I can’t stop Leavers covering their eyes and blocking their ears. But the information will still be there when they stop tantrumming and face the real world.
I really think this argument is lost and the matter has moved on
Damage is damage. It isn’t wished away because hopeful Leavers say so. It’s going to be pointed out repeatedly to those who have chosen to maim the country’s economy because of an irrational hatred.
I’m getting nostalgic.
The damage of Brexit will be far more enduring than Covid-19 because it springs from a baleful malevolence in the hearts of the most avid Leavers that is going to continue to actuate a senselessly hostile approach to the EU for the foreseeable future.
And, as that tweet shows, the Conservatives have abandoned any pretence of fiscal prudence in order partially to mitigate the effects of their own idiotic obsession.
I completely agree with you @AlastairMeeks but sadly, those who say "No one is listening" are correct.
Brexit is a balls-up we have to live with unless Boris moves to EEA
Boris will never move to EEA, EEA will be Starmer's position
One question: anyone wanting to get to the US from the EU will now head to the UK, hang around for 14 days and then fly on.
Doesn’t that increase the risk of more infection coming to the U.K.? And if so don’t we now have to say “No flights to the US” precisely to stop us becoming the holding pen for the coronavirus in Europe?
South Korea and the UK are being held up by medical critics of the Trump Administration as the way it should have been done here.
The first of those two is correct.
Do you apply the same level of contempt to other Govt responses in Europe as you do to the UK?
Yes.
I'm just finding it hard to believe that eastern Asian countries seem have worked out how to keep the spread of this thing under control and their economies working at the same time, without coercion, much of it with simple, common-sense leadership, and the US and Europe have completed ignored what they've been doing for weeks, followed inevitably by huge, disruptive lock-downs when the numbers get to where the numbers were always projected to get to.
"Please consider cancelling events and large gatherings unless they are essential. Please work from home if practical". Why is this hard?
So dumb. So, so dumb.
Something that puzzles me about the UK response is that it's pretty obvious (and there's modelling studies to back this up) that contact tracing is a more effective way to control an outbreak if the number of transmissions caused by each case is nice and low. Contact tracing is quite resource-intensive and can be overwhelmed if community transmission is high. To give it the best chance of working, you want to reduce transmission. And we have ways of doing that. So why was no package of transmission-reduction measures (e.g. at least some of the low-cost forms of social distancing) incorporated into the Contain stage of the response, to give it the best chance of working? Only introducing them at the point where you've de-emphasised contact-tracing as part of your response seems to miss out on the potential synergy of the two approaches.
There must be reasons behind this decision - it wasn't a call made by idiots - and I'm genuinely curious what it was.
Comment of the night above, cruelly cut off at the end of thread.
Even as I try to get across that what we already know gives an upper bound well below much of the catastrophising, the holding off on ready options to make the Contain phase easier confuses me and I wish they were implementing social distancing measures faster.
I expect the answer to MBE's question is that the social distancing and the rest is seen as a strategy with a time-limited utility - i.e. after a while people will get fed up with it - and they didn't want to "waste" it during the contain phase when it will be critical during the "delay" phase to avoid the NHS becoming overwhelmed.
Virtually no-one on here is thinking in terms of the covid 19 levels next winter as opposed to the spring and summer. The UK govt is. It means accepting a level of Covid 19 now, trying to control it so it doesnt overwhelm us, but building up some herd immunity.
Along with Ians answer, that is why many of the "obvious" measures being demanded are not part of the solution.
Minimise Covid 19 in spring/summer would need a different set of outcomes to minimising Covid 19 and its impact over the longer term. I am glad the govt is not just looking at short term headlines (for once!).
This
Those saying "do this now" rarely appear to have thought about what next.
Trump now clearly shifting to a close the borders narrative banning flights from the EU having previously banned flights to the US from China and Iran to contain the spread of the virus in the USA
Wrong. It is people who have been to the Schengen zone in the last 14 days and are not US citizens that are banned. Not the flights.
Tom Burridge Transport correspondent Given that this is happening in many airports abroad, lots of people have been asking this question and we’ve been asking Public Health England. Their line is still that this is not deemed a necessary step.
There is a protocol in place at UK airports for flights arriving from countries like Italy and China. The crew on the flight are supposed to ask passengers if they’re feeling unwell and communicate any possible cases to health officials, based at the airport of arrival, before the plane lands.
A colleague arrived on a flight from Hong Kong on Monday and a passenger was displaying symptoms so officials in protective gear boarded the plane on arrival at Heathrow. We don’t know if it was a confirmed case of coronavirus.
It's 13 races for MotoGP. The Texas round in April has been moved back to November, Thailand has been cancelled and the season could still be going well into December.
It seems to me that it is pretty pointless banning attendance of sporting events without restricting pubs, clubs, cinemas and theatres too.
That pretty much bankrupts the entire hospitality, leisure and domestic tourism sector. If the government wants to avoid that then it will need to do more than simply suspend business rates, provide an £3k cash grant and pay SSP for 14 days.
You are lucky!
Business rates in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are set by the devolved administrations.
In Wales, the Labour Government has not yet decided whether it can afford to suspend business rates.
I am touched by your faith in our elders and betters. It is rare to find nowadays.
Just wait until the government finally realizes its policy is a huge, massively dangerous failure and announces that it'll be doing all the things it previously said were a bad idea. The faithful will undergo a flash of inspiration as bad becomes good and good becomes bad.
Which "bad ideas"?
So far the only "bad idea" dismissed is "take it on the chin and get it over with" - other things have been "not yet" rather than "never".
Well exactly. Edmund is wilfully misrepresenting what has been said to make what has been advised worse, pretending that options have been ruled out rather than that the timing is a judgement call. Its pathetic quite frankly - they might make the wrong call or already have made the wrong call without pretending people have been saying certain things should never happen.
The depressing thing is it was entirely predicted that such a lie would be uttered. It is very Trump like.
There we have it, the government can never be wrong, it can only ever be part of the way to its ultimate destination of being right.
The reason why this problem is kicking humanity's arse is because every adversary it's come into contact with has been two steps behind. Whatever the UK government does *today* won't start to show results for at least two weeks, which is a huge number in terms of the speed at which the threat is growing. Being right about stopping the spread at some unspecified future time is the same as being wrong.
The government is acting on the advice of scientific advisors.
It is not a case of "the government can never be wrong". Because in a problem of this magnitude, the government will be doing what it is told by its scientific advisors.
Scientific advisors of Tory Governments are not Tories, just as advisors of Labour Governments are not Labour.
Scientific advisors are independent scientists with career long expertise in their discipline, they have access to enormous resources in terms of computing, simulations, modelling. They do the job out of responsibility and duty and desire to help the country. The country, not the government.
They will know that "Whatever the UK government does *today* won't start to show results for at least two weeks". That is because they are experts, not morons.
Of course, experts can be wrong. If we had access to lots of data and modelling expertise, we could check their advice (I am sure that will be done after the event). But, for the moment we pretty much have to act on their advice. After all, there is no point in funding decades long research into epidemiology, if you ignore it at the critical moment you need it.
The experts are damn sight more likely to be right than someone mouthing platitudes or who keeps on posting obviously wanky and flawed graphs.
We have to act on their advice. That's why it is deeply frustrating. I'm still getting asked to attend a public event in two weeks time. I suggested this event should be cancelled. We can't cancel until the government updates it guidance. Ahh ok then.
I think you have a rose-tinted view of how decision making occurs. There is incredible uncertainty here, there is modelling but how do we validate models without any actual data of intervention effectiveness alone or in combination? It is mainly theoretical and so it is challenging and to certain extent it is therefore faith-based. That's why reasonable people can disagree on policy.
Ultimately it is a judgement call on short term costs versus long term benefits and vice versa. That is value-based. What are their trade-offs?
They are placing too much weight on reducing public disruption in my view. I would like more weight placed on reducing deaths but that's just me.
On Covid-19, the government has generally done ok to date (it's early days yet). Yes, other courses of action are available but it's not obvious that they are better. Britain has the huge benefit of being a week or two behind the curve of other comparable countries. It can go to school on their experiences.
The next few months are going to be fairly grim. Get used to that idea. With the debatable exception of the excitable @eadric, we have yet to have a pb case of Covid-19. Any guesses on when we'll get our first one? This is not a sweepstake that any of us wants to be the winning horse in.
Some years ago Nadine said that her main source of polling news was PB
I can’t stop Leavers covering their eyes and blocking their ears. But the information will still be there when they stop tantrumming and face the real world.
I really think this argument is lost and the matter has moved on
Damage is damage. It isn’t wished away because hopeful Leavers say so. It’s going to be pointed out repeatedly to those who have chosen to maim the country’s economy because of an irrational hatred.
Alastair. I do worry for you.
I have no irrational hatred of immigrants but now we have left we must move on
I would not like to think you will end up like the Japanese soldier who remained in the jungle for 29 years after the war had ended refusing to believe it was over
“We must move on”.
Does “moving on” oblige us to simply ignore the plain fact that we have dumped a shit on our economy and are now borrowing from your grandchildren to mask the effects?
It seems to me that it is pretty pointless banning attendance of sporting events without restricting pubs, clubs, cinemas and theatres too.
That pretty much bankrupts the entire hospitality, leisure and domestic tourism sector. If the government wants to avoid that then it will need to do more than simply suspend business rates, provide an £3k cash grant and pay SSP for 14 days.
You are lucky!
Business rates in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are set by the devolved administrations.
In Wales, the Labour Government has not yet decided whether it can afford to suspend business rates.
If the UK government is carrying the cost for England surely it must for the rest of the UK?
I can’t stop Leavers covering their eyes and blocking their ears. But the information will still be there when they stop tantrumming and face the real world.
I really think this argument is lost and the matter has moved on
Damage is damage. It isn’t wished away because hopeful Leavers say so. It’s going to be pointed out repeatedly to those who have chosen to maim the country’s economy because of an irrational hatred.
I’m getting nostalgic.
The damage of Brexit will be far more enduring than Covid-19 because it springs from a baleful malevolence in the hearts of the most avid Leavers that is going to continue to actuate a senselessly hostile approach to the EU for the foreseeable future.
And, as that tweet shows, the Conservatives have abandoned any pretence of fiscal prudence in order partially to mitigate the effects of their own idiotic obsession.
Had Remain won we would have seen spending slashed to just 35% of gdp under Osborne, rather than austerity ending and spending heading for over 40% of gdp under Sunak
Yes, closing schools is complicated because aside from whether the kids actually pass on the thing, the impact depends where they go instead.
"Real bad news kids, you are going to have to stay home, watch TV and play games in your room for a couple of weeks... Well make sure you have chocolate biscuits though."
"COOL!!!"
My son is doing GCSEs, this is worrying him a lot.
Exams is certainly an area where Govt. is going to have to give guidance before very long. Worst case, this year they have to scrap them and give grades based on course work to date.
2020 - the year of significant grade inflation. So what?
Like many others, my son has done a ton of work. It’s a big deal and deserves respect. For many courses there is no coursework, just mocks. It’s a big deal for a young person.
Another good reason *NOT* to shut the schools if at all possible.
In the worst case scenario, my guess would be that we run the exams but in smaller rooms, meaning the schools would be open for Years 11 and 13 only, so that we could staff it adequately.
But I stress that is a guess.
I just cannot see them being cancelled. Trying to base grades on mocks would be damn near impossible in most subjects (some schools take a month off timetable, others under a week - how do you make a valid comparison?) and Gove and Cummings in their infinite wisdom abolished coursework at GCSE.
And for that abolition I will always be grateful.
I’m not. It’s made managing the transition to A-level in History much harder.
Controlled assessments were daft though.
I did coursework as part of my History O-level back in the eighties. We were not allowed to type them: they had to be hand written to prove it was our own work.
Pray, how did that prove it was your own work? It might have proved it was your own handwriting but not much else...
There was a mini exam part way through were I agreed a question with my teacher and wrote an essay based on my research in class. I thought it was silly at the time as it was the easiest test I ever did, but I now know that would not have been true if I had just copied the work from someone else.
Plagiarism has alway been the Achilles heel of coursework though.
One question: anyone wanting to get to the US from the EU will now head to the UK, hang around for 14 days and then fly on.
Or Ireland or Canada. I doubt many businessmen will want 14 days dead time or holidaymakers be able to afford it. A potential problem in theory rather than practice I suspect.
One question: anyone wanting to get to the US from the EU will now head to the UK, hang around for 14 days and then fly on.
Doesn’t that increase the risk of more infection coming to the U.K.? And if so don’t we now have to say “No flights to the US” precisely to stop us becoming the holding pen for the coronavirus in Europe?
Or am I missing something?
Yes, we have been chosen as we are best able to cope. Currently.
I can’t stop Leavers covering their eyes and blocking their ears. But the information will still be there when they stop tantrumming and face the real world.
I really think this argument is lost and the matter has moved on
Damage is damage. It isn’t wished away because hopeful Leavers say so. It’s going to be pointed out repeatedly to those who have chosen to maim the country’s economy because of an irrational hatred.
Alastair. I do worry for you.
I have no irrational hatred of immigrants but now we have left we must move on
I would not like to think you will end up like the Japanese soldier who remained in the jungle for 29 years after the war had ended refusing to believe it was over
You cannot move on until you have adequately assessed the damage done and sought to mitigate it. Currently Leavers are planning on making the damage as great as they possibly can.
Looks as if you will be saying the same in 30 years or so if the Japanese soldier is to be believed
Trump now clearly shifting to a close the borders narrative banning flights from the EU having previously banned flights to the US from China and Iran to contain the spread of the virus in the USA
Wrong. It is people who have been to the Schengen zone in the last 14 days and are not US citizens that are banned. Not the flights.
Which covers all EU citizens now banned from flying to the US from the EU (excluding Ireland), Thank you
Well the "crisis" has now had a direct effect on me, but thankfully not medically. We have recieved information about restrictions we need to adhere to. One clear directive is that the summer semester lectures which were dure to start on 1st April is pushed back to a 20th April start.
There is a list of other things that are cancelled and others which we need to consider whether they take place or not. There are now lots of emails flying around as to what is cancelled, and what is not. Particularly unclear to me is what happens to oral exams.
These measures apply to all Berlin Unis, but most others have a semester start date of 14th April.
I can’t stop Leavers covering their eyes and blocking their ears. But the information will still be there when they stop tantrumming and face the real world.
I really think this argument is lost and the matter has moved on
Damage is damage. It isn’t wished away because hopeful Leavers say so. It’s going to be pointed out repeatedly to those who have chosen to maim the country’s economy because of an irrational hatred.
Alastair. I do worry for you.
I have no irrational hatred of immigrants but now we have left we must move on
I would not like to think you will end up like the Japanese soldier who remained in the jungle for 29 years after the war had ended refusing to believe it was over
“We must move on”.
Does “moving on” oblige us to simply ignore the plain fact that we have dumped a shit on our economy and are now borrowing from your grandchildren to mask the effects?
That is your view but others are available
Indeed, and some believe the moon landings are faked, and that vaccines cause autism.
I can’t stop Leavers covering their eyes and blocking their ears. But the information will still be there when they stop tantrumming and face the real world.
I really think this argument is lost and the matter has moved on
Damage is damage. It isn’t wished away because hopeful Leavers say so. It’s going to be pointed out repeatedly to those who have chosen to maim the country’s economy because of an irrational hatred.
Alastair. I do worry for you.
I have no irrational hatred of immigrants but now we have left we must move on
I would not like to think you will end up like the Japanese soldier who remained in the jungle for 29 years after the war had ended refusing to believe it was over
You cannot move on until you have adequately assessed the damage done and sought to mitigate it. Currently Leavers are planning on making the damage as great as they possibly can.
Looks as if you will be saying the same in 30 years or so if the Japanese soldier is to be believed
I note that Leavers don't regard the OBR as expert enough to assess the damage they've caused.
On Covid-19, the government has generally done ok to date (it's early days yet). Yes, other courses of action are available but it's not obvious that they are better. Britain has the huge benefit of being a week or two behind the curve of other comparable countries. It can go to school on their experiences.
The next few months are going to be fairly grim. Get used to that idea. With the debatable exception of the excitable @eadric, we have yet to have a pb case of Covid-19. Any guesses on when we'll get our first one? This is not a sweepstake that any of us wants to be the winning horse in.
Some years ago Nadine said that her main source of polling news was PB
Hopefully this period of isolation might mean she can revisit.
Mr. Meeks, whether or not it's possible to have rational reasons for wishing the UK to leave the EU is entirely relevant given your view of the most 'ardent', as you put it, Leavers.
"The damage of Brexit will be far more enduring than Covid-19 because it springs from a baleful malevolence in the hearts of the most avid Leavers that is going to continue to actuate a senselessly hostile approach to the EU for the foreseeable future."
I agree it's very unhelpful that the use of language such as 'treachery' and 'xenophobia' has proliferated. There are entirely reasonable arguments for the UK to retain membership of the EU or to leave it, and noisy fringe elements who consider one to be treason and the other to be racism do more harm than good to their own sides.
Mr. Jonathan, the behaviour of pro-EU types, particularly in the courts and Parliament, has led to the exact opposite of what they wanted. Instead of either remaining, or having a second referendum, or having the very soft May departure, there's a credible chance we now leave with no deal in place whatsoever.
More thinking and less mindless opposition from pro-EU MPs would've served their cause well. I remember Grieve bleating in the Commons that it was 'too late' when the Government backed down and gave him precisely what he wanted, and he voted against them anyway.
One - slots. There is only so much capacity in the UK's airports. The EU is attempting to reduce ghost flights by easing the 80% slot rule but if all USA passengers for Europe (and v.v.) are channelled through the UK, then there is only so much capacity. They will be packed in like sardines in a place thought to be one of the most effective spreaders of disease - an aircraft.
Two - the UK is being squeezed between two blocs - the known infections in Schengen and the apparently unknown infections in the USA. What will happen to the UK if it is the transit point of choice for the infected?
I can’t stop Leavers covering their eyes and blocking their ears. But the information will still be there when they stop tantrumming and face the real world.
I really think this argument is lost and the matter has moved on
Damage is damage. It isn’t wished away because hopeful Leavers say so. It’s going to be pointed out repeatedly to those who have chosen to maim the country’s economy because of an irrational hatred.
Alastair. I do worry for you.
I have no irrational hatred of immigrants but now we have left we must move on
I would not like to think you will end up like the Japanese soldier who remained in the jungle for 29 years after the war had ended refusing to believe it was over
You cannot move on until you have adequately assessed the damage done and sought to mitigate it. Currently Leavers are planning on making the damage as great as they possibly can.
It is possible, probable in my view, that the quieter the remain side is now the easier it is for the govt to pivot to closer EU ties than they are currently suggesting. The PM has shown himself to be a man for great U-turns over NI so who knows.
Going over old battles will not change the result.
Trump at 2.04 for President, if he continues to drift to say 2.3/2.4 I think he's value.
I'm guessing the Hilary bettors are thinking she may be the only one of experience left standing by the summer.
Hillary lacks Biden's appeal with the white working class and black voters, if Hillary replaced him I make it a clear Trump re election rather than neck and neck with states like Pennsylvania sifting from lean Biden back to Trump
On the whole, Boris hasn't dome too much wrong over Covid. All along it's been about flattening and extending the peak demand for ICU places without bankrupting the country.
He's listened to advice from the disease specialists and the economists (the latter being as much, if not more guesswork). But he's done it. Corbyn would have seen everything through a lens based on Trotsky.
Trump is teasing the non-British Europeans and they'll probably fall for it. He is what he is, but the Septics chose him.
Trump now clearly shifting to a close the borders narrative banning flights from the EU having previously banned flights to the US from China and Iran to contain the spread of the virus in the USA
Wrong. It is people who have been to the Schengen zone in the last 14 days and are not US citizens that are banned. Not the flights.
Which covers all EU citizens now banned from flying to the US from the EU (excluding Ireland), Thank you
No it doesn't. An EU citizen resident in the UK - or here for 14 days - can fly to the US, from the UK or Ireland.
A British citizen recently in Schengen in the last 14 days can't.
F1: this is an interesting question I hadn't considered. There's a minimum number of races for the titles to be doled out: ttps://twitter.com/GrandPrixDiary/status/1238010517555490817
The correct answer is that *eight* races are needed to constitute a World Championship. Right now we’ve got Australia, Bahrain, then possibly a big gap...
Trump now clearly shifting to a close the borders narrative banning flights from the EU having previously banned flights to the US from China and Iran to contain the spread of the virus in the USA
Wrong. It is people who have been to the Schengen zone in the last 14 days and are not US citizens that are banned. Not the flights.
Which covers all EU citizens now banned from flying to the US from the EU (excluding Ireland), Thank you
No, Citizens of an EU Country who have not been in the Schengen Zone in the last 14 days are legally allowed in to the US.
I can’t stop Leavers covering their eyes and blocking their ears. But the information will still be there when they stop tantrumming and face the real world.
I really think this argument is lost and the matter has moved on
Damage is damage. It isn’t wished away because hopeful Leavers say so. It’s going to be pointed out repeatedly to those who have chosen to maim the country’s economy because of an irrational hatred.
Alastair. I do worry for you.
I have no irrational hatred of immigrants but now we have left we must move on
I would not like to think you will end up like the Japanese soldier who remained in the jungle for 29 years after the war had ended refusing to believe it was over
You cannot move on until you have adequately assessed the damage done and sought to mitigate it. Currently Leavers are planning on making the damage as great as they possibly can.
Looks as if you will be saying the same in 30 years or so if the Japanese soldier is to be believed
I note that Leavers don't regard the OBR as expert enough to assess the damage they've caused.
That implies that economics is a scientific discipline. It isn't.
It doesn’t mean much unless you do it as GDP per capita.
We might have had a bigger national income if we had Remained, but we’d also have had a larger population as well.
I appreciate that point is moot if net migration gets back up to c.350k net a year but so far it’s running at 230-280k per year.
What proportion of leave voters will still be backing the govt in ten years time if there another 2-3m new immigrants despite Brexit?
We need immigration because of our demographics not because of the EU. Politicians need to ensure it is far better managed, locally, economically and culturally, and explain to the public why it is needed.
I should imagine that PB is playing its part in helping with social distancing. This provides a useful platform to interact with people without risking getting the virus.
Meanwhile all the miserable buggers who hate the company of fellow human beings are the ones most likely to come out of this unscaved.
On Covid-19, the government has generally done ok to date (it's early days yet). Yes, other courses of action are available but it's not obvious that they are better. Britain has the huge benefit of being a week or two behind the curve of other comparable countries. It can go to school on their experiences.
The next few months are going to be fairly grim. Get used to that idea. With the debatable exception of the excitable @eadric, we have yet to have a pb case of Covid-19. Any guesses on when we'll get our first one? This is not a sweepstake that any of us wants to be the winning horse in.
I’d really rather not speculate on this, especially as I am probably at higher risk than many. This stuff is serious and I am, in addition to taking the necessary precautions, trying to avoid thinking about it morning, noon and night.
In reality with my family in Italy at risk, my own situation, the likely effect on my daughter’s business and my sons’ current job-hunting efforts - let alone my pension (!) - there is more than enough to worry about.
But living in a state of terror is pointless. So other than do what I can and use my rainy day savings for what seems like it’s going to be weeks of rainy days, best to use the time on other constructive pursuits.
I can’t stop Leavers covering their eyes and blocking their ears. But the information will still be there when they stop tantrumming and face the real world.
Your so called information is a load of projection codswallop.
The UK was supposed to suffer from not being in the Eurozone. The UK was supposed to have suffered from the uncertainty of announcing a referendum to leave the EU and voting to do so. Now the UK is supposed to suffer from having left the EU.
We'll see.
In reality so far: The UK outgrew the Eurozone in the first decade of this century. The UK outgrew the Eurozone in the second decade of this century.
What odds the UK outgrows the Eurozone in the third decade of this century?
Alternatively if the UK was doing so well in the EU why risk changing it dramatically?
Because Brexit was about far more than just economics.
Yes, closing schools is complicated because aside from whether the kids actually pass on the thing, the impact depends where they go instead.
"Real bad news kids, you are going to have to stay home, watch TV and play games in your room for a couple of weeks... Well make sure you have chocolate biscuits though."
"COOL!!!"
My son is doing GCSEs, this is worrying him a lot.
Exams is certainly an area where Govt. is going to have to give guidance before very long. Worst case, this year they have to scrap them and give grades based on course work to date.
2020 - the year of significant grade inflation. So what?
Like many others, my son has done a ton of work. It’s a big deal and deserves respect. For many courses there is no coursework, just mocks. It’s a big deal for a young person.
Another good reason *NOT* to shut the schools if at all possible.
In the worst case scenario, my guess would be that we run the exams but in smaller rooms, meaning the schools would be open for Years 11 and 13 only, so that we could staff it adequately.
But I stress that is a guess.
I just cannot see them being cancelled. Trying to base grades on mocks would be damn near impossible in most subjects (some schools take a month off timetable, others under a week - how do you make a valid comparison?) and Gove and Cummings in their infinite wisdom abolished coursework at GCSE.
And for that abolition I will always be grateful.
I’m not. It’s made managing the transition to A-level in History much harder.
Controlled assessments were daft though.
I did coursework as part of my History O-level back in the eighties. We were not allowed to type them: they had to be hand written to prove it was our own work.
No coursework at all for A levels or O levels in the early 1970s.
Well the "crisis" has now had a direct effect on me, but thankfully not medically. We have recieved information about restrictions we need to adhere to. One clear directive is that the summer semester lectures which were dure to start on 1st April is pushed back to a 20th April start.
There is a list of other things that are cancelled and others which we need to consider whether they take place or not. There are now lots of emails flying around as to what is cancelled, and what is not. Particularly unclear to me is what happens to oral exams.
These measures apply to all Berlin Unis, but most others have a semester start date of 14th April.
One thing Governments across Europe (and round the world) are going to have to start considering is how to handle deferments. My daughter has already lost 5 weeks of teaching in her first year at University due to strikes. If they shut down next week that will mean she could be approaching a full term of lost education.
I can’t stop Leavers covering their eyes and blocking their ears. But the information will still be there when they stop tantrumming and face the real world.
I really think this argument is lost and the matter has moved on
Damage is damage. It isn’t wished away because hopeful Leavers say so. It’s going to be pointed out repeatedly to those who have chosen to maim the country’s economy because of an irrational hatred.
Alastair. I do worry for you.
I have no irrational hatred of immigrants but now we have left we must move on
I would not like to think you will end up like the Japanese soldier who remained in the jungle for 29 years after the war had ended refusing to believe it was over
You cannot move on until you have adequately assessed the damage done and sought to mitigate it. Currently Leavers are planning on making the damage as great as they possibly can.
Looks as if you will be saying the same in 30 years or so if the Japanese soldier is to be believed
I note that Leavers don't regard the OBR as expert enough to assess the damage they've caused.
That implies that economics is a scientific discipline. It isn't.
I fear the plague has already rotted what was left of your brain.
Yes, closing schools is complicated because aside from whether the kids actually pass on the thing, the impact depends where they go instead.
"Real bad news kids, you are going to have to stay home, watch TV and play games in your room for a couple of weeks... Well make sure you have chocolate biscuits though."
"COOL!!!"
My son is doing GCSEs, this is worrying him a lot.
Exams is certainly an area where Govt. is going to have to give guidance before very long. Worst case, this year they have to scrap them and give grades based on course work to date.
2020 - the year of significant grade inflation. So what?
Like many others, my son has done a ton of work. It’s a big deal and deserves respect. For many courses there is no coursework, just mocks. It’s a big deal for a young person.
Another good reason *NOT* to shut the schools if at all possible.
In the worst case scenario, my guess would be that we run the exams but in smaller rooms, meaning the schools would be open for Years 11 and 13 only, so that we could staff it adequately.
But I stress that is a guess.
I just cannot see them being cancelled. Trying to base grades on mocks would be damn near impossible in most subjects (some schools take a month off timetable, others under a week - how do you make a valid comparison?) and Gove and Cummings in their infinite wisdom abolished coursework at GCSE.
And for that abolition I will always be grateful.
I’m not. It’s made managing the transition to A-level in History much harder.
Controlled assessments were daft though.
I did coursework as part of my History O-level back in the eighties. We were not allowed to type them: they had to be hand written to prove it was our own work.
No coursework at all for A levels or O levels in the early 1970s.
Nor for me doing A level history, biology and chemistry (the much adored Nuffield) in the 80s.
One - slots. There is only so much capacity in the UK's airports. The EU is attempting to reduce ghost flights by easing the 80% slot rule but if all USA passengers for Europe (and v.v.) are channelled through the UK, then there is only so much capacity. They will be packed in like sardines in a place thought to be one of the most effective spreaders of disease - an aircraft.
Two - the UK is being squeezed between two blocs - the known infections in Schengen and the apparently unknown infections in the USA. What will happen to the UK if it is the transit point of choice for the infected?
Your second point is the concerning one to me. Trump has effectively made the U.K. the transit point for the infected. So don’t we have to react by saying thanks - but, er, no thanks?
I can’t stop Leavers covering their eyes and blocking their ears. But the information will still be there when they stop tantrumming and face the real world.
I really think this argument is lost and the matter has moved on
Damage is damage. It isn’t wished away because hopeful Leavers say so. It’s going to be pointed out repeatedly to those who have chosen to maim the country’s economy because of an irrational hatred.
Alastair. I do worry for you.
I have no irrational hatred of immigrants but now we have left we must move on
I would not like to think you will end up like the Japanese soldier who remained in the jungle for 29 years after the war had ended refusing to believe it was over
You cannot move on until you have adequately assessed the damage done and sought to mitigate it. Currently Leavers are planning on making the damage as great as they possibly can.
Looks as if you will be saying the same in 30 years or so if the Japanese soldier is to be believed
I note that Leavers don't regard the OBR as expert enough to assess the damage they've caused.
That implies that economics is a scientific discipline. It isn't.
I fear the plague has already rotted what was left of your brain.
Self isolate before you contaminate others.
If you think economics is a science then you were already senile.
Mr. Meeks, whether or not it's possible to have rational reasons for wishing the UK to leave the EU is entirely relevant given your view of the most 'ardent', as you put it, Leavers.
"The damage of Brexit will be far more enduring than Covid-19 because it springs from a baleful malevolence in the hearts of the most avid Leavers that is going to continue to actuate a senselessly hostile approach to the EU for the foreseeable future."
I agree it's very unhelpful that the use of language such as 'treachery' and 'xenophobia' has proliferated. There are entirely reasonable arguments for the UK to retain membership of the EU or to leave it, and noisy fringe elements who consider one to be treason and the other to be racism do more harm than good to their own sides.
Mr. Jonathan, the behaviour of pro-EU types, particularly in the courts and Parliament, has led to the exact opposite of what they wanted. Instead of either remaining, or having a second referendum, or having the very soft May departure, there's a credible chance we now leave with no deal in place whatsoever.
More thinking and less mindless opposition from pro-EU MPs would've served their cause well. I remember Grieve bleating in the Commons that it was 'too late' when the Government backed down and gave him precisely what he wanted, and he voted against them anyway.
This I'm afraid is incorrect. These arguments have been rehearsed a thousand times now and may be historical soon, but the May government excluded soft Brexit from the start. It was only when her government began to shift from talking about hard Brexit to no-deal Brexit that Grieve got involved, and thus parliament.
I can’t stop Leavers covering their eyes and blocking their ears. But the information will still be there when they stop tantrumming and face the real world.
I really think this argument is lost and the matter has moved on
Damage is damage. It isn’t wished away because hopeful Leavers say so. It’s going to be pointed out repeatedly to those who have chosen to maim the country’s economy because of an irrational hatred.
I’m getting nostalgic.
The damage of Brexit will be far more enduring than Covid-19 because it springs from a baleful malevolence in the hearts of the most avid Leavers that is going to continue to actuate a senselessly hostile approach to the EU for the foreseeable future.
And, as that tweet shows, the Conservatives have abandoned any pretence of fiscal prudence in order partially to mitigate the effects of their own idiotic obsession.
I completely agree with you @AlastairMeeks but sadly, those who say "No one is listening" are correct.
Brexit is a balls-up we have to live with unless Boris moves to EEA
Boris will never move to EEA, EEA will be Starmer's position
If Starmer moves to EEA he can only achieve that by winning a GE on that basis
Mr. Meeks, whether or not it's possible to have rational reasons for wishing the UK to leave the EU is entirely relevant given your view of the most 'ardent', as you put it, Leavers.
"The damage of Brexit will be far more enduring than Covid-19 because it springs from a baleful malevolence in the hearts of the most avid Leavers that is going to continue to actuate a senselessly hostile approach to the EU for the foreseeable future."
I agree it's very unhelpful that the use of language such as 'treachery' and 'xenophobia' has proliferated. There are entirely reasonable arguments for the UK to retain membership of the EU or to leave it, and noisy fringe elements who consider one to be treason and the other to be racism do more harm than good to their own sides.
Mr. Jonathan, the behaviour of pro-EU types, particularly in the courts and Parliament, has led to the exact opposite of what they wanted. Instead of either remaining, or having a second referendum, or having the very soft May departure, there's a credible chance we now leave with no deal in place whatsoever.
More thinking and less mindless opposition from pro-EU MPs would've served their cause well. I remember Grieve bleating in the Commons that it was 'too late' when the Government backed down and gave him precisely what he wanted, and he voted against them anyway.
This I'm afraid is incorrect. These arguments have been rehearsed a thousand times now and may not be relevant any more, but the May government excluded soft Brexit from the start. It was only when her government began to shift from talking about hard Brexit to no-deal Brexit that Grieve get involved, and thus parliament.
@Morris_Dancer's post is a good example of the self-radicalisation of Leavers. The normalisation among them of extremism is profoundly worrying in its own right and a great example of the way in which the internet can act as a vector of extremism.
It seems to me that it is pretty pointless banning attendance of sporting events without restricting pubs, clubs, cinemas and theatres too.
That pretty much bankrupts the entire hospitality, leisure and domestic tourism sector. If the government wants to avoid that then it will need to do more than simply suspend business rates, provide an £3k cash grant and pay SSP for 14 days.
But bankrupting sports clubs and institutions is fine?
What concerns me most about the measures being put in place is that we don't want the economy to do well over the next few months. We want people to change their behaviour.
No of course it isn’t fine. Sports was included in the catch-all word “leisure”.
Mr. Meeks, whether or not it's possible to have rational reasons for wishing the UK to leave the EU is entirely relevant given your view of the most 'ardent', as you put it, Leavers.
"The damage of Brexit will be far more enduring than Covid-19 because it springs from a baleful malevolence in the hearts of the most avid Leavers that is going to continue to actuate a senselessly hostile approach to the EU for the foreseeable future."
I agree it's very unhelpful that the use of language such as 'treachery' and 'xenophobia' has proliferated. There are entirely reasonable arguments for the UK to retain membership of the EU or to leave it, and noisy fringe elements who consider one to be treason and the other to be racism do more harm than good to their own sides.
Mr. Jonathan, the behaviour of pro-EU types, particularly in the courts and Parliament, has led to the exact opposite of what they wanted. Instead of either remaining, or having a second referendum, or having the very soft May departure, there's a credible chance we now leave with no deal in place whatsoever.
More thinking and less mindless opposition from pro-EU MPs would've served their cause well. I remember Grieve bleating in the Commons that it was 'too late' when the Government backed down and gave him precisely what he wanted, and he voted against them anyway.
This I'm afraid is incorrect. These arguments have been rehearsed a thousand times now and may be historical soon, but the May government excluded soft Brexit from the start. It was only when her government began to shift from talking about hard Brexit to no-deal Brexit that Grieve got involved, and thus parliament.
The mistake they made was not backing CU and SM through the Letwin process and then trying to get this established as the deal, either by forcing May's government to do it or by seizing the agenda.
Nevertheless I'd wager that imposing a trade disruption at year end will be seen, by then, as suicidal. Whether the government has the maturity to realise that now, or waits and tries to suspend it later, remains to be seen
We have to act on their advice. That's why it is deeply frustrating. I'm still getting asked to attend a public event in two weeks time. I suggested this event should be cancelled. We can't cancel until the government updates it guidance. Ahh ok then.
I think you have a rose-tinted view of how decision making occurs. There is incredible uncertainty here, there is modelling but how do we validate models without any actual data of intervention effectiveness alone or in combination? It is mainly theoretical and so it is challenging and to certain extent it is therefore faith-based. That's why reasonable people can disagree on policy.
Ultimately it is a judgement call on short term costs versus long term benefits and vice versa. That is value-based. What are their trade-offs?
They are placing too much weight on reducing public disruption in my view. I would like more weight placed on reducing deaths but that's just me.
"How do we validate models without any actual data of intervention effectiveness alone or in combination? "
This is not the first pandemic. There have been many previous pandemics, both in humans and in animal/plant populations. So, I am not sure I agree it is "mainly theoretical". There are many opportunities to cross-check the theory and models, and to war-game various responses. Epidemiology is a mature scientific discipline.
Economic epidemiology is a sub-discipline that looks at precisely the questions that you are posing regarding the intersection of economics, people's behaviour and epidemiology.
You may be right when you assert "They are placing too much weight on reducing public disruption in my view. I would like more weight placed on reducing deaths but that's just me." However, it is almost impossible to check this right at the moment unless you have the up-to-date data & the simulation codes & the expertise.
We will only know this by modelling after the event.
I do return to another point that I think is important. I would expect the experts to get this right -- because they are 2 weeks behind the European curve, and 2 months behind the Chinese curve. That is an enormous advantage.
We are lucky we are on island perched on the Western edge of Europe -- and the plague has come from the East and South.
One - slots. There is only so much capacity in the UK's airports. The EU is attempting to reduce ghost flights by easing the 80% slot rule but if all USA passengers for Europe (and v.v.) are channelled through the UK, then there is only so much capacity. They will be packed in like sardines in a place thought to be one of the most effective spreaders of disease - an aircraft.
Two - the UK is being squeezed between two blocs - the known infections in Schengen and the apparently unknown infections in the USA. What will happen to the UK if it is the transit point of choice for the infected?
Your second point is the concerning one to me. Trump has effectively made the U.K. the transit point for the infected. So don’t we have to react by saying thanks - but, er, no thanks?
Trump has not made us do anything, we have the ability to stop people using the UK as a transit point from either the EU or US. Whether our government chooses to do anything about it is our problem.
Mr. Oracle, and the pro-EU Commons repeatedly rejected May's soft departure deal. Now it looks like the split will be starker.
It would be difficult to describe Mrs May's deal as soft Brexit, and the ERG were just as much, if not more important with their intra-parliamentary influence in the conservative party, than Labour Remainers in the defeat of it.
One - slots. There is only so much capacity in the UK's airports. The EU is attempting to reduce ghost flights by easing the 80% slot rule but if all USA passengers for Europe (and v.v.) are channelled through the UK, then there is only so much capacity. They will be packed in like sardines in a place thought to be one of the most effective spreaders of disease - an aircraft.
Two - the UK is being squeezed between two blocs - the known infections in Schengen and the apparently unknown infections in the USA. What will happen to the UK if it is the transit point of choice for the infected?
Your second point is the concerning one to me. Trump has effectively made the U.K. the transit point for the infected. So don’t we have to react by saying thanks - but, er, no thanks?
The US missive says that no-one will be allowed entry to the US if they have been in the Schengen zone in the last 14 days. Presumably because they can’t reliably determine if someone has been in one of the known European hotspots simply by looking at their passport.
It won’t be possible from transit from mainland Europe through the U.K. directly to the USA.
The ‘Communicator-in-Chief’, chiefly failed to communicate effectively.
One - slots. There is only so much capacity in the UK's airports. The EU is attempting to reduce ghost flights by easing the 80% slot rule but if all USA passengers for Europe (and v.v.) are channelled through the UK, then there is only so much capacity. They will be packed in like sardines in a place thought to be one of the most effective spreaders of disease - an aircraft.
Two - the UK is being squeezed between two blocs - the known infections in Schengen and the apparently unknown infections in the USA. What will happen to the UK if it is the transit point of choice for the infected?
Your second point is the concerning one to me. Trump has effectively made the U.K. the transit point for the infected. So don’t we have to react by saying thanks - but, er, no thanks?
The transAtlantic route is very, very lucrative. Stopping it for any length of time would probably bankrupt a lot of airlines.
One question: anyone wanting to get to the US from the EU will now head to the UK, hang around for 14 days and then fly on.
Doesn’t that increase the risk of more infection coming to the U.K.? And if so don’t we now have to say “No flights to the US” precisely to stop us becoming the holding pen for the coronavirus in Europe?
Or am I missing something?
Another issue is that a large number of UK transatlantic flights go through Amsterdam
Pretty sure this call came from the government's advisers, who have publicly defended not bringing in social distancing measures sooner or setting out more strident advice on avoiding infection. They didn't think the evidence supported it. But I suspect a fuller picture of their reasoning isn't going to emerge until all this is over. A counter-intuitive modelling result suggesting it would be ineffective or disproportionately disruptive for whatever effect it would have, perhaps? If it turns out to have come down to a judgment call from leading social psychologists and communications experts that "average British people are too stupid and emotional to handle such advice, they'll either start a mass panic or completely ignore it - best stick to telling them to wash hands and use a tissue until that message has permeated their thick skulls" then I'll feel a bit miffed (though whether at the experts or my fellow Brits I haven't decided yet!).
It's hard to say exactly what's coming from where.
Could it be coming from the Pandemic plan the government drew up in 2011?
It does look like the government is sticking to the script outlined here
The strategy is about managing an epidemic in business as usual rather than an "all it takes" attack.
It doesn't take into account lessons from the SARS epidemic. Strictly neither SARS nor COVID-19 is influenza of course. Nevertheless Asian countries that were hit by SARS have adapted their strategies to a more preventative approach.
The point, I think, is that there are two schools thought on how to tackle COVID-19. They are both scientifically based, so we need to be lead by the science.
My concerns about the UK's approach relate to Italy, in particular:
Is the current Italian situation envisaged in the UK's strategy?
If not, what is the UK doing differently from Italy, and in an effective way, to prevent us becoming a second Italy?
One - slots. There is only so much capacity in the UK's airports. The EU is attempting to reduce ghost flights by easing the 80% slot rule but if all USA passengers for Europe (and v.v.) are channelled through the UK, then there is only so much capacity. They will be packed in like sardines in a place thought to be one of the most effective spreaders of disease - an aircraft.
Two - the UK is being squeezed between two blocs - the known infections in Schengen and the apparently unknown infections in the USA. What will happen to the UK if it is the transit point of choice for the infected?
Your second point is the concerning one to me. Trump has effectively made the U.K. the transit point for the infected. So don’t we have to react by saying thanks - but, er, no thanks?
The transAtlantic route is very, very lucrative. Stopping it for any length of time would probably bankrupt a lot of airlines.
But yes, I see the UK as infection central now.
And it’s your cheerfulness that keeps me going!
The government is going to have to react to this. We owe Trump absolutely no favours on this.
I should imagine that PB is playing its part in helping with social distancing. This provides a useful platform to interact with people without risking getting the virus.
Meanwhile all the miserable buggers who hate the company of fellow human beings are the ones most likely to come out of this unscaved.
I would be perfectly happy to self-isolate for several weeks. I work from home anyway, we're well stocked with supplies and entertainment, and I'm not a social animal. Unfortunately, though, other family members are likely to bring the plague back from school or work, and I am obliged to help out elderly and ill members of my extended family, as well as dealing with my mother's sick dog!
I regard social media as having a lot of seven-year-olds with green crayons. It all started with radio phone-ins where they put on the loudest and gobbiest to make it more interesting.
On Covid-19, the government has generally done ok to date (it's early days yet). Yes, other courses of action are available but it's not obvious that they are better. Britain has the huge benefit of being a week or two behind the curve of other comparable countries. It can go to school on their experiences.
The next few months are going to be fairly grim. Get used to that idea. With the debatable exception of the excitable @eadric, we have yet to have a pb case of Covid-19. Any guesses on when we'll get our first one? This is not a sweepstake that any of us wants to be the winning horse in.
I think I may have had it last Thursday and Friday. I certainly had the symptoms, but they were pretty mild and 24 hours of bed rest did the trick. I'm still relatively young and in good health and I've had worse colds and certainly much worse food poisoning. I didn't get tested though so I'll never know. Anyway, I'll emerge from self-isolation soon.
One - slots. There is only so much capacity in the UK's airports. The EU is attempting to reduce ghost flights by easing the 80% slot rule but if all USA passengers for Europe (and v.v.) are channelled through the UK, then there is only so much capacity. They will be packed in like sardines in a place thought to be one of the most effective spreaders of disease - an aircraft.
Two - the UK is being squeezed between two blocs - the known infections in Schengen and the apparently unknown infections in the USA. What will happen to the UK if it is the transit point of choice for the infected?
Your second point is the concerning one to me. Trump has effectively made the U.K. the transit point for the infected. So don’t we have to react by saying thanks - but, er, no thanks?
The transAtlantic route is very, very lucrative. Stopping it for any length of time would probably bankrupt a lot of airlines.
But yes, I see the UK as infection central now.
Not many people are actually going to want to fly to the US from EU now.
A two week holiday becomes a months holiday. You dont know if you will be allowed in anyway or not so cant book firm hotels. Clearing immigration might take forever. It is high risk for covid19. It has poor and/or expensive healthcare if you do get ill.
Business trips dont work for the same reasons. Conferences are called off.
There are not going to be loads of Europeans spending 2 weeks here just to get to the US. Some, but not many.
Mr. Meeks, you actually think I'm, to use your words, a self-radicalised extremist?
In this very thread I've written there are legitimate reasons to be in favour of EU membership for the UK, and for our departure. I've also condemned the proliferation of language such as 'xenophobe' and 'treachery' when discussing this matter.
Show me the extremism in accepting the legitimacy of alternative views, and condemning verbal abuse of those who hold different political opinions.
Mr. Meeks, whether or not it's possible to have rational reasons for wishing the UK to leave the EU is entirely relevant given your view of the most 'ardent', as you put it, Leavers.
"The damage of Brexit will be far more enduring than Covid-19 because it springs from a baleful malevolence in the hearts of the most avid Leavers that is going to continue to actuate a senselessly hostile approach to the EU for the foreseeable future."
I agree it's very unhelpful that the use of language such as 'treachery' and 'xenophobia' has proliferated. There are entirely reasonable arguments for the UK to retain membership of the EU or to leave it, and noisy fringe elements who consider one to be treason and the other to be racism do more harm than good to their own sides.
Mr. Jonathan, the behaviour of pro-EU types, particularly in the courts and Parliament, has led to the exact opposite of what they wanted. Instead of either remaining, or having a second referendum, or having the very soft May departure, there's a credible chance we now leave with no deal in place whatsoever.
More thinking and less mindless opposition from pro-EU MPs would've served their cause well. I remember Grieve bleating in the Commons that it was 'too late' when the Government backed down and gave him precisely what he wanted, and he voted against them anyway.
This I'm afraid is incorrect. These arguments have been rehearsed a thousand times now and may not be relevant any more, but the May government excluded soft Brexit from the start. It was only when her government began to shift from talking about hard Brexit to no-deal Brexit that Grieve get involved, and thus parliament.
@Morris_Dancer's post is a good example of the self-radicalisation of Leavers. The normalisation among them of extremism is profoundly worrying in its own right and a great example of the way in which the internet can act as a vector of extremism.
So, us deplorable gammon racists who just wish it to be easier to live with our wives are the extremists, and you’re not. Okay, understood.
On Covid-19, the government has generally done ok to date (it's early days yet). Yes, other courses of action are available but it's not obvious that they are better. Britain has the huge benefit of being a week or two behind the curve of other comparable countries. It can go to school on their experiences.
The next few months are going to be fairly grim. Get used to that idea. With the debatable exception of the excitable @eadric, we have yet to have a pb case of Covid-19. Any guesses on when we'll get our first one? This is not a sweepstake that any of us wants to be the winning horse in.
I think I may have had it last Thursday and Friday. I certainly had the symptoms, but they were pretty mild and 24 hours of bed rest did the trick. I'm still relatively young and in good health and I've had worse colds and certainly much worse food poisoning. I didn't get tested though so I'll never know. Anyway, I'll emerge from self-isolation soon.
Brexit is the chronic disease; Coronavirus is the acute disease. Diabetes versus a heart attack, if you will. The chronic disease weakens the body and makes it more prone to the acute one.
Mr. Meeks, whether or not it's possible to have rational reasons for wishing the UK to leave the EU is entirely relevant given your view of the most 'ardent', as you put it, Leavers.
"The damage of Brexit will be far more enduring than Covid-19 because it springs from a baleful malevolence in the hearts of the most avid Leavers that is going to continue to actuate a senselessly hostile approach to the EU for the foreseeable future."
I agree it's very unhelpful that the use of language such as 'treachery' and 'xenophobia' has proliferated. There are entirely reasonable arguments for the UK to retain membership of the EU or to leave it, and noisy fringe elements who consider one to be treason and the other to be racism do more harm than good to their own sides.
Mr. Jonathan, the behaviour of pro-EU types, particularly in the courts and Parliament, has led to the exact opposite of what they wanted. Instead of either remaining, or having a second referendum, or having the very soft May departure, there's a credible chance we now leave with no deal in place whatsoever.
More thinking and less mindless opposition from pro-EU MPs would've served their cause well. I remember Grieve bleating in the Commons that it was 'too late' when the Government backed down and gave him precisely what he wanted, and he voted against them anyway.
This I'm afraid is incorrect. These arguments have been rehearsed a thousand times now and may be historical soon, but the May government excluded soft Brexit from the start. It was only when her government began to shift from talking about hard Brexit to no-deal Brexit that Grieve got involved, and thus parliament.
The mistake they made was not backing CU and SM through the Letwin process and then trying to get this established as the deal, either by forcing May's government to do it or by seizing the agenda.
Nevertheless I'd wager that imposing a trade disruption at year end will be seen, by then, as suicidal. Whether the government has the maturity to realise that now, or waits and tries to suspend it later, remains to be seen
This was primarily due to a split in the Conservative Party, though. Remainers were not united or cohesive as a force inside or outside and across parties, as seen in the election, while Leavers, relatively speaking, were.
One question: anyone wanting to get to the US from the EU will now head to the UK, hang around for 14 days and then fly on.
Doesn’t that increase the risk of more infection coming to the U.K.? And if so don’t we now have to say “No flights to the US” precisely to stop us becoming the holding pen for the coronavirus in Europe?
Or am I missing something?
Another issue is that a large number of UK transatlantic flights go through Amsterdam
I assume that route is closed now
Only because a lot of regional airports don't have decent flights to Heathrow. My preferred route is Amsterdam as Dublin required an hours drive to Newcastle and often not enough time to do immigration...
One question: anyone wanting to get to the US from the EU will now head to the UK, hang around for 14 days and then fly on.
Doesn’t that increase the risk of more infection coming to the U.K.? And if so don’t we now have to say “No flights to the US” precisely to stop us becoming the holding pen for the coronavirus in Europe?
Or am I missing something?
I doubt that Trump has thought through his travel ban in such detail.
I should imagine that PB is playing its part in helping with social distancing. This provides a useful platform to interact with people without risking getting the virus.
Meanwhile all the miserable buggers who hate the company of fellow human beings are the ones most likely to come out of this unscaved.
A 90 y old friend has self-isolated in the middle of Powys & has 3-4 months' of tinned food for when he decides visiting the shops is too risky.
I can rather recommend Powys to Eadric. Nearer to London than Cornwall is yet full of ... green fields, hills and sheep.
Maybe the plague in 1349 selected for extreme introverts. They had a higher chance of survival.
I would like to thank the early morning discussants here, and especially @CarlottaVance for the informed and dispassionately reasoned discussions. These exchanges take public debate to a new level which the MSM get nowhere near imo.
One question: anyone wanting to get to the US from the EU will now head to the UK, hang around for 14 days and then fly on.
Doesn’t that increase the risk of more infection coming to the U.K.? And if so don’t we now have to say “No flights to the US” precisely to stop us becoming the holding pen for the coronavirus in Europe?
Or am I missing something?
Another issue is that a large number of UK transatlantic flights go through Amsterdam
I assume that route is closed now
Only because a lot of regional airports don't have decent flights to Heathrow. My preferred route is Amsterdam as Dublin required an hours drive to Newcastle and often not enough time to do immigration...
Most went through Amsterdam to get around green taxes and make them more attractive to the budget traveller.
The default assumption in our planning for Covid-19 is that between 40 and 70% of the population are going to get it eventually. The object of our response is therefore not to eliminate but to flatten the curve of infection reducing the pressure on our medical capacity. If the default assumption is correct this is sensible and it also makes sense to introduce measures gradually with a view to achieving that objective with the minimum economic cost. This is the current government strategy and it seems to be based on models produced some years ago which contain this assumption.
What I think we need to do is measure those assumptions against the real world examples that we have. China currently has 14,800 active cases. On current trends it will eliminate the virus within the month. The infection rate in China, because of the steps they have taken, is currently 0.56% of the population. By the end of this phase it may reach 0.6%. Not 40%, not 70% but 0.6%.
If our default assumptions are correct all they are achieving at considerable cost is more deferral. There will be a second, third, fourth wave of infections until that 40-70% level of infection is achieved and there are insufficient hosts for further spread. But what if they are wrong? What if it is possible to actually eliminate this virus from the herd? If that proves to be the case tens of thousands of Britons and possibly hundreds of thousands of Europeans will have died needlessly.
This is a big call and it is entirely right to listen to the experts in making it. Will China really be able to prevent further outbreaks in our interconnected world? Would we? I am not sure but I want assurance that the government is thinking about the alternative strategies very carefully.
I can’t stop Leavers covering their eyes and blocking their ears. But the information will still be there when they stop tantrumming and face the real world.
I really think this argument is lost and the matter has moved on
Damage is damage. It isn’t wished away because hopeful Leavers say so. It’s going to be pointed out repeatedly to those who have chosen to maim the country’s economy because of an irrational hatred.
Alastair. I do worry for you.
I have no irrational hatred of immigrants but now we have left we must move on
I would not like to think you will end up like the Japanese soldier who remained in the jungle for 29 years after the war had ended refusing to believe it was over
You cannot move on until you have adequately assessed the damage done and sought to mitigate it. Currently Leavers are planning on making the damage as great as they possibly can.
Looks as if you will be saying the same in 30 years or so if the Japanese soldier is to be believed
I note that Leavers don't regard the OBR as expert enough to assess the damage they've caused.
That implies that economics is a scientific discipline. It isn't.
I fear the plague has already rotted what was left of your brain.
Self isolate before you contaminate others.
If you think economics is a science then you were already senile.
Economics is a science in the sense that it works on probabilities. It is not an exact science, rather like climate science. Leavers tend to dislike both because the probabilities don't fit with their prejudices, and the inexactitude gives them a straw to grasp. There is a slim probability that Leavers might prove correct on both fronts, but as this is a betting site most people know that those who deny calculated probability based on blind belief and hope are fools.
The default assumption in our planning for Covid-19 is that between 40 and 70% of the population are going to get it eventually. The object of our response is therefore not to eliminate but to flatten the curve of infection reducing the pressure on our medical capacity. If the default assumption is correct this is sensible and it also makes sense to introduce measures gradually with a view to achieving that objective with the minimum economic cost. This is the current government strategy and it seems to be based on models produced some years ago which contain this assumption.
What I think we need to do is measure those assumptions against the real world examples that we have. China currently has 14,800 active cases. On current trends it will eliminate the virus within the month. The infection rate in China, because of the steps they have taken, is currently 0.56% of the population. By the end of this phase it may reach 0.6%. Not 40%, not 70% but 0.6%.
If our default assumptions are correct all they are achieving at considerable cost is more deferral. There will be a second, third, fourth wave of infections until that 40-70% level of infection is achieved and there are insufficient hosts for further spread. But what if they are wrong? What if it is possible to actually eliminate this virus from the herd? If that proves to be the case tens of thousands of Britons and possibly hundreds of thousands of Europeans will have died needlessly.
This is a big call and it is entirely right to listen to the experts in making it. Will China really be able to prevent further outbreaks in our interconnected world? Would we? I am not sure but I want assurance that the government is thinking about the alternative strategies very carefully.
If the Chinese numbers are anywhere near accurate they have done a remarkable job in the last 6 weeks.
I should imagine that PB is playing its part in helping with social distancing. This provides a useful platform to interact with people without risking getting the virus.
Meanwhile all the miserable buggers who hate the company of fellow human beings are the ones most likely to come out of this unscaved.
A 90 y old friend has self-isolated in the middle of Powys & has 3-4 months' of tinned food for when he decides visiting the shops is too risky.
I can rather recommend Powys to Eadric. Nearer to London than Cornwall is yet full of ... green fields, hills and sheep.
Maybe the plague in 1349 selected for extreme introverts. They had a higher chance of survival.
Rural Wales is excellent for avoiding the disease.
The problem is, if you get it and need ICUs, then you are in very serious trouble.
First, you are long way from a hospital, and second, Wales is the country with the lowest number of ICUs per capita in Western Europe.
Eadric should probably move to Powys or Gwynedd, and then have a private jet at hand to move him to Addenbrookes in Cambridge as soon as he gets a touch of high fever.
In other news, I am starting to lose track, but think my trading profits since 24 Feb have now passed £10k; more than enough to pay for all the holidays I wont be taking.
Slightly better than my £150K deficit, holidays not required.
But at least if you sit tight the market will go back up again. Whereas with the budget yesterday I lost many times that amount. Though I guess it made sense.
On Covid-19, the government has generally done ok to date (it's early days yet). Yes, other courses of action are available but it's not obvious that they are better. Britain has the huge benefit of being a week or two behind the curve of other comparable countries. It can go to school on their experiences.
The next few months are going to be fairly grim. Get used to that idea. With the debatable exception of the excitable @eadric, we have yet to have a pb case of Covid-19. Any guesses on when we'll get our first one? This is not a sweepstake that any of us wants to be the winning horse in.
I think I may have had it last Thursday and Friday. I certainly had the symptoms, but they were pretty mild and 24 hours of bed rest did the trick. I'm still relatively young and in good health and I've had worse colds and certainly much worse food poisoning. I didn't get tested though so I'll never know. Anyway, I'll emerge from self-isolation soon.
kidding yourself, man flu for wimps no doubt
Certainly possible. The symptoms are very similar. Without a test I'll never know.
Mr. Meeks, whether or not it's possible to have rational reasons for wishing the UK to leave the EU is entirely relevant given your view of the most 'ardent', as you put it, Leavers.
"The damage of Brexit will be far more enduring than Covid-19 because it springs from a baleful malevolence in the hearts of the most avid Leavers that is going to continue to actuate a senselessly hostile approach to the EU for the foreseeable future."
I agree it's very unhelpful that the use of language such as 'treachery' and 'xenophobia' has proliferated. There are entirely reasonable arguments for the UK to retain membership of the EU or to leave it, and noisy fringe elements who consider one to be treason and the other to be racism do more harm than good to their own sides.
Mr. Jonathan, the behaviour of pro-EU types, particularly in the courts and Parliament, has led to the exact opposite of what they wanted. Instead of either remaining, or having a second referendum, or having the very soft May departure, there's a credible chance we now leave with no deal in place whatsoever.
More thinking and less mindless opposition from pro-EU MPs would've served their cause well. I remember Grieve bleating in the Commons that it was 'too late' when the Government backed down and gave him precisely what he wanted, and he voted against them anyway.
This I'm afraid is incorrect. These arguments have been rehearsed a thousand times now and may not be relevant any more, but the May government excluded soft Brexit from the start. It was only when her government began to shift from talking about hard Brexit to no-deal Brexit that Grieve get involved, and thus parliament.
@Morris_Dancer's post is a good example of the self-radicalisation of Leavers. The normalisation among them of extremism is profoundly worrying in its own right and a great example of the way in which the internet can act as a vector of extremism.
So, us deplorable gammon racists who just wish it to be easier to live with our wives are the extremists, and you’re not. Okay, understood.
No, I'm saying that people who would have been fine with EEA membership four years ago are now determined that Britain should leave on WTO terms.
Pretty sure this call came from the government's advisers, who have publicly defended not bringing in social distancing measures sooner or setting out more strident advice on avoiding infection. They didn't think the evidence supported it. But I suspect a fuller picture of their reasoning isn't going to emerge until all this is over. A counter-intuitive modelling result suggesting it would be ineffective or disproportionately disruptive for whatever effect it would have, perhaps? If it turns out to have come down to a judgment call from leading social psychologists and communications experts that "average British people are too stupid and emotional to handle such advice, they'll either start a mass panic or completely ignore it - best stick to telling them to wash hands and use a tissue until that message has permeated their thick skulls" then I'll feel a bit miffed (though whether at the experts or my fellow Brits I haven't decided yet!).
It's hard to say exactly what's coming from where.
Could it be coming from the Pandemic plan the government drew up in 2011?
It does look like the government is sticking to the script outlined here
The strategy is about managing an epidemic in business as usual rather than an "all it takes" attack.
It doesn't take into account lessons from the SARS epidemic. Strictly neither SARS nor COVID-19 is influenza of course. Nevertheless Asian countries that were hit by SARS have adapted their strategies to a more preventative approach.
The point, I think, is that there are two schools thought on how to tackle COVID-19. They are both scientifically based, so we need to be lead by the science.
My concerns about the UK's approach relate to Italy, in particular:
Is the current Italian situation envisaged in the UK's strategy?
If not, what is the UK doing differently from Italy, and in an effective way, to prevent us becoming a second Italy?
I garbled this. I meant to say, there are two schools of thought about how best to manage the epidemic: manage it within business as usual or all-it-takes prevention. They are both science-based approaches so you can't just say, let's go with the science. You need to understand what each strategy is trying to achieve and make a decision based on what you think is more important. However, the all-it-takes prevention approach is informed by recent SARS epidemics.
I see the North East will miss out on vital Metro funding because the government is obsessed with imposing a single “Tyne and Wear” authority rather than the agreed North of Tyne one...
What I think we need to do is measure those assumptions against the real world examples that we have. China currently has 14,800 active cases. On current trends it will eliminate the virus within the month. The infection rate in China, because of the steps they have taken, is currently 0.56% of the population. By the end of this phase it may reach 0.6%. Not 40%, not 70% but 0.6%.
You have not got the data there to calculate the 'population infection rate', as some large majority (80%? 99%? 99.9%?) of cases ('mild') are not known to the authorities, and we do not know what that number is.
So this is the "detected infection" rate.
We will only have a better idea of the 'population infection rate' from serological studies done after the fact.
For all we know it could already be 10% or 30% or 70% in that area.
Spain is attempting to double its hospital bed capacity whist it still has time utilizing on site facilities like gyms etc as to how it doubles its healthcare staff I’m not sure but I hope UK is doing similar and is quietly deploying the RAMC etc
The default assumption in our planning for Covid-19 is that between 40 and 70% of the population are going to get it eventually. The object of our response is therefore not to eliminate but to flatten the curve of infection reducing the pressure on our medical capacity. If the default assumption is correct this is sensible and it also makes sense to introduce measures gradually with a view to achieving that objective with the minimum economic cost. This is the current government strategy and it seems to be based on models produced some years ago which contain this assumption.
What I think we need to do is measure those assumptions against the real world examples that we have. China currently has 14,800 active cases. On current trends it will eliminate the virus within the month. The infection rate in China, because of the steps they have taken, is currently 0.56% of the population. By the end of this phase it may reach 0.6%. Not 40%, not 70% but 0.6%.
If our default assumptions are correct all they are achieving at considerable cost is more deferral. There will be a second, third, fourth wave of infections until that 40-70% level of infection is achieved and there are insufficient hosts for further spread. But what if they are wrong? What if it is possible to actually eliminate this virus from the herd? If that proves to be the case tens of thousands of Britons and possibly hundreds of thousands of Europeans will have died needlessly.
This is a big call and it is entirely right to listen to the experts in making it. Will China really be able to prevent further outbreaks in our interconnected world? Would we? I am not sure but I want assurance that the government is thinking about the alternative strategies very carefully.
If the Chinese numbers are anywhere near accurate they have done a remarkable job in the last 6 weeks.
If they were alone I would be really doubtful but Japan (despite the abuse heaped on @edmundintokyo downthread), SK, Taiwan, Singapore all offer alternative models that also seem to be working based on elimination not containment.
It's remarkable the faith that people put into offical *guidance*. If only you understood how guidelines are put together, the murkiness of the evidence, the rules of thumb and heuristics that are used (e.g. standing 2 metres apart - lol) then we would think for ourselves a bit more.
Comments
Doesn’t that increase the risk of more infection coming to the U.K.? And if so don’t we now have to say “No flights to the US” precisely to stop us becoming the holding pen for the coronavirus in Europe?
Or am I missing something?
Those saying "do this now" rarely appear to have thought about what next.
Why are UK airports not screening people?
Tom Burridge
Transport correspondent
Given that this is happening in many airports abroad, lots of people have been asking this question and we’ve been asking Public Health England. Their line is still that this is not deemed a necessary step.
There is a protocol in place at UK airports for flights arriving from countries like Italy and China. The crew on the flight are supposed to ask passengers if they’re feeling unwell and communicate any possible cases to health officials, based at the airport of arrival, before the plane lands.
A colleague arrived on a flight from Hong Kong on Monday and a passenger was displaying symptoms so officials in protective gear boarded the plane on arrival at Heathrow. We don’t know if it was a confirmed case of coronavirus.
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-us-canada-51847128
Business rates in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are set by the devolved administrations.
In Wales, the Labour Government has not yet decided whether it can afford to suspend business rates.
I think you have a rose-tinted view of how decision making occurs. There is incredible uncertainty here, there is modelling but how do we validate models without any actual data of intervention effectiveness alone or in combination? It is mainly theoretical and so it is challenging and to certain extent it is therefore faith-based. That's why reasonable people can disagree on policy.
Ultimately it is a judgement call on short term costs versus long term benefits and vice versa. That is value-based. What are their trade-offs?
They are placing too much weight on reducing public disruption in my view. I would like more weight placed on reducing deaths but that's just me.
Chancellor is on the radio. Sounds very happy. Good, persuasive communicator.
Plagiarism has alway been the Achilles heel of coursework though.
We have recieved information about restrictions we need to adhere to. One clear directive is that the summer semester lectures which were dure to start on 1st April is pushed back to a 20th April start.
There is a list of other things that are cancelled and others which we need to consider whether they take place or not. There are now lots of emails flying around as to what is cancelled, and what is not. Particularly unclear to me is what happens to oral exams.
These measures apply to all Berlin Unis, but most others have a semester start date of 14th April.
One - slots. There is only so much capacity in the UK's airports. The EU is attempting to reduce ghost flights by easing the 80% slot rule but if all USA passengers for Europe (and v.v.) are channelled through the UK, then there is only so much capacity. They will be packed in like sardines in a place thought to be one of the most effective spreaders of disease - an aircraft.
Two - the UK is being squeezed between two blocs - the known infections in Schengen and the apparently unknown infections in the USA. What will happen to the UK if it is the transit point of choice for the infected?
Going over old battles will not change the result.
He's listened to advice from the disease specialists and the economists (the latter being as much, if not more guesswork). But he's done it. Corbyn would have seen everything through a lens based on Trotsky.
Trump is teasing the non-British Europeans and they'll probably fall for it. He is what he is, but the Septics chose him.
A British citizen recently in Schengen in the last 14 days can't.
Right now we’ve got Australia, Bahrain, then possibly a big gap...
Meanwhile all the miserable buggers who hate the company of fellow human beings are the ones most likely to come out of this unscaved.
In reality with my family in Italy at risk, my own situation, the likely effect on my daughter’s business and my sons’ current job-hunting efforts - let alone my pension (!) - there is more than enough to worry about.
But living in a state of terror is pointless. So other than do what I can and use my rainy day savings for what seems like it’s going to be weeks of rainy days, best to use the time on other constructive pursuits.
Mr. Smithson, huzzah for introversion!
Self isolate before you contaminate others.
Nevertheless I'd wager that imposing a trade disruption at year end will be seen, by then, as suicidal. Whether the government has the maturity to realise that now, or waits and tries to suspend it later, remains to be seen
This is not the first pandemic. There have been many previous pandemics, both in humans and in animal/plant populations. So, I am not sure I agree it is "mainly theoretical". There are many opportunities to cross-check the theory and models, and to war-game various responses. Epidemiology is a mature scientific discipline.
Economic epidemiology is a sub-discipline that looks at precisely the questions that you are posing regarding the intersection of economics, people's behaviour and epidemiology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_epidemiology
You may be right when you assert "They are placing too much weight on reducing public disruption in my view. I would like more weight placed on reducing deaths but that's just me." However, it is almost impossible to check this right at the moment unless you have the up-to-date data & the simulation codes & the expertise.
We will only know this by modelling after the event.
I do return to another point that I think is important. I would expect the experts to get this right -- because they are 2 weeks behind the European curve, and 2 months behind the Chinese curve. That is an enormous advantage.
We are lucky we are on island perched on the Western edge of Europe -- and the plague has come from the East and South.
It won’t be possible from transit from mainland Europe through the U.K. directly to the USA.
The ‘Communicator-in-Chief’, chiefly failed to communicate effectively.
But yes, I see the UK as infection central now.
I assume that route is closed now
- It does look like the government is sticking to the script outlined here
- The strategy is about managing an epidemic in business as usual rather than an "all it takes" attack.
- It doesn't take into account lessons from the SARS epidemic. Strictly neither SARS nor COVID-19 is influenza of course. Nevertheless Asian countries that were hit by SARS have adapted their strategies to a more preventative approach.
The point, I think, is that there are two schools thought on how to tackle COVID-19. They are both scientifically based, so we need to be lead by the science.My concerns about the UK's approach relate to Italy, in particular:
https://twitter.com/toddzwillich/status/1237934520751607808
The government is going to have to react to this. We owe Trump absolutely no favours on this.
https://twitter.com/SamWangPhD/status/1237918618580586497
I except PB, and that's why I still tune in.
But empty vessels make the most noise still.
A two week holiday becomes a months holiday. You dont know if you will be allowed in anyway or not so cant book firm hotels. Clearing immigration might take forever. It is high risk for covid19. It has poor and/or expensive healthcare if you do get ill.
Business trips dont work for the same reasons. Conferences are called off.
There are not going to be loads of Europeans spending 2 weeks here just to get to the US. Some, but not many.
In this very thread I've written there are legitimate reasons to be in favour of EU membership for the UK, and for our departure. I've also condemned the proliferation of language such as 'xenophobe' and 'treachery' when discussing this matter.
Show me the extremism in accepting the legitimacy of alternative views, and condemning verbal abuse of those who hold different political opinions.
I can rather recommend Powys to Eadric. Nearer to London than Cornwall is yet full of ... green fields, hills and sheep.
Maybe the plague in 1349 selected for extreme introverts. They had a higher chance of survival.
What I think we need to do is measure those assumptions against the real world examples that we have. China currently has 14,800 active cases. On current trends it will eliminate the virus within the month. The infection rate in China, because of the steps they have taken, is currently 0.56% of the population. By the end of this phase it may reach 0.6%. Not 40%, not 70% but 0.6%.
If our default assumptions are correct all they are achieving at considerable cost is more deferral. There will be a second, third, fourth wave of infections until that 40-70% level of infection is achieved and there are insufficient hosts for further spread. But what if they are wrong? What if it is possible to actually eliminate this virus from the herd? If that proves to be the case tens of thousands of Britons and possibly hundreds of thousands of Europeans will have died needlessly.
This is a big call and it is entirely right to listen to the experts in making it. Will China really be able to prevent further outbreaks in our interconnected world? Would we? I am not sure but I want assurance that the government is thinking about the alternative strategies very carefully.
The problem is, if you get it and need ICUs, then you are in very serious trouble.
First, you are long way from a hospital, and second, Wales is the country with the lowest number of ICUs per capita in Western Europe.
Eadric should probably move to Powys or Gwynedd, and then have a private jet at hand to move him to Addenbrookes in Cambridge as soon as he gets a touch of high fever.
So this is the "detected infection" rate.
We will only have a better idea of the 'population infection rate' from serological studies done after the fact.
For all we know it could already be 10% or 30% or 70% in that area.
https://twitter.com/peston/status/1238029983831990273?s=21
https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/03/11/whos-confusing-guidance-masks-covid-19-epidemic/?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=socialnetwork
It's remarkable the faith that people put into offical *guidance*. If only you understood how guidelines are put together, the murkiness of the evidence, the rules of thumb and heuristics that are used (e.g. standing 2 metres apart - lol) then we would think for ourselves a bit more.
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1237903444201046018?s=20