Caldwerood admits to visiting her holiday home on successive weekends.
She has to go even if we have to replace her with an empty podium.
Madness. What possessed her?! Beyond stupid.
Again, what's the problem with this?
Presumably no-one lives at her second home.
Well when your local hospital is at 110% capacity 90% full of Spanish second homers from Madrid and you can’t get medical treatment you might start to see the problem.
latest UK covid-19 test results pretty horrific - most ever daily tests (12,334), up from around 10,000 the last few days, of which 48% were positive, up from 36% a week ago and 12% 2 weeks ago. only 40% positive yesterday
won't see the true toll for around a month until we see the ONS death stats, which lag by 3 weeks on average, plus some days depending on whether these tests are in early stage of infection or what.
AIUI we have 2 priorities for medical tests. The first is those presenting at hospital with symptoms consistent where you would expect a fairly high number of positives. The second is front line medical staff. 48% is a frightening number in that context.
I think hospital admissions (on the slides presented at the government briefings) would be more helpful. If NHS staff and their families are being tested at a few thousand per day, it could give quite a lot of positive cases that are not that severe... The former figures (the raw numbers for which I don't think exist) will tell us more about how things are progressing perhaps.
I agree that hospital admissions and in particular ICU admissions would be helpful information to have more readily available. Testing the families of front line staff should really be producing more negatives than 52%. It suggests to me that a frightening number of staff have become infected already.
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
Am I missing some Scottish nuance here? Why has Nicola done this?
She had an excellent chance to show herself firm, fair and First Ministerial, by sacking a friend for an unforgivable mistake.
“No one in Scotland is above the law, this is a matter of life and death”
Everyone would have said Well done, very sad, but the right thing, etc
Instead she looks craven, weak and hypocritical. What does she gain from that? And she sets herself up for endless criticism down the line if social distancing fails, or has to be prolonged...
Caldwerood admits to visiting her holiday home on successive weekends.
She has to go even if we have to replace her with an empty podium.
Madness. What possessed her?! Beyond stupid.
Again, what's the problem with this?
Presumably no-one lives at her second home.
On one level, nothing. If you're going from A to B in a car, interacting with nobody, from one private residence to another AND nobody but you and your household is involved, then that shouldn't cause any harm.
The real problem in this case is that the authorities are desperately trying to discourage non-local travel unless there's a very good reason for it (and going, effectively, on holiday isn't a good reason.)
If people in authority go doing things like that then it's a green light to the ordinary citizen to say "Sod it, if she can go to her country cottage halfway across the country then I can drive a hundred miles to a national park for a hike, or go on a jaunt to my favourite seaside resort."
Worse still, if there are enough instances of disobedience like this then the risk is that the Government will fly off the handle and withdraw the allowance for exercise, to try to compensate for the behaviour of people like her by compelling everybody else to spend even more time at home. Which would be particularly bloody cruel for people living in places like round here, where there are few people out at any one time and they're all behaving themselves.
Hopefully if they feel the need to take further action then they'll only chain all the parks shut, so we can at least still leave our homes for some reason other than going directly to and from work and the shops. I live too close to work to get any useful exercise out of the trip there and back, so being forbidden from doing a good long circuit around the town would be a serious privation.
It’s not like her at all, she is usually a much more savvy operator than this. It smacks of cronyism. That press conference was difficult to watch. How can she honestly continue to put faith in the CMO?
On a human level, of course we all make mistakes. But this one was pretty fundamental. If your job has been to stand up on a podium for days on end and give people direction in a critical situation, it’s pretty fundamental that you are able to demonstrate you are following through with those directions yourself.
She should have resigned (or at least accepted a demotion) and if she was not willing to do that she should have been sacked or demoted. That’s all there is to it.
Am I missing some Scottish nuance here? Why has Nicola done this?
She had an excellent chance to show herself firm, fair and First Ministerial, by sacking a friend for an unforgivable mistake.
“No one in Scotland is above the law, this is a matter of life and death”
Everyone would have said Well done, very sad, but the right thing, etc
Instead she looks craven, weak and hypocritical. What does she gain from that? And she sets herself up for endless criticism down the line if social distancing fails, or has to be prolonged...
Cui bono?
Yes dithering by Nicola, she looks more like Theresa every day and may find 2021 is her 2017
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
latest UK covid-19 test results pretty horrific - most ever daily tests (12,334), up from around 10,000 the last few days, of which 48% were positive, up from 36% a week ago and 12% 2 weeks ago. only 40% positive yesterday
won't see the true toll for around a month until we see the ONS death stats, which lag by 3 weeks on average, plus some days depending on whether these tests are in early stage of infection or what.
AIUI we have 2 priorities for medical tests. The first is those presenting at hospital with symptoms consistent where you would expect a fairly high number of positives. The second is front line medical staff. 48% is a frightening number in that context.
I think hospital admissions (on the slides presented at the government briefings) would be more helpful. If NHS staff and their families are being tested at a few thousand per day, it could give quite a lot of positive cases that are not that severe... The former figures (the raw numbers for which I don't think exist) will tell us more about how things are progressing perhaps.
I agree that hospital admissions and in particular ICU admissions would be helpful information to have more readily available. Testing the families of front line staff should really be producing more negatives than 52%. It suggests to me that a frightening number of staff have become infected already.
Not sure I agree - the sampling will not be random but amongst those with symptoms, so you would expect a fairly high fraction of positives. But without a more informative breakdown of numbers it's hard to know... similarly the number of resolved cases (where people are sent home) would be really good to know. I'm a bit frustrated no journalist has asked for this information at the daily press conferences.
One thing Starmer has is that the way the cards fall, the 124th seat isn't ridiculously safe (5.25% swing required). A 6% swing would probably deliver a reasonable majority.
A 5.25% takes Filton and Bradley Stoke, target no. 59. That would still be a greater swing than Thatcher managed.
Not entirely sure the usual rules apply, such was Corbyn's toxicity. The inability to recapture Scotland is a massive and likely insurmountable hurdle for any future Labour majority to be reached. A minority Labour Government sans Corbyn is not beyond possibility next time.
As TSE has pointed out Covid-19 changes everything, and to who's advantage is anyone's guess.
latest UK covid-19 test results pretty horrific - most ever daily tests (12,334), up from around 10,000 the last few days, of which 48% were positive, up from 36% a week ago and 12% 2 weeks ago. only 40% positive yesterday
won't see the true toll for around a month until we see the ONS death stats, which lag by 3 weeks on average, plus some days depending on whether these tests are in early stage of infection or what.
AIUI we have 2 priorities for medical tests. The first is those presenting at hospital with symptoms consistent where you would expect a fairly high number of positives. The second is front line medical staff. 48% is a frightening number in that context.
I think hospital admissions (on the slides presented at the government briefings) would be more helpful. If NHS staff and their families are being tested at a few thousand per day, it could give quite a lot of positive cases that are not that severe... The former figures (the raw numbers for which I don't think exist) will tell us more about how things are progressing perhaps.
I agree that hospital admissions and in particular ICU admissions would be helpful information to have more readily available. Testing the families of front line staff should really be producing more negatives than 52%. It suggests to me that a frightening number of staff have become infected already.
Although maybe that's a good thing. It's like GPs getting it. A few GPs having the illness is massively beneficial to surgeries wanting to lift restrictions and actually start seeing patients again. Because lots of lives are potentially being put at risk because of anti-CV19 precautionary measures
(As a general point - obviously every case of resulting death is horrific - I agree with those who say that hugely increased risk of death or serious illness should not be part of the deal of working in healthcare.)
latest UK covid-19 test results pretty horrific - most ever daily tests (12,334), up from around 10,000 the last few days, of which 48% were positive, up from 36% a week ago and 12% 2 weeks ago. only 40% positive yesterday
won't see the true toll for around a month until we see the ONS death stats, which lag by 3 weeks on average, plus some days depending on whether these tests are in early stage of infection or what.
AIUI we have 2 priorities for medical tests. The first is those presenting at hospital with symptoms consistent where you would expect a fairly high number of positives. The second is front line medical staff. 48% is a frightening number in that context.
I think hospital admissions (on the slides presented at the government briefings) would be more helpful. If NHS staff and their families are being tested at a few thousand per day, it could give quite a lot of positive cases that are not that severe... The former figures (the raw numbers for which I don't think exist) will tell us more about how things are progressing perhaps.
I agree that hospital admissions and in particular ICU admissions would be helpful information to have more readily available. Testing the families of front line staff should really be producing more negatives than 52%. It suggests to me that a frightening number of staff have become infected already.
It depends whether they are giving priority to staff who are off work because they are self-isolating because of symptoms, for example.
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
Very well summarised, hard to really pick holes in this analysis. Ugly indeed. Also, whatever South Korea is doing seems to be working, so maybe throwing money and manpower at that will keep deaths to a minimum while allowing some form of normality to return?
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
Am I missing some Scottish nuance here? Why has Nicola done this?
She had an excellent chance to show herself firm, fair and First Ministerial, by sacking a friend for an unforgivable mistake.
“No one in Scotland is above the law, this is a matter of life and death”
Everyone would have said Well done, very sad, but the right thing, etc
Instead she looks craven, weak and hypocritical. What does she gain from that? And she sets herself up for endless criticism down the line if social distancing fails, or has to be prolonged...
Cui bono?
Yes dithering by Nicola, she looks more like Theresa every day and may find 2021 is her 2017
I don't necessarily disagree with the general consensus on this, but is it absolutely certain that Scotland would be right to change CMOs in the middle of a pandemic?
I get that it might be better than keeping one in place whose credibility has been damaged with whatever proportion of people actually follow the news closely. But it strikes me that those people will probably still follow the guidelines regardless, and there might be relatively few people who would have done only because of the say-so of someone they'd almost certainly never heard of until a few weeks ago.
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I posted earlier that on one social media outlet someone had said "as we were out for our daily exercise in the park, we saw lots of groups. It shouldn't be allowed."
I don't necessarily disagree with the general consensus on this, but is it absolutely certain that Scotland would be right to change CMOs in the middle of a pandemic?
I get that it might be better than keeping one in place whose credibility has been damaged with whatever proportion of people actually follow the news closely. But it strikes me that those people will probably still follow the guidelines regardless, and there might be relatively few people who would have done only because of the say-so of someone they'd almost certainly never heard of until a few weeks ago.
Perhaps the best solution would have been for her to get a hefty fine.
Mr Ukip has a point. Why is being in the park standing up OK but lying down not?
Because you can lie down in your own home! The rules are that you can go out to exercise.
The impenetrable thickness of some people never ceases to amaze me.
If going to the park is dangerous, ban it. If it is not, then let people sunbathe. The trouble with inconsistent regulations is people misunderstand them, and so inadvertently break them.
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
Very well summarised, hard to really pick holes in this analysis. Ugly indeed. Also, whatever South Korea is doing seems to be working, so maybe throwing money and manpower at that will keep deaths to a minimum while allowing some form of normality to return?
Massive testing (100K per day) and rapid contact tracing (manual and using Apps) can not only reduce the number of new cases but also, as per South Korea, prevent the situation getting out of control entirely (i.e., no new epidemic at all - I'd argue South Korea have not even really had an epidemic and life there continues without anything like the disruption we are seeing here).
And that's before we factor in the number of completely asymptomatic infections and improvements in treatment that will be gleaned, if nothing else, by experience.
Am I missing some Scottish nuance here? Why has Nicola done this?
She had an excellent chance to show herself firm, fair and First Ministerial, by sacking a friend for an unforgivable mistake.
“No one in Scotland is above the law, this is a matter of life and death”
Everyone would have said Well done, very sad, but the right thing, etc
Instead she looks craven, weak and hypocritical. What does she gain from that? And she sets herself up for endless criticism down the line if social distancing fails, or has to be prolonged...
Cui bono?
Personally I think that retrospective witch-hunts are undesirable. She should say "The rule is new and I was stupidly still following my old habits - it was quite wrong and it won't happen again." If she then did it anyway it would certainly be a sacking offence.
I could understand it a bit if she had only visited the place once, a 'look, even this senior person cocked up once, let this be a lesson to all of us to take this seriously', but now it's known to have been more than once.
Lombardia introduced a new rule that you need to wear a mask if you go out. If you don't have a mask (which is possible given the current shortage), you can put a scarf, a foulard, or any other garment to cover nose and mouth.
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
Very well summarised, hard to really pick holes in this analysis. Ugly indeed. Also, whatever South Korea is doing seems to be working, so maybe throwing money and manpower at that will keep deaths to a minimum while allowing some form of normality to return?
Massive testing (100K per day) and rapid contact tracing (manual and using Apps) can not only reduce the number of new cases but also, as per South Korea, prevent the situation getting out of control entirely (i.e., no new epidemic at all - I'd argue South Korea have not even really had an epidemic and life there continues without anything like the disruption we are seeing here).
And that's before we factor in the number of completely asymptomatic infections and improvements in treatment that will be gleaned, if nothing else, by experience.
I think improvements in treatment is something that is overlooked. It’s not all about a vaccine. An HIV vaccine has never come along but we have been quietly seeing improved life expectancy for those infected since the early Nineties. Keeping people out of hospital is the key thing.
Am I missing some Scottish nuance here? Why has Nicola done this?
She had an excellent chance to show herself firm, fair and First Ministerial, by sacking a friend for an unforgivable mistake.
“No one in Scotland is above the law, this is a matter of life and death”
Everyone would have said Well done, very sad, but the right thing, etc
Instead she looks craven, weak and hypocritical. What does she gain from that? And she sets herself up for endless criticism down the line if social distancing fails, or has to be prolonged...
Cui bono?
Personally I think that retrospective witch-hunts are undesirable. She should say "The rule is new and I was stupidly still following my old habits - it was quite wrong and it won't happen again." If she then did it anyway it would certainly be a sacking offence.
But she did it more than once. It did happen again. Otherwise I'd certainly agree with you, especially as replacing in the middle of a crisis often would not help. But someone in such a senior position will be held to a higher standard of understanding what should have been happening; she cannot reasonably say she did not know. Leeway might have been reasonable if she had realised her error, but she didn't. It's safe to presume she'd have done it next week if not caught.
Am I missing some Scottish nuance here? Why has Nicola done this?
She had an excellent chance to show herself firm, fair and First Ministerial, by sacking a friend for an unforgivable mistake.
“No one in Scotland is above the law, this is a matter of life and death”
Everyone would have said Well done, very sad, but the right thing, etc
Instead she looks craven, weak and hypocritical. What does she gain from that? And she sets herself up for endless criticism down the line if social distancing fails, or has to be prolonged...
Cui bono?
Personally I think that retrospective witch-hunts are undesirable. She should say "The rule is new and I was stupidly still following my old habits - it was quite wrong and it won't happen again." If she then did it anyway it would certainly be a sacking offence.
Ignorantia juris haud excusat, more especially when you are personally responsible for formulating and announcing the ius. There is nothing retrospective about it, it isn't as if she went to her house on day D and the rules were only announced on day D+1.
Am I missing some Scottish nuance here? Why has Nicola done this?
She had an excellent chance to show herself firm, fair and First Ministerial, by sacking a friend for an unforgivable mistake.
“No one in Scotland is above the law, this is a matter of life and death”
Everyone would have said Well done, very sad, but the right thing, etc
Instead she looks craven, weak and hypocritical. What does she gain from that? And she sets herself up for endless criticism down the line if social distancing fails, or has to be prolonged...
Cui bono?
Personally I think that retrospective witch-hunts are undesirable. She should say "The rule is new and I was stupidly still following my old habits - it was quite wrong and it won't happen again." If she then did it anyway it would certainly be a sacking offence.
Going once - might have been an old habit. Going on more than one occasion - she is wilfully flouting the rules she has been insisting that others follow.
She should have been sacked. At a time of international crisis, leaders have to lead by example. Sturgeon has got this utterly wrong. She has put friendship ahead of national interest.
One thing Starmer has is that the way the cards fall, the 124th seat isn't ridiculously safe (5.25% swing required). A 6% swing would probably deliver a reasonable majority.
A 5.25% takes Filton and Bradley Stoke, target no. 59. That would still be a greater swing than Thatcher managed.
Not entirely sure the usual rules apply, such was Corbyn's toxicity. The inability to recapture Scotland is a massive and likely insurmountable hurdle for any future Labour majority to be reached. A minority Labour Government sans Corbyn is not beyond possibility next time.
As TSE has pointed out Covid-19 changes everything, and to who's advantage is anyone's guess.
As ever, a recipe for a catastrophic mess. The main enablers for a Labour minority are likely to be the SNP, who will insist on a second referendum.
The UK Government could very well end up trying to negotiate the dissolution of the UK with the SNP, whilst being propped up (until the point that this is completed) by... the SNP.
I could understand it a bit if she had only visited the place once, a 'look, even this senior person cocked up once, let this be a lesson to all of us to take this seriously', but now it's known to have been more than once.
Looks awful, one rule for the plebs & another for Sturgeon's cronies.
Is there such a lack of talent that there is no competent replacement for the CMO & more importantly who is going to listen to her now?
I know he has a very poor rep on here, but from a personal perspective, I didn't despise the guy. It's just his position as a prominent shadow Secretary of State laid bare how empty Corbyn's party was of any talent.
Here’s a thought. Say Corbyn had become PM in December and responded to CV19 in the exact same way as this government, how might the response have been received and supported by the press and Conservatives. Nixon, China writ large.
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
That's the first time that I have seen ethnicity feature in a UK report. Asians and Black look over represented. Possibly due to the worst hotspots being in London and the West Midlands, but noteworthy nevertheless. Alternatively could relate to high rates of diabetes and CVS disease in those groups. Outcomes still looking grim for those needing advanced respiratory support.
Here’s a thought. Say Corbyn had become PM in December and responded to CV19 in the exact same way as this government, how might the response have been received and supported by the press and Conservatives. Nixon, China writ large.
I would assume the rally round the flag effect would yield somewhat less results on the basis that even in a Corbyn PM situation he'd have been starting from a less popular base position than Boris as a result of his GE and then Brexit honeymoons.
Nobody can have any confidence about predicting the economic prospects after the crisis starts to resolve. The situation is quite unlike anything that has ever happened and the actions of governments and central banks have yet to evolve. If you want an optimistic take: 1. Short and decisive shock deflates various bubbles and kills off zombie firms hanging around because of 2008 measures. 2. Probably scope for huge infrastructure investment and pump-priming without risk of high inflation. 3. Scientific and technical innovation is proceeding at a hell of pace.
If the government takes some more steps based on rapidly responding to feedback the recovery could be like cork from a bottle!
My recommendation is 3 month axing of all mortgage and rent payments (including commercial). Combine with no payments and no interest accruing on most loans and no interest on savings accounts. A kind of hiatus to allow a reset. Put that through parliament.
I know he has a very poor rep on here, but from a personal perspective, I didn't despise the guy. It's just his position as a prominent shadow Secretary of State laid bare how empty Corbyn's party was of any talent.
What time is Shami's exist? I wouldn't want to miss it.
Fair play to him for not spinning it as some mutual choice, but that he was 'stood down', and in that situation not being bitter about it (at least not openly).
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!
As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
That's the first time that I have seen ethnicity feature in a UK report. Asians and Black look over represented. Possibly due to the worst hotspots being in London and the West Midlands, but noteworthy nevertheless. Alternatively could relate to high rates of diabetes and CVS disease in those groups. Outcomes still looking grim for those needing advanced respiratory support.
I read somewhere that Jews are yugely over represented, too.
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!
As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
Vaccine is a method of herd immunity, not an alternative to it.
I don't necessarily disagree with the general consensus on this, but is it absolutely certain that Scotland would be right to change CMOs in the middle of a pandemic?
I get that it might be better than keeping one in place whose credibility has been damaged with whatever proportion of people actually follow the news closely. But it strikes me that those people will probably still follow the guidelines regardless, and there might be relatively few people who would have done only because of the say-so of someone they'd almost certainly never heard of until a few weeks ago.
I think the problem in this instance isn’t the fact that someone has been doing something they’ve advised against per se, it’s the fact that this is the critical message that is being rammed down everyone’s throats day in, day out at the moment.
Stay home. No non essential travel. You are protecting lives by doing so. It naturally follows from that message that you are not protecting lives by breaking the rules.
Additionally if you are asking people to make pretty huge sacrifices - not going out, accepting an incredibly curtailed life, not even attending funerals, it’s pretty damaging and hurtful to those making those sacrifices to see this.
Mmm, just had some lovely Christmas Pudding. And people thought I was silly to keep a whole bunch back in December - they will last until at least March 2021, so I've easily sorted.
Mr Ukip has a point. Why is being in the park standing up OK but lying down not?
Running in the park is probably worse. More likely to come into close contact with others (eg, when passing on the paths) and more likely to exhale CV in their direction inadvertently.
It’s not difficult to understand, though, is it? A few people sunbathing in the park is obviously fine. If everyone goes to the park, it’s a potential disaster right now. Without a fair and realistic way to ration time in the park, the only rational way to avoid the disaster is to say people shouldn’t be lying about in the park, and do enough enforcement in the more prominent parks to prevent more than a few pushing their luck
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!
As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
We might never get a vaccine. In which case herd immunity plus an improvement in treatment is the only way forward.
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!
As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
Vaccine is a method of herd immunity, not an alternative to it.
Thanks for the clarification. I assumed it was more a case of contract the virus and get better, or contract the virus and it's goodnight Vienna!
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
Very well summarised, hard to really pick holes in this analysis. Ugly indeed. Also, whatever South Korea is doing seems to be working, so maybe throwing money and manpower at that will keep deaths to a minimum while allowing some form of normality to return?
I am sadly of the opinion that more people will die in Britain as a direct or indirect consequence of the lockdown and the shredding of the economy than will die as a result of CV-19. We already know that people are dying because of disruption to their treatment, because of suicides and because they are alone with no one to look after them.
The trouble is that saying more will die as a result of the 'cure' compared to the disease does not take into account what would have happened if we had not instigated the 'cure'. I am inclined to believe the ICL numbers about how many would have died without a lockdown. But I am still uncomfortable with the fact that we are, to large extent, acting as if the lockdown is victimless.
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!
As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
I think you're being both naïve and partisan here. Its an easy to ignore mix.
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!
As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
Vaccine is a method of herd immunity, not an alternative to it.
I particularly like the implication a safe, reliable, effective vaccine will just be magicked up.
Mr Ukip has a point. Why is being in the park standing up OK but lying down not?
Because you can lie down in your own home! The rules are that you can go out to exercise.
The impenetrable thickness of some people never ceases to amaze me.
If going to the park is dangerous, ban it. If it is not, then let people sunbathe. The trouble with inconsistent regulations is people misunderstand them, and so inadvertently break them.
And still you're too thick to understand, even after it's been spelled out in words of one syllable!
That's the first time that I have seen ethnicity feature in a UK report. Asians and Black look over represented. Possibly due to the worst hotspots being in London and the West Midlands, but noteworthy nevertheless. Alternatively could relate to high rates of diabetes and CVS disease in those groups. Outcomes still looking grim for those needing advanced respiratory support.
Isn't it possibly a measure of social activities involving close proximity? - the story up here (Brum) was that people who were better advised to stay at home were still making their way to the usual religious observances.
The average IQ figure for the Shadow Cabinet has just increased dramatically.
I though Barry was quite well educated, in theology at least. I rather liked his priest like charm. Far from the worst in the shadow cabinet.
He probably suffered from being a safe pair of hands willing to to turn up for awkward media slots that no one else would. This did mean he burbled an awful lot of bollocks on occasion though.
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!
As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
A vaccine is the way of getting herd immunity with fewer casualties. Unless there is a sudden scientific breakthrough we have to assume that the lock down will be eased when the advisers are confident that the health system can cope. I assume they hope they can fine tune infection rates as measures are slowly eased. The vulnerable will continue in greater isolation for the foreseeable. Eventually the combination of greater social isolation even after lock down is eased plus more immune people in the community will mean that it will burn out. Of course mutations may confound this and extend the struggle.
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!
As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
I think you're being both naïve and partisan here. Its an easy to ignore mix.
I wasn't trying to be partisan. Boris, practically speaking is personally out of the woods as far as Covid-19 is concerned.
The average IQ figure for the Shadow Cabinet has just increased dramatically.
I though Barry was quite well educated, in theology at least. I rather liked his priest like charm. Far from the worst in the shadow cabinet.
He probably suffered from being a safe pair of hands willing to to turn up for awkward media slots that no one else would. This did mean he burbled an awful lot of bollocks on occasion though.
Yes, he had either the balls or the confidence to give it a go at least.
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!
As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
A vaccine is the way of getting herd immunity with fewer casualties. Unless there is a sudden scientific breakthrough we have to assume that the lock down will be eased when the advisers are confident that the health system can cope. I assume they hope they can fine tune infection rates as measures are slowly eased. The vulnerable will continue in greater isolation for the foreseeable. Eventually the combination of greater social isolation even after lock down is eased plus more immune people in the community will mean that it will burn out. Of course mutations may confound this and extend the struggle.
They may but if Covid-19 has any sense will mutate to stop killing its hosts for its own survival
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!
As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
I think you're being both naïve and partisan here. Its an easy to ignore mix.
I wasn't trying to be partisan. Boris, practically speaking is personally out of the woods as far as Covid-19 is concerned.
yeah, to be fair, I didn't have a effing clue that tortured Boris nonsense was going on about.
I don't think that what lies ahead is what Jonhson signed up for when he went for being PM. I think he imagined himself breezing through dispensing largesse to all and sundry and being popular for doing so. Is he really going to be up for 5 years of hard slog and difficult decisions? I'm not so sure.
Similarly I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised if Trump cuts and runs sometime between now and November.
Mr Ukip has a point. Why is being in the park standing up OK but lying down not?
Because you can lie down in your own home! The rules are that you can go out to exercise.
The impenetrable thickness of some people never ceases to amaze me.
If going to the park is dangerous, ban it. If it is not, then let people sunbathe. The trouble with inconsistent regulations is people misunderstand them, and so inadvertently break them.
And still you're too thick to understand, even after it's been spelled out in words of one syllable!
I know what the rules are. I am pointing out they are inconsistent. I am further suggesting that this inconsistency is what leads to them being broken by people who are acting in good faith by maintaining social distancing.
Caldwerood admits to visiting her holiday home on successive weekends.
She has to go even if we have to replace her with an empty podium.
Madness. What possessed her?! Beyond stupid.
Again, what's the problem with this?
Presumably no-one lives at her second home.
Well when your local hospital is at 110% capacity 90% full of Spanish second homers from Madrid and you can’t get medical treatment you might start to see the problem.
Quite - he is unwittingly making the case for the most severe lockdown possible - and all on the grounds of his personal freedom to flout rules.
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!
As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
I think you're being both naïve and partisan here. Its an easy to ignore mix.
I wasn't trying to be partisan. Boris, practically speaking is personally out of the woods as far as Covid-19 is concerned.
yeah, to be fair, I didn't have a effing clue that tortured Boris nonsense was going on about.
I am really not with you. The fact is that Boris recovering from Covid-19 will presumably mean he is no longer susceptible to a recurrence.
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!
As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
Vaccine is a method of herd immunity, not an alternative to it.
Yeah, the method of acquiring immunity might be either getting it and surviving or being vaccinated. The end result is the same.
The NE miners vote is lost! Oh wait... already gone!
Who are these miners of which you speak?
Ian Lavery was the last of them. That’s why he was able to use all their accumulated union subs to buy his house and get a massive redundancy payment for resigning.
Am I missing some Scottish nuance here? Why has Nicola done this?
She had an excellent chance to show herself firm, fair and First Ministerial, by sacking a friend for an unforgivable mistake.
“No one in Scotland is above the law, this is a matter of life and death”
Everyone would have said Well done, very sad, but the right thing, etc
Instead she looks craven, weak and hypocritical. What does she gain from that? And she sets herself up for endless criticism down the line if social distancing fails, or has to be prolonged...
Cui bono?
Yes dithering by Nicola, she looks more like Theresa every day and may find 2021 is her 2017
There was already a theory that she would stand down after the pandemic plays out rather than have to deal with the insurgency in her own party. May explain why she isn't too bothered by the political fall-out - won't be there in 2021.
Unfortunately I believe Abbot had already resigned her role, so she doesn't get to be sacked. Not sure about McDonnell.
He said he would be stepping down.
I have only seen one name being bandied around as his successor - the deeply unimpressive Annalise Dodds
Rachel Reeves has been mentioned a few times. He really needs some prominent women (other than Raynor) to prove the party isn't hopelessly misogynistic. From what I've seen she's quite a lot better than Dodds, not that that's saying much.
"The second is one of the most memorable pieces I have ever read in The Spectator. It is from 2003 and is in that bucket of pieces that at the time – and still – I think ‘Gosh I can’t believe we ran that, but I’m glad we did’."
I'd guess it's safe to assume that everbody will already have been aware that SeanT is an obsessive wanker. The two pertinent questions to ask right now may be "how does the publishing of this 'piece' reflect on the Spectator editorship at that time" and "how much do we have to worry about granny and the swans".
One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.
I find it rather distasteful.
I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!
As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
A vaccine is the way of getting herd immunity with fewer casualties. Unless there is a sudden scientific breakthrough we have to assume that the lock down will be eased when the advisers are confident that the health system can cope. I assume they hope they can fine tune infection rates as measures are slowly eased. The vulnerable will continue in greater isolation for the foreseeable. Eventually the combination of greater social isolation even after lock down is eased plus more immune people in the community will mean that it will burn out. Of course mutations may confound this and extend the struggle.
They may but if Covid-19 has any sense will mutate to stop killing its hosts for its own survival
Lol, but if it doesn't kill its host, its hosts will eventually kill it
"The second is one of the most memorable pieces I have ever read in The Spectator. It is from 2003 and is in that bucket of pieces that at the time – and still – I think ‘Gosh I can’t believe we ran that, but I’m glad we did’."
I'd guess it's safe to assume that everbody will already have been aware that SeanT is an obsessive wanker. The two pertinent questions to ask right now may be "how does the publishing of this 'piece' reflect on the Spectator editorship at that time" and "how much do we have to worry about granny and the swans".
I can’t access the article. Was that the one about him and the Danish porn, or the one about the Thai prostitute’s autograph?
Comments
At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.
A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.
A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.
People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.
Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
https://www.icnarc.org/DataServices/Attachments/Download/76a7364b-4b76-ea11-9124-00505601089b
The impenetrable thickness of some people never ceases to amaze me.
The real problem in this case is that the authorities are desperately trying to discourage non-local travel unless there's a very good reason for it (and going, effectively, on holiday isn't a good reason.)
If people in authority go doing things like that then it's a green light to the ordinary citizen to say "Sod it, if she can go to her country cottage halfway across the country then I can drive a hundred miles to a national park for a hike, or go on a jaunt to my favourite seaside resort."
Worse still, if there are enough instances of disobedience like this then the risk is that the Government will fly off the handle and withdraw the allowance for exercise, to try to compensate for the behaviour of people like her by compelling everybody else to spend even more time at home. Which would be particularly bloody cruel for people living in places like round here, where there are few people out at any one time and they're all behaving themselves.
Hopefully if they feel the need to take further action then they'll only chain all the parks shut, so we can at least still leave our homes for some reason other than going directly to and from work and the shops. I live too close to work to get any useful exercise out of the trip there and back, so being forbidden from doing a good long circuit around the town would be a serious privation.
On a human level, of course we all make mistakes. But this one was pretty fundamental. If your job has been to stand up on a podium for days on end and give people direction in a critical situation, it’s pretty fundamental that you are able to demonstrate you are following through with those directions yourself.
She should have resigned (or at least accepted a demotion) and if she was not willing to do that she should have been sacked or demoted. That’s all there is to it.
https://twitter.com/mattwardman/status/1246807403988910082
One possibly close pass, but not much risk.
https://twitter.com/BarryGardiner/status/1246805606939463681?s=20
https://twitter.com/BarryGardiner/status/1246805606939463681
As TSE has pointed out Covid-19 changes everything, and to who's advantage is anyone's guess.
Or because they're harder to see, and hence avoid?
(As a general point - obviously every case of resulting death is horrific - I agree with those who say that hugely increased risk of death or serious illness should not be part of the deal of working in healthcare.)
https://twitter.com/IanLaveryMP/status/1246806516499468288?s=20
Also, whatever South Korea is doing seems to be working, so maybe throwing money and manpower at that will keep deaths to a minimum while allowing some form of normality to return?
I get that it might be better than keeping one in place whose credibility has been damaged with whatever proportion of people actually follow the news closely. But it strikes me that those people will probably still follow the guidelines regardless, and there might be relatively few people who would have done only because of the say-so of someone they'd almost certainly never heard of until a few weeks ago.
Blissfully unaware of the irony.
And that's before we factor in the number of completely asymptomatic infections and improvements in treatment that will be gleaned, if nothing else, by experience.
So basically put something random on your face.
She should have been sacked. At a time of international crisis, leaders have to lead by example. Sturgeon has got this utterly wrong. She has put friendship ahead of national interest.
The UK Government could very well end up trying to negotiate the dissolution of the UK with the SNP, whilst being propped up (until the point that this is completed) by... the SNP.
Is there such a lack of talent that there is no competent replacement for the CMO & more importantly who is going to listen to her now?
1. Short and decisive shock deflates various bubbles and kills off zombie firms hanging around because of 2008 measures.
2. Probably scope for huge infrastructure investment and pump-priming without risk of high inflation.
3. Scientific and technical innovation is proceeding at a hell of pace.
If the government takes some more steps based on rapidly responding to feedback the recovery could be like cork from a bottle!
My recommendation is 3 month axing of all mortgage and rent payments (including commercial). Combine with no payments and no interest accruing on most loans and no interest on savings accounts. A kind of hiatus to allow a reset. Put that through parliament.
Fair play to him for not spinning it as some mutual choice, but that he was 'stood down', and in that situation not being bitter about it (at least not openly).
As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
Stay home. No non essential travel. You are protecting lives by doing so. It naturally follows from that message that you are not protecting lives by breaking the rules.
Additionally if you are asking people to make pretty huge sacrifices - not going out, accepting an incredibly curtailed life, not even attending funerals, it’s pretty damaging and hurtful to those making those sacrifices to see this.
It’s a pretty fundamental slip up.
The trouble is that saying more will die as a result of the 'cure' compared to the disease does not take into account what would have happened if we had not instigated the 'cure'. I am inclined to believe the ICL numbers about how many would have died without a lockdown. But I am still uncomfortable with the fact that we are, to large extent, acting as if the lockdown is victimless.
Brilliant.
I have only seen one name being bandied around as his successor - the deeply unimpressive Annalise Dodds
Similarly I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised if Trump cuts and runs sometime between now and November.
Also Rachel Riley, but I think that's a joke.
I'd guess it's safe to assume that everbody will already have been aware that SeanT is an obsessive wanker.
The two pertinent questions to ask right now may be "how does the publishing of this 'piece' reflect on the Spectator editorship at that time" and "how much do we have to worry about granny and the swans".
(£)
"JONATHAN SUMPTION
Coronavirus lockdown: we are so afraid of death, no one even asks whether this ‘cure’ is actually worse"
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/coronavirus-lockdown-we-are-so-afraid-of-death-no-one-even-asks-whether-this-cure-is-actually-worse-3t97k66vj