I find it interesting that people are talking about cancelling Cheltenham on it's first day March 10th as something that would have made a difference. In reality it would have just moved the drinking to pubs around the area and possibly made things worse rather than better (packed indoor spaces, rather than outdoor spaces)
In reality Cheltenham would have needed to be cancelled on or before the Thursday of the week before (March 5th) and that would definitely have been a far more awkward call.
Another thing they needed to do was to close the pubs...
You have been living a necessarily restricted expat life for too long. Opining on closing down society in the UK.
Some people can not comprehend an event that doesn’t have binary blame for the bad outcome. The same people think it is the job of the government to insure them against any event.
I see the right-wing headbangers are marching in force this morning. I shall gracefully retire therefore.
Rant and rave all you like on here but you've lost this argument so you're wasting your energy. Even the tory press have called the Government to account.
As I say, I'm currently broadly supportive of the Gov't but lying about their crass mistakes demeans the integrity of your posting both now and in the future.
Have a good day everyone.
xx
Shame being triggered into a snowflake flounce by an opposing view isn’t a symptom of Covid - could double the testing rate in a trice.
I have several Conservative friends who think the Govt's handling of this has been 'shambolic' and that Johnson is 'unfit' to lead such a crisis. They are surprised that I've been more pro.
The decision to allow Cheltenham to go ahead was frankly unbelievable.
I’m very grateful that Boris saw a lockdown as a last resort, and only went there when he had to do so.
Entirely right, in my view.
Asking organizers to cancel large events, closing pubs, asking people to work from home where appropriate, quarantine requirements for people arriving from places with a lot of contagious people - none of these constitute a lockdown.
A lockdown is what you're getting because less disruptive things weren't done when there was time, and the government's run out of runway.
Benefit of hindsight still applies
Who could have predicted etc etc.
J League and K League are still suspended - Japan and Korea are not back to normal.
Of course they're not back to normal, that's the whole point. You can't do normal, there's a raging novel killer virus on the loose. You probably can't do normal until there's a vaccine, maybe not even then.
What you need to do is find out what changes you can make that are enough to contain it but with the least possible disruption. This isn't easy - there's a two-week lag between action and results, and that's long enough for the virus to get a lot of growth if you make the wrong moves in the "normality" direction (which Japan did, after initially stabilizing it by acting early).
Doing what the British did and doing next-to-nothing then going into a full lockdown doesn't avoid this, because sooner or later you're going to have to end the lockdown, and if you go back to normal it's just going to come back again and the whole cycle will repeat.
From my PoV there are only two real significant changes to my life - 1) working from home, 2) no sport to watch (in person or on TV).
It doesn't sound to me like Japan and Korea are much different to us.
And was Cheltenham responsible for Italy, Spain, Belgium, France too? Don't get me wrong, it was a ridiculous mistake and I said so at the time but the fact is that this virus has managed to spread every bit as fast, indeed a bit faster in some cases, in all these other countries without the nonsense of Cheltenham. The idea that it would have spread less in this country without it is, at best, inconsistent with the comparable evidence.
I do agree that far more than the incidental detail of Brexit the handling of the CV is going to define Boris's premiership. For me the question will be whether Rishi Sunak's bold and innovative plans work and/or bankrupt the country. We are facing a situation where despite these efforts hundreds of thousands of small businesses are going to be insolvent creating significant unemployment in this country for the first time in years and potentially wiping out a generation of entrepreneurs. Mitigating that and the speed of any bounce back will for me determine the success or failure of the Boris years. It makes the job Osborne inherited in 2010 look like a walk in the park.
All other countries had their own mass gatherings that should have been stopped, but weren’t. Nothing that’s happened here is exceptional.
The early government response was confusing. It seemed driven by ideology more than science. Some weird contortion the British didn’t accept enforced rules. Restrictions were voluntary advice and ineffective if not actually counter productive.
Good. Excellent. We’re not that sort of country.
And this lockdown is fucking shit. The later it starts and sooner it’s over - the better.
Silly. Early government policy actually created an incentive for people to go out. May hay whilst the sun shines.
No, the Government were progressively increasing restrictions as the crisis developed and evidence changed. They were doing it on the basis of absolute necessity only.
Entirely correct.
"the crisis developed and evidence changed. "
It was known that the virus doubles its hosts approximately every 2.5 days left uncontrolled, takes approx 7 days to manifest symptons and then perhaps another 13 to die. You're always behind the 8 ball on this one, so you need to make decisions as if you're 20 to 25 days in the future with approx 3000 times more cases than you have at the moment. One thing I'll give the Gov't credit for is the lockdown has seemed fair and sensible though I worry it's a bit of a white collar lockdown with infection amongst warehouse staff etc continuing at a greater rate. Since R is exponential you need to have as much locked off as possible.
I argued for the same things as you (banning Cheltenham and the Athletico match, banning flights from Italy or at least having a quarantine for anyone foolish enough to go there) at the same time. It was obvious. Whether the virus would have spread anyway is a moot point. What I find more interesting is why the government was so slow. I think that it is because far too many of our politicians and too much of our Civil Service is basically innumerate. They are not stupid, they can get the point, the obvious consequences of exponential growth were not adequately obvious to them.
I have argued on here before that we must develop a system of governance that gets the importance of maths. It will result in better, quicker decisions. It will respond more quickly to events (which in fairness the government has once the numerate CSO and CMO were given key rolls). Cummings was right about this. His advert highlighted the problem with our government and what we need to do to change it.
The early government response was confusing. It seemed driven by ideology more than science. Some weird contortion the British didn’t accept enforced rules. Restrictions were voluntary advice and ineffective if not actually counter productive.
Good. Excellent. We’re not that sort of country.
And this lockdown is fucking shit. The later it starts and sooner it’s over - the better.
Silly. Early government policy actually created an incentive for people to go out. May hay whilst the sun shines.
No, the Government were progressively increasing restrictions as the crisis developed and evidence changed. They were doing it on the basis of absolute necessity only.
Entirely correct.
"the crisis developed and evidence changed. "
It was known that the virus doubles its hosts approximately every 2.5 days left uncontrolled, takes approx 7 days to manifest symptons and then perhaps another 13 to die. You're always behind the 8 ball on this one, so you need to make decisions as if you're 20 to 25 days in the future with approx 3000 times more cases than you have at the moment. One thing I'll give the Gov't credit for is the lockdown has seemed fair and sensible though I worry it's a bit of a white collar lockdown with infection amongst warehouse staff etc continuing at a greater rate. Since R in any subgroup is exponential you need to have as much locked off as possible.
Morning all,
Anyone know what is happening with construction? There is a fairly big flats project not too far from me that has stopped. Yet I hear reports that other projects are carrying on.
The early government response was confusing. It seemed driven by ideology more than science. Some weird contortion the British didn’t accept enforced rules. Restrictions were voluntary advice and ineffective if not actually counter productive.
Good. Excellent. We’re not that sort of country.
And this lockdown is fucking shit. The later it starts and sooner it’s over - the better.
Silly. Early government policy actually created an incentive for people to go out. May hay whilst the sun shines.
No, the Government were progressively increasing restrictions as the crisis developed and evidence changed. They were doing it on the basis of absolute necessity only.
Entirely correct.
"the crisis developed and evidence changed. "
It was known that the virus doubles its hosts approximately every 2.5 days left uncontrolled, takes approx 7 days to manifest symptons and then perhaps another 13 to die. You're always behind the 8 ball on this one, so you need to make decisions as if you're 20 to 25 days in the future with approx 3000 times more cases than you have at the moment. One thing I'll give the Gov't credit for is the lockdown has seemed fair and sensible though I worry it's a bit of a white collar lockdown with infection amongst warehouse staff etc continuing at a greater rate. Since R in any subgroup is exponential you need to have as much locked off as possible.
Not the only vector though. Public opinion/acceptance, economic damage, risk tolerance and political appetite are all factors that vary in each country. And the analysis of infections has also been subject to change from the academics at Imperial and Oxford so it’s not been consistently black and white.
The Government was following a restrict as little as possible, and only as much and as long as we must, approach - which is exactly where I’m at.
The early government response was confusing. It seemed driven by ideology more than science. Some weird contortion the British didn’t accept enforced rules. Restrictions were voluntary advice and ineffective if not actually counter productive.
Good. Excellent. We’re not that sort of country.
And this lockdown is fucking shit. The later it starts and sooner it’s over - the better.
Silly. Early government policy actually created an incentive for people to go out. May hay whilst the sun shines.
No, the Government were progressively increasing restrictions as the crisis developed and evidence changed. They were doing it on the basis of absolute necessity only.
Entirely correct.
That's my memory of early to mid March as well. The current lockdown came on the Monday after that warm weekend. There was two weeks of gradually built up measures preceding it.
And, again, you look at the data and, practically, all the western European countries are tracking very, very similar paths; that is unless they've absolutely ballsed it up and are looking at their health care system simply not coping.
EDIT - added a 'practically', just for the "but what about" crew. You know who you are, lads, your cards been marked.
I have several Conservative friends who think the Govt's handling of this has been 'shambolic' and that Johnson is 'unfit' to lead such a crisis. They are surprised that I've been more pro.
The decision to allow Cheltenham to go ahead was frankly unbelievable.
I’m very grateful that Boris saw a lockdown as a last resort, and only went there when he had to do so.
Entirely right, in my view.
Asking organizers to cancel large events, closing pubs, asking people to work from home where appropriate, quarantine requirements for people arriving from places with a lot of contagious people - none of these constitute a lockdown.
A lockdown is what you're getting because less disruptive things weren't done when there was time, and the government's run out of runway.
I know what a lockdown is. So your first paragraph is unnecessary. It started at 8.30pm on Monday 23rd March.
What would you have suggested instead and when?
As far as I can tell you’ve been arguing for a lockdown (vociferously) since day one.
I don't know where you're getting that from, I don't think I've ever argued for a lockdown here (although by the time the UK did it was probably the right thing to do, I don't disagree with it now that they are where they are).
What I've been saying the UK government should have done early (and I was saying this early) is the same kind of thing the Japanese government did, at a similar point on the trajectory: Start by *asking* people to work from home where practical and cancel events and avoid social gatherings. (Follow up with coercion if necessary.) Bring in quarantine requirements for people arriving from contagious places. Maybe close schools (not sure, that's complicated as it depends where the kids go instead.) IIRC Japan did this when they were at about 200 cases, which in the UK case would have been around the first week of March, certainly well before the Liverpool-Madrid match.
The early government response was confusing. It seemed driven by ideology more than science. Some weird contortion the British didn’t accept enforced rules. Restrictions were voluntary advice and ineffective if not actually counter productive.
I disagree about the early response being confusing. They talked a lot about escalating measures as things developed and that's what they did. People then claimed u turn and confusion when measures were escalated as things developed.
There have been communication missteps in this crisis, but theres also been a lot of claims of confusion even when the messaging was clear
And on the fundamental point of restrictions advice seems to have been followed not ideological whims.
The government was slow to spot the danger, slow to warm up the public to the danger and slow to take the necessary measures to lock down. It has been slow at procurement and slow to put into place the financial measures required.
On all fronts it eventually did the right thing. The cost of this government’s lethargy has yet to be calculated.
The UK government’s handling of the crisis - health-wise and economic - has been mainstream European. What’s happened here is pretty much what’s happened across the continent. It’s fascinating to see all the criticisms here are exactly the ones being levelled at other governments. Everyone was too complacent for too long, everyone has taken stringent action subsequently, everyone is discovering that decisions previously taken are becoming millstones, everyone is thanking God that Donald Trump is not in charge.
I did a thread header on the subject on 19 February:
"If you aren’t worried, you haven’t been paying attention."
My final line was:
"Those of us who are not experts must hope that those who are find a way to keep Covid-19 tamed. The alternatives are just awful."
The first Cobra meeting on the subject was held on 2 March.
I was no great seer (though as a treat I will let you see which poster commented "Alastair Meeks has turned into a cross between Eeyore and Private Fraser"). I was simply commenting on what had been widely reported on. Yet the government seems to have been altogether too casual about an obvious threat.
I agree that it was not the only government to make that mistake. That should not absolve it.
The early government response was confusing. It seemed driven by ideology more than science. Some weird contortion the British didn’t accept enforced rules. Restrictions were voluntary advice and ineffective if not actually counter productive.
Good. Excellent. We’re not that sort of country.
And this lockdown is fucking shit. The later it starts and sooner it’s over - the better.
I think the answer to this problem is government-funded Summer Camps for all the people so eager to get and spread the virus and create herd immunity.
The Government certainly need an exit strategy (very soon) for less vulnerable people.
There will always be risk though. Even if one or two younger people die after it (purely by statistical fluke) whilst millions are fine headlines galore will ensue so the Government needs to be careful about managing that message on reasonable risk.
Of course it depends what you mean by "younger". Based on the Italian figures, about 10% of the deaths would be of people under 65.
The early government response was confusing. It seemed driven by ideology more than science. Some weird contortion the British didn’t accept enforced rules. Restrictions were voluntary advice and ineffective if not actually counter productive.
Good. Excellent. We’re not that sort of country.
And this lockdown is fucking shit. The later it starts and sooner it’s over - the better.
Silly. Early government policy actually created an incentive for people to go out. May hay whilst the sun shines.
No, the Government were progressively increasing restrictions as the crisis developed and evidence changed. They were doing it on the basis of absolute necessity only.
Entirely correct.
"the crisis developed and evidence changed. "
It was known that the virus doubles its hosts approximately every 2.5 days left uncontrolled, takes approx 7 days to manifest symptons and then perhaps another 13 to die. You're always behind the 8 ball on this one, so you need to make decisions as if you're 20 to 25 days in the future with approx 3000 times more cases than you have at the moment. One thing I'll give the Gov't credit for is the lockdown has seemed fair and sensible though I worry it's a bit of a white collar lockdown with infection amongst warehouse staff etc continuing at a greater rate. Since R in any subgroup is exponential you need to have as much locked off as possible.
Morning all,
Anyone know what is happening with construction? There is a fairly big flats project not too far from me that has stopped. Yet I hear reports that other projects are carrying on.
The site near me decided to stop and make safe on the 27th March
A fair number of people were saying it at the time! The Italian lockdown started on March 9th, 2 days before the clip I posted with the PM.
Still, the government did admit that it got it wrong initially, even before PM, CMO and Health Secretary all came down with it.
Britain has stood out from most of Europe in two respects - the initial flirtation with herd immunity (and hence slower move to lockdown) and the wooliness of the advice. We are over a week into lockdown and the rules are still neither clear nor being consistently enforced. The testing strategy remains difficult to grasp. And if there is a post-lockdown economic strategy to prepare for - even without specific dates - we have literally no clue what it is.
Most of the time, Boris does very well in being amicably non-specific - he's a broad brush politician, happiest with simple mantras. That can work if you are surrounded by policy-makers focused on detail. But at the moment, a unique opportunity of a virtually united nation ready to follow a clear path is being squandered by the failure to provide one.
The early government response was confusing. It seemed driven by ideology more than science. Some weird contortion the British didn’t accept enforced rules. Restrictions were voluntary advice and ineffective if not actually counter productive.
Good. Excellent. We’re not that sort of country.
And this lockdown is fucking shit. The later it starts and sooner it’s over - the better.
Silly. Early government policy actually created an incentive for people to go out. May hay whilst the sun shines.
No, the Government were progressively increasing restrictions as the crisis developed and evidence changed. They were doing it on the basis of absolute necessity only.
Entirely correct.
We have always been at war with Eastasia...
Uncalled for allegation. The government really did say it would introduce more and stricter measures as things changed. Let's say that approach was wrong, that doesnt mean someone who correctly states that approach is comparable to a blind follower of Ingsoc.
3 weeks seems like years ago on the current timelines, things change so quickly. The next day the Football leagues suspended their fixtures.
Yes, smug fucks were confidently stating that because of science mass sporting events should go ahead as they were far less likely to spread corona virus than any other activity on Earth and shutting down schools would be counter productive.
I see swords made before 1954 are fine. I might start carrying my Crimean era RN Officer's sword with its Toledo blade and full patent solid hilt at all times.
The early government response was confusing. It seemed driven by ideology more than science. Some weird contortion the British didn’t accept enforced rules. Restrictions were voluntary advice and ineffective if not actually counter productive.
Good. Excellent. We’re not that sort of country.
And this lockdown is fucking shit. The later it starts and sooner it’s over - the better.
Silly. Early government policy actually created an incentive for people to go out. May hay whilst the sun shines.
No, the Government were progressively increasing restrictions as the crisis developed and evidence changed. They were doing it on the basis of absolute necessity only.
Entirely correct.
"the crisis developed and evidence changed. "
It was known that the virus doubles its hosts approximately every 2.5 days left uncontrolled, takes approx 7 days to manifest symptons and then perhaps another 13 to die. You're always behind the 8 ball on this one, so you need to make decisions as if you're 20 to 25 days in the future with approx 3000 times more cases than you have at the moment. One thing I'll give the Gov't credit for is the lockdown has seemed fair and sensible though I worry it's a bit of a white collar lockdown with infection amongst warehouse staff etc continuing at a greater rate. Since R in any subgroup is exponential you need to have as much locked off as possible.
Morning all,
Anyone know what is happening with construction? There is a fairly big flats project not too far from me that has stopped. Yet I hear reports that other projects are carrying on.
A project near here, on a greenfield site has stopped. The farmer, current owner, has been told he can plough and plant.
The early government response was confusing. It seemed driven by ideology more than science. Some weird contortion the British didn’t accept enforced rules. Restrictions were voluntary advice and ineffective if not actually counter productive.
Good. Excellent. We’re not that sort of country.
And this lockdown is fucking shit. The later it starts and sooner it’s over - the better.
Silly. Early government policy actually created an incentive for people to go out. May hay whilst the sun shines.
No, the Government were progressively increasing restrictions as the crisis developed and evidence changed. They were doing it on the basis of absolute necessity only.
Entirely correct.
"the crisis developed and evidence changed. "
It was known that the virus doubles its hosts approximately every 2.5 days left uncontrolled, takes approx 7 days to manifest symptons and then perhaps another 13 to die. You're always behind the 8 ball on this one, so you need to make decisions as if you're 20 to 25 days in the future with approx 3000 times more cases than you have at the moment. One thing I'll give the Gov't credit for is the lockdown has seemed fair and sensible though I worry it's a bit of a white collar lockdown with infection amongst warehouse staff etc continuing at a greater rate. Since R in any subgroup is exponential you need to have as much locked off as possible.
Morning all,
Anyone know what is happening with construction? There is a fairly big flats project not too far from me that has stopped. Yet I hear reports that other projects are carrying on.
The site near me decided to stop and make safe on the 27th March
There are three empty buildings near me where the teams of builders have disappeared, but each has one craftsman working in there alone. I assume a subcontractor who has been allowed to get on with his specialism while the site is clear.
The early government response was confusing. It seemed driven by ideology more than science. Some weird contortion the British didn’t accept enforced rules. Restrictions were voluntary advice and ineffective if not actually counter productive.
Good. Excellent. We’re not that sort of country.
And this lockdown is fucking shit. The later it starts and sooner it’s over - the better.
Silly. Early government policy actually created an incentive for people to go out. May hay whilst the sun shines.
No, the Government were progressively increasing restrictions as the crisis developed and evidence changed. They were doing it on the basis of absolute necessity only.
Entirely correct.
"the crisis developed and evidence changed. "
It was known that the virus doubles its hosts approximately every 2.5 days left uncontrolled, takes approx 7 days to manifest symptons and then perhaps another 13 to die. You're always behind the 8 ball on this one, so you need to make decisions as if you're 20 to 25 days in the future with approx 3000 times more cases than you have at the moment. One thing I'll give the Gov't credit for is the lockdown has seemed fair and sensible though I worry it's a bit of a white collar lockdown with infection amongst warehouse staff etc continuing at a greater rate. Since R in any subgroup is exponential you need to have as much locked off as possible.
Morning all,
Anyone know what is happening with construction? There is a fairly big flats project not too far from me that has stopped. Yet I hear reports that other projects are carrying on.
Railway projects are continuing if Network Rail are the client (not TfL). This has been hampered as some Tier 2s have stood down staff until full risk assessments are in place.
I have several Conservative friends who think the Govt's handling of this has been 'shambolic' and that Johnson is 'unfit' to lead such a crisis. They are surprised that I've been more pro.
The decision to allow Cheltenham to go ahead was frankly unbelievable.
I’m very grateful that Boris saw a lockdown as a last resort, and only went there when he had to do so.
Entirely right, in my view.
Asking organizers to cancel large events, closing pubs, asking people to work from home where appropriate, quarantine requirements for people arriving from places with a lot of contagious people - none of these constitute a lockdown.
A lockdown is what you're getting because less disruptive things weren't done when there was time, and the government's run out of runway.
I know what a lockdown is. So your first paragraph is unnecessary. It started at 8.30pm on Monday 23rd March.
What would you have suggested instead and when?
As far as I can tell you’ve been arguing for a lockdown (vociferously) since day one.
I don't know where you're getting that from, I don't think I've ever argued for a lockdown here (although by the time the UK did it was probably the right thing to do, I don't disagree with it now that they are where they are).
What I've been saying the UK government should have done early (and I was saying this early) is the same kind of thing the Japanese government did, at a similar point on the trajectory: Start by *asking* people to work from home where practical and cancel events and avoid social gatherings. (Follow up with coercion if necessary.) Bring in quarantine requirements for people arriving from contagious places. Maybe close schools (not sure, that's complicated as it depends where the kids go instead.) IIRC Japan did this when they were at about 200 cases, which in the UK case would have been around the first week of March, certainly well before the Liverpool-Madrid match.
As per last thread, although the papers are critical of Cheltenham, there is still not much evidence of a spike -- the three celebrities struck down might be only two since Lee Mack says he caught it from the driver who took him to Cheltenham each day. Of course, with no testing (or contact tracing) it is hard to be certain. The question of whether there is a difference between indoor and outdoor events was raised at the regular press conferences this week.
Good morning team. First off feeling very shamed about @Richard_Nabavi's list of cultural events watched. Number of suchlike for me: zero.
Second on Cheltenham. Was it a mass infecting event? No idea. Of all the people I know who went, and all the people I met in close proximity after I returned, none have it. Or all had it asymptomatically.
But that's just an anecdote so who knows what the numbers really are.
At what point are you out the woods from getting I’ll from Cheltenham, it was nearly 4 weeks ago.
The government was slow to spot the danger, slow to warm up the public to the danger and slow to take the necessary measures to lock down. It has been slow at procurement and slow to put into place the financial measures required.
On all fronts it eventually did the right thing. The cost of this government’s lethargy has yet to be calculated.
The UK government’s handling of the crisis - health-wise and economic - has been mainstream European. What’s happened here is pretty much what’s happened across the continent. It’s fascinating to see all the criticisms here are exactly the ones being levelled at other governments. Everyone was too complacent for too long, everyone has taken stringent action subsequently, everyone is discovering that decisions previously taken are becoming millstones, everyone is thanking God that Donald Trump is not in charge.
I did a thread header on the subject on 19 February:
"If you aren’t worried, you haven’t been paying attention."
My final line was:
"Those of us who are not experts must hope that those who are find a way to keep Covid-19 tamed. The alternatives are just awful."
The first Cobra meeting on the subject was held on 2 March.
I was no great seer (though as a treat I will let you see which poster commented "Alastair Meeks has turned into a cross between Eeyore and Private Fraser"). I was simply commenting on what had been widely reported on. Yet the government seems to have been altogether too casual about an obvious threat.
I agree that it was not the only government to make that mistake. That should not absolve it.
Its a bad business when even lawyers can see the implications of the maths more clearly than the government.
The early government response was confusing. It seemed driven by ideology more than science. Some weird contortion the British didn’t accept enforced rules. Restrictions were voluntary advice and ineffective if not actually counter productive.
Good. Excellent. We’re not that sort of country.
And this lockdown is fucking shit. The later it starts and sooner it’s over - the better.
Silly. Early government policy actually created an incentive for people to go out. May hay whilst the sun shines.
It really did not. And a lot of people were restricting themselves before lockdown even though not all were.
Did the policy encourage and warn people to stay in enough? Perhaps not - theres clearly a case to be made they should have been harder faster. But its perverse to claim it encouraged the opposite.
And, again, you look at the data and, practically, all the western European countries are tracking very, very similar paths; that is unless they've absolutely ballsed it up and are looking at their health care system simply not coping.
EDIT - added a 'practically', just for the "but what about" crew. You know who you are, lads, your cards been marked.
An important point. Until there is a significant and enduring difference in path between the various western democracies, we are all p***ing in the wind opining on the merits of each country's approach.
The government was slow to spot the danger, slow to warm up the public to the danger and slow to take the necessary measures to lock down. It has been slow at procurement and slow to put into place the financial measures required.
On all fronts it eventually did the right thing. The cost of this government’s lethargy has yet to be calculated.
The UK government’s handling of the crisis - health-wise and economic - has been mainstream European. What’s happened here is pretty much what’s happened across the continent. It’s fascinating to see all the criticisms here are exactly the ones being levelled at other governments. Everyone was too complacent for too long, everyone has taken stringent action subsequently, everyone is discovering that decisions previously taken are becoming millstones, everyone is thanking God that Donald Trump is not in charge.
I did a thread header on the subject on 19 February:
"If you aren’t worried, you haven’t been paying attention."
My final line was:
"Those of us who are not experts must hope that those who are find a way to keep Covid-19 tamed. The alternatives are just awful."
The first Cobra meeting on the subject was held on 2 March.
I was no great seer (though as a treat I will let you see which poster commented "Alastair Meeks has turned into a cross between Eeyore and Private Fraser"). I was simply commenting on what had been widely reported on. Yet the government seems to have been altogether too casual about an obvious threat.
I agree that it was not the only government to make that mistake. That should not absolve it.
If the government has made any mistakes they are in the area of not learning from other countries given they had a ten day cushion. The shut down could have been sooner and could have been stricter but maybe it was policy?
3 weeks seems like years ago on the current timelines, things change so quickly. The next day the Football leagues suspended their fixtures.
Yes, smug fucks were confidently stating that because of science mass sporting events should go ahead as they were far less likely to spread corona virus than any other activity on Earth and shutting down schools would be counter productive.
Then someone looked at the boffins' spreadsheet, page four, cell F247 - and asked "what's this number 500,000 - in the deaths column?"
I see swords made before 1954 are fine. I might start carrying my Crimean era RN Officer's sword with its Toledo blade and full patent solid hilt at all times.
I didn't know there was a date limit on swords. Makes mine legal so we can meet up for a public display of swordsmanship.
For clarity Norman should have added "..with the required level of accuracy". Hancock was explaining that less reliable tests would cause as many problems as they solve, and he wants to avoid sending false positives into danger as far as is possible.
The early government response was confusing. It seemed driven by ideology more than science. Some weird contortion the British didn’t accept enforced rules. Restrictions were voluntary advice and ineffective if not actually counter productive.
Good. Excellent. We’re not that sort of country.
And this lockdown is fucking shit. The later it starts and sooner it’s over - the better.
Silly. Early government policy actually created an incentive for people to go out. May hay whilst the sun shines.
No, the Government were progressively increasing restrictions as the crisis developed and evidence changed. They were doing it on the basis of absolute necessity only.
Entirely correct.
"the crisis developed and evidence changed. "
It was known that the virus doubles its hosts approximately every 2.5 days left uncontrolled, takes approx 7 days to manifest symptons and then perhaps another 13 to die. You're always behind the 8 ball on this one, so you need to make decisions as if you're 20 to 25 days in the future with approx 3000 times more cases than you have at the moment. One thing I'll give the Gov't credit for is the lockdown has seemed fair and sensible though I worry it's a bit of a white collar lockdown with infection amongst warehouse staff etc continuing at a greater rate. Since R in any subgroup is exponential you need to have as much locked off as possible.
Morning all,
Anyone know what is happening with construction? There is a fairly big flats project not too far from me that has stopped. Yet I hear reports that other projects are carrying on.
The site near me decided to stop and make safe on the 27th March
There are three empty buildings near me where the teams of builders have disappeared, but each has one craftsman working in there alone. I assume a subcontractor who has been allowed to get on with his specialism while the site is clear.
Perfect, a completely socially distanced job carrying on - precisely the way the non key worker economy should work through this.
I see swords made before 1954 are fine. I might start carrying my Crimean era RN Officer's sword with its Toledo blade and full patent solid hilt at all times.
I didn't know there was a date limit on swords. Makes mine legal so we can meet up for a public display of swordsmanship.
Although he has from day one been accusing the U.K. govt (and other western Govt’s, when pushed) of failing to follow approaches of Asian Govt’s. Although given that Korean/Japanese/ Chinese approaches seem to have been vastly different, whether on lockdowns or testing it wasn’t exactly easy to pick a consistent example to follow!
Yes, the lessons don't necessarily translate *directly* from one country to another, but all the countries that have been seeing any success seem to have restricted social gatherings and encouraged working from home early on. (Maybe Singapore didn't do WFH, not sure?) They've also closed schools and other non-essential public facilities, although the schools part is complicated.
South Korea seems like the poster child for a non-authoritarian response; I don't know whether or not the UK could have logistically done all the testing they've done. I think Japan is a good example of what the UK could have done because they got results even though the implementation was often quite incompetent - with the exception of the contact tracing effort, which is something where the UK also sounds like it was doing well. The results aren't as good as SK and it could still easily all go horribly wrong, but the benefits in controlling the disease are very striking and the disruption is pretty minimal compared to where the UK has ended up.
For clarity Norman should have added "..with the required level of accuracy". Hancock was explaining that less reliable tests would cause as many problems as they solve, and he wants to avoid sending false positives into danger as far as is possible.
Required level of accuracy is just detail, it's better to have a short clear cut answer and leave it at that.
I see swords made before 1954 are fine. I might start carrying my Crimean era RN Officer's sword with its Toledo blade and full patent solid hilt at all times.
I didn't know there was a date limit on swords. Makes mine legal so we can meet up for a public display of swordsmanship.
That's good news, means the Gov't is testing fast. We need things to break quickly in this one.
I agree. The main take out from yesterday was no test better than a bad test. All sorts of junk being pushed in the lobby, all sorts of pressure being on to accept it. Media showing league tables of lagging behind with No nuance of the control and quality behind the numbers.
Hancock was good, Hancocks sure and confident performance as well as the 100,000 day pledge seems to have deprived ongoing newspaper and media assault of oxygen. Only the mirror whinging end of month is long way away.
The issue though is Germany scaling back testing because its rationing reagent, U.K. government may struggle to meet this pledge.
The government have won the testing war for now though.
3 weeks seems like years ago on the current timelines, things change so quickly. The next day the Football leagues suspended their fixtures.
Yes, smug fucks were confidently stating that because of science mass sporting events should go ahead as they were far less likely to spread corona virus than any other activity on Earth and shutting down schools would be counter productive.
Actually, they were arguing that holding the events without an audience - which was the Italian Serie A approach at the time - would be counter-productive in the UK, given that people would crowd into front rooms and pubs to watch. Banning the events altogether came later, even in Italy which at the time was the non-Chinese epicentre.
I see swords made before 1954 are fine. I might start carrying my Crimean era RN Officer's sword with its Toledo blade and full patent solid hilt at all times.
I didn't know there was a date limit on swords. Makes mine legal so we can meet up for a public display of swordsmanship.
For clarity Norman should have added "..with the required level of accuracy". Hancock was explaining that less reliable tests would cause as many problems as they solve, and he wants to avoid sending false positives into danger as far as is possible.
That's really poor from Norman actually to report it as such. When will journalists learn that now is not the time for misleading tweets.
And, again, you look at the data and, practically, all the western European countries are tracking very, very similar paths; that is unless they've absolutely ballsed it up and are looking at their health care system simply not coping.
EDIT - added a 'practically', just for the "but what about" crew. You know who you are, lads, your cards been marked.
An important point. Until there is a significant and enduring difference in path between the various western democracies, we are all p***ing in the wind opining on the merits of each country's approach.
Yes, I dont get the strand of thought of criticising deviations from the 'normal' approach and X did Y at Z. Unless we think we could have matched South Korea theres not much in it in terms of response sadly so the uniquely poor messaging etc points seem premature to me, and for the moment improbable though if we remain wordecas others improve that will be different.
I see swords made before 1954 are fine. I might start carrying my Crimean era RN Officer's sword with its Toledo blade and full patent solid hilt at all times.
I think that's legal to sell or buy, not legal to carry without cause.
(Personally I was wondering whether it would be legal to shoot one of those feral goats for the freezer in my back garden, were I to have a suitable back garden and a suitable rifle in Llandudno.)
The early government response was confusing. It seemed driven by ideology more than science. Some weird contortion the British didn’t accept enforced rules. Restrictions were voluntary advice and ineffective if not actually counter productive.
Good. Excellent. We’re not that sort of country.
And this lockdown is fucking shit. The later it starts and sooner it’s over - the better.
Silly. Early government policy actually created an incentive for people to go out. May hay whilst the sun shines.
No, the Government were progressively increasing restrictions as the crisis developed and evidence changed. They were doing it on the basis of absolute necessity only.
Entirely correct.
"the crisis developed and evidence changed. "
It was known that the virus doubles its hosts approximately every 2.5 days left uncontrolled, takes approx 7 days to manifest symptons and then perhaps another 13 to die. You're always behind the 8 ball on this one, so you need to make decisions as if you're 20 to 25 days in the future with approx 3000 times more cases than you have at the moment. One thing I'll give the Gov't credit for is the lockdown has seemed fair and sensible though I worry it's a bit of a white collar lockdown with infection amongst warehouse staff etc continuing at a greater rate. Since R in any subgroup is exponential you need to have as much locked off as possible.
Morning all,
Anyone know what is happening with construction? There is a fairly big flats project not too far from me that has stopped. Yet I hear reports that other projects are carrying on.
Construction has all but stopped, despite this being entirely against the Governments wishes. Thousands of companies are going to close. The thread header is in fact nonsense. What will define Boris will be the economic devastation that is going to happen over the coming years. In a month lots of people will start running out of money. Supermarkets, a growth industry industry in this crisis, are so different now to just last week. Shelves are full and the shops are empty. The "cure" to Covid-19 will be disastrous.
You don't need to have good reason to carry a legal penknife (folding blade with a cutting edge 3 inches long or less).
We are arguing at cross purposes.
I carry a legal knife so I don't have to debate with some busybody in a uniform. I would carry a locking knife, as it is safer, but I don't because I would then need to be able to justify having it.
In my experience busybodies in uniforms lack common sense.
The early government response was confusing. It seemed driven by ideology more than science. Some weird contortion the British didn’t accept enforced rules. Restrictions were voluntary advice and ineffective if not actually counter productive.
Good. Excellent. We’re not that sort of country.
And this lockdown is fucking shit. The later it starts and sooner it’s over - the better.
Silly. Early government policy actually created an incentive for people to go out. May hay whilst the sun shines.
No, the Government were progressively increasing restrictions as the crisis developed and evidence changed. They were doing it on the basis of absolute necessity only.
Entirely correct.
"the crisis developed and evidence changed. "
It was known that the virus doubles its hosts approximately every 2.5 days left uncontrolled, takes approx 7 days to manifest symptons and then perhaps another 13 to die. You're always behind the 8 ball on this one, so you need to make decisions as if you're 20 to 25 days in the future with approx 3000 times more cases than you have at the moment. One thing I'll give the Gov't credit for is the lockdown has seemed fair and sensible though I worry it's a bit of a white collar lockdown with infection amongst warehouse staff etc continuing at a greater rate. Since R is exponential you need to have as much locked off as possible.
I argued for the same things as you (banning Cheltenham and the Athletico match, banning flights from Italy or at least having a quarantine for anyone foolish enough to go there) at the same time. It was obvious. Whether the virus would have spread anyway is a moot point. What I find more interesting is why the government was so slow. I think that it is because far too many of our politicians and too much of our Civil Service is basically innumerate. They are not stupid, they can get the point, the obvious consequences of exponential growth were not adequately obvious to them.
I have argued on here before that we must develop a system of governance that gets the importance of maths. It will result in better, quicker decisions. It will respond more quickly to events (which in fairness the government has once the numerate CSO and CMO were given key rolls). Cummings was right about this. His advert highlighted the problem with our government and what we need to do to change it.
He CSO and CMO were amongst the people saying there was no point banning sporting events as people would just go to the pub instead like they were aliens who assumed people travelled to a match by themselves then promptly left for home individually when final whistle went.
You have to wonder, how many lives did Mikel Arteta save. ~
It was his +ve test that postponed the Arsenal match which convened the meeting of Prem clubs, which led to the closure of the Prem, which snowballed into other sport, which (in my view) moved the Gov't quicker than it otherwise might have to stopping pretty much all sport and then onto the current lockdown.
3 weeks seems like years ago on the current timelines, things change so quickly. The next day the Football leagues suspended their fixtures.
Yes, smug fucks were confidently stating that because of science mass sporting events should go ahead as they were far less likely to spread corona virus than any other activity on Earth and shutting down schools would be counter productive.
Correct question is, do mass sporting events spread coronavirus *more* than ohter activities? There were no real restrictions on anything at that point and it's not clear that Cheltenham etc were worse than other things those people might have been doing at that time. Possibly more geographical spread, but then people were still free to wander all over the country visiting friends and relatives, travelling for work. I'm not convinced (still) that Cheltenham alone going ahead or being cancelled made much difference.
With hindsight, the lockdown should perhaps have come sooner, but that's easy to say now. It's not easy to deliberately crash your economy when you think there might still be another way.
Other actions, such as encouraging home working could perhaps have come sooner.
Carrying a knife with a locking blade is banned in the UK (yes, stupid law).
Only when carried without good reason.
I carry a (legal) penknife all the time. How can I argue good reason?
I may start carrying an Easter egg, just to get the rozzers really annoyed...
Agree with that. Nutty rule since locking blades make the tool safer. A silly precedent from a decision by a silly magistrate and a silly judge 20 years ago, which was clearly against the intention of Parliament.
Which then became a convenient precedent to be clutched at.
3 weeks seems like years ago on the current timelines, things change so quickly. The next day the Football leagues suspended their fixtures.
Yes, smug fucks were confidently stating that because of science mass sporting events should go ahead as they were far less likely to spread corona virus than any other activity on Earth and shutting down schools would be counter productive.
Correct question is, do mass sporting events spread coronavirus *more* than ohter activities? There were no real restrictions on anything at that point and it's not clear that Cheltenham etc were worse than other things those people might have been doing at that time. Possibly more geographical spread, but then people were still free to wander all over the country visiting friends and relatives, travelling for work. I'm not convinced (still) that Cheltenham alone going ahead or being cancelled made much difference.
With hindsight, the lockdown should perhaps have come sooner, but that's easy to say now. It's not easy to deliberately crash your economy when you think there might still be another way.
Other actions, such as encouraging home working could perhaps have come sooner.
The Cheltenham festival stuff is silly, tubes and trains were still running and full. Thats people on top of eachother inside a tight carriage.
3 weeks seems like years ago on the current timelines, things change so quickly. The next day the Football leagues suspended their fixtures.
Yes, smug fucks were confidently stating that because of science mass sporting events should go ahead as they were far less likely to spread corona virus than any other activity on Earth and shutting down schools would be counter productive.
Correct question is, do mass sporting events spread coronavirus *more* than ohter activities? There were no real restrictions on anything at that point and it's not clear that Cheltenham etc were worse than other things those people might have been doing at that time. Possibly more geographical spread, but then people were still free to wander all over the country visiting friends and relatives, travelling for work. I'm not convinced (still) that Cheltenham alone going ahead or being cancelled made much difference.
With hindsight, the lockdown should perhaps have come sooner, but that's easy to say now. It's not easy to deliberately crash your economy when you think there might still be another way.
Other actions, such as encouraging home working could perhaps have come sooner.
If everyone worked from home a month earlier, but was still going to their local and their favourite restaurant - not sure that helps much.
3 weeks seems like years ago on the current timelines, things change so quickly. The next day the Football leagues suspended their fixtures.
Yes, smug fucks were confidently stating that because of science mass sporting events should go ahead as they were far less likely to spread corona virus than any other activity on Earth and shutting down schools would be counter productive.
Correct question is, do mass sporting events spread coronavirus *more* than ohter activities? There were no real restrictions on anything at that point and it's not clear that Cheltenham etc were worse than other things those people might have been doing at that time. Possibly more geographical spread, but then people were still free to wander all over the country visiting friends and relatives, travelling for work. I'm not convinced (still) that Cheltenham alone going ahead or being cancelled made much difference.
With hindsight, the lockdown should perhaps have come sooner, but that's easy to say now. It's not easy to deliberately crash your economy when you think there might still be another way.
Other actions, such as encouraging home working could perhaps have come sooner.
The Cheltenham festival stuff is silly, tubes and trains were still running and full. Thats people on top of eachother inside a tight carriage.
You either want a full tube service or none at all, a restricted one is the worst of all worlds.
I see swords made before 1954 are fine. I might start carrying my Crimean era RN Officer's sword with its Toledo blade and full patent solid hilt at all times.
I didn't know there was a date limit on swords. Makes mine legal so we can meet up for a public display of swordsmanship.
I see swords made before 1954 are fine. I might start carrying my Crimean era RN Officer's sword with its Toledo blade and full patent solid hilt at all times.
I think that's legal to sell or buy, not legal to carry without cause.
(Personally I was wondering whether it would be legal to shoot one of those feral goats for the freezer in my back garden, were I to have a suitable back garden and a suitable rifle in Llandudno.)
Speak nicely to Big_G. He might bag one for you, as it nibbles his petunias....
US covid19 stimulus payments going out, if printing money and giving it directly to the voters turns out to be as popular as it sounds we could see a lot more of it in the future...
A tongue in cheek tweet judging by the payments shown.
Is there difference between US and U.K. mechanism for getting money to people? Trump personally signing check to each voter... furloughed person, dropped straight into their mail can? What’s the U.K. equivalent?
US covid19 stimulus payments going out, if printing money and giving it directly to the voters turns out to be as popular as it sounds we could see a lot more of it in the future...
A tongue in cheek tweet judging by the payments shown.
Is there difference between US and U.K. mechanism for getting money to people? Trump personally signing check to each voter... furloughed person, dropped straight into their mail can? What’s the U.K. equivalent?
There is still no website for companies to claim Furlough. If this does not happen very quickly then people will not be getting paid.
3 weeks seems like years ago on the current timelines, things change so quickly. The next day the Football leagues suspended their fixtures.
Yes, smug fucks were confidently stating that because of science mass sporting events should go ahead as they were far less likely to spread corona virus than any other activity on Earth and shutting down schools would be counter productive.
Correct question is, do mass sporting events spread coronavirus *more* than ohter activities? There were no real restrictions on anything at that point and it's not clear that Cheltenham etc were worse than other things those people might have been doing at that time. Possibly more geographical spread, but then people were still free to wander all over the country visiting friends and relatives, travelling for work. I'm not convinced (still) that Cheltenham alone going ahead or being cancelled made much difference.
With hindsight, the lockdown should perhaps have come sooner, but that's easy to say now. It's not easy to deliberately crash your economy when you think there might still be another way.
Other actions, such as encouraging home working could perhaps have come sooner.
If everyone worked from home a month earlier, but was still going to their local and their favourite restaurant - not sure that helps much.
Yep, almost added that, then thought I'd gone on long enough
If you encourage home working, how do you justify not closing bars, pubs, restaurants, closing schools? If you do all of those (particularly schools) then you've significantly damaged your economy already due to reduced productivity (if working at all) of working parents caring for kids at home.
@AlastairMeeks I'm glad Starmer is going to win the Labour election. Nandy would have been better if not much had been happening but we're in the biggest crisis since World War II so need someone ready to start opposing effectively immediately.
Is there difference between US and U.K. mechanism for getting money to people? Trump personally signing check to each voter... furloughed person, dropped straight into their mail can? What’s the U.K. equivalent?
Johnson promising cash that turns out to be XBox Live points delivered 6 months late.
I see swords made before 1954 are fine. I might start carrying my Crimean era RN Officer's sword with its Toledo blade and full patent solid hilt at all times.
I think that's legal to sell or buy, not legal to carry without cause.
(Personally I was wondering whether it would be legal to shoot one of those feral goats for the freezer in my back garden, were I to have a suitable back garden and a suitable rifle in Llandudno.)
Speak nicely to Big_G. He might bag one for you, as it nibbles his petunias....
Conwy Borough Council decreed on the 7th November 1996 that no goats could be shot unless they were sick or injured. So they are protected
I'm sorry has Theo seen the ballot result? I was under the impression that it was tomorrow.
Let's hope he and others aren't making a massive mistake
The polling was backed up by the CLP results which are known. It'd be staggering if Starmer didn't win. The only unknown is whether he gets in on the first ballot.
Starmer would be making a strategic mistake if he goes down that route as his first act imo. Playing the supportive statesman with gentle prodding on the medias issue of the day is where he should be for now.
You have to wonder, how many lives did Mikel Arteta save. ~
It was his +ve test that postponed the Arsenal match which convened the meeting of Prem clubs, which led to the closure of the Prem, which snowballed into other sport, which (in my view) moved the Gov't quicker than it otherwise might have to stopping pretty much all sport and then onto the current lockdown.
Nice thought. Arsenal save the world, with “that” defence
Is that an immunity certificate I see for sale on eBay?
Very very stupid idea from Hancock. Everyone between 20 and 45 will rush outside instantly to try to get the virus.
It’s a rock and hard place one. The obvious way to respond to your post is turn it round and say You are health minister what would you do then.
No certificate Just ask someone. And take their word for it. Whole load of people at a 🍗 and they all produce fake certificates when pressed.
To have certificates ie you say you lot can go out and frolic and all is well, but you lot must stay locked down is perhaps the most stupid ideas.
The way to lift it IMO as I mentioned the other day is an inkspot approach. When or if they are happy there is some measure of control (what that?) then ask people to incrementally increase their groups. Plenty of streets/floors/etc - within these units, which have gazed at each other for weeks and effectively self-isolated, there could be association, then inter-unit ie neighbouring streets, adjacent floors and so forth.
The timing could be an issue because that suggests weeks at a time but to say to one group of people you're fine while restricting another is simply not going to work and will result in the actions you point out.
I'm sorry has Theo seen the ballot result? I was under the impression that it was tomorrow.
Let's hope he and others aren't making a massive mistake
The polling was backed up by the CLP results which are known. It'd be staggering if Starmer didn't win. The only unknown is whether he gets in on the first ballot.
I'd be staggered too, but I am wary, particularly after reports of missing ballots.
US covid19 stimulus payments going out, if printing money and giving it directly to the voters turns out to be as popular as it sounds we could see a lot more of it in the future...
A tongue in cheek tweet judging by the payments shown.
Is there difference between US and U.K. mechanism for getting money to people? Trump personally signing check to each voter... furloughed person, dropped straight into their mail can? What’s the U.K. equivalent?
There is still no website for companies to claim Furlough. If this does not happen very quickly then people will not be getting paid.
It is not expected before mid to late April so plan towards start of May if you can.
For clarity Norman should have added "..with the required level of accuracy". Hancock was explaining that less reliable tests would cause as many problems as they solve, and he wants to avoid sending false positives into danger as far as is possible.
Given the purposes these tests will be used for, arguably the government should be a little more relaxed on the false positive front. If decent herd immunity kicks in at 60%, a test giving 1 in 10 false positives (which would normally be an horrendous accuracy level) probably doesn't undermine what you're trying to achieve here too much given the result of a false positive is not to proceed with a medical treatment
You don't need to have good reason to carry a legal penknife (folding blade with a cutting edge 3 inches long or less).
We are arguing at cross purposes.
I carry a legal knife so I don't have to debate with some busybody in a uniform. I would carry a locking knife, as it is safer, but I don't because I would then need to be able to justify having it.
In my experience busybodies in uniforms lack common sense.
I agree that a locking knife is safer to use, but it can be considerably more dangerous if used to stab somebody. I imagine that even a relatively short locked blade will be capable of reaching the heart or aorta and that the law has come about because of this.
US covid19 stimulus payments going out, if printing money and giving it directly to the voters turns out to be as popular as it sounds we could see a lot more of it in the future...
A tongue in cheek tweet judging by the payments shown.
Is there difference between US and U.K. mechanism for getting money to people? Trump personally signing check to each voter... furloughed person, dropped straight into their mail can? What’s the U.K. equivalent?
In regards to lockdowns, yesterday 24 days into their lockdown there were still well over 4000 new cases in Italy. Now I know that means the percentage increase is low, but that is still 4000+ new infections when people haven’t been out for 24 days.
For a variant of "haven't been out for 24 days" that included still going to bars and restaurants, of course.
The nationwaide Italian lockdown was set up in a staged manner. Restaurants and bars, for example, were still allowed to be open originally (from the lockdown on the 9th of March), as long as you stayed 1 metre apart.
It was toughened on the 11 March to closing non-essential businesses, and further toughened on 21 March to all “non-necessary” businesses (no, I’m not sure of the difference).
There were, of course, regional lockdowns prior to that (Lombardy and Northern Italy)
Deaths reported as of yesterday would have occurred the day before. So 09 March equates to reports on 03 April (ie today). 11 March equates to reports from 05 April; 21 March to reports from 15 April. (Very loosely because these are just averages. And, of course, the averages will get thrown out of whack if we get big chunks of former deaths reported on a given day (such as the France deaths in nursing homes).
Some people can not comprehend an event that doesn’t have binary blame for the bad outcome. The same people think it is the job of the government to insure them against any event.
I see the right-wing headbangers are marching in force this morning. I shall gracefully retire therefore.
Rant and rave all you like on here but you've lost this argument so you're wasting your energy. Even the tory press have called the Government to account.
As I say, I'm currently broadly supportive of the Gov't but lying about their crass mistakes demeans the integrity of your posting both now and in the future.
Have a good day everyone.
xx
Not at all Rose, the argument has at least now moved on. At least they are not all embarrassing themselves with their China bashing.
In regards to lockdowns, yesterday 24 days into their lockdown there were still well over 4000 new cases in Italy. Now I know that means the percentage increase is low, but that is still 4000+ new infections when people haven’t been out for 24 days.
For a variant of "haven't been out for 24 days" that included still going to bars and restaurants, of course.
The nationwaide Italian lockdown was set up in a staged manner. Restaurants and bars, for example, were still allowed to be open originally (from the lockdown on the 9th of March), as long as you stayed 1 metre apart.
It was toughened on the 11 March to closing non-essential businesses, and further toughened on 21 March to all “non-necessary” businesses (no, I’m not sure of the difference).
There were, of course, regional lockdowns prior to that (Lombardy and Northern Italy)
Deaths reported as of yesterday would have occurred the day before. So 09 March equates to reports on 03 April (ie today). 11 March equates to reports from 05 April; 21 March to reports from 15 April. (Very loosely because these are just averages. And, of course, the averages will get thrown out of whack if we get big chunks of former deaths reported on a given day (such as the France deaths in nursing homes).
My worry is that in 2 weeks time there will still be 4000+ plus cases in Italy. If that is the case how does a lockdown ever end?
Some people can not comprehend an event that doesn’t have binary blame for the bad outcome. The same people think it is the job of the government to insure them against any event.
I see the right-wing headbangers are marching in force this morning. I shall gracefully retire therefore.
Rant and rave all you like on here but you've lost this argument so you're wasting your energy. Even the tory press have called the Government to account.
As I say, I'm currently broadly supportive of the Gov't but lying about their crass mistakes demeans the integrity of your posting both now and in the future.
Have a good day everyone.
xx
Not at all Rose, the argument has at least now moved on. At least they are not all embarrassing themselves with their China bashing.
When all this is over you should take Rose on a wonderful holiday to Wuhan and sample the local cuisine.
The scientifically accepted wisdom was that for outdoor events, air spread is limited to those in your immediate vicinity at rest, not necessarily those you pass by briefly near the stadium, though you are at close range with many n of v those brief passes. Surface spread - handrails as you enter or exit the stadium, busy bathrooms, that seems more a thing. And more than that, transport to and from the venue.
Compare and contrast with a tube train, the crowding at an event is of people substantially going bto a common destination and fanning in from far and wide, but not fanning out until the destination. For those coming in on planes ir is massively true. This is a slightly different pattern even to central London underground, where the rotation of people you are standing next to is quite rapid - it more resembles a commute from the outskirts to the centre. You also have segregation to consider. To what extent did Athletico fans and Liverpool fans actually mingle.
Now I'm certainly not saying Cheltenham was right, or that the Bergamo to Madrid to Merseyside jump has not been made, simply that the dynamics of spread do require some thought as to how people and surfaces were involved at each location, in each circumstance from house to event and back again. The spread may not have been focussed at the time or place where the biggest crowd gathered.
There are no good outcomes for Boris as such, only really bad, worse and worst ones. But politics not an activity of absolute good and bad but one of comparative advantage. What looked like the largest obstacle, Brexit in the medium term, is now ignored as a little local difficulty.
Boris faces the risk of economic meltdown, or old (and some young) people dying without care because the system is overwhelmed, or of course both. On the evidence at least one of those is going to happen come what may. Boris has chosen like everyone else more or less, to minimise the chance of uncontrolled mass untreated deaths.
There is always a chance that a global downturn can be blamed, as Gordon Brown tried to do, on global events. That's not the case, given human nature, with mass deaths outside of war.
At the current rate of progress Boris still has a chance of being the best of bad options at the next election. To a politician that is what counts.
US covid19 stimulus payments going out, if printing money and giving it directly to the voters turns out to be as popular as it sounds we could see a lot more of it in the future...
A tongue in cheek tweet judging by the payments shown.
Is there difference between US and U.K. mechanism for getting money to people? Trump personally signing check to each voter... furloughed person, dropped straight into their mail can? What’s the U.K. equivalent?
There is still no website for companies to claim Furlough. If this does not happen very quickly then people will not be getting paid.
There are whispers that all Rishi Sunak's good work is to be undone by lamentable implementation, not unlike everything else in this Covid-19 saga.
I agree that a locking knife is safer to use, but it can be considerably more dangerous if used to stab somebody. I imagine that even a relatively short locked blade will be capable of reaching the heart or aorta and that the law has come about because of this.
But a short fixed blade is still legal. Though probably not safer for the person carrying it.
Some people can not comprehend an event that doesn’t have binary blame for the bad outcome. The same people think it is the job of the government to insure them against any event.
I see the right-wing headbangers are marching in force this morning. I shall gracefully retire therefore.
Rant and rave all you like on here but you've lost this argument so you're wasting your energy. Even the tory press have called the Government to account.
As I say, I'm currently broadly supportive of the Gov't but lying about their crass mistakes demeans the integrity of your posting both now and in the future.
Have a good day everyone.
xx
Not at all Rose, the argument has at least now moved on. At least they are not all embarrassing themselves with their China bashing.
When all this is over you should take Rose on a wonderful holiday to Wuhan and sample the local cuisine.
Some people can not comprehend an event that doesn’t have binary blame for the bad outcome. The same people think it is the job of the government to insure them against any event.
I see the right-wing headbangers are marching in force this morning. I shall gracefully retire therefore.
Rant and rave all you like on here but you've lost this argument so you're wasting your energy. Even the tory press have called the Government to account.
As I say, I'm currently broadly supportive of the Gov't but lying about their crass mistakes demeans the integrity of your posting both now and in the future.
Have a good day everyone.
xx
Not at all Rose, the argument has at least now moved on. At least they are not all embarrassing themselves with their China bashing.
When all this is over you should take Rose on a wonderful holiday to Wuhan and sample the local cuisine.
US covid19 stimulus payments going out, if printing money and giving it directly to the voters turns out to be as popular as it sounds we could see a lot more of it in the future...
A tongue in cheek tweet judging by the payments shown.
Is there difference between US and U.K. mechanism for getting money to people? Trump personally signing check to each voter... furloughed person, dropped straight into their mail can? What’s the U.K. equivalent?
There is still no website for companies to claim Furlough. If this does not happen very quickly then people will not be getting paid.
There are whispers that all Rishi Sunak's good work is to be undone by lamentable implementation, not unlike everything else in this Covid-19 saga.
As i said last week, the website to do Furlough will have to be incredible as the number of companies claiming will be in the hundreds of thousands
Starmer would be making a strategic mistake if he goes down that route as his first act imo. Playing the supportive statesman with gentle prodding on the medias issue of the day is where he should be for now.
Forensic, schmorensic. Far too much is made of this. I don't know what Starmer's reputation as an advocate was like, but he gave up advocacy quite early on in favour of the DPP role and one thing DPPs don't do, is prosecute. As an advocate he did human rights defence stuff which I imagine doesn't lend itself to brilliant Aha, we've wheedled it out of you at last sort of cross examination - more If I could take your lordship to para 453 of the 5th schedule to the Act sort of stuff. And anyway when did forensically brilliant attacks actually damage a PM? There's a sort of rule of thumb among litigators which says that 90% of cases go the way they were always going to go, 9% are lost against the run of play by legal incompetence, and 1% won by legal brilliance, and that sounds about right for politics. Whatever Johnson's downfall is, it won't be anyone getting forensic on his ass, it will be something he does or doesn't do. There will be opportunities for showpiece attacks on him as it all goes pear-shaped but they won't be what made the difference.
Plus as you say, now is not the time to be seen to be making party political attacks on the PM.
Comments
It doesn't sound to me like Japan and Korea are much different to us.
Very very stupid idea from Hancock. Everyone between 20 and 45 will rush outside instantly to try to get the virus.
I have argued on here before that we must develop a system of governance that gets the importance of maths. It will result in better, quicker decisions. It will respond more quickly to events (which in fairness the government has once the numerate CSO and CMO were given key rolls). Cummings was right about this. His advert highlighted the problem with our government and what we need to do to change it.
Anyone know what is happening with construction? There is a fairly big flats project not too far from me that has stopped. Yet I hear reports that other projects are carrying on.
The Government was following a restrict as little as possible, and only as much and as long as we must, approach - which is exactly where I’m at.
EDIT - added a 'practically', just for the "but what about" crew. You know who you are, lads, your cards been marked.
What I've been saying the UK government should have done early (and I was saying this early) is the same kind of thing the Japanese government did, at a similar point on the trajectory: Start by *asking* people to work from home where practical and cancel events and avoid social gatherings. (Follow up with coercion if necessary.) Bring in quarantine requirements for people arriving from contagious places. Maybe close schools (not sure, that's complicated as it depends where the kids go instead.) IIRC Japan did this when they were at about 200 cases, which in the UK case would have been around the first week of March, certainly well before the Liverpool-Madrid match.
There have been communication missteps in this crisis, but theres also been a lot of claims of confusion even when the messaging was clear
And on the fundamental point of restrictions advice seems to have been followed not ideological whims.
https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/02/19/a-journal-of-the-plague-year-the-politics-of-covid-19/
My opening line was:
"If you aren’t worried, you haven’t been paying attention."
My final line was:
"Those of us who are not experts must hope that those who are find a way to keep Covid-19 tamed. The alternatives are just awful."
The first Cobra meeting on the subject was held on 2 March.
I was no great seer (though as a treat I will let you see which poster commented "Alastair Meeks has turned into a cross between Eeyore and Private Fraser"). I was simply commenting on what had been widely reported on. Yet the government seems to have been altogether too casual about an obvious threat.
I agree that it was not the only government to make that mistake. That should not absolve it.
https://www.avanthomes.co.uk/coronavirusinfo/
Most of the time, Boris does very well in being amicably non-specific - he's a broad brush politician, happiest with simple mantras. That can work if you are surrounded by policy-makers focused on detail. But at the moment, a unique opportunity of a virtually united nation ready to follow a clear path is being squandered by the failure to provide one.
Did the policy encourage and warn people to stay in enough? Perhaps not - theres clearly a case to be made they should have been harder faster. But its perverse to claim it encouraged the opposite.
South Korea seems like the poster child for a non-authoritarian response; I don't know whether or not the UK could have logistically done all the testing they've done. I think Japan is a good example of what the UK could have done because they got results even though the implementation was often quite incompetent - with the exception of the contact tracing effort, which is something where the UK also sounds like it was doing well. The results aren't as good as SK and it could still easily all go horribly wrong, but the benefits in controlling the disease are very striking and the disruption is pretty minimal compared to where the UK has ended up.
Hancock was good, Hancocks sure and confident performance as well as the 100,000 day pledge seems to have deprived ongoing newspaper and media assault of oxygen. Only the mirror whinging end of month is long way away.
The issue though is Germany scaling back testing because its rationing reagent, U.K. government may struggle to meet this pledge.
The government have won the testing war for now though.
Personally I usually have an Opinel No 6 with me (locking ring removed), or a Spyderco UK Legal Carry if I am out in a more worky environment).
(Personally I was wondering whether it would be legal to shoot one of those feral goats for the freezer in my back garden, were I to have a suitable back garden and a suitable rifle in Llandudno.)
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/877074/secretary-of-state-letter-construction-industry.pdf
I carry a legal knife so I don't have to debate with some busybody in a uniform. I would carry a locking knife, as it is safer, but I don't because I would then need to be able to justify having it.
In my experience busybodies in uniforms lack common sense.
People who mow look back and say X should not have happened are about 1426258 times less impressive than those who said so AT THE TIME
It was his +ve test that postponed the Arsenal match which convened the meeting of Prem clubs, which led to the closure of the Prem, which snowballed into other sport, which (in my view) moved the Gov't quicker than it otherwise might have to stopping pretty much all sport and then onto the current lockdown.
No certificate Just ask someone. And take their word for it.
Whole load of people at a 🍗 and they all produce fake certificates when pressed.
With hindsight, the lockdown should perhaps have come sooner, but that's easy to say now. It's not easy to deliberately crash your economy when you think there might still be another way.
Other actions, such as encouraging home working could perhaps have come sooner.
You know, served in the jails where Covid-19 runs rife.
That should help.
Which then became a convenient precedent to be clutched at.
https://images.app.goo.gl/TU7Rkxgb2Hg7uPAFA
If you encourage home working, how do you justify not closing bars, pubs, restaurants, closing schools? If you do all of those (particularly schools) then you've significantly damaged your economy already due to reduced productivity (if working at all) of working parents caring for kids at home.
https://twitter.com/theobertram/status/1245973205686398977?s=20
Let's hope he and others aren't making a massive mistake
for bookies.
The way to lift it IMO as I mentioned the other day is an inkspot approach. When or if they are happy there is some measure of control (what that?) then ask people to incrementally increase their groups. Plenty of streets/floors/etc - within these units, which have gazed at each other for weeks and effectively self-isolated, there could be association, then inter-unit ie neighbouring streets, adjacent floors and so forth.
The timing could be an issue because that suggests weeks at a time but to say to one group of people you're fine while restricting another is simply not going to work and will result in the actions you point out.
US scheme is one off $1200, UK scheme is 80% of wages up to £2500 per month.
Most people will rather have their job and 80% wages than $1200 one off direct and being made redundant.
The nationwaide Italian lockdown was set up in a staged manner. Restaurants and bars, for example, were still allowed to be open originally (from the lockdown on the 9th of March), as long as you stayed 1 metre apart.
It was toughened on the 11 March to closing non-essential businesses, and further toughened on 21 March to all “non-necessary” businesses (no, I’m not sure of the difference).
There were, of course, regional lockdowns prior to that (Lombardy and Northern Italy)
Deaths reported as of yesterday would have occurred the day before. So 09 March equates to reports on 03 April (ie today). 11 March equates to reports from 05 April; 21 March to reports from 15 April.
(Very loosely because these are just averages. And, of course, the averages will get thrown out of whack if we get big chunks of former deaths reported on a given day (such as the France deaths in nursing homes).
Compare and contrast with a tube train, the crowding at an event is of people substantially going bto a common destination and fanning in from far and wide, but not fanning out until the destination. For those coming in on planes ir is massively true. This is a slightly different pattern even to central London underground, where the rotation of people you are standing next to is quite rapid - it more resembles a commute from the outskirts to the centre.
You also have segregation to consider. To what extent did Athletico fans and Liverpool fans actually mingle.
Now I'm certainly not saying Cheltenham was right, or that the Bergamo to Madrid to Merseyside jump has not been made, simply that the dynamics of spread do require some thought as to how people and surfaces were involved at each location, in each circumstance from house to event and back again. The spread may not have been focussed at the time or place where the biggest crowd gathered.
Boris faces the risk of economic meltdown, or old (and some young) people dying without care because the system is overwhelmed, or of course both. On the evidence at least one of those is going to happen come what may. Boris has chosen like everyone else more or less, to minimise the chance of uncontrolled mass untreated deaths.
There is always a chance that a global downturn can be blamed, as Gordon Brown tried to do, on global events. That's not the case, given human nature, with mass deaths outside of war.
At the current rate of progress Boris still has a chance of being the best of bad options at the next election. To a politician that is what counts.
My complete guess!
Trains incl Tube
Buses
Offices
Pubs
Schools
Restaurants
Shops
Planes
Sporting Events
IIRC the Yorkshire ripper used a screwdriver.
Although, if any bastard had jumped me that day, I would have neatly butterfly filleted them....
Ubers.
Also, hotels with aircon.
Plus as you say, now is not the time to be seen to be making party political attacks on the PM.