We're seeing the media, and witnesses with reputational damage to shift, focusing only on the worst 0.1% of what was being said, and 0.0% of what was being done. Only the most reckless PM would write anything down in future.
It was always going to be the way. Also, only a wally would think that a) some sort of public inquiry wouldn't eventually come along and b) that all comms would be requested by those running it.
One thing for certain is there will be zero reflection by the media one how piss poor they were, consistently wrong about even the most basic of things.
Yes, the media were poor, instead of sending their science correspondents to the COVID briefings they would send their political correspondents, hoping for a "gotcha" moment.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
One point that does strike me when reading the blog is that the outrageous and ridiculous stuff is being (perfectly understandably) picked out by the media, and there's a mass of perfectly sensible discussion in level-headed terms as everyone gropes for the best way through. I don't think Boris is coming out of it well, but the general impression of total chaos of everyone involved is probably exaggerated.
The shocking thing today was the Deputy Cabinet Secretary staring into the abyss when she realised there was no plan.
Also very interesting was her point about leaders clinging to 'following the science' as a way to avoid having to think too much about all the other stuff.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
One point that does strike me when reading the blog is that the outrageous and ridiculous stuff is being (perfectly understandably) picked out by the media, and there's a mass of perfectly sensible discussion in level-headed terms as everyone gropes for the best way through. I don't think Boris is coming out of it well, but the general impression of total chaos of everyone involved is probably exaggerated.
The shocking thing today was the Deputy Cabinet Secretary staring into the abyss when she realised there was no plan.
Also very interesting was her point about leaders clinging to 'following the science' as a way to avoid having to think too much about all the other stuff.
'Following the science' just is inherently populist and wrong. When it comes to actions there is no such thing. Science may, to a degree, indicate what may occur if you do X, Y or Z, or how to calculate QALYS, but science can't tell you what to do with the information. Science may give background facts about choices, but the govern is to choose.
But it is also worth remembering as soon as any politician tried to deviate from it, even a delay of a day or two, they got absolutely trashed in the media. SAGE would leak out their recommendations, the media would run with the latest absolute craptactic models that showed 6 billion new cases and a million dead in 3 months, and the media would be straight away why aren't you following the science.
Now really strong leadership would have said I'm in charge, screw the media, we are doing what I think is right, and eventually we did get that, with if you remember Boris was told Christmas 2021 we all needed locking in our homes again, it was going to be another killer wave, and finally he said no, we aren't doing this anymore....he got absolutely shelled in the media and nobody ever said actually he made the right call there.
Christmas 2021? And no card-carrying Conservative would ever shut up about Boris getting the big calls right.
He did get the big calls right, or less wrong than others.
He got the little calls wrong, that's what brought him down.
No he fucking didn’t. The few things that went right were despite him not because of him.
What were the big calls?
Lockdown - He got this wrong, Stefan Löfven got this right, but he got this less wrong than every other party major leader in this country who wanted to lockdown sooner and harder and for longer.
Vaccines - He got this absolutely spot on, we quite literally had a world beating vaccine rollout.
Supporting Ukraine (pre-2021) - He got this absolutely spot on, as too did Theresa May and David Cameron.
Supporting Ukraine (2022) - He got this absolutely spot on.
The need to change Theresa May's backstop deal - He got this absolutely spot on, and when others said it was impossible, it was suddenly done when he was PM.
The need to have an election to break the deadlock of the 2017 Parliament - He got this absolutely spot on. I remember well on here people mocking Boris for having "lost" his majority that May "had". Despite the fact May couldn't pass her critical legislation and Boris then did.
The need for planning reform - He got this right, but he backed down to NIMBY pressure after losing a by-election to the Lib Dems. Heart was in the right place, but nil points for failing to execute well.
Letting Sunak put up National Insurance - terrible idea, should never have happened.
Besides NI and caving to the pressure of having lockdown (but I don't think any PM could have avoided the pressure on that) was the small calls he got wrong. Lying on almost trivial shit that should have never been lied about.
What I don't get about Bozo appearing on GB News is that he has zero real experience of being a TV presenter (unlike even Nigel Farage who had experience doing a Radio show) to the extent it's likely to be a grade A car crash,,
He was entertainingly incompetent on HIGNFY, but presenting serious news and opinion may not work with his limited repertoire of mangled Latin and hair ruffling.
We're seeing the media, and witnesses with reputational damage to shift, focusing only on the worst 0.1% of what was being said, and 0.0% of what was being done. Only the most reckless PM would write anything down in future.
It was always going to be the way. Also, only a wally would think that a) some sort of public inquiry wouldn't eventually come along and b) that all comms would be requested by those running it.
The problem was - and is - our entire system of government is being run by people who can’t be called wallies without defaming people who would be considered genuine wallies.
Its wider than just the system of highest level of governance e.g. remember when we all used to wait for the daily data dump, so then PB own ran their scripts to build the charts etc.....and from time to time, not only was it late, it was delayed until the next day.
This was because they had to hired a team to write this complex code to pre-process all the raw data, because across the NHS, data couldn't be provided in standardised formats, there were multiple repetitions and edge cases in the raw datasets etc etc etc. It was an absolute nightmare and took months to really start to get on top of it.
Even then, these scripts had to run for several hours to preprocess this data to even get it into any sort of usable form. The days it was very late, was because these scripts crashed because of somebody had entered further non-standard entries.
We of course also had Excel-gate.
And instead so far all the focus seems to be on how rude Big Dom was to people etc and lots of people all pointing at a) Boris and b) everybody but themselves. And the media lapping up the drawm.
The dashboard ended up being a brilliant example of aggregating data and making it publicly available.
The civil service made very sure that funding was reduced and the team dispersed.
Absolutely. Just as the government are doing all this AI stuff this week, really we should be pushing ahead with really looking at how to improve data science in the public sector, instead the opposite has happened.
Get the data collection system right, employ people to use ML to process that data and it will pay for itself many times over. Just like the Nudge Unit paid for themselves easily with their ideas over things like nudging people to pay their taxes, we should be working on how to get the systems in place so the data pipeline allows for ML to improve efficiency and outcomes.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
What are PB Tories? How many posters express detailed support for this government, principled adherence to its underlying ethos and philosophy and what it is doing, delight that this parliament and cabinet is doing so well, and a conviction that a better one is not really thinkable or available, and that a right thinking public should send them back with a large majority at the next election?
I think they are few in number. This One Nation Burkean Tory is voting Labour as the nearest thing available to my principles.
“PB Tories” has become a very confusing moniker when it is used nowadays on this site, IMHO. Back in the runup to 2010, or during the coalition, I could see the point because the site was rather heavily populated by Cameroony Tory voters. Nowadays it feels to me most Tory voters on here have either switched camps, or left the site, other than a handful of holdouts. But very few of those holdouts would defend everything the current government does to the hilt. So it just doesn’t feel like a particularly accurate observation anymore.
"PB Tory" is a state of mind, a worldview, a particular position in the political and cultural map of British society rather than an indication of current voting intention. Do you prefer Rugby to Association Football? You are a PB Tory. Do you instinctively hate diversity training, the ULEZ and people who travel in small waterborne craft other than during the Oxford-Cambridge Boat Race? You are a PB Tory. Are you at home in the Home Counties and at a stretch the posher bits of the Midlands, but nervous of the no go zones of Londonistan and need an interpreter if you venture north of the Watford Gap? You are a PB Tory. Do you now claim to have seen through Boris Johnson all along, but when he was PM got a semi every time he appeared at the dispatch box? You are a PB Tory. Are you currently losing your shit over Labour proposing VAT on private school fees, but remain silent when real per pupil spending is cut in the state sector? You are a PB Tory. Know about wine? PB Tory. Wash your car? PB Tory (or Dura_Ace). Hate the BBC, apart from Test Match Special? PB Tory. Oppose immigration, but not for any kind of racist reasons? PB Tory.
It seems I'm not a PB Tory at all then.
Absolutely zero of those represent me.
Apart from a slight prejudice against diversity training because I don't know what it is but it sounds like something delivered by women of a certain sort with dangly earrings who don't like being asked questions by older white males, I score Zero too. Where do I put in my application for the Socialist Workers Party?
On another planet a PB Tory could be someone who thinks Kenneth Clarke should now be in about his 30th year as PM and intends to honour this thought by voting Labour. Tick.
Anyone who likes Test Match Special is a fool anyway.
Agnew is a dud commentator and a pretty nasty piece of work.
Dunno about that but certainly that "legover" corpsing that gets replayed every series was never funny in the first place.
Here’s old school for you. I’m currently sitting on a station platform shelter and a guy opposite me just flicked through his, obviously new, printed copy of Mayfair before returning it to his bag. Who buys soft porn in hard copy these days? For the articles?
Perhaps he is a fan of the Monopoly board game and will be quite disappointed in the content?
We're seeing the media, and witnesses with reputational damage to shift, focusing only on the worst 0.1% of what was being said, and 0.0% of what was being done. Only the most reckless PM would write anything down in future.
It was always going to be the way. Also, only a wally would think that a) some sort of public inquiry wouldn't eventually come along and b) that all comms would be requested by those running it.
One thing for certain is there will be zero reflection by the media one how piss poor they were, consistently wrong about even the most basic of things.
Yes, the media were poor, instead of sending their science correspondents to the COVID briefings they would send their political correspondents, hoping for a "gotcha" moment.
The media share a lot of the culpability for perpetuating the sense of crisis. Some of their criticism was legitimate, but much was carping from the sidelines about every decision the government took.
The classics being immediately pointing out how one could bend the rules being implemented, then saying well this is all too confusing. When there job should have been to disseminate the information as clearly and concisely as possible with the general undertone of the best way we can minimise deaths is really try to limit contact with people outside your household.
God help us if we ever do go to war, because they’ll probably be fixated about whether the government is 5 seconds off in their estimate how long it would take an ICBM to get here, as the apocalypse approaches.
Incidentally, if the Germans join GCAD, it'll be a German/Swedish/Japanese/Italian program with British support. Color me stupid, but historically when the Germans, Swedes, Japanese and Italians join in a military project it doesn't always go as planned.
Sweden has been neutral since 1815.
Sweden provided huge amounts of industrial and technical assistance to Germany during WW2. They were definitely neutral leaning towards the Axis rather than neutral leaning towards the Allies.
Very helpful to (Danish) Jewish refugees, though.
Yes. I agree. As they were to escaping prisoners of war.
So it appears that Boris was desperate to finish his Shakespeare book when the hairdryer-up-the-nose episode occurred. Makes sense - Boris was exasperated by the whole inconvenience of Covid, had better things to be getting on with, and therefore 'did his own research' on the internet in the hope of stumbling across a solution science had missed.
Hair dryer up nose?!?
What have I missed?
Oh, Boris just saw something on the internet about blowing air up your nose with a hairdryer as a cure for Covid. He then instructed his scientists to brief him about it.
Which is why he's nothing like Trump.
Trump sees stupid shit on the internet, he says it unfiltered on the cameras to hundreds of millions around the globe.
Boris sees stupid shit, he asks an expert "is this believable or not", they say no, end of story, life goes on.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
One point that does strike me when reading the blog is that the outrageous and ridiculous stuff is being (perfectly understandably) picked out by the media, and there's a mass of perfectly sensible discussion in level-headed terms as everyone gropes for the best way through. I don't think Boris is coming out of it well, but the general impression of total chaos of everyone involved is probably exaggerated.
The shocking thing today was the Deputy Cabinet Secretary staring into the abyss when she realised there was no plan.
Also very interesting was her point about leaders clinging to 'following the science' as a way to avoid having to think too much about all the other stuff.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
One point that does strike me when reading the blog is that the outrageous and ridiculous stuff is being (perfectly understandably) picked out by the media, and there's a mass of perfectly sensible discussion in level-headed terms as everyone gropes for the best way through. I don't think Boris is coming out of it well, but the general impression of total chaos of everyone involved is probably exaggerated.
The shocking thing today was the Deputy Cabinet Secretary staring into the abyss when she realised there was no plan.
Also very interesting was her point about leaders clinging to 'following the science' as a way to avoid having to think too much about all the other stuff.
'Following the science' just is inherently populist and wrong. When it comes to actions there is no such thing. Science may, to a degree, indicate what may occur if you do X, Y or Z, or how to calculate QALYS, but science can't tell you what to do with the information. Science may give background facts about choices, but the govern is to choose.
But it is also worth remembering as soon as any politician tried to deviate from it, even a delay of a day or two, they got absolutely trashed in the media. SAGE would leak out their recommendations, the media would run with the latest absolute craptactic models that showed 6 billion new cases and a million dead in 3 months, and the media would be straight away why aren't you following the science.
Now really strong leadership would have said I'm in charge, screw the media, we are doing what I think is right, and eventually we did get that, with if you remember Boris was told Christmas 2021 we all needed locking in our homes again, it was going to be another killer wave, and finally he said no, we aren't doing this anymore....he got absolutely shelled in the media and nobody ever said actually he made the right call there.
Christmas 2021? And no card-carrying Conservative would ever shut up about Boris getting the big calls right.
He did get the big calls right, or less wrong than others.
He got the little calls wrong, that's what brought him down.
No he fucking didn’t. The few things that went right were despite him not because of him.
What were the big calls?
Lockdown - He got this wrong, Stefan Löfven got this right, but he got this less wrong than every other party major leader in this country who wanted to lockdown sooner and harder and for longer.
Vaccines - He got this absolutely spot on, we quite literally had a world beating vaccine rollout.
Supporting Ukraine (pre-2021) - He got this absolutely spot on, as too did Theresa May and David Cameron.
Supporting Ukraine (2022) - He got this absolutely spot on.
The need to change Theresa May's backstop deal - He got this absolutely spot on, and when others said it was impossible, it was suddenly done when he was PM.
The need to have an election to break the deadlock of the 2017 Parliament - He got this absolutely spot on. I remember well on here people mocking Boris for having "lost" his majority that May "had". Despite the fact May couldn't pass her critical legislation and Boris then did.
It was the small calls he got wrong. Lying on almost trivial shit that should have never been lied about.
He could have been rather a good PM, had he been semi-principled.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
One point that does strike me when reading the blog is that the outrageous and ridiculous stuff is being (perfectly understandably) picked out by the media, and there's a mass of perfectly sensible discussion in level-headed terms as everyone gropes for the best way through. I don't think Boris is coming out of it well, but the general impression of total chaos of everyone involved is probably exaggerated.
The shocking thing today was the Deputy Cabinet Secretary staring into the abyss when she realised there was no plan.
Also very interesting was her point about leaders clinging to 'following the science' as a way to avoid having to think too much about all the other stuff.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
One point that does strike me when reading the blog is that the outrageous and ridiculous stuff is being (perfectly understandably) picked out by the media, and there's a mass of perfectly sensible discussion in level-headed terms as everyone gropes for the best way through. I don't think Boris is coming out of it well, but the general impression of total chaos of everyone involved is probably exaggerated.
The shocking thing today was the Deputy Cabinet Secretary staring into the abyss when she realised there was no plan.
Also very interesting was her point about leaders clinging to 'following the science' as a way to avoid having to think too much about all the other stuff.
'Following the science' just is inherently populist and wrong. When it comes to actions there is no such thing. Science may, to a degree, indicate what may occur if you do X, Y or Z, or how to calculate QALYS, but science can't tell you what to do with the information. Science may give background facts about choices, but the govern is to choose.
But it is also worth remembering as soon as any politician tried to deviate from it, even a delay of a day or two, they got absolutely trashed in the media. SAGE would leak out their recommendations, the media would run with the latest absolute craptactic models that showed 6 billion new cases and a million dead in 3 months, and the media would be straight away why aren't you following the science.
Now really strong leadership would have said I'm in charge, screw the media, we are doing what I think is right, and eventually we did get that, with if you remember Boris was told Christmas 2021 we all needed locking in our homes again, it was going to be another killer wave, and finally he said no, we aren't doing this anymore....he got absolutely shelled in the media and nobody ever said actually he made the right call there.
Christmas 2021? And no card-carrying Conservative would ever shut up about Boris getting the big calls right.
He did get the big calls right, or less wrong than others.
He got the little calls wrong, that's what brought him down.
No he fucking didn’t. The few things that went right were despite him not because of him.
What were the big calls?
Lockdown - He got this wrong, Stefan Löfven got this right, but he got this less wrong than every other party major leader in this country who wanted to lockdown sooner and harder and for longer.
Vaccines - He got this absolutely spot on, we quite literally had a world beating vaccine rollout.
Supporting Ukraine (pre-2021) - He got this absolutely spot on, as too did Theresa May and David Cameron.
Supporting Ukraine (2022) - He got this absolutely spot on.
The need to change Theresa May's backstop deal - He got this absolutely spot on, and when others said it was impossible, it was suddenly done when he was PM.
The need to have an election to break the deadlock of the 2017 Parliament - He got this absolutely spot on. I remember well on here people mocking Boris for having "lost" his majority that May "had". Despite the fact May couldn't pass her critical legislation and Boris then did.
It was the small calls he got wrong. Lying on almost trivial shit that should have never been lied about.
The Vaccine rollout was nothing to do with Johnson. The NHS infrastructure that predated him handled that.
Everything else you cite, apart from Ukraine, is to do with Brexit and nothing is ever ever going to reconcile us on that issue.
We're seeing the media, and witnesses with reputational damage to shift, focusing only on the worst 0.1% of what was being said, and 0.0% of what was being done. Only the most reckless PM would write anything down in future.
It was always going to be the way. Also, only a wally would think that a) some sort of public inquiry wouldn't eventually come along and b) that all comms would be requested by those running it.
One thing for certain is there will be zero reflection by the media one how piss poor they were, consistently wrong about even the most basic of things.
Yes, the media were poor, instead of sending their science correspondents to the COVID briefings they would send their political correspondents, hoping for a "gotcha" moment.
Peston making it all about him.
Prof. Peston, FRS, DipSHit to you
Expert in optics, mathematics and biology.
Its amazing how after f##k up after f##k up after f##k, he is not only still in a job, he is still doing this. I mean he has no shame, not once, but twice, he challenged JVT and twice JVT had to take time out of his day to slap Prof Dipstick around to stop him spreading misinformation.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
What are PB Tories? How many posters express detailed support for this government, principled adherence to its underlying ethos and philosophy and what it is doing, delight that this parliament and cabinet is doing so well, and a conviction that a better one is not really thinkable or available, and that a right thinking public should send them back with a large majority at the next election?
I think they are few in number. This One Nation Burkean Tory is voting Labour as the nearest thing available to my principles.
“PB Tories” has become a very confusing moniker when it is used nowadays on this site, IMHO. Back in the runup to 2010, or during the coalition, I could see the point because the site was rather heavily populated by Cameroony Tory voters. Nowadays it feels to me most Tory voters on here have either switched camps, or left the site, other than a handful of holdouts. But very few of those holdouts would defend everything the current government does to the hilt. So it just doesn’t feel like a particularly accurate observation anymore.
"PB Tory" is a state of mind, a worldview, a particular position in the political and cultural map of British society rather than an indication of current voting intention. Do you prefer Rugby to Association Football? You are a PB Tory. Do you instinctively hate diversity training, the ULEZ and people who travel in small waterborne craft other than during the Oxford-Cambridge Boat Race? You are a PB Tory. Are you at home in the Home Counties and at a stretch the posher bits of the Midlands, but nervous of the no go zones of Londonistan and need an interpreter if you venture north of the Watford Gap? You are a PB Tory. Do you now claim to have seen through Boris Johnson all along, but when he was PM got a semi every time he appeared at the dispatch box? You are a PB Tory. Are you currently losing your shit over Labour proposing VAT on private school fees, but remain silent when real per pupil spending is cut in the state sector? You are a PB Tory. Know about wine? PB Tory. Wash your car? PB Tory (or Dura_Ace). Hate the BBC, apart from Test Match Special? PB Tory. Oppose immigration, but not for any kind of racist reasons? PB Tory.
It seems I'm not a PB Tory at all then.
Absolutely zero of those represent me.
Apart from a slight prejudice against diversity training because I don't know what it is but it sounds like something delivered by women of a certain sort with dangly earrings who don't like being asked questions by older white males, I score Zero too. Where do I put in my application for the Socialist Workers Party?
On another planet a PB Tory could be someone who thinks Kenneth Clarke should now be in about his 30th year as PM and intends to honour this thought by voting Labour. Tick.
Anyone who likes Test Match Special is a fool anyway.
Agnew is a dud commentator and a pretty nasty piece of work.
Dunno about that but certainly that "legover" corpsing that gets replayed every series was never funny in the first place.
Comletely OT but I would just like to point out that Amol Rajan is far and away the best presenter of University Challenge in the history of the programme. Better even than good old Bamber Gascoigne.
What I don't get about Bozo appearing on GB News is that he has zero real experience of being a TV presenter (unlike even Nigel Farage who had experience doing a Radio show) to the extent it's likely to be a grade A car crash,,
He was entertainingly incompetent on HIGNFY, but presenting serious news and opinion may not work with his limited repertoire of mangled Latin and hair ruffling.
Surely the credibility of GB News takes a hit if it persists with him?
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
What are PB Tories? How many posters express detailed support for this government, principled adherence to its underlying ethos and philosophy and what it is doing, delight that this parliament and cabinet is doing so well, and a conviction that a better one is not really thinkable or available, and that a right thinking public should send them back with a large majority at the next election?
I think they are few in number. This One Nation Burkean Tory is voting Labour as the nearest thing available to my principles.
“PB Tories” has become a very confusing moniker when it is used nowadays on this site, IMHO. Back in the runup to 2010, or during the coalition, I could see the point because the site was rather heavily populated by Cameroony Tory voters. Nowadays it feels to me most Tory voters on here have either switched camps, or left the site, other than a handful of holdouts. But very few of those holdouts would defend everything the current government does to the hilt. So it just doesn’t feel like a particularly accurate observation anymore.
"PB Tory" is a state of mind, a worldview, a particular position in the political and cultural map of British society rather than an indication of current voting intention. Do you prefer Rugby to Association Football? You are a PB Tory. Do you instinctively hate diversity training, the ULEZ and people who travel in small waterborne craft other than during the Oxford-Cambridge Boat Race? You are a PB Tory. Are you at home in the Home Counties and at a stretch the posher bits of the Midlands, but nervous of the no go zones of Londonistan and need an interpreter if you venture north of the Watford Gap? You are a PB Tory. Do you now claim to have seen through Boris Johnson all along, but when he was PM got a semi every time he appeared at the dispatch box? You are a PB Tory. Are you currently losing your shit over Labour proposing VAT on private school fees, but remain silent when real per pupil spending is cut in the state sector? You are a PB Tory. Know about wine? PB Tory. Wash your car? PB Tory (or Dura_Ace). Hate the BBC, apart from Test Match Special? PB Tory. Oppose immigration, but not for any kind of racist reasons? PB Tory.
It seems I'm not a PB Tory at all then.
Absolutely zero of those represent me.
I think diversity training is a load of toss.
But, I’ve lived North of Watford, in a Labour stronghold, for 16 years.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
One point that does strike me when reading the blog is that the outrageous and ridiculous stuff is being (perfectly understandably) picked out by the media, and there's a mass of perfectly sensible discussion in level-headed terms as everyone gropes for the best way through. I don't think Boris is coming out of it well, but the general impression of total chaos of everyone involved is probably exaggerated.
The shocking thing today was the Deputy Cabinet Secretary staring into the abyss when she realised there was no plan.
Also very interesting was her point about leaders clinging to 'following the science' as a way to avoid having to think too much about all the other stuff.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
One point that does strike me when reading the blog is that the outrageous and ridiculous stuff is being (perfectly understandably) picked out by the media, and there's a mass of perfectly sensible discussion in level-headed terms as everyone gropes for the best way through. I don't think Boris is coming out of it well, but the general impression of total chaos of everyone involved is probably exaggerated.
The shocking thing today was the Deputy Cabinet Secretary staring into the abyss when she realised there was no plan.
Also very interesting was her point about leaders clinging to 'following the science' as a way to avoid having to think too much about all the other stuff.
'Following the science' just is inherently populist and wrong. When it comes to actions there is no such thing. Science may, to a degree, indicate what may occur if you do X, Y or Z, or how to calculate QALYS, but science can't tell you what to do with the information. Science may give background facts about choices, but the govern is to choose.
But it is also worth remembering as soon as any politician tried to deviate from it, even a delay of a day or two, they got absolutely trashed in the media. SAGE would leak out their recommendations, the media would run with the latest absolute craptactic models that showed 6 billion new cases and a million dead in 3 months, and the media would be straight away why aren't you following the science.
Now really strong leadership would have said I'm in charge, screw the media, we are doing what I think is right, and eventually we did get that, with if you remember Boris was told Christmas 2021 we all needed locking in our homes again, it was going to be another killer wave, and finally he said no, we aren't doing this anymore....he got absolutely shelled in the media and nobody ever said actually he made the right call there.
Christmas 2021? And no card-carrying Conservative would ever shut up about Boris getting the big calls right.
He did get the big calls right, or less wrong than others.
He got the little calls wrong, that's what brought him down.
No he fucking didn’t. The few things that went right were despite him not because of him.
What were the big calls?
Lockdown - He got this wrong, Stefan Löfven got this right, but he got this less wrong than every other party major leader in this country who wanted to lockdown sooner and harder and for longer.
Vaccines - He got this absolutely spot on, we quite literally had a world beating vaccine rollout.
Supporting Ukraine (pre-2021) - He got this absolutely spot on, as too did Theresa May and David Cameron.
Supporting Ukraine (2022) - He got this absolutely spot on.
The need to change Theresa May's backstop deal - He got this absolutely spot on, and when others said it was impossible, it was suddenly done when he was PM.
The need to have an election to break the deadlock of the 2017 Parliament - He got this absolutely spot on. I remember well on here people mocking Boris for having "lost" his majority that May "had". Despite the fact May couldn't pass her critical legislation and Boris then did.
It was the small calls he got wrong. Lying on almost trivial shit that should have never been lied about.
The Vaccine rollout was nothing to do with Johnson. The NHS infrastructure that predated him handled that.
Everything else you cite, apart from Ukraine, is to do with Brexit and nothing is ever ever going to reconcile us on that issue.
Yeah. He was nice to Ukraine. I’ll give you that.
I think to be fair, the vaccines were more than just the roll-out. The UK was very quick on funding different opportunities and securing supplies. Boris ultimately was the one who had to agree to that. Also, Kate Bingham was brought onboard because of him.
And how was this covered at the time....constant hit pieces on Kate Bingham...there were serious calls that she had to go, but it turns out she was bloody brilliant.
So it appears that Boris was desperate to finish his Shakespeare book when the hairdryer-up-the-nose episode occurred. Makes sense - Boris was exasperated by the whole inconvenience of Covid, had better things to be getting on with, and therefore 'did his own research' on the internet in the hope of stumbling across a solution science had missed.
Hair dryer up nose?!?
What have I missed?
Oh, Boris just saw something on the internet about blowing air up your nose with a hairdryer as a cure for Covid. He then instructed his scientists to brief him about it.
Which is why he's nothing like Trump.
Trump sees stupid shit on the internet, he says it unfiltered on the cameras to hundreds of millions around the globe.
Boris sees stupid shit, he asks an expert "is this believable or not", they say no, end of story, life goes on.
Precisely what any leader should be doing.
Although why Boris was Googling 'cure for Covid' to begin with is certainly a thought to conjure with.
We're seeing the media, and witnesses with reputational damage to shift, focusing only on the worst 0.1% of what was being said, and 0.0% of what was being done. Only the most reckless PM would write anything down in future.
It was always going to be the way. Also, only a wally would think that a) some sort of public inquiry wouldn't eventually come along and b) that all comms would be requested by those running it.
One thing for certain is there will be zero reflection by the media one how piss poor they were, consistently wrong about even the most basic of things.
Yes, the media were poor, instead of sending their science correspondents to the COVID briefings they would send their political correspondents, hoping for a "gotcha" moment.
The media share a lot of the culpability for perpetuating the sense of crisis. Some of their criticism was legitimate, but much was carping from the sidelines about every decision the government took.
The classics being immediately pointing out how one could bend the rules being implemented, then saying well this is all too confusing. When there job should have been to disseminate the information as clearly and concisely as possible with the general undertone of the best way we can minimise deaths is really try to limit contact with people outside your household.
God help us if we ever do go to war, because they’ll probably be fixated about whether the government is 5 seconds off in their estimate how long it would take an ICBM to get here, as the apocalypse approaches.
Perhaps a serious war is needed, occasionally, to stop people from obsessing about trivia.
What I don't get about Bozo appearing on GB News is that he has zero real experience of being a TV presenter (unlike even Nigel Farage who had experience doing a Radio show) to the extent it's likely to be a grade A car crash,,
He was entertainingly incompetent on HIGNFY, but presenting serious news and opinion may not work with his limited repertoire of mangled Latin and hair ruffling.
Surely the credibility of GB News takes a hit if it persists with him?
And instead so far all the focus seems to be on how rude Big Dom was to people etc and lots of people all pointing at a) Boris and b) everybody but themselves. And the media lapping up the drawm.
I haven't followed the enquiry, but judging from what's been in the news the last few days it appears to be descending into a farce. If this is considered a good use of time I wonder if there's really any point to it at all.
We're seeing the media, and witnesses with reputational damage to shift, focusing only on the worst 0.1% of what was being said, and 0.0% of what was being done. Only the most reckless PM would write anything down in future.
It was always going to be the way. Also, only a wally would think that a) some sort of public inquiry wouldn't eventually come along and b) that all comms would be requested by those running it.
One thing for certain is there will be zero reflection by the media one how piss poor they were, consistently wrong about even the most basic of things.
Yes, the media were poor, instead of sending their science correspondents to the COVID briefings they would send their political correspondents, hoping for a "gotcha" moment.
The media share a lot of the culpability for perpetuating the sense of crisis. Some of their criticism was legitimate, but much was carping from the sidelines about every decision the government took.
The classics being immediately pointing out how one could bend the rules being implemented, then saying well this is all too confusing. When there job should have been to disseminate the information as clearly and concisely as possible with the general undertone of the best way we can minimise deaths is really try to limit contact with people outside your household.
God help us if we ever do go to war, because they’ll probably be fixated about whether the government is 5 seconds off in their estimate how long it would take an ICBM to get here, as the apocalypse approaches.
Perhaps a serious war is needed, occasionally, to stop people from obsessing about trivia.
There’s a Not the Nine O’Clock News skit on that subject:
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
What are PB Tories? How many posters express detailed support for this government, principled adherence to its underlying ethos and philosophy and what it is doing, delight that this parliament and cabinet is doing so well, and a conviction that a better one is not really thinkable or available, and that a right thinking public should send them back with a large majority at the next election?
I think they are few in number. This One Nation Burkean Tory is voting Labour as the nearest thing available to my principles.
“PB Tories” has become a very confusing moniker when it is used nowadays on this site, IMHO. Back in the runup to 2010, or during the coalition, I could see the point because the site was rather heavily populated by Cameroony Tory voters. Nowadays it feels to me most Tory voters on here have either switched camps, or left the site, other than a handful of holdouts. But very few of those holdouts would defend everything the current government does to the hilt. So it just doesn’t feel like a particularly accurate observation anymore.
"PB Tory" is a state of mind, a worldview, a particular position in the political and cultural map of British society rather than an indication of current voting intention. Do you prefer Rugby to Association Football? You are a PB Tory. Do you instinctively hate diversity training, the ULEZ and people who travel in small waterborne craft other than during the Oxford-Cambridge Boat Race? You are a PB Tory. Are you at home in the Home Counties and at a stretch the posher bits of the Midlands, but nervous of the no go zones of Londonistan and need an interpreter if you venture north of the Watford Gap? You are a PB Tory. Do you now claim to have seen through Boris Johnson all along, but when he was PM got a semi every time he appeared at the dispatch box? You are a PB Tory. Are you currently losing your shit over Labour proposing VAT on private school fees, but remain silent when real per pupil spending is cut in the state sector? You are a PB Tory. Know about wine? PB Tory. Wash your car? PB Tory (or Dura_Ace). Hate the BBC, apart from Test Match Special? PB Tory. Oppose immigration, but not for any kind of racist reasons? PB Tory.
I know at least two Corbyn supporters who both know a great deal about wine and who love TMS and I think would have some strong words to say to you about being labelled Tories.
And instead so far all the focus seems to be on how rude Big Dom was to people etc and lots of people all pointing at a) Boris and b) everybody but themselves. And the media lapping up the drawm.
I haven't followed the enquiry, but judging from what's been in the news the last few days it appears to be descending into a farce. If this is considered a good use of time I wonder if there's really any point to it at all.
I don't think it is descending into farce at all. Indeed I think the only reason for getting that impression is that it is trying to examine one of the biggest and most tragic farces of the modern era - Johnson's* mishandling of Covid.
*Edit : and the rest of the Governmental structure
Things have moved on, past enthusiasm for Hamas. What is increasingly seen is sympathy for Palestinian victims, and no amount of "Hamas started it" and "human shields" and "Iranian and Russian trolls" will alter that, even though all are true. Thankfully, what we largely see are not new pogroms but lots of flag-waving, chanting, and a couple of idiots releasing mice into McDonalds for who knows what purpose.
Comletely OT but I would just like to point out that Amol Rajan is far and away the best presenter of University Challenge in the history of the programme. Better even than good old Bamber Gascoigne.
Paxman is a very distant third.
No way! Rajan is all right but he's always flashing his big watch like he's being sponsored by Rolex and it's distracting. Agree that Paxman is last but Bamber is best, even just for his enthusiasm.
And instead so far all the focus seems to be on how rude Big Dom was to people etc and lots of people all pointing at a) Boris and b) everybody but themselves. And the media lapping up the drawm.
I haven't followed the enquiry, but judging from what's been in the news the last few days it appears to be descending into a farce. If this is considered a good use of time I wonder if there's really any point to it at all.
If it only concludes that Boris and those in Downing Street was useless then yes it will have been a huge wasted opportunity. Maybe in the further phases will we get past the soap opera stuff, but we will see.
Because if we get another national emergency and even an anti-Boris is in charge, unless there is significant reform, most of the same shit will happen.
It would be hilarious to see how all these senior politicians and civil servants are dumping all over each other at the Covid enquiry, if it wasn’t thoroughly depressing to reflect this bunch of poisonous, lying, cowardly nitwits are meant to be the cream of our government system.
Much of this feels to me to be a reflection of the exponential increase in use of SpAds
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
What are PB Tories? How many posters express detailed support for this government, principled adherence to its underlying ethos and philosophy and what it is doing, delight that this parliament and cabinet is doing so well, and a conviction that a better one is not really thinkable or available, and that a right thinking public should send them back with a large majority at the next election?
I think they are few in number. This One Nation Burkean Tory is voting Labour as the nearest thing available to my principles.
“PB Tories” has become a very confusing moniker when it is used nowadays on this site, IMHO. Back in the runup to 2010, or during the coalition, I could see the point because the site was rather heavily populated by Cameroony Tory voters. Nowadays it feels to me most Tory voters on here have either switched camps, or left the site, other than a handful of holdouts. But very few of those holdouts would defend everything the current government does to the hilt. So it just doesn’t feel like a particularly accurate observation anymore.
"PB Tory" is a state of mind, a worldview, a particular position in the political and cultural map of British society rather than an indication of current voting intention. Do you prefer Rugby to Association Football? You are a PB Tory. Do you instinctively hate diversity training, the ULEZ and people who travel in small waterborne craft other than during the Oxford-Cambridge Boat Race? You are a PB Tory. Are you at home in the Home Counties and at a stretch the posher bits of the Midlands, but nervous of the no go zones of Londonistan and need an interpreter if you venture north of the Watford Gap? You are a PB Tory. Do you now claim to have seen through Boris Johnson all along, but when he was PM got a semi every time he appeared at the dispatch box? You are a PB Tory. Are you currently losing your shit over Labour proposing VAT on private school fees, but remain silent when real per pupil spending is cut in the state sector? You are a PB Tory. Know about wine? PB Tory. Wash your car? PB Tory (or Dura_Ace). Hate the BBC, apart from Test Match Special? PB Tory. Oppose immigration, but not for any kind of racist reasons? PB Tory.
It seems I'm not a PB Tory at all then.
Absolutely zero of those represent me.
I think diversity training is a load of toss.
But, I’ve lived North of Watford, in a Labour stronghold, for 16 years.
I find most training a load of nonsense, but I don't hate it. Similarly for ULEZ, I think its a bad idea, but I don't hate it, user-pays can be justified, I dislike the motives of amny of those supporting it more than I dislike the idea itself.
Other issues raised are just silly to me.
And Cricket wasn't even mentioned, or is Cricket too much most males on PB. Which is most of PB.
There don't seem to be many supporters of the current Government on here but plenty who continue to pine wistfully for Boris Johnson.
Apparently, he got all the "big calls" right yet somehow he's ended up quitting with his Cabinet in revolt and vilified by the majority.
Perhaps the continuing refrain he's the only Conservative Labour really fears is the reason - some mystical belief having beaten "the Left" before, he could do it again. Unfortunately, Boris wasn't voted out by the people but forced out by the Conservative Parliamentary Party, 40% of whom had no confidence in the man who had won them a big election victory just two and a half years earlier.
Comletely OT but I would just like to point out that Amol Rajan is far and away the best presenter of University Challenge in the history of the programme. Better even than good old Bamber Gascoigne.
Paxman is a very distant third.
No way! Rajan is all right but he's always flashing his big watch like he's being sponsored by Rolex and it's distracting. Agree that Paxman is last but Bamber is best, even just for his enthusiasm.
I can honestly say I have never noticed that so it hasn't been distracting for me.
And instead so far all the focus seems to be on how rude Big Dom was to people etc and lots of people all pointing at a) Boris and b) everybody but themselves. And the media lapping up the drawm.
I haven't followed the enquiry, but judging from what's been in the news the last few days it appears to be descending into a farce. If this is considered a good use of time I wonder if there's really any point to it at all.
If it only concludes that Boris and those in Downing Street was useless then yes it will have been a huge wasted opportunity. Maybe in the further phases will we get past the soap opera stuff, but we will see.
Because if we get another national emergency and even an anti-Boris is in charge, unless there is significant reform, most of the same shit will happen.
I have no doubt we will learn lessons about how to deal with coronavirus pandemics, but I doubt that we will learn much about how to prepare for large scale emergencies more generally, and give it a few decades I'm sure that in the name of cost savings we will undo whatever good does come out of it all.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
What are PB Tories? How many posters express detailed support for this government, principled adherence to its underlying ethos and philosophy and what it is doing, delight that this parliament and cabinet is doing so well, and a conviction that a better one is not really thinkable or available, and that a right thinking public should send them back with a large majority at the next election?
I think they are few in number. This One Nation Burkean Tory is voting Labour as the nearest thing available to my principles.
“PB Tories” has become a very confusing moniker when it is used nowadays on this site, IMHO. Back in the runup to 2010, or during the coalition, I could see the point because the site was rather heavily populated by Cameroony Tory voters. Nowadays it feels to me most Tory voters on here have either switched camps, or left the site, other than a handful of holdouts. But very few of those holdouts would defend everything the current government does to the hilt. So it just doesn’t feel like a particularly accurate observation anymore.
"PB Tory" is a state of mind, a worldview, a particular position in the political and cultural map of British society rather than an indication of current voting intention. Do you prefer Rugby to Association Football? You are a PB Tory. Do you instinctively hate diversity training, the ULEZ and people who travel in small waterborne craft other than during the Oxford-Cambridge Boat Race? You are a PB Tory. Are you at home in the Home Counties and at a stretch the posher bits of the Midlands, but nervous of the no go zones of Londonistan and need an interpreter if you venture north of the Watford Gap? You are a PB Tory. Do you now claim to have seen through Boris Johnson all along, but when he was PM got a semi every time he appeared at the dispatch box? You are a PB Tory. Are you currently losing your shit over Labour proposing VAT on private school fees, but remain silent when real per pupil spending is cut in the state sector? You are a PB Tory. Know about wine? PB Tory. Wash your car? PB Tory (or Dura_Ace). Hate the BBC, apart from Test Match Special? PB Tory. Oppose immigration, but not for any kind of racist reasons? PB Tory.
It seems I'm not a PB Tory at all then.
Absolutely zero of those represent me.
Apart from a slight prejudice against diversity training because I don't know what it is but it sounds like something delivered by women of a certain sort with dangly earrings who don't like being asked questions by older white males, I score Zero too. Where do I put in my application for the Socialist Workers Party?
On another planet a PB Tory could be someone who thinks Kenneth Clarke should now be in about his 30th year as PM and intends to honour this thought by voting Labour. Tick.
Anyone who likes Test Match Special is a fool anyway.
Agnew is a dud commentator and a pretty nasty piece of work.
Dunno about that but certainly that "legover" corpsing that gets replayed every series was never funny in the first place.
In my experience diversity training is about making middle class people feel simultaneously horrible and wonderful at the same time. Goop! for the mind.
It puts me in mind about what Malcolm X said about white enthusiasts for the cause.
There don't seem to be many supporters of the current Government on here but plenty who continue to pine wistfully for Boris Johnson.
Apparently, he got all the "big calls" right yet somehow he's ended up quitting with his Cabinet in revolt and vilified by the majority.
Perhaps the continuing refrain he's the only Conservative Labour really fears is the reason - some mystical belief having beaten "the Left" before, he could do it again. Unfortunately, Boris wasn't voted out by the people but forced out by the Conservative Parliamentary Party, 40% of whom had no confidence in the man who had won them a big election victory just two and a half years earlier.
He got the big calls largely right. It was his own character flaws that brought him down.
And instead so far all the focus seems to be on how rude Big Dom was to people etc and lots of people all pointing at a) Boris and b) everybody but themselves. And the media lapping up the drawm.
I haven't followed the enquiry, but judging from what's been in the news the last few days it appears to be descending into a farce. If this is considered a good use of time I wonder if there's really any point to it at all.
If it only concludes that Boris and those in Downing Street was useless then yes it will have been a huge wasted opportunity. Maybe in the further phases will we get past the soap opera stuff, but we will see.
Because if we get another national emergency and even an anti-Boris is in charge, unless there is significant reform, most of the same shit will happen.
I have no doubt we will learn lessons about how to deal with coronavirus pandemics, but I doubt that we will learn much about how to prepare for large scale emergencies more generally, and give it a few decades I'm sure that in the name of cost savings we will undo whatever good does come out of it all.
Maybe I am biased because I was invited to be part of the response, but as I said down thread, the state of the data available was absolute shit show, which hugely limited the ability of people will ML skills to help.
But now the focus is all about LLMs, and how they will turn into the terminator and destroy us all...eyes roll.
And instead so far all the focus seems to be on how rude Big Dom was to people etc and lots of people all pointing at a) Boris and b) everybody but themselves. And the media lapping up the drawm.
I haven't followed the enquiry, but judging from what's been in the news the last few days it appears to be descending into a farce. If this is considered a good use of time I wonder if there's really any point to it at all.
If it only concludes that Boris and those in Downing Street was useless then yes it will have been a huge wasted opportunity. Maybe in the further phases will we get past the soap opera stuff, but we will see.
Because if we get another national emergency and even an anti-Boris is in charge, unless there is significant reform, most of the same shit will happen.
I have no doubt we will learn lessons about how to deal with coronavirus pandemics, but I doubt that we will learn much about how to prepare for large scale emergencies more generally, and give it a few decades I'm sure that in the name of cost savings we will undo whatever good does come out of it all.
Maybe I am biased because I was invited to be part of the response, but as I said down thread, the state of the data available was absolute shit show, which hugely limited the ability of people will ML skills to help.
But now the focus is all about LLMs, and how they will turn into the terminator and destroy us all...eyes roll.
In the meantime they can give us lots of pictures of cats wearing top hats. Swings and roundabouts.
The Covid enquiry is crucial and seems to be doing a good job revealing just how debased and unfit for purpose our system of Govt has become. Johnson takes a lot of the blame but Thatcher and Blair sped it along this path. Ministers commenting publicly outside their briefs and their knowledge. A Presidential No 10 having its policies rubber-stamped by a bloated and talentless Cabinet. Think tanks and pseudo-journalists making policy bereft of any realism or utility.
It struck me how many PB were on here yesterday saying - well would you or I have done any better?
There don't seem to be many supporters of the current Government on here but plenty who continue to pine wistfully for Boris Johnson.
Apparently, he got all the "big calls" right yet somehow he's ended up quitting with his Cabinet in revolt and vilified by the majority.
Perhaps the continuing refrain he's the only Conservative Labour really fears is the reason - some mystical belief having beaten "the Left" before, he could do it again. Unfortunately, Boris wasn't voted out by the people but forced out by the Conservative Parliamentary Party, 40% of whom had no confidence in the man who had won them a big election victory just two and a half years earlier.
He got the big calls largely right. It was his own character flaws that brought him down.
Boris Johnson only ever made one big call- that Boris Johnson should be Prime Minister. Everything else was chaff to seduce the person in front of him, or to barge a rival out of the way.
And that call was tragicomically wrong. He should never have been anywhere near the top job, because of the character flaws that everyone paying attention knew about.
And instead so far all the focus seems to be on how rude Big Dom was to people etc and lots of people all pointing at a) Boris and b) everybody but themselves. And the media lapping up the drawm.
I haven't followed the enquiry, but judging from what's been in the news the last few days it appears to be descending into a farce. If this is considered a good use of time I wonder if there's really any point to it at all.
If it only concludes that Boris and those in Downing Street was useless then yes it will have been a huge wasted opportunity. Maybe in the further phases will we get past the soap opera stuff, but we will see.
Because if we get another national emergency and even an anti-Boris is in charge, unless there is significant reform, most of the same shit will happen.
I have no doubt we will learn lessons about how to deal with coronavirus pandemics, but I doubt that we will learn much about how to prepare for large scale emergencies more generally, and give it a few decades I'm sure that in the name of cost savings we will undo whatever good does come out of it all.
Maybe I am biased because I was invited to be part of the response, but as I said down thread, the state of the data available was absolute shit show, which hugely limited the ability of people will ML skills to help.
But now the focus is all about LLMs, and how they will turn into the terminator and destroy us all...eyes roll.
The dashboard rapidly became world class and the underlying systems were excellent. The openly available API meant I could pull down any data I wanted.
It was fascinating to see how fast the system chucked a couple of honours their way and got rid of the team.
And instead so far all the focus seems to be on how rude Big Dom was to people etc and lots of people all pointing at a) Boris and b) everybody but themselves. And the media lapping up the drawm.
I haven't followed the enquiry, but judging from what's been in the news the last few days it appears to be descending into a farce. If this is considered a good use of time I wonder if there's really any point to it at all.
If it only concludes that Boris and those in Downing Street was useless then yes it will have been a huge wasted opportunity. Maybe in the further phases will we get past the soap opera stuff, but we will see.
Because if we get another national emergency and even an anti-Boris is in charge, unless there is significant reform, most of the same shit will happen.
I have no doubt we will learn lessons about how to deal with coronavirus pandemics, but I doubt that we will learn much about how to prepare for large scale emergencies more generally, and give it a few decades I'm sure that in the name of cost savings we will undo whatever good does come out of it all.
Maybe I am biased because I was invited to be part of the response, but as I said down thread, the state of the data available was absolute shit show, which hugely limited the ability of people will ML skills to help.
But now the focus is all about LLMs, and how they will turn into the terminator and destroy us all...eyes roll.
The dashboard rapidly became world class and the underlying systems were excellent. The openly available API meant I could pull down any data I wanted.
It was fascinating to see how fast the system chucked a couple of honours their way and got rid of the team.
Also worth mention of Our World in Data....which the Big Dom got absolutely lambasted for giving them £500k of funding right at the start of the pandemic.
“Someone please ensure that they have the 530k within 24 hours from now and report back to me it’s been sent,” Cummings wrote to the chief executive of NHSX. “No procurement, no lawyers, no meetings, no delay please – just send immediately,” he continued.
I suspect the wins like the Dashboard and Our World in Data will get overlooked and forgotten as the soap opera reporting continues at the inquiry. Instead we will hear all about the failure of the tracking app (quite rightly), but you need to looks at wins and loses.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
What are PB Tories? How many posters express detailed support for this government, principled adherence to its underlying ethos and philosophy and what it is doing, delight that this parliament and cabinet is doing so well, and a conviction that a better one is not really thinkable or available, and that a right thinking public should send them back with a large majority at the next election?
I think they are few in number. This One Nation Burkean Tory is voting Labour as the nearest thing available to my principles.
“PB Tories” has become a very confusing moniker when it is used nowadays on this site, IMHO. Back in the runup to 2010, or during the coalition, I could see the point because the site was rather heavily populated by Cameroony Tory voters. Nowadays it feels to me most Tory voters on here have either switched camps, or left the site, other than a handful of holdouts. But very few of those holdouts would defend everything the current government does to the hilt. So it just doesn’t feel like a particularly accurate observation anymore.
"PB Tory" is a state of mind, a worldview, a particular position in the political and cultural map of British society rather than an indication of current voting intention. Do you prefer Rugby to Association Football? You are a PB Tory. Do you instinctively hate diversity training, the ULEZ and people who travel in small waterborne craft other than during the Oxford-Cambridge Boat Race? You are a PB Tory. Are you at home in the Home Counties and at a stretch the posher bits of the Midlands, but nervous of the no go zones of Londonistan and need an interpreter if you venture north of the Watford Gap? You are a PB Tory. Do you now claim to have seen through Boris Johnson all along, but when he was PM got a semi every time he appeared at the dispatch box? You are a PB Tory. Are you currently losing your shit over Labour proposing VAT on private school fees, but remain silent when real per pupil spending is cut in the state sector? You are a PB Tory. Know about wine? PB Tory. Wash your car? PB Tory (or Dura_Ace). Hate the BBC, apart from Test Match Special? PB Tory. Oppose immigration, but not for any kind of racist reasons? PB Tory.
It seems I'm not a PB Tory at all then.
Absolutely zero of those represent me.
I think diversity training is a load of toss.
But, I’ve lived North of Watford, in a Labour stronghold, for 16 years.
I find most training a load of nonsense, but I don't hate it. Similarly for ULEZ, I think its a bad idea, but I don't hate it, user-pays can be justified, I dislike the motives of amny of those supporting it more than I dislike the idea itself.
Other issues raised are just silly to me.
And Cricket wasn't even mentioned, or is Cricket too much most males on PB. Which is most of PB.
The biggest problem with diversity training is that it is a substitute for actual action and change.
Every organisation that has problems with racism and sexism - they’ll have 99% compliance with the HR thing about mandatory trainings every year.
It’s what happens in the Met. Wayne Couzens had to do yearly courses in equality…
I am no fan of Boris, but he isn't an MP anymore so what's it to us, the public, what jobs he gets? I don't watch GB News, but nobody is forcing anybody to watch it or pay for it via a telly tax.
True. And I wonder if the assumption that he's totally written off isn't premature. We'll see what his evidence says, but more importantly, he's keeping in the news, which automatically makes him still relevant - and perhaps with a post-election future.
I think he remains a fairly influential onlooker in the same mould as Blair, Farage, Heseltine, Corbyn, Heath etc.
I'm not sure Ted remains an influential onlooker ?
Not now for obvious reasons but he did throughout Thatcher's tenure.
Heath certainly tried to stay in political relevance - his hatred of Thatcher slowly mutated into a hatred of the voters who refused to acknowledge that he (Ted Heath) was right. By the 90s he was openly praising the Chinese government - chiefly for not listening to The People on Important Decisions.
Boris dropped straight back into journalism - with rather a low political content. He certainly isn't trying to challenge the leadership of the Conservative Party in any meaningful way.
I don't know if you've read 'Agent Lavender', an Alt-History about what if Harold Wilson really was a Soviet spy, but Heath features large in that TL.
He makes his comeback in a big way as after Wilson runs off to the Soviets, Labour are 'banned' (for a bit) and Thatcher replaced as she isn't up to it. In steps Ted, and whilst its been a while, the author perfectly captures Heath's glee at being Prime Minister again.
Those Britain Trump comparisons weren't far off in hindsight.
Just when you thought you'd heard it all....
Boris Johnson asked scientists if you could kill Covid by blowing hairdryer up nose
Boris Johnson asked scientists if people could kill Covid by blowing a hairdryer up their nose after he watched a YouTube video suggesting this.
The then-PM shared the clip on a WhatsApp group including Government health experts and senior No10 officials. In a written statement to the Covid Inquiry, Dominic Cummings accused Mr Johnson of spreading misinformation during the pandemic.
I mean, if I had access to important and knowledgeable scientists and there was a new disease going around, I bet I would ask some pretty dumb questions about it.
Trump started musing out loud in a public press conference, which was the problem. I’m prepared to cut Boris some slack on this, which I am not often accustomed to do.
Not even a cretin would begin to imagine blowing a hairdryer up your nose would do anything good.
Some of the best science comes from thinking a bit differently. Sometimes the consensus is wrong.
Take H. Pylori (or rather don't take it orally). Stomach ulcers were long thought to be down to stress. Then someone thought differently and wondered if a pathogen might be involved. There was a fair bit of skepticism, but it turned out to be right. Barry Marshal even infected himself to prove it.
Does that make Johnson's comments sesnsible? Not really, but thinking outside the box ought to be encouraged.
Quite.
And how can his actions be considered non-sensible? He didn't tell the public to rush to their hairdryers, he sent it to the 'experts' to check out. That seems exactly what he should have done.
No he shouldn't. They have better things to do than look at every crackpot idea from the internet. By your logic (Boris being a non expert) we should all have been sending them our pet theories and by god there were enough of them on the internet and they could have wasted their entire time investigating all of them rather using you know, science.
Yes we should be encouraged to think outside the box. It can produce great results. It is however not recommended that the likes of Boris and Trump bombard their scientists (who were under severe pressure) with videos posted by loons on the internet.
Next suggestions: Email NASA with youtube videos on how to land on the sun. Maybe Trump did that when president and I'm guessing you think that is a good idea?
This post is infantile rubbish. He didn't ask them to look at 'every crackpot idea from the internet', he saw something that seemed plausible, and asked the people he needed to ask until he got a (presumably) satisfactory response. We haven't seen the video, and we don't know how cogently argued, or grounded in science the points made in it were. I have already mentioned that Covid incubates in the nasal cavity for 24 hours before it spreads to the rest of the body, and that other treatments for Covid that have made it into production have focused on this crucial period. The people that he asked to provide him with answers were Government advisors - that was their literal job. The idea that he should have not sought their advice on this because of some spurious notion of not overtaxing them is absurd.
You are utterly nuts. It is you talking infantile rubbish if you think it sensible that scientists should drop what they were doing because Boris, who has no scientific skills whatsoever, sees a youtube video of someone pointing a hairdryer up their nose as a cure for covid.
I mean are you real - 'it seemed plausible'? How in gods earth is that plausible? A hairdryer up the nose.
You are absolutely barking.
Do you not think that scientists would have already done humidity and temperature tests way before this. All the research worldwide and the solution is a hairdryer up the nose? You are as batty as hell.
You also completely missed the logic of 'all the crackpot ideas on the internet'. If they investigate this one, why shouldn't they investigate all the others? This only takes priority because a completely unqualified but influential person suggested it. It has no other merit over the other stuff on the internet. So instead of them doing real science, they spend their valuable time dismissing one crackpot idea after another. It is people like you, Boris and Trump who are a danger to science. Although in your case I assume you are far enough away from it to be harmless.
And in case you thought that was personal by pointing out how really dim you are, maybe you should have considered that before starting your post by being insulting.
My criticism was of your excrescence of a post, rather than of you as a person, however, I can see why you'd have struggled to appreciate the distinction given that you appear to have a worrisome level of impairment when dealing with the issue of Boris Johnson.
I don't think that the NHS had testing data on whether blowing hot air up your nose helped with Covid, because they didn't have any data on Covid, it being a completely new virus. Information on similar pandemics highlighted ventilation as particularly beneficial ('fresh air hospitals' were one of the few good treatment options during the Spanish flu), and the need for the virus to incubate in the nasal cavity before infecting the rest of the body was and remains a key vulnerability in its life cycle. I have no idea whether depriving it of moisture and heating it up a bit kills it, but the option seems worth exploring, given that if it did work, it would be virtually free and save millions of lives.
The danger to science in my opinion is presented by those who like science to be preserved in aspick and remain solely the preserve of distinguished people in white coats, with the 'little people' taking their pills and shutting the f*** up.
There is no such thing as a silly question, only silly answers, and if a good answer was provided to Boris's question, I'm sure it was useful to everyone reading the exchange.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
One point that does strike me when reading the blog is that the outrageous and ridiculous stuff is being (perfectly understandably) picked out by the media, and there's a mass of perfectly sensible discussion in level-headed terms as everyone gropes for the best way through. I don't think Boris is coming out of it well, but the general impression of total chaos of everyone involved is probably exaggerated.
The shocking thing today was the Deputy Cabinet Secretary staring into the abyss when she realised there was no plan.
Also very interesting was her point about leaders clinging to 'following the science' as a way to avoid having to think too much about all the other stuff.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
One point that does strike me when reading the blog is that the outrageous and ridiculous stuff is being (perfectly understandably) picked out by the media, and there's a mass of perfectly sensible discussion in level-headed terms as everyone gropes for the best way through. I don't think Boris is coming out of it well, but the general impression of total chaos of everyone involved is probably exaggerated.
The shocking thing today was the Deputy Cabinet Secretary staring into the abyss when she realised there was no plan.
Also very interesting was her point about leaders clinging to 'following the science' as a way to avoid having to think too much about all the other stuff.
'Following the science' just is inherently populist and wrong. When it comes to actions there is no such thing. Science may, to a degree, indicate what may occur if you do X, Y or Z, or how to calculate QALYS, but science can't tell you what to do with the information. Science may give background facts about choices, but the govern is to choose.
But it is also worth remembering as soon as any politician tried to deviate from it, even a delay of a day or two, they got absolutely trashed in the media. SAGE would leak out their recommendations, the media would run with the latest absolute craptactic models that showed 6 billion new cases and a million dead in 3 months, and the media would be straight away why aren't you following the science.
Now really strong leadership would have said I'm in charge, screw the media, we are doing what I think is right, and eventually we did get that, with if you remember Boris was told Christmas 2021 we all needed locking in our homes again, it was going to be another killer wave, and finally he said no, we aren't doing this anymore....he got absolutely shelled in the media and nobody ever said actually he made the right call there.
Christmas 2021? And no card-carrying Conservative would ever shut up about Boris getting the big calls right.
He did get the big calls right, or less wrong than others.
He got the little calls wrong, that's what brought him down.
No he fucking didn’t. The few things that went right were despite him not because of him.
What were the big calls?
Lockdown - He got this wrong, Stefan Löfven got this right, but he got this less wrong than every other party major leader in this country who wanted to lockdown sooner and harder and for longer.
Vaccines - He got this absolutely spot on, we quite literally had a world beating vaccine rollout.
Supporting Ukraine (pre-2021) - He got this absolutely spot on, as too did Theresa May and David Cameron.
Supporting Ukraine (2022) - He got this absolutely spot on.
The need to change Theresa May's backstop deal - He got this absolutely spot on, and when others said it was impossible, it was suddenly done when he was PM.
The need to have an election to break the deadlock of the 2017 Parliament - He got this absolutely spot on. I remember well on here people mocking Boris for having "lost" his majority that May "had". Despite the fact May couldn't pass her critical legislation and Boris then did.
It was the small calls he got wrong. Lying on almost trivial shit that should have never been lied about.
The Vaccine rollout was nothing to do with Johnson. The NHS infrastructure that predated him handled that.
Everything else you cite, apart from Ukraine, is to do with Brexit and nothing is ever ever going to reconcile us on that issue.
Yeah. He was nice to Ukraine. I’ll give you that.
I think to be fair, the vaccines were more than just the roll-out. The UK was very quick on funding different opportunities and securing supplies. Boris ultimately was the one who had to agree to that. Also, Kate Bingham was brought onboard because of him.
And how was this covered at the time....constant hit pieces on Kate Bingham...there were serious calls that she had to go, but it turns out she was bloody brilliant.
You mean apart from saying we wouldn't want to vaccinate the whole population because there would be dangerous side effects? Bloody brilliant.
We're seeing the media, and witnesses with reputational damage to shift, focusing only on the worst 0.1% of what was being said, and 0.0% of what was being done. Only the most reckless PM would write anything down in future.
It was always going to be the way. Also, only a wally would think that a) some sort of public inquiry wouldn't eventually come along and b) that all comms would be requested by those running it.
The problem was - and is - our entire system of government is being run by people who can’t be called wallies without defaming people who would be considered genuine wallies.
Its wider than just the system of highest level of governance e.g. remember when we all used to wait for the daily data dump, so then PB own ran their scripts to build the charts etc.....and from time to time, not only was it late, it was delayed until the next day.
This was because they had to hired a team to write this complex code to pre-process all the raw data, because across the NHS, data couldn't be provided in standardised formats, there were multiple repetitions and edge cases in the raw datasets etc etc etc. It was an absolute nightmare and took months to really start to get on top of it.
Even then, these scripts had to run for several hours to preprocess this data to even get it into any sort of usable form. The days it was very late, was because these scripts crashed because of somebody had entered further non-standard entries.
We of course also had Excel-gate.
And instead so far all the focus seems to be on how rude Big Dom was to people etc and lots of people all pointing at a) Boris and b) everybody but themselves. And the media lapping up the drawm.
The dashboard ended up being a brilliant example of aggregating data and making it publicly available.
The civil service made very sure that funding was reduced and the team dispersed.
Absolutely. Just as the government are doing all this AI stuff this week, really we should be pushing ahead with really looking at how to improve data science in the public sector, instead the opposite has happened.
Get the data collection system right, employ people to use ML to process that data and it will pay for itself many times over. Just like the Nudge Unit paid for themselves easily with their ideas over things like nudging people to pay their taxes, we should be working on how to get the systems in place so the data pipeline allows for ML to improve efficiency and outcomes.
I think you'll find that what we should be doing is hosting a conference on ML. Perhaps a whole new department set up to investigate it's uses and applications throughout government, Central government - obviously no heed paid to local. Reports to be written. A new HR & review process enacted. Several new under-secretaries created. A very wise decision, minister.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
One point that does strike me when reading the blog is that the outrageous and ridiculous stuff is being (perfectly understandably) picked out by the media, and there's a mass of perfectly sensible discussion in level-headed terms as everyone gropes for the best way through. I don't think Boris is coming out of it well, but the general impression of total chaos of everyone involved is probably exaggerated.
The shocking thing today was the Deputy Cabinet Secretary staring into the abyss when she realised there was no plan.
Also very interesting was her point about leaders clinging to 'following the science' as a way to avoid having to think too much about all the other stuff.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
One point that does strike me when reading the blog is that the outrageous and ridiculous stuff is being (perfectly understandably) picked out by the media, and there's a mass of perfectly sensible discussion in level-headed terms as everyone gropes for the best way through. I don't think Boris is coming out of it well, but the general impression of total chaos of everyone involved is probably exaggerated.
The shocking thing today was the Deputy Cabinet Secretary staring into the abyss when she realised there was no plan.
Also very interesting was her point about leaders clinging to 'following the science' as a way to avoid having to think too much about all the other stuff.
'Following the science' just is inherently populist and wrong. When it comes to actions there is no such thing. Science may, to a degree, indicate what may occur if you do X, Y or Z, or how to calculate QALYS, but science can't tell you what to do with the information. Science may give background facts about choices, but the govern is to choose.
But it is also worth remembering as soon as any politician tried to deviate from it, even a delay of a day or two, they got absolutely trashed in the media. SAGE would leak out their recommendations, the media would run with the latest absolute craptactic models that showed 6 billion new cases and a million dead in 3 months, and the media would be straight away why aren't you following the science.
Now really strong leadership would have said I'm in charge, screw the media, we are doing what I think is right, and eventually we did get that, with if you remember Boris was told Christmas 2021 we all needed locking in our homes again, it was going to be another killer wave, and finally he said no, we aren't doing this anymore....he got absolutely shelled in the media and nobody ever said actually he made the right call there.
Christmas 2021? And no card-carrying Conservative would ever shut up about Boris getting the big calls right.
He did get the big calls right, or less wrong than others.
He got the little calls wrong, that's what brought him down.
No he fucking didn’t. The few things that went right were despite him not because of him.
What were the big calls?
Lockdown - He got this wrong, Stefan Löfven got this right, but he got this less wrong than every other party major leader in this country who wanted to lockdown sooner and harder and for longer.
Vaccines - He got this absolutely spot on, we quite literally had a world beating vaccine rollout.
Supporting Ukraine (pre-2021) - He got this absolutely spot on, as too did Theresa May and David Cameron.
Supporting Ukraine (2022) - He got this absolutely spot on.
The need to change Theresa May's backstop deal - He got this absolutely spot on, and when others said it was impossible, it was suddenly done when he was PM.
The need to have an election to break the deadlock of the 2017 Parliament - He got this absolutely spot on. I remember well on here people mocking Boris for having "lost" his majority that May "had". Despite the fact May couldn't pass her critical legislation and Boris then did.
It was the small calls he got wrong. Lying on almost trivial shit that should have never been lied about.
The Vaccine rollout was nothing to do with Johnson. The NHS infrastructure that predated him handled that.
Everything else you cite, apart from Ukraine, is to do with Brexit and nothing is ever ever going to reconcile us on that issue.
Yeah. He was nice to Ukraine. I’ll give you that.
I think to be fair, the vaccines were more than just the roll-out. The UK was very quick on funding different opportunities and securing supplies. Boris ultimately was the one who had to agree to that. Also, Kate Bingham was brought onboard because of him.
And how was this covered at the time....constant hit pieces on Kate Bingham...there were serious calls that she had to go, but it turns out she was bloody brilliant.
You mean apart from saying we wouldn't want to vaccinate the whole population because there would be dangerous side effects? Bloody brilliant.
Well side effects have been found (without going all tin foil hat GB News) and for instance the risk / reward for children certainly isn't clear cut.
If I remember correctly she was saying we need to get all over 50s, vulnerable adults, healthcare works etc done ASAP. We don't need to do children. Young adults will have to wait.
In the light of day given what we know about risk profiles etc, that isn't crazy at all.
It would be hilarious to see how all these senior politicians and civil servants are dumping all over each other at the Covid enquiry, if it wasn’t thoroughly depressing to reflect this bunch of poisonous, lying, cowardly nitwits are meant to be the cream of our government system.
Much of this feels to me to be a reflection of the exponential increase in use of SpAds
Much of it feels to me like a great many people who think they are smart but are not trying to make decisions about matters they don’t understand and have never really tried to understand - and screwing them up.
But that’s been the modus operandi of our government for a hundred years so I don’t know why I’m surprised.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
What are PB Tories? How many posters express detailed support for this government, principled adherence to its underlying ethos and philosophy and what it is doing, delight that this parliament and cabinet is doing so well, and a conviction that a better one is not really thinkable or available, and that a right thinking public should send them back with a large majority at the next election?
I think they are few in number. This One Nation Burkean Tory is voting Labour as the nearest thing available to my principles.
“PB Tories” has become a very confusing moniker when it is used nowadays on this site, IMHO. Back in the runup to 2010, or during the coalition, I could see the point because the site was rather heavily populated by Cameroony Tory voters. Nowadays it feels to me most Tory voters on here have either switched camps, or left the site, other than a handful of holdouts. But very few of those holdouts would defend everything the current government does to the hilt. So it just doesn’t feel like a particularly accurate observation anymore.
"PB Tory" is a state of mind, a worldview, a particular position in the political and cultural map of British society rather than an indication of current voting intention. Do you prefer Rugby to Association Football? You are a PB Tory. Do you instinctively hate diversity training, the ULEZ and people who travel in small waterborne craft other than during the Oxford-Cambridge Boat Race? You are a PB Tory. Are you at home in the Home Counties and at a stretch the posher bits of the Midlands, but nervous of the no go zones of Londonistan and need an interpreter if you venture north of the Watford Gap? You are a PB Tory. Do you now claim to have seen through Boris Johnson all along, but when he was PM got a semi every time he appeared at the dispatch box? You are a PB Tory. Are you currently losing your shit over Labour proposing VAT on private school fees, but remain silent when real per pupil spending is cut in the state sector? You are a PB Tory. Know about wine? PB Tory. Wash your car? PB Tory (or Dura_Ace). Hate the BBC, apart from Test Match Special? PB Tory. Oppose immigration, but not for any kind of racist reasons? PB Tory.
It seems I'm not a PB Tory at all then.
Absolutely zero of those represent me.
I think diversity training is a load of toss.
But, I’ve lived North of Watford, in a Labour stronghold, for 16 years.
I find most training a load of nonsense, but I don't hate it. Similarly for ULEZ, I think its a bad idea, but I don't hate it, user-pays can be justified, I dislike the motives of amny of those supporting it more than I dislike the idea itself.
Other issues raised are just silly to me.
And Cricket wasn't even mentioned, or is Cricket too much most males on PB. Which is most of PB.
The biggest problem with diversity training is that it is a substitute for actual action and change.
Every organisation that has problems with racism and sexism - they’ll have 99% compliance with the HR thing about mandatory trainings every year.
It’s what happens in the Met. Wayne Couzens had to do yearly courses in equality…
I had to take a diversity course a while back and was 'failed' for saying that the answer to the question should be 'well, the pilot landed the plane.' having *not* assumed that the pilot in the scenario was A Man.
I should have made that assumption and then I would have passed.
These class 350s really are horribly badly designed. It’s not as though I’m even particularly tall but I can’t sit comfortably in a normal row.
Current railway rolling stock reminds me of Genesis - Get Em Out By Friday. “ This is an announcement from Genetic Control It is my sad duty to inform you of a four foot restriction on Humanoid height I hear the directors of Genetic Control have been buying all the Properties that have recently been sold, taking risks oh so bold It's said now that people will be shorter in height They can fit twice as many in the same building site They say it's alright”
My view that Yousaf is doing ok is not reflected in the data... 😬
A 13% swing would give Labour a pretty decent chance in Edinburgh North and Leith. I'm not sure I've ever voted in a constituency that has changed hands at the election where I voted before.
My view that Yousaf is doing ok is not reflected in the data... 😬
A 13% swing would give Labour a pretty decent chance in Edinburgh North and Leith. I'm not sure I've ever voted in a constituency that has changed hands at the election where I voted before.
My view that Yousaf is doing ok is not reflected in the data... 😬
Does that make you a Scotch Expert?
I'm trying to think of a reason why the SNP are doing badly despite the effectiveness of Yousaf, but struggling somewhat.
I'll cling to the idea that there is a slow, seismic shift away from Indy and Yousaf is a victim of it.
OTOH, given Labour's rather lacklustre defence of Net Zero, I'm surprised they haven't made a bigger deal of Scotland's green energy supply, which is looking increasingly good. I reckon that's the escape route for Indy supporters.
And instead so far all the focus seems to be on how rude Big Dom was to people etc and lots of people all pointing at a) Boris and b) everybody but themselves. And the media lapping up the drawm.
I haven't followed the enquiry, but judging from what's been in the news the last few days it appears to be descending into a farce. If this is considered a good use of time I wonder if there's really any point to it at all.
I don't think it is descending into farce at all. Indeed I think the only reason for getting that impression is that it is trying to examine one of the biggest and most tragic farces of the modern era - Johnson's* mishandling of Covid.
*Edit : and the rest of the Governmental structure
The inquiry is being badly served (again) by our awful media. They are only interested in who swore at whom and whatsapp messages. Just like during Covid, a gotcha is more important to them than reporting the facts.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
What are PB Tories? How many posters express detailed support for this government, principled adherence to its underlying ethos and philosophy and what it is doing, delight that this parliament and cabinet is doing so well, and a conviction that a better one is not really thinkable or available, and that a right thinking public should send them back with a large majority at the next election?
I think they are few in number. This One Nation Burkean Tory is voting Labour as the nearest thing available to my principles.
“PB Tories” has become a very confusing moniker when it is used nowadays on this site, IMHO. Back in the runup to 2010, or during the coalition, I could see the point because the site was rather heavily populated by Cameroony Tory voters. Nowadays it feels to me most Tory voters on here have either switched camps, or left the site, other than a handful of holdouts. But very few of those holdouts would defend everything the current government does to the hilt. So it just doesn’t feel like a particularly accurate observation anymore.
"PB Tory" is a state of mind, a worldview, a particular position in the political and cultural map of British society rather than an indication of current voting intention. Do you prefer Rugby to Association Football? You are a PB Tory. Do you instinctively hate diversity training, the ULEZ and people who travel in small waterborne craft other than during the Oxford-Cambridge Boat Race? You are a PB Tory. Are you at home in the Home Counties and at a stretch the posher bits of the Midlands, but nervous of the no go zones of Londonistan and need an interpreter if you venture north of the Watford Gap? You are a PB Tory. Do you now claim to have seen through Boris Johnson all along, but when he was PM got a semi every time he appeared at the dispatch box? You are a PB Tory. Are you currently losing your shit over Labour proposing VAT on private school fees, but remain silent when real per pupil spending is cut in the state sector? You are a PB Tory. Know about wine? PB Tory. Wash your car? PB Tory (or Dura_Ace). Hate the BBC, apart from Test Match Special? PB Tory. Oppose immigration, but not for any kind of racist reasons? PB Tory.
It seems I'm not a PB Tory at all then.
Absolutely zero of those represent me.
I think diversity training is a load of toss.
But, I’ve lived North of Watford, in a Labour stronghold, for 16 years.
I find most training a load of nonsense, but I don't hate it. Similarly for ULEZ, I think its a bad idea, but I don't hate it, user-pays can be justified, I dislike the motives of amny of those supporting it more than I dislike the idea itself.
Other issues raised are just silly to me.
And Cricket wasn't even mentioned, or is Cricket too much most males on PB. Which is most of PB.
The biggest problem with diversity training is that it is a substitute for actual action and change.
Every organisation that has problems with racism and sexism - they’ll have 99% compliance with the HR thing about mandatory trainings every year.
It’s what happens in the Met. Wayne Couzens had to do yearly courses in equality…
I had to take a diversity course a while back and was 'failed' for saying that the answer to the question should be 'well, the pilot landed the plane.' having *not* assumed that the pilot in the scenario was A Man.
I should have made that assumption and then I would have passed.
It's quite dizzying.
I used to enjoy the courses - I was working for a company contracted into the banks. A colleague was the most honest person I have ever met. A Russian - given a choice between a lie and death, I reckon he’d have chosen death… put me in mind of the stories of the guys the Gulag couldn’t break..
Anyway he was quite a greybeard as programmers go. Done software for the Backfire bombers and their missiles in his National Service.
He used to have tremendous fun pulling the tails of “The Political Officers” as he called the trainers. Used to tie them in knots with innocent questions.
Kate Forbes says she kept all 'relevant' messages from during the pandemic, and handed them to Covid Inquiry.
When asked about her former boss, Nicola Sturgeon, she says 'I think it's incumbent on all of us to give an account of our own actions'
I imagine 90% of Sturgeon's WhatApps will be f##king Boris, f##king Gove, f##king Boris....the other 10%, see how I f##king owned the English scrumbag government there...
My view that Yousaf is doing ok is not reflected in the data... 😬
A 13% swing would give Labour a pretty decent chance in Edinburgh North and Leith. I'm not sure I've ever voted in a constituency that has changed hands at the election where I voted before.
2001 - Nope, incumbent Labour held the seat. 2005 & 2010 - Again, Labour holds, though in a different constituency to 2001. 2015 - This time I voted in a constituency where the Tory incumbent held the seat. 2017 & 2019 - This constituency was both times an SNP hold.
There's an element of moving constituency at just the right time to avoid voting in an election that sees the seat change hands, but it's a bit of an impressive run to have voted in four different constituencies and have the result of every vote be the return of the incumbent (who I didn't vote for in any of the cases).
Circa 34% for pro independence parties has to be one of the lowest supports polled for a long while, surely?
There are a significant number of voters who vote for independence parties for the Scottish Government, but prioritise UK and international issues for UK Government elections. This includes left wing voters who vote Green for the Scottish Parliament (where they can make a difference) but Labour for the UK Parliament (to help keep theTories out).
And instead so far all the focus seems to be on how rude Big Dom was to people etc and lots of people all pointing at a) Boris and b) everybody but themselves. And the media lapping up the drawm.
I haven't followed the enquiry, but judging from what's been in the news the last few days it appears to be descending into a farce. If this is considered a good use of time I wonder if there's really any point to it at all.
If it only concludes that Boris and those in Downing Street was useless then yes it will have been a huge wasted opportunity. Maybe in the further phases will we get past the soap opera stuff, but we will see.
Because if we get another national emergency and even an anti-Boris is in charge, unless there is significant reform, most of the same shit will happen.
I have no doubt we will learn lessons about how to deal with coronavirus pandemics, but I doubt that we will learn much about how to prepare for large scale emergencies more generally, and give it a few decades I'm sure that in the name of cost savings we will undo whatever good does come out of it all.
Already have. The vaccine etc research/innovation centre was shut down and scrapped alarmingly quickly.
The Conservatives polled 25% in Scotland in December 2019 so this is a decent poll. The England polls are showing the party's support down over 20 points. When was the last time the Conservative vote share in Scotland was similar to the share in the rest of Britain?
And instead so far all the focus seems to be on how rude Big Dom was to people etc and lots of people all pointing at a) Boris and b) everybody but themselves. And the media lapping up the drawm.
I haven't followed the enquiry, but judging from what's been in the news the last few days it appears to be descending into a farce. If this is considered a good use of time I wonder if there's really any point to it at all.
If it only concludes that Boris and those in Downing Street was useless then yes it will have been a huge wasted opportunity. Maybe in the further phases will we get past the soap opera stuff, but we will see.
Because if we get another national emergency and even an anti-Boris is in charge, unless there is significant reform, most of the same shit will happen.
I have no doubt we will learn lessons about how to deal with coronavirus pandemics, but I doubt that we will learn much about how to prepare for large scale emergencies more generally, and give it a few decades I'm sure that in the name of cost savings we will undo whatever good does come out of it all.
Already have. The vaccine etc research/innovation centre was shut down and scrapped alarmingly quickly.
I don't think it was shut down, it was sold off.
Now I was very critical of this, but MaxPB, who I think knows more about this stuff (and no Boris fan), said actually this wasn't a crazy decision, as it will allow continued private / public partnerships to develop with funding that wouldn't otherwise be forthcoming.
The most surprising thing about that (to me) is the Tory figure. Given that their vote in the Central Belt must surely be haemmorrhaging , their vote in their rural heartlands must be rock hard. Then again, maybe this is an outlier. Humza must hope so otherwise he's gonna find himself a soft kernel in an electoral nutcracker.
My view that Yousaf is doing ok is not reflected in the data... 😬
Does that make you a Scotch Expert?
I'm trying to think of a reason why the SNP are doing badly despite the effectiveness of Yousaf, but struggling somewhat.
I'll cling to the idea that there is a slow, seismic shift away from Indy and Yousaf is a victim of it.
OTOH, given Labour's rather lacklustre defence of Net Zero, I'm surprised they haven't made a bigger deal of Scotland's green energy supply, which is looking increasingly good. I reckon that's the escape route for Indy supporters.
Although Yousaf has done well on Israel/Palestine, I don’t think it is an issue that will change many votes.
And instead so far all the focus seems to be on how rude Big Dom was to people etc and lots of people all pointing at a) Boris and b) everybody but themselves. And the media lapping up the drawm.
I haven't followed the enquiry, but judging from what's been in the news the last few days it appears to be descending into a farce. If this is considered a good use of time I wonder if there's really any point to it at all.
If it only concludes that Boris and those in Downing Street was useless then yes it will have been a huge wasted opportunity. Maybe in the further phases will we get past the soap opera stuff, but we will see.
Because if we get another national emergency and even an anti-Boris is in charge, unless there is significant reform, most of the same shit will happen.
I have no doubt we will learn lessons about how to deal with coronavirus pandemics, but I doubt that we will learn much about how to prepare for large scale emergencies more generally, and give it a few decades I'm sure that in the name of cost savings we will undo whatever good does come out of it all.
Already have. The vaccine etc research/innovation centre was shut down and scrapped alarmingly quickly.
I don't think it was shut down, it was sold off.
Now I was very critical of this, but MaxPB, who I think knows more about this stuff (and no Boris fan), said actually this wasn't a crazy decision, as it will allow continued private / public partnerships to develop with funding that wouldn't otherwise be forthcoming.
Hmm. But sold off = out of state control. So it can be shut down, or diverted to producing some Viagra substitute, whenever some venture capitalist wants, no? And bugger the imperatives of public health.
I am surprised that there are so few comments on PB in relation to the Covid inquiry? Is that because it is embarrassing for PB Tories?
What are PB Tories? How many posters express detailed support for this government, principled adherence to its underlying ethos and philosophy and what it is doing, delight that this parliament and cabinet is doing so well, and a conviction that a better one is not really thinkable or available, and that a right thinking public should send them back with a large majority at the next election?
I think they are few in number. This One Nation Burkean Tory is voting Labour as the nearest thing available to my principles.
“PB Tories” has become a very confusing moniker when it is used nowadays on this site, IMHO. Back in the runup to 2010, or during the coalition, I could see the point because the site was rather heavily populated by Cameroony Tory voters. Nowadays it feels to me most Tory voters on here have either switched camps, or left the site, other than a handful of holdouts. But very few of those holdouts would defend everything the current government does to the hilt. So it just doesn’t feel like a particularly accurate observation anymore.
"PB Tory" is a state of mind, a worldview, a particular position in the political and cultural map of British society rather than an indication of current voting intention. Do you prefer Rugby to Association Football? You are a PB Tory. Do you instinctively hate diversity training, the ULEZ and people who travel in small waterborne craft other than during the Oxford-Cambridge Boat Race? You are a PB Tory. Are you at home in the Home Counties and at a stretch the posher bits of the Midlands, but nervous of the no go zones of Londonistan and need an interpreter if you venture north of the Watford Gap? You are a PB Tory. Do you now claim to have seen through Boris Johnson all along, but when he was PM got a semi every time he appeared at the dispatch box? You are a PB Tory. Are you currently losing your shit over Labour proposing VAT on private school fees, but remain silent when real per pupil spending is cut in the state sector? You are a PB Tory. Know about wine? PB Tory. Wash your car? PB Tory (or Dura_Ace). Hate the BBC, apart from Test Match Special? PB Tory. Oppose immigration, but not for any kind of racist reasons? PB Tory.
It seems I'm not a PB Tory at all then.
Absolutely zero of those represent me.
I think diversity training is a load of toss.
But, I’ve lived North of Watford, in a Labour stronghold, for 16 years.
I find most training a load of nonsense, but I don't hate it. Similarly for ULEZ, I think its a bad idea, but I don't hate it, user-pays can be justified, I dislike the motives of amny of those supporting it more than I dislike the idea itself.
Other issues raised are just silly to me.
And Cricket wasn't even mentioned, or is Cricket too much most males on PB. Which is most of PB.
The biggest problem with diversity training is that it is a substitute for actual action and change.
Every organisation that has problems with racism and sexism - they’ll have 99% compliance with the HR thing about mandatory trainings every year.
It’s what happens in the Met. Wayne Couzens had to do yearly courses in equality…
I had to take a diversity course a while back and was 'failed' for saying that the answer to the question should be 'well, the pilot landed the plane.' having *not* assumed that the pilot in the scenario was A Man.
I should have made that assumption and then I would have passed.
It's quite dizzying.
I used to enjoy the courses - I was working for a company contracted into the banks. A colleague was the most honest person I have ever met. A Russian - given a choice between a lie and death, I reckon he’d have chosen death… put me in mind of the stories of the guys the Gulag couldn’t break..
Anyway he was quite a greybeard as programmers go. Done software for the Backfire bombers and their missiles in his National Service.
He used to have tremendous fun pulling the tails of “The Political Officers” as he called the trainers. Used to tie them in knots with innocent questions.
After he left, they were bloody boring.
I did some training on how to be an ally to women. I thought that it was really just reinforcing stereotypes about women, and didn't take account of the fact that people are individuals and react to things in different ways. Obviously I can't say that though.
My view that Yousaf is doing ok is not reflected in the data... 😬
A 13% swing would give Labour a pretty decent chance in Edinburgh North and Leith. I'm not sure I've ever voted in a constituency that has changed hands at the election where I voted before.
2001 - Nope, incumbent Labour held the seat. 2005 & 2010 - Again, Labour holds, though in a different constituency to 2001. 2015 - This time I voted in a constituency where the Tory incumbent held the seat. 2017 & 2019 - This constituency was both times an SNP hold.
There's an element of moving constituency at just the right time to avoid voting in an election that sees the seat change hands, but it's a bit of an impressive run to have voted in four different constituencies and have the result of every vote be the return of the incumbent (who I didn't vote for in any of the cases).
2007 Scottish Parliament election. Our seat changed hands from Labour to SNP with a majority of 48. The SNP won 47 seats to Labour’s 46. If 25 SNP voters had voted Labour instead, there may not have been an SNP led government, and who knows what would have subsequently happened re: Indyref? I don’t expect my vote to be as important ever again.
And instead so far all the focus seems to be on how rude Big Dom was to people etc and lots of people all pointing at a) Boris and b) everybody but themselves. And the media lapping up the drawm.
I haven't followed the enquiry, but judging from what's been in the news the last few days it appears to be descending into a farce. If this is considered a good use of time I wonder if there's really any point to it at all.
If it only concludes that Boris and those in Downing Street was useless then yes it will have been a huge wasted opportunity. Maybe in the further phases will we get past the soap opera stuff, but we will see.
Because if we get another national emergency and even an anti-Boris is in charge, unless there is significant reform, most of the same shit will happen.
I have no doubt we will learn lessons about how to deal with coronavirus pandemics, but I doubt that we will learn much about how to prepare for large scale emergencies more generally, and give it a few decades I'm sure that in the name of cost savings we will undo whatever good does come out of it all.
Already have. The vaccine etc research/innovation centre was shut down and scrapped alarmingly quickly.
I don't think it was shut down, it was sold off.
Now I was very critical of this, but MaxPB, who I think knows more about this stuff (and no Boris fan), said actually this wasn't a crazy decision, as it will allow continued private / public partnerships to develop with funding that wouldn't otherwise be forthcoming.
Hmm. But sold off = out of state control. So it can be shut down, or diverted to producing some Viagra substitute, whenever some venture capitalist wants, no? And bugger the imperatives of public health.
The company who bought it develop and manufacture biologic therapies and vaccines, including mRNA, proteins, and other advanced modalities. So no they won't be making Viagra.
But yes, I personally think it was a wasted opportunity. Just like the scraping of the task force to reduce our reliance on China for crucial products like precursor chemicals.
Ciaran: 90mph gust already recorded in Western Brittany, and we are hours from the peak there. Highest winds of the storm will be slap bang over Guernsey and Alderney around 4am. Likely to peak at 110-115mph. Near record speeds.
The strongest mainland winds will be around rush-hour time in Sussex, likely to reach 85-90mph. Damaging especially with trees in leaf, but not the worst we've seen. However, there is a definite sting-jet forming, which could give us a arrow ribbon of higher winds dragged down from aloft. Signs of the characteristic hook and sting shape on the NW of the depression and evaporative subsidence.
The Covid enquiry is crucial and seems to be doing a good job revealing just how debased and unfit for purpose our system of Govt has become. Johnson takes a lot of the blame but Thatcher and Blair sped it along this path. Ministers commenting publicly outside their briefs and their knowledge. A Presidential No 10 having its policies rubber-stamped by a bloated and talentless Cabinet. Think tanks and pseudo-journalists making policy bereft of any realism or utility.
It struck me how many PB were on here yesterday saying - well would you or I have done any better?
Yes is the answer to that. Much better.
Witout in any way excusing the atrocious performances of Johnson and Trump, it was interesting how the incumbents at the time of the pandemic found themselves trying to deal with the situation with the expected systems and resources completely missing due to the actions of their predecessors.
I am reminded that GW Bush had instigated a massive programme of preparedness for a pandemic after being shocked by the potentialities and the whole lot was cancelled or mothballed by Obama.
Likewise Sam Coates was reporting yesterday that multiple witnesses to the enquiry have said that when they went to the Civil Service to ask for a prepared plan on dealing with a pandemic they were told none existed and they would have to start from scratch. What little did exist was for a completely different sort of pandemic threat and hadn't been updated in several years.
I am no fan of Boris, but he isn't an MP anymore so what's it to us, the public, what jobs he gets? I don't watch GB News, but nobody is forcing anybody to watch it or pay for it via a telly tax.
True. And I wonder if the assumption that he's totally written off isn't premature. We'll see what his evidence says, but more importantly, he's keeping in the news, which automatically makes him still relevant - and perhaps with a post-election future.
I think he remains a fairly influential onlooker in the same mould as Blair, Farage, Heseltine, Corbyn, Heath etc.
I'm not sure Ted remains an influential onlooker ?
Not now for obvious reasons but he did throughout Thatcher's tenure.
Heath certainly tried to stay in political relevance - his hatred of Thatcher slowly mutated into a hatred of the voters who refused to acknowledge that he (Ted Heath) was right. By the 90s he was openly praising the Chinese government - chiefly for not listening to The People on Important Decisions.
Boris dropped straight back into journalism - with rather a low political content. He certainly isn't trying to challenge the leadership of the Conservative Party in any meaningful way.
I don't know if you've read 'Agent Lavender', an Alt-History about what if Harold Wilson really was a Soviet spy, but Heath features large in that TL.
He makes his comeback in a big way as after Wilson runs off to the Soviets, Labour are 'banned' (for a bit) and Thatcher replaced as she isn't up to it. In steps Ted, and whilst its been a while, the author perfectly captures Heath's glee at being Prime Minister again.
Those Britain Trump comparisons weren't far off in hindsight.
Just when you thought you'd heard it all....
Boris Johnson asked scientists if you could kill Covid by blowing hairdryer up nose
Boris Johnson asked scientists if people could kill Covid by blowing a hairdryer up their nose after he watched a YouTube video suggesting this.
The then-PM shared the clip on a WhatsApp group including Government health experts and senior No10 officials. In a written statement to the Covid Inquiry, Dominic Cummings accused Mr Johnson of spreading misinformation during the pandemic.
I mean, if I had access to important and knowledgeable scientists and there was a new disease going around, I bet I would ask some pretty dumb questions about it.
Trump started musing out loud in a public press conference, which was the problem. I’m prepared to cut Boris some slack on this, which I am not often accustomed to do.
Not even a cretin would begin to imagine blowing a hairdryer up your nose would do anything good.
Some of the best science comes from thinking a bit differently. Sometimes the consensus is wrong.
Take H. Pylori (or rather don't take it orally). Stomach ulcers were long thought to be down to stress. Then someone thought differently and wondered if a pathogen might be involved. There was a fair bit of skepticism, but it turned out to be right. Barry Marshal even infected himself to prove it.
Does that make Johnson's comments sesnsible? Not really, but thinking outside the box ought to be encouraged.
Quite.
And how can his actions be considered non-sensible? He didn't tell the public to rush to their hairdryers, he sent it to the 'experts' to check out. That seems exactly what he should have done.
No he shouldn't. They have better things to do than look at every crackpot idea from the internet. By your logic (Boris being a non expert) we should all have been sending them our pet theories and by god there were enough of them on the internet and they could have wasted their entire time investigating all of them rather using you know, science.
Yes we should be encouraged to think outside the box. It can produce great results. It is however not recommended that the likes of Boris and Trump bombard their scientists (who were under severe pressure) with videos posted by loons on the internet.
Next suggestions: Email NASA with youtube videos on how to land on the sun. Maybe Trump did that when president and I'm guessing you think that is a good idea?
This post is infantile rubbish. He didn't ask them to look at 'every crackpot idea from the internet', he saw something that seemed plausible, and asked the people he needed to ask until he got a (presumably) satisfactory response. We haven't seen the video, and we don't know how cogently argued, or grounded in science the points made in it were. I have already mentioned that Covid incubates in the nasal cavity for 24 hours before it spreads to the rest of the body, and that other treatments for Covid that have made it into production have focused on this crucial period. The people that he asked to provide him with answers were Government advisors - that was their literal job. The idea that he should have not sought their advice on this because of some spurious notion of not overtaxing them is absurd.
You are utterly nuts. It is you talking infantile rubbish if you think it sensible that scientists should drop what they were doing because Boris, who has no scientific skills whatsoever, sees a youtube video of someone pointing a hairdryer up their nose as a cure for covid.
I mean are you real - 'it seemed plausible'? How in gods earth is that plausible? A hairdryer up the nose.
You are absolutely barking.
Do you not think that scientists would have already done humidity and temperature tests way before this. All the research worldwide and the solution is a hairdryer up the nose? You are as batty as hell.
You also completely missed the logic of 'all the crackpot ideas on the internet'. If they investigate this one, why shouldn't they investigate all the others? This only takes priority because a completely unqualified but influential person suggested it. It has no other merit over the other stuff on the internet. So instead of them doing real science, they spend their valuable time dismissing one crackpot idea after another. It is people like you, Boris and Trump who are a danger to science. Although in your case I assume you are far enough away from it to be harmless.
And in case you thought that was personal by pointing out how really dim you are, maybe you should have considered that before starting your post by being insulting.
My criticism was of your excrescence of a post, rather than of you as a person, however, I can see why you'd have struggled to appreciate the distinction given that you appear to have a worrisome level of impairment when dealing with the issue of Boris Johnson.
I don't think that the NHS had testing data on whether blowing hot air up your nose helped with Covid, because they didn't have any data on Covid, it being a completely new virus. Information on similar pandemics highlighted ventilation as particularly beneficial ('fresh air hospitals' were one of the few good treatment options during the Spanish flu), and the need for the virus to incubate in the nasal cavity before infecting the rest of the body was and remains a key vulnerability in its life cycle. I have no idea whether depriving it of moisture and heating it up a bit kills it, but the option seems worth exploring, given that if it did work, it would be virtually free and save millions of lives.
The danger to science in my opinion is presented by those who like science to be preserved in aspick and remain solely the preserve of distinguished people in white coats, with the 'little people' taking their pills and shutting the f*** up.
There is no such thing as a silly question, only silly answers, and if a good answer was provided to Boris's question, I'm sure it was useful to everyone reading the exchange.
'They didn't have any data on Covid' - What? Of course there was a lot of data on Covid. This conversation didn't happen the instant Covid was discovered and we are talking about heat and humidity tests which would have been some of the first tests carried out, presumably hundreds of times around the world.
Just have a think about this. When Boris asked the question do you think they all suddenly had the shattering realisation that nobody had thought about that, or thought 'What a pillock'.
See you ignored all the other points raised as to why there really is such a thing as a silly question when people are busy doing serious work. It was also of no use to anyone reading the exchange as you claim, but just a waste of everyone's time. There really is such a thing as a silly question when your resources are limited. What if he came back and said 'I've seen another video on UV- C, or bleach, or hydrogen peroxide or saline sprays, or 5G Bioshields, or Corona-Cure Coronavirus Infection Prevention Nasal Spray, or, or, or, etc. The list is endless.
People creating Youtube videos, twitter threads, etc promoting possible cures to previous incurable ailments are charlatans. People taken in by them are idiots who need protecting.
On the matter of 'appearing to have a worrisome level of impairment when dealing with the issue of Boris'. Eh? That is bizarre logic. That implies that anyone I criticise for doing something I think is wrong I must have a worrisome level of impairment about, as I haven't been more critical of Boris than say Corbyn or a whole host of other politicians (Rachel Reeves and Annelisa Doods to mention two from this week). Do I have a worrisome level of impairment when dealing with them as well? How do you come to your conclusion about Boris in particular? It seems somewhat random.
Ciaran: 90mph gust already recorded in Western Brittany, and we are hours from the peak there. Highest winds of the storm will be slap bang over Guernsey and Alderney around 4am. Likely to peak at 110-115mph. Near record speeds.
The strongest mainland winds will be around rush-hour time in Sussex, likely to reach 85-90mph. Damaging especially with trees in leaf, but not the worst we've seen. However, there is a definite sting-jet forming, which could give us a arrow ribbon of higher winds dragged down from aloft. Signs of the characteristic hook and sting shape on the NW of the depression and evaporative subsidence.
My view that Yousaf is doing ok is not reflected in the data... 😬
Does that make you a Scotch Expert?
I'm trying to think of a reason why the SNP are doing badly despite the effectiveness of Yousaf, but struggling somewhat.
I'll cling to the idea that there is a slow, seismic shift away from Indy and Yousaf is a victim of it.
OTOH, given Labour's rather lacklustre defence of Net Zero, I'm surprised they haven't made a bigger deal of Scotland's green energy supply, which is looking increasingly good. I reckon that's the escape route for Indy supporters.
The basic problem for Yousaf I think is that he lacks the personal loyalty of voters or his colleagues that Sturgeon or before her, Salmond, engendered by having taken the SNP so far. That skated over all manner of differences of opinion and personal rivalries. Few ever questioned Sturgeon's decisions but with Yousaf, because he wasn't an architect of the party's success lots think they know better where the party should go. There have also been chickens coming home to roost.
Parties often have issues when they have to move to the next generation after a successful one. Look at Labour when New Labour's SpAd cast took over. It's exacerbated by the fact that on some pretty big issues the SNP is divided. And there are now plausible alternatives in Labour looking like they may form a UK government, or now Alba if you're pro-indy but uncomfortable with its progressive turn. Plus internally Forbes and her supporters are clearly smarting and would love to put the knife in when appropriate.
Ciaran: 90mph gust already recorded in Western Brittany, and we are hours from the peak there. Highest winds of the storm will be slap bang over Guernsey and Alderney around 4am. Likely to peak at 110-115mph. Near record speeds.
The strongest mainland winds will be around rush-hour time in Sussex, likely to reach 85-90mph. Damaging especially with trees in leaf, but not the worst we've seen. However, there is a definite sting-jet forming, which could give us a arrow ribbon of higher winds dragged down from aloft. Signs of the characteristic hook and sting shape on the NW of the depression and evaporative subsidence.
EDIT: 59mph gust recorded just now on the Isle of Portland. Many hours away from the peak still.
Don't most of the leaves just shed as the wind rises?
Not yet. If this were mid November then yes, but at the moment there's enough sticking power for them to act as sails on the trees. Most of the trees around here are still largely green.
Here's a nice visualisation of this evening's sting jet by the way:
My view that Yousaf is doing ok is not reflected in the data... 😬
Does that make you a Scotch Expert?
I'm trying to think of a reason why the SNP are doing badly despite the effectiveness of Yousaf, but struggling somewhat.
I'll cling to the idea that there is a slow, seismic shift away from Indy and Yousaf is a victim of it.
OTOH, given Labour's rather lacklustre defence of Net Zero, I'm surprised they haven't made a bigger deal of Scotland's green energy supply, which is looking increasingly good. I reckon that's the escape route for Indy supporters.
Is Yousaf effective though?
From where I’m sitting, he appears to have fixated on political dividing lines like the gender ID court battle and keeping a close relationship with the Greens while members like Regan quit the party. He seems to on one hand be telling the party they need to play the long game on independence while suggesting the next GE will be a de facto vote on independence, hence creating a confused message but still giving the impression the SNP are still utterly fixated on the issue. I am a bit removed from the day to day on Scottish politics so I’m prepared to be educated on his successes, and I am not naturally predisposed to being an SNP fan, so there is that.
(I should mention I am setting aside the very difficult family circumstances he is going through at the moment (for which I feel for him)).
Ciaran: 90mph gust already recorded in Western Brittany, and we are hours from the peak there. Highest winds of the storm will be slap bang over Guernsey and Alderney around 4am. Likely to peak at 110-115mph. Near record speeds.
The strongest mainland winds will be around rush-hour time in Sussex, likely to reach 85-90mph. Damaging especially with trees in leaf, but not the worst we've seen. However, there is a definite sting-jet forming, which could give us a arrow ribbon of higher winds dragged down from aloft. Signs of the characteristic hook and sting shape on the NW of the depression and evaporative subsidence.
EDIT: 59mph gust recorded just now on the Isle of Portland. Many hours away from the peak still.
Don't most of the leaves just shed as the wind rises?
Not yet. If this were mid November then yes, but at the moment there's enough sticking power for them to act as sails on the trees. Most of the trees around here are still largely green.
My view that Yousaf is doing ok is not reflected in the data... 😬
Does that make you a Scotch Expert?
I'm trying to think of a reason why the SNP are doing badly despite the effectiveness of Yousaf, but struggling somewhat.
I'll cling to the idea that there is a slow, seismic shift away from Indy and Yousaf is a victim of it.
OTOH, given Labour's rather lacklustre defence of Net Zero, I'm surprised they haven't made a bigger deal of Scotland's green energy supply, which is looking increasingly good. I reckon that's the escape route for Indy supporters.
The basic problem for Yousaf I think is that he lacks the personal loyalty of voters or his colleagues that Sturgeon or before her, Salmond, engendered by having taken the SNP so far. That skated over all manner of differences of opinion and personal rivalries. Few ever questioned Sturgeon's decisions but with Yousaf, because he wasn't an architect of the party's success lots think they know better where the party should go. There have also been chickens coming home to roost.
Parties often have issues when they have to move to the next generation after a successful one. Look at Labour when New Labour's SpAd cast took over. It's exacerbated by the fact that on some pretty big issues the SNP is divided. And there are now plausible alternatives in Labour looking like they may form a UK government, or now Alba if you're pro-indy but uncomfortable with its progressive turn. Plus internally Forbes and her supporters are clearly smarting and would love to put the knife in when appropriate.
Salmond and Sturgeon, whatever one thinks of them, were top notch political operators. Yousaf doesn't appear to be. It's rare to get three in a row for any Party.
US President Joe Biden and his aides reportedly believe that Benjamin Netanyahu’s days as Israel’s prime minister are numbered in the fallout of the war in Gaza.
Biden leads 47% to 46% for Trump without Kennedy, so RFK now hitting Trump more than Biden. Kennedy wins 36% of Independents, 14% of Republicans but just 12% of Democrats. Kennedy also leads with voters aged 18-34 on 38% to 32% for Biden and 27% for Trump. Kennedy also beats Trump with Black and Hispanic voters.
'In the Republican primary race, former President Donald Trump receives 64 percent support among Republican and Republican leaning voters, followed by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis with 15 percent support; former United Nations Ambassador and South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley with 8 percent support; and South Carolina Senator Tim Scott, former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy with 3 percent support each.'
Comments
Expert in optics, mathematics and biology.
Lockdown - He got this wrong, Stefan Löfven got this right, but he got this less wrong than every other party major leader in this country who wanted to lockdown sooner and harder and for longer.
Vaccines - He got this absolutely spot on, we quite literally had a world beating vaccine rollout.
Supporting Ukraine (pre-2021) - He got this absolutely spot on, as too did Theresa May and David Cameron.
Supporting Ukraine (2022) - He got this absolutely spot on.
The need to change Theresa May's backstop deal - He got this absolutely spot on, and when others said it was impossible, it was suddenly done when he was PM.
The need to have an election to break the deadlock of the 2017 Parliament - He got this absolutely spot on. I remember well on here people mocking Boris for having "lost" his majority that May "had". Despite the fact May couldn't pass her critical legislation and Boris then did.
The need for planning reform - He got this right, but he backed down to NIMBY pressure after losing a by-election to the Lib Dems. Heart was in the right place, but nil points for failing to execute well.
Letting Sunak put up National Insurance - terrible idea, should never have happened.
Besides NI and caving to the pressure of having lockdown (but I don't think any PM could have avoided the pressure on that) was the small calls he got wrong. Lying on almost trivial shit that should have never been lied about.
Get the data collection system right, employ people to use ML to process that data and it will pay for itself many times over. Just like the Nudge Unit paid for themselves easily with their ideas over things like nudging people to pay their taxes, we should be working on how to get the systems in place so the data pipeline allows for ML to improve efficiency and outcomes.
Trump sees stupid shit on the internet, he says it unfiltered on the cameras to hundreds of millions around the globe.
Boris sees stupid shit, he asks an expert "is this believable or not", they say no, end of story, life goes on.
Precisely what any leader should be doing.
His duplicity became self-defeating.
Everything else you cite, apart from Ukraine, is to do with Brexit and nothing is ever ever going to reconcile us on that issue.
Yeah. He was nice to Ukraine. I’ll give you that.
Paxman is a very distant third.
But, I’ve lived North of Watford, in a Labour stronghold, for 16 years.
https://twitter.com/tomerpersico/status/1719737329277944194
And how was this covered at the time....constant hit pieces on Kate Bingham...there were serious calls that she had to go, but it turns out she was bloody brilliant.
Boris Johnson’s profligacy problem
https://www.economist.com/britain/2020/11/14/boris-johnsons-profligacy-problem
https://youtu.be/ny7nvnshhkg?si=CE4U0XPdR7wZOg7j
*Edit : and the rest of the Governmental structure
Because if we get another national emergency and even an anti-Boris is in charge, unless there is significant reform, most of the same shit will happen.
Other issues raised are just silly to me.
And Cricket wasn't even mentioned, or is Cricket too much most males on PB. Which is most of PB.
There don't seem to be many supporters of the current Government on here but plenty who continue to pine wistfully for Boris Johnson.
Apparently, he got all the "big calls" right yet somehow he's ended up quitting with his Cabinet in revolt and vilified by the majority.
Perhaps the continuing refrain he's the only Conservative Labour really fears is the reason - some mystical belief having beaten "the Left" before, he could do it again. Unfortunately, Boris wasn't voted out by the people but forced out by the Conservative Parliamentary Party, 40% of whom had no confidence in the man who had won them a big election victory just two and a half years earlier.
New plans for a minimum global rate for big firms will allow foreign nations to pilfer UK and US profits
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/01/britain-is-about-to-surrender-its-tax-sovereignty/ (£££)
Priti Patel no less.
It puts me in mind about what Malcolm X said about white enthusiasts for the cause.
But now the focus is all about LLMs, and how they will turn into the terminator and destroy us all...eyes roll.
Finally have a seat with legroom.
These class 350s really are horribly badly designed. It’s not as though I’m even particularly tall but I can’t sit comfortably in a normal row.
It struck me how many PB were on here yesterday saying - well would you or I have done any better?
Yes is the answer to that. Much better.
And that call was tragicomically wrong. He should never have been anywhere near the top job, because of the character flaws that everyone paying attention knew about.
It was fascinating to see how fast the system chucked a couple of honours their way and got rid of the team.
@RedfieldWilton
SNP and Labour are tied in Scotland.
Scotland Westminster VI (29-30 October):
SNP 32% (-2)
Labour 32% (–)
Conservative 23% (+2)
Lib Dem 8% (-1)
Green 2% (–)
Reform 2% (+1)
Other 1% (–)
Changes +/- 4-5 October"
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1719761222093160730
“Someone please ensure that they have the 530k within 24 hours from now and report back to me it’s been sent,” Cummings wrote to the chief executive of NHSX. “No procurement, no lawyers, no meetings, no delay please – just send immediately,” he continued.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jun/22/cummings-told-officials-to-bypass-procedures-on-530k-grant-to-data-team-leak-reveals
I suspect the wins like the Dashboard and Our World in Data will get overlooked and forgotten as the soap opera reporting continues at the inquiry. Instead we will hear all about the failure of the tracking app (quite rightly), but you need to looks at wins and loses.
Every organisation that has problems with racism and sexism - they’ll have 99% compliance with the HR thing about mandatory trainings every year.
It’s what happens in the Met. Wayne Couzens had to do yearly courses in equality…
I don't think that the NHS had testing data on whether blowing hot air up your nose helped with Covid, because they didn't have any data on Covid, it being a completely new virus. Information on similar pandemics highlighted ventilation as particularly beneficial ('fresh air hospitals' were one of the few good treatment options during the Spanish flu), and the need for the virus to incubate in the nasal cavity before infecting the rest of the body was and remains a key vulnerability in its life cycle. I have no idea whether depriving it of moisture and heating it up a bit kills it, but the option seems worth exploring, given that if it did work, it would be virtually free and save millions of lives.
The danger to science in my opinion is presented by those who like science to be preserved in aspick and remain solely the preserve of distinguished people in white coats, with the 'little people' taking their pills and shutting the f*** up.
There is no such thing as a silly question, only silly answers, and if a good answer was provided to Boris's question, I'm sure it was useful to everyone reading the exchange.
My view that Yousaf is doing ok is not reflected in the data... 😬
If I remember correctly she was saying we need to get all over 50s, vulnerable adults, healthcare works etc done ASAP. We don't need to do children. Young adults will have to wait.
In the light of day given what we know about risk profiles etc, that isn't crazy at all.
But that’s been the modus operandi of our government for a hundred years so I don’t know why I’m surprised.
I should have made that assumption and then I would have passed.
It's quite dizzying.
“ This is an announcement from Genetic Control
It is my sad duty to inform you of a four foot restriction on
Humanoid height
I hear the directors of Genetic Control have been buying all the
Properties that have recently been sold, taking risks oh so bold
It's said now that people will be shorter in height
They can fit twice as many in the same building site
They say it's alright”
In the five minutes since I’ve got off the down stopper to Crewe there’ve been three trains heading north.
At Rugeley Trent Valley at 8.30 at night.
This line is full.
Don't think I have either.
I'll cling to the idea that there is a slow, seismic shift away from Indy and Yousaf is a victim of it.
OTOH, given Labour's rather lacklustre defence of Net Zero, I'm surprised they haven't made a bigger deal of Scotland's green energy supply, which is looking increasingly good. I reckon that's the escape route for Indy supporters.
Anyway he was quite a greybeard as programmers go. Done software for the Backfire bombers and their missiles in his National Service.
He used to have tremendous fun pulling the tails of “The Political Officers” as he called the trainers. Used to tie them in knots with innocent questions.
After he left, they were bloody boring.
@ITVBorderRB
Kate Forbes says she kept all 'relevant' messages from during the pandemic, and handed them to Covid Inquiry.
When asked about her former boss, Nicola Sturgeon, she says 'I think it's incumbent on all of us to give an account of our own actions'
TFW you're Kate Forbes today.
2005 & 2010 - Again, Labour holds, though in a different constituency to 2001.
2015 - This time I voted in a constituency where the Tory incumbent held the seat.
2017 & 2019 - This constituency was both times an SNP hold.
There's an element of moving constituency at just the right time to avoid voting in an election that sees the seat change hands, but it's a bit of an impressive run to have voted in four different constituencies and have the result of every vote be the return of the incumbent (who I didn't vote for in any of the cases).
Now I was very critical of this, but MaxPB, who I think knows more about this stuff (and no Boris fan), said actually this wasn't a crazy decision, as it will allow continued private / public partnerships to develop with funding that wouldn't otherwise be forthcoming.
- Biden 39%
- Trump 36%
- RFK Jr. 22%
https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?releaseid=3881
But yes, I personally think it was a wasted opportunity. Just like the scraping of the task force to reduce our reliance on China for crucial products like precursor chemicals.
https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1719783559659974880?s=20
We are a nation of Martyrs...says bloke living in luxury in Qatar.
Man United getting turned over at home again too.
The strongest mainland winds will be around rush-hour time in Sussex, likely to reach 85-90mph. Damaging especially with trees in leaf, but not the worst we've seen. However, there is a definite sting-jet forming, which could give us a arrow ribbon of higher winds dragged down from aloft. Signs of the characteristic hook and sting shape on the NW of the depression and evaporative subsidence.
An exciting night.
https://www.wetterzentrale.de/en/topkarten.php?map=20&model=aro&var=19&time=15&run=15&lid=OP&h=0&mv=0&tr=1
EDIT: 59mph gust recorded just now on the Isle of Portland. Many hours away from the peak still.
I am reminded that GW Bush had instigated a massive programme of preparedness for a pandemic after being shocked by the potentialities and the whole lot was cancelled or mothballed by Obama.
Likewise Sam Coates was reporting yesterday that multiple witnesses to the enquiry have said that when they went to the Civil Service to ask for a prepared plan on dealing with a pandemic they were told none existed and they would have to start from scratch. What little did exist was for a completely different sort of pandemic threat and hadn't been updated in several years.
Just have a think about this. When Boris asked the question do you think they all suddenly had the shattering realisation that nobody had thought about that, or thought 'What a pillock'.
See you ignored all the other points raised as to why there really is such a thing as a silly question when people are busy doing serious work. It was also of no use to anyone reading the exchange as you claim, but just a waste of everyone's time. There really is such a thing as a silly question when your resources are limited. What if he came back and said 'I've seen another video on UV- C, or bleach, or hydrogen peroxide or saline sprays, or 5G Bioshields, or Corona-Cure Coronavirus Infection Prevention Nasal Spray, or, or, or, etc. The list is endless.
People creating Youtube videos, twitter threads, etc promoting possible cures to previous incurable ailments are charlatans. People taken in by them are idiots who need protecting.
On the matter of 'appearing to have a worrisome level of impairment when dealing with the issue of Boris'. Eh? That is bizarre logic. That implies that anyone I criticise for doing something I think is wrong I must have a worrisome level of impairment about, as I haven't been more critical of Boris than say Corbyn or a whole host of other politicians (Rachel Reeves and Annelisa Doods to mention two from this week). Do I have a worrisome level of impairment when dealing with them as well? How do you come to your conclusion about Boris in particular? It seems somewhat random.
Parties often have issues when they have to move to the next generation after a successful one. Look at Labour when New Labour's SpAd cast took over. It's exacerbated by the fact that on some pretty big issues the SNP is divided. And there are now plausible alternatives in Labour looking like they may form a UK government, or now Alba if you're pro-indy but uncomfortable with its progressive turn. Plus internally Forbes and her supporters are clearly smarting and would love to put the knife in when appropriate.
Here's a nice visualisation of this evening's sting jet by the way:
https://x.com/zoom_earth/status/1719825403295006837?s=20
From where I’m sitting, he appears to have fixated on political dividing lines like the gender ID court battle and keeping a close relationship with the Greens while members like Regan quit the party. He seems to on one hand be telling the party they need to play the long game on independence while suggesting the next GE will be a de facto vote on independence, hence creating a confused message but still giving the impression the SNP are still utterly fixated on the issue. I am a bit removed from the day to day on Scottish politics so I’m prepared to be educated on his successes, and I am not naturally predisposed to being an SNP fan, so there is that.
(I should mention I am setting aside the very difficult family circumstances he is going through at the moment (for which I feel for him)).
The ash are largely moribund from Ash Die Back
Yousaf doesn't appear to be. It's rare to get three in a row for any Party.
US President Joe Biden and his aides reportedly believe that Benjamin Netanyahu’s days as Israel’s prime minister are numbered in the fallout of the war in Gaza.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/report-biden-told-netanyahu-he-believes-his-days-in-office-are-numbered/
'In the Republican primary race, former President Donald Trump receives 64 percent support among Republican and Republican leaning voters, followed by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis with 15 percent support; former United Nations Ambassador and South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley with 8 percent support; and South Carolina Senator Tim Scott, former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy with 3 percent support each.'