Tory MP Lee Anderson says no massive need for food banks in UK, and real problem people not being able to cook properly
In his contribution to the Queen’s speech debate the Conservative MP Lee Anderson said that a food bank in his Ashfield constituency operated a “brilliant scheme” whereby people accepting a donation had to register for a budgeting course and a cooking course. He went on:
We show them how to cook cheap and nutritious meals on a budget. We can make a meal for about 30p a day, and this is cooking from scratch.
When an opposition MP put it to Anderson that food banks should not be needed in 21st century Britain, Anderson agreed. He went on:
This is exactly my point. I’ll invite you personally to come to Ashfield, look at our food bank, how it works. And I’ll think you’ll see first hand that there’s not this massive use for food banks in this country. We’ve got generation after generation who cannot cook properly. They can’t cook a meal from scratch. They cannot budget. The challenge is there.
From the context, it is clear that when he said there was not a “massive use for food banks”, he meant no massive need for them.
There is a real problem of people not being able to cook properly.
If Jack Monroe had said that people struggle to cook properly and budget and support was needed for that, you wouldn't blink twice, but a Tory says that and its horrific.
Alternatively, we could find out what Jack Monroe thinks;
"Helping somebody conditional on them saying 'you know what, this is all my own fault, please teach me how to be better at being poor', is disgusting, actually."
To a large extent, it's the Captain Vines theory of economics. Being poor forces you into making bad long-term choices. If you are rich enough to have time and space to cook and buy in bulk, you can feed yourself well and cheaply much more easily than if you are in a bedsit or worse
So she wants people to learn how to cook, but doesn't like a scheme that literally teaches people how to cook. It's almost as if the campaigners have an agenda. Isn't the actual answer - "hey it's not ideal but one extra person who can cook cheaply is another person out of food poverty".
The agenda is they want a world where people are helpless and utterly reliant on state support. I am reliant financially on state support and it's fucking miserable. Anything that can be done to teach skills, techniques etc to help lift yourself away from poverty is a good thing.
A recent comedy. Round where I live.
There are quite a number of bike shops catering to the very well off. Lots of work doing upgrades and stuff, that frankly, a competent bike owner could do themselves.
So they have buckets of second hand bits. Lots of stuff that is straight off bikes that has just been bought - not even used. The bike is bought and then a long list of bit changed. Yes, I know - why not buy a bare frame and buy the toys to match? Anyway....
A lot is not even worth fleabaying.
So a couple of the owners got in touch with some local people and for a couple of quid, let them pick out any stuff they want. Awesome, you'd think?
No, no, no, no..... No.
Before you could say "Clipboard" - a couple of hi-vizziers from the Council popped in to try and claim they were selling dangerous and unsafe equipment.
Of course they did this in earshot of some the rich evul middle class bike owners. One of whom was a lawyer. Of course. The hi-vizziers got pounded like dockside hookers.....
Clipboard wielders are worse than Durham curry and beer people
The important thing is to "professionalise" everything so only middle class and above can afford it.
This worked really well for childcare.
Spot on. What's the point if being middle class unless everything is tailored to expressing your relative affluence? Why have a cheap exercise bike when you can spend £1500 on an exercise bike with a kindle fire stuck on it?
Obviously - but the important bit is to make sure that the Head Count can't get a cheap version. What is the point of having a Sign of Affluence if the Mob all have one?
Very true. Also important to make cheap cuts of meat trendy in the dinner party and tv chef set so they become pricey and only for you. No belly pork or shin of beef for the peasants if you please
I got a huge piece of 26 day aged rib of beef on the weekend at the butchers - he's dropped the prices on that, while the price of ox tail etc rockets up.
Taking food education further I would like to see an ongoing level of free life skills provision available for all.
Something like first 2 hrs per week of cooking, sports, literacy, numeracy, personal finance, fitness, basic IT paid for by the state for everyone who wants it.
A real investment in the people of the UK. It would be expensive at first but we would quickly become happier, better educated and also more productive in work and less costly to the health service.
There might even be more permanent salaried positions for qualified FE teachers. I approve of this. And would chuck languages into the mix. And "wellbeing". Though I detest the term.
Agree on wellbeing, but also couldnt define it so it was in my fitness. Languages borderline for me, not against it but not fussed compared to the others that I think are real issues within the UK.
Yeah. Just noticed you had sport and fitness as two discrete categories.
Yes - get people into actually doing sport. Excessive emphasis on fitness, too early, can just put them off.
Now I must go and row on the Thames.....
Fitness should be a very broad church if it is for all ages, not just gym, but mindfulness, walking groups, yoga, dance, whatever gets people out and about and moving or thinking better.
What is the fucking matter with the man. He's at the 'I love you' stage of being drunk, chucking our overstretched military at anyone who'll have it like an unwanted beery hug.
Uniting the Baltics against the war criminal that is Putin is just desserts for his foolish and miscalculated criminal attack on the sovereign nation of Ukraine
This is interesting and worthy comment, but aren’t you going to do ANY beergate this week? 🙁
I am able to multi task and I did post this earlier today
This may come back to cause issues for Starmer if he receives a Cumming's style verdict from Durham Police rather than a FPN and ironically penned by Mary Foy MP who was present at 'beergate'
“The vast majority of constituents who have contacted me have expressed the view that Mr Cummings’ actions have been insensitive and unacceptable at best, and many feel that they warrant further investigation by the police.”
“While I understand today’s decision by Durham Police to take no further action, many of the constituents who have written to me would like Mr Cummings to resign or be sacked. Clearly, whether you stick by him or not is a matter for you, but the perception from my constituents, and I would hazard a guess that this is a common view across the North East, is that you are currently putting the interests of your chief adviser above that of the people of the region and the country as a whole.”
What is the fucking matter with the man. He's at the 'I love you' stage of being drunk, chucking our overstretched military at anyone who'll have it like an unwanted beery hug.
Isn't Boris just making formal, an unspoken truth?
If Russia invades Finland or Sweden (or both) it's WWIII! Which is why a Russian invasion of Finland or Sweden probably isn't going to happen (I say *probably* rather the *definitely* because there's always that 5% chance Mad Vlad has become so loopy he might actually do it)
If it is WW3, my suggestion would be wait it out until we're attacked - it worked for the Americans in WW2 - few people seem to see that as a blot on their copybook.
Tory MP Lee Anderson says no massive need for food banks in UK, and real problem people not being able to cook properly
In his contribution to the Queen’s speech debate the Conservative MP Lee Anderson said that a food bank in his Ashfield constituency operated a “brilliant scheme” whereby people accepting a donation had to register for a budgeting course and a cooking course. He went on:
We show them how to cook cheap and nutritious meals on a budget. We can make a meal for about 30p a day, and this is cooking from scratch.
When an opposition MP put it to Anderson that food banks should not be needed in 21st century Britain, Anderson agreed. He went on:
This is exactly my point. I’ll invite you personally to come to Ashfield, look at our food bank, how it works. And I’ll think you’ll see first hand that there’s not this massive use for food banks in this country. We’ve got generation after generation who cannot cook properly. They can’t cook a meal from scratch. They cannot budget. The challenge is there.
From the context, it is clear that when he said there was not a “massive use for food banks”, he meant no massive need for them.
It's a fair comment. People in the UK have poorer cooking skill than the rest of Europe. I come across people who struggle to make rice or pasta regularly and not having basic skills really limits the ability to each cheap and nutritious food. Takeaways are both expensive and unhealthy.
It’s the remarkable thing about being in Italy. You hear a group of ordinary Italians having a most heated argument about something, and from the passion and energy you’d think the eldest daughter had run off with the best man or some similar family catastrophe was unfolding.
Then, armed with a little basic Italian, you begin to make out enough words to realise that the debate is really about how to cook a certain recipe or whether one restaurant in town does pasta better than another.
That said, today has been so hot that we escaped to the Slovenian mountains and have been exploring the remains of the trenches in the high mountains around Caporetto - the battle that did more than any single other thing to subsequently and eventually give birth to fascism in Europe - but a name that will draw blank looks from almost anyone you mention it to back at home.
The battles on the Isonzo made the Somme and Paschendale look like masterpieces of military tactics.
Indeed. Although we did pause for a breather atop the hill the capture of which first made the name of a then lieutenant Rommel.
Be tricky doing that for some of the features they fought over further north ... just been reading about that particular theatre of the war.
To a large extent, it's the Captain Vines theory of economics. Being poor forces you into making bad long-term choices. If you are rich enough to have time and space to cook and buy in bulk, you can feed yourself well and cheaply much more easily than if you are in a bedsit or worse
Dorothy L Sayers also wrote about in Murder Must Advertise.
Plus, deep freezes. You can't run one if you are hand-to-mouth about electricity,and they are the or a great saver.
We have a bunch of frozen vegtables in our freezer, and some frozen prawns. When I'm being lazy, I chuck 'em all in a frying pan and add some rice noodles and soy sauce.
My children pronounce this delicious, and it takes less than ten minutes and involves maybe $1 of ingredients per person.
What is the fucking matter with the man. He's at the 'I love you' stage of being drunk, chucking our overstretched military at anyone who'll have it like an unwanted beery hug.
Uniting the Baltics against the war criminal that is Putin is just desserts for his foolish and miscalculated criminal attack on the sovereign nation of Ukraine
This is interesting and worthy comment, but aren’t you going to do ANY beergate this week? 🙁
I am able to multi task and I did post this earlier today
This may come back to cause issues for Starmer if he receives a Cumming's style verdict from Durham Police rather than a FPN and ironically penned by Mary Foy MP who was present at 'beergate'
“The vast majority of constituents who have contacted me have expressed the view that Mr Cummings’ actions have been insensitive and unacceptable at best, and many feel that they warrant further investigation by the police.”
“While I understand today’s decision by Durham Police to take no further action, many of the constituents who have written to me would like Mr Cummings to resign or be sacked. Clearly, whether you stick by him or not is a matter for you, but the perception from my constituents, and I would hazard a guess that this is a common view across the North East, is that you are currently putting the interests of your chief adviser above that of the people of the region and the country as a whole.”
You've been saying for months we have to wait for Ms Gray's report, for a whole catalogue of things allegedly perpetrated by Mr Johnson.
The Express leads with welcome news for families suffering cost of living crisis.
Many other papers lead on government back tracking on what Boris promised.
Is coordinating government messaging really as difficult as they are making it look?
Are you not reading BigG. 's dispatched. Boris is having a great day signing international treaties with non-NATO partners. He has just tweaked Putin's nose and said "nuke us if you dare Vlad"!
Boris has his own hard hat and hi-viz coat, so he'll be fine...
...although if Putin is keeping up with the NI Protocol he might just be thinking, "Boris Johnson and international treaties? Pah!"
If Putin nuked us, Johnson would of course send a Trident nuclear missile to nuke Moscow.
In any case a UK Sweden mutual defence treaty is not yet the same as Sweden joining NATO
Well my reading of it from tonight's PM programme is this: If Putin puts a boot onto Swedish or Finnish soil Boris will be on his case. If Putin so much as harms a hair on the head of a British Tommy sent to defend Sweden or Finland, NATO are involved.
Johnson has ramped this up big time. He was the FIRST NATO leader to sign a treaty and any escalation into Scandinavia by Putin and it's all out confrontation. And do you know what? Good on you BigDog (I still wouldn't vote for the duplicitous b****** mind).
There was already a military alliance between the UK, Finland and Sweden (among others)
A further affirmation of what was the situation anyway - that if Russia attacks Finland or Sweden, then we will be very, very rude.
This re-affirmation of outstanding commitments is a long standing thing in times of tension. For the very, very good reasons why, read The Guns of August -
The Germans in 1914 convinced themselves that the UK would abandon the Belgians, because WWI wasn't going to work for them (the Germans) if the UK didn't.
On the UK side, no-one thought that they needed to re-affirm the treaty. If they had...
The Armenian genocide memoir that I’m reading right now makes that same point. The Armenian author is in Germany in 1914 when WW1 kicks off. At first everyone is elated because they are convinced Germany can easily win a swift war against France and Russia
Then “England” joins the war and the elation turns instantly to a numb, stunned sourness, as Germans realise the war will be looooooong and they might not win
Never seen it told that way before
I recently watched a video on the history of WW1. It takes the conflict as a totality, and it is surprising how little of it concentrates on the trenches of France, and instead on events in Turkey or the Middle East. The western front was just a part of a much wider conflict; much of which 'we' ignore. (Mrs J, being Turkish, has a very different perspective.)
But this brings me onto a thorny question: who was to 'blame' for WW1? WW2 is an easy answer: Germany and Japan. But was WW1 just a conflict that was going to happen, as empires and would-be empires faced each other off like drunkards in a dive bar? Might it have happened earlier, and if Ferdinand had not been killed, might a reason for war have been found a year or two later?
What is the fucking matter with the man. He's at the 'I love you' stage of being drunk, chucking our overstretched military at anyone who'll have it like an unwanted beery hug.
Uniting the Baltics against the war criminal that is Putin is just desserts for his foolish and miscalculated criminal attack on the sovereign nation of Ukraine
This is interesting and worthy comment, but aren’t you going to do ANY beergate this week? 🙁
I am able to multi task and I did post this earlier today
This may come back to cause issues for Starmer if he receives a Cumming's style verdict from Durham Police rather than a FPN and ironically penned by Mary Foy MP who was present at 'beergate'
“The vast majority of constituents who have contacted me have expressed the view that Mr Cummings’ actions have been insensitive and unacceptable at best, and many feel that they warrant further investigation by the police.”
“While I understand today’s decision by Durham Police to take no further action, many of the constituents who have written to me would like Mr Cummings to resign or be sacked. Clearly, whether you stick by him or not is a matter for you, but the perception from my constituents, and I would hazard a guess that this is a common view across the North East, is that you are currently putting the interests of your chief adviser above that of the people of the region and the country as a whole.”
You've been saying for months we have to wait for Ms Gray's report, for a whole catalogue of things allegedly perpetrated by Mr Johnson.
Now you can't wait for a few days?!
Six to eight weeks apparently and why is this not salient ?
Tory MP Lee Anderson says no massive need for food banks in UK, and real problem people not being able to cook properly
In his contribution to the Queen’s speech debate the Conservative MP Lee Anderson said that a food bank in his Ashfield constituency operated a “brilliant scheme” whereby people accepting a donation had to register for a budgeting course and a cooking course. He went on:
We show them how to cook cheap and nutritious meals on a budget. We can make a meal for about 30p a day, and this is cooking from scratch.
When an opposition MP put it to Anderson that food banks should not be needed in 21st century Britain, Anderson agreed. He went on:
This is exactly my point. I’ll invite you personally to come to Ashfield, look at our food bank, how it works. And I’ll think you’ll see first hand that there’s not this massive use for food banks in this country. We’ve got generation after generation who cannot cook properly. They can’t cook a meal from scratch. They cannot budget. The challenge is there.
From the context, it is clear that when he said there was not a “massive use for food banks”, he meant no massive need for them.
There is a real problem of people not being able to cook properly.
If Jack Monroe had said that people struggle to cook properly and budget and support was needed for that, you wouldn't blink twice, but a Tory says that and its horrific.
Alternatively, we could find out what Jack Monroe thinks;
"Helping somebody conditional on them saying 'you know what, this is all my own fault, please teach me how to be better at being poor', is disgusting, actually."
To a large extent, it's the Captain Vines theory of economics. Being poor forces you into making bad long-term choices. If you are rich enough to have time and space to cook and buy in bulk, you can feed yourself well and cheaply much more easily than if you are in a bedsit or worse
So she wants people to learn how to cook, but doesn't like a scheme that literally teaches people how to cook. It's almost as if the campaigners have an agenda. Isn't the actual answer - "hey it's not ideal but one extra person who can cook cheaply is another person out of food poverty".
The agenda is they want a world where people are helpless and utterly reliant on state support. I am reliant financially on state support and it's fucking miserable. Anything that can be done to teach skills, techniques etc to help lift yourself away from poverty is a good thing.
A recent comedy. Round where I live.
There are quite a number of bike shops catering to the very well off. Lots of work doing upgrades and stuff, that frankly, a competent bike owner could do themselves.
So they have buckets of second hand bits. Lots of stuff that is straight off bikes that has just been bought - not even used. The bike is bought and then a long list of bit changed. Yes, I know - why not buy a bare frame and buy the toys to match? Anyway....
A lot is not even worth fleabaying.
So a couple of the owners got in touch with some local people and for a couple of quid, let them pick out any stuff they want. Awesome, you'd think?
No, no, no, no..... No.
Before you could say "Clipboard" - a couple of hi-vizziers from the Council popped in to try and claim they were selling dangerous and unsafe equipment.
Of course they did this in earshot of some the rich evul middle class bike owners. One of whom was a lawyer. Of course. The hi-vizziers got pounded like dockside hookers.....
When I first moved to Cambridge, I lived in a shared house in Milton with a few blokes. One was a caterer who worked at one of the Cambridge colleges. He had made a top-notch bike by stealing bits of various other bikes from around the city at night: if a nice bike was locked through the wheel, he'd dismantle it and steal the frame, leaving everything else behind. If he needed the chainset, he'd take just that.
What got me was that it would probably have been quicker to steal the whole bike; instead, he would carefully dismantle it, taking only the bits he needed, and leaving the rest in a pile. Because of his job, he was often around the city late at night.
He'd also go into the back garden of the house and hit golf balls over the surrounding rooftops, not caring where they landed.
Nice bike as a whole = identifiable configuration, traceable against Ploddata.
Bits = not traceable. Presumably he also had an UV lamp and the necessary solvents?
What is the fucking matter with the man. He's at the 'I love you' stage of being drunk, chucking our overstretched military at anyone who'll have it like an unwanted beery hug.
Isn't Boris just making formal, an unspoken truth?
If Russia invades Finland or Sweden (or both) it's WWIII! Which is why a Russian invasion of Finland or Sweden probably isn't going to happen (I say *probably* rather the *definitely* because there's always that 5% chance Mad Vlad has become so loopy he might actually do it)
If it is WW3, my suggestion would be wait it out until we're attacked - it worked for the Americans in WW2 - few people seem to see that as a blot on their copybook.
I'd take your 'suggestion' with more weight if you would answer a simple question: do you believe the Dutch investigation into the M17 shootdown got to the truth of the matter, or do you still parrot a Russian line?
What is the fucking matter with the man. He's at the 'I love you' stage of being drunk, chucking our overstretched military at anyone who'll have it like an unwanted beery hug.
Isn't Boris just making formal, an unspoken truth?
If Russia invades Finland or Sweden (or both) it's WWIII! Which is why a Russian invasion of Finland or Sweden probably isn't going to happen (I say *probably* rather the *definitely* because there's always that 5% chance Mad Vlad has become so loopy he might actually do it)
If it is WW3, my suggestion would be wait it out until we're attacked - it worked for the Americans in WW2 - few people seem to see that as a blot on their copybook.
Probably sounding cynical but trying to be honest, the answer is, Lucky, Boris pressed on partygate and beergate at the news conference today refuses to answer with “we have moved on to far more important things now.”
I expect operation save big dog is still working to shore up his position. Things like todays visits and promises are his best way to do that maybe? Considering his Treasury or cabinet won’t back his promise in debate yesterday to help families with cost of living crisis, what else can operation saving big dog work with this week? 🤔
HYUFD, playing these deals down in contrast to Big G, summed up todays entente cordially deals by pointing out in this thread, they are not “legally binding” in the same way as NATO membership, leaving us in no doubt once NATO membership deals come along, these deals become superseded even mostly meaningless is what I took from it.
However, correct me where I am wrong, I understand HY is also not being open about “legally bindings” if a NATO ally is attacked - we could just send Putin a stiff letter and call in his ambassador for a dressing down, this is all we are “legally obliged” to do in NATO membership?
Taking food education further I would like to see an ongoing level of free life skills provision available for all.
Something like first 2 hrs per week of cooking, sports, literacy, numeracy, personal finance, fitness, basic IT paid for by the state for everyone who wants it.
A real investment in the people of the UK. It would be expensive at first but we would quickly become happier, better educated and also more productive in work and less costly to the health service.
There might even be more permanent salaried positions for qualified FE teachers. I approve of this. And would chuck languages into the mix. And "wellbeing". Though I detest the term.
Agree on wellbeing, but also couldnt define it so it was in my fitness. Languages borderline for me, not against it but not fussed compared to the others that I think are real issues within the UK.
Yeah. Just noticed you had sport and fitness as two discrete categories.
Yes - get people into actually doing sport. Excessive emphasis on fitness, too early, can just put them off.
Now I must go and row on the Thames.....
Fitness should be a very broad church if it is for all ages, not just gym, but mindfulness, walking groups, yoga, dance, whatever gets people out and about and moving or thinking better.
I would argue it goes wider still. Encompassing anger management, parenting skills, addiction therapies, cooking, personal finance and the like. Which is where it tips into "wellbeing". Which I don't like, but haven't a better term for. All of which are much better than yet another night of Netflix.
What is the fucking matter with the man. He's at the 'I love you' stage of being drunk, chucking our overstretched military at anyone who'll have it like an unwanted beery hug.
Uniting the Baltics against the war criminal that is Putin is just desserts for his foolish and miscalculated criminal attack on the sovereign nation of Ukraine
This is interesting and worthy comment, but aren’t you going to do ANY beergate this week? 🙁
I am able to multi task and I did post this earlier today
This may come back to cause issues for Starmer if he receives a Cumming's style verdict from Durham Police rather than a FPN and ironically penned by Mary Foy MP who was present at 'beergate'
“The vast majority of constituents who have contacted me have expressed the view that Mr Cummings’ actions have been insensitive and unacceptable at best, and many feel that they warrant further investigation by the police.”
“While I understand today’s decision by Durham Police to take no further action, many of the constituents who have written to me would like Mr Cummings to resign or be sacked. Clearly, whether you stick by him or not is a matter for you, but the perception from my constituents, and I would hazard a guess that this is a common view across the North East, is that you are currently putting the interests of your chief adviser above that of the people of the region and the country as a whole.”
You've been saying for months we have to wait for Ms Gray's report, for a whole catalogue of things allegedly perpetrated by Mr Johnson.
Now you can't wait for a few days?!
Six to eight weeks apparently and why is this not salient ?
Given how long the wait for justice is these days, that's pretty quick by current standards. Unless you want the Tory party to interfere.
I agree that too many people can't cook from scratch.
But only an idiot would say that you can make homemade meals for "30p per day". Lee Anderson is an idiot, so that fits.
Risotto and Spanish Omelette.
Both are utterly delicious (or can be if cooked well). Both can be made extremely cheaply.
(Spanish omlette - 1.5 eggs per person, 1/4 onion, a couple of potatoes, a splash of olive oil... that's going to come in below 50p per person unless you really overboard with your eggs.)
To a large extent, it's the Captain Vines theory of economics. Being poor forces you into making bad long-term choices. If you are rich enough to have time and space to cook and buy in bulk, you can feed yourself well and cheaply much more easily than if you are in a bedsit or worse
Dorothy L Sayers also wrote about in Murder Must Advertise.
Plus, deep freezes. You can't run one if you are hand-to-mouth about electricity,and they are the or a great saver.
We have a bunch of frozen vegtables in our freezer, and some frozen prawns. When I'm being lazy, I chuck 'em all in a frying pan and add some rice noodles and soy sauce.
My children pronounce this delicious, and it takes less than ten minutes and involves maybe $1 of ingredients per person.
I had some chicken, frozen sliced mushrooms, spring onions and noodles with soy today as it happens. Cheap and tasty
Watching that Gove video, crikey, he reminds me of a friend who went through a pretty messy divorce.
It's not pleasant.
I had thought of all the twatty Brexiteers out there, there was one, that while very weird in many ways appeared otherwise comparatively sane, and that was Gove. This morning he proved he was even more twatty than the worst of them.
Yeah, as long as the people on the other side of the argument are low rent basic types like David Davis, JRM, Mad Nad and Priti Patel you can be pretty sure you're on the right side. Gove is the exception because he is really not stupid. But he seems to be undergoing an epic mid life crisis, so maybe he was mad too, or BDS has taken its toll on him. I don't count Johnson in this because as we all know he doesn't give a shit about Brexit either way.
What is the fucking matter with the man. He's at the 'I love you' stage of being drunk, chucking our overstretched military at anyone who'll have it like an unwanted beery hug.
Uniting the Baltics against the war criminal that is Putin is just desserts for his foolish and miscalculated criminal attack on the sovereign nation of Ukraine
This is interesting and worthy comment, but aren’t you going to do ANY beergate this week? 🙁
I am able to multi task and I did post this earlier today
This may come back to cause issues for Starmer if he receives a Cumming's style verdict from Durham Police rather than a FPN and ironically penned by Mary Foy MP who was present at 'beergate'
“The vast majority of constituents who have contacted me have expressed the view that Mr Cummings’ actions have been insensitive and unacceptable at best, and many feel that they warrant further investigation by the police.”
“While I understand today’s decision by Durham Police to take no further action, many of the constituents who have written to me would like Mr Cummings to resign or be sacked. Clearly, whether you stick by him or not is a matter for you, but the perception from my constituents, and I would hazard a guess that this is a common view across the North East, is that you are currently putting the interests of your chief adviser above that of the people of the region and the country as a whole.”
You've been saying for months we have to wait for Ms Gray's report, for a whole catalogue of things allegedly perpetrated by Mr Johnson.
Now you can't wait for a few days?!
Six to eight weeks apparently and why is this not salient ?
Given how long the wait for justice is these days, that's pretty quick by current standards. Unless you want the Tory party to interfere.
What is the fucking matter with the man. He's at the 'I love you' stage of being drunk, chucking our overstretched military at anyone who'll have it like an unwanted beery hug.
Uniting the Baltics against the war criminal that is Putin is just desserts for his foolish and miscalculated criminal attack on the sovereign nation of Ukraine
This is interesting and worthy comment, but aren’t you going to do ANY beergate this week? 🙁
I am able to multi task and I did post this earlier today
This may come back to cause issues for Starmer if he receives a Cumming's style verdict from Durham Police rather than a FPN and ironically penned by Mary Foy MP who was present at 'beergate'
“The vast majority of constituents who have contacted me have expressed the view that Mr Cummings’ actions have been insensitive and unacceptable at best, and many feel that they warrant further investigation by the police.”
“While I understand today’s decision by Durham Police to take no further action, many of the constituents who have written to me would like Mr Cummings to resign or be sacked. Clearly, whether you stick by him or not is a matter for you, but the perception from my constituents, and I would hazard a guess that this is a common view across the North East, is that you are currently putting the interests of your chief adviser above that of the people of the region and the country as a whole.”
That is the spot on answer Big G, becuase I already posted this myself a few days ago when my Dad said it - a ticking off or “not enough evidence to prove it” verdict but no fine means he can be hounded by beergate innuendo all over again, forever 😄
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
Tory MP Lee Anderson says no massive need for food banks in UK, and real problem people not being able to cook properly
In his contribution to the Queen’s speech debate the Conservative MP Lee Anderson said that a food bank in his Ashfield constituency operated a “brilliant scheme” whereby people accepting a donation had to register for a budgeting course and a cooking course. He went on:
We show them how to cook cheap and nutritious meals on a budget. We can make a meal for about 30p a day, and this is cooking from scratch.
When an opposition MP put it to Anderson that food banks should not be needed in 21st century Britain, Anderson agreed. He went on:
This is exactly my point. I’ll invite you personally to come to Ashfield, look at our food bank, how it works. And I’ll think you’ll see first hand that there’s not this massive use for food banks in this country. We’ve got generation after generation who cannot cook properly. They can’t cook a meal from scratch. They cannot budget. The challenge is there.
From the context, it is clear that when he said there was not a “massive use for food banks”, he meant no massive need for them.
There is a real problem of people not being able to cook properly.
If Jack Monroe had said that people struggle to cook properly and budget and support was needed for that, you wouldn't blink twice, but a Tory says that and its horrific.
Alternatively, we could find out what Jack Monroe thinks;
"Helping somebody conditional on them saying 'you know what, this is all my own fault, please teach me how to be better at being poor', is disgusting, actually."
To a large extent, it's the Captain Vines theory of economics. Being poor forces you into making bad long-term choices. If you are rich enough to have time and space to cook and buy in bulk, you can feed yourself well and cheaply much more easily than if you are in a bedsit or worse
So she wants people to learn how to cook, but doesn't like a scheme that literally teaches people how to cook. It's almost as if the campaigners have an agenda. Isn't the actual answer - "hey it's not ideal but one extra person who can cook cheaply is another person out of food poverty".
The agenda is they want a world where people are helpless and utterly reliant on state support. I am reliant financially on state support and it's fucking miserable. Anything that can be done to teach skills, techniques etc to help lift yourself away from poverty is a good thing.
A recent comedy. Round where I live.
There are quite a number of bike shops catering to the very well off. Lots of work doing upgrades and stuff, that frankly, a competent bike owner could do themselves.
So they have buckets of second hand bits. Lots of stuff that is straight off bikes that has just been bought - not even used. The bike is bought and then a long list of bit changed. Yes, I know - why not buy a bare frame and buy the toys to match? Anyway....
A lot is not even worth fleabaying.
So a couple of the owners got in touch with some local people and for a couple of quid, let them pick out any stuff they want. Awesome, you'd think?
No, no, no, no..... No.
Before you could say "Clipboard" - a couple of hi-vizziers from the Council popped in to try and claim they were selling dangerous and unsafe equipment.
Of course they did this in earshot of some the rich evul middle class bike owners. One of whom was a lawyer. Of course. The hi-vizziers got pounded like dockside hookers.....
When I first moved to Cambridge, I lived in a shared house in Milton with a few blokes. One was a caterer who worked at one of the Cambridge colleges. He had made a top-notch bike by stealing bits of various other bikes from around the city at night: if a nice bike was locked through the wheel, he'd dismantle it and steal the frame, leaving everything else behind. If he needed the chainset, he'd take just that.
What got me was that it would probably have been quicker to steal the whole bike; instead, he would carefully dismantle it, taking only the bits he needed, and leaving the rest in a pile. Because of his job, he was often around the city late at night.
He'd also go into the back garden of the house and hit golf balls over the surrounding rooftops, not caring where they landed.
Nice bike as a whole = identifiable configuration, traceable against Ploddata.
Bits = not traceable. Presumably he also had an UV lamp and the necessary solvents?
No idea; didn't ask. I do know he took to prowling around the streets at night, looking for the components he needed, with tools in his backpack. "Just needed for fixing my bike, officer."
His parents lived near Nottingham, so I'd often drive him home at weekends on the way to see my girlfriend in derby. One of the people you meet and spend a lot of time with, but then touch with when you move. Or at least I do...
Taking food education further I would like to see an ongoing level of free life skills provision available for all.
Something like first 2 hrs per week of cooking, sports, literacy, numeracy, personal finance, fitness, basic IT paid for by the state for everyone who wants it.
A real investment in the people of the UK. It would be expensive at first but we would quickly become happier, better educated and also more productive in work and less costly to the health service.
There might even be more permanent salaried positions for qualified FE teachers. I approve of this. And would chuck languages into the mix. And "wellbeing". Though I detest the term.
Agree on wellbeing, but also couldnt define it so it was in my fitness. Languages borderline for me, not against it but not fussed compared to the others that I think are real issues within the UK.
Yeah. Just noticed you had sport and fitness as two discrete categories.
Yes - get people into actually doing sport. Excessive emphasis on fitness, too early, can just put them off.
Now I must go and row on the Thames.....
Fitness should be a very broad church if it is for all ages, not just gym, but mindfulness, walking groups, yoga, dance, whatever gets people out and about and moving or thinking better.
I would argue it goes wider still. Encompassing anger management, parenting skills, addiction therapies, cooking, personal finance and the like. Which is where it tips into "wellbeing". Which I don't like, but haven't a better term for. All of which are much better than yet another night of Netflix.
Parenting absolutely! Forgot that, but it is a key one, crazy it is not taught yet we obsess over kings and queens from 1000 years ago. Coping with anger or addiction definitely should be available for free, far cheaper for society to avoid some of the issues by paying early than dealing with it afterwards.
Tory MP Lee Anderson says no massive need for food banks in UK, and real problem people not being able to cook properly
In his contribution to the Queen’s speech debate the Conservative MP Lee Anderson said that a food bank in his Ashfield constituency operated a “brilliant scheme” whereby people accepting a donation had to register for a budgeting course and a cooking course. He went on:
We show them how to cook cheap and nutritious meals on a budget. We can make a meal for about 30p a day, and this is cooking from scratch.
When an opposition MP put it to Anderson that food banks should not be needed in 21st century Britain, Anderson agreed. He went on:
This is exactly my point. I’ll invite you personally to come to Ashfield, look at our food bank, how it works. And I’ll think you’ll see first hand that there’s not this massive use for food banks in this country. We’ve got generation after generation who cannot cook properly. They can’t cook a meal from scratch. They cannot budget. The challenge is there.
From the context, it is clear that when he said there was not a “massive use for food banks”, he meant no massive need for them.
It's a fair comment. People in the UK have poorer cooking skill than the rest of Europe. I come across people who struggle to make rice or pasta regularly and not having basic skills really limits the ability to each cheap and nutritious food. Takeaways are both expensive and unhealthy.
It’s the remarkable thing about being in Italy. You hear a group of ordinary Italians having a most heated argument about something, and from the passion and energy you’d think the eldest daughter had run off with the best man or some similar family catastrophe was unfolding.
Then, armed with a little basic Italian, you begin to make out enough words to realise that the debate is really about how to cook a certain recipe or whether one restaurant in town does pasta better than another.
That said, today has been so hot that we escaped to the Slovenian mountains and have been exploring the remains of the trenches in the high mountains around Caporetto - the battle that did more than any single other thing to subsequently and eventually give birth to fascism in Europe - but a name that will draw blank looks from almost anyone you mention it to back at home.
The battles on the Isonzo made the Somme and Paschendale look like masterpieces of military tactics.
Indeed. Although we did pause for a breather atop the hill the capture of which first made the name of a then lieutenant Rommel.
My great grandfather was attached to General Gough's military mission to the Italians and was wounded at Vaporetto. After he recovered he was sent to Paschendael where he was gassed. He died with half a lung in 1924
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
ISW @TheStudyofWar · 10m The three key takeaways from the 4/9 report:
1) Russia is unlikely to be able to mass combat power for the fight in eastern Ukraine proportionate to the number of troops and BTGs it sends there. ISW @TheStudyofWar · 10m 2. The Russian military continues to suffer from devastating morale, recruitment, and retention problems that seriously undermine its ability to fight effectively.
3. The outcome of forthcoming Russian operations in eastern Ukraine remains very much in question.
I agree that too many people can't cook from scratch.
But only an idiot would say that you can make homemade meals for "30p per day". Lee Anderson is an idiot, so that fits.
Risotto and Spanish Omelette.
Both are utterly delicious (or can be if cooked well). Both can be made extremely cheaply.
(Spanish omlette - 1.5 eggs per person, 1/4 onion, a couple of potatoes, a splash of olive oil... that's going to come in below 50p per person unless you really overboard with your eggs.)
Eggs are key to eating on a low budget. Cheap, filling, nutritious, flexible.
I think a lot of people like to comfort themselves with the idea that people using foodbanks are doing so because they don't know how to cook or manage a budget. But I am not sure they would actually be able to cope with having to live the lives those who do use foodbanks have. Doing it for a week and knowing that it will all then go away is not the same as doing it with no reason to believe it will ever stop.
How did that Pulp song go?
Rent a flat above a shop Cut your hair and get a job Smoke some fags and play some pool Pretend you never went to school But still you'll never get it right 'Cause when you're laid in bed at night Watching roaches climb the wall If you called your dad he could stop it all, yeah You'll never live like common people You'll never do whatever common people do You'll never fail like common people You'll never watch your life slide out of view And you dance and drink and screw Because there's nothing else to do
didnt he go to public school as well?
Nah, he went to a comprehensive. His mum was a Tory councillor though
Ha ha, great minds make similar recourse to Wikipedia. I definitely had him down as a fellow Comprehensive school kid though. I once ran into Jarvis Cocker in the toilets at Watford Gap services, which seemed a suitably Pulp like venue. Our eyes met but only Leon will be able to tell you whether there was any romantic spark. Pulp are amazing, one of my favourite bands.
Pulp would be on my 'yeah, I guess' list
Go and listen to "Being Followed Home" and then tell me what you think
Yeah, I guess
You either know it already or you didn't go listen. It's 6 minutes of magnificence and you replied before 6 minutes were up! There's no other song like it. Nobody else would write a song like that. Say what you like about Pulp, they are madly unique.
I've listened to it - hasn't grabbed me yet. Sometimes tracks need a few listens to sink in for me.
I've re-discovered Sparks. Take a listen to (and watch) "My Baby's Taking Me Home" (official video) on YouTube. I'm hooked on it.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
What is the fucking matter with the man. He's at the 'I love you' stage of being drunk, chucking our overstretched military at anyone who'll have it like an unwanted beery hug.
Isn't Boris just making formal, an unspoken truth?
If Russia invades Finland or Sweden (or both) it's WWIII! Which is why a Russian invasion of Finland or Sweden probably isn't going to happen (I say *probably* rather the *definitely* because there's always that 5% chance Mad Vlad has become so loopy he might actually do it)
If it is WW3, my suggestion would be wait it out until we're attacked - it worked for the Americans in WW2 - few people seem to see that as a blot on their copybook.
Probably sounding cynical but trying to be honest, the answer is, Lucky, Boris pressed on partygate and beergate at the news conference today refuses to answer with “we have moved on to far more important things now.”
I expect operation save big dog is still working to shore up his position. Things like todays visits and promises are his best way to do that maybe? Considering his Treasury or cabinet won’t back his promise in debate yesterday to help families with cost of living crisis, what else can operation saving big dog work with this week? 🤔
HYUFD, playing these deals down in contrast to Big G, summed up todays entente cordially deals by pointing out in this thread, they are not “legally binding” in the same way as NATO membership, leaving us in no doubt once NATO membership deals come along, these deals become superseded even mostly meaningless is what I took from it.
However, correct me where I am wrong, I understand HY is also not being open about “legally bindings” if a NATO ally is attacked - we could just send Putin a stiff letter and call in his ambassador for a dressing down, this is all we are “legally obliged” to do in NATO membership?
It's the abandoning of all pretence to be governing in the interests of the people in favour of playing with tin soldiers that really grips my scrotes. It was probably always thus, but at least in the pomp of Empire we could afford it. Poor Germany and the pelters that they get for trying to keep the lights on and ensure their population can have a shower every day. That's how a Government is actually meant to behave.
Lots of people on PB cannot cook and have no discernible interest in food. It really is quite a sad spectacle to hear of grown professional men relishing ready meals, instant coffee and being unable to navigate a saucepan.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
The Express leads with welcome news for families suffering cost of living crisis.
Many other papers lead on government back tracking on what Boris promised.
Is coordinating government messaging really as difficult as they are making it look?
Are you not reading BigG. 's dispatched. Boris is having a great day signing international treaties with non-NATO partners. He has just tweaked Putin's nose and said "nuke us if you dare Vlad"!
Boris has his own hard hat and hi-viz coat, so he'll be fine...
...although if Putin is keeping up with the NI Protocol he might just be thinking, "Boris Johnson and international treaties? Pah!"
If Putin nuked us, Johnson would of course send a Trident nuclear missile to nuke Moscow.
In any case a UK Sweden mutual defence treaty is not yet the same as Sweden joining NATO
Well my reading of it from tonight's PM programme is this: If Putin puts a boot onto Swedish or Finnish soil Boris will be on his case. If Putin so much as harms a hair on the head of a British Tommy sent to defend Sweden or Finland, NATO are involved.
Johnson has ramped this up big time. He was the FIRST NATO leader to sign a treaty and any escalation into Scandinavia by Putin and it's all out confrontation. And do you know what? Good on you BigDog (I still wouldn't vote for the duplicitous b****** mind).
There was already a military alliance between the UK, Finland and Sweden (among others)
A further affirmation of what was the situation anyway - that if Russia attacks Finland or Sweden, then we will be very, very rude.
This re-affirmation of outstanding commitments is a long standing thing in times of tension. For the very, very good reasons why, read The Guns of August -
The Germans in 1914 convinced themselves that the UK would abandon the Belgians, because WWI wasn't going to work for them (the Germans) if the UK didn't.
On the UK side, no-one thought that they needed to re-affirm the treaty. If they had...
The Armenian genocide memoir that I’m reading right now makes that same point. The Armenian author is in Germany in 1914 when WW1 kicks off. At first everyone is elated because they are convinced Germany can easily win a swift war against France and Russia
Then “England” joins the war and the elation turns instantly to a numb, stunned sourness, as Germans realise the war will be looooooong and they might not win
Never seen it told that way before
The Guns Of August has a passage on exactly that - the German public (in the cafes) realising that they have few allies.
Lots of people on PB cannot cook and have no discernible interest in food. It really is quite a sad spectacle to hear of grown professional men relishing ready meals, instant coffee and being unable to navigate a saucepan.
Some top meals are simple one's though to be fair. For me, when I'm really hungry not much beats cheese on toast with mature cheddar and chilli jam.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
Lots of people on PB cannot cook and have no discernible interest in food. It really is quite a sad spectacle to hear of grown professional men relishing ready meals, instant coffee and being unable to navigate a saucepan.
I wasn't able to cook at all, but I promised my wife that on retirement I would cook for her and now 13 years later I cook all the roast meals, Christmas dinner, and most meals during the week in addition to giving her breakfast and I enjoy it and my late mother would not believe it !!!!!!
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
Could be opening salvo in a massive war of words during the inquiry, when it finally happens. Modellers blaming DoH and ministers for giving their models too much weight.
Personally, I think Robert Dingwall's call this week in the Telegraph that the public inquiry must answer the question as to why decades of public health and public risk policy on how to deal with a pandemic were thrown out of the window in an instance and lockdown became the tool of choice.
I think a lot of people like to comfort themselves with the idea that people using foodbanks are doing so because they don't know how to cook or manage a budget. But I am not sure they would actually be able to cope with having to live the lives those who do use foodbanks have. Doing it for a week and knowing that it will all then go away is not the same as doing it with no reason to believe it will ever stop.
How did that Pulp song go?
Rent a flat above a shop Cut your hair and get a job Smoke some fags and play some pool Pretend you never went to school But still you'll never get it right 'Cause when you're laid in bed at night Watching roaches climb the wall If you called your dad he could stop it all, yeah You'll never live like common people You'll never do whatever common people do You'll never fail like common people You'll never watch your life slide out of view And you dance and drink and screw Because there's nothing else to do
didnt he go to public school as well?
Nah, he went to a comprehensive. His mum was a Tory councillor though
Ha ha, great minds make similar recourse to Wikipedia. I definitely had him down as a fellow Comprehensive school kid though. I once ran into Jarvis Cocker in the toilets at Watford Gap services, which seemed a suitably Pulp like venue. Our eyes met but only Leon will be able to tell you whether there was any romantic spark. Pulp are amazing, one of my favourite bands.
Pulp would be on my 'yeah, I guess' list
Go and listen to "Being Followed Home" and then tell me what you think
Yeah, I guess
You either know it already or you didn't go listen. It's 6 minutes of magnificence and you replied before 6 minutes were up! There's no other song like it. Nobody else would write a song like that. Say what you like about Pulp, they are madly unique.
My personal favourite is I Spy. "my favourite parks are car parks Grass is something you smoke Birds are something you shag Take your year in Provence And shove it up your ass..." Genius. Special mention for Do you remember the first time, Babies, Disco 2000 and Bar Italia.
Tory MP Lee Anderson says no massive need for food banks in UK, and real problem people not being able to cook properly
In his contribution to the Queen’s speech debate the Conservative MP Lee Anderson said that a food bank in his Ashfield constituency operated a “brilliant scheme” whereby people accepting a donation had to register for a budgeting course and a cooking course. He went on:
We show them how to cook cheap and nutritious meals on a budget. We can make a meal for about 30p a day, and this is cooking from scratch.
When an opposition MP put it to Anderson that food banks should not be needed in 21st century Britain, Anderson agreed. He went on:
This is exactly my point. I’ll invite you personally to come to Ashfield, look at our food bank, how it works. And I’ll think you’ll see first hand that there’s not this massive use for food banks in this country. We’ve got generation after generation who cannot cook properly. They can’t cook a meal from scratch. They cannot budget. The challenge is there.
From the context, it is clear that when he said there was not a “massive use for food banks”, he meant no massive need for them.
There is a real problem of people not being able to cook properly.
If Jack Monroe had said that people struggle to cook properly and budget and support was needed for that, you wouldn't blink twice, but a Tory says that and its horrific.
Alternatively, we could find out what Jack Monroe thinks;
"Helping somebody conditional on them saying 'you know what, this is all my own fault, please teach me how to be better at being poor', is disgusting, actually."
To a large extent, it's the Captain Vines theory of economics. Being poor forces you into making bad long-term choices. If you are rich enough to have time and space to cook and buy in bulk, you can feed yourself well and cheaply much more easily than if you are in a bedsit or worse
So she wants people to learn how to cook, but doesn't like a scheme that literally teaches people how to cook. It's almost as if the campaigners have an agenda. Isn't the actual answer - "hey it's not ideal but one extra person who can cook cheaply is another person out of food poverty".
The agenda is they want a world where people are helpless and utterly reliant on state support. I am reliant financially on state support and it's fucking miserable. Anything that can be done to teach skills, techniques etc to help lift yourself away from poverty is a good thing.
A recent comedy. Round where I live.
There are quite a number of bike shops catering to the very well off. Lots of work doing upgrades and stuff, that frankly, a competent bike owner could do themselves.
So they have buckets of second hand bits. Lots of stuff that is straight off bikes that has just been bought - not even used. The bike is bought and then a long list of bit changed. Yes, I know - why not buy a bare frame and buy the toys to match? Anyway....
A lot is not even worth fleabaying.
So a couple of the owners got in touch with some local people and for a couple of quid, let them pick out any stuff they want. Awesome, you'd think?
No, no, no, no..... No.
Before you could say "Clipboard" - a couple of hi-vizziers from the Council popped in to try and claim they were selling dangerous and unsafe equipment.
Of course they did this in earshot of some the rich evul middle class bike owners. One of whom was a lawyer. Of course. The hi-vizziers got pounded like dockside hookers.....
Clipboard wielders are worse than Durham curry and beer people
The important thing is to "professionalise" everything so only middle class and above can afford it.
This worked really well for childcare.
Spot on. What's the point if being middle class unless everything is tailored to expressing your relative affluence? Why have a cheap exercise bike when you can spend £1500 on an exercise bike with a kindle fire stuck on it?
Obviously - but the important bit is to make sure that the Head Count can't get a cheap version. What is the point of having a Sign of Affluence if the Mob all have one?
Very true. Also important to make cheap cuts of meat trendy in the dinner party and tv chef set so they become pricey and only for you. No belly pork or shin of beef for the peasants if you please
This is a standard Spectator bore meme, why pay £££s for takeaways when you can buy three penn'orth of scrag end of faggot from the butcher and boil it up with a fardel of shallots in a Le Creuset marmite in the slow oven of the Aga for 3 weeks. Serve with a full bodied first growth burgundy.
300% increase in price overnight if some tosser like Blumenthal cooks it in a vacuum cleaner bag at 40 degrees facing north.
The Express leads with welcome news for families suffering cost of living crisis.
Many other papers lead on government back tracking on what Boris promised.
Is coordinating government messaging really as difficult as they are making it look?
Are you not reading BigG. 's dispatched. Boris is having a great day signing international treaties with non-NATO partners. He has just tweaked Putin's nose and said "nuke us if you dare Vlad"!
Boris has his own hard hat and hi-viz coat, so he'll be fine...
...although if Putin is keeping up with the NI Protocol he might just be thinking, "Boris Johnson and international treaties? Pah!"
If Putin nuked us, Johnson would of course send a Trident nuclear missile to nuke Moscow.
In any case a UK Sweden mutual defence treaty is not yet the same as Sweden joining NATO
Well my reading of it from tonight's PM programme is this: If Putin puts a boot onto Swedish or Finnish soil Boris will be on his case. If Putin so much as harms a hair on the head of a British Tommy sent to defend Sweden or Finland, NATO are involved.
Johnson has ramped this up big time. He was the FIRST NATO leader to sign a treaty and any escalation into Scandinavia by Putin and it's all out confrontation. And do you know what? Good on you BigDog (I still wouldn't vote for the duplicitous b****** mind).
There was already a military alliance between the UK, Finland and Sweden (among others)
A further affirmation of what was the situation anyway - that if Russia attacks Finland or Sweden, then we will be very, very rude.
This re-affirmation of outstanding commitments is a long standing thing in times of tension. For the very, very good reasons why, read The Guns of August -
The Germans in 1914 convinced themselves that the UK would abandon the Belgians, because WWI wasn't going to work for them (the Germans) if the UK didn't.
On the UK side, no-one thought that they needed to re-affirm the treaty. If they had...
The Armenian genocide memoir that I’m reading right now makes that same point. The Armenian author is in Germany in 1914 when WW1 kicks off. At first everyone is elated because they are convinced Germany can easily win a swift war against France and Russia
Then “England” joins the war and the elation turns instantly to a numb, stunned sourness, as Germans realise the war will be looooooong and they might not win
Never seen it told that way before
The Guns Of August has a passage on exactly that - the German public (in the cafes) realising that they have few allies.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
It should be at the very core of the inquiry, along with an examination on how it was that the government was able to remove the most basic of liberties from its citizens. In our lib dem we took a lot granted and what has been revealed is an inadequacy of fundamental checks and balances in our system. A culture of safety took over from what we thought were categorical imperatives.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
It should be at the very core of the inquiry, along with an examination on how it was that the government was able to remove the most basic of liberties from its citizens. In our lib dem we took a lot granted and what has been revealed is an inadequacy of fundamental checks and balances in our system. A culture of safety took over from what we thought were categorical imperatives.
It should be.
The sad reality is I expect any inquiry and it's reporting to mostly be sob stories of "deaths that could have been prevented" and why didn't we lockdown sooner etc.
I don't have any experience of foodbanks - Mrs Stodge however (and I don't know how she knows this) tells me some foodbanks actually means test those coming in and will only help those who can prove they are on benefits. I wasn't aware of that.
In Newham, the food banks tend to be religious in nature - the owner of one stood in last week's Council election. My understanding is they will help anyone and on our way home last Saturday the queue at the food bank in East Ham High Street had probably 60-70 waiting.
There is a big problem with food education - as with so much else relating to public health information, the decision to take part of the function from the NHS and give it to councils without any resources probably didn't help. Food education goes with health education - the expression "you are what you eat" is in my case apposite and may be for others, Yet as been said, you can't make people healthy - you can't force people to look after themselves even if, in the face of all the health information, they choose to drink, smoke or eat poor food to excess.
It's possible to eat well, it's just easier and cheaper to eat badly.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
It should be at the very core of the inquiry, along with an examination on how it was that the government was able to remove the most basic of liberties from its citizens. In our lib dem we took a lot granted and what has been revealed is an inadequacy of fundamental checks and balances in our system. A culture of safety took over from what we thought were categorical imperatives.
It should be.
The sad reality is I expect any inquiry and it's reporting to mostly be sob stories of "deaths that could have been prevented" and why didn't we lockdown sooner etc.
Jeez I hope you're wrong. This needs to focus on what we do in the future when a similar thing happens again. Otherwise we live in trepidation, not of a future virus but of what a future government will do in response to one now that it has these illiberal precedents are in its toolkit.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
It should be at the very core of the inquiry, along with an examination on how it was that the government was able to remove the most basic of liberties from its citizens. In our lib dem we took a lot granted and what has been revealed is an inadequacy of fundamental checks and balances in our system. A culture of safety took over from what we thought were categorical imperatives.
It should be.
The sad reality is I expect any inquiry and it's reporting to mostly be sob stories of "deaths that could have been prevented" and why didn't we lockdown sooner etc.
I'm hoping for a very tough minded judge for the chair who will not allow that to happen.
"along with an examination on how it was that the government was able to remove the most basic of liberties from its citizens."
Absolutely. I think it was Big Dog himself who at one point who expressed surprise at how easy it was to turn off the most basic rights of freedom and association.
I don't have any experience of foodbanks - Mrs Stodge however (and I don't know how she knows this) tells me some foodbanks actually means test those coming in and will only help those who can prove they are on benefits. I wasn't aware of that.
In Newham, the food banks tend to be religious in nature - the owner of one stood in last week's Council election. My understanding is they will help anyone and on our way home last Saturday the queue at the food bank in East Ham High Street had probably 60-70 waiting.
There is a big problem with food education - as with so much else relating to public health information, the decision to take part of the function from the NHS and give it to councils without any resources probably didn't help. Food education goes with health education - the expression "you are what you eat" is in my case apposite and may be for others, Yet as been said, you can't make people healthy - you can't force people to look after themselves even if, in the face of all the health information, they choose to drink, smoke or eat poor food to excess.
It's possible to eat well, it's just easier and cheaper to eat badly.
SAme with the local foodbank - they need a reference from a relevant agency, which has the same effect, but is slighly more flexible. Thwere is no way anyone can rock up (contrary to Tory myth) and do the weekly shop for free.
The very occasional exception is if sometimes they have an impossible glut like 10 crates of almost overripe bananas but then they put them outside with a notice to help yourself - not inside the shop.
I agree that too many people can't cook from scratch.
But only an idiot would say that you can make homemade meals for "30p per day". Lee Anderson is an idiot, so that fits.
Risotto and Spanish Omelette.
Both are utterly delicious (or can be if cooked well). Both can be made extremely cheaply.
(Spanish omlette - 1.5 eggs per person, 1/4 onion, a couple of potatoes, a splash of olive oil... that's going to come in below 50p per person unless you really overboard with your eggs.)
Eggs are key to eating on a low budget. Cheap, filling, nutritious, flexible.
I've developed a liking for pickled eggs - much to Mrs Stocky's disgust.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Chelsea FC is close to unveiling a £20m-a-year sponsorship deal with a fast-growing cryptocurrency group – despite a temporary ban on the club striking lucrative new partnerships while it operates under government supervision.
Sky News can reveal that the Blues have agreed a shirt-sleeve contract with WhaleFin, a digital asset platform owned by Singapore-based Amber Group.
Sources said the deal, which will launch next season, could be confirmed publicly as early as Thursday morning.
Chelsea FC is close to unveiling a £20m-a-year sponsorship deal with a fast-growing cryptocurrency group – despite a temporary ban on the club striking lucrative new partnerships while it operates under government supervision.
Sky News can reveal that the Blues have agreed a shirt-sleeve contract with WhaleFin, a digital asset platform owned by Singapore-based Amber Group.
Sources said the deal, which will launch next season, could be confirmed publicly as early as Thursday morning.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
PB anti-Woke warriors won't know whether to laugh or cry, jeer or cheer . . .
Seattle Times ($) - San Juan Islands waterway could be renamed to honor Indigenous leader
Ken Carrasco was reading about the 1855 Battle of Ash Hollow when he came across a familiar name: Gen. William Harney.
The Harney Channel that his Orcas Island home overlooks, he realized, was named after a man who once tried to defend the San Juan Islands from British rule but also was responsible for the murders of Indigenous people and an enslaved woman. . . .
Now three years later, Carrasco and Shaw Island resident Stephanie Buffum are leading an effort to rename the channel to honor Henry Cayou, an Indigenous San Juan County commissioner and commercial fisherman . . .
The proposal to rename the waterway Cayou Channel was approved by the Washington State Committee on Geographic Names in April and is now under consideration by the Washington Board on Geographic Names. If approved, the proposal will go to the federal Board on Geographic Names for a final decision. . . .
General George B. McClellan . . . claimed that General William S. Harney and Pickett conspired with a cabal, to start a war with Britain, creating a common enemy, to head off a north–south confrontation. . . .
[SSI - my own theory is that Pickett was Harney's protege AND both were rash hotheads NOT noted for brainpower]
Brigadier General William S. Harney, commanding the Department of Oregon, initially dispatched Captain George Pickett and 66 American soldiers of the 9th Infantry Regiment under Pickett's command, to San Juan Island with orders to prevent the British from landing . . . Concerned that a squatter population of Americans would begin to occupy San Juan Island if the Americans were not kept in check, the British sent three warships . . . Pickett was quoted as saying defiantly, "We'll make a Bunker Hill of it," placing him in the national limelight. . . .
Pickett established the American Camp near the south end of San Juan Island, today one of two historical sites on the island, the other being the British Camp, defended by the Royal Marines on the north end of the island. . . .
The governor of the Colony of Vancouver Island, James Douglas, had ordered Captain Hornby to dislodge the American troops, avoiding armed conflict if possible. At the time, the additional reinforcements sent by American General Harney had not yet arrived, and the island was occupied by only Pickett's 66 men.
Hornby refused to take any action until British Rear Admiral Robert L. Baynes, who was in command of the British Navy in the Pacific, would arrive himself. When Baynes finally came and took stock of the situation, he told Governor Douglas that he would not escalate the conflict into a war between great nations "over a squabble about a pig".
The Pig War. Harney and Pickett didn't come out well in my HS Canadian history course. The main street in Victoria is still named after the governor of Vancouver Island who sent the troops, James Douglas.
Quite a fellow in his own right, rose through ranks of Hudson's Bay Co, spent much quality time at Fort Vancouver on Columbia River, now in WA State just north of Portland, Oregon. Before he along with HBC were run out by Americans with partition of Oregon Country, which explains his touchiness re: the pig.
BTW, Douglas was also one of the few satraps-of-color in mid-19th century British Empire, being born out of wedlock in (today's) Guyana to a Scottish planter/merchant father and mixed African-European mother.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
That is fundamental and well-said. No-one in the government wanted Covid to happen. No-one wanted tens of thousands of people to die. And they had to make decisions in days, from an (in modern times) unprecedented situation, and without the benefit of hindsight.
However much you might hate Boris, he did not want, or gain, from the Covid crisis. If he could have clicked his fingers and made the crisis go away, he would have. Instead the government had to made decisions on very incomplete information.
I don't have any experience of foodbanks - Mrs Stodge however (and I don't know how she knows this) tells me some foodbanks actually means test those coming in and will only help those who can prove they are on benefits. I wasn't aware of that.
In Newham, the food banks tend to be religious in nature - the owner of one stood in last week's Council election. My understanding is they will help anyone and on our way home last Saturday the queue at the food bank in East Ham High Street had probably 60-70 waiting.
There is a big problem with food education - as with so much else relating to public health information, the decision to take part of the function from the NHS and give it to councils without any resources probably didn't help. Food education goes with health education - the expression "you are what you eat" is in my case apposite and may be for others, Yet as been said, you can't make people healthy - you can't force people to look after themselves even if, in the face of all the health information, they choose to drink, smoke or eat poor food to excess.
It's possible to eat well, it's just easier and cheaper to eat badly.
We have two "official" food banks locally which do indeed require a referral from the CAB or Job Centre to confirm you're on benefits. There's also a more easygoing one run by the town council where people drop stuff off and anyone can come in and take stuff - it's been running for a year and seems to work without problems - I know one of the volunteers, asnd she says they never get anyone being silly and asking to take mountains of stuff. The main issue is that some who come are terribly embarrassed, and need to be reassured that loads of people have a spell of bad luck, nothing to be ashamed of.
Clearly (despite my own unhealthy preference for chilled meals) it's possible to cook on a modest budget and helpful if one knows how. That said, it was (I think unintentionally) a bit awkwardly phrased by the MP, as it could be read as victim-blaming. If you don't know how to cook, you don't - just telling you to go away and learn isn't a helpful approach, especially if you're in debt and buying anything at all is intimidating. And if my local places are any guide the food banks are all about providing the basics which people do then cook themselves.
I agree that too many people can't cook from scratch.
But only an idiot would say that you can make homemade meals for "30p per day". Lee Anderson is an idiot, so that fits.
Risotto and Spanish Omelette.
Both are utterly delicious (or can be if cooked well). Both can be made extremely cheaply.
(Spanish omlette - 1.5 eggs per person, 1/4 onion, a couple of potatoes, a splash of olive oil... that's going to come in below 50p per person unless you really overboard with your eggs.)
Eggs are key to eating on a low budget. Cheap, filling, nutritious, flexible.
I've developed a liking for pickled eggs - much to Mrs Stocky's disgust.
Here's a tip - next time you find yourself in a dark tavern somewhere in the USA and see a jar of pickled eggs on the bar - do NOT indulge.
That is, NOT before ascertaining they haven't been sitting there since the Ford administration.
To a large extent, it's the Captain Vines theory of economics. Being poor forces you into making bad long-term choices. If you are rich enough to have time and space to cook and buy in bulk, you can feed yourself well and cheaply much more easily than if you are in a bedsit or worse
Dorothy L Sayers also wrote about in Murder Must Advertise.
Plus, deep freezes. You can't run one if you are hand-to-mouth about electricity,and they are the or a great saver.
We have a bunch of frozen vegtables in our freezer, and some frozen prawns. When I'm being lazy, I chuck 'em all in a frying pan and add some rice noodles and soy sauce.
My children pronounce this delicious, and it takes less than ten minutes and involves maybe $1 of ingredients per person.
I had some chicken, frozen sliced mushrooms, spring onions and noodles with soy today as it happens. Cheap and tasty
Kikkoman’s soy sauce makes almost everything tolerable. Instant umami
When I travel, I always take: a bottle of Kikkoman’s soy sauce, a bottle of Tabasco, a bottle of sriracha, grindable rock salt and grindable black pepper. These can usually salvage any meal, no matter how banal
I was delighted to discover recently that Lord Byron did exactly the same. He took three or four bottled sauces from London wherever he went, to rescue insipid meals on his continental travels. Somewhat counter-intuitive, but true
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
That is fundamental and well-said. No-one in the government wanted Covid to happen. No-one wanted tens of thousands of people to die. And they had to make decisions in days, from an (in modern times) unprecedented situation, and without the benefit of hindsight.
However much you might hate Boris, he did not want, or gain, from the Covid crisis. If he could have clicked his fingers and made the crisis go away, he would have. Instead the government had to made decisions on very incomplete information.
Agreed.
But we need to know why existing approaches and plans were thrown out of the window.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
I largely agree, though feel strongly that the government acted partly to protect itself from as much criticism as possible and so took the line of least resistance rather than applying science and principle, partly by injecting fear into its citizens and partly by contracting out to unelected individuals often to provide cover.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
Well mostly. I still have my doubts about Susan Michie. It doesn't seem beyond the bounds of credibility that a communist party member saw an opportunity to bring down capitalism and massively expand the reach of the state.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
But how were they supposed to do that with the media screaming that "we're all going to die if you don't Follow The Science"?
Lots of people on PB cannot cook and have no discernible interest in food. It really is quite a sad spectacle to hear of grown professional men relishing ready meals, instant coffee and being unable to navigate a saucepan.
I find it a bit lamentable, TBH
Being unable to cook is nothing to be proud of. It’s like being unable to read
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
But how were they supposed to do that with the media screaming that "we're all going to die if you don't Follow The Science"?
Ignore the media. They are the government, not the media. And rather a lot of the time, the media were screaming "but the money" and attacking and discrediting any scientist they could name.
Edit: though, on reflection, if you have a government of journalists and PR manipulators, there is a problem.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
I largely agree, though feel strongly that the government acted partly to protect itself from as much criticism as possible and so took the line of least resistance rather than applying science and principle, partly by injecting fear into its citizens and partly by contracting out to unelected individuals often to provide cover.
What 'science' could be applied at the beginning? Back in late March 2020, we had little idea of how the virus spread - remember all the stuff about cleaning your hands regularly with gel, which (although good advice generally), did little to prevent the spread of this particular virus?
'virus' is a small word that covers a multitude of sins. We knew something was happening, and the science could tell us it was a virus and even the virus's genetic code. But we are not yet advanced enough to go from that to say 'this is how we deal with it.'
There had to be a certain amount of fear for the first lockdown, as we had little idea *what* we were dealing with. I'd argue that was still the case (though less so) a year later.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
My anger on the subject is, I admit, due to losing precious time with my dying mother and the impact it had on my personal mental health.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
But how were they supposed to do that with the media screaming that "we're all going to die if you don't Follow The Science"?
Ignore the media. They are the government, not the media. And rather a lot of the time, the media were screaming "but the money" and attacking and discrediting any scientist they could name.
Edit: though, on reflection, if you have a government of journalists and PR manipulators, there is a problem.
The problem was that too big a proportion of people watched, and believed, the scaremongering bullshit of the primary TV news bulletins.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
Really not sure that’s true. Witness the Lab Leak debate. That was not “everyone trying to do the right thing” that was a section of the scientific elite conniving with politicians and social media to silence the possibility that this was the greatest scientific fuck up in all history - and China/America were and are both implicated
That was not benign intentions gone wrong. It was a conspiracy of malignant lies
And that is true even IF it turns out it came from the wet market (highly unlikely, but let’s allow it)
To a large extent, it's the Captain Vines theory of economics. Being poor forces you into making bad long-term choices. If you are rich enough to have time and space to cook and buy in bulk, you can feed yourself well and cheaply much more easily than if you are in a bedsit or worse
Dorothy L Sayers also wrote about in Murder Must Advertise.
Plus, deep freezes. You can't run one if you are hand-to-mouth about electricity,and they are the or a great saver.
We have a bunch of frozen vegtables in our freezer, and some frozen prawns. When I'm being lazy, I chuck 'em all in a frying pan and add some rice noodles and soy sauce.
My children pronounce this delicious, and it takes less than ten minutes and involves maybe $1 of ingredients per person.
I had some chicken, frozen sliced mushrooms, spring onions and noodles with soy today as it happens. Cheap and tasty
Kikkoman’s soy sauce makes almost everything tolerable. Instant umami
When I travel, I always take: a bottle of Kikkoman’s soy sauce, a bottle of Tabasco, a bottle of sriracha, grindable rock salt and grindable black pepper. These can usually salvage any meal, no matter how banal
I was delighted to discover recently that Lord Byron did exactly the same. He took three or four bottled sauces from London wherever he went, to rescue insipid meals on his continental travels. Somewhat counter-intuitive, but true
Decent condiments are worth missing out on something else for
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
Really not sure that’s true. Witness the Lab Leak debate. That was not “everyone trying to do the right thing” that was a section of the scientific elite conniving with politicians and social media to silence the possibility that this was the greatest scientific fuck up in all history - and China/America were and are both implicated
That was not benign intentions gone wrong. It was a conspiracy of malignant lies
And that is true even IF it turns out it came from the wet market (highly unlikely, but let’s allow it)
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
My anger on the subject is, I admit, due to losing precious time with my dying mother and the impact it had on my personal mental health.
Total sympathy, mate
On a cheerier note, it’s great to have you back, posting on PB, Mister Woolie. You’ve been missed
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
I largely agree, though feel strongly that the government acted partly to protect itself from as much criticism as possible and so took the line of least resistance rather than applying science and principle, partly by injecting fear into its citizens and partly by contracting out to unelected individuals often to provide cover.
What 'science' could be applied at the beginning? Back in late March 2020, we had little idea of how the virus spread - remember all the stuff about cleaning your hands regularly with gel, which (although good advice generally), did little to prevent the spread of this particular virus?
'virus' is a small word that covers a multitude of sins. We knew something was happening, and the science could tell us it was a virus and even the virus's genetic code. But we are not yet advanced enough to go from that to say 'this is how we deal with it.'
There had to be a certain amount of fear for the first lockdown, as we had little idea *what* we were dealing with. I'd argue that was still the case (though less so) a year later.
The very first lockdown - at three weeks - was understandable in the circumstances. But there has been no official acknowledgement, TTBOMK, that the data suggests strongly that infections had peaked before it started and this had already started to become clear at the end of those three weeks.
If it is indeed true, it demolishes the case for lockdown as a matter of law as opposed to government advice on how to be sensible.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
Really not sure that’s true. Witness the Lab Leak debate. That was not “everyone trying to do the right thing” that was a section of the scientific elite conniving with politicians and social media to silence the possibility that this was the greatest scientific fuck up in all history - and China/America were and are both implicated
That was not benign intentions gone wrong. It was a conspiracy of malignant lies
And that is true even IF it turns out it came from the wet market (highly unlikely, but let’s allow it)
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
Really not sure that’s true. Witness the Lab Leak debate. That was not “everyone trying to do the right thing” that was a section of the scientific elite conniving with politicians and social media to silence the possibility that this was the greatest scientific fuck up in all history - and China/America were and are both implicated
That was not benign intentions gone wrong. It was a conspiracy of malignant lies
And that is true even IF it turns out it came from the wet market (highly unlikely, but let’s allow it)
This isn't about the origins of the virus, this is about understanding how we respond optimally to future health crises. What did we do right? What could we do better?
If it becomes a case of "who is to blame?" then all you'll get is a bunch of people saying "I don't recall", and we learn nothing.
Almost without exception, the people in the government (and yes, the most of the people on SAGE) were trying to do the right thing. They also were coming from a place of limited knowledge, no vaccines, no effective treatments, and were utterly terrified of making decisions that might result in tens or hundreds of thousands of excess deaths.
A really good enquiry would also ask, which countries had better outcomes? And why? And we also need to remember that luck (good and bad) plays a massive role.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
Really not sure that’s true. Witness the Lab Leak debate. That was not “everyone trying to do the right thing” that was a section of the scientific elite conniving with politicians and social media to silence the possibility that this was the greatest scientific fuck up in all history - and China/America were and are both implicated
That was not benign intentions gone wrong. It was a conspiracy of malignant lies
And that is true even IF it turns out it came from the wet market (highly unlikely, but let’s allow it)
It's an enormity (in the original sense of the word) too far for most to contemplate that the US, abetted China, may have developed Covid and unleashed it on the world.
Tory MP Lee Anderson says no massive need for food banks in UK, and real problem people not being able to cook properly
In his contribution to the Queen’s speech debate the Conservative MP Lee Anderson said that a food bank in his Ashfield constituency operated a “brilliant scheme” whereby people accepting a donation had to register for a budgeting course and a cooking course. He went on:
We show them how to cook cheap and nutritious meals on a budget. We can make a meal for about 30p a day, and this is cooking from scratch.
When an opposition MP put it to Anderson that food banks should not be needed in 21st century Britain, Anderson agreed. He went on:
This is exactly my point. I’ll invite you personally to come to Ashfield, look at our food bank, how it works. And I’ll think you’ll see first hand that there’s not this massive use for food banks in this country. We’ve got generation after generation who cannot cook properly. They can’t cook a meal from scratch. They cannot budget. The challenge is there.
From the context, it is clear that when he said there was not a “massive use for food banks”, he meant no massive need for them.
It's a fair comment. People in the UK have poorer cooking skill than the rest of Europe. I come across people who struggle to make rice or pasta regularly and not having basic skills really limits the ability to each cheap and nutritious food. Takeaways are both expensive and unhealthy.
It’s the remarkable thing about being in Italy. You hear a group of ordinary Italians having a most heated argument about something, and from the passion and energy you’d think the eldest daughter had run off with the best man or some similar family catastrophe was unfolding.
Then, armed with a little basic Italian, you begin to make out enough words to realise that the debate is really about how to cook a certain recipe or whether one restaurant in town does pasta better than another.
That said, today has been so hot that we escaped to the Slovenian mountains and have been exploring the remains of the trenches in the high mountains around Caporetto - the battle that did more than any single other thing to subsequently and eventually give birth to fascism in Europe - but a name that will draw blank looks from almost anyone you mention it to back at home.
Anyone who has read A Farewell to Arms should be familiar with it (which admittedly may not decrease the blank looks by much). We did it for Higher English and the misery and sordidness of the retreat from Caporetto certainly stuck with me. A bathetic snippet Istr is Hemingway noting that Italian units had individuals carrying large casks of Marc (a rough brandy) in which it was rumoured that they dropped turds to aid its potency.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
My anger on the subject is, I admit, due to losing precious time with my dying mother and the impact it had on my personal mental health.
Total sympathy, mate
On a cheerier note, it’s great to have you back, posting on PB, Mister Woolie. You’ve been missed
Appreciate that sentiment, thank you. Ma Woolie was a legend of Norwich and is missed every day. I've been about. I've lurked a bit. I left because I get ridiculously grumpy and I get that I'm not to everyone's taste but I'm hopeful of adding some insight that isn't just my hatred of Labour.
7, possibly 8 tanks in that picture. Which, given they only have maybe 1,500 more tanks in Russia, is somewhat sub-optimal.
So we can put that down as a qualified success, then? The river crossing got approximately 50 feet across the river, and they didn't lose all 1500 tanks in theatre.
Yep, if they send all 1,500 to that point on the river, they should be able to get a handful across. Job done
This was pretty grim news for Russians MIAs earlier:
To hide its losses in the war with Ukraine, Russia puts the killed soldiers on the list of 'missing in action'.
Their bodies are stored in makeshift dumps, where there are so many 200's that the mountains of corpses reach two meters in height. https://t.co/NaWm4H7h0y
They can’t even treat their own dead with respect. Shocking to see, and chances are most of the deaths of men will not be acknowledged to their wives and mothers waiting for news.
They will (falsely, of course) claim that they are alive and the Ukrainians are holding them as a "human shield - it is why we had to back off Kiev."
Pol Pot's regime was barking mad. But Putin's must take the award for the scummiest regime of a major country in recent decades. It seems nothing is beneath them.
Tory MP Lee Anderson says no massive need for food banks in UK, and real problem people not being able to cook properly
In his contribution to the Queen’s speech debate the Conservative MP Lee Anderson said that a food bank in his Ashfield constituency operated a “brilliant scheme” whereby people accepting a donation had to register for a budgeting course and a cooking course. He went on:
We show them how to cook cheap and nutritious meals on a budget. We can make a meal for about 30p a day, and this is cooking from scratch.
When an opposition MP put it to Anderson that food banks should not be needed in 21st century Britain, Anderson agreed. He went on:
This is exactly my point. I’ll invite you personally to come to Ashfield, look at our food bank, how it works. And I’ll think you’ll see first hand that there’s not this massive use for food banks in this country. We’ve got generation after generation who cannot cook properly. They can’t cook a meal from scratch. They cannot budget. The challenge is there.
From the context, it is clear that when he said there was not a “massive use for food banks”, he meant no massive need for them.
It's a fair comment. People in the UK have poorer cooking skill than the rest of Europe. I come across people who struggle to make rice or pasta regularly and not having basic skills really limits the ability to each cheap and nutritious food. Takeaways are both expensive and unhealthy.
It’s the remarkable thing about being in Italy. You hear a group of ordinary Italians having a most heated argument about something, and from the passion and energy you’d think the eldest daughter had run off with the best man or some similar family catastrophe was unfolding.
Then, armed with a little basic Italian, you begin to make out enough words to realise that the debate is really about how to cook a certain recipe or whether one restaurant in town does pasta better than another.
That said, today has been so hot that we escaped to the Slovenian mountains and have been exploring the remains of the trenches in the high mountains around Caporetto - the battle that did more than any single other thing to subsequently and eventually give birth to fascism in Europe - but a name that will draw blank looks from almost anyone you mention it to back at home.
Anyone who has read A Farewell to Arms should be familiar with it (which admittedly may not decrease the blank looks by much). We did it for Higher English and the misery and sordidness of the retreat from Caporetto certainly stuck with me. A bathetic snippet Istr is Hemingway noting that Italian units had individuals carrying large casks of Marc (a rough brandy) in which it was rumoured that they dropped turds to aid its potency.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
Really not sure that’s true. Witness the Lab Leak debate. That was not “everyone trying to do the right thing” that was a section of the scientific elite conniving with politicians and social media to silence the possibility that this was the greatest scientific fuck up in all history - and China/America were and are both implicated
That was not benign intentions gone wrong. It was a conspiracy of malignant lies
And that is true even IF it turns out it came from the wet market (highly unlikely, but let’s allow it)
It's an enormity (in the original sense of the word) too far for most to contemplate that the US, abetted China, may have developed Covid and unleashed it on the world.
No, what you say is crap. It's bullshit. It's tinfoil-hattery of the highest order. The idea that the US abetted China not only has zero evidence, but is propaganda that is borderline evil.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
I largely agree, though feel strongly that the government acted partly to protect itself from as much criticism as possible and so took the line of least resistance rather than applying science and principle, partly by injecting fear into its citizens and partly by contracting out to unelected individuals often to provide cover.
What 'science' could be applied at the beginning? Back in late March 2020, we had little idea of how the virus spread - remember all the stuff about cleaning your hands regularly with gel, which (although good advice generally), did little to prevent the spread of this particular virus?
'virus' is a small word that covers a multitude of sins. We knew something was happening, and the science could tell us it was a virus and even the virus's genetic code. But we are not yet advanced enough to go from that to say 'this is how we deal with it.'
There had to be a certain amount of fear for the first lockdown, as we had little idea *what* we were dealing with. I'd argue that was still the case (though less so) a year later.
The very first lockdown - at three weeks - was understandable in the circumstances. But there has been no official acknowledgement, TTBOMK, that the data suggests strongly that infections had peaked before it started and this had already started to become clear at the end of those three weeks.
If it is indeed true, it demolishes the case for lockdown as a matter of law as opposed to government advice on how to be sensible.
That'll be because people lock themselves down if they think it is dangerous to go outside.
There was a fabulous bit of research by an American academic looking at OpenTable reservation patterns through the pandemic, which he/she thought would be a good proxy for peoples' willingness to socialise. And - surprise, surprise - reservations collapsed as case numbers rose, and vice-versa.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
Really not sure that’s true. Witness the Lab Leak debate. That was not “everyone trying to do the right thing” that was a section of the scientific elite conniving with politicians and social media to silence the possibility that this was the greatest scientific fuck up in all history - and China/America were and are both implicated
That was not benign intentions gone wrong. It was a conspiracy of malignant lies
And that is true even IF it turns out it came from the wet market (highly unlikely, but let’s allow it)
It's an enormity (in the original sense of the word) too far for most to contemplate that the US, abetted China, may have developed Covid and unleashed it on the world.
No, what you say is crap. It's bullshit. It's tinfoil-hattery of the highest order. The idea that the US abetted China not only has zero evidence, but is propaganda that is borderline evil.
Which is exactly your usual MO.
It was meant to say abetted by China. Not abetted China.
The British security commitments to Sweden and Finland mean a huge amount. There has been a lot of uncertainty for the last 8 years as to whether there would be any mutual aid in the event of a Russian attack on Finland, and speculation about this has been the cause of a lot of public debate in Finland, IE it was very often on the front cover of newspapers when you looked at them in the supermarket. Johnson will now be feted as a hero in Finland, whereas for many years he was a villain because of Brexit. Obviously neither characterisations are particularly correct, but the good part of the story is that we all seem to have moved on to a positive place after Brexit, at least from this angle.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
Really not sure that’s true. Witness the Lab Leak debate. That was not “everyone trying to do the right thing” that was a section of the scientific elite conniving with politicians and social media to silence the possibility that this was the greatest scientific fuck up in all history - and China/America were and are both implicated
That was not benign intentions gone wrong. It was a conspiracy of malignant lies
And that is true even IF it turns out it came from the wet market (highly unlikely, but let’s allow it)
This isn't about the origins of the virus, this is about understanding how we respond optimally to future health crises. What did we do right? What could we do better?
If it becomes a case of "who is to blame?" then all you'll get is a bunch of people saying "I don't recall", and we learn nothing.
Almost without exception, the people in the government (and yes, the most of the people on SAGE) were trying to do the right thing. They also were coming from a place of limited knowledge, no vaccines, no effective treatments, and were utterly terrified of making decisions that might result in tens or hundreds of thousands of excess deaths.
A really good enquiry would also ask, which countries had better outcomes? And why? And we also need to remember that luck (good and bad) plays a massive role.
But you can’t divorce them. Our initial response was crippled from the start by ignorance of the virus, which was deliberately made worse by China’s lying (aided by American guilt) because they were shit-scared the virus escaped from their own labs, and was actually engineered to be more virulent than anything natural
And, again, that is true whether it came from the lab or not (hint: it came from the lab)
Tory MP Lee Anderson says no massive need for food banks in UK, and real problem people not being able to cook properly
In his contribution to the Queen’s speech debate the Conservative MP Lee Anderson said that a food bank in his Ashfield constituency operated a “brilliant scheme” whereby people accepting a donation had to register for a budgeting course and a cooking course. He went on:
We show them how to cook cheap and nutritious meals on a budget. We can make a meal for about 30p a day, and this is cooking from scratch.
When an opposition MP put it to Anderson that food banks should not be needed in 21st century Britain, Anderson agreed. He went on:
This is exactly my point. I’ll invite you personally to come to Ashfield, look at our food bank, how it works. And I’ll think you’ll see first hand that there’s not this massive use for food banks in this country. We’ve got generation after generation who cannot cook properly. They can’t cook a meal from scratch. They cannot budget. The challenge is there.
From the context, it is clear that when he said there was not a “massive use for food banks”, he meant no massive need for them.
It's a fair comment. People in the UK have poorer cooking skill than the rest of Europe. I come across people who struggle to make rice or pasta regularly and not having basic skills really limits the ability to each cheap and nutritious food. Takeaways are both expensive and unhealthy.
It’s the remarkable thing about being in Italy. You hear a group of ordinary Italians having a most heated argument about something, and from the passion and energy you’d think the eldest daughter had run off with the best man or some similar family catastrophe was unfolding.
Then, armed with a little basic Italian, you begin to make out enough words to realise that the debate is really about how to cook a certain recipe or whether one restaurant in town does pasta better than another.
That said, today has been so hot that we escaped to the Slovenian mountains and have been exploring the remains of the trenches in the high mountains around Caporetto - the battle that did more than any single other thing to subsequently and eventually give birth to fascism in Europe - but a name that will draw blank looks from almost anyone you mention it to back at home.
Anyone who has read A Farewell to Arms should be familiar with it (which admittedly may not decrease the blank looks by much). We did it for Higher English and the misery and sordidness of the retreat from Caporetto certainly stuck with me. A bathetic snippet Istr is Hemingway noting that Italian units had individuals carrying large casks of Marc (a rough brandy) in which it was rumoured that they dropped turds to aid its potency.
I am really hoping that's a typo for 'turps'.
I regret to say it is not. I guess it’s not that far from cider makers of yore dropping a dead rat in their fermenting nectar.
Tory MP Lee Anderson says no massive need for food banks in UK, and real problem people not being able to cook properly
In his contribution to the Queen’s speech debate the Conservative MP Lee Anderson said that a food bank in his Ashfield constituency operated a “brilliant scheme” whereby people accepting a donation had to register for a budgeting course and a cooking course. He went on:
We show them how to cook cheap and nutritious meals on a budget. We can make a meal for about 30p a day, and this is cooking from scratch.
When an opposition MP put it to Anderson that food banks should not be needed in 21st century Britain, Anderson agreed. He went on:
This is exactly my point. I’ll invite you personally to come to Ashfield, look at our food bank, how it works. And I’ll think you’ll see first hand that there’s not this massive use for food banks in this country. We’ve got generation after generation who cannot cook properly. They can’t cook a meal from scratch. They cannot budget. The challenge is there.
From the context, it is clear that when he said there was not a “massive use for food banks”, he meant no massive need for them.
It's a fair comment. People in the UK have poorer cooking skill than the rest of Europe. I come across people who struggle to make rice or pasta regularly and not having basic skills really limits the ability to each cheap and nutritious food. Takeaways are both expensive and unhealthy.
It’s the remarkable thing about being in Italy. You hear a group of ordinary Italians having a most heated argument about something, and from the passion and energy you’d think the eldest daughter had run off with the best man or some similar family catastrophe was unfolding.
Then, armed with a little basic Italian, you begin to make out enough words to realise that the debate is really about how to cook a certain recipe or whether one restaurant in town does pasta better than another.
That said, today has been so hot that we escaped to the Slovenian mountains and have been exploring the remains of the trenches in the high mountains around Caporetto - the battle that did more than any single other thing to subsequently and eventually give birth to fascism in Europe - but a name that will draw blank looks from almost anyone you mention it to back at home.
Anyone who has read A Farewell to Arms should be familiar with it (which admittedly may not decrease the blank looks by much). We did it for Higher English and the misery and sordidness of the retreat from Caporetto certainly stuck with me. A bathetic snippet Istr is Hemingway noting that Italian units had individuals carrying large casks of Marc (a rough brandy) in which it was rumoured that they dropped turds to aid its potency.
I am really hoping that's a typo for 'turps'.
I regret to say it is not. I guess it’s not that far from cider makers of yore dropping a dead rat in their fermenting nectar.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
But how were they supposed to do that with the media screaming that "we're all going to die if you don't Follow The Science"?
Ignore the media. They are the government, not the media. And rather a lot of the time, the media were screaming "but the money" and attacking and discrediting any scientist they could name.
Edit: though, on reflection, if you have a government of journalists and PR manipulators, there is a problem.
Nah. I am right up there with criticism of the Government on most things but on this they had absolutely no choice. People seem to be forgetting that we have lost over 175,000 people in Britain to this virus. If the Government had ignored the advice of the scientists and we had lost not one more person than we have, I would suggest we would still be in a position right now where ministers were not only out of office but were now on trial for manslaughter. Practically every single person in this country - including almost everyone on here - would have been claiming that many, if not most, of those deaths would have been avoided if only the ministers had followed the scientific advice.
Nor would the economy have been in any better state. With hundreds of people dying of the disease every day people would have imposed their own lockdowns and that includes many essential workers who carried on because they were asked to by the Government.
The scientists do bear some responsibility for this. They were dealing with people untutored in science, epidemiology and statistics and they chose to present them time and time again with the worst case scenarios. Again, what minister is going to ignore those?
But in the end no one can be too heavily criticised for the lockdown policies. There is way too much 20:20 hindsight being used from the safety of triple jabbing.
There are lots of valid criticisms of other areas of covid policy but not this one.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
Really not sure that’s true. Witness the Lab Leak debate. That was not “everyone trying to do the right thing” that was a section of the scientific elite conniving with politicians and social media to silence the possibility that this was the greatest scientific fuck up in all history - and China/America were and are both implicated
That was not benign intentions gone wrong. It was a conspiracy of malignant lies
And that is true even IF it turns out it came from the wet market (highly unlikely, but let’s allow it)
This isn't about the origins of the virus, this is about understanding how we respond optimally to future health crises. What did we do right? What could we do better?
If it becomes a case of "who is to blame?" then all you'll get is a bunch of people saying "I don't recall", and we learn nothing.
Almost without exception, the people in the government (and yes, the most of the people on SAGE) were trying to do the right thing. They also were coming from a place of limited knowledge, no vaccines, no effective treatments, and were utterly terrified of making decisions that might result in tens or hundreds of thousands of excess deaths.
A really good enquiry would also ask, which countries had better outcomes? And why? And we also need to remember that luck (good and bad) plays a massive role.
But you can’t divorce them. Our initial response was crippled from the start by ignorance of the virus, which was deliberately made worse by China’s lying (aided by American guilt) because they were shit-scared the virus escaped from their own labs, and was actually engineered to be more virulent than anything natural
And, again, that is true whether it came from the lab or not (hint: it came from the lab)
When it comes to bat soup versus the lab up the road that studies coronaviruses I'm amazed how many people plumped for the bat soup origin conspiracy for this coronavirus
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
Well mostly. I still have my doubts about Susan Michie. It doesn't seem beyond the bounds of credibility that a communist party member saw an opportunity to bring down capitalism and massively expand the reach of the state.
Strange time to do it, when the Revolutionary Communist Party are welcomed at the heart of the state.
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
Really not sure that’s true. Witness the Lab Leak debate. That was not “everyone trying to do the right thing” that was a section of the scientific elite conniving with politicians and social media to silence the possibility that this was the greatest scientific fuck up in all history - and China/America were and are both implicated
That was not benign intentions gone wrong. It was a conspiracy of malignant lies
And that is true even IF it turns out it came from the wet market (highly unlikely, but let’s allow it)
This isn't about the origins of the virus, this is about understanding how we respond optimally to future health crises. What did we do right? What could we do better?
If it becomes a case of "who is to blame?" then all you'll get is a bunch of people saying "I don't recall", and we learn nothing.
Almost without exception, the people in the government (and yes, the most of the people on SAGE) were trying to do the right thing. They also were coming from a place of limited knowledge, no vaccines, no effective treatments, and were utterly terrified of making decisions that might result in tens or hundreds of thousands of excess deaths.
A really good enquiry would also ask, which countries had better outcomes? And why? And we also need to remember that luck (good and bad) plays a massive role.
But you can’t divorce them. Our initial response was crippled from the start by ignorance of the virus, which was deliberately made worse by China’s lying (aided by American guilt) because they were shit-scared the virus escaped from their own labs, and was actually engineered to be more virulent than anything natural
And, again, that is true whether it came from the lab or not (hint: it came from the lab)
When it cones to bat soup versus the lab up the road that studies coronaviruses I'm amazed how many people plumped for the bat soup origin conspiracy for this coronavirus
It is incredible, I don’t quite understand it
The only explanation that makes sense is that Trump espoused the lab leak early on so many left-leaning people - or just people - have developed a tremendous allergy to the notion, plus they tend to be middlebrow thinkers who bow before Science (which was totally behind IT CAME FROM THE MARKET for obvious reasons, until about a year ago)
95% of the evidence points to the lab. Plus, Ockham’s Razor, FFS
Wow. Key modeller who demanded more lockdowns admits too much weight was given to models - a regular area of strong discussion on PB (where there are many who are more numerate than most peeps) at the time.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
These absolute shits should be held to account. Along with the indie sage attention seeking scaremongers
YOu think so? He did his best, and the DM is evidently trying to blame him for the wider problems of government decision making. Look at the scope of his work - excluding the wider effects. That was a government duty, to take the wider effects and decide on the result.
I'm referring to them collectively and specifically to anyone recommending lockdown, or appearing on television, radio etc promoting lockdown. It is the most catastrophic policy inflicted in decades.
That's what we should try and establish with a proper inquiry: whether you are right or not. Personally, I am leaning to the conclusion that it was the greatest peacetime public policy mistake in decades, but I would like to see a frank and full debate of the evidence.
Such an inquiry, though, needs to come from a place of realising people were trying to do the right thing. This shouldn't be about who is to blame, but about learning lessons about how we do things better next time.
I largely agree, though feel strongly that the government acted partly to protect itself from as much criticism as possible and so took the line of least resistance rather than applying science and principle, partly by injecting fear into its citizens and partly by contracting out to unelected individuals often to provide cover.
What 'science' could be applied at the beginning? Back in late March 2020, we had little idea of how the virus spread - remember all the stuff about cleaning your hands regularly with gel, which (although good advice generally), did little to prevent the spread of this particular virus?
'virus' is a small word that covers a multitude of sins. We knew something was happening, and the science could tell us it was a virus and even the virus's genetic code. But we are not yet advanced enough to go from that to say 'this is how we deal with it.'
There had to be a certain amount of fear for the first lockdown, as we had little idea *what* we were dealing with. I'd argue that was still the case (though less so) a year later.
The very first lockdown - at three weeks - was understandable in the circumstances. But there has been no official acknowledgement, TTBOMK, that the data suggests strongly that infections had peaked before it started and this had already started to become clear at the end of those three weeks.
If it is indeed true, it demolishes the case for lockdown as a matter of law as opposed to government advice on how to be sensible.
That'll be because people lock themselves down if they think it is dangerous to go outside.
There was a fabulous bit of research by an American academic looking at OpenTable reservation patterns through the pandemic, which he/she thought would be a good proxy for peoples' willingness to socialise. And - surprise, surprise - reservations collapsed as case numbers rose, and vice-versa.
Exactly - the case for lockdown was that you can't trust the stupid plebs to do that enough, and that seems to have been false.
Comments
This may come back to cause issues for Starmer if he receives a Cumming's style verdict from Durham Police rather than a FPN and ironically penned by Mary Foy MP who was present at 'beergate'
“The vast majority of constituents who have contacted me have expressed the view that Mr Cummings’ actions have been insensitive and unacceptable at best, and many feel that they warrant further investigation by the police.”
“While I understand today’s decision by Durham Police to take no further action, many of the constituents who have written to me would like Mr Cummings to resign or be sacked. Clearly, whether you stick by him or not is a matter for you, but the perception from my constituents, and I would hazard a guess that this is a common view across the North East, is that you are currently putting the interests of your chief adviser above that of the people of the region and the country as a whole.”
My children pronounce this delicious, and it takes less than ten minutes and involves maybe $1 of ingredients per person.
Now you can't wait for a few days?!
But this brings me onto a thorny question: who was to 'blame' for WW1? WW2 is an easy answer: Germany and Japan. But was WW1 just a conflict that was going to happen, as empires and would-be empires faced each other off like drunkards in a dive bar? Might it have happened earlier, and if Ferdinand had not been killed, might a reason for war have been found a year or two later?
Bits = not traceable. Presumably he also had an UV lamp and the necessary solvents?
I expect operation save big dog is still working to shore up his position. Things like todays visits and promises are his best way to do that maybe? Considering his Treasury or cabinet won’t back his promise in debate yesterday to help families with cost of living crisis, what else can operation saving big dog work with this week? 🤔
HYUFD, playing these deals down in contrast to Big G, summed up todays entente cordially deals by pointing out in this thread, they are not “legally binding” in the same way as NATO membership, leaving us in no doubt once NATO membership deals come along, these deals become superseded even mostly meaningless is what I took from it.
However, correct me where I am wrong, I understand HY is also not being open about “legally bindings” if a NATO ally is attacked - we could just send Putin a stiff letter and call in his ambassador for a dressing down, this is all we are “legally obliged” to do in NATO membership?
All of which are much better than yet another night of Netflix.
Both are utterly delicious (or can be if cooked well). Both can be made extremely cheaply.
(Spanish omlette - 1.5 eggs per person, 1/4 onion, a couple of potatoes, a splash of olive oil... that's going to come in below 50p per person unless you really overboard with your eggs.)
I don't count Johnson in this because as we all know he doesn't give a shit about Brexit either way.
I am going to be charitable and say that this is a very important if belated contribution to the forthcoming public inquiry on covid.
"Britain relied too much on 'very scary' SAGE models to decide on lockdowns, according to the man behind some of those very projections.
Just months after SAGE predicted 6,000 deaths per day and called for a Christmas lockdown in response to Omicron, Professor John Edmunds said the models were only supposed to be 'one component' of decision-making but were leaned on too much by ministers.
He accepted the models failed to account for the economic harm and the knock-on health effects that lockdowns caused."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10804993/SAGE-models-scary-held-weight-says-lockdown-architect-them.html
His parents lived near Nottingham, so I'd often drive him home at weekends on the way to see my girlfriend in derby. One of the people you meet and spend a lot of time with, but then touch with when you move. Or at least I do...
ISW
@TheStudyofWar
·
10m
The three key takeaways from the 4/9 report:
1) Russia is unlikely to be able to mass combat power for the fight in eastern Ukraine proportionate to the number of troops and BTGs it sends there.
ISW
@TheStudyofWar
·
10m
2. The Russian military continues to suffer from devastating morale, recruitment, and retention problems that seriously undermine its ability to fight effectively.
3. The outcome of forthcoming Russian operations in eastern Ukraine remains very much in question.
https://twitter.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1524437300574310401
I've re-discovered Sparks. Take a listen to (and watch) "My Baby's Taking Me Home" (official video) on YouTube. I'm hooked on it.
Personally, I think Robert Dingwall's call this week in the Telegraph that the public inquiry must answer the question as to why decades of public health and public risk policy on how to deal with a pandemic were thrown out of the window in an instance and lockdown became the tool of choice.
"my favourite parks are car parks
Grass is something you smoke
Birds are something you shag
Take your year in Provence
And shove it up your ass..."
Genius.
Special mention for Do you remember the first time, Babies, Disco 2000 and Bar Italia.
It’s “facing Nor’ Nor’ East”
The sad reality is I expect any inquiry and it's reporting to mostly be sob stories of "deaths that could have been prevented" and why didn't we lockdown sooner etc.
I don't have any experience of foodbanks - Mrs Stodge however (and I don't know how she knows this) tells me some foodbanks actually means test those coming in and will only help those who can prove they are on benefits. I wasn't aware of that.
In Newham, the food banks tend to be religious in nature - the owner of one stood in last week's Council election. My understanding is they will help anyone and on our way home last Saturday the queue at the food bank in East Ham High Street had probably 60-70 waiting.
There is a big problem with food education - as with so much else relating to public health information, the decision to take part of the function from the NHS and give it to councils without any resources probably didn't help. Food education goes with health education - the expression "you are what you eat" is in my case apposite and may be for others, Yet as been said, you can't make people healthy - you can't force people to look after themselves even if, in the face of all the health information, they choose to drink, smoke or eat poor food to excess.
It's possible to eat well, it's just easier and cheaper to eat badly.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10806101/Newly-elected-Tory-councillor-forced-quit-series-racist-tweets-memes.html
"along with an examination on how it was that the government was able to remove the most basic of liberties from its citizens."
Absolutely. I think it was Big Dog himself who at one point who expressed surprise at how easy it was to turn off the most basic rights of freedom and association.
The very occasional exception is if sometimes they have an impossible glut like 10 crates of almost overripe bananas but then they put them outside with a notice to help yourself - not inside the shop.
Chelsea FC is close to unveiling a £20m-a-year sponsorship deal with a fast-growing cryptocurrency group – despite a temporary ban on the club striking lucrative new partnerships while it operates under government supervision.
Sky News can reveal that the Blues have agreed a shirt-sleeve contract with WhaleFin, a digital asset platform owned by Singapore-based Amber Group.
Sources said the deal, which will launch next season, could be confirmed publicly as early as Thursday morning.
https://news.sky.com/story/chelsea-to-unveil-20m-a-year-shirt-deal-with-cryptocurrency-brand-whalefin-12610660
However much you might hate Boris, he did not want, or gain, from the Covid crisis. If he could have clicked his fingers and made the crisis go away, he would have. Instead the government had to made decisions on very incomplete information.
Clearly (despite my own unhealthy preference for chilled meals) it's possible to cook on a modest budget and helpful if one knows how. That said, it was (I think unintentionally) a bit awkwardly phrased by the MP, as it could be read as victim-blaming. If you don't know how to cook, you don't - just telling you to go away and learn isn't a helpful approach, especially if you're in debt and buying anything at all is intimidating. And if my local places are any guide the food banks are all about providing the basics which people do then cook themselves.
That is, NOT before ascertaining they haven't been sitting there since the Ford administration.
When I travel, I always take: a bottle of Kikkoman’s soy sauce, a bottle of Tabasco, a bottle of sriracha, grindable rock salt and grindable black pepper. These can usually salvage any meal, no matter how banal
I was delighted to discover recently that Lord Byron did exactly the same. He took three or four bottled sauces from London wherever he went, to rescue insipid meals on his continental travels. Somewhat counter-intuitive, but true
Suits you sir. 🫡
But we need to know why existing approaches and plans were thrown out of the window.
Being unable to cook is nothing to be proud of. It’s like being unable to read
Edit: though, on reflection, if you have a government of journalists and PR manipulators, there is a problem.
'virus' is a small word that covers a multitude of sins. We knew something was happening, and the science could tell us it was a virus and even the virus's genetic code. But we are not yet advanced enough to go from that to say 'this is how we deal with it.'
There had to be a certain amount of fear for the first lockdown, as we had little idea *what* we were dealing with. I'd argue that was still the case (though less so) a year later.
That was not benign intentions gone wrong. It was a conspiracy of malignant lies
And that is true even IF it turns out it came from the wet market (highly unlikely, but let’s allow it)
To some it might mean money for example - mixing the price of everything and the value of nothing.
On a cheerier note, it’s great to have you back, posting on PB, Mister Woolie. You’ve been missed
If it is indeed true, it demolishes the case for lockdown as a matter of law as opposed to government advice on how to be sensible.
If it becomes a case of "who is to blame?" then all you'll get is a bunch of people saying "I don't recall", and we learn nothing.
Almost without exception, the people in the government (and yes, the most of the people on SAGE) were trying to do the right thing. They also were coming from a place of limited knowledge, no vaccines, no effective treatments, and were utterly terrified of making decisions that might result in tens or hundreds of thousands of excess deaths.
A really good enquiry would also ask, which countries had better outcomes? And why? And we also need to remember that luck (good and bad) plays a massive role.
https://twitter.com/oryxspioenkop/status/1524399801617592322
Edit: Ooops, beaten to it.
He’s been honest, lucid, articulate and happy to admit and see doubt. I’m not surprised he has stepped up here
I've been about. I've lurked a bit. I left because I get ridiculously grumpy and I get that I'm not to everyone's taste but I'm hopeful of adding some insight that isn't just my hatred of Labour.
Pol Pot's regime was barking mad. But Putin's must take the award for the scummiest regime of a major country in recent decades. It seems nothing is beneath them.
Which is exactly your usual MO.
There was a fabulous bit of research by an American academic looking at OpenTable reservation patterns through the pandemic, which he/she thought would be a good proxy for peoples' willingness to socialise. And - surprise, surprise - reservations collapsed as case numbers rose, and vice-versa.
And, again, that is true whether it came from the lab or not (hint: it came from the lab)
I guess it’s not that far from cider makers of yore dropping a dead rat in their fermenting nectar.
Nor would the economy have been in any better state. With hundreds of people dying of the disease every day people would have imposed their own lockdowns and that includes many essential workers who carried on because they were asked to by the Government.
The scientists do bear some responsibility for this. They were dealing with people untutored in science, epidemiology and statistics and they chose to present them time and time again with the worst case scenarios. Again, what minister is going to ignore those?
But in the end no one can be too heavily criticised for the lockdown policies. There is way too much 20:20 hindsight being used from the safety of triple jabbing.
There are lots of valid criticisms of other areas of covid policy but not this one.
The only explanation that makes sense is that Trump espoused the lab leak early on so many left-leaning people - or just people - have developed a tremendous allergy to the notion, plus they tend to be middlebrow thinkers who bow before Science (which was totally behind IT CAME FROM THE MARKET for obvious reasons, until about a year ago)
95% of the evidence points to the lab. Plus, Ockham’s Razor, FFS