When I suggested the "letter boxes" and "bank robbers" commentary was Islamaphobic, I was shouted down because I was too stupid to understand hilarious satire.
I am officially declaring Boris Johnson will soon be an ex Prime Minister.
I’m now officially calling it the other way.
Despite what has been thrown at him, The Tory Press still solidly behind Boris, not one resignation from any of the 150 MPs working in government, and no VONC yet because rebels don’t have winning numbers, it can’t be won. This storm is blowing over already now - Nor does bad set mid term locals remove him, on the basis they are always meaningless for news agenda, 24hrs and done.
At what point do you accept we have passed peak danger for Boris in this term, and the Boris recovery is underway? Report comes out this week and by next Saturday still no Vonc? Is that fair, you would admit defeat then?
It was right to have tried, Boris is a lazy oaf with no attention or grasp of detail, and inane broad brush economic policys that aren’t really Conservative at all.
Phoney war.
What came next?
Yes I agree Z - I think phoney is apt word for it. There is a great line in Man for all seasons, a fake argument is no argument at all.
The partygate attack on Johnson hides the truth that he hasn’t been under any pressure at all on delivery - Brexit done, covid done, economy bouncing back. Getting on with levelling up.
To paraphrase, fake pressure is no pressure at all, can blow over.
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
Do you have a percentage for how many will refuse?
While Germany aligns with Russia against the EU Baltic states
How about providing your insight into this divisive crisis now engulfing the EU
Whats that got to do with the queue at Dover like
@Scott_xP posts anti brexit tweets while remaining silent on the crisis engulfing his beloved EU
This anti-EU goading isn't really informative of what is actually happening, so I wonder what you're up to.
Apart from, you know, unwittingly reinforcing Putin's talking points.
Try selling that to the Baltic states and Ukraine and what is actually happening
Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realise your goading of Scott was preserving the fucking freedom of the good people of Vilnius. Well done, we should probably get a medal pinned to your jacket ffs.
I have been to the Baltic States and Russia terrifies them
The EU should be standing together against this threat but it is clear Germany is not and even preventing NATO aircraft to 9v4rly their airspace
It seems those who are so full of the EU cannot accept criticism in what is a very serious and developing crisis
I'm not at all convinced that the EU should get involved. It wasn't formed as a military force, despite Macron's wishes, and as TSE states, that's what NATO is for. So I would suggest we dismiss that notion and stop bringing in a separate 'bash the EU' agenda. Leave the EU out of it.
The real question is whether NATO should be standing up to an invasion. Many will think they should. I'm not so sure. We never should have got involved in Afghanistan and arguably should have kept out Iraq. We may gnash our teeth if China invades Taiwan but I doubt we'll throw troops into a conflict there either.
It's all very sad for Ukraine but I think we're best keeping out of this.
You cannot leave the EU out when the Baltic EU member states feel threatened
Ukraine isn't an EU member state
It's a bit strange that someone anti-EU, pro Britain leaving the EU, is advocating that the EU pitch up to a battle despite having no military force
While Germany aligns with Russia against the EU Baltic states
How about providing your insight into this divisive crisis now engulfing the EU
Whats that got to do with the queue at Dover like
@Scott_xP posts anti brexit tweets while remaining silent on the crisis engulfing his beloved EU
This anti-EU goading isn't really informative of what is actually happening, so I wonder what you're up to.
Apart from, you know, unwittingly reinforcing Putin's talking points.
Try selling that to the Baltic states and Ukraine and what is actually happening
Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realise your goading of Scott was preserving the fucking freedom of the good people of Vilnius. Well done, we should probably get a medal pinned to your jacket ffs.
I have been to the Baltic States and Russia terrifies them
The EU should be standing together against this threat but it is clear Germany is not and even preventing NATO aircraft to 9v4rly their airspace
It seems those who are so full of the EU cannot accept criticism in what is a very serious and developing crisis
I'm not at all convinced that the EU should get involved. It wasn't formed as a military force, despite Macron's wishes, and as TSE states, that's what NATO is for. So I would suggest we dismiss that notion and stop bringing in a separate 'bash the EU' agenda. Leave the EU out of it.
The real question is whether NATO should be standing up to an invasion. Many will think they should. I'm not so sure. We never should have got involved in Afghanistan and arguably should have kept out Iraq. We may gnash our teeth if China invades Taiwan but I doubt we'll throw troops into a conflict there either.
It's all very sad for Ukraine but I think we're best keeping out of this.
where is Germany in all this
Germany has a rather 'colourful' military history when it comes to the rest of Europe, including Russia. Don't you think that might explain why they are being extremely wary?
I think that is one reason of three. The other two being:
1 - They are mercantilists. Nordstream 2 was forced through over strong EU objections in knowledge of the consequences for Ukraine. 2 - They are up a creek without a paddle for the next decade for energy, with no Plan B if not Russia. Putin has succeeded in making Germany significantly dependent on Russia. *
* Though there may be options to mitigate, but not in the short term and not as much as needed.
I am officially declaring Boris Johnson will soon be an ex Prime Minister.
I have officially stuck another hundred notes on gone by end Q1
I expect to be bitterly disappointed with myself for not making it a k
I think he goes Q2.
Say he quits week beginning January 31st.
It's going to take at least a fortnight (probably three weeks) to run the MP section of the contest which takes us into mid/late February.
Another month/six weeks for we Tory members to vote, takes us into April.
Boris Johnson formally quits as PM/Leader in Q2.
Are you confident he will quit as PM even if the conservatives appoint a new leader?
Well, new leader will pop round to Queenie and say he commands a majority I assume
God forfend London Bridge, this is no time for a novice
I need to re-read FTPA but I’m not sure the house can pass a vote of confidence in a possible government if the old one which lost the confidence vote hasn’t resigned. Does anyone know? The Queen can fire the PM if he doesn’t do the constitutionally proper thing and resign. Based on how she dealt with the 2019 prorogation I’m not sure she would.
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
Do you have a percentage for how many will refuse?
Mail says 6% of staff have refused to be vaxxed.
Get 2% vaxxed, move 2% to non patient facing roles and lose 2%. Not ideal but should be manageable.
With adding 80K vacancies to 100K not being a good look for a backlog reduction initiative, you are aware the government are imminently to U-TURN on compulsive jabs for health workers by first adding 2 month delay, then kicking into long grass?
Hard at this moment to defend the government on this controversial policy when they are about to pull rug from under your feet.
On the contrary - they will have little sensible choice but to u-turn because of the extent of selfish idiocy at play (and I've not been persuaded by defences of people in health services taking this stance), but the idea itself was perfectly reasonable.
Yes I can understand that argument, the 80K shouldn’t be unjabbed.
But it’s still government insisting on a policy and then U turning late in the day.
Yes, which may look weak, but the claim was it was hard to defend the government on the policy when they are about to pull the rug on it, and it isn't hard at all - they're right, but they're unable to do it, which is unfortunate is all.
No - the day they announced the policy, they should have been aware they couldn’t go through with it, adding 80K vacancies to 100K not being a good look for a backlog reduction initiative, yet it’s still not the governments fault the u-turn makes them look naff and weak? Very odd logic from you. 🤔
That's not my logic. You claimed it was hard to defend the government on the policy because they are about to u-turn on it. I don't agree that it is hard.
I don't care whether a u-turn makes the government look weak. And them looking weak for u-turning doesn't make the policy any more or less of a good idea.
It was a good idea, I support them trying it, and regretfully understand why it must u-turn.
I'm no fan of the government, but being unable to do something good because of idiots? I'll give them a pass on that.
No I’m not letting you get away with it.
Staking credibility on a working policy you then lose when you u-turn, because it’s not a working policy, and before it was announced wasn’t ever going to work, has to go down into the naff politics column. And add to that they have managed to swell the numbers in a flaming anti vax March today.
Sorry for being a bit hard, I’m only trying to untangle your twisted logic on this. Twisted because you appear to be saying there will be no political damage because the policy was the right one.
Kle4 where have you gone 😞
It’s a good policy if you go through with it. 2 libdems, Foxy supports it, I don’t have a problem with it. But adding 80K vacancies to 100K does not help the fight back on waiting lists was always going to be the case, government should have seen the dangers of pushing it and then u-turning on it.
Happy to end the discussion here, both of us okay with the policy if can be acted on, you admitting it goes into naff politics column on basis at what point could it ever have been acted on?
I’m sorry. U turns made the opponents of the policy winners, it’s strengthened them. It has to be moved into naff politics column.
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
I does seem rather absurd that from April NHS staff will be fired for being unvaxxed, yet people who are positive for covid permitted to work unmasked in jobs like taxi-driving, pubs, restaurants and shops where exposure is highly likely.
It is unclear yet if people who are covid positive will be permitted to work in Health and Social care.
Getting a big ‘WHY isn’t there an EU army’ vibe which is amusing as it’s coming mainly from the ‘the EU wants an army and that’s why we need to leave’ chaps.
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
Do you have a percentage for how many will refuse?
Mail says 6% of staff have refused to be vaxxed.
Then that'll be 6% of NHS staff being shuffled into back office roles or getting the heave-ho, if true.
The Government didn't back down over social care workers, despite that sector being, if anything, even more distressed than health. I don't think they'll give the NHS heel-diggers a free pass either.
In London, demonstrators marched from Regents Park to the BBC headquarters in Portland Place in a peaceful protest against mandating vaccines for health workers.
But Dr Nikki Kanani, medical director of primary care for NHS England, said health care professionals had "a duty" to make sure they were protected.
She said: "If you're marching today, just take a moment, think about the people that you've been looking after who have experienced Covid, think about your colleagues who you've been working with, and think about the best way to make sure that we're all protected, and that we're all as safe as possible, because we are very much in this together and it's down to us to look after each other too."
...
The deputy chief executive of NHS Providers, Saffron Cordery, said delaying the policy on mandatory vaccination was not the answer.
She said staff who worked with patients and choose not to be vaccinated "will be redeployed where that is possible, or potentially dismissed".
And while health bosses were worried about "exacerbating staff shortages at a time when the service is under huge operational pressures", the majority backed the policy.
Germany has a rather 'colourful' military history when it comes to the rest of Europe, including Russia. Don't you think that might explain why they are being extremely wary?
Germany invaded Ukraine in 1918, as well as the more well-known invasion of 1941.
Germany has been extremely non-careful about arming and helping arm *Russia* since the last time the Russians went walkabout in Ukraine.
Selling arms to one side in a war, then claiming that they can't possibly allow someone to arm the other side.
Interestingly, that would put their legal status as a neutral in a war at risk. Ukraine could claim, under international law, that Germany was a co-beligerant with Russia and demand reparations....
I remember years ago, in the 80s, listening to Stefan Terlezki MP. He was a one-term Tory who represented a seat in Cardiff. He was a Ukrainian and came to the UK as a refugee. He remarked that one half of his family had been murdered by the Nazis, and the other half by the Soviets. Wonder what he would be thinking now.
With adding 80K vacancies to 100K not being a good look for a backlog reduction initiative, you are aware the government are imminently to U-TURN on compulsive jabs for health workers by first adding 2 month delay, then kicking into long grass?
Hard at this moment to defend the government on this controversial policy when they are about to pull rug from under your feet.
On the contrary - they will have little sensible choice but to u-turn because of the extent of selfish idiocy at play (and I've not been persuaded by defences of people in health services taking this stance), but the idea itself was perfectly reasonable.
Yes I can understand that argument, the 80K shouldn’t be unjabbed.
But it’s still government insisting on a policy and then U turning late in the day.
Yes, which may look weak, but the claim was it was hard to defend the government on the policy when they are about to pull the rug on it, and it isn't hard at all - they're right, but they're unable to do it, which is unfortunate is all.
No - the day they announced the policy, they should have been aware they couldn’t go through with it, adding 80K vacancies to 100K not being a good look for a backlog reduction initiative, yet it’s still not the governments fault the u-turn makes them look naff and weak? Very odd logic from you. 🤔
That's not my logic. You claimed it was hard to defend the government on the policy because they are about to u-turn on it. I don't agree that it is hard.
I don't care whether a u-turn makes the government look weak. And them looking weak for u-turning doesn't make the policy any more or less of a good idea.
It was a good idea, I support them trying it, and regretfully understand why it must u-turn.
I'm no fan of the government, but being unable to do something good because of idiots? I'll give them a pass on that.
No I’m not letting you get away with it.
Staking credibility on a working policy you then lose when you u-turn, because it’s not a working policy, and before it was announced wasn’t ever going to work, has to go down into the naff politics column. And add to that they have managed to swell the numbers in a flaming anti vax March today.
Sorry for being a bit hard, I’m only trying to untangle your twisted logic on this. Twisted because you appear to be saying there will be no political damage because the policy was the right one.
Kle4 where have you gone 😞
It’s a good policy if you go through with it. 2 libdems, Foxy supports it, I don’t have a problem with it. But adding 80K vacancies to 100K does not help the fight back on waiting lists was always going to be the case, government should have seen the dangers of pushing it and then u-turning on it.
Happy to end the discussion here, both of us okay with the policy if can be acted on, you admitting it goes into naff politics column on basis at what point could it ever have been acted on?
I’m sorry. U turns made the opponents of the policy winners, it’s strengthened them. It has to be moved into naff politics column.
I don't support it as it stands, though have no objection in principle. My reasons include:
1) only double vaxxing is required, not a booster, making the policy less effective.
2) there should be an exception for staff with documented evidence of recent infection by antibody blood tests. This gives similar protection as double vaccination.
3) it is absurd to permit covid positive people to work at the same time as banning the unvaxxed.
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
Do you have a percentage for how many will refuse?
Mail says 6% of staff have refused to be vaxxed.
Get 2% vaxxed, move 2% to non patient facing roles and lose 2%. Not ideal but should be manageable.
I feel strongly that patient safety must come first, as that is what the NHS is for, and I note:
1 - It seems to have worked in France. 2 - Student Nurse recruitment has been booming. 3 - If necessary, roles can be available in eg telemedicine or non-contact type disciplines.
I can't fathom the stance of Scotland and Wales on this.
The Government pausing without good reason would be classic backdown-Boris, suffering from LMF when he can't freewheel.
When I suggested the "letter boxes" and "bank robbers" commentary was Islamaphobic, I was shouted down because I was too stupid to understand hilarious satire.
There will be reasons. Or ‘reasons’.
A good test as to whether or not all of BJ’s credibility has dribbled away will be if the usual rush to shoot the messenger takes place.
Germany has a rather 'colourful' military history when it comes to the rest of Europe, including Russia. Don't you think that might explain why they are being extremely wary?
Germany invaded Ukraine in 1918, as well as the more well-known invasion of 1941.
Germany has been extremely non-careful about arming and helping arm *Russia* since the last time the Russians went walkabout in Ukraine.
Selling arms to one side in a war, then claiming that they can't possibly allow someone to arm the other side.
Interestingly, that would put their legal status as a neutral in a war at risk. Ukraine could claim, under international law, that Germany was a co-beligerant with Russia and demand reparations....
I remember years ago, in the 80s, listening to Stefan Terlezki MP. He was a one-term Tory who represented a seat in Cardiff. He was a Ukrainian and came to the UK as a refugee. He remarked that one half of his family had been murdered by the Nazis, and the other half by the Soviets. Wonder what he would be thinking now.
That is the story of my family, on one side. Came from around Lvov. There is no one left there now. The last were put on trains when the area was re-conquered by the Soviet Union. The Nazis killed most - being Jews. But the Soviets tidied up.
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
Do you have a percentage for how many will refuse?
Mail says 6% of staff have refused to be vaxxed.
Then that'll be 6% of NHS staff being shuffled into back office roles or getting the heave-ho, if true.
The Government didn't back down over social care workers, despite that sector being, if anything, even more distressed than health. I don't think they'll give the NHS heel-diggers a free pass either.
In London, demonstrators marched from Regents Park to the BBC headquarters in Portland Place in a peaceful protest against mandating vaccines for health workers.
But Dr Nikki Kanani, medical director of primary care for NHS England, said health care professionals had "a duty" to make sure they were protected.
She said: "If you're marching today, just take a moment, think about the people that you've been looking after who have experienced Covid, think about your colleagues who you've been working with, and think about the best way to make sure that we're all protected, and that we're all as safe as possible, because we are very much in this together and it's down to us to look after each other too."
...
The deputy chief executive of NHS Providers, Saffron Cordery, said delaying the policy on mandatory vaccination was not the answer.
She said staff who worked with patients and choose not to be vaccinated "will be redeployed where that is possible, or potentially dismissed".
And while health bosses were worried about "exacerbating staff shortages at a time when the service is under huge operational pressures", the majority backed the policy.
I cannot for the life of me see why a classic political compromise cannot be brought to bear here. Pause the sackings. Give them until next Autumn to get vaxxed as there is no panic as the omi variant is not as severe as first thought etc etc...
The principle is retained. The date is moved. The staff carry on.
There seems little evidence that them being vaxxed will protect patients. Maybe I have missed this?
Who could have predicted a Prime Minister who compared Muslim women wearing the burqa to “letterboxes” and “bank robbers” would appoint Islamophobes to his government?
I agree. It’s disgusting he done all that and then became leader. Did he say that to help him become leader Eagles? That’s a good question isn’t it?
Is 50 pieces of silver worth an 80 seat majority, won on such a platform?
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
Do you have a percentage for how many will refuse?
Mail says 6% of staff have refused to be vaxxed.
Then that'll be 6% of NHS staff being shuffled into back office roles or getting the heave-ho, if true.
The Government didn't back down over social care workers, despite that sector being, if anything, even more distressed than health. I don't think they'll give the NHS heel-diggers a free pass either.
In London, demonstrators marched from Regents Park to the BBC headquarters in Portland Place in a peaceful protest against mandating vaccines for health workers.
But Dr Nikki Kanani, medical director of primary care for NHS England, said health care professionals had "a duty" to make sure they were protected.
She said: "If you're marching today, just take a moment, think about the people that you've been looking after who have experienced Covid, think about your colleagues who you've been working with, and think about the best way to make sure that we're all protected, and that we're all as safe as possible, because we are very much in this together and it's down to us to look after each other too."
...
The deputy chief executive of NHS Providers, Saffron Cordery, said delaying the policy on mandatory vaccination was not the answer.
She said staff who worked with patients and choose not to be vaccinated "will be redeployed where that is possible, or potentially dismissed".
And while health bosses were worried about "exacerbating staff shortages at a time when the service is under huge operational pressures", the majority backed the policy.
I cannot for the life of me see why a classic political compromise cannot be brought to bear here. Pause the sackings. Give them until next Autumn to get vaxxed as there is no panic as the omi variant is not as severe as first thought etc etc...
The principle is retained. The date is moved. The staff carry on.
There seems little evidence that them being vaxxed will protect patients. Maybe I have missed this?
Except NHS staff have already had a year to get vaccinated anytime they like, can kicking, we will be in the same position in 6 months time. This deadline is already effectively a delayed deadline as government talked about this from the start and mandated care home staff needed to be vaccinated, so it was absolutely clear if you work in the NHS you were going to be asked to get jabbed. The government have given people ages to get sorted.
Germany has a rather 'colourful' military history when it comes to the rest of Europe, including Russia. Don't you think that might explain why they are being extremely wary?
Germany invaded Ukraine in 1918, as well as the more well-known invasion of 1941.
Germany has been extremely non-careful about arming and helping arm *Russia* since the last time the Russians went walkabout in Ukraine.
Selling arms to one side in a war, then claiming that they can't possibly allow someone to arm the other side.
Interestingly, that would put their legal status as a neutral in a war at risk. Ukraine could claim, under international law, that Germany was a co-beligerant with Russia and demand reparations....
I remember years ago, in the 80s, listening to Stefan Terlezki MP. He was a one-term Tory who represented a seat in Cardiff. He was a Ukrainian and came to the UK as a refugee. He remarked that one half of his family had been murdered by the Nazis, and the other half by the Soviets. Wonder what he would be thinking now.
He would be wanting what is the real threat to banana republic Russia - that Putin's plaything bufferzone countries become advanced, stable, successful democracies.
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
Do you have a percentage for how many will refuse?
Mail says 6% of staff have refused to be vaxxed.
Then that'll be 6% of NHS staff being shuffled into back office roles or getting the heave-ho, if true.
The Government didn't back down over social care workers, despite that sector being, if anything, even more distressed than health. I don't think they'll give the NHS heel-diggers a free pass either.
In London, demonstrators marched from Regents Park to the BBC headquarters in Portland Place in a peaceful protest against mandating vaccines for health workers.
But Dr Nikki Kanani, medical director of primary care for NHS England, said health care professionals had "a duty" to make sure they were protected.
She said: "If you're marching today, just take a moment, think about the people that you've been looking after who have experienced Covid, think about your colleagues who you've been working with, and think about the best way to make sure that we're all protected, and that we're all as safe as possible, because we are very much in this together and it's down to us to look after each other too."
...
The deputy chief executive of NHS Providers, Saffron Cordery, said delaying the policy on mandatory vaccination was not the answer.
She said staff who worked with patients and choose not to be vaccinated "will be redeployed where that is possible, or potentially dismissed".
And while health bosses were worried about "exacerbating staff shortages at a time when the service is under huge operational pressures", the majority backed the policy.
I cannot for the life of me see why a classic political compromise cannot be brought to bear here. Pause the sackings. Give them until next Autumn to get vaxxed as there is no panic as the omi variant is not as severe as first thought etc etc...
The principle is retained. The date is moved. The staff carry on.
There seems little evidence that them being vaxxed will protect patients. Maybe I have missed this?
The latest data from the CDC in the US shows a massive difference between unvaxed and boosted for infection
When I suggested the "letter boxes" and "bank robbers" commentary was Islamaphobic, I was shouted down because I was too stupid to understand hilarious satire.
There will be reasons. Or ‘reasons’.
A good test as to whether or not all of BJ’s credibility has dribbled away will be if the usual rush to shoot the messenger takes place.
‘Only her word for it’
Some of the earlier Johnson defenders seem keen on shooting down Johnson's premiership rather than the messenger.these days.
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
Do you have a percentage for how many will refuse?
Mail says 6% of staff have refused to be vaxxed.
Then that'll be 6% of NHS staff being shuffled into back office roles or getting the heave-ho, if true.
The Government didn't back down over social care workers, despite that sector being, if anything, even more distressed than health. I don't think they'll give the NHS heel-diggers a free pass either.
In London, demonstrators marched from Regents Park to the BBC headquarters in Portland Place in a peaceful protest against mandating vaccines for health workers.
But Dr Nikki Kanani, medical director of primary care for NHS England, said health care professionals had "a duty" to make sure they were protected.
She said: "If you're marching today, just take a moment, think about the people that you've been looking after who have experienced Covid, think about your colleagues who you've been working with, and think about the best way to make sure that we're all protected, and that we're all as safe as possible, because we are very much in this together and it's down to us to look after each other too."
...
The deputy chief executive of NHS Providers, Saffron Cordery, said delaying the policy on mandatory vaccination was not the answer.
She said staff who worked with patients and choose not to be vaccinated "will be redeployed where that is possible, or potentially dismissed".
And while health bosses were worried about "exacerbating staff shortages at a time when the service is under huge operational pressures", the majority backed the policy.
Big G - what has Sunak ever done that makes him a plausible leader?
He is professional and honest, he was the architect of furlough, and is the complete opposite to Boris
Furthermore he seems to worry the opposition and is well liked by the public
Does Javid (or anyone else in cabinet) now put honour before personal ambition and call for a VONC?
That's really what's needed. Steve Baker, in his interview a few days ago, basically said he was looking to the cabinet to take a lead. I'm not sure I can really see anyone there of the stature to do that TBH.
We know all about taking out cables - we were I think the first to do it.
Within about a day of the start of WW1, we had hoicked up all the German owned cables in the Channel and cut them. Which meant that a lot of their comms had to either go via radio which we could monitor, or neutral-owned cables, which I think tended to go via Cornwall.
See the Zimmermann Telegram, which was a proposal from Germnay to Mexico that they subsidise a Mexican war on the USA. We got it by I think tapping diplomatic traffic, and it was how we got the USA into WW1. A good story. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimmermann_Telegram
Big G - what has Sunak ever done that makes him a plausible leader?
He is professional and honest, he was the architect of furlough, and is the complete opposite to Boris
Furthermore he seems to worry the opposition and is well liked by the public
Does Javid (or anyone else in cabinet) now put honour before personal ambition and call for a VONC?
That's really what's needed. Steve Baker, in his interview a few days ago, basically said he was looking to the cabinet to take a lead. I'm not sure I can really see anyone there of the stature to do that TBH.
I do wonder if the old adage about daggers and crowns is as true as it’s claimed in this case.
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
Do you have a percentage for how many will refuse?
Mail says 6% of staff have refused to be vaxxed.
Then that'll be 6% of NHS staff being shuffled into back office roles or getting the heave-ho, if true.
The Government didn't back down over social care workers, despite that sector being, if anything, even more distressed than health. I don't think they'll give the NHS heel-diggers a free pass either.
In London, demonstrators marched from Regents Park to the BBC headquarters in Portland Place in a peaceful protest against mandating vaccines for health workers.
But Dr Nikki Kanani, medical director of primary care for NHS England, said health care professionals had "a duty" to make sure they were protected.
She said: "If you're marching today, just take a moment, think about the people that you've been looking after who have experienced Covid, think about your colleagues who you've been working with, and think about the best way to make sure that we're all protected, and that we're all as safe as possible, because we are very much in this together and it's down to us to look after each other too."
...
The deputy chief executive of NHS Providers, Saffron Cordery, said delaying the policy on mandatory vaccination was not the answer.
She said staff who worked with patients and choose not to be vaccinated "will be redeployed where that is possible, or potentially dismissed".
And while health bosses were worried about "exacerbating staff shortages at a time when the service is under huge operational pressures", the majority backed the policy.
I cannot for the life of me see why a classic political compromise cannot be brought to bear here. Pause the sackings. Give them until next Autumn to get vaxxed as there is no panic as the omi variant is not as severe as first thought etc etc...
The principle is retained. The date is moved. The staff carry on.
There seems little evidence that them being vaxxed will protect patients. Maybe I have missed this?
There's no point pausing it. At this point no-one is on the fence about vaccination, particularly NHS personnel who had earlier access to it than most. By now everyone's made their decision one way or the other. If people haven't had it by now they're not going to get it.
Problem the government has is that it's saying to the general public "the danger's passed, we can ditch everything now in terms of restrictions" so the natural vaccine sceptic is going to say "well I've gone this far without so don't see the urgency". Telling them then "omi isn't that bad but it's still mandatory but it's not mandatory for a while yet" is just the worst of all mixed messages.
Pausing it is just saying "you guys have the power here". What's going to have changed at the end of the pause? You either go through with it or you can it entirely.
Big G - what has Sunak ever done that makes him a plausible leader?
He is professional and honest, he was the architect of furlough, and is the complete opposite to Boris
Furthermore he seems to worry the opposition and is well liked by the public
Does Javid (or anyone else in cabinet) now put honour before personal ambition and call for a VONC?
That's really what's needed. Steve Baker, in his interview a few days ago, basically said he was looking to the cabinet to take a lead. I'm not sure I can really see anyone there of the stature to do that TBH.
I do wonder if the old adage about daggers and crowns is as true as it’s claimed in this case.
Funny thing about that is that Mrs T stabbed Ted Heath in the front and was rewarded with the leadership as a result. She would have stood no chance otherwise, but the grandees wouldn't move. The adage took off largely because of Hezza's fate.
Just a reminder that Nus Ghani was sacked for being a Muslim the same time the Muslim Sajid Javid was ousted as Chancellor.
Hmmm....
Was that not thought to be Mr Cummings doing?
Well that was the spin....
I'm doubtful about this. Boris may be many things but not dumb-ass racist. He's a one-man melting pot.
I am SHOCKED a Prime Minister who compared Muslim women wearing the burqa to “letterboxes” and “bank robbers” would appoint Islamophobes to his government.
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
Do you have a percentage for how many will refuse?
Mail says 6% of staff have refused to be vaxxed.
Then that'll be 6% of NHS staff being shuffled into back office roles or getting the heave-ho, if true.
The Government didn't back down over social care workers, despite that sector being, if anything, even more distressed than health. I don't think they'll give the NHS heel-diggers a free pass either.
In London, demonstrators marched from Regents Park to the BBC headquarters in Portland Place in a peaceful protest against mandating vaccines for health workers.
But Dr Nikki Kanani, medical director of primary care for NHS England, said health care professionals had "a duty" to make sure they were protected.
She said: "If you're marching today, just take a moment, think about the people that you've been looking after who have experienced Covid, think about your colleagues who you've been working with, and think about the best way to make sure that we're all protected, and that we're all as safe as possible, because we are very much in this together and it's down to us to look after each other too."
...
The deputy chief executive of NHS Providers, Saffron Cordery, said delaying the policy on mandatory vaccination was not the answer.
She said staff who worked with patients and choose not to be vaccinated "will be redeployed where that is possible, or potentially dismissed".
And while health bosses were worried about "exacerbating staff shortages at a time when the service is under huge operational pressures", the majority backed the policy.
I cannot for the life of me see why a classic political compromise cannot be brought to bear here. Pause the sackings. Give them until next Autumn to get vaxxed as there is no panic as the omi variant is not as severe as first thought etc etc...
The principle is retained. The date is moved. The staff carry on.
There seems little evidence that them being vaxxed will protect patients. Maybe I have missed this?
There's no point pausing it. At this point no-one is on the fence about vaccination, particularly NHS personnel who had earlier access to it than most. By now everyone's made their decision one way or the other. If people haven't had it by now they're not going to get it.
Problem the government has is that it's saying to the general public "the danger's passed, we can ditch everything now in terms of restrictions" so the natural vaccine sceptic is going to say "well I've gone this far without so don't see the urgency". Telling them then "omi isn't that bad but it's still mandatory but it's not mandatory for a while yet" is just the worst of all mixed messages.
Pausing it is just saying "you guys have the power here". What's going to have changed at the end of the pause? You either go through with it or you can it entirely.
Nothing has changed at the end of the pause.
There's a chance it will not be an issue by the autumn as the world moves on, the plague passes into history or at least live-with-it-like-flu status. We don't sack NHS for not being flu jabbed.
It's a political fix to get through another few months before deciding what to do. By then the pieces have moved on the board.
Don't get me wrong: It would be better if they got vaxxed, but I am talking pragmatic politics here.
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
Do you have a percentage for how many will refuse?
Mail says 6% of staff have refused to be vaxxed.
Then that'll be 6% of NHS staff being shuffled into back office roles or getting the heave-ho, if true.
The Government didn't back down over social care workers, despite that sector being, if anything, even more distressed than health. I don't think they'll give the NHS heel-diggers a free pass either.
In London, demonstrators marched from Regents Park to the BBC headquarters in Portland Place in a peaceful protest against mandating vaccines for health workers.
But Dr Nikki Kanani, medical director of primary care for NHS England, said health care professionals had "a duty" to make sure they were protected.
She said: "If you're marching today, just take a moment, think about the people that you've been looking after who have experienced Covid, think about your colleagues who you've been working with, and think about the best way to make sure that we're all protected, and that we're all as safe as possible, because we are very much in this together and it's down to us to look after each other too."
...
The deputy chief executive of NHS Providers, Saffron Cordery, said delaying the policy on mandatory vaccination was not the answer.
She said staff who worked with patients and choose not to be vaccinated "will be redeployed where that is possible, or potentially dismissed".
And while health bosses were worried about "exacerbating staff shortages at a time when the service is under huge operational pressures", the majority backed the policy.
I cannot for the life of me see why a classic political compromise cannot be brought to bear here. Pause the sackings. Give them until next Autumn to get vaxxed as there is no panic as the omi variant is not as severe as first thought etc etc...
The principle is retained. The date is moved. The staff carry on.
There seems little evidence that them being vaxxed will protect patients. Maybe I have missed this?
There is evidence that vaccination does suppress infection and spread. It’s complicated because it’s not binary. Vaccination doesn’t give you 100% of anything. I’m reluctantly with @Foxy on this. Let those with antibodies be treated as if vaccinated. I’m just sad that so many still reject the clear evidence of safety and efficacy of vaccination.
Germany has a rather 'colourful' military history when it comes to the rest of Europe, including Russia. Don't you think that might explain why they are being extremely wary?
Germany invaded Ukraine in 1918, as well as the more well-known invasion of 1941.
Germany has been extremely non-careful about arming and helping arm *Russia* since the last time the Russians went walkabout in Ukraine.
Selling arms to one side in a war, then claiming that they can't possibly allow someone to arm the other side.
Interestingly, that would put their legal status as a neutral in a war at risk. Ukraine could claim, under international law, that Germany was a co-beligerant with Russia and demand reparations....
I remember years ago, in the 80s, listening to Stefan Terlezki MP. He was a one-term Tory who represented a seat in Cardiff. He was a Ukrainian and came to the UK as a refugee. He remarked that one half of his family had been murdered by the Nazis, and the other half by the Soviets. Wonder what he would be thinking now.
He would be wanting what is the real threat to banana republic Russia - that Putin's plaything bufferzone countries become advanced, stable, successful democracies.
That's what really scares Putin.
I totally support this post.
Putin isn’t seriously eyeing Latvia, and in my opinion Putin never will but the next Russian leader may if the country, rather like the Chinese have done, swings Nationalist post Putin, of which we will be partly responsible for making Putin appear so ineffective.
Putin is in a spot with his plaything buffer zones moving towards successful West leaning democracies. Spinning it up more than that, placing Putin as greedy and hungry as Hitler, hasn’t convinced me yet.
Big G - what has Sunak ever done that makes him a plausible leader?
He is professional and honest, he was the architect of furlough, and is the complete opposite to Boris
Furthermore he seems to worry the opposition and is well liked by the public
Does Javid (or anyone else in cabinet) now put honour before personal ambition and call for a VONC?
That's really what's needed. Steve Baker, in his interview a few days ago, basically said he was looking to the cabinet to take a lead. I'm not sure I can really see anyone there of the stature to do that TBH.
I do wonder if the old adage about daggers and crowns is as true as it’s claimed in this case.
Steve Baker was on Political Thinking on R4 at 5:30pm this evening.
Big G - what has Sunak ever done that makes him a plausible leader?
He is professional and honest, he was the architect of furlough, and is the complete opposite to Boris
Furthermore he seems to worry the opposition and is well liked by the public
Does Javid (or anyone else in cabinet) now put honour before personal ambition and call for a VONC?
That's really what's needed. Steve Baker, in his interview a few days ago, basically said he was looking to the cabinet to take a lead. I'm not sure I can really see anyone there of the stature to do that TBH.
And of course there blooming well isn't anyone of sufficient stature. Nobody with sufficient stature or self-respect would be offered a job by Boris, or accept any offer made.
(Which is why Rishi isn't the panacea some imagine, as seen in the small positive but not game-changing Rishi effect in hypothetical polls. Rishi was one of the first Boris Backers and has risen by doing his master's will.)
With adding 80K vacancies to 100K not being a good look for a backlog reduction initiative, you are aware the government are imminently to U-TURN on compulsive jabs for health workers by first adding 2 month delay, then kicking into long grass?
Hard at this moment to defend the government on this controversial policy when they are about to pull rug from under your feet.
On the contrary - they will have little sensible choice but to u-turn because of the extent of selfish idiocy at play (and I've not been persuaded by defences of people in health services taking this stance), but the idea itself was perfectly reasonable.
Yes I can understand that argument, the 80K shouldn’t be unjabbed.
But it’s still government insisting on a policy and then U turning late in the day.
Yes, which may look weak, but the claim was it was hard to defend the government on the policy when they are about to pull the rug on it, and it isn't hard at all - they're right, but they're unable to do it, which is unfortunate is all.
No - the day they announced the policy, they should have been aware they couldn’t go through with it, adding 80K vacancies to 100K not being a good look for a backlog reduction initiative, yet it’s still not the governments fault the u-turn makes them look naff and weak? Very odd logic from you. 🤔
That's not my logic. You claimed it was hard to defend the government on the policy because they are about to u-turn on it. I don't agree that it is hard.
I don't care whether a u-turn makes the government look weak. And them looking weak for u-turning doesn't make the policy any more or less of a good idea.
It was a good idea, I support them trying it, and regretfully understand why it must u-turn.
I'm no fan of the government, but being unable to do something good because of idiots? I'll give them a pass on that.
No I’m not letting you get away with it.
Staking credibility on a working policy you then lose when you u-turn, because it’s not a working policy, and before it was announced wasn’t ever going to work, has to go down into the naff politics column. And add to that they have managed to swell the numbers in a flaming anti vax March today.
Sorry for being a bit hard, I’m only trying to untangle your twisted logic on this. Twisted because you appear to be saying there will be no political damage because the policy was the right one.
There''s nothing twisted about it, you just seem to be ignoring what I am saying.
I did not say there would be no political damage. I said it would look weak, ergo it has political damage.
I don't care about political damage, and the point you seem to have missed is that what kicked off this discussion had nothing to do with that either.
Your exact words were: Hard at this moment to defend the government on this controversial policy when they are about to pull rug from under your feet.
That's all this discussion was about, not some wider point about the politics of it. Your words were that it would be 'hard' to defend the government 'on' the policy when they are about to 'pull rug from under your feet' on it. No more and no less than that - that because the government are u-turning, defending the policy would be hard.
My sole point was I don't agree with that. I think it is very easy to defend the intended policy. That the government aren't going through with it matters to them, but not to me.
Why would my opinion on a policy be dependent on the government's stance on it?
Big G - what has Sunak ever done that makes him a plausible leader?
He is professional and honest, he was the architect of furlough, and is the complete opposite to Boris
Furthermore he seems to worry the opposition and is well liked by the public
Does Javid (or anyone else in cabinet) now put honour before personal ambition and call for a VONC?
That's really what's needed. Steve Baker, in his interview a few days ago, basically said he was looking to the cabinet to take a lead. I'm not sure I can really see anyone there of the stature to do that TBH.
And of course there blooming well isn't anyone of sufficient stature. Nobody with sufficient stature or self-respect would be offered a job by Boris, or accept any offer made.
(Which is why Rishi isn't the panacea some imagine, as seen in the small positive but not game-changing Rishi effect in hypothetical polls. Rishi was one of the first Boris Backers and has risen by doing his master's will.)
Have there been any other recent PMs who strangled talent and surrounded themselves with the second rate?
Just a reminder that Nus Ghani was sacked for being a Muslim the same time the Muslim Sajid Javid was ousted as Chancellor.
Hmmm....
Was that not thought to be Mr Cummings doing?
Well that was the spin....
I'm doubtful about this. Boris may be many things but not dumb-ass racist. He's a one-man melting pot.
I am SHOCKED a Prime Minister who compared Muslim women wearing the burqa to “letterboxes” and “bank robbers” would appoint Islamophobes to his government.
With adding 80K vacancies to 100K not being a good look for a backlog reduction initiative, you are aware the government are imminently to U-TURN on compulsive jabs for health workers by first adding 2 month delay, then kicking into long grass?
Hard at this moment to defend the government on this controversial policy when they are about to pull rug from under your feet.
On the contrary - they will have little sensible choice but to u-turn because of the extent of selfish idiocy at play (and I've not been persuaded by defences of people in health services taking this stance), but the idea itself was perfectly reasonable.
Yes I can understand that argument, the 80K shouldn’t be unjabbed.
But it’s still government insisting on a policy and then U turning late in the day.
Yes, which may look weak, but the claim was it was hard to defend the government on the policy when they are about to pull the rug on it, and it isn't hard at all - they're right, but they're unable to do it, which is unfortunate is all.
No - the day they announced the policy, they should have been aware they couldn’t go through with it, adding 80K vacancies to 100K not being a good look for a backlog reduction initiative, yet it’s still not the governments fault the u-turn makes them look naff and weak? Very odd logic from you. 🤔
That's not my logic. You claimed it was hard to defend the government on the policy because they are about to u-turn on it. I don't agree that it is hard.
I don't care whether a u-turn makes the government look weak. And them looking weak for u-turning doesn't make the policy any more or less of a good idea.
It was a good idea, I support them trying it, and regretfully understand why it must u-turn.
I'm no fan of the government, but being unable to do something good because of idiots? I'll give them a pass on that.
No I’m not letting you get away with it.
Staking credibility on a working policy you then lose when you u-turn, because it’s not a working policy, and before it was announced wasn’t ever going to work, has to go down into the naff politics column. And add to that they have managed to swell the numbers in a flaming anti vax March today.
Sorry for being a bit hard, I’m only trying to untangle your twisted logic on this. Twisted because you appear to be saying there will be no political damage because the policy was the right one.
There''s nothing twisted about it, you just seem to be ignoring what I am saying.
I did not say there would be no political damage. I said it would look weak, ergo it has political damage.
I don't care about political damage, and the point you seem to have missed is that what kicked off this discussion had nothing to do with that either.
Your exact words were: Hard at this moment to defend the government on this controversial policy when they are about to pull rug from under your feet.
That's all this discussion was about, not some wider point about the politics of it. Your words were that it would be 'hard' to defend the government 'on' the policy when they are about to 'pull rug from under your feet' on it. No more and no less than that - that because the government are u-turning, defending the policy would be hard.
My sole point was I don't agree with that. I think it is very easy to defend the intended policy. That the government aren't going through with it matters to them, but not to me.
Why would my opinion on a policy be dependent on the government's stance on it?
Okay. Good point well made. Thanks for the reply 🙂
When I suggested the "letter boxes" and "bank robbers" commentary was Islamaphobic, I was shouted down because I was too stupid to understand hilarious satire.
There will be reasons. Or ‘reasons’.
A good test as to whether or not all of BJ’s credibility has dribbled away will be if the usual rush to shoot the messenger takes place.
‘Only her word for it’
I'm merely confused - what idiot would admit that as the reason to anyone, even when it was the reason, even if among like minded people at the time one of whom might let it slip later?
Puts me in mind of a John Oliver bit about someone who reacted angrily to being questioned about being a white supremacist, but didn't actually deny it, noting something like 'People who are't racists say no. Even people who are racists know to say no'.
Germany has a rather 'colourful' military history when it comes to the rest of Europe, including Russia. Don't you think that might explain why they are being extremely wary?
Germany invaded Ukraine in 1918, as well as the more well-known invasion of 1941.
Germany has been extremely non-careful about arming and helping arm *Russia* since the last time the Russians went walkabout in Ukraine.
Selling arms to one side in a war, then claiming that they can't possibly allow someone to arm the other side.
Interestingly, that would put their legal status as a neutral in a war at risk. Ukraine could claim, under international law, that Germany was a co-beligerant with Russia and demand reparations....
I remember years ago, in the 80s, listening to Stefan Terlezki MP. He was a one-term Tory who represented a seat in Cardiff. He was a Ukrainian and came to the UK as a refugee. He remarked that one half of his family had been murdered by the Nazis, and the other half by the Soviets. Wonder what he would be thinking now.
He would be wanting what is the real threat to banana republic Russia - that Putin's plaything bufferzone countries become advanced, stable, successful democracies.
That's what really scares Putin.
I totally support this post.
Putin isn’t seriously eyeing Latvia, and in my opinion Putin never will but the next Russian leader may if the country, rather like the Chinese have done, swings Nationalist post Putin, of which we will be partly responsible for making Putin appear so ineffective.
Putin is in a spot with his plaything buffer zones moving towards successful West leaning democracies. Spinning it up more than that, placing Putin as greedy and hungry as Hitler, hasn’t convinced me yet.
So you are saying that by not giving Putin all the Ukraine he can eat, we are weakening him, which will make his nationalistic successors more nationalistic?
Why don't we feed him someone else, just to be sure?
Just a reminder that Nus Ghani was sacked for being a Muslim the same time the Muslim Sajid Javid was ousted as Chancellor.
Hmmm....
Was that not thought to be Mr Cummings doing?
Well that was the spin....
I'm doubtful about this. Boris may be many things but not dumb-ass racist. He's a one-man melting pot.
I am SHOCKED a Prime Minister who compared Muslim women wearing the burqa to “letterboxes” and “bank robbers” would appoint Islamophobes to his government.
With adding 80K vacancies to 100K not being a good look for a backlog reduction initiative, you are aware the government are imminently to U-TURN on compulsive jabs for health workers by first adding 2 month delay, then kicking into long grass?
Hard at this moment to defend the government on this controversial policy when they are about to pull rug from under your feet.
On the contrary - they will have little sensible choice but to u-turn because of the extent of selfish idiocy at play (and I've not been persuaded by defences of people in health services taking this stance), but the idea itself was perfectly reasonable.
Yes I can understand that argument, the 80K shouldn’t be unjabbed.
But it’s still government insisting on a policy and then U turning late in the day.
Yes, which may look weak, but the claim was it was hard to defend the government on the policy when they are about to pull the rug on it, and it isn't hard at all - they're right, but they're unable to do it, which is unfortunate is all.
No - the day they announced the policy, they should have been aware they couldn’t go through with it, adding 80K vacancies to 100K not being a good look for a backlog reduction initiative, yet it’s still not the governments fault the u-turn makes them look naff and weak? Very odd logic from you. 🤔
That's not my logic. You claimed it was hard to defend the government on the policy because they are about to u-turn on it. I don't agree that it is hard.
I don't care whether a u-turn makes the government look weak. And them looking weak for u-turning doesn't make the policy any more or less of a good idea.
It was a good idea, I support them trying it, and regretfully understand why it must u-turn.
I'm no fan of the government, but being unable to do something good because of idiots? I'll give them a pass on that.
No I’m not letting you get away with it.
Staking credibility on a working policy you then lose when you u-turn, because it’s not a working policy, and before it was announced wasn’t ever going to work, has to go down into the naff politics column. And add to that they have managed to swell the numbers in a flaming anti vax March today.
Sorry for being a bit hard, I’m only trying to untangle your twisted logic on this. Twisted because you appear to be saying there will be no political damage because the policy was the right one.
There''s nothing twisted about it, you just seem to be ignoring what I am saying.
I did not say there would be no political damage. I said it would look weak, ergo it has political damage.
I don't care about political damage, and the point you seem to have missed is that what kicked off this discussion had nothing to do with that either.
Your exact words were: Hard at this moment to defend the government on this controversial policy when they are about to pull rug from under your feet.
That's all this discussion was about, not some wider point about the politics of it. Your words were that it would be 'hard' to defend the government 'on' the policy when they are about to 'pull rug from under your feet' on it. No more and no less than that - that because the government are u-turning, defending the policy would be hard.
My sole point was I don't agree with that. I think it is very easy to defend the intended policy. That the government aren't going through with it matters to them, but not to me.
Why would my opinion on a policy be dependent on the government's stance on it?
Okay. Good point well made. Thanks for the reply 🙂
Thank you - now I can get back to what I presume are the last days of Leto (II) Atreides with a clear mind .
Germany has a rather 'colourful' military history when it comes to the rest of Europe, including Russia. Don't you think that might explain why they are being extremely wary?
Germany invaded Ukraine in 1918, as well as the more well-known invasion of 1941.
Surely the Austians. (I think not Hungarians)
It was a German-led operation. Sure, the Austrians went along with it, but as soon as Ukrainian independence was recognised by the Central Powers in February 1918, the ethnic Poles in Austria-Hungary weren't too happy (competing territorial claims and all that).
Germany has a rather 'colourful' military history when it comes to the rest of Europe, including Russia. Don't you think that might explain why they are being extremely wary?
Germany invaded Ukraine in 1918, as well as the more well-known invasion of 1941.
Surely the Austians. (I think not Hungarians)
It was a German-led operation. Sure, the Austrians went along with it, but as soon as Ukrainian independence was recognised by the Central Powers in February 1918, the ethnic Poles in Austria-Hungary weren't too happy (competing territorial claims and all that).
Big G - what has Sunak ever done that makes him a plausible leader?
He is professional and honest, he was the architect of furlough, and is the complete opposite to Boris
Furthermore he seems to worry the opposition and is well liked by the public
Does Javid (or anyone else in cabinet) now put honour before personal ambition and call for a VONC?
That's really what's needed. Steve Baker, in his interview a few days ago, basically said he was looking to the cabinet to take a lead. I'm not sure I can really see anyone there of the stature to do that TBH.
And of course there blooming well isn't anyone of sufficient stature. Nobody with sufficient stature or self-respect would be offered a job by Boris, or accept any offer made.
(Which is why Rishi isn't the panacea some imagine, as seen in the small positive but not game-changing Rishi effect in hypothetical polls. Rishi was one of the first Boris Backers and has risen by doing his master's will.)
Have there been any other recent PMs who strangled talent and surrounded themselves with the second rate?
Excellent question. Brown is meant to have made sure that he was the only possible successor to Blair by nuking any potential rivals, isn't he? Though that's a bit different.
Normally, the logic goes "appoint the best broadly sympathetic people you can, because if they do well, the boss looks good." If an organisation doesn't do that, it's normally a hefty red light.
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
Do you have a percentage for how many will refuse?
Mail says 6% of staff have refused to be vaxxed.
Then that'll be 6% of NHS staff being shuffled into back office roles or getting the heave-ho, if true.
The Government didn't back down over social care workers, despite that sector being, if anything, even more distressed than health. I don't think they'll give the NHS heel-diggers a free pass either.
In London, demonstrators marched from Regents Park to the BBC headquarters in Portland Place in a peaceful protest against mandating vaccines for health workers.
But Dr Nikki Kanani, medical director of primary care for NHS England, said health care professionals had "a duty" to make sure they were protected.
She said: "If you're marching today, just take a moment, think about the people that you've been looking after who have experienced Covid, think about your colleagues who you've been working with, and think about the best way to make sure that we're all protected, and that we're all as safe as possible, because we are very much in this together and it's down to us to look after each other too."
...
The deputy chief executive of NHS Providers, Saffron Cordery, said delaying the policy on mandatory vaccination was not the answer.
She said staff who worked with patients and choose not to be vaccinated "will be redeployed where that is possible, or potentially dismissed".
And while health bosses were worried about "exacerbating staff shortages at a time when the service is under huge operational pressures", the majority backed the policy.
I cannot for the life of me see why a classic political compromise cannot be brought to bear here. Pause the sackings. Give them until next Autumn to get vaxxed as there is no panic as the omi variant is not as severe as first thought etc etc...
The principle is retained. The date is moved. The staff carry on.
There seems little evidence that them being vaxxed will protect patients. Maybe I have missed this?
There's no point pausing it. At this point no-one is on the fence about vaccination, particularly NHS personnel who had earlier access to it than most. By now everyone's made their decision one way or the other. If people haven't had it by now they're not going to get it.
Problem the government has is that it's saying to the general public "the danger's passed, we can ditch everything now in terms of restrictions" so the natural vaccine sceptic is going to say "well I've gone this far without so don't see the urgency". Telling them then "omi isn't that bad but it's still mandatory but it's not mandatory for a while yet" is just the worst of all mixed messages.
Pausing it is just saying "you guys have the power here". What's going to have changed at the end of the pause? You either go through with it or you can it entirely.
Nothing has changed at the end of the pause.
There's a chance it will not be an issue by the autumn as the world moves on, the plague passes into history or at least live-with-it-like-flu status. We don't sack NHS for not being flu jabbed.
It's a political fix to get through another few months before deciding what to do. By then the pieces have moved on the board.
Don't get me wrong: It would be better if they got vaxxed, but I am talking pragmatic politics here.
yes and the key thing is that anti-vac NHS workers actually have power as they do essential and in short supply jobs.So fair play to them if they recognise this and stick to their principles. Everyone in life should use their individual power however big or small to further their own life. Imagine if an ultimatum was given to non-job sectors like diversity officers , nobody would care including government if they got sacked
Once again I have to admire Mike for this thread, since it comes from someone who stands to gain a massive win if Sunak IS next PM (a bet at 250/1).
I think great political betting is about distancing oneself and observing as objectively and dispassionately as possible.
Johnson is not giving up without a fight, that's for sure.
Which makes his bet on Starmer insurance, rather than the pursuit of value on its own. While it's decent value, for those of us without a highly leverage Suns position, it’s less compelling.
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
Do you have a percentage for how many will refuse?
Mail says 6% of staff have refused to be vaxxed.
Then that'll be 6% of NHS staff being shuffled into back office roles or getting the heave-ho, if true.
The Government didn't back down over social care workers, despite that sector being, if anything, even more distressed than health. I don't think they'll give the NHS heel-diggers a free pass either.
In London, demonstrators marched from Regents Park to the BBC headquarters in Portland Place in a peaceful protest against mandating vaccines for health workers.
But Dr Nikki Kanani, medical director of primary care for NHS England, said health care professionals had "a duty" to make sure they were protected.
She said: "If you're marching today, just take a moment, think about the people that you've been looking after who have experienced Covid, think about your colleagues who you've been working with, and think about the best way to make sure that we're all protected, and that we're all as safe as possible, because we are very much in this together and it's down to us to look after each other too."
...
The deputy chief executive of NHS Providers, Saffron Cordery, said delaying the policy on mandatory vaccination was not the answer.
She said staff who worked with patients and choose not to be vaccinated "will be redeployed where that is possible, or potentially dismissed".
And while health bosses were worried about "exacerbating staff shortages at a time when the service is under huge operational pressures", the majority backed the policy.
I cannot for the life of me see why a classic political compromise cannot be brought to bear here. Pause the sackings. Give them until next Autumn to get vaxxed as there is no panic as the omi variant is not as severe as first thought etc etc...
The principle is retained. The date is moved. The staff carry on.
There seems little evidence that them being vaxxed will protect patients. Maybe I have missed this?
My immediate guess would be between 800-1000 of our staff at our trust are not double vaccinated.
That is a mixture of non vaccinated and only had one jab.
The ones that had say one jab can probably be encouraged and worked on to have their second. The main reasons I have seen so far for only having one is that they either had the 1st jab and felt unwell after it so didn't bother with the 2nd or they had 1 jab and still got Covid so again they didn't see the point. These groups I think with time and effort and simply the fear of losing their jobs or being redeployed will end up having their 2nd.
The no jabs at all group will be much harder, a lot will make a stand and are strong in their beliefs. They have had plenty of time to get vaccinated and not had it.
The medically exempt (those that might be and those that believe they should be) and those that are pregnant will of course have to be looked at. You also have overseas vaccinations with Doctors and Nurses that will have to be checked out and screened.
There is really a lot of work coming up and my department will be right in the thick of it at our Trust.
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
Do you have a percentage for how many will refuse?
Mail says 6% of staff have refused to be vaxxed.
Then that'll be 6% of NHS staff being shuffled into back office roles or getting the heave-ho, if true.
The Government didn't back down over social care workers, despite that sector being, if anything, even more distressed than health. I don't think they'll give the NHS heel-diggers a free pass either.
In London, demonstrators marched from Regents Park to the BBC headquarters in Portland Place in a peaceful protest against mandating vaccines for health workers.
But Dr Nikki Kanani, medical director of primary care for NHS England, said health care professionals had "a duty" to make sure they were protected.
She said: "If you're marching today, just take a moment, think about the people that you've been looking after who have experienced Covid, think about your colleagues who you've been working with, and think about the best way to make sure that we're all protected, and that we're all as safe as possible, because we are very much in this together and it's down to us to look after each other too."
...
The deputy chief executive of NHS Providers, Saffron Cordery, said delaying the policy on mandatory vaccination was not the answer.
She said staff who worked with patients and choose not to be vaccinated "will be redeployed where that is possible, or potentially dismissed".
And while health bosses were worried about "exacerbating staff shortages at a time when the service is under huge operational pressures", the majority backed the policy.
I cannot for the life of me see why a classic political compromise cannot be brought to bear here. Pause the sackings. Give them until next Autumn to get vaxxed as there is no panic as the omi variant is not as severe as first thought etc etc...
The principle is retained. The date is moved. The staff carry on.
There seems little evidence that them being vaxxed will protect patients. Maybe I have missed this?
There's no point pausing it. At this point no-one is on the fence about vaccination, particularly NHS personnel who had earlier access to it than most. By now everyone's made their decision one way or the other. If people haven't had it by now they're not going to get it.
Problem the government has is that it's saying to the general public "the danger's passed, we can ditch everything now in terms of restrictions" so the natural vaccine sceptic is going to say "well I've gone this far without so don't see the urgency". Telling them then "omi isn't that bad but it's still mandatory but it's not mandatory for a while yet" is just the worst of all mixed messages.
Pausing it is just saying "you guys have the power here". What's going to have changed at the end of the pause? You either go through with it or you can it entirely.
Nothing has changed at the end of the pause.
There's a chance it will not be an issue by the autumn as the world moves on, the plague passes into history or at least live-with-it-like-flu status. We don't sack NHS for not being flu jabbed.
It's a political fix to get through another few months before deciding what to do. By then the pieces have moved on the board.
Don't get me wrong: It would be better if they got vaxxed, but I am talking pragmatic politics here.
yes and the key thing is that anti-vac NHS workers actually have power as they do essential and in short supply jobs.So fair play to them if they recognise this and stick to their principles. Everyone in life should use their individual power however big or small to further their own life. Imagine if an ultimatum was given to non-job sectors like diversity officers , nobody would care including government if they got sacked
Except that such "principles" undermine their job-purpose to care for patients, and being jabbed in this case is an essential requirement of the job.
With strong evidence to back it up.
If they are opposed, let a TU bring a Judicial Review under the "irrational" and "illogical" criteria to get an independent evaluation.
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
Do you have a percentage for how many will refuse?
Mail says 6% of staff have refused to be vaxxed.
Then that'll be 6% of NHS staff being shuffled into back office roles or getting the heave-ho, if true.
The Government didn't back down over social care workers, despite that sector being, if anything, even more distressed than health. I don't think they'll give the NHS heel-diggers a free pass either.
In London, demonstrators marched from Regents Park to the BBC headquarters in Portland Place in a peaceful protest against mandating vaccines for health workers.
But Dr Nikki Kanani, medical director of primary care for NHS England, said health care professionals had "a duty" to make sure they were protected.
She said: "If you're marching today, just take a moment, think about the people that you've been looking after who have experienced Covid, think about your colleagues who you've been working with, and think about the best way to make sure that we're all protected, and that we're all as safe as possible, because we are very much in this together and it's down to us to look after each other too."
...
The deputy chief executive of NHS Providers, Saffron Cordery, said delaying the policy on mandatory vaccination was not the answer.
She said staff who worked with patients and choose not to be vaccinated "will be redeployed where that is possible, or potentially dismissed".
And while health bosses were worried about "exacerbating staff shortages at a time when the service is under huge operational pressures", the majority backed the policy.
I cannot for the life of me see why a classic political compromise cannot be brought to bear here. Pause the sackings. Give them until next Autumn to get vaxxed as there is no panic as the omi variant is not as severe as first thought etc etc...
The principle is retained. The date is moved. The staff carry on.
There seems little evidence that them being vaxxed will protect patients. Maybe I have missed this?
My immediate guess would be between 800-1000 of our staff at our trust are not double vaccinated.
That is a mixture of non vaccinated and only had one jab.
The ones that had say one jab can probably be encouraged and worked on to have their second. The main reasons I have seen so far for only having one is that they either had the 1st jab and felt unwell after it so didn't bother with the 2nd or they had 1 jab and still got Covid so again they didn't see the point. These groups I think with time and effort and simply the fear of losing their jobs or being redeployed will end up having their 2nd.
The no jabs at all group will be much harder, a lot will make a stand and are strong in their beliefs. They have had plenty of time to get vaccinated and not had it.
The medically exempt (those that might be and those that believe they should be) and those that are pregnant will of course have to be looked at. You also have overseas vaccinations with Doctors and Nurses that will have to be checked out and screened.
There is really a lot of work coming up and my department will be right in the thick of it at our Trust.
and all not necessary if the government had not had a power surge go to their head on this. You cannot force people to stick needles in their body
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
Do you have a percentage for how many will refuse?
Mail says 6% of staff have refused to be vaxxed.
Then that'll be 6% of NHS staff being shuffled into back office roles or getting the heave-ho, if true.
The Government didn't back down over social care workers, despite that sector being, if anything, even more distressed than health. I don't think they'll give the NHS heel-diggers a free pass either.
In London, demonstrators marched from Regents Park to the BBC headquarters in Portland Place in a peaceful protest against mandating vaccines for health workers.
But Dr Nikki Kanani, medical director of primary care for NHS England, said health care professionals had "a duty" to make sure they were protected.
She said: "If you're marching today, just take a moment, think about the people that you've been looking after who have experienced Covid, think about your colleagues who you've been working with, and think about the best way to make sure that we're all protected, and that we're all as safe as possible, because we are very much in this together and it's down to us to look after each other too."
...
The deputy chief executive of NHS Providers, Saffron Cordery, said delaying the policy on mandatory vaccination was not the answer.
She said staff who worked with patients and choose not to be vaccinated "will be redeployed where that is possible, or potentially dismissed".
And while health bosses were worried about "exacerbating staff shortages at a time when the service is under huge operational pressures", the majority backed the policy.
I cannot for the life of me see why a classic political compromise cannot be brought to bear here. Pause the sackings. Give them until next Autumn to get vaxxed as there is no panic as the omi variant is not as severe as first thought etc etc...
The principle is retained. The date is moved. The staff carry on.
There seems little evidence that them being vaxxed will protect patients. Maybe I have missed this?
There's no point pausing it. At this point no-one is on the fence about vaccination, particularly NHS personnel who had earlier access to it than most. By now everyone's made their decision one way or the other. If people haven't had it by now they're not going to get it.
Problem the government has is that it's saying to the general public "the danger's passed, we can ditch everything now in terms of restrictions" so the natural vaccine sceptic is going to say "well I've gone this far without so don't see the urgency". Telling them then "omi isn't that bad but it's still mandatory but it's not mandatory for a while yet" is just the worst of all mixed messages.
Pausing it is just saying "you guys have the power here". What's going to have changed at the end of the pause? You either go through with it or you can it entirely.
Nothing has changed at the end of the pause.
There's a chance it will not be an issue by the autumn as the world moves on, the plague passes into history or at least live-with-it-like-flu status. We don't sack NHS for not being flu jabbed.
It's a political fix to get through another few months before deciding what to do. By then the pieces have moved on the board.
Don't get me wrong: It would be better if they got vaxxed, but I am talking pragmatic politics here.
It's the same sort of political fix that played out so badly with Brexit. There's a decision to be made, but it's too politically difficult to make it, so let's postpone it, kick the can down the road a bit and hope that either something different has appeared by then to change the equation or everyone's forgotten about it. I understand the rationale, I'm just not convinced it's the solution.
If you pause it, open-deadline style, then you're basically saying the mandatory thing isn't tenable, having already pissed off the social care staff with a mandatory jab. If you pause it with a new fixed deadline, you're basically just moving the problem another few months along the line.
Just a reminder that Nus Ghani was sacked for being a Muslim the same time the Muslim Sajid Javid was ousted as Chancellor.
Hmmm....
Was that not thought to be Mr Cummings doing?
Well that was the spin....
I'm doubtful about this. Boris may be many things but not dumb-ass racist. He's a one-man melting pot.
I am SHOCKED a Prime Minister who compared Muslim women wearing the burqa to “letterboxes” and “bank robbers” would appoint Islamophobes to his government.
Don't forget the piccaninnies!
Heavily overegged.
"Picaninnies" was a good satire of Tony Blair's imperial progress to avoid the UK where he was unpopular.
Letterboxes and bank robbers were exactly the same sentiments as previous comments by the likes of Harriet Harman, expressed in journalese rather than politico.
Germany has a rather 'colourful' military history when it comes to the rest of Europe, including Russia. Don't you think that might explain why they are being extremely wary?
Germany invaded Ukraine in 1918, as well as the more well-known invasion of 1941.
Surely the Austians. (I think not Hungarians)
It was a German-led operation. Sure, the Austrians went along with it, but as soon as Ukrainian independence was recognised by the Central Powers in February 1918, the ethnic Poles in Austria-Hungary weren't too happy (competing territorial claims and all that).
Rehashing last weekend's theme of how busy the hospitality industry suddenly seems: after last week's failure to get into a restaurant in my home suburb, for complicated reasons the family and I have ended up in Poynton - which was also rammed. At 6.30 we were apologetically turned away from two curry houses before a third squeezed us in. But the whole town is packed. In January! Socialising put off from December? Or is 6 o'clock in the suburbs suddenly the time and place to eat?
Packers-49ers tonight, not sure I am ready for another soul destroying playoff loss...
This mandatory vaccination for NHS staff is about to really blow up. Already seeing signs of staff panicking or getting extremely fired up about it. My manager has warned us that the next 3-4 weeks is going to be very difficult at work with the 3rd Feb deadline for 1st doses. Emotions will be running high.
Do you have a percentage for how many will refuse?
Mail says 6% of staff have refused to be vaxxed.
Then that'll be 6% of NHS staff being shuffled into back office roles or getting the heave-ho, if true.
The Government didn't back down over social care workers, despite that sector being, if anything, even more distressed than health. I don't think they'll give the NHS heel-diggers a free pass either.
In London, demonstrators marched from Regents Park to the BBC headquarters in Portland Place in a peaceful protest against mandating vaccines for health workers.
But Dr Nikki Kanani, medical director of primary care for NHS England, said health care professionals had "a duty" to make sure they were protected.
She said: "If you're marching today, just take a moment, think about the people that you've been looking after who have experienced Covid, think about your colleagues who you've been working with, and think about the best way to make sure that we're all protected, and that we're all as safe as possible, because we are very much in this together and it's down to us to look after each other too."
...
The deputy chief executive of NHS Providers, Saffron Cordery, said delaying the policy on mandatory vaccination was not the answer.
She said staff who worked with patients and choose not to be vaccinated "will be redeployed where that is possible, or potentially dismissed".
And while health bosses were worried about "exacerbating staff shortages at a time when the service is under huge operational pressures", the majority backed the policy.
I cannot for the life of me see why a classic political compromise cannot be brought to bear here. Pause the sackings. Give them until next Autumn to get vaxxed as there is no panic as the omi variant is not as severe as first thought etc etc...
The principle is retained. The date is moved. The staff carry on.
There seems little evidence that them being vaxxed will protect patients. Maybe I have missed this?
There's no point pausing it. At this point no-one is on the fence about vaccination, particularly NHS personnel who had earlier access to it than most. By now everyone's made their decision one way or the other. If people haven't had it by now they're not going to get it.
Problem the government has is that it's saying to the general public "the danger's passed, we can ditch everything now in terms of restrictions" so the natural vaccine sceptic is going to say "well I've gone this far without so don't see the urgency". Telling them then "omi isn't that bad but it's still mandatory but it's not mandatory for a while yet" is just the worst of all mixed messages.
Pausing it is just saying "you guys have the power here". What's going to have changed at the end of the pause? You either go through with it or you can it entirely.
Nothing has changed at the end of the pause.
There's a chance it will not be an issue by the autumn as the world moves on, the plague passes into history or at least live-with-it-like-flu status. We don't sack NHS for not being flu jabbed.
It's a political fix to get through another few months before deciding what to do. By then the pieces have moved on the board.
Don't get me wrong: It would be better if they got vaxxed, but I am talking pragmatic politics here.
It's the same sort of political fix that played out so badly with Brexit. There's a decision to be made, but it's too politically difficult to make it, so let's postpone it, kick the can down the road a bit and hope that either something different has appeared by then to change the equation or everyone's forgotten about it. I understand the rationale, I'm just not convinced it's the solution.
If you pause it, open-deadline style, then you're basically saying the mandatory thing isn't tenable, having already pissed off the social care staff with a mandatory jab. If you pause it with a new fixed deadline, you're basically just moving the problem another few months along the line.
scrap it - The government have actually had a good pandemic imo but this was the worst bit of it - hard man posturing when up against people who have real power (essential workers)
Just a reminder that Nus Ghani was sacked for being a Muslim the same time the Muslim Sajid Javid was ousted as Chancellor.
Hmmm....
Was that not thought to be Mr Cummings doing?
Well that was the spin....
I'm doubtful about this. Boris may be many things but not dumb-ass racist. He's a one-man melting pot.
I am SHOCKED a Prime Minister who compared Muslim women wearing the burqa to “letterboxes” and “bank robbers” would appoint Islamophobes to his government.
Don't forget the piccaninnies!
Heavily overegged.
"Picaninnies" was a good satire of Tony Blair's imperial progress to avoid the UK where he was unpopular.
Letterboxes and bank robbers were exactly the same sentiments as previous comments by the likes of Harriet Harman, expressed in journalese rather than politico.
Well I never knew it wasn't possible to engage in satire without using racially offensive language, I suppose in your head it would be fine to use the n word to make his point.
Germany has a rather 'colourful' military history when it comes to the rest of Europe, including Russia. Don't you think that might explain why they are being extremely wary?
Germany invaded Ukraine in 1918, as well as the more well-known invasion of 1941.
Germany has been extremely non-careful about arming and helping arm *Russia* since the last time the Russians went walkabout in Ukraine.
Selling arms to one side in a war, then claiming that they can't possibly allow someone to arm the other side.
Interestingly, that would put their legal status as a neutral in a war at risk. Ukraine could claim, under international law, that Germany was a co-beligerant with Russia and demand reparations....
I remember years ago, in the 80s, listening to Stefan Terlezki MP. He was a one-term Tory who represented a seat in Cardiff. He was a Ukrainian and came to the UK as a refugee. He remarked that one half of his family had been murdered by the Nazis, and the other half by the Soviets. Wonder what he would be thinking now.
He would be wanting what is the real threat to banana republic Russia - that Putin's plaything bufferzone countries become advanced, stable, successful democracies.
That's what really scares Putin.
I totally support this post.
Putin isn’t seriously eyeing Latvia, and in my opinion Putin never will but the next Russian leader may if the country, rather like the Chinese have done, swings Nationalist post Putin, of which we will be partly responsible for making Putin appear so ineffective.
Putin is in a spot with his plaything buffer zones moving towards successful West leaning democracies. Spinning it up more than that, placing Putin as greedy and hungry as Hitler, hasn’t convinced me yet.
So you are saying that by not giving Putin all the Ukraine he can eat, we are weakening him, which will make his nationalistic successors more nationalistic?
Why don't we feed him someone else, just to be sure?
We’ve been here to 3am Malmsy! You know I believe There’s complicated questions at the heart of this a proxy war does not answer.
Where do you stand on the point I just made, the road to a proxy war and weakened Putin can lead to a more nationalist and aggressive Russia post Putin? We have a short termist and half blind approach to the problem of creating peace we half share with Russia.
Along the same lines the First World War happened because the French had been waiting since 1870 for it.
The Second World War happened because Hitler had been waiting since 1918 to be driving around a defeated Paris.
Germany has a rather 'colourful' military history when it comes to the rest of Europe, including Russia. Don't you think that might explain why they are being extremely wary?
Germany invaded Ukraine in 1918, as well as the more well-known invasion of 1941.
Germany has been extremely non-careful about arming and helping arm *Russia* since the last time the Russians went walkabout in Ukraine.
Selling arms to one side in a war, then claiming that they can't possibly allow someone to arm the other side.
Interestingly, that would put their legal status as a neutral in a war at risk. Ukraine could claim, under international law, that Germany was a co-beligerant with Russia and demand reparations....
I remember years ago, in the 80s, listening to Stefan Terlezki MP. He was a one-term Tory who represented a seat in Cardiff. He was a Ukrainian and came to the UK as a refugee. He remarked that one half of his family had been murdered by the Nazis, and the other half by the Soviets. Wonder what he would be thinking now.
He would be wanting what is the real threat to banana republic Russia - that Putin's plaything bufferzone countries become advanced, stable, successful democracies.
That's what really scares Putin.
I totally support this post.
Putin isn’t seriously eyeing Latvia, and in my opinion Putin never will but the next Russian leader may if the country, rather like the Chinese have done, swings Nationalist post Putin, of which we will be partly responsible for making Putin appear so ineffective.
Putin is in a spot with his plaything buffer zones moving towards successful West leaning democracies. Spinning it up more than that, placing Putin as greedy and hungry as Hitler, hasn’t convinced me yet.
So you are saying that by not giving Putin all the Ukraine he can eat, we are weakening him, which will make his nationalistic successors more nationalistic?
Why don't we feed him someone else, just to be sure?
We’ve been here to 3am Malmsy! You know I believe There’s complicated questions at the heart of this a proxy war does not answer.
Where do you stand on the point I just made, the road to a proxy war and weakened Putin can lead to a more nationalist and aggressive Russia post Putin? We have a short termist and half blind approach to the problem of creating peace we half share with Russia.
Along the same lines the First World War happened because the French had been waiting since 1870 for it.
The Second World War happened because Hitler had been waiting since 1918 to be driving around a defeated Paris.
It seems appeasement is alive and well in certain dark corners of PB
Sitting on a balcony in Kollupitiya, Colombo 3, overlooking the starlit Indian Ocean, drinking the world’s FUCK OFFEST Gin Martini. It’s about a pint in quantity
You?
Either you down it in one or it'll be lukewarm before you're through. Not sure which is more eeeuch
Send it back.
True
TBH I’m only drinking it because the bar has RUN OUT OF TONIC = no G&T
It wouldn’t have happened during the Raj. And if it had happened, the bar manager would surely have been keelhauled in the bay by the Royal Navy
Keelhauling seems such a cruel punshment, and yet it was far from exceptional.
There's a horrible catalogue of ways to hurt people.
Little evidence of its use in the British navy.
There’s a chilling scene in Black Sails when Blackbeard, played by the great Ray Stevenson, is (somewhat ahistorically) keelhauled. Makes me wince remembering it.
Rehashing last weekend's theme of how busy the hospitality industry suddenly seems: after last week's failure to get into a restaurant in my home suburb, for complicated reasons the family and I have ended up in Poynton - which was also rammed. At 6.30 we were apologetically turned away from two curry houses before a third squeezed us in. But the whole town is packed. In January! Socialising put off from December? Or is 6 o'clock in the suburbs suddenly the time and place to eat?
Our postponed works Xmas do has been a subject of occasional discussion this week just gone, but we're being a bit tardy about getting round to arranging it. I would imagine that others have already got their fingers out - along with quite a lot of punters just generally demob happy over what we all hope is the end of the pandemic.
Comments
Furthermore he seems to worry the opposition and is well liked by the public
The partygate attack on Johnson hides the truth that he hasn’t been under any pressure at all on delivery - Brexit done, covid done, economy bouncing back. Getting on with levelling up.
To paraphrase, fake pressure is no pressure at all, can blow over.
1 - They are mercantilists. Nordstream 2 was forced through over strong EU objections in knowledge of the consequences for Ukraine.
2 - They are up a creek without a paddle for the next decade for energy, with no Plan B if not Russia. Putin has succeeded in making Germany significantly dependent on Russia. *
* Though there may be options to mitigate, but not in the short term and not as much as needed.
It’s a good policy if you go through with it. 2 libdems, Foxy supports it, I don’t have a problem with it. But adding 80K vacancies to 100K does not help the fight back on waiting lists was always going to be the case, government should have seen the dangers of pushing it and then u-turning on it.
Happy to end the discussion here, both of us okay with the policy if can be acted on, you admitting it goes into naff politics column on basis at what point could it ever have been acted on?
I’m sorry. U turns made the opponents of the policy winners, it’s strengthened them. It has to be moved into naff politics column.
My Conservative wife doesn't rate him particularly highly, but considers him head and shoulders better than "Dizzy Lizzie".
It is unclear yet if people who are covid positive will be permitted to work in Health and Social care.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/covid-isolation-rules-for-infected-people-set-to-end-cvdjs8xpx
The Government didn't back down over social care workers, despite that sector being, if anything, even more distressed than health. I don't think they'll give the NHS heel-diggers a free pass either.
In London, demonstrators marched from Regents Park to the BBC headquarters in Portland Place in a peaceful protest against mandating vaccines for health workers.
But Dr Nikki Kanani, medical director of primary care for NHS England, said health care professionals had "a duty" to make sure they were protected.
She said: "If you're marching today, just take a moment, think about the people that you've been looking after who have experienced Covid, think about your colleagues who you've been working with, and think about the best way to make sure that we're all protected, and that we're all as safe as possible, because we are very much in this together and it's down to us to look after each other too."
...
The deputy chief executive of NHS Providers, Saffron Cordery, said delaying the policy on mandatory vaccination was not the answer.
She said staff who worked with patients and choose not to be vaccinated "will be redeployed where that is possible, or potentially dismissed".
And while health bosses were worried about "exacerbating staff shortages at a time when the service is under huge operational pressures", the majority backed the policy.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60096735
Or, to attack Omnium’s lazy question with the answer it deserves - if Boris can be Prime Minister so can I.
1) only double vaxxing is required, not a booster, making the policy less effective.
2) there should be an exception for staff with documented evidence of recent infection by antibody blood tests. This gives similar protection as double vaccination.
3) it is absurd to permit covid positive people to work at the same time as banning the unvaxxed.
1 - It seems to have worked in France.
2 - Student Nurse recruitment has been booming.
3 - If necessary, roles can be available in eg telemedicine or non-contact type disciplines.
I can't fathom the stance of Scotland and Wales on this.
The Government pausing without good reason would be classic backdown-Boris, suffering from LMF when he can't freewheel.
Agree with Foxy's nuances generally.
Could the Russians do the same to us with a cable to one of our offshore wind farms?
https://news.sky.com/story/russian-submarines-threatening-undersea-network-of-internet-cables-says-uk-defence-chief-sir-tony-radakin-12511437
A good test as to whether or not all of BJ’s credibility has dribbled away will be if the usual rush to shoot the messenger takes place.
‘Only her word for it’
The principle is retained. The date is moved. The staff carry on.
There seems little evidence that them being vaxxed will protect patients. Maybe I have missed this?
Is 50 pieces of silver worth an 80 seat majority, won on such a platform?
That's what really scares Putin.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/01/unvaccinated-5x-more-likely-to-get-omicron-than-those-boosted-cdc-reports/
{Mon Motha voice}
Many Trumpet Fuckwits died to bring us this data
{/Mon Montha voice}
And good for them!
We know all about taking out cables - we were I think the first to do it.
Within about a day of the start of WW1, we had hoicked up all the German owned cables in the Channel and cut them. Which meant that a lot of their comms had to either go via radio which we could monitor, or neutral-owned cables, which I think tended to go via Cornwall.
See the Zimmermann Telegram, which was a proposal from Germnay to Mexico that they subsidise a Mexican war on the USA. We got it by I think tapping diplomatic traffic, and it was how we got the USA into WW1. A good story.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimmermann_Telegram
Hmmm....
Problem the government has is that it's saying to the general public "the danger's passed, we can ditch everything now in terms of restrictions" so the natural vaccine sceptic is going to say "well I've gone this far without so don't see the urgency". Telling them then "omi isn't that bad but it's still mandatory but it's not mandatory for a while yet" is just the worst of all mixed messages.
Pausing it is just saying "you guys have the power here". What's going to have changed at the end of the pause? You either go through with it or you can it entirely.
There's a chance it will not be an issue by the autumn as the world moves on, the plague passes into history or at least live-with-it-like-flu status. We don't sack NHS for not being flu jabbed.
It's a political fix to get through another few months before deciding what to do. By then the pieces have moved on the board.
Don't get me wrong: It would be better if they got vaxxed, but I am talking pragmatic politics here.
I’m reluctantly with @Foxy on this. Let those with antibodies be treated as if vaccinated.
I’m just sad that so many still reject the clear evidence of safety and efficacy of vaccination.
Putin isn’t seriously eyeing Latvia, and in my opinion Putin never will but the next Russian leader may if the country, rather like the Chinese have done, swings Nationalist post Putin, of which we will be partly responsible for making Putin appear so ineffective.
Putin is in a spot with his plaything buffer zones moving towards successful West leaning democracies. Spinning it up more than that, placing Putin as greedy and hungry as Hitler, hasn’t convinced me yet.
Very interesting interview. He's an adrenaline junkie in some ways. Freefall parachuting.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0013qt4
(Which is why Rishi isn't the panacea some imagine, as seen in the small positive but not game-changing Rishi effect in hypothetical polls. Rishi was one of the first Boris Backers and has risen by doing his master's will.)
I did not say there would be no political damage. I said it would look weak, ergo it has political damage.
I don't care about political damage, and the point you seem to have missed is that what kicked off this discussion had nothing to do with that either.
Your exact words were:
Hard at this moment to defend the government on this controversial policy when they are about to pull rug from under your feet.
That's all this discussion was about, not some wider point about the politics of it. Your words were that it would be 'hard' to defend the government 'on' the policy when they are about to 'pull rug from under your feet' on it. No more and no less than that - that because the government are u-turning, defending the policy would be hard.
My sole point was I don't agree with that. I think it is very easy to defend the intended policy. That the government aren't going through with it matters to them, but not to me.
Why would my opinion on a policy be dependent on the government's stance on it?
https://news.sky.com/story/yorkshire-county-cricket-club-appoints-new-chairman-amid-institutional-racism-storm-12460540
Puts me in mind of a John Oliver bit about someone who reacted angrily to being questioned about being a white supremacist, but didn't actually deny it, noting something like 'People who are't racists say no. Even people who are racists know to say no'.
Why don't we feed him someone else, just to be sure?
Leon drinks his mega-martinis in Columbo . . . at same time yours truly watches an old "Columbo" re-run . . .
Coincidence? Karma?? Kismet???
What a wonderful name.
Normally, the logic goes "appoint the best broadly sympathetic people you can, because if they do well, the boss looks good." If an organisation doesn't do that, it's normally a hefty red light.
Imagine if an ultimatum was given to non-job sectors like diversity officers , nobody would care including government if they got sacked
Wait until you hear some of the chat up lines I've used at parties.
While it's decent value, for those of us without a highly leverage Suns position, it’s less compelling.
And I think Johnson is toast, FWIW.
That is a mixture of non vaccinated and only had one jab.
The ones that had say one jab can probably be encouraged and worked on to have their second. The main reasons I have seen so far for only having one is that they either had the 1st jab and felt unwell after it so didn't bother with the 2nd or they had 1 jab and still got Covid so again they didn't see the point. These groups I think with time and effort and simply the fear of losing their jobs or being redeployed will end up having their 2nd.
The no jabs at all group will be much harder, a lot will make a stand and are strong in their beliefs. They have had plenty of time to get vaccinated and not had it.
The medically exempt (those that might be and those that believe they should be) and those that are pregnant will of course have to be looked at. You also have overseas vaccinations with Doctors and Nurses that will have to be checked out and screened.
There is really a lot of work coming up and my department will be right in the thick of it at our Trust.
With strong evidence to back it up.
If they are opposed, let a TU bring a Judicial Review under the "irrational" and "illogical" criteria to get an independent evaluation.
If you pause it, open-deadline style, then you're basically saying the mandatory thing isn't tenable, having already pissed off the social care staff with a mandatory jab. If you pause it with a new fixed deadline, you're basically just moving the problem another few months along the line.
"Picaninnies" was a good satire of Tony Blair's imperial progress to avoid the UK where he was unpopular.
Letterboxes and bank robbers were exactly the same sentiments as previous comments by the likes of Harriet Harman, expressed in journalese rather than politico.
Socialising put off from December? Or is 6 o'clock in the suburbs suddenly the time and place to eat?
Where do you stand on the point I just made, the road to a proxy war and weakened Putin can lead to a more nationalist and aggressive Russia post Putin? We have a short termist and half blind approach to the problem of creating peace we half share with Russia.
Along the same lines the First World War happened because the French had been waiting since 1870 for it.
The Second World War happened because Hitler had been waiting since 1918 to be driving around a defeated Paris.
Makes me wince remembering it.