Will Boris Johnson announce his resignation before the end of January? – politicalbetting.com

System

Will Boris Johnson announce his resignation before the end of January? – politicalbetting.com

Those of us who had to go through several hoops to get paid out on the Theresa May exit date as Tory leader markets are understandably wary about exit date markets unless the terms are explicitly laid out, fortunately this market from Smarkets make the terms explicitly clear.

Read the full story here

MattW

First.

No_Offence_Alan

Second, and the Aussies are 63-6.

Sandpit

Those odds are the other way round to what I was expecting, given the wall-to-wall media coverage.

Dura_Ace

An tantalising amuse bouche for how the mid-terms are going to go...

https://www.salon.com/2022/01/14/florida-lost-special-by-59-points-files-and-refuses-to-concede/

Sandpit

91/7, lead of 206. This might be England’s best chance of a win.

Edit: maybe not, yet another no-ball, Woakes this time.

Heathener

I don't think Johnson will survive this year and I suspect the May locals will serve the coup de grace.

However, that's a far cry from suggesting that Boris Johnson, who has spent all his life wanting to be king of the world, will resign in the next 14 days. The chances of him doing so are less than 2%.

JBriskin3

Sandpit said:

Those odds are the other way round to what I was expecting, given the wall-to-wall media coverage.

I think TSE argues his case well though - I'd be tempted if I could afford betting.

Pulpstar

Ffs bod on sky linking the volcano to climate change.
Large volcanic eruptions can actually cool the planet a bit iirc

Pulpstar

I think it'd be pretty outrageous if the courts overturn the govt decision in Australia - it's an express reserve power of the minister - but judges are full of their own self importance on matters like this so it's well possible.

darkage

I wouldn't bother. The return isn't brilliant, and there is a non trivial risk that he will resign in the next couple of weeks, albeit unlikely.

Sandpit

No_Offence_Alan said:

Second, and the Aussies are 63-6.

Were 63/6, yet somehow make it to lunch dinner on 141/8.

Even when it looks like England have a glimmer of an opportunity, it seems to quickly slip away…

moonshine

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

Theuniondivvie

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’

Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.

moonshine

Theuniondivvie said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’

Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.

Ha! Well yes his reasons for seeking privacy are no doubt less than pure. But he has always made a point of saying that his family life is not a worthy target of media inquiry. This story, from the Telegraph no less, will sting.

OldKingCole

Theuniondivvie said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’

Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.

Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud.
However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.

On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry.
They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'.
Or similar.

darkage

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

On reflection, the hatred of Carrie is a bit disturbing. It does have a whiff of misogyny about it. But that shouldn't make her immune from criticism or comment.

Fundamentally, it seems that the problem is that she is a poor political advisor. This can be measured against objective criteria - the decline in opinion poll ratings. Johnson and the tories have been in a sharp decline on this front since the Patterson debacle, which was only 2 months ago, to the point where the crisis is now existential. But there is no corrective action, and things keep getting worse. There cannot be any 'shake up' to arrest the decline in No.10, because Carrie is his wife and he is seemingly unable to curb her power.

It seems like they are just going down together, and there is nothing that we can do but watch the tragedy unfold.

Sandpit

OldKingCole said:

Theuniondivvie said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’

Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.

Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud.
However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.

On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry.
They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'.
Or similar.

Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.

Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.

Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.

OldKingCole

Sandpit said:

OldKingCole said:

Theuniondivvie said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’

Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.

Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud.
However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.

On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry.
They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'.
Or similar.

Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.

Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.

Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.

Noted. Euan Blair is left alone, of course.
Will Johnson die a rich man, I wonder. I know about the probability of well-paid newspaper articles and speaking engagements, but as you say his track record as a money manager isn't good.

Theuniondivvie

OldKingCole said:

Theuniondivvie said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’

Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.

Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud.
However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.

On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry.
They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'.
Or similar.

It’s more than likely that at least one of the Johnson children (or at least their mother) is legally constrained from mentioning their ancestry let alone capitalise upon it,

JosiasJessop

Sandpit said:

OldKingCole said:

Theuniondivvie said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’

Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.

Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud.
However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.

On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry.
They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'.
Or similar.

Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.

Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.

Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.

I'm unconvinced that Carrie is fair game, at least to the extent she seems to be vilified.

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. Pulpstar, be fair. If only we had more wind turbines, the volcano would never have erupted.

Mr. Sandpit, the clown doesn't want to leave, and the potential successor and backbenchers seem to be dithering pointlessly (reminds me of May after her woeful election).

darkage

OldKingCole said:

Sandpit said:

OldKingCole said:

Theuniondivvie said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’

Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.

Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud.
However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.

On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry.
They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'.
Or similar.

Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.

Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.

Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.

Noted. Euan Blair is left alone, of course.
Will Johnson die a rich man, I wonder. I know about the probability of well-paid newspaper articles and speaking engagements, but as you say his track record as a money manager isn't good.

I suspect he has got to close to the point where no amount of income can cover his overheads, particularly if his current marriage ends in divorce.

pigeon

rottenborough said:

Andy_JS said:

Let's hope all of the Covid restrictions are lifted on 26th January, if not sooner. Is that the government plan? That everything goes on that date, or is just some of the restrictions?

Who cares. No one is listening to these liars anymore.

Nobody respects the Government, but that doesn't mean that a decision to dump the rules isn't of value. In my case, I'll be delighted to get rid of nuisance masks in shop, on trains, and walking through the corridors at the gym (yes, mine's gold-plated the regulations and brought the bloody things back, even though you only have to put them on for about 0.5% of the time you are in the building, which is profoundly pointless.) Secondly, my paranoid employer is basically still stuck in a January 2021 time warp full of masks and social distancing and obsessional surface cleaning everywhere: if all the rules go in the rest of the country then there's at least some hope that they might also get rid of them at some point before the heat death of the universe.

I'm very much in the camp that's happy to see targeted measures like the PCR tests and emergency anti-virals for the most vulnerable, but the petty, nit-picking regulation of everybody's day-to-day life needs to go. Anything that helps to hurry that along can only be a positive development.

Pulpstar

Out

Sandpit

Dan Hannan is in the same small minority as myself:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/01/15/boris-has-kept-economy-open-recovery-track-matters-drinks/

” Our economy is surging commensurately: new figures show we regained our pre-pandemic GDP in November, before the eurozone. The phasing out of furlough payments has not stopped us having, to all intents and purposes, full employment.

“We did not stumble into this happy situation by luck. We got here because ministers made hard decisions in the teeth of resistance from opposition politicians, public health doomsters and panicky journalists.
…
“ We led the world with our vaccine roll-out – not once, but twice. That in turn was possible because we had left the EU and stayed out of its common procurement scheme.

“At the same time, the PM defied the Eeyores to lift restrictions. When he ended the lockdown in July, epidemiologists called it a dangerous and unethical experiment and the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) predicted that hospital admissions would rise to between 2,000 and 7,000 a day…

“That, in my book, matters vastly more than whether he wandered into his garden while officials were drinking alcohol.”

OldKingCole

pigeon said:

rottenborough said:

Andy_JS said:

Let's hope all of the Covid restrictions are lifted on 26th January, if not sooner. Is that the government plan? That everything goes on that date, or is just some of the restrictions?

Who cares. No one is listening to these liars anymore.

Nobody respects the Government, but that doesn't mean that a decision to dump the rules isn't of value. In my case, I'll be delighted to get rid of nuisance masks in shop, on trains, and walking through the corridors at the gym (yes, mine's gold-plated the regulations and brought the bloody things back, even though you only have to put them on for about 0.5% of the time you are in the building, which is profoundly pointless.) Secondly, my paranoid employer is basically still stuck in a January 2021 time warp full of masks and social distancing and obsessional surface cleaning everywhere: if all the rules go in the rest of the country then there's at least some hope that they might also get rid of them at some point before the heat death of the universe.

I'm very much in the camp that's happy to see targeted measures like the PCR tests and emergency anti-virals for the most vulnerable, but the petty, nit-picking regulation of everybody's day-to-day life needs to go. Anything that helps to hurry that along can only be a positive development.

If it's any consolation, feathered friend, I went to two small (6-10 people) meetings of OAP's last week. In one nearly everyone was masked; in the other only one person was. In the 'mostly masked' one there were, to be fair, two people who could reasonably be regarded as 'vulnerable' on general health grounds, as well as age.
I think it's wearing off, although I do do an LFT every three or four days.

pigeon

Novaxgate: Djokovic loses appeal, to be deported from Australia

rcs1000

No_Offence_Alan said:

Second, and the Aussies are 63-6.

Wtf? Really?

OldKingCole

rcs1000 said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

Second, and the Aussies are 63-6.

Wtf? Really?

150-8 now. However that's a net 265-8 about halfway through Day 3.

Sandpit

JosiasJessop said:

Sandpit said:

OldKingCole said:

Theuniondivvie said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’

Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.

Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud.
However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.

On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry.
They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'.
Or similar.

Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.

Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.

Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.

I'm unconvinced that Carrie is fair game, at least to the extent she seems to be vilified.

She’s a former communications manager for the party, was the main reason Cummings left No.10, and remains the biggest reason that the PM has been unable to hire a replacement senior advisor. No-one of any political talent wants the job with Carrie around, that in itself is a big story - and a huge part of why the government are unable to stop the relentless negative headlines.

darkage

JosiasJessop said:

Sandpit said:

OldKingCole said:

Theuniondivvie said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’

Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.

Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud.
However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.

On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry.
They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'.
Or similar.

Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.

Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.

Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.

I'm unconvinced that Carrie is fair game, at least to the extent she seems to be vilified.

I think the point here is that she shouldn't be allowed to use the 'long suffering wife who is entitled to a private life' defence to avoid scrutiny when it is convenient for her. It is well known that she is as much a part of the No.10 operation as was Dominic Cummings, or any of the other 'official' advisors, former or current. She has chosen this path. So, if she is breaking public health rules imposed by the government she is part of, then there is a public interest in revealing them.

The choice of picture, on the other hand, is perhaps more questionable - I've not seen it so cannot comment.

Taz

rcs1000 said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

Second, and the Aussies are 63-6.

Wtf? Really?

151-8 now. 9th wicket have stuck around

Sandpit

rcs1000 said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

Second, and the Aussies are 63-6.

Wtf? Really?

Don’t get excited, that was just the brief moment of hope. It’s back to the gloom now.

Chris

Sandpit said:

Dan Hannan is in the same small minority as myself:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/01/15/boris-has-kept-economy-open-recovery-track-matters-drinks/

” Our economy is surging commensurately: new figures show we regained our pre-pandemic GDP in November, before the eurozone. The phasing out of furlough payments has not stopped us having, to all intents and purposes, full employment.

“We did not stumble into this happy situation by luck. We got here because ministers made hard decisions in the teeth of resistance from opposition politicians, public health doomsters and panicky journalists.
…
“ We led the world with our vaccine roll-out – not once, but twice. That in turn was possible because we had left the EU and stayed out of its common procurement scheme.

“At the same time, the PM defied the Eeyores to lift restrictions. When he ended the lockdown in July, epidemiologists called it a dangerous and unethical experiment and the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) predicted that hospital admissions would rise to between 2,000 and 7,000 a day…

“That, in my book, matters vastly more than whether he wandered into his garden while officials were drinking alcohol.”

If Boris Johnson had repeatedly "defied the Eeyores" because his scientific understanding of the pandemic was superior to that of the expert advisers, there might be some point to that.

But if it just reflected a reckless willingness to hope blindly for the best, ignore the best advice available and risk other people's lives for his own political advantage? After all, he tried to do much the same thing in March and December 2020 but was forced to reverse the policy by looming catastrophe. Does the fact that he (and we) got lucky this time make him a second Solomon?

darkage

pigeon said:

rottenborough said:

Andy_JS said:

Let's hope all of the Covid restrictions are lifted on 26th January, if not sooner. Is that the government plan? That everything goes on that date, or is just some of the restrictions?

Who cares. No one is listening to these liars anymore.

Nobody respects the Government, but that doesn't mean that a decision to dump the rules isn't of value. In my case, I'll be delighted to get rid of nuisance masks in shop, on trains, and walking through the corridors at the gym (yes, mine's gold-plated the regulations and brought the bloody things back, even though you only have to put them on for about 0.5% of the time you are in the building, which is profoundly pointless.) Secondly, my paranoid employer is basically still stuck in a January 2021 time warp full of masks and social distancing and obsessional surface cleaning everywhere: if all the rules go in the rest of the country then there's at least some hope that they might also get rid of them at some point before the heat death of the universe.

I'm very much in the camp that's happy to see targeted measures like the PCR tests and emergency anti-virals for the most vulnerable, but the petty, nit-picking regulation of everybody's day-to-day life needs to go. Anything that helps to hurry that along can only be a positive development.

It is best for the rules to go. That makes it easier to bring them back if needed. Better to have a clear distinction between freedom and restrictions than perpetual half restrictions where politicians gratuitiously mess around with liberty and freedom.

ThomasNashe

Someone rightly criticised yesterday’s Star front page as a pretty lame effort. But I’m happy to see that today’s ‘Party Party Taxes Parties’ is a fine return to form!

IanB2

darkage said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

On reflection, the hatred of Carrie is a bit disturbing. It does have a whiff of misogyny about it. But that shouldn't make her immune from criticism or comment.

Fundamentally, it seems that the problem is that she is a poor political advisor. This can be measured against objective criteria - the decline in opinion poll ratings. Johnson and the tories have been in a sharp decline on this front since the Patterson debacle, which was only 2 months ago, to the point where the crisis is now existential. But there is no corrective action, and things keep getting worse. There cannot be any 'shake up' to arrest the decline in No.10, because Carrie is his wife and he is seemingly unable to curb her power.

It seems like they are just going down together, and there is nothing that we can do but watch the tragedy unfold.

I doubt that Carrie was the least bit interested in Paterson.

Remember that Bozo flew back from the climate conference for a boozy lunch with Charles Moore and others from the Spectator, and they told him to save Paterson.

Taz

Sandpit said:

Dan Hannan is in the same small minority as myself:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/01/15/boris-has-kept-economy-open-recovery-track-matters-drinks/

” Our economy is surging commensurately: new figures show we regained our pre-pandemic GDP in November, before the eurozone. The phasing out of furlough payments has not stopped us having, to all intents and purposes, full employment.

“We did not stumble into this happy situation by luck. We got here because ministers made hard decisions in the teeth of resistance from opposition politicians, public health doomsters and panicky journalists.
…
“ We led the world with our vaccine roll-out – not once, but twice. That in turn was possible because we had left the EU and stayed out of its common procurement scheme.

“At the same time, the PM defied the Eeyores to lift restrictions. When he ended the lockdown in July, epidemiologists called it a dangerous and unethical experiment and the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) predicted that hospital admissions would rise to between 2,000 and 7,000 a day…

“That, in my book, matters vastly more than whether he wandered into his garden while officials were drinking alcohol.”

Not only this but the Welsh and Scottish admins applied needless lockdowns/restrictions to their people. Effectively banning park runs and stopping hospitality from making the best of the Xmas and new year period and the like. Drakeford even played politics claiming what the English had done was a dangerous experiment when they simply followed the science from S Africa.

Will they be held to account for this disastrous public health policy. Of course not.

JosiasJessop

Sandpit said:

JosiasJessop said:

Sandpit said:

OldKingCole said:

Theuniondivvie said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’

Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.

Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud.
However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.

On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry.
They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'.
Or similar.

Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.

Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.

Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.

I'm unconvinced that Carrie is fair game, at least to the extent she seems to be vilified.

She’s a former communications manager for the party, was the main reason Cummings left No.10, and remains the biggest reason that the PM has been unable to hire a replacement senior advisor. No-one of any political talent wants the job with Carrie around, that in itself is a big story - and a huge part of why the government are unable to stop the relentless negative headlines.

I know about her old role. I'm talking about all this 'Princess Nut Nut' rubbish that gets thrown at her.

It's not as if the flaws that have deflated Johnson in the last few months were not visible in the decades before he even met her.

Dura_Ace

Sandpit said:

No-one of any political talent wants the job with Carrie around, that in itself is a big story - and a huge part of why the government are unable to stop the relentless negative headlines.

Which gigawatt political talent have turned down jobs with Johnson because of NutNut?

Taz

IanB2 said:

darkage said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

On reflection, the hatred of Carrie is a bit disturbing. It does have a whiff of misogyny about it. But that shouldn't make her immune from criticism or comment.

Fundamentally, it seems that the problem is that she is a poor political advisor. This can be measured against objective criteria - the decline in opinion poll ratings. Johnson and the tories have been in a sharp decline on this front since the Patterson debacle, which was only 2 months ago, to the point where the crisis is now existential. But there is no corrective action, and things keep getting worse. There cannot be any 'shake up' to arrest the decline in No.10, because Carrie is his wife and he is seemingly unable to curb her power.

It seems like they are just going down together, and there is nothing that we can do but watch the tragedy unfold.

I doubt that Carrie was the least bit interested in Paterson.

Remember that Bozo flew back from the climate conference for a boozy lunch with Charles Moore and others from the Spectator, and they told him to save Paterson.

Really !

What on Earth were they thinking and what was he thinking.

Johnson is someone whose judgement is constantly found to be sorely lacking. Unforced error after unforced error.

OldKingCole

Australia 155 all out now. England have to get 270 to win. No hurry though. No rash shots needed!

darkage

Chris said:

Sandpit said:

Dan Hannan is in the same small minority as myself:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/01/15/boris-has-kept-economy-open-recovery-track-matters-drinks/

” Our economy is surging commensurately: new figures show we regained our pre-pandemic GDP in November, before the eurozone. The phasing out of furlough payments has not stopped us having, to all intents and purposes, full employment.

“We did not stumble into this happy situation by luck. We got here because ministers made hard decisions in the teeth of resistance from opposition politicians, public health doomsters and panicky journalists.
…
“ We led the world with our vaccine roll-out – not once, but twice. That in turn was possible because we had left the EU and stayed out of its common procurement scheme.

“At the same time, the PM defied the Eeyores to lift restrictions. When he ended the lockdown in July, epidemiologists called it a dangerous and unethical experiment and the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) predicted that hospital admissions would rise to between 2,000 and 7,000 a day…

“That, in my book, matters vastly more than whether he wandered into his garden while officials were drinking alcohol.”

If Boris Johnson had repeatedly "defied the Eeyores" because his scientific understanding of the pandemic was superior to that of the expert advisers, there might be some point to that.

But if it just reflected a reckless willingness to hope blindly for the best, ignore the best advice available and risk other people's lives for his own political advantage? After all, he tried to do much the same thing in March and December 2020 but was forced to reverse the policy by looming catastrophe. Does the fact that he (and we) got lucky this time make him a second Solomon?

He took risk based decisions and faced down the "experts" who by nature of their position will emphasise caution. He does deserve credit for this, otherwise we would have ended up with a Drakeford/Sturgeon scenario of perpetual caution.

ThomasNashe

OldKingCole said:

Australia 155 all out now. England have to get 270 to win. No hurry though. No rash shots needed!

Unlikely, but not impossible. And as you say, plenty of time.

IanB2

Chris said:

Sandpit said:

Dan Hannan is in the same small minority as myself:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/01/15/boris-has-kept-economy-open-recovery-track-matters-drinks/

” Our economy is surging commensurately: new figures show we regained our pre-pandemic GDP in November, before the eurozone. The phasing out of furlough payments has not stopped us having, to all intents and purposes, full employment.

“We did not stumble into this happy situation by luck. We got here because ministers made hard decisions in the teeth of resistance from opposition politicians, public health doomsters and panicky journalists.
…
“ We led the world with our vaccine roll-out – not once, but twice. That in turn was possible because we had left the EU and stayed out of its common procurement scheme.

“At the same time, the PM defied the Eeyores to lift restrictions. When he ended the lockdown in July, epidemiologists called it a dangerous and unethical experiment and the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) predicted that hospital admissions would rise to between 2,000 and 7,000 a day…

“That, in my book, matters vastly more than whether he wandered into his garden while officials were drinking alcohol.”

If Boris Johnson had repeatedly "defied the Eeyores" because his scientific understanding of the pandemic was superior to that of the expert advisers, there might be some point to that.

But if it just reflected a reckless willingness to hope blindly for the best, ignore the best advice available and risk other people's lives for his own political advantage? After all, he tried to do much the same thing in March and December 2020 but was forced to reverse the policy by looming catastrophe. Does the fact that he (and we) got lucky this time make him a second Solomon?

I’m just surprised that some combination of sand blindness and politics makes it so difficult for him to recognise that this is a catastrophic failure of leadership and judgement from the PM, and he has continually lied about it all.

Scott_xP

Concerns grow that scale of ‘partygate’ is now too great for Sue Gray’s inquiry https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/16/concerns-grow-that-scale-of-partygate-is-now-too-great-for-sue-grays-inquiry?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

IanB2

Taz said:

IanB2 said:

darkage said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

On reflection, the hatred of Carrie is a bit disturbing. It does have a whiff of misogyny about it. But that shouldn't make her immune from criticism or comment.

Fundamentally, it seems that the problem is that she is a poor political advisor. This can be measured against objective criteria - the decline in opinion poll ratings. Johnson and the tories have been in a sharp decline on this front since the Patterson debacle, which was only 2 months ago, to the point where the crisis is now existential. But there is no corrective action, and things keep getting worse. There cannot be any 'shake up' to arrest the decline in No.10, because Carrie is his wife and he is seemingly unable to curb her power.

It seems like they are just going down together, and there is nothing that we can do but watch the tragedy unfold.

I doubt that Carrie was the least bit interested in Paterson.

Remember that Bozo flew back from the climate conference for a boozy lunch with Charles Moore and others from the Spectator, and they told him to save Paterson.

Really !

What on Earth were they thinking and what was he thinking.

Johnson is someone whose judgement is constantly found to be sorely lacking. Unforced error after unforced error.

Their motivation was undoubtedly personal.

But the political argument put to the PM was probably along the lines of “if there’s a recall petition there’s a risk of a by-election and if there’s an election there’s a small risk you might lose it. Why risk such a wobble to your premiership at such a time?”

But maybe I am being naive, and they just quietly pushed an envelope with photos of some random musician across the table and said “your call…”

darkage

IanB2 said:

darkage said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

On reflection, the hatred of Carrie is a bit disturbing. It does have a whiff of misogyny about it. But that shouldn't make her immune from criticism or comment.

Fundamentally, it seems that the problem is that she is a poor political advisor. This can be measured against objective criteria - the decline in opinion poll ratings. Johnson and the tories have been in a sharp decline on this front since the Patterson debacle, which was only 2 months ago, to the point where the crisis is now existential. But there is no corrective action, and things keep getting worse. There cannot be any 'shake up' to arrest the decline in No.10, because Carrie is his wife and he is seemingly unable to curb her power.

It seems like they are just going down together, and there is nothing that we can do but watch the tragedy unfold.

I doubt that Carrie was the least bit interested in Paterson.

Remember that Bozo flew back from the climate conference for a boozy lunch with Charles Moore and others from the Spectator, and they told him to save Paterson.

Yes - in the end, it is all on his head.
However, someone in No.10 should have been advising him. If she was the main advisor and she wasn't interested or involved, then there is a significant failure for which she is at least partly at fault.

ydoethur

OldKingCole said:

Australia 155 all out now. England have to get 270 to win. No hurry though. No rash shots needed!

The question is whether Oz win by more or less than 200 runs.

I’m firmly in the ‘more’ camp.

OldKingCole

Scott_xP said:

Concerns grow that scale of ‘partygate’ is now too great for Sue Gray’s inquiry https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/16/concerns-grow-that-scale-of-partygate-is-now-too-great-for-sue-grays-inquiry?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Deleted.

Scott_xP

...

IanB2

darkage said:

Chris said:

Sandpit said:

Dan Hannan is in the same small minority as myself:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/01/15/boris-has-kept-economy-open-recovery-track-matters-drinks/

” Our economy is surging commensurately: new figures show we regained our pre-pandemic GDP in November, before the eurozone. The phasing out of furlough payments has not stopped us having, to all intents and purposes, full employment.

“We did not stumble into this happy situation by luck. We got here because ministers made hard decisions in the teeth of resistance from opposition politicians, public health doomsters and panicky journalists.
…
“ We led the world with our vaccine roll-out – not once, but twice. That in turn was possible because we had left the EU and stayed out of its common procurement scheme.

“At the same time, the PM defied the Eeyores to lift restrictions. When he ended the lockdown in July, epidemiologists called it a dangerous and unethical experiment and the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) predicted that hospital admissions would rise to between 2,000 and 7,000 a day…

“That, in my book, matters vastly more than whether he wandered into his garden while officials were drinking alcohol.”

If Boris Johnson had repeatedly "defied the Eeyores" because his scientific understanding of the pandemic was superior to that of the expert advisers, there might be some point to that.

But if it just reflected a reckless willingness to hope blindly for the best, ignore the best advice available and risk other people's lives for his own political advantage? After all, he tried to do much the same thing in March and December 2020 but was forced to reverse the policy by looming catastrophe. Does the fact that he (and we) got lucky this time make him a second Solomon?

He took risk based decisions….

the new term for not doing something under threat from your backbenchers that you would be risking your job?

OldKingCole

darkage said:

IanB2 said:

darkage said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

On reflection, the hatred of Carrie is a bit disturbing. It does have a whiff of misogyny about it. But that shouldn't make her immune from criticism or comment.

Fundamentally, it seems that the problem is that she is a poor political advisor. This can be measured against objective criteria - the decline in opinion poll ratings. Johnson and the tories have been in a sharp decline on this front since the Patterson debacle, which was only 2 months ago, to the point where the crisis is now existential. But there is no corrective action, and things keep getting worse. There cannot be any 'shake up' to arrest the decline in No.10, because Carrie is his wife and he is seemingly unable to curb her power.

It seems like they are just going down together, and there is nothing that we can do but watch the tragedy unfold.

I doubt that Carrie was the least bit interested in Paterson.

Remember that Bozo flew back from the climate conference for a boozy lunch with Charles Moore and others from the Spectator, and they told him to save Paterson.

Yes - in the end, it is all on his head.
However, someone in No.10 should have been advising him. If she was the main advisor and she wasn't interested or involved, then there is a significant failure for which she is at least partly at fault.

Isn't it a matter of 'last person who advised him'?

Dura_Ace

OldKingCole said:

darkage said:

IanB2 said:

darkage said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

On reflection, the hatred of Carrie is a bit disturbing. It does have a whiff of misogyny about it. But that shouldn't make her immune from criticism or comment.

Fundamentally, it seems that the problem is that she is a poor political advisor. This can be measured against objective criteria - the decline in opinion poll ratings. Johnson and the tories have been in a sharp decline on this front since the Patterson debacle, which was only 2 months ago, to the point where the crisis is now existential. But there is no corrective action, and things keep getting worse. There cannot be any 'shake up' to arrest the decline in No.10, because Carrie is his wife and he is seemingly unable to curb her power.

It seems like they are just going down together, and there is nothing that we can do but watch the tragedy unfold.

I doubt that Carrie was the least bit interested in Paterson.

Remember that Bozo flew back from the climate conference for a boozy lunch with Charles Moore and others from the Spectator, and they told him to save Paterson.

Yes - in the end, it is all on his head.
However, someone in No.10 should have been advising him. If she was the main advisor and she wasn't interested or involved, then there is a significant failure for which she is at least partly at fault.

Isn't it a matter of 'last person who advised him'?

The chaos, venality and incompetence of the Johnson regime become more understandable after that Danny Finkelstein article in the Times. He opined that wishing for a change of advisors is pointless because the only advisor that Johnson listens to is Johnson.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. xP, perfect for the PM. He cancels the inquiry and has a new, broader one commissioned.

Like Russian dolls, there will always be a bigger one ready. It'll be akin to Zeno's tortoise. The inquiry will never report because there'll always be one more.

Foxy

IanB2 said:

darkage said:

Chris said:

Sandpit said:

Dan Hannan is in the same small minority as myself:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/01/15/boris-has-kept-economy-open-recovery-track-matters-drinks/

” Our economy is surging commensurately: new figures show we regained our pre-pandemic GDP in November, before the eurozone. The phasing out of furlough payments has not stopped us having, to all intents and purposes, full employment.

“We did not stumble into this happy situation by luck. We got here because ministers made hard decisions in the teeth of resistance from opposition politicians, public health doomsters and panicky journalists.
…
“ We led the world with our vaccine roll-out – not once, but twice. That in turn was possible because we had left the EU and stayed out of its common procurement scheme.

“At the same time, the PM defied the Eeyores to lift restrictions. When he ended the lockdown in July, epidemiologists called it a dangerous and unethical experiment and the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) predicted that hospital admissions would rise to between 2,000 and 7,000 a day…

“That, in my book, matters vastly more than whether he wandered into his garden while officials were drinking alcohol.”

If Boris Johnson had repeatedly "defied the Eeyores" because his scientific understanding of the pandemic was superior to that of the expert advisers, there might be some point to that.

But if it just reflected a reckless willingness to hope blindly for the best, ignore the best advice available and risk other people's lives for his own political advantage? After all, he tried to do much the same thing in March and December 2020 but was forced to reverse the policy by looming catastrophe. Does the fact that he (and we) got lucky this time make him a second Solomon?

He took risk based decisions….

the new term for not doing something under threat from your backbenchers that you would be risking your job?

The reason that Johnson didn't back restrictions was because he knew they were not tenable in light of the partying that had already emerged.

There were chaotic changes to travel rules, and while no formal ban on hospitality, encouragement for people to cancel and stay away. It wasn't just @Cyclefree Jr that had multiple cancellations. In practice was there much real difference in how busy things were on the other side of borders? And as nothing official, no compensation for those businesses.

OldKingCole

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. xP, perfect for the PM. He cancels the inquiry and has a new, broader one commissioned.

Like Russian dolls, there will always be a bigger one ready. It'll be akin to Zeno's tortoise. The inquiry will never report because there'll always be one more.

Did I read that the Met were now 'interested'? Of course the likelihood of Ms Dick pursuing anything which might bring discredit on her force is slight.

Gadfly

Chief Justice James Allsop handed down orders that will see Djokovic on a flight back home.

“This is not an appeal against the decision of the executive government,” Allsop told the court. “It is an application to the court as a separate arm of government being the Commonwealth judicial branch to review a decision by a member of executive, the minister, for the lawfulness or legality of the decision on the three grounds put forward.

“These grounds focus on whether decision was for different reasons irrational or legally unreasonable. It is no part or function of the court to decide upon the merit or wisdom of the decision.”

The decision was unanimous and full reasons will be published at a later date. Djokovic was ordered to pay costs.

https://www.news.com.au/sport/tennis/australian-open/live-novak-djokovic-court-hearing-updates-result-of-visa-cancellation/news-story/5f941dd26abe1171e4a7f2e63644b05b

ThomasNashe

Gadfly said:

Chief Justice James Allsop handed down orders that will see Djokovic on a flight back home.

“This is not an appeal against the decision of the executive government,” Allsop told the court. “It is an application to the court as a separate arm of government being the Commonwealth judicial branch to review a decision by a member of executive, the minister, for the lawfulness or legality of the decision on the three grounds put forward.

“These grounds focus on whether decision was for different reasons irrational or legally unreasonable. It is no part or function of the court to decide upon the merit or wisdom of the decision.”

The decision was unanimous and full reasons will be published at a later date. Djokovic was ordered to pay costs.

https://www.news.com.au/sport/tennis/australian-open/live-novak-djokovic-court-hearing-updates-result-of-visa-cancellation/news-story/5f941dd26abe1171e4a7f2e63644b05b

Djokovic now has a decision to make: is he going to get vaccinated, or retire. It’s one or the other.

rcs1000

Sandpit said:

Dan Hannan is in the same small minority as myself:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/01/15/boris-has-kept-economy-open-recovery-track-matters-drinks/

” Our economy is surging commensurately: new figures show we regained our pre-pandemic GDP in November, before the eurozone. The phasing out of furlough payments has not stopped us having, to all intents and purposes, full employment.

“We did not stumble into this happy situation by luck. We got here because ministers made hard decisions in the teeth of resistance from opposition politicians, public health doomsters and panicky journalists.
…
“ We led the world with our vaccine roll-out – not once, but twice. That in turn was possible because we had left the EU and stayed out of its common procurement scheme.

“At the same time, the PM defied the Eeyores to lift restrictions. When he ended the lockdown in July, epidemiologists called it a dangerous and unethical experiment and the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) predicted that hospital admissions would rise to between 2,000 and 7,000 a day…

“That, in my book, matters vastly more than whether he wandered into his garden while officials were drinking alcohol.”

We are ahead of the Eurozone. As we were pre-pandemic too. Given how much of the Eurozone has tourism dependent economies (such as Italy, Greece, and Spain) that really shouldn't be that surprising.

We've done well on vaccines, and well on removing restrictions (mostly). Our economy is making new highs - which is better than Germany, Italy or Japan, but worse than France, the US, or Canada.

We've done poorly on risk segmentation, and could have done better with specific recommendations (the Germans have emphasised ventilation from the beginning, which is surely correct.)

We've done poorly on government deficit. Total government debt has increased by about 24 percentage points since March 2020, which is better than Italy, but worse than pretty much any other G7 or EU country.

Most of our mistakes were early. Since a (very poor) early performance, we've done reasonably well. Equally, though, we can't say we've done amazingly. It's been a decent performance - but can we really say we've done *that* well compared to Germany or France?

ThomasNashe

ydoethur said:

OldKingCole said:

Australia 155 all out now. England have to get 270 to win. No hurry though. No rash shots needed!

The question is whether Oz win by more or less than 200 runs.

I’m firmly in the ‘more’ camp.

They’d need to lose all ten wickets for fewer than 30 runs. A batting collapse that is, I think, beyond even this team.

Eabhal

The Spectator has just updated their model analysis.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-did-sage-scenarios-compare-to-reality-an-update

Scott_xP

There really isn’t any more to be said. Johnson lied to Parliament. Johnson’s Ministerial Code sets out the consequence of that lie. https://twitter.com/GeorgePeretzQC/status/1482485748108611584/photo/1

The central pillar of our system of parliamentary democracy is ministers’ accountability to Parliament. That pillar is built on sand if ministers - especially the PM - lie to Parliament without having to resign.

JohnLilburne

rcs1000 said:

Sandpit said:

Dan Hannan is in the same small minority as myself:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/01/15/boris-has-kept-economy-open-recovery-track-matters-drinks/

” Our economy is surging commensurately: new figures show we regained our pre-pandemic GDP in November, before the eurozone. The phasing out of furlough payments has not stopped us having, to all intents and purposes, full employment.

“We did not stumble into this happy situation by luck. We got here because ministers made hard decisions in the teeth of resistance from opposition politicians, public health doomsters and panicky journalists.
…
“ We led the world with our vaccine roll-out – not once, but twice. That in turn was possible because we had left the EU and stayed out of its common procurement scheme.

“At the same time, the PM defied the Eeyores to lift restrictions. When he ended the lockdown in July, epidemiologists called it a dangerous and unethical experiment and the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) predicted that hospital admissions would rise to between 2,000 and 7,000 a day…

“That, in my book, matters vastly more than whether he wandered into his garden while officials were drinking alcohol.”

We are ahead of the Eurozone. As we were pre-pandemic too. Given how much of the Eurozone has tourism dependent economies (such as Italy, Greece, and Spain) that really shouldn't be that surprising.

We've done well on vaccines, and well on removing restrictions (mostly). Our economy is making new highs - which is better than Germany, Italy or Japan, but worse than France, the US, or Canada.

We've done poorly on risk segmentation, and could have done better with specific recommendations (the Germans have emphasised ventilation from the beginning, which is surely correct.)

We've done poorly on government deficit. Total government debt has increased by about 24 percentage points since March 2020, which is better than Italy, but worse than pretty much any other G7 or EU country.

Most of our mistakes were early. Since a (very poor) early performance, we've done reasonably well. Equally, though, we can't say we've done amazingly. It's been a decent performance - but can we really say we've done *that* well compared to Germany or France?

And of course the Government could have done all that *without* Boris being an arse.

OldKingCole

ThomasNashe said:

ydoethur said:

OldKingCole said:

Australia 155 all out now. England have to get 270 to win. No hurry though. No rash shots needed!

The question is whether Oz win by more or less than 200 runs.

I’m firmly in the ‘more’ camp.

They’d need to lose all ten wickets for fewer than 30 runs. A batting collapse that is, I think, beyond even this team.

According to the BBC they've had a bit of luck. An appeals which wasn't given 'should' have been reviewed, but wasn't.

ydoethur

ThomasNashe said:

ydoethur said:

OldKingCole said:

Australia 155 all out now. England have to get 270 to win. No hurry though. No rash shots needed!

The question is whether Oz win by more or less than 200 runs.

I’m firmly in the ‘more’ camp.

They’d need to lose all ten wickets for fewer than 30 runs. A batting collapse that is, I think, beyond even this team.

41 runs, I think. If I’m reading the scorecard correctly.

pigeon

Eabhal said:

The Spectator has just updated their model analysis.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-did-sage-scenarios-compare-to-reality-an-update

The defences of Sage modelling (including those published in The Spectator) leave many questions unanswered. If the modelling is only ‘illustrative’ and does not predict or forecast, then why are they summarised (and presented to ministers) this way:

‘Without intervention beyond those measures already in place (“Plan B”), modelling indicates a peak of at least 3,000 hospital admissions per day in England.’

And why are scenarios described as being ‘likely’?

Modelling matters. It has consequences. If the summer reopening scenarios were seen as credible, a disastrous lockdown could have been extended. If the autumn scenarios were believed, schools might have remained shut. If just one December cabinet meeting had gone differently we would have faced restrictions that the real world data now tells us would have been completely unnecessary.

The Spectator’s data team has been using new techniques to follow Sage graphs: scanning software that lets us interpolate the hidden values (the figures are, oddly, not released) and an API Covid data feed that lets us compare Sage scenarios to the eventual reality. But it’s surely time for a proper public inquiry to look into how these Sage ‘scenarios’ were put together and presented to policymakers and the public.

Quite.

rcs1000

ydoethur said:

ThomasNashe said:

ydoethur said:

OldKingCole said:

Australia 155 all out now. England have to get 270 to win. No hurry though. No rash shots needed!

The question is whether Oz win by more or less than 200 runs.

I’m firmly in the ‘more’ camp.

They’d need to lose all ten wickets for fewer than 30 runs. A batting collapse that is, I think, beyond even this team.

41 runs, I think. If I’m reading the scorecard correctly.

34 now.

ThomasNashe

ydoethur said:

ThomasNashe said:

ydoethur said:

OldKingCole said:

Australia 155 all out now. England have to get 270 to win. No hurry though. No rash shots needed!

The question is whether Oz win by more or less than 200 runs.

I’m firmly in the ‘more’ camp.

They’d need to lose all ten wickets for fewer than 30 runs. A batting collapse that is, I think, beyond even this team.

41 runs, I think. If I’m reading the scorecard correctly.

Yes, I think you are. My mistake.

ydoethur

Incidentally, in other cricket news, Kohli has quit as Indian captain.

Nohit Sharma must surely be the favourite to take over as the Test VC and ODI captain. But KL Rahul might be value given his age and the sheer amount of cricket involved.

Instructive that Rahane isn’t even mentioned as a possibility despite a magnificent record as captain, but I think his test career might be over after that tour.

rcs1000

pigeon said:

Eabhal said:

The Spectator has just updated their model analysis.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-did-sage-scenarios-compare-to-reality-an-update

The defences of Sage modelling (including those published in The Spectator) leave many questions unanswered. If the modelling is only ‘illustrative’ and does not predict or forecast, then why are they summarised (and presented to ministers) this way:

‘Without intervention beyond those measures already in place (“Plan B”), modelling indicates a peak of at least 3,000 hospital admissions per day in England.’

And why are scenarios described as being ‘likely’?

Modelling matters. It has consequences. If the summer reopening scenarios were seen as credible, a disastrous lockdown could have been extended. If the autumn scenarios were believed, schools might have remained shut. If just one December cabinet meeting had gone differently we would have faced restrictions that the real world data now tells us would have been completely unnecessary.

The Spectator’s data team has been using new techniques to follow Sage graphs: scanning software that lets us interpolate the hidden values (the figures are, oddly, not released) and an API Covid data feed that lets us compare Sage scenarios to the eventual reality. But it’s surely time for a proper public inquiry to look into how these Sage ‘scenarios’ were put together and presented to policymakers and the public.

Quite.

To defend SAGE for a minute, there is a certain complexity here: their forecasts change peoples' behaviour. If SAGE had forecast zero hospitalisations, then people would have worn masks less often, socialised more, etc. If - on the other hand - they'd predicted three million dead, then people would have never left their homes.

rcs1000

BIGGEST ENGLISH OPENING PARTNERSHIP OF THE ASHES.

(Shame it's in the final innings of the last test.)

rcs1000

Just 23 needed to bring the deficit down below 200!

rcs1000

FIFTY PARTNERSHIP UP FOR ENGLAND!

Jonathan

rcs1000 said:

FIFTY PARTNERSHIP UP FOR ENGLAND!

Shhhhh you’ll jinx it.

Morris_Dancer

F1: bit of movement on Ladbrokes, Hamilton out to 2.5, Verstappen in to the same number.

I wonder if this is a reaction to the outside possibility of Hamilton not competing next year.

Russell's also down from around 6 or 6.5 to 5.

noneoftheabove

OldKingCole said:

Sandpit said:

OldKingCole said:

Theuniondivvie said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’

Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.

Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud.
However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.

On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry.
They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'.
Or similar.

Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.

Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.

Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.

Noted. Euan Blair is left alone, of course.
Will Johnson die a rich man, I wonder. I know about the probability of well-paid newspaper articles and speaking engagements, but as you say his track record as a money manager isn't good.

One curiosity about the PM is why do even his worst critics, who know he constantly lies, automatically believe him when he says he is skint. I would not at all be surprised if he has comfortable seven figures in the bank but simply enjoys getting other people to pay for him.

Scott_xP

noneoftheabove said:

One curiosity about the PM is why do even his worst critics, who know he constantly lies, automatically believe him when he says he is skint. I would not at all be surprised if he has comfortable seven figures in the bank but simply enjoys getting other people to pay for him.

Alimony...

IanB2

rcs1000 said:

(...the final innings of the last test.)

At last, some good news.

rcs1000

Rory Burns has a very curious technique.

noneoftheabove

Scott_xP said:

noneoftheabove said:

One curiosity about the PM is why do even his worst critics, who know he constantly lies, automatically believe him when he says he is skint. I would not at all be surprised if he has comfortable seven figures in the bank but simply enjoys getting other people to pay for him.

Alimony...

His ex is a QC barrister.

ydoethur

rcs1000 said:

FIFTY PARTNERSHIP UP FOR ENGLAND!

I think what this innings and that previous one where he thrashed 77 is showing is that Crawley has what it takes to open for England long term. Burns probably doesn't but that's another story.

Crawley can and should be the attacking option, the Trescothick with the range of shots. I think part of the problem has been people in the England set up have been trying to get him to bat in a way that doesn't suit him. As they have with just about every batsman they get hold of (please keep Lammonby and Salt out of their clutches a while longer).

The question is, who should open with him? Burns is probably not the answer. The realistic options would be Hain, Sibley, Hameed, Bracey. Sibley needs runs, as does Hameed (another one who has been chronically mismanaged) but both could anchor the innings while Crawley, a No. 3 (for which in default of other options James Vince is surely worth another go even if only for a year) and Root play shots around them.

Bracey, however, as the only batsman other than Bairstow to score a century on this England tour and as a left hander is probably the one they should at least try for next season. If he is not preferred, and the press hate him (largely I think because he plays for Gloucestershire) then surely Sam Hain is worth a try.

This post has nothing to do with my prediction two years ago that Bracey and Crawley were the long term top order options for England.

noneoftheabove

rcs1000 said:

Rory Burns has a very curious technique.

He has a technique?

Scott_xP

There can be no Cummings Coup. Boris must face his reckoning at the hands of the British people > Mail On Sunday > https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-10406815/DAN-HODGES-Cummings-coup-brings-PM-wont-end-blood-letting.html

rcs1000

noneoftheabove said:

Scott_xP said:

noneoftheabove said:

One curiosity about the PM is why do even his worst critics, who know he constantly lies, automatically believe him when he says he is skint. I would not at all be surprised if he has comfortable seven figures in the bank but simply enjoys getting other people to pay for him.

Alimony...

His ex is a QC barrister.

How much do you think Boris receives from her every month?

DecrepiterJohnL

noneoftheabove said:

OldKingCole said:

Sandpit said:

OldKingCole said:

Theuniondivvie said:

moonshine said:

What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.

They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.

It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.

Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.

Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.

‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’

Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.

Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud.
However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.

On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry.
They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'.
Or similar.

Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.

Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.

Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.

Noted. Euan Blair is left alone, of course.
Will Johnson die a rich man, I wonder. I know about the probability of well-paid newspaper articles and speaking engagements, but as you say his track record as a money manager isn't good.

One curiosity about the PM is why do even his worst critics, who know he constantly lies, automatically believe him when he says he is skint. I would not at all be surprised if he has comfortable seven figures in the bank but simply enjoys getting other people to pay for him.

Boris is almost certainly a millionaire unless his houses are mortgaged up to the hilt. Although it is said he was taken to the cleaners in his divorce settlement, his and Marina's children are all young adults so there will be no school fees to pay, even if he has agreed to pay off their student loans. His other children are anyone's guess. What is true is that Boris's income, and his household income, is less than it used to be. The switch to living off savings from living off income can be a concern, as I have found after redundancy/retirement.

Scott_xP

Sketch: Boris Johnson is waiting for the outcome of the investigation into whether Boris Johnson attended an illegal party at Boris Johnson’s home, before deciding what to do with Boris Johnson https://www.holyrood.com/comment/view,sketch-shades-of-gray By @louisewilso Cartoon: @IainGreen2 https://twitter.com/HolyroodDaily/status/1482618411788255237/photo/1

eek

rcs1000 said:

noneoftheabove said:

Scott_xP said:

noneoftheabove said:

One curiosity about the PM is why do even his worst critics, who know he constantly lies, automatically believe him when he says he is skint. I would not at all be surprised if he has comfortable seven figures in the bank but simply enjoys getting other people to pay for him.

Alimony...

His ex is a QC barrister.

How much do you think Boris receives from her every month?

Isn't it the opposite and Boris has to pay a significant amount of his income - for he went up against an angry barrister unprepared.

DecrepiterJohnL

Scott_xP said:

There can be no Cummings Coup. Boris must face his reckoning at the hands of the British people > Mail On Sunday > https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-10406815/DAN-HODGES-Cummings-coup-brings-PM-wont-end-blood-letting.html

It is hardly a Cummings Coup. #ClassicDom's only contribution to partygate was to distract the media from a photo where he was present by drawing attention to a second party but it was only when someone else leaked the BYOB email that the press took notice.

rcs1000

ydoethur said:

rcs1000 said:

FIFTY PARTNERSHIP UP FOR ENGLAND!

I think what this innings and that previous one where he thrashed 77 is showing is that Crawley has what it takes to open for England long term. Burns probably doesn't but that's another story.

Crawley can and should be the attacking option, the Trescothick with the range of shots. I think part of the problem has been people in the England set up have been trying to get him to bat in a way that doesn't suit him. As they have with just about every batsman they get hold of (please keep Lammonby and Salt out of their clutches a while longer).

The question is, who should open with him? Burns is probably not the answer. The realistic options would be Hain, Sibley, Hameed, Bracey. Sibley needs runs, as does Hameed (another one who has been chronically mismanaged) but both could anchor the innings while Crawley, a No. 3 (for which in default of other options James Vince is surely worth another go even if only for a year) and Root play shots around them.

Bracey, however, as the only batsman other than Bairstow to score a century on this England tour and as a left hander is probably the one they should at least try for next season. If he is not preferred, and the press hate him (largely I think because he plays for Gloucestershire) then surely Sam Hain is worth a try.

This post has nothing to do with my prediction two years ago that Bracey and Crawley were the long term top order options for England.

I think Zac is a better player than his father: the same eye, but much more athletic. I think he could play for England for another fifteen years.

eek

Morris_Dancer said:

F1: bit of movement on Ladbrokes, Hamilton out to 2.5, Verstappen in to the same number.

I wonder if this is a reaction to the outside possibility of Hamilton not competing next year.

Russell's also down from around 6 or 6.5 to 5.

That changes does seem to imply that Hamilton won't be competing.

It's possible because if the Mercedes isn't a 100% championship winner why bother when you have the titles don't need the money and while the 8th championship is missing 2021 will always have an asterisk beside it.

Sandpit

Morris_Dancer said:

F1: bit of movement on Ladbrokes, Hamilton out to 2.5, Verstappen in to the same number.

I wonder if this is a reaction to the outside possibility of Hamilton not competing next year.

Russell's also down from around 6 or 6.5 to 5.

The F1 rumour mill is suggesting that Ferrari might have a good car for next year.

Meanwhile, a Mercedes test driver is suggesting that the new cars won’t be slower than the old ones - the rule-makers were hoping to have them start off 4 or 5 seconds down, given how quickly they will develop over the. Next few years.

rcs1000

noneoftheabove said:

rcs1000 said:

Rory Burns has a very curious technique.

He has a technique?

Yes. There's the wide open stance, that's reminiscent of Jack Russell, and then this weird look to the right as the ball is bowled.

And the big step.

He reminds me of no-one at all.

ydoethur

rcs1000 said:

ydoethur said:

rcs1000 said:

FIFTY PARTNERSHIP UP FOR ENGLAND!

I think what this innings and that previous one where he thrashed 77 is showing is that Crawley has what it takes to open for England long term. Burns probably doesn't but that's another story.

Crawley can and should be the attacking option, the Trescothick with the range of shots. I think part of the problem has been people in the England set up have been trying to get him to bat in a way that doesn't suit him. As they have with just about every batsman they get hold of (please keep Lammonby and Salt out of their clutches a while longer).

The question is, who should open with him? Burns is probably not the answer. The realistic options would be Hain, Sibley, Hameed, Bracey. Sibley needs runs, as does Hameed (another one who has been chronically mismanaged) but both could anchor the innings while Crawley, a No. 3 (for which in default of other options James Vince is surely worth another go even if only for a year) and Root play shots around them.

Bracey, however, as the only batsman other than Bairstow to score a century on this England tour and as a left hander is probably the one they should at least try for next season. If he is not preferred, and the press hate him (largely I think because he plays for Gloucestershire) then surely Sam Hain is worth a try.

This post has nothing to do with my prediction two years ago that Bracey and Crawley were the long term top order options for England.

I think Zac is a better player than his father: the same eye, but much more athletic. I think he could play for England for another fifteen years.

Since Terry Crawley was in your line of work, I'm sure you're right, but I'm not sure what the relevance of that post is.

Eabhal

rcs1000 said:

pigeon said:

Eabhal said:

The Spectator has just updated their model analysis.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-did-sage-scenarios-compare-to-reality-an-update

The defences of Sage modelling (including those published in The Spectator) leave many questions unanswered. If the modelling is only ‘illustrative’ and does not predict or forecast, then why are they summarised (and presented to ministers) this way:

‘Without intervention beyond those measures already in place (“Plan B”), modelling indicates a peak of at least 3,000 hospital admissions per day in England.’

And why are scenarios described as being ‘likely’?

Modelling matters. It has consequences. If the summer reopening scenarios were seen as credible, a disastrous lockdown could have been extended. If the autumn scenarios were believed, schools might have remained shut. If just one December cabinet meeting had gone differently we would have faced restrictions that the real world data now tells us would have been completely unnecessary.

The Spectator’s data team has been using new techniques to follow Sage graphs: scanning software that lets us interpolate the hidden values (the figures are, oddly, not released) and an API Covid data feed that lets us compare Sage scenarios to the eventual reality. But it’s surely time for a proper public inquiry to look into how these Sage ‘scenarios’ were put together and presented to policymakers and the public.

Quite.

To defend SAGE for a minute, there is a certain complexity here: their forecasts change peoples' behaviour. If SAGE had forecast zero hospitalisations, then people would have worn masks less often, socialised more, etc. If - on the other hand - they'd predicted three million dead, then people would have never left their homes.

The key thing is how did Whitty etc present these models to Ministers?

- This will happen
- This will happen if you don't do anything
- This will happen if you put our recommended restrictions in place
- This will happen if the public don't do anything

I presume it was the last option.

I also reckon Vallance probably uses the first option in press conferences just to prevent the last option happening, through (benign) scaremongering.

rcs1000

Burns looked out there.

rcs1000

ydoethur said:

rcs1000 said:

ydoethur said:

rcs1000 said:

FIFTY PARTNERSHIP UP FOR ENGLAND!

I think what this innings and that previous one where he thrashed 77 is showing is that Crawley has what it takes to open for England long term. Burns probably doesn't but that's another story.

Crawley can and should be the attacking option, the Trescothick with the range of shots. I think part of the problem has been people in the England set up have been trying to get him to bat in a way that doesn't suit him. As they have with just about every batsman they get hold of (please keep Lammonby and Salt out of their clutches a while longer).

The question is, who should open with him? Burns is probably not the answer. The realistic options would be Hain, Sibley, Hameed, Bracey. Sibley needs runs, as does Hameed (another one who has been chronically mismanaged) but both could anchor the innings while Crawley, a No. 3 (for which in default of other options James Vince is surely worth another go even if only for a year) and Root play shots around them.

Bracey, however, as the only batsman other than Bairstow to score a century on this England tour and as a left hander is probably the one they should at least try for next season. If he is not preferred, and the press hate him (largely I think because he plays for Gloucestershire) then surely Sam Hain is worth a try.

This post has nothing to do with my prediction two years ago that Bracey and Crawley were the long term top order options for England.

I think Zac is a better player than his father: the same eye, but much more athletic. I think he could play for England for another fifteen years.

Since Terry Crawley was in your line of work, I'm sure you're right, but I'm not sure what the relevance of that post is.

Ah... not John Crawley's son then?

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Sandpit, interesting... Sainz might be worth a shot, for each way (I think Ladbrokes, annoyingly, only has it as a straight win). Heard anything on Hamilton?

Mr. eek, possibly. I'd still be quite surprised if he didn't compete but the odds have shifted.

Eabhal

Eabhal said:

rcs1000 said:

pigeon said:

Eabhal said:

The Spectator has just updated their model analysis.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-did-sage-scenarios-compare-to-reality-an-update

The defences of Sage modelling (including those published in The Spectator) leave many questions unanswered. If the modelling is only ‘illustrative’ and does not predict or forecast, then why are they summarised (and presented to ministers) this way:

‘Without intervention beyond those measures already in place (“Plan B”), modelling indicates a peak of at least 3,000 hospital admissions per day in England.’

And why are scenarios described as being ‘likely’?

Modelling matters. It has consequences. If the summer reopening scenarios were seen as credible, a disastrous lockdown could have been extended. If the autumn scenarios were believed, schools might have remained shut. If just one December cabinet meeting had gone differently we would have faced restrictions that the real world data now tells us would have been completely unnecessary.

The Spectator’s data team has been using new techniques to follow Sage graphs: scanning software that lets us interpolate the hidden values (the figures are, oddly, not released) and an API Covid data feed that lets us compare Sage scenarios to the eventual reality. But it’s surely time for a proper public inquiry to look into how these Sage ‘scenarios’ were put together and presented to policymakers and the public.

Quite.

To defend SAGE for a minute, there is a certain complexity here: their forecasts change peoples' behaviour. If SAGE had forecast zero hospitalisations, then people would have worn masks less often, socialised more, etc. If - on the other hand - they'd predicted three million dead, then people would have never left their homes.

The key thing is how did Whitty etc present these models to Ministers?

- This will happen
- This will happen if you don't do anything
- This will happen if you put our recommended restrictions in place
- This will happen if the public don't do anything

I presume it was the last option.

I also reckon Vallance probably uses the first option in press conferences just to prevent the last option happening, through (benign) scaremongering.

While I'm in the lockdown-sceptic camp, I really dislike this hindsight "omichron was completely fine in the end" attitude.

It's clear that public health messaging got through over Christmas and that had a big impact on reducing cases (even though they went to 250,000!), mainly through people spamming LFTs. Without the scare stories before hand I don't think we'd be in this position.

rcs1000

rcs1000 said:

Burns looked out there.

Not, in fact, out.