I'm surprised. I would guess that a section of Tory membership is opposed to Sunak due to fiscal profligacy?
I often wonder whether resignation on the basis 'I'm not bankrolling SAGE's forecasts any more' might have been Sunak's best career move.
Too late now.
According to that Fraser Nelson Twitter discussion, SAGE is forecasting what the government has asked it to forecast.
That isn't a remotely reasonable interpretation of what was said. What they said is the Government asks SAGE "what happens if we do X" and SAGE models it. X in the most recent round ranged from "Nothing" to "Introduce lockdown now". The alternative - that SAGE guesses what policy decisions might be possible - is nonsensical.
That's not a remotely reasonable interpretation of what was said.
He explicitly said they were only forwarding on models showing a catastrophe. Models showing that doing nothing would be fine weren't included within the evidence as they were "not informative".
Surely a model showing that doing nothing won't result in any issues is definitely informative and should be included within the evidence?
He explicitly said they were only forwarding on models showing a catastrophe: No, he didn't. The models produce a range of possible outcomes for each policy option. The range is what was quoted. There were no models that were run for which the outputs were not included in the results.
Models showing that doing nothing would be fine weren't included within the evidence That isn't how the models work. The models produce a range of possible outcomes for each policy option. Again, nothing was excluded.
Surely a model showing that doing nothing won't result in any issues is definitely informative and should be included within the evidence? Yes, it is, and yes, it was. Unfortunately, because the models produce a range of possible outcomes for each policy option, there was a tendency by the media and by some people in Government/the DfH to focus solely on the top end of the ranges and ignore the rest of the results. This is partially human nature - if you're likely to be blamed for inaction, then there is an inevitable bias towards acting prudently - and partly because people are bad at understanding distributions of outcomes.
Graham Medley has stated that he regrets getting into that debate with Nelson, because of how badly he has been misinterpreted (partially his own fault for not being clear; mostly due to the format making this inevitable). You are misinterpreting what he said.
It seems to me that they basically don't have any ideas beyond the slogans. And this was obvious in GE19 to me
As a red wall town dweller what ideas does labour have ?
I think the other side of the question is whether the Red Wall ex-Labour supporters are willing to give Starmer and Labour a hearing in a way they wouldn't for Jeremy Corbyn.
Well they were happy to vote for "weird" Ed M so why not Starmer?
This debate is basically, do people think these voters left because of Corbyn and Brexit, or for other reasons. And if there are other reasons, what are they and have these been resolved by the Tories.
We saw In North Shropshire a Leave seat going to the Lib Dems, with one voter saying "now Brexit is over I can vote for you again". How many others feel the same?
In the South West, has anyone considered that the Lib Dems might now reclaim some seats?
Paterson, Parties, gaffes, an improved Labour led by Starmer and overall government fatigue (Soon to be 12 years of government led by one Party) are all factors of why Johnson and his party are in the position they are in.
Add in a tough economic situation when the new financial year kicks in and I can see them getting a kicking at the locals no matter the leader.
I wouldn’t rule out part of the collapse in the red wall being due to the reneging on levelling up.
Yes, we've forgotten about the HS2 and Northern Poorhouse Rail Uturns with everything else that is going on.
I haven’t forgot
Oh they aren't forgotten
The places that want it still want it Worse the places blighted by it are still blighted by it.
And without it being 100% completed its going to be incredibly easy to attack everywhere.
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
The Treasury will do everything they can to avoid business rate changes and exactly how does an online sales tax work?
Does it count if the good is delivered to a store rather than a home? How about delivery to the corner shop?
It's going to get utterly insane incredibly quickly.
I just don't see how this idea is going to level up the Red Wall, is the idea to discourage shopping online?
The damage to Red Wall town centres comes more from out of town shopping than online shopping - it doesn't help and shows how much Gove and co are clutching at straws.
Want to win Red Wall seats, spend money on them nowt else is going to work.
The final nail in the cross where I live was when the council stopped free parking in the town centre many years ago. In part to fund the park and ride into Durham. We had a thriving town before then. Now it is moribund. But has been for quite a while. Long before the rush to online.
I remember when Philip was telling us what a good idea the tunnel and bridge to NI was
I don't.
Why the deadname?
You rather than CHB appear to have connected yourself to a deadname.
In any case I thought deadnaming concerned using the former name of a transgender or non-binary person without their consent? Is there something you want to tell us?
Yes I've transitioned to using the name BartholomewRoberts and I don't consent to anyone trying to doxx me by using any other name.
If CHB wishes to be a doxxing troll then shame on him.
(Though to the best of my knowledge I never said a bridge to NI was a good idea)
I remember when Philip was telling us what a good idea the tunnel and bridge to NI was
I don't.
Why the deadname?
You rather than CHB appear to have connected yourself to a deadname.
In any case I thought deadnaming concerned using the former name of a transgender or non-binary person without their consent? Is there something you want to tell us?
Yes I've transitioned to using the name BartholomewRoberts and I don't consent to anyone trying to doxx me by using any other name.
If CHB wishes to be a doxxing troll then shame on him.
I remember when Philip was telling us what a good idea the tunnel and bridge to NI was
I don't.
Why the deadname?
You rather than CHB appear to have connected yourself to a deadname.
In any case I thought deadnaming concerned using the former name of a transgender or non-binary person without their consent? Is there something you want to tell us?
Yes I've transitioned to using the name BartholomewRoberts and I don't consent to anyone trying to doxx me by using any other name.
If CHB wishes to be a doxxing troll then shame on him.
The fuck?
I've said repeatedly why I've changed my username, that I don't want to be doxxed. Should I try and find out what your real name is and doxx you?
Calling people the name they want to go by is basic respect.
Spent Christmas at my daughter's , they had all taken tests etc , she felt crap next day and just received the wonderful news that she has Covid. Wife is having kittens.
What I would say Malcolm is that if you and your wife have had boosters in the last month catching it now may not be the worst result. Far better now than when any booster effect has worn off although I appreciate that your wife has been ill recently.
David, yes certainly not be a better time , but has wife well spooked to say the least. I would expect us to be ok , but just concerned a bit re her given her lungs not in best condition from last episode.
Spent Christmas at my daughter's , they had all taken tests etc , she felt crap next day and just received the wonderful news that she has Covid. Wife is having kittens.
Hope your daughter gets well soon and has a speedy recovery. Fingers crossed you and your wife dodged it.
Best of luck, Malc. And to your good lady wife. You have both had all three vaccinations, haven't you?
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
The Treasury will do everything they can to avoid business rate changes and exactly how does an online sales tax work?
Does it count if the good is delivered to a store rather than a home? How about delivery to the corner shop?
It's going to get utterly insane incredibly quickly.
I just don't see how this idea is going to level up the Red Wall, is the idea to discourage shopping online?
The damage to Red Wall town centres comes more from out of town shopping than online shopping - it doesn't help and shows how much Gove and co are clutching at straws.
Want to win Red Wall seats, spend money on them nowt else is going to work.
It seems to me that they basically don't have any ideas beyond the slogans. And this was obvious in GE19 to me
As a red wall town dweller what ideas does labour have ?
I think genuine investment rather than cuts over the last decade would have done a lot more for the Red Wall.
New Labour did the most levelling up of any Government in recent memory
Sorry, that is utter bilge. Labour did little for the red wall. You may be a labour fanboy and think they can do no wrong but under labour our manufacturing as a percentage of gdp halved, we lost 1/6th of our manufacturing jobs and companies closed and moved to Eastern Europe. New labour were obsessed with the so called future industries. They allowed the red wall to decline simply because they used to weigh votes here as opposed to count them.
I remember when Philip was telling us what a good idea the tunnel and bridge to NI was
I don't.
Why the deadname?
You rather than CHB appear to have connected yourself to a deadname.
In any case I thought deadnaming concerned using the former name of a transgender or non-binary person without their consent? Is there something you want to tell us?
Yes I've transitioned to using the name BartholomewRoberts and I don't consent to anyone trying to doxx me by using any other name.
If CHB wishes to be a doxxing troll then shame on him.
The fuck?
I've said repeatedly why I've changed my username, that I don't want to be doxxed. Should I try and find out what your real name is and doxx you?
Calling people the name they want to go by is basic respect.
I genuinely have no idea what the fuck you are on about. I made a post about a user that you've chosen to respond to and you then accuse me of doxing you?
Spent Christmas at my daughter's , they had all taken tests etc , she felt crap next day and just received the wonderful news that she has Covid. Wife is having kittens.
What I would say Malcolm is that if you and your wife have had boosters in the last month catching it now may not be the worst result. Far better now than when any booster effect has worn off although I appreciate that your wife has been ill recently.
David, yes certainly not be a better time , but has wife well spooked to say the least. I would expect us to be ok , but just concerned a bit re her given her lungs not in best condition from last episode.
Oh, that is such a shame. Very best wishes to you and your family.
I remember when Philip was telling us what a good idea the tunnel and bridge to NI was
I don't.
Why the deadname?
You rather than CHB appear to have connected yourself to a deadname.
In any case I thought deadnaming concerned using the former name of a transgender or non-binary person without their consent? Is there something you want to tell us?
Yes I've transitioned to using the name BartholomewRoberts and I don't consent to anyone trying to doxx me by using any other name.
If CHB wishes to be a doxxing troll then shame on him.
The fuck?
I've said repeatedly why I've changed my username, that I don't want to be doxxed. Should I try and find out what your real name is and doxx you?
Calling people the name they want to go by is basic respect.
I genuinely have no idea what the fuck you are on about. I made a post about a user that you've chosen to respond to and you then accuse me of doxing you?
Try reading back your posts at 12:38 and 12:47 then. 🙄
The PM repeatedly and loudly proclaimed for months that our world beating vaccine programme would solve the issue. It didn't. People notice.
They have had a undeniable positive impact and God forbid what sort of situation we would be in right now without the vaccines. They protect against serious disease and unquestionably reduce the severity of illness.
However they are not a Panacea, Covid is not the common Cold or Flu.
My hope is that these 2nd Gen vaccines along with better treatment and drugs in 2022 means that at some point we have an annual jab like Flu and we carry on.
Actually omicron may well turn out to be no more dangerous (to the individual, particularly the vaccinated individual) than “flu”. And no more transmissable than the common cold. The combination could be a problem - although that may ultimately be more due to the measures put in place as a result of its transmissibility and attempts to “control” it - time will tell.
Except, literally none of the actual evidence supports this. More wishful thinking
Well the evidence says it is “milder”. The evidence does not yet confirm how much milder (particularly to the vaccinated individual - happy for you to point to any countervailing evidence). And presumably you accept that, if not omicron, then Covid will ultimately reach that point? People talk about “flu” as if it is harmless. It isn’t. “Mild” does not mean “harmless”.
You can call it “wishful thinking”. But if it is it is not wishful thinking without basis - it is, as a minimum, the current direction of travel.
There's no evidence it will get milder, not all viruses do. That again is wishful thinking
Care to provide an example, taken in the round when combined with treatments and other medical interventions/pre-interventions? I’m not saying that it is a straight line thing - the course of Covid itself proves that would be wrong.
Anyway for all you criticise wishful thinking, others are free to criticise “disaster assumption”. Just as you shouldn’t always assume rosy outcomes and make no planning for worse, so you shouldn’t assume terrible outcomes and pre-emptively take hugely costly measures to ward them off. Having plans for the worst is not implementing for the worst.
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
The Treasury will do everything they can to avoid business rate changes and exactly how does an online sales tax work?
Does it count if the good is delivered to a store rather than a home? How about delivery to the corner shop?
It's going to get utterly insane incredibly quickly.
I just don't see how this idea is going to level up the Red Wall, is the idea to discourage shopping online?
The damage to Red Wall town centres comes more from out of town shopping than online shopping - it doesn't help and shows how much Gove and co are clutching at straws.
Want to win Red Wall seats, spend money on them nowt else is going to work.
It seems to me that they basically don't have any ideas beyond the slogans. And this was obvious in GE19 to me
As a red wall town dweller what ideas does labour have ?
I think genuine investment rather than cuts over the last decade would have done a lot more for the Red Wall.
New Labour did the most levelling up of any Government in recent memory
Sorry, that is utter bilge. Labour did little for the red wall. You may be a labour fanboy and think they can do no wrong but under labour our manufacturing as a percentage of gdp halved, we lost 1/6th of our manufacturing jobs and companies closed and moved to Eastern Europe. New labour were obsessed with the so called future industries. They allowed the red wall to decline simply because they used to weigh votes here as opposed to count them.
Not a Labour fanboy dude, I've voted Tory and Lib Dem in the past, just think Labour are the best option at the moment.
The numbers don't lie, New Labour did a tremendous amount of the Red Wall, more than the Tories have done. What have the Tories done for the Red Wall?
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to is months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Sure the vaccines are working, but the government is undermining its own message on that by imposing new restrictions...?
Yes it is. Completely. Care homes have been instructed to limit visitation again.
100% staff vaccination, 100% resident vaccination, boosters, plus all visitors have to take a Covid test before entrance.
All this and still the backward step to limit visitation. I can't think of a better example of not trusting the vaccines.
Is this not just arithmetic?
My son, who is 18 has just had his booster. The chances of him getting seriously ill from Covid must be similar to the chances of being struck by lightning.
I have had my booster which will help enormously, at least in the short term, but as a 60 year old, overweight man with lung issues there is still a significant chance that I will become seriously ill if I get covid. Maybe 1 in 25? Maybe better than that. I am not sure.
My mother in law is 86 next week and increasingly frail. She had her booster nearly 2 months ago now. She is not in a home but that point might come. If she caught Covid the chances of being seriously ill will be much higher, maybe 1 in 5?
So, if you are going to a nursing home with very elderly and frail residents you are going into a high risk environment for them. That makes such restrictions and a requirement for LFTs before a visit, for example, entirely rational. It is not a question of not trusting the vaccines. It is simply recognising that they are not a complete protection.
However if your son gets struck by lightning then that's a much greater tragedy.
The way that some care homes have abandoned all sense of proportion in the face of this virus is a tragedy. My nan spent her first Christmas in a care home this year after being admitted earlier this year. Its tragic, but if I'm honest I don't expect she'll see another one, Covid or no Covid.
This year has been very tough, especially on my grandad, but the restrictions have compounded the matter and made their tragedy even worse. The home she's in (which she's been put into by the NHS, who won't let her be discharged) has gone so far 'above and beyond' the official restrictions its ridiculous. For Christmas they were only allowing one visitor at a time - not one per resident, one total. My grandad had to do the LFT, PPE etc to get ten minutes with his wife and then be told he had to leave so someone else could have a turn.
I'm going to be sad when we inevitably lose my nan, and my grandad is going to be heartbroken, he already is, but what they're being put through in the name of these 'protections' is an inhumane torture. 😢
I have huge sympathy for this and for @Stocky. The problem, as I see it, is that when you go into the home it is not just your nan that is taking the risk but the residents in the surrounding rooms, the common rooms and the dining room. These risks are materially increased by the infectivity of Omicron. How much risk should they take to allow you or your grandad to see your nan?
There are no easy answers to this but I can't deny its cruel.
I can assure you that my mother would be utterly appalled to think that people were being restricted to see their loved ones for her own protection.
And how would she feel if she made that choice and then one or more of her neighbours got sick and died?
Spent Christmas at my daughter's , they had all taken tests etc , she felt crap next day and just received the wonderful news that she has Covid. Wife is having kittens.
Hope your daughter gets well soon and has a speedy recovery. Fingers crossed you and your wife dodged it.
Best of luck, Malc. And to your good lady wife. You have both had all three vaccinations, haven't you?
Yes we have OKC, so fingers crossed.
Our best wishes to you all Malc. Hope you are all okay.
Spent Christmas at my daughter's , they had all taken tests etc , she felt crap next day and just received the wonderful news that she has Covid. Wife is having kittens.
Hope your daughter gets well soon and has a speedy recovery. Fingers crossed you and your wife dodged it.
Best of luck, Malc. And to your good lady wife. You have both had all three vaccinations, haven't you?
Yes we have OKC, so fingers crossed.
Sorry to hear your news, hopefully you can sail through it safely. Aye the best.
I remember when Philip was telling us what a good idea the tunnel and bridge to NI was
I don't.
Why the deadname?
You rather than CHB appear to have connected yourself to a deadname.
In any case I thought deadnaming concerned using the former name of a transgender or non-binary person without their consent? Is there something you want to tell us?
Yes I've transitioned to using the name BartholomewRoberts and I don't consent to anyone trying to doxx me by using any other name.
If CHB wishes to be a doxxing troll then shame on him.
The fuck?
I've said repeatedly why I've changed my username, that I don't want to be doxxed. Should I try and find out what your real name is and doxx you?
Calling people the name they want to go by is basic respect.
I genuinely have no idea what the fuck you are on about. I made a post about a user that you've chosen to respond to and you then accuse me of doxing you?
Try reading back your posts at 12:38 and 12:47 then. 🙄
I made a post, you responded to it, you doxed yourself. I don't know what the fuck you're going on about.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to is months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Sure the vaccines are working, but the government is undermining its own message on that by imposing new restrictions...?
Yes it is. Completely. Care homes have been instructed to limit visitation again.
100% staff vaccination, 100% resident vaccination, boosters, plus all visitors have to take a Covid test before entrance.
All this and still the backward step to limit visitation. I can't think of a better example of not trusting the vaccines.
Is this not just arithmetic?
My son, who is 18 has just had his booster. The chances of him getting seriously ill from Covid must be similar to the chances of being struck by lightning.
I have had my booster which will help enormously, at least in the short term, but as a 60 year old, overweight man with lung issues there is still a significant chance that I will become seriously ill if I get covid. Maybe 1 in 25? Maybe better than that. I am not sure.
My mother in law is 86 next week and increasingly frail. She had her booster nearly 2 months ago now. She is not in a home but that point might come. If she caught Covid the chances of being seriously ill will be much higher, maybe 1 in 5?
So, if you are going to a nursing home with very elderly and frail residents you are going into a high risk environment for them. That makes such restrictions and a requirement for LFTs before a visit, for example, entirely rational. It is not a question of not trusting the vaccines. It is simply recognising that they are not a complete protection.
However if your son gets struck by lightning then that's a much greater tragedy.
The way that some care homes have abandoned all sense of proportion in the face of this virus is a tragedy. My nan spent her first Christmas in a care home this year after being admitted earlier this year. Its tragic, but if I'm honest I don't expect she'll see another one, Covid or no Covid.
This year has been very tough, especially on my grandad, but the restrictions have compounded the matter and made their tragedy even worse. The home she's in (which she's been put into by the NHS, who won't let her be discharged) has gone so far 'above and beyond' the official restrictions its ridiculous. For Christmas they were only allowing one visitor at a time - not one per resident, one total. My grandad had to do the LFT, PPE etc to get ten minutes with his wife and then be told he had to leave so someone else could have a turn.
I'm going to be sad when we inevitably lose my nan, and my grandad is going to be heartbroken, he already is, but what they're being put through in the name of these 'protections' is an inhumane torture. 😢
I have huge sympathy for this and for @Stocky. The problem, as I see it, is that when you go into the home it is not just your nan that is taking the risk but the residents in the surrounding rooms, the common rooms and the dining room. These risks are materially increased by the infectivity of Omicron. How much risk should they take to allow you or your grandad to see your nan?
There are no easy answers to this but I can't deny its cruel.
I can assure you that my mother would be utterly appalled to think that people were being restricted to see their loved ones for her own protection.
And how would she feel if she made that choice and then one or more of her neighbours got sick and died?
Almost everyone in a care home is relatively sick and close to death.
Ensuring they spend their final days in dignity and well loved is surely the most important thing?
Is cutting away their dignity, love and respect in order to drag out the time they can spend imprisoned in a home without access to their loved ones a worthwhile choice?
I remember when Philip was telling us what a good idea the tunnel and bridge to NI was
I don't.
Why the deadname?
You rather than CHB appear to have connected yourself to a deadname.
In any case I thought deadnaming concerned using the former name of a transgender or non-binary person without their consent? Is there something you want to tell us?
Yes I've transitioned to using the name BartholomewRoberts and I don't consent to anyone trying to doxx me by using any other name.
If CHB wishes to be a doxxing troll then shame on him.
The fuck?
I've said repeatedly why I've changed my username, that I don't want to be doxxed. Should I try and find out what your real name is and doxx you?
Calling people the name they want to go by is basic respect.
I genuinely have no idea what the fuck you are on about. I made a post about a user that you've chosen to respond to and you then accuse me of doxing you?
Try reading back your posts at 12:38 and 12:47 then. 🙄
I made a post, you responded to it, you doxed yourself. I don't know what the fuck you're going on about.
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
What a daft point. So they are 22 years old and unfair. So updating them so they are even more unfair is progress?
And Phil mentioned earlier that the Commission is independent, however didn't Cameron set the terms of reference, i.e. registered voters not general voting age population?
I'm not sure what's unfair about registered voters. The unregistered have disenfranchised themselves. And they are much easier to count than population.
It's an undisputed fact that people who are settled in one place (who tend to be older, which nowadays means more likely to be Tory) are more likely to be registered. People who move frequently (typically young people) will only regard electoral registration each time as a priority if they're political zealots like, er, us. So one can bring about a better Conservative result (without a single mind being changed) by requiring frequent re-registration. It's a subtle form of voter suppression, as conducted more energetically in the USA.
The cure, in my view, is to ask the Electoral Commission to define constituency boundaries according to the census (excluding foreign nationals where these are not eligible) rather than on who has currently registered.
I entirely agree with your concerns here Nick. The untested introduction of individual electoral registration in 2015 made an already bad problem of voter non-registration much worse in the UK. And applying it to the definition of new constituency boundaries will make it worse still.
Ironically, the solution you rightly advocate (for defining constituencies) is basically that in place in the USA, where all calculations of electorates for the purposes of defining boundaries have to use the official federal population estimates, ultimately defined by and updated from their census. In the UK, that would require the use of the mid-year adult population estimates broken down by constituency, these being the best official estimates of population in each part of the UK. They are informed by the census and updated using other population trends since, but crucially, in contrast to the electoral register, also contain detailed adjustments to correct for non-responses at the time of the census, adding in an imputed population. Anyone who claimed that the electoral register was a better estimate of the adult population would be laughed out of court by the ONS.
So, is voter suppression really greater in the US than here? Or is it just that it's built into our system by design, and goes under the radar in the UK?
Chill, man. Banning all the Labour student activists from voting at their parent's home as well as their term time address really isn't going to make all that much of a difference in the grand scheme of things.
Clearly, unlike me, you have never tried to canvass streets made up largely of HMOs and bedsits, only to discover that half the flats had no-one at all registered at those addresses (and that when someone did answer at one of the remaining properties, the name of the person registered was usually a long gone former tenant.) People who move house frequently in cheap private rented accommodation by and large don't bother to register. No, I'm not going to chill about it.
We're talking about whether you use census data or electoral registrations to set the boundaries, for the purposes of ensuring equal sized constituencies. Calling that "voter suppression" is ridiculous - no-one's ability to vote is being affected in the slightest.
I remember when Philip was telling us what a good idea the tunnel and bridge to NI was
I don't.
Why the deadname?
You rather than CHB appear to have connected yourself to a deadname.
In any case I thought deadnaming concerned using the former name of a transgender or non-binary person without their consent? Is there something you want to tell us?
Yes I've transitioned to using the name BartholomewRoberts and I don't consent to anyone trying to doxx me by using any other name.
If CHB wishes to be a doxxing troll then shame on him.
The fuck?
I've said repeatedly why I've changed my username, that I don't want to be doxxed. Should I try and find out what your real name is and doxx you?
Calling people the name they want to go by is basic respect.
I genuinely have no idea what the fuck you are on about. I made a post about a user that you've chosen to respond to and you then accuse me of doxing you?
Try reading back your posts at 12:38 and 12:47 then. 🙄
I made a post, you responded to it, you doxed yourself. I don't know what the fuck you're going on about.
Fuck you.
This is genuinely one of the most bizarre things I've seen on this website, have a good day whoever you are
I remember when Philip was telling us what a good idea the tunnel and bridge to NI was
I don't.
Why the deadname?
You rather than CHB appear to have connected yourself to a deadname.
In any case I thought deadnaming concerned using the former name of a transgender or non-binary person without their consent? Is there something you want to tell us?
Hope you are well mate.
Fine thanks, bearing up under the oppressive restriction of (checks notes) maintaining 1m distancing in my local hostelry. People are looking a bit scared as I sidle up to them then abruptly stop at the required 100cm. May start bringing out my folding ruler for extra discomfitting.
I remember when Philip was telling us what a good idea the tunnel and bridge to NI was
I don't.
Why the deadname?
You rather than CHB appear to have connected yourself to a deadname.
In any case I thought deadnaming concerned using the former name of a transgender or non-binary person without their consent? Is there something you want to tell us?
Hope you are well mate.
Fine thanks, bearing up under the oppressive restriction of (checks notes) maintaining 1m distancing in my local hostelry. People are looking a bit scared as I sidle up to them then abruptly stop at the required 100cm. May start bringing out my folding ruler for extra discomfitting.
Yersel?
Well I had COVID prior to Christmas so had to isolate but okay now. Sadly lots of other friends have caught it.
But doing fine here now, can't see much need for a lockdown at present but worried about the situation going forward.
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
The Treasury will do everything they can to avoid business rate changes and exactly how does an online sales tax work?
Does it count if the good is delivered to a store rather than a home? How about delivery to the corner shop?
It's going to get utterly insane incredibly quickly.
I just don't see how this idea is going to level up the Red Wall, is the idea to discourage shopping online?
The damage to Red Wall town centres comes more from out of town shopping than online shopping - it doesn't help and shows how much Gove and co are clutching at straws.
Want to win Red Wall seats, spend money on them nowt else is going to work.
It seems to me that they basically don't have any ideas beyond the slogans. And this was obvious in GE19 to me
As a red wall town dweller what ideas does labour have ?
I think genuine investment rather than cuts over the last decade would have done a lot more for the Red Wall.
New Labour did the most levelling up of any Government in recent memory
Sorry, that is utter bilge. Labour did little for the red wall. You may be a labour fanboy and think they can do no wrong but under labour our manufacturing as a percentage of gdp halved, we lost 1/6th of our manufacturing jobs and companies closed and moved to Eastern Europe. New labour were obsessed with the so called future industries. They allowed the red wall to decline simply because they used to weigh votes here as opposed to count them.
Not a Labour fanboy dude, I've voted Tory and Lib Dem in the past, just think Labour are the best option at the moment.
The numbers don't lie, New Labour did a tremendous amount of the Red Wall, more than the Tories have done. What have the Tories done for the Red Wall?
Could Labour have done more, hell yes.
What did labour do for us ? Under labour, both govt and local govt, my town went from thriving to on its knees.
I don’t expect the Tories to do stuff for us, I expected labour to. They did sweet FA. The Tories made a promise. So far have failed. Let’s see what labour offer. They cannot take our votes for granted and do nothing for us in future
Factories closed, well paying jobs went offshore and young people moved away, but let’s celebrate a sure start centre.
Anyway weren’t your whining the other week that levelling was punishing the rich and affluent south.
Exactly, the public want Sunak, Tory members it seems increasingly want Truss or even Steve Baker.
There is no guarantee if Boris goes you get Sunak
The ConHome surveys gauge only a general membership satisfaction in each politician. It doesn't necessarily follow that an individual who is highly regarded in the current role would be similarly touted as future PM material. Truss's high ratings, therefore, do not necessarily imply that she would be widely supported for leader. She might but might not.
No, today's ConservativeHome survey is a Tory leadership survey and has Truss first narrowly ahead of Sunak with Baker joint third with Mordaunt
Oh, thanks - missed that. I'm surprised. I would guess that a section of Tory membership is opposed to Sunak due to fiscal profligacy?
I often wonder whether resignation on the basis 'I'm not bankrolling SAGE's forecasts any more' might have been Sunak's best career move.
Too late now.
According to that Fraser Nelson Twitter discussion, SAGE is forecasting what the government has asked it to forecast.
That isn't a remotely reasonable interpretation of what was said. What they said is the Government asks SAGE "what happens if we do X" and SAGE models it. X in the most recent round ranged from "Nothing" to "Introduce lockdown now". The alternative - that SAGE guesses what policy decisions might be possible - is nonsensical.
Actually it’s in between. It’s actually “what happens if we do X assuming “Y” for inputs for a range of unknowns. Importantly they also tend to assume that if Govt does X then the population will comply. I think one important issue in all this is the extent to which introduction of new restrictions could have on public faith in vaccines and willingness to continue having them.
While it is important to consider all such possibilities, the evidence to date is that people will largely comply (https://osf.io/gfs9x/ ) and that they still largely put their faith in vaccines.
Spent Christmas at my daughter's , they had all taken tests etc , she felt crap next day and just received the wonderful news that she has Covid. Wife is having kittens.
What I would say Malcolm is that if you and your wife have had boosters in the last month catching it now may not be the worst result. Far better now than when any booster effect has worn off although I appreciate that your wife has been ill recently.
David, yes certainly not be a better time , but has wife well spooked to say the least. I would expect us to be ok , but just concerned a bit re her given her lungs not in best condition from last episode.
That's deeply unamusing for you. My better half is deemed sufficiently vulnerable to have been shielded, had a third primary jab and been sent a pre-emptive PCR test kit to keep in the flat, so I sympathise with your situation.
We both wish to and do get out there and enjoy life in spite of it all, but that's not always something for the faint-hearted: Covid, alas, is everywhere.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to is months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Sure the vaccines are working, but the government is undermining its own message on that by imposing new restrictions...?
Yes it is. Completely. Care homes have been instructed to limit visitation again.
100% staff vaccination, 100% resident vaccination, boosters, plus all visitors have to take a Covid test before entrance.
All this and still the backward step to limit visitation. I can't think of a better example of not trusting the vaccines.
Is this not just arithmetic?
My son, who is 18 has just had his booster. The chances of him getting seriously ill from Covid must be similar to the chances of being struck by lightning.
I have had my booster which will help enormously, at least in the short term, but as a 60 year old, overweight man with lung issues there is still a significant chance that I will become seriously ill if I get covid. Maybe 1 in 25? Maybe better than that. I am not sure.
My mother in law is 86 next week and increasingly frail. She had her booster nearly 2 months ago now. She is not in a home but that point might come. If she caught Covid the chances of being seriously ill will be much higher, maybe 1 in 5?
So, if you are going to a nursing home with very elderly and frail residents you are going into a high risk environment for them. That makes such restrictions and a requirement for LFTs before a visit, for example, entirely rational. It is not a question of not trusting the vaccines. It is simply recognising that they are not a complete protection.
However if your son gets struck by lightning then that's a much greater tragedy.
The way that some care homes have abandoned all sense of proportion in the face of this virus is a tragedy. My nan spent her first Christmas in a care home this year after being admitted earlier this year. Its tragic, but if I'm honest I don't expect she'll see another one, Covid or no Covid.
This year has been very tough, especially on my grandad, but the restrictions have compounded the matter and made their tragedy even worse. The home she's in (which she's been put into by the NHS, who won't let her be discharged) has gone so far 'above and beyond' the official restrictions its ridiculous. For Christmas they were only allowing one visitor at a time - not one per resident, one total. My grandad had to do the LFT, PPE etc to get ten minutes with his wife and then be told he had to leave so someone else could have a turn.
I'm going to be sad when we inevitably lose my nan, and my grandad is going to be heartbroken, he already is, but what they're being put through in the name of these 'protections' is an inhumane torture. 😢
I have huge sympathy for this and for @Stocky. The problem, as I see it, is that when you go into the home it is not just your nan that is taking the risk but the residents in the surrounding rooms, the common rooms and the dining room. These risks are materially increased by the infectivity of Omicron. How much risk should they take to allow you or your grandad to see your nan?
There are no easy answers to this but I can't deny its cruel.
I can assure you that my mother would be utterly appalled to think that people were being restricted to see their loved ones for her own protection.
And how would she feel if she made that choice and then one or more of her neighbours got sick and died?
Almost everyone in a care home is relatively sick and close to death.
Ensuring they spend their final days in dignity and well loved is surely the most important thing?
Is cutting away their dignity, love and respect in order to drag out the time they can spend imprisoned in a home without access to their loved ones a worthwhile choice?
It's a tough one, as I have acknowledged. If I was the management of such an establishment I would be very wary of taking these kinds of risks, especially if I had a number of residents who were not even compos mentis enough to express an opinion.
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
The Treasury will do everything they can to avoid business rate changes and exactly how does an online sales tax work?
Does it count if the good is delivered to a store rather than a home? How about delivery to the corner shop?
It's going to get utterly insane incredibly quickly.
I just don't see how this idea is going to level up the Red Wall, is the idea to discourage shopping online?
The damage to Red Wall town centres comes more from out of town shopping than online shopping - it doesn't help and shows how much Gove and co are clutching at straws.
Want to win Red Wall seats, spend money on them nowt else is going to work.
The final nail in the cross where I live was when the council stopped free parking in the town centre many years ago. In part to fund the park and ride into Durham. We had a thriving town before then. Now it is moribund. But has been for quite a while. Long before the rush to online.
The problem is particularly acute in smaller towns without the hipster specialist shops, boutiques and cafes.
Bigger cities can reinvent themselves for destination shopping and the night time economy, but it is hard to see a future for smaller towns without a university and within striking range of a bigger city.
Best wishes to @malcolmg and Mrs. Fortunately, the new strain doesn't seem to attack the lungs much, though that ain't much of a consolation I know. Fingers crossed.
Spent Christmas at my daughter's , they had all taken tests etc , she felt crap next day and just received the wonderful news that she has Covid. Wife is having kittens.
What I would say Malcolm is that if you and your wife have had boosters in the last month catching it now may not be the worst result. Far better now than when any booster effect has worn off although I appreciate that your wife has been ill recently.
David, yes certainly not be a better time , but has wife well spooked to say the least. I would expect us to be ok , but just concerned a bit re her given her lungs not in best condition from last episode.
Fingers crossed Malc, not easy reassuring someone in your wife's situation.
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
The Treasury will do everything they can to avoid business rate changes and exactly how does an online sales tax work?
Does it count if the good is delivered to a store rather than a home? How about delivery to the corner shop?
It's going to get utterly insane incredibly quickly.
I just don't see how this idea is going to level up the Red Wall, is the idea to discourage shopping online?
The damage to Red Wall town centres comes more from out of town shopping than online shopping - it doesn't help and shows how much Gove and co are clutching at straws.
Want to win Red Wall seats, spend money on them nowt else is going to work.
It seems to me that they basically don't have any ideas beyond the slogans. And this was obvious in GE19 to me
As a red wall town dweller what ideas does labour have ?
I think genuine investment rather than cuts over the last decade would have done a lot more for the Red Wall.
New Labour did the most levelling up of any Government in recent memory
Sorry, that is utter bilge. Labour did little for the red wall. You may be a labour fanboy and think they can do no wrong but under labour our manufacturing as a percentage of gdp halved, we lost 1/6th of our manufacturing jobs and companies closed and moved to Eastern Europe. New labour were obsessed with the so called future industries. They allowed the red wall to decline simply because they used to weigh votes here as opposed to count them.
Not a Labour fanboy dude, I've voted Tory and Lib Dem in the past, just think Labour are the best option at the moment.
The numbers don't lie, New Labour did a tremendous amount of the Red Wall, more than the Tories have done. What have the Tories done for the Red Wall?
Could Labour have done more, hell yes.
What did labour do for us ? Under labour, both govt and local govt, my town went from thriving to on its knees.
I don’t expect the Tories to do stuff for us, I expected labour to. They did sweet FA. The Tories made a promise. So far have failed. Let’s see what labour offer. They cannot take our votes for granted and do nothing for us in future
Factories closed, well paying jobs went offshore and young people moved away, but let’s celebrate a sure start centre.
Anyway weren’t your whining the other week that levelling was punishing the rich and affluent south.
No I said genuine levelling up is not making the south poorer. It's about levelling up the entire country.
My point was that London has some of the worst poverty in the country, I do not want them neglected just as I don't want the Red Wall neglected. The Tory view is that everyone in London is metropolitan elite and drinking champagne
Spent Christmas at my daughter's , they had all taken tests etc , she felt crap next day and just received the wonderful news that she has Covid. Wife is having kittens.
😟 Hope things work out okay Malc.
Been at my brothers for Christmas back at barn conversion now. Just catching up on things. There a lot of it about. I’m sort of feeling guilty I’ve never had it. 😕 unless one of the bad colds I’ve had was it.
Yesterday I got soaked, freezing, lost all my money. I was on the right horses for the finish, they slipped over in wet before got there. 🙄 Brilliant day out though! 👍🏻
Getting a bad chest now. Done latty test negative, but still possible to get bad chest without covid suppose having spent day out getting so wet and cold.
Spent Christmas at my daughter's , they had all taken tests etc , she felt crap next day and just received the wonderful news that she has Covid. Wife is having kittens.
What I would say Malcolm is that if you and your wife have had boosters in the last month catching it now may not be the worst result. Far better now than when any booster effect has worn off although I appreciate that your wife has been ill recently.
David, yes certainly not be a better time , but has wife well spooked to say the least. I would expect us to be ok , but just concerned a bit re her given her lungs not in best condition from last episode.
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
The Treasury will do everything they can to avoid business rate changes and exactly how does an online sales tax work?
Does it count if the good is delivered to a store rather than a home? How about delivery to the corner shop?
It's going to get utterly insane incredibly quickly.
I just don't see how this idea is going to level up the Red Wall, is the idea to discourage shopping online?
The damage to Red Wall town centres comes more from out of town shopping than online shopping - it doesn't help and shows how much Gove and co are clutching at straws.
Want to win Red Wall seats, spend money on them nowt else is going to work.
It seems to me that they basically don't have any ideas beyond the slogans. And this was obvious in GE19 to me
As a red wall town dweller what ideas does labour have ?
I think genuine investment rather than cuts over the last decade would have done a lot more for the Red Wall.
New Labour did the most levelling up of any Government in recent memory
Sorry, that is utter bilge. Labour did little for the red wall. You may be a labour fanboy and think they can do no wrong but under labour our manufacturing as a percentage of gdp halved, we lost 1/6th of our manufacturing jobs and companies closed and moved to Eastern Europe. New labour were obsessed with the so called future industries. They allowed the red wall to decline simply because they used to weigh votes here as opposed to count them.
Not a Labour fanboy dude, I've voted Tory and Lib Dem in the past, just think Labour are the best option at the moment.
The numbers don't lie, New Labour did a tremendous amount of the Red Wall, more than the Tories have done. What have the Tories done for the Red Wall?
Could Labour have done more, hell yes.
What did labour do for us ? Under labour, both govt and local govt, my town went from thriving to on its knees.
I don’t expect the Tories to do stuff for us, I expected labour to. They did sweet FA. The Tories made a promise. So far have failed. Let’s see what labour offer. They cannot take our votes for granted and do nothing for us in future
Factories closed, well paying jobs went offshore and young people moved away, but let’s celebrate a sure start centre.
Anyway weren’t your whining the other week that levelling was punishing the rich and affluent south.
No I said genuine levelling up is not making the south poorer. It's about levelling up the entire country.
My point was that London has some of the worst poverty in the country, I do not want them neglected just as I don't want the Red Wall neglected. The Tory view is that everyone in London is metropolitan elite and drinking champagne
But labour is about making everyone poorer....its what they always do
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
Gove is a marmite character, but he is a spectacularly productive and innovative cabinet minister. The contrast with Robert Jenrick, his predecessor (and a man once regarded as a rising star) is huge. Jenrick seemed to be just treading water, following orders from the treasury and No.10 and incapable of spotting the political catastrophes that would inevitably follow. Gove is quickly coming up with ideas of his own, some of them quite good.
And some (like this one) make as much sense as Boris's bridge to Belfast.
I don't agree. I can tell you from the bitter experience of Dundee that there are few things as depressing as a town centre that is boarded up and deserted. We need to save our town centres, both because of the employment they bring and the community they create.
We need to do a variety of things to achieve this. Firstly, and probably most importantly, we need to rebalance the playing field between the online and bricks and mortar retailer. At the moment this is heavily weighed in favour of the online supplier who pays a fraction of the business rates that the B&M retailer does because, historically, town centre shops have been seen as cash cows ready to be milked. We also need to improve transport into town, parking, the availability of charging points, a broader range of permitted uses for old retail and to increase the number of people actually living there. It is not a sufficient policy but it is a start. And it is going to be absolutely central to the levelling up agenda.
The biggest problem is the pyramid that has been built on the back of town centre shops. Quite simply town centre shops are not worth *that* much money any more.
I had this conversation with an Abingdon town councillor, years ago. He literally could not accept that the river of money was gone.
This effects the landlords, the tenants, the councils and the government.
There are a few choices -
1) Recognise that due to the enormous pressures on hosing costs caused by planning limits, that turning town centres into more homes is infinitely more profitable than keeping the shops*. 2) Accept a massive reduction in taxation, rents etc to match the actual footfall/spend. This includes a lot of landlords going bust. 3) Increase the cost of other ways to shop by about 100%
*Where I live, the council insisted in retail units on the ground floor of new developments. Which, in some cases are now still empty after a *decade*.
Gove is always interesting, as I've said before - you can put him in charge of anything at all and he'll come up with new ideas for it - one can disagree with him but he's the opposite of a "Minister for a Quiet Life".
A detail - the councils are barely affected at all, because over 90% of business rates go to the Government. I'm not advocating it, but purely in terms of financial interest, councils would be better off if all highstreets turned into homes, since council tax goes to the council. It's a curious anomaly.
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
The Treasury will do everything they can to avoid business rate changes and exactly how does an online sales tax work?
Does it count if the good is delivered to a store rather than a home? How about delivery to the corner shop?
It's going to get utterly insane incredibly quickly.
I just don't see how this idea is going to level up the Red Wall, is the idea to discourage shopping online?
The damage to Red Wall town centres comes more from out of town shopping than online shopping - it doesn't help and shows how much Gove and co are clutching at straws.
Want to win Red Wall seats, spend money on them nowt else is going to work.
It seems to me that they basically don't have any ideas beyond the slogans. And this was obvious in GE19 to me
As a red wall town dweller what ideas does labour have ?
I think genuine investment rather than cuts over the last decade would have done a lot more for the Red Wall.
New Labour did the most levelling up of any Government in recent memory
Sorry, that is utter bilge. Labour did little for the red wall. You may be a labour fanboy and think they can do no wrong but under labour our manufacturing as a percentage of gdp halved, we lost 1/6th of our manufacturing jobs and companies closed and moved to Eastern Europe. New labour were obsessed with the so called future industries. They allowed the red wall to decline simply because they used to weigh votes here as opposed to count them.
Not a Labour fanboy dude, I've voted Tory and Lib Dem in the past, just think Labour are the best option at the moment.
The numbers don't lie, New Labour did a tremendous amount of the Red Wall, more than the Tories have done. What have the Tories done for the Red Wall?
Could Labour have done more, hell yes.
What did labour do for us ? Under labour, both govt and local govt, my town went from thriving to on its knees.
I don’t expect the Tories to do stuff for us, I expected labour to. They did sweet FA. The Tories made a promise. So far have failed. Let’s see what labour offer. They cannot take our votes for granted and do nothing for us in future
Factories closed, well paying jobs went offshore and young people moved away, but let’s celebrate a sure start centre.
Anyway weren’t your whining the other week that levelling was punishing the rich and affluent south.
No I said genuine levelling up is not making the south poorer. It's about levelling up the entire country.
No one is talking about making the south poorer. It’s not in our interests to do that and it’s levelling up not down. There’s the clue !
No, you cried and whine about London being punished when that was not the case.
Just look at the investment per head in transport for London compared to the north east ?
The south and London benefits from young people from the regions, educated and bright, moving there from the regions for the opportunities. But the moment the regions want some levelling up you’re the victim,
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to is months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Sure the vaccines are working, but the government is undermining its own message on that by imposing new restrictions...?
Yes it is. Completely. Care homes have been instructed to limit visitation again.
100% staff vaccination, 100% resident vaccination, boosters, plus all visitors have to take a Covid test before entrance.
All this and still the backward step to limit visitation. I can't think of a better example of not trusting the vaccines.
Is this not just arithmetic?
My son, who is 18 has just had his booster. The chances of him getting seriously ill from Covid must be similar to the chances of being struck by lightning.
I have had my booster which will help enormously, at least in the short term, but as a 60 year old, overweight man with lung issues there is still a significant chance that I will become seriously ill if I get covid. Maybe 1 in 25? Maybe better than that. I am not sure.
My mother in law is 86 next week and increasingly frail. She had her booster nearly 2 months ago now. She is not in a home but that point might come. If she caught Covid the chances of being seriously ill will be much higher, maybe 1 in 5?
So, if you are going to a nursing home with very elderly and frail residents you are going into a high risk environment for them. That makes such restrictions and a requirement for LFTs before a visit, for example, entirely rational. It is not a question of not trusting the vaccines. It is simply recognising that they are not a complete protection.
However if your son gets struck by lightning then that's a much greater tragedy.
The way that some care homes have abandoned all sense of proportion in the face of this virus is a tragedy. My nan spent her first Christmas in a care home this year after being admitted earlier this year. Its tragic, but if I'm honest I don't expect she'll see another one, Covid or no Covid.
This year has been very tough, especially on my grandad, but the restrictions have compounded the matter and made their tragedy even worse. The home she's in (which she's been put into by the NHS, who won't let her be discharged) has gone so far 'above and beyond' the official restrictions its ridiculous. For Christmas they were only allowing one visitor at a time - not one per resident, one total. My grandad had to do the LFT, PPE etc to get ten minutes with his wife and then be told he had to leave so someone else could have a turn.
I'm going to be sad when we inevitably lose my nan, and my grandad is going to be heartbroken, he already is, but what they're being put through in the name of these 'protections' is an inhumane torture. 😢
I have huge sympathy for this and for @Stocky. The problem, as I see it, is that when you go into the home it is not just your nan that is taking the risk but the residents in the surrounding rooms, the common rooms and the dining room. These risks are materially increased by the infectivity of Omicron. How much risk should they take to allow you or your grandad to see your nan?
There are no easy answers to this but I can't deny its cruel.
I can assure you that my mother would be utterly appalled to think that people were being restricted to see their loved ones for her own protection.
And how would she feel if she made that choice and then one or more of her neighbours got sick and died?
Almost everyone in a care home is relatively sick and close to death.
Ensuring they spend their final days in dignity and well loved is surely the most important thing?
Is cutting away their dignity, love and respect in order to drag out the time they can spend imprisoned in a home without access to their loved ones a worthwhile choice?
It's a tough one, as I have acknowledged. If I was the management of such an establishment I would be very wary of taking these kinds of risks, especially if I had a number of residents who were not even compos mentis enough to express an opinion.
Not to mention the insurers.
Not everyone in a care home is 'close to death', either.
Remembering #DesmondTutu: “I would not worship a God who is homophobic… I have to tell you, I cannot keep quiet when people are penalised for something about which they can do nothing… I oppose such injustice with the same passion that I opposed apartheid.”
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
The Treasury will do everything they can to avoid business rate changes and exactly how does an online sales tax work?
Does it count if the good is delivered to a store rather than a home? How about delivery to the corner shop?
It's going to get utterly insane incredibly quickly.
I just don't see how this idea is going to level up the Red Wall, is the idea to discourage shopping online?
The damage to Red Wall town centres comes more from out of town shopping than online shopping - it doesn't help and shows how much Gove and co are clutching at straws.
Want to win Red Wall seats, spend money on them nowt else is going to work.
It seems to me that they basically don't have any ideas beyond the slogans. And this was obvious in GE19 to me
As a red wall town dweller what ideas does labour have ?
I think genuine investment rather than cuts over the last decade would have done a lot more for the Red Wall.
New Labour did the most levelling up of any Government in recent memory
Sorry, that is utter bilge. Labour did little for the red wall. You may be a labour fanboy and think they can do no wrong but under labour our manufacturing as a percentage of gdp halved, we lost 1/6th of our manufacturing jobs and companies closed and moved to Eastern Europe. New labour were obsessed with the so called future industries. They allowed the red wall to decline simply because they used to weigh votes here as opposed to count them.
Not a Labour fanboy dude, I've voted Tory and Lib Dem in the past, just think Labour are the best option at the moment.
The numbers don't lie, New Labour did a tremendous amount of the Red Wall, more than the Tories have done. What have the Tories done for the Red Wall?
Could Labour have done more, hell yes.
What did labour do for us ? Under labour, both govt and local govt, my town went from thriving to on its knees.
I don’t expect the Tories to do stuff for us, I expected labour to. They did sweet FA. The Tories made a promise. So far have failed. Let’s see what labour offer. They cannot take our votes for granted and do nothing for us in future
Factories closed, well paying jobs went offshore and young people moved away, but let’s celebrate a sure start centre.
Anyway weren’t your whining the other week that levelling was punishing the rich and affluent south.
Yes, but the era of mass employment in manufacturing and extraction industries is over, at least for unskilled and semi-skilled workers. Automation has done as much for that as trade policy.
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
The Treasury will do everything they can to avoid business rate changes and exactly how does an online sales tax work?
Does it count if the good is delivered to a store rather than a home? How about delivery to the corner shop?
It's going to get utterly insane incredibly quickly.
I just don't see how this idea is going to level up the Red Wall, is the idea to discourage shopping online?
The damage to Red Wall town centres comes more from out of town shopping than online shopping - it doesn't help and shows how much Gove and co are clutching at straws.
Want to win Red Wall seats, spend money on them nowt else is going to work.
It seems to me that they basically don't have any ideas beyond the slogans. And this was obvious in GE19 to me
As a red wall town dweller what ideas does labour have ?
I think genuine investment rather than cuts over the last decade would have done a lot more for the Red Wall.
New Labour did the most levelling up of any Government in recent memory
Sorry, that is utter bilge. Labour did little for the red wall. You may be a labour fanboy and think they can do no wrong but under labour our manufacturing as a percentage of gdp halved, we lost 1/6th of our manufacturing jobs and companies closed and moved to Eastern Europe. New labour were obsessed with the so called future industries. They allowed the red wall to decline simply because they used to weigh votes here as opposed to count them.
Not a Labour fanboy dude, I've voted Tory and Lib Dem in the past, just think Labour are the best option at the moment.
The numbers don't lie, New Labour did a tremendous amount of the Red Wall, more than the Tories have done. What have the Tories done for the Red Wall?
Could Labour have done more, hell yes.
What did labour do for us ? Under labour, both govt and local govt, my town went from thriving to on its knees.
I don’t expect the Tories to do stuff for us, I expected labour to. They did sweet FA. The Tories made a promise. So far have failed. Let’s see what labour offer. They cannot take our votes for granted and do nothing for us in future
Factories closed, well paying jobs went offshore and young people moved away, but let’s celebrate a sure start centre.
Anyway weren’t your whining the other week that levelling was punishing the rich and affluent south.
No I said genuine levelling up is not making the south poorer. It's about levelling up the entire country.
No, you cried and whine about London being punished when that was not the case.
Just look at the investment per head in transport for London compared to the north east ?
The south and London benefits from young people from the regions, educated and bright, moving there from the regions for the opportunities. But the moment the regions want some levelling up you’re the victim,
London is being punished though, the Government is currently trying to destroy TfL.
More investment in the North for transport, 100% on board with that
I remember when Philip was telling us what a good idea the tunnel and bridge to NI was
I don't.
Why the deadname?
You rather than CHB appear to have connected yourself to a deadname.
In any case I thought deadnaming concerned using the former name of a transgender or non-binary person without their consent? Is there something you want to tell us?
Yes I've transitioned to using the name BartholomewRoberts and I don't consent to anyone trying to doxx me by using any other name.
If CHB wishes to be a doxxing troll then shame on him.
The fuck?
I've said repeatedly why I've changed my username, that I don't want to be doxxed. Should I try and find out what your real name is and doxx you?
Calling people the name they want to go by is basic respect.
I genuinely have no idea what the fuck you are on about. I made a post about a user that you've chosen to respond to and you then accuse me of doxing you?
Try reading back your posts at 12:38 and 12:47 then. 🙄
I made a post, you responded to it, you doxed yourself. I don't know what the fuck you're going on about.
Fuck you.
You will get deservedly banned soon Philip Thompson if you carry on like this. Your behaviour is far worse than anything isam or Justin124 ever did and they deserve to be reinstated.
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
The Treasury will do everything they can to avoid business rate changes and exactly how does an online sales tax work?
Does it count if the good is delivered to a store rather than a home? How about delivery to the corner shop?
It's going to get utterly insane incredibly quickly.
I just don't see how this idea is going to level up the Red Wall, is the idea to discourage shopping online?
The damage to Red Wall town centres comes more from out of town shopping than online shopping - it doesn't help and shows how much Gove and co are clutching at straws.
Want to win Red Wall seats, spend money on them nowt else is going to work.
It seems to me that they basically don't have any ideas beyond the slogans. And this was obvious in GE19 to me
As a red wall town dweller what ideas does labour have ?
I think genuine investment rather than cuts over the last decade would have done a lot more for the Red Wall.
New Labour did the most levelling up of any Government in recent memory
Sorry, that is utter bilge. Labour did little for the red wall. You may be a labour fanboy and think they can do no wrong but under labour our manufacturing as a percentage of gdp halved, we lost 1/6th of our manufacturing jobs and companies closed and moved to Eastern Europe. New labour were obsessed with the so called future industries. They allowed the red wall to decline simply because they used to weigh votes here as opposed to count them.
Not a Labour fanboy dude, I've voted Tory and Lib Dem in the past, just think Labour are the best option at the moment.
The numbers don't lie, New Labour did a tremendous amount of the Red Wall, more than the Tories have done. What have the Tories done for the Red Wall?
Could Labour have done more, hell yes.
What did labour do for us ? Under labour, both govt and local govt, my town went from thriving to on its knees.
I don’t expect the Tories to do stuff for us, I expected labour to. They did sweet FA. The Tories made a promise. So far have failed. Let’s see what labour offer. They cannot take our votes for granted and do nothing for us in future
Factories closed, well paying jobs went offshore and young people moved away, but let’s celebrate a sure start centre.
Anyway weren’t your whining the other week that levelling was punishing the rich and affluent south.
No I said genuine levelling up is not making the south poorer. It's about levelling up the entire country.
My point was that London has some of the worst poverty in the country, I do not want them neglected just as I don't want the Red Wall neglected. The Tory view is that everyone in London is metropolitan elite and drinking champagne
But labour is about making everyone poorer....its what they always do
Paterson, Parties, gaffes, an improved Labour led by Starmer and overall government fatigue (Soon to be 12 years of government led by one Party) are all factors of why Johnson and his party are in the position they are in.
Add in a tough economic situation when the new financial year kicks in and I can see them getting a kicking at the locals no matter the leader.
I wouldn’t rule out part of the collapse in the red wall being due to the reneging on levelling up.
Yes, we've forgotten about the HS2 and Northern Poorhouse Rail Uturns with everything else that is going on.
I haven’t forgot
Oh they aren't forgotten
The places that want it still want it Worse the places blighted by it are still blighted by it.
And without it being 100% completed its going to be incredibly easy to attack everywhere.
Agreed. Practical example for you:
The M42 is closed for the next week between junctions 9 and 10 while work is carried out for HS2.
This is one of a series of closures as the whole road has to be moved about 50 yards just outside Tamworth to accommodate the junction.
My friends in Wilnecote were ecstatic about the cancellation of the Eastern leg until they realised it wasn't cancelled and their road will still be closed. Now they're fuming.
I'm still fuming because the line has been severely and wantonly damaged by total imbeciles in the Treasury and DfT who clearly don't have a clue what they're talking about, or basic geography, or even economics, to save a piddling £5 billion by destroying capacity on the Midland Main Line and proposing to massively reduce local services, without even realising it.
The IRP (leaving aside the fact that it is full of deliberately dishonest statements) somehow managed to piss everyone off at once. Which is quite an achievement.
I didn't even know @BartholomewRoberts was Philip, wasn't even aware Philip had left.
If you want to connect yourself to another poster that's up to you, you could have just not responded and we wouldn't be here.
Did I connect you to this new account. No, you did
Bullshit, why tell lies? You have less integrity than Boris Johnson it seems.
You did know it was me and I've made no secret, there is no "another poster" and you know that full well you lying shitbag which is why you said the name in response to me. I've said in conversations with you before that I don't want to be doxxed and you keep using the name to doxx me as an attempt to win an argument.
You're a fucking liar and a nasty person to boot. Fuck you. And you started swearing first if @PBModerator wants to get involved.
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
The Treasury will do everything they can to avoid business rate changes and exactly how does an online sales tax work?
Does it count if the good is delivered to a store rather than a home? How about delivery to the corner shop?
It's going to get utterly insane incredibly quickly.
I just don't see how this idea is going to level up the Red Wall, is the idea to discourage shopping online?
The damage to Red Wall town centres comes more from out of town shopping than online shopping - it doesn't help and shows how much Gove and co are clutching at straws.
Want to win Red Wall seats, spend money on them nowt else is going to work.
It seems to me that they basically don't have any ideas beyond the slogans. And this was obvious in GE19 to me
As a red wall town dweller what ideas does labour have ?
I think genuine investment rather than cuts over the last decade would have done a lot more for the Red Wall.
New Labour did the most levelling up of any Government in recent memory
Sorry, that is utter bilge. Labour did little for the red wall. You may be a labour fanboy and think they can do no wrong but under labour our manufacturing as a percentage of gdp halved, we lost 1/6th of our manufacturing jobs and companies closed and moved to Eastern Europe. New labour were obsessed with the so called future industries. They allowed the red wall to decline simply because they used to weigh votes here as opposed to count them.
Not a Labour fanboy dude, I've voted Tory and Lib Dem in the past, just think Labour are the best option at the moment.
The numbers don't lie, New Labour did a tremendous amount of the Red Wall, more than the Tories have done. What have the Tories done for the Red Wall?
Could Labour have done more, hell yes.
What did labour do for us ? Under labour, both govt and local govt, my town went from thriving to on its knees.
I don’t expect the Tories to do stuff for us, I expected labour to. They did sweet FA. The Tories made a promise. So far have failed. Let’s see what labour offer. They cannot take our votes for granted and do nothing for us in future
Factories closed, well paying jobs went offshore and young people moved away, but let’s celebrate a sure start centre.
Anyway weren’t your whining the other week that levelling was punishing the rich and affluent south.
Yes, but the era of mass employment in manufacturing and extraction industries is over, at least for unskilled and semi-skilled workers. Automation has done as much for that as trade policy.
Automation was happening from the eighties . This was more offshoring. Manufacturing halved as a percentage of GDP under labour who did nothing To try to help or arrest the development especially when the pound was so high as to make exports expensive in the late nineties. Still you’re okay so why should you be bothered.
I remember when Philip was telling us what a good idea the tunnel and bridge to NI was
I don't.
Why the deadname?
You rather than CHB appear to have connected yourself to a deadname.
In any case I thought deadnaming concerned using the former name of a transgender or non-binary person without their consent? Is there something you want to tell us?
Yes I've transitioned to using the name BartholomewRoberts and I don't consent to anyone trying to doxx me by using any other name.
If CHB wishes to be a doxxing troll then shame on him.
The fuck?
I've said repeatedly why I've changed my username, that I don't want to be doxxed. Should I try and find out what your real name is and doxx you?
Calling people the name they want to go by is basic respect.
I genuinely have no idea what the fuck you are on about. I made a post about a user that you've chosen to respond to and you then accuse me of doxing you?
Try reading back your posts at 12:38 and 12:47 then. 🙄
I made a post, you responded to it, you doxed yourself. I don't know what the fuck you're going on about.
Fuck you.
This is genuinely one of the most bizarre things I've seen on this website, have a good day whoever you are
I had more idea what was going on in Tenet than this exchange 🤷♀️
I didn't even know @BartholomewRoberts was Philip, wasn't even aware Philip had left.
If you want to connect yourself to another poster that's up to you, you could have just not responded and we wouldn't be here.
Did I connect you to this new account. No, you did
Bullshit, why tell lies? You have less integrity than Boris Johnson it seems.
You did know it was me and I've made no secret, there is no "another poster" and you know that full well you lying shitbag which is why you said the name in response to me. I've said in conversations with you before that I don't want to be doxxed and you keep using the name to doxx me as an attempt to win an argument.
You're a fucking liar and a nasty person to boot. Fuck you. And you started swearing first if @PBModerator wants to get involved.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
His telegraph column was £250k for a mornings work. Easy money that didn't interfere with evening socialising. Probably can double that after being PM.
Yes, I think people grossly exaggerate the earing capacity of lecture circuits. Boris will do better than most because he is genuinely entertaining but its a pretty short term option as the novelty wears off.
The other major problem for Boris Johnson is that it is rumoured that his ex wife took him to the cleaners during the divorce and gets 50% of his future income.
Was Boris representing himself as it takes a particularly bad performance to get that sort of judgment in this day and age
Marianne Wheeler is a QC. I really cannot see any basis on which she would be receiving anything for herself at all in terms of income. Clearly she would have been entitled to capital and Boris would have still had some obligations towards the children although most should be adults now and finished their university education.
Yes which was my original point but equally I can’t see why TSE would be lying about the judgement.
So you then have to ask how bad was the divorce case that a judge went against current precedent to award such a judgement - did Boris represent himself and try to make it up as he went along rather than reading a prepared script.
No doubt she could have provided an embarrassingly long list of paramours but I think Boris is beyond embarrassment about that and the reporting restrictions on the Family Court systems are fairly severe.
That conversation assumes that it was setup in a Court.
Not really. It simply tries to imagine what pressure might have been applied to allow to make the claims she apparently did.
Surely silence is what he is paying for...
The premise of that is that she has something interesting to say. I am not sure that my husband preferred sleeping with other women, almost any other woman, is it.
It wouldn’t need to be massively interesting, the Mirror would stil write a six-figure cheque for a week of exclusive stories about the PM, and a publisher would advance six figures more for the book.
I didn't even know @BartholomewRoberts was Philip, wasn't even aware Philip had left.
If you want to connect yourself to another poster that's up to you, you could have just not responded and we wouldn't be here.
Did I connect you to this new account. No, you did
Bullshit, why tell lies? You have less integrity than Boris Johnson it seems.
You did know it was me and I've made no secret, there is no "another poster" and you know that full well you lying shitbag which is why you said the name in response to me. I've said in conversations with you before that I don't want to be doxxed and you keep using the name to doxx me as an attempt to win an argument.
You're a fucking liar and a nasty person to boot. Fuck you. And you started swearing first if @PBModerator wants to get involved.
Whatever bartholephilips is drinking today, I don’t want any 😆
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
Gove is a marmite character, but he is a spectacularly productive and innovative cabinet minister. The contrast with Robert Jenrick, his predecessor (and a man once regarded as a rising star) is huge. Jenrick seemed to be just treading water, following orders from the treasury and No.10 and incapable of spotting the political catastrophes that would inevitably follow. Gove is quickly coming up with ideas of his own, some of them quite good.
And some (like this one) make as much sense as Boris's bridge to Belfast.
I don't agree. I can tell you from the bitter experience of Dundee that there are few things as depressing as a town centre that is boarded up and deserted. We need to save our town centres, both because of the employment they bring and the community they create.
We need to do a variety of things to achieve this. Firstly, and probably most importantly, we need to rebalance the playing field between the online and bricks and mortar retailer. At the moment this is heavily weighed in favour of the online supplier who pays a fraction of the business rates that the B&M retailer does because, historically, town centre shops have been seen as cash cows ready to be milked. We also need to improve transport into town, parking, the availability of charging points, a broader range of permitted uses for old retail and to increase the number of people actually living there. It is not a sufficient policy but it is a start. And it is going to be absolutely central to the levelling up agenda.
The biggest problem is the pyramid that has been built on the back of town centre shops. Quite simply town centre shops are not worth *that* much money any more.
I had this conversation with an Abingdon town councillor, years ago. He literally could not accept that the river of money was gone.
This effects the landlords, the tenants, the councils and the government.
There are a few choices -
1) Recognise that due to the enormous pressures on hosing costs caused by planning limits, that turning town centres into more homes is infinitely more profitable than keeping the shops*. 2) Accept a massive reduction in taxation, rents etc to match the actual footfall/spend. This includes a lot of landlords going bust. 3) Increase the cost of other ways to shop by about 100%
*Where I live, the council insisted in retail units on the ground floor of new developments. Which, in some cases are now still empty after a *decade*.
That's a massive problem, because for the last couple of decades new shopping centres has been the go-to way to regenerate towns. Romford, to take an extreme example, has at least one more complex than it can really support- so there are vacant sites, some fairly meh shops and big distances to walk between shops.
Romford is especially unlucky- it's been hit by both Lakeside and Stratford. But even without the online effect (who needs classic department stores any more?), there's more shop space than is useful. But it will be hard to shrink in a coherent way.
Paterson, Parties, gaffes, an improved Labour led by Starmer and overall government fatigue (Soon to be 12 years of government led by one Party) are all factors of why Johnson and his party are in the position they are in.
Add in a tough economic situation when the new financial year kicks in and I can see them getting a kicking at the locals no matter the leader.
I wouldn’t rule out part of the collapse in the red wall being due to the reneging on levelling up.
Yes, we've forgotten about the HS2 and Northern Poorhouse Rail Uturns with everything else that is going on.
I haven’t forgot
Oh they aren't forgotten
The places that want it still want it Worse the places blighted by it are still blighted by it.
And without it being 100% completed its going to be incredibly easy to attack everywhere.
Agreed. Practical example for you:
The M42 is closed for the next week between junctions 9 and 10 while work is carried out for HS2.
This is one of a series of closures as the whole road has to be moved about 50 yards just outside Tamworth to accommodate the junction.
My friends in Wilnecote were ecstatic about the cancellation of the Eastern leg until they realised it wasn't cancelled and their road will still be closed. Now they're fuming.
I'm still fuming because the line has been severely and wantonly damaged by total imbeciles in the Treasury and DfT who clearly don't have a clue what they're talking about, or basic geography, or even economics, to save a piddling £5 billion by destroying capacity on the Midland Main Line and proposing to massively reduce local services, without even realising it.
The IRP (leaving aside the fact that it is full of deliberately dishonest statements) somehow managed to piss everyone off at once. Which is quite an achievement.
The IRP is written in such a way that I suspect someone knew the reality but was asked to write it regardless. There are clues within it (basic assumptions) that allow anyone clueful to destroy it in minutes while demonstrating how implausible the proposals actually are.
I'm looking forward to the discover that the only way to achieve the quoted to London speeds is by straightening the entire track between point X and London....
Michael Gove is prepared to “go to war” with Rishi Sunak as he pushes to exempt high-street retailers from paying business rates as part of his levelling-up agenda, The Times has been told.
Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wants a radical overhaul of the commercial property tax because he views it as one of the most effective ways of achieving tangible change in crucial red wall seats before the next election.
He is said to be in favour of funding it by introducing an online sales tax, which would effectively add extra VAT to purchases made over the internet. Sunak, the chancellor, is resisting wholesale changes to business rates, which bring in £25 billion per year and are relatively easy to collect in comparison with other taxes. He is said to be sceptical about an online sales tax.
Agree with exempting high street shops from some business rates. However I would oppose an online sales tax. Instead tax online retailers like Amazon more on their out of town warehouses
Comments
My Mother in Laws home lost a half dozen to covid in last winters wave.
For me care home residents have, along with international travellers and now the unvaxed, been a cohort to kick repeatedly with the security of the government knowing that it has popular opinion urging them on. Populism in practice again.
BoJo is a very poor PM and I had no illusions, but his faults were thrown into focus by the recent events. Every tme I see him now, I want to throw something at the telly. Why then, isn't Starmer miles ahead? His problem isn't the echoes of Corbyn, or Brexit, it's dog shit.
He can't help being a middle-class metropolitan. He's not even particularly Woke, but that's the dogshit that sticks to his shoes. It's not him, but there's always one of his fellow-travellers who demands to go too far. The Rick from the Young Ones. Who, in an argument between the UK and China will automatically take the Chinese side. Even worse, will vocally take the North Korean side against the Brits. And he's the one who who will garner all the publicity.
Starmer won't step in the dogshit deliberately but the aroma will stick to his shoes. You can imagine him supporting it, because he has no interest having a go at them. Unfair? Of course, but politics is inherently unfair. He's too nice.
BoJo cocks up on a regular basis, but at least, we know he hasn't any principles to start with.
We need to do a variety of things to achieve this. Firstly, and probably most importantly, we need to rebalance the playing field between the online and bricks and mortar retailer. At the moment this is heavily weighed in favour of the online supplier who pays a fraction of the business rates that the B&M retailer does because, historically, town centre shops have been seen as cash cows ready to be milked. We also need to improve transport into town, parking, the availability of charging points, a broader range of permitted uses for old retail and to increase the number of people actually living there. It is not a sufficient policy but it is a start. And it is going to be absolutely central to the levelling up agenda.
Having said all that I know how delighted my wife and I, both in our eighties, were to actually see all our grandchildren this Christmas. First time since the middle of 2019, and how sad my sister and her family were at here isolation.
Why the deadname?
You can call it “wishful thinking”. But if it is it is not wishful thinking without basis - it is, as a minimum, the current direction of travel.
There are no easy answers to this but I can't deny its cruel.
He explicitly said they were only forwarding on models showing a catastrophe. Models showing that doing nothing would be fine weren't included within the evidence as they were "not informative".
Surely a model showing that doing nothing won't result in any issues is definitely informative and should be included within the evidence?
Let the high streets cater to useful stuff that you don't want to do online, butchers , bakers, etc . Frankly most high streets are souless deserts of tat and have been for decades
This guy @Philip_Thompson was BoJo's biggest fan, he told us what a good idea the bridge was, even though we told him that it was a munitions dump and not safe
I had this conversation with an Abingdon town councillor, years ago. He literally could not accept that the river of money was gone.
This effects the landlords, the tenants, the councils and the government.
There are a few choices -
1) Recognise that due to the enormous pressures on hosing costs caused by planning limits, that turning town centres into more homes is infinitely more profitable than keeping the shops*.
2) Accept a massive reduction in taxation, rents etc to match the actual footfall/spend. This includes a lot of landlords going bust.
3) Increase the cost of other ways to shop by about 100%
*Where I live, the council insisted in retail units on the ground floor of new developments. Which, in some cases are now still empty after a *decade*.
In any case I thought deadnaming concerned using the former name of a transgender or non-binary person without their consent? Is there something you want to tell us?
We walked in Grenoble entrance to be greeted by no fellow travellers - none. Tumbleweed. A few airport staff looking at us. We thought we had the wrong day or something.
We checked in and then another family turned up - looking equally bemused. In the end there were 21 people on the flight and I'm impressed that the airline maintained the service to be honest.
New Labour did the most levelling up of any Government in recent memory
The thing that will save the High Street is folk living there. And not in dingy bedsits over shops either.
Because it isn't coming back.
No, he didn't. The models produce a range of possible outcomes for each policy option. The range is what was quoted. There were no models that were run for which the outputs were not included in the results.
Models showing that doing nothing would be fine weren't included within the evidence
That isn't how the models work. The models produce a range of possible outcomes for each policy option. Again, nothing was excluded.
Surely a model showing that doing nothing won't result in any issues is definitely informative and should be included within the evidence?
Yes, it is, and yes, it was. Unfortunately, because the models produce a range of possible outcomes for each policy option, there was a tendency by the media and by some people in Government/the DfH to focus solely on the top end of the ranges and ignore the rest of the results. This is partially human nature - if you're likely to be blamed for inaction, then there is an inevitable bias towards acting prudently - and partly because people are bad at understanding distributions of outcomes.
Graham Medley has stated that he regrets getting into that debate with Nelson, because of how badly he has been misinterpreted (partially his own fault for not being clear; mostly due to the format making this inevitable). You are misinterpreting what he said.
This debate is basically, do people think these voters left because of Corbyn and Brexit, or for other reasons. And if there are other reasons, what are they and have these been resolved by the Tories.
We saw In North Shropshire a Leave seat going to the Lib Dems, with one voter saying "now Brexit is over I can vote for you again". How many others feel the same?
In the South West, has anyone considered that the Lib Dems might now reclaim some seats?
The places that want it still want it
Worse the places blighted by it are still blighted by it.
And without it being 100% completed its going to be incredibly easy to attack everywhere.
If CHB wishes to be a doxxing troll then shame on him.
(Though to the best of my knowledge I never said a bridge to NI was a good idea)
Calling people the name they want to go by is basic respect.
Anyway for all you criticise wishful thinking, others are free to criticise “disaster assumption”. Just as you shouldn’t always assume rosy outcomes and make no planning for worse, so you shouldn’t assume terrible outcomes and pre-emptively take hugely costly measures to ward them off. Having plans for the worst is not implementing for the worst.
The numbers don't lie, New Labour did a tremendous amount of the Red Wall, more than the Tories have done. What have the Tories done for the Red Wall?
Could Labour have done more, hell yes.
Ensuring they spend their final days in dignity and well loved is surely the most important thing?
Is cutting away their dignity, love and respect in order to drag out the time they can spend imprisoned in a home without access to their loved ones a worthwhile choice?
If you want to connect yourself to another poster that's up to you, you could have just not responded and we wouldn't be here.
Did I connect you to this new account. No, you did
Yersel?
But doing fine here now, can't see much need for a lockdown at present but worried about the situation going forward.
Hope you had a good Christmas
I don’t expect the Tories to do stuff for us, I expected labour to. They did sweet FA. The Tories made a promise. So far have failed. Let’s see what labour offer. They cannot take our votes for granted and do nothing for us in future
Factories closed, well paying jobs went offshore and young people moved away, but let’s celebrate a sure start centre.
Anyway weren’t your whining the other week that levelling was punishing the rich and affluent south.
We both wish to and do get out there and enjoy life in spite of it all, but that's not always something for the faint-hearted: Covid, alas, is everywhere.
Bigger cities can reinvent themselves for destination shopping and the night time economy, but it is hard to see a future for smaller towns without a university and within striking range of a bigger city.
Fortunately, the new strain doesn't seem to attack the lungs much, though that ain't much of a consolation I know.
Fingers crossed.
My point was that London has some of the worst poverty in the country, I do not want them neglected just as I don't want the Red Wall neglected. The Tory view is that everyone in London is metropolitan elite and drinking champagne
Been at my brothers for Christmas back at barn conversion now. Just catching up on things. There a lot of it about. I’m sort of feeling guilty I’ve never had it. 😕 unless one of the bad colds I’ve had was it.
Yesterday I got soaked, freezing, lost all my money. I was on the right horses for the finish, they slipped over in wet before got there. 🙄 Brilliant day out though! 👍🏻
Getting a bad chest now. Done latty test negative, but still possible to get bad chest without covid suppose having spent day out getting so wet and cold.
A detail - the councils are barely affected at all, because over 90% of business rates go to the Government. I'm not advocating it, but purely in terms of financial interest, councils would be better off if all highstreets turned into homes, since council tax goes to the council. It's a curious anomaly.
No, you cried and whine about London being punished when that was not the case.
Just look at the investment per head in transport for London compared to the north east ?
The south and London benefits from young people from the regions, educated and bright, moving there from the regions for the opportunities. But the moment the regions want some levelling up you’re the victim,
Not everyone in a care home is 'close to death', either.
https://twitter.com/RevRichardColes/status/1475219260716765187
More investment in the North for transport, 100% on board with that
The M42 is closed for the next week between junctions 9 and 10 while work is carried out for HS2.
This is one of a series of closures as the whole road has to be moved about 50 yards just outside Tamworth to accommodate the junction.
My friends in Wilnecote were ecstatic about the cancellation of the Eastern leg until they realised it wasn't cancelled and their road will still be closed. Now they're fuming.
I'm still fuming because the line has been severely and wantonly damaged by total imbeciles in the Treasury and DfT who clearly don't have a clue what they're talking about, or basic geography, or even economics, to save a piddling £5 billion by destroying capacity on the Midland Main Line and proposing to massively reduce local services, without even realising it.
The IRP (leaving aside the fact that it is full of deliberately dishonest statements) somehow managed to piss everyone off at once. Which is quite an achievement.
You did know it was me and I've made no secret, there is no "another poster" and you know that full well you lying shitbag which is why you said the name in response to me. I've said in conversations with you before that I don't want to be doxxed and you keep using the name to doxx me as an attempt to win an argument.
You're a fucking liar and a nasty person to boot. Fuck you. And you started swearing first if @PBModerator wants to get involved.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/17152701/boris-johnson-wont-announce-lockdown-omicron/
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3160997/chinese-scientists-develop-ai-prosecutor-can-press-its-own
The Chinese government seem to watch all the great dystopian movies which predicted these types of futures and say I want that....
Romford is especially unlucky- it's been hit by both Lakeside and Stratford. But even without the online effect (who needs classic department stores any more?), there's more shop space than is useful. But it will be hard to shrink in a coherent way.
I'm looking forward to the discover that the only way to achieve the quoted to London speeds is by straightening the entire track between point X and London....