It’s wrong to be too quick because you need to gather facts first to make strong decisions.
For example you can’t sack or expel people for saying boris deserves what he’s getting
if that person didn’t say that, it’s a twisted grotesque truth of what they did say, distorted by scurrilous media or opponent skull duggery. I’m not saying these are the facts in this case, only that is point of principle we All can agree with, it needs to be soundly factual more so than fast.
It’s wrong to be too quick because you need to gather facts first to make strong decisions.
For example you can’t sack or expel people for saying boris deserves what he’s getting
if that person didn’t say that, it’s a twisted grotesque truth of what they did say, distorted by scurrilous media or opponent skull duggery. I’m not saying these are the facts in this case, only that is point of principle we All can agree with, it needs to be soundly factual more so than fast.
Except the person did say that. It is in fact a direct quote of what they said.
Low numbers Sunday, Monday, high Tuesday - seems a pattern of record keeping/clerical staff availability.
The rules are that enough time has to be given for relatives to be notified. I guess that paper trail means numbers are lower over the weekend so Monday is sadly a lot busier.
I would suggest plateaued, rather than peaked, might be more appropriate, and still a bit early to have much confidence in that, but still a good singe. can I suggest that we start to think about how to restore normalcy.
Afternoon Ydoethur, lazy git, some of us have to work. I am stuck on webex, and spreadsheets.
@ydoethur might need to get back to work soon. The boffins are having second thoughts on school closures.
Countries like the UK that have closed schools to help stop the spread of coronavirus should ask hard questions about whether this is now the right policy, says one team of scientists.
The University College London team says keeping pupils off has little impact, even with other lockdown measures.
But a scientist whose work has informed the UK strategy insists school closures play an important role.
Or rather, third thoughts, given the initial plan was to keep schools open.
They then go on to suggest measures that are completely impossible for anything else except, maybe, A Level teaching.
Students stay 2 metres apart? Has he ever been inside a school? I do some of my teaching in the Early Years and try getting them to do it? It'd be like trying to knit fog. Same for anything up to and through GCSE, it just isn't based on reality. Practical subjects gone, they aren't possible either. Computer rooms, gone because only half a class can fit inside them. Corridors, god, corridors. I mean it's insane but, then again, most suggestions about school have been made by people who never set foot inside one, so they probably don't even realise.
The only way to keep children 2m apart (especially young ones) would be to encase them, individually, in those giant rolling inflatable ball things.
Mind you, that would solve the whole violence against teachers/accusations against teachers thing.
Well, that's P.E. sorted.
Another thing, school buses. Remember what they are like?
Our school buses were the eighth tier of hell. We used to have contests to see who could remove the most screws from the structure. By the time we got off, the seats upstairs would be riding backwards and forwards with the accelerator and the brake....
Surely if all the children are encased in giant bouncy balls, seating etc is not required. Use a dump truck?
Even encased head to foot in plastic, we'd still have found a way to disable the tipper mechanism.... With an implement hidden up our tie. Along with the squeezed-flat JIF lemon.
Considering this is including the weekend deaths (especially in Scotland) it does feel like we have reached the peak.
To say you've reached the peak, doesn't it have to start going down again? I love the optimism, but I'm not sure we know that for sure yet.
Surely the peak is when it stops increasing? And because today's figures are inflated with the weekend count, if you average the last 3 days with the prior 3 days there is no increase - the death count has stabilised on average for the past week now. It was exponentially growing, but now it is consistent (barring minor differences and the weekend effect).
We'll see if it starts going down but for now its stopped going up at least.
I suspect they don't include all the Scotland data yet though. That might come in over the next few days once the way they record fatalities is finalised ( I think they might be ~60 cases shy of what Sturgeon mentioned earlier). Otherwise, I think your hypothesis about number of fatalities (and new cases, actually) beginning to stabilise is reasonable. It was seen in Spain / Italy so it's somewhat expected, but reassuring that we are showing a similar trend.
I don't believe in prayer but it'd be better to pray for the victims of paedophile priests and repentance for those who helped cover it up.
In this case though Cardinal Pell was found not guilty by the High court of Australia, hence I assume the tweet
They quashed the sentence because they said there was an element of doubt, yes.
The only response that vile organisation should have is to apologise profusely for covering up decades of paedophilic abuse, including possibly Pell's. Not claim people are out to get them.
Pell was found not guily, end of conversation. He is as entitled to be considered an innocent man as Salmond is
Yes and he shouldn't be in jail.
But the Catholic Church remains a vile organisation whose only role on the matter should be profoundly apologising for covering up paedophilic abusers.
Half the foodbanks in the world are provided by the Catholic church and much of the great art and architecture and many of the schools and hospitals were also created by the Catholic church.
Pell was acquitted on appeal, if he was it suggests other accused may be too, apologies where guilty verdicts are given, certainly not where allegations are proven unfounded
Oh wow, the vastly wealthy and corrupt Catholic Church has provided some charity out of its vast golden fortune? Oh good for them, that makes covering up decades of paedophilia and hoarding golden treasuries perfectly reasonable - or not!
The allegations were not proven "unfounded". They were deemed not "proven beyond a reasonable doubt" there's a difference.
Philip Thompson reveals another of his pathetic prejudices and populist standpoints. You really are a sad little hate filled pipsqueak with little to say of importance on anything. There is a lot to criticise the Roman Catholic church for, and the paedophilia scandal was and is very shocking, but I guess you would still take the same type of prejudicial position even if it had never happened. It is just another excuse for people of your unthinking mindset. As a lapsed Catholic of Irish decent I can smell your two brain celled anti-Catholicism in the same way a Jew can tell a racist trying to justify their anti-Semitism. Your nasty inherited hatred has been a feature in this country for far too long. Right minded people need to call it out for what it is.
Oh go cry me a river.
We wouldn't even be discussing this if it wasn't for the fact the Pope was basically gloating about doubt being found in a Cardinal's conviction, rather than being restrained and saying thought were with the victims.
If I don't like the Roman Catholic Church or organised religion in general its not a "prejudice" it is because in your own words "there is a lot to criticise the Roman Catholic Church for" including but not limited to covering up the scandal of organised paedophilia within its institution.
No institution is beyond criticism and the Church deserves any scorn heaped upon it - and the Pontifex is only encouraging it with his words.
Nope, you are just a very nasty prejudiced little man with little to do other than rant those prejudices on here (where you seem to be a sad permanent resident). You are no better than an anti-Semite. Anti-Semitism has a slightly longer history in this country than anti-Catholicism (particularly anti-Irish/anti-Catholicism, but both bear very similar hallmarks. The main hallmark is the general stupidity of the people that hold such prejudices, and you are a prime example. Well, I don't know about you, saddo, but now I have had my rant, I will do some work. Keep up the good work in showing everyone your general ignorance of anything that requires analysis and subtle nuance.
No you are talking complete bullshit.
Anti-semitism is being against Jews because they are Jews regardless of anything else. It is racism pure and simple.
Being against the institution of the Roman Catholic Church because it is a vile organisation with a terrible history going back through centuries and up to the present day is a completely different matter.
I have no qualms with Catholics. I would not have a go at someone because they are Catholic. My opinion is on the Catholic Church itself not individuals.
Though anti Semitism can also arguably include anti Israel sentiment
It can. If you are against Israel because they are Jewish certainly.
If you are against Israel because of [reasons] and you are against other countries with the same [reasons] then that is not anti-Semitism.
I am against the Roman Catholic Church because [reasons] and would be against any other organised religion or institution with the same [reasons].
Anti Israel sentiment is totally fine if you're just criticising the actions of the State; it just puts you into the same category as about 75% of Israelis on any particular issue.
The problem areas are a) arguing that the State of Israel shouldn't exist at all (and more generally holding it to a higher standard than other countries), and b) where it's clear that someone actually wants to express anti-Semitic viewpoints but thinks that's socially unacceptable, so has hit upon the wizard wheeze of saying the same things but with "Israel" and "Israelis" instead of "Judaism" and "Jews".
It’s wrong to be too quick because you need to gather facts first to make strong decisions.
For example you can’t sack or expel people for saying boris deserves what he’s getting
if that person didn’t say that, it’s a twisted grotesque truth of what they did say, distorted by scurrilous media or opponent skull duggery. I’m not saying these are the facts in this case, only that is point of principle we All can agree with, it needs to be soundly factual more so than fast.
Except the person did say that. It is in fact a direct quote of what they said.
Isn't the tory process they can immediately suspend, so quick action, followed by due consideration? I'd always assumed labour was the same. But if facts are not in dispute and mitigation is impossible then summary decision is not inherently unreasonable.
Theres also potentially a difference between a process not properly followed and one some might think precipitate.
Why are almost 50% of those tested getting more than one test in a day? Or am I misreading the difference between tests and people tested?
Because the test has a problem with accuracy - something like 25% of the time for a negative test, the negative means that the swabs from the patient didn't find the virus that was there.
So if you get a negative, you may well need to re-test.
Not really the time at the moment but once we've got through the crisis I suspect there will be a lot of questions to be answered of China, WHO and many national governments (Italy, US, UK etc) for what happened in the early stages on this virus.
Doubt many governments will be immune to the fall out... Next few years will not be a good time for incumbents at general elections.
Afternoon Ydoethur, lazy git, some of us have to work. I am stuck on webex, and spreadsheets.
@ydoethur might need to get back to work soon. The boffins are having second thoughts on school closures.
Countries like the UK that have closed schools to help stop the spread of coronavirus should ask hard questions about whether this is now the right policy, says one team of scientists.
The University College London team says keeping pupils off has little impact, even with other lockdown measures.
But a scientist whose work has informed the UK strategy insists school closures play an important role.
Or rather, third thoughts, given the initial plan was to keep schools open.
They then go on to suggest measures that are completely impossible for anything else except, maybe, A Level teaching.
Students stay 2 metres apart? Has he ever been inside a school? I do some of my teaching in the Early Years and try getting them to do it? It'd be like trying to knit fog. Same for anything up to and through GCSE, it just isn't based on reality. Practical subjects gone, they aren't possible either. Computer rooms, gone because only half a class can fit inside them. Corridors, god, corridors. I mean it's insane but, then again, most suggestions about school have been made by people who never set foot inside one, so they probably don't even realise.
The only way to keep children 2m apart (especially young ones) would be to encase them, individually, in those giant rolling inflatable ball things.
Mind you, that would solve the whole violence against teachers/accusations against teachers thing.
Well, that's P.E. sorted.
Another thing, school buses. Remember what they are like?
Our school buses were the eighth tier of hell. We used to have contests to see who could remove the most screws from the structure. By the time we got off, the seats upstairs would be riding backwards and forwards with the accelerator and the brake....
Surely if all the children are encased in giant bouncy balls, seating etc is not required. Use a dump truck?
Even encased head to foot in plastic, we'd still have found a way to disable the tipper mechanism.... With an implement hidden up our tie. Along with the squeezed-flat JIF lemon.
Seal them in using knife proof plastic. Wait, I've just solved juvenile knife crime as well....
councillor Sheila Oakes, who is currently mayor of Heanor in Derbyshire, saying: 'Sorry he completely deserves this and he is one of the worst PM's we've ever had.'
Haters got to hate eh
I don’t like Johnson. Or Cummings. Or Corbyn. Or Drakeford. Or Raab. Or Patel.
But I don’t wish death on them. One of them is seriously ill. I hope he recovers. Similarly, although he’s been silent for some time, I hope Cummings is making progress towards a full recovery.
Maybe I would for real, utter, unredeemable scumbags like Xi, or Kim, or Mugabe.
But none of them are even remotely in that class. None of them are out trying to cause deaths, or seize power illegally, or enrich themselves at the expense of the British people.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is frankly not worth listening to.
I agree. I raised a similar point during the election when a minority of our more right wing posters were expressing excessive joy and pleasure if, as happened, some of their opponents lost. It wasn't the pleasure of winning (which of course one should enjoy) but it was the expressed pleasure of an opponent losing. Of course you celebrate your victory, but have sympathy for those that lose.
I remember when Stephen Twigg won I was very pleased for him and simultaneously sorry for Michael Portillo, yet I supported neither.
Similarly in a sporting contest you enjoy your victory but feel for your opponent.
The only exception for me is, as you said a serious corrupt politician or a cheat in a sporting event.
That behaviour really isn't limited to one wing of politics. See Sturgeon's reaction, for example.
Absolutely.
I wasn't making a political biased point. It is just what happened and that I called out at the time. I would have done the same if the boot was on the other foot as it will be. It is the individuals (whether right left or centre) not the parties.
Agree re Sturgeon. It was unpleasant.
I couldn't disagree more. Sturgeon was entirely appropriate to celebrate winning a seat, let alone winning such a high profile scalp.
Suggesting it is inappropriate to celebrate gaining a seat because an opposition has lost it is as utterly facetious as claiming it is inappropriate for a striker to celebrate scoring a goal because an opposition has conceded it.
Philip that is not what I said (probably need to look at my earlier post). She should celebrate gaining a seat and in fairness to Sturgeon she was possibly caught off guard and it isn't obvious what she is celebrating. It didn't look good though.
Re the football. Of course you celebrate scoring the goal. I said that, but after your victory you shake hands with your opponent and commiserate with them.
You don't go up to them and and rub it in do you. At least a civilised person doesn't. That is all I am saying.
Enjoy and celebrate your vistory. Don't enjoy your opponents defeat.
I disagree though, it did look good - it looked human. She's not a robot and she genuinely celebrated a victory: Good for her!
She didn't rub it in anyone's face. She may have commisserated with Swinson afterwards. She'd almost certainly shake hands with her. But the video clip was her celebrating her own victory announced in that moment - good on her for celebrating her own parties victory being announced and her own colleague winning a seat.
Why shouldn't she celebrate that in that instant even if she's human with Swinson afterwards.
Are you saying Sturgeon was only sure of victory for the SNP at exactly the same moment that Swinson lost her seat to the SNP (not to Sturgeon herself). By that time SNP victory was certain.
I think the successful SNP candidate was a young female and Nicola was delighted on her account. It was fairly unexpected. Don't think she was necessarily celebrating Jo Swinson's downfall.
Are there any pictures of her celebrating any of the other SNP wins?
Isn't the tory process they can immediately suspend, so quick action, followed by due consideration? I'd always assumed labour was the same. But if facts are not in dispute and mitigation is impossible then summary decision is not inherently unreasonable.
That is generally the process in modern political parties - in the countries I am familiar with.
Him posting it now when it's so out of date almost seems irresponsible. Trying to propagate a view that it is nothing to worry about.
I wouldn’t say so, because he is using the latest data we have. What it does tell us is we are well under par so far this year, going into the hazardous last round
I may be missing something obvious, but that graph seems to be saying that before the pandemic hit, we were on a trajectory for one of the lowest death rates seen week-to-week for some time, but since it started to get traction, the trajectory arced upwards and as of a week ago (before most of the covid-19 deaths had hit; after some of them) we were already seeing a worse weekly death toll than we had in any of the comparison years?
Isn't this showing a bad thing, that's getting worse?
Why are almost 50% of those tested getting more than one test in a day? Or am I misreading the difference between tests and people tested?
People will probably not be tested twice on the same day. When there is a reason to administer a second test that will be done a couple of days later.
That wouldn't result in the daily stats showing more tests than people, though, unless I'm missing something.
Isn't it that a big part of this is testing on front line medical staff, and the test has a high false negative rate (and possibly a false positive rate) that officials are trying to keep track of?
Why are almost 50% of those tested getting more than one test in a day? Or am I misreading the difference between tests and people tested?
Because the test has a problem with accuracy - something like 25% of the time for a negative test, the negative means that the swabs from the patient didn't find the virus that was there.
So if you get a negative, you may well need to re-test.
Ah thanks. Makes sense. Hope they get a better test.
I don't believe in prayer but it'd be better to pray for the victims of paedophile priests and repentance for those who helped cover it up.
In this case though Cardinal Pell was found not guilty by the High court of Australia, hence I assume the tweet
They quashed the sentence because they said there was an element of doubt, yes.
The only response that vile organisation should have is to apologise profusely for covering up decades of paedophilic abuse, including possibly Pell's. Not claim people are out to get them.
Pell was found not guily, end of conversation. He is as entitled to be considered an innocent man as Salmond is
Yes and he shouldn't be in jail.
But the Catholic Church remains a vile organisation whose only role on the matter should be profoundly apologising for covering up paedophilic abusers.
Half the foodbanks in the world are provided by the Catholic church and much of the great art and architecture and many of the schools and hospitals were also created by the Catholic church.
Pell was acquitted on appeal, if he was it suggests other accused may be too, apologies where guilty verdicts are given, certainly not where allegations are proven unfounded
Oh wow, the vastly wealthy and corrupt Catholic Church has provided some charity out of its vast golden fortune? Oh good for them, that makes covering up decades of paedophilia and hoarding golden treasuries perfectly reasonable - or not!
The allegations were not proven "unfounded". They were deemed not "proven beyond a reasonable doubt" there's a difference.
Philip Thompson reveals another of his pathetic prejudices and populist standpoints. You really are a sad little hate filled pipsqueak with little to say of importance on anything. There is a lot to criticise the Roman Catholic church for, and the paedophilia scandal was and is very shocking, but I guess you would still take the same type of prejudicial position even if it had never happened. It is just another excuse for people of your unthinking mindset. As a lapsed Catholic of Irish decent I can smell your two brain celled anti-Catholicism in the same way a Jew can tell a racist trying to justify their anti-Semitism. Your nasty inherited hatred has been a feature in this country for far too long. Right minded people need to call it out for what it is.
Oh go cry me a river.
We wouldn't even be discussing this if it wasn't for the fact the Pope was basically gloating about doubt being found in a Cardinal's conviction, rather than being restrained and saying thought were with the victims.
If I don't like the Roman Catholic Church or organised religion in general its not a "prejudice" it is because in your own words "there is a lot to criticise the Roman Catholic Church for" including but not limited to covering up the scandal of organised paedophilia within its institution.
No institution is beyond criticism and the Church deserves any scorn heaped upon it - and the Pontifex is only encouraging it with his words.
Nope, you are just a very nasty prejudiced little man with little to do other than rant those prejudices on here (where you seem to be a sad permanent resident). You are no better than an anti-Semite. Anti-Semitism has a slightly longer history in this country than anti-Catholicism (particularly anti-Irish/anti-Catholicism, but both bear very similar hallmarks. The main hallmark is the general stupidity of the people that hold such prejudices, and you are a prime example. Well, I don't know about you, saddo, but now I have had my rant, I will do some work. Keep up the good work in showing everyone your general ignorance of anything that requires analysis and subtle nuance.
No you are talking complete bullshit.
Anti-semitism is being against Jews because they are Jews regardless of anything else. It is racism pure and simple.
Being against the institution of the Roman Catholic Church because it is a vile organisation with a terrible history going back through centuries and up to the present day is a completely different matter.
I have no qualms with Catholics. I would not have a go at someone because they are Catholic. My opinion is on the Catholic Church itself not individuals.
Though anti Semitism can also arguably include anti Israel sentiment
It can. If you are against Israel because they are Jewish certainly.
If you are against Israel because of [reasons] and you are against other countries with the same [reasons] then that is not anti-Semitism.
I am against the Roman Catholic Church because [reasons] and would be against any other organised religion or institution with the same [reasons].
Anti Israel sentiment is totally fine if you're just criticising the actions of the State; it just puts you into the same category as about 75% of Israelis on any particular issue.
The problem areas are a) arguing that the State of Israel shouldn't exist at all (and more generally holding it to a higher standard than other countries), and b) where it's clear that someone actually wants to express anti-Semitic viewpoints but thinks that's socially unacceptable, so has hit upon the wizard wheeze of saying the same things but with "Israel" and "Israelis" instead of "Judaism" and "Jews".
Indeed, that was my point.
I'm prepared to criticise any organised religion - or any other institution - that tolerates and covers up the abuse of children by paedophilic priests. That's not limited to the Roman Catholic Church.
The idea that is "discrimination" or comparable to "anti-Semitism" is just the fevered workings of @Nigel_Foremain 's own fevered two brain cells burning out trying desperately to make a point.
It’s wrong to be too quick because you need to gather facts first to make strong decisions.
For example you can’t sack or expel people for saying boris deserves what he’s getting
if that person didn’t say that, it’s a twisted grotesque truth of what they did say, distorted by scurrilous media or opponent skull duggery. I’m not saying these are the facts in this case, only that is point of principle we All can agree with, it needs to be soundly factual more so than fast.
Except the person did say that. It is in fact a direct quote of what they said.
Why are almost 50% of those tested getting more than one test in a day? Or am I misreading the difference between tests and people tested?
Because the test has a problem with accuracy - something like 25% of the time for a negative test, the negative means that the swabs from the patient didn't find the virus that was there.
So if you get a negative, you may well need to re-test.
Ah thanks. Makes sense. Hope they get a better test.
Him posting it now when it's so out of date almost seems irresponsible. Trying to propagate a view that it is nothing to worry about.
I wouldn’t say so, because he is using the latest data we have. What it does tell us is we are well under par so far this year, going into the hazardous last round
I may be missing something obvious, but that graph seems to be saying that before the pandemic hit, we were on a trajectory for one of the lowest death rates seen week-to-week for some time, but since it started to get traction, the trajectory arced upwards and as of a week ago (before most of the covid-19 deaths had hit; after some of them) we were already seeing a worse weekly death toll than we had in any of the comparison years?
Isn't this showing a bad thing, that's getting worse?
That's my reading as well.
One important caveat: this graph looks like it has automatic line smoothing between points, which I think may be exaggerating some of the trends.
For example, I don't think 2020 ever actually goes below the 5yr min - it just looks that way because of the way the software interpolates the curves in between points (note the crossovers between the two lines - I think these are the actual data points).
This may be affecting the bump right at the end of the 2020 data series as well, making it look worse than it really was (albeit that it'll almost certainly get worse from hereon out).
Considering this is including the weekend deaths (especially in Scotland) it does feel like we have reached the peak.
To say you've reached the peak, doesn't it have to start going down again? I love the optimism, but I'm not sure we know that for sure yet.
Surely the peak is when it stops increasing? And because today's figures are inflated with the weekend count, if you average the last 3 days with the prior 3 days there is no increase - the death count has stabilised on average for the past week now. It was exponentially growing, but now it is consistent (barring minor differences and the weekend effect).
We'll see if it starts going down but for now its stopped going up at least.
My point is we can't say with confidence that this is the peak. The Government thinks it's going to keep rising for a few more days yet, peaking at the weekend.
councillor Sheila Oakes, who is currently mayor of Heanor in Derbyshire, saying: 'Sorry he completely deserves this and he is one of the worst PM's we've ever had.'
Haters got to hate eh
I don’t like Johnson. Or Cummings. Or Corbyn. Or Drakeford. Or Raab. Or Patel.
But I don’t wish death on them. One of them is seriously ill. I hope he recovers. Similarly, although he’s been silent for some time, I hope Cummings is making progress towards a full recovery.
Maybe I would for real, utter, unredeemable scumbags like Xi, or Kim, or Mugabe.
But none of them are even remotely in that class. None of them are out trying to cause deaths, or seize power illegally, or enrich themselves at the expense of the British people.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is frankly not worth listening to.
I agree. I raised a similar point during the election when a minority of our more right wing posters were expressing excessive joy and pleasure if, as happened, some of their opponents lost. It wasn't the pleasure of winning (which of course one should enjoy) but it was the expressed pleasure of an opponent losing. Of course you celebrate your victory, but have sympathy for those that lose.
I remember when Stephen Twigg won I was very pleased for him and simultaneously sorry for Michael Portillo, yet I supported neither.
Similarly in a sporting contest you enjoy your victory but feel for your opponent.
The only exception for me is, as you said a serious corrupt politician or a cheat in a sporting event.
That behaviour really isn't limited to one wing of politics. See Sturgeon's reaction, for example.
Absolutely.
I wasn't making a political biased point. It is just what happened and that I called out at the time. I would have done the same if the boot was on the other foot as it will be. It is the individuals (whether right left or centre) not the parties.
Agree re Sturgeon. It was unpleasant.
I couldn't disagree more. Sturgeon was entirely appropriate to celebrate winning a seat, let alone winning such a high profile scalp.
Suggesting it is inappropriate to celebrate gaining a seat because an opposition has lost it is as utterly facetious as claiming it is inappropriate for a striker to celebrate scoring a goal because an opposition has conceded it.
Philip that is not what I said (probably need to look at my earlier post). She should celebrate gaining a seat and in fairness to Sturgeon she was possibly caught off guard and it isn't obvious what she is celebrating. It didn't look good though.
Re the football. Of course you celebrate scoring the goal. I said that, but after your victory you shake hands with your opponent and commiserate with them.
You don't go up to them and and rub it in do you. At least a civilised person doesn't. That is all I am saying.
Enjoy and celebrate your vistory. Don't enjoy your opponents defeat.
I disagree though, it did look good - it looked human. She's not a robot and she genuinely celebrated a victory: Good for her!
She didn't rub it in anyone's face. She may have commisserated with Swinson afterwards. She'd almost certainly shake hands with her. But the video clip was her celebrating her own victory announced in that moment - good on her for celebrating her own parties victory being announced and her own colleague winning a seat.
Why shouldn't she celebrate that in that instant even if she's human with Swinson afterwards.
Are you saying Sturgeon was only sure of victory for the SNP at exactly the same moment that Swinson lost her seat to the SNP (not to Sturgeon herself). By that time SNP victory was certain.
Sturgeon was only sure of victory for the SNP in East Dunbartonshire at the exact same moment that Swinson lost her seat of East Dunbartonshire yes.
As party leader Sturgeon is responsible for every single SNP candidate not just her own seat (and she didn't even have one that night).
She wasn't that excited for any other!
It was the only big scalp available on the night and was considered nigh on impossible to win with an unknown up against the great white chief from down south.
Why are almost 50% of those tested getting more than one test in a day? Or am I misreading the difference between tests and people tested?
People will probably not be tested twice on the same day. When there is a reason to administer a second test that will be done a couple of days later.
That wouldn't result in the daily stats showing more tests than people, though, unless I'm missing something.
Isn't it that a big part of this is testing on front line medical staff, and the test has a high false negative rate (and possibly a false positive rate) that officials are trying to keep track of?
I think false positives are much more rare than false negatives. Numbers of tests performed yesterday will include considerable numbers of second tests performed on people who were first tested a week or so ago. Therefor the overall numbers of tests performed will be higher than the numbers of people tested.
"Police in North Yorkshire have stepped up patrols in Harrogate amid reports of reports of people having picnics, residents drinking in the streets, groups congregating in the town centre and people meeting up to go for walks in the spa town."
Meanwhile, across town they are building an emergency virus hospital in the convention centre.
Some really seem to be assuming that the PM being out of an action must equal absolute chaos in government, and I'm not sure what that is based on. For all the importance of a PM in how we are governed thesedays its a situation where our arrangements work pretty well in these circumstances, not everything about our, shall we say, bespoke arrangements works to our disadvantage.
Why are almost 50% of those tested getting more than one test in a day? Or am I misreading the difference between tests and people tested?
People will probably not be tested twice on the same day. When there is a reason to administer a second test that will be done a couple of days later.
That wouldn't result in the daily stats showing more tests than people, though, unless I'm missing something.
Isn't it that a big part of this is testing on front line medical staff, and the test has a high false negative rate (and possibly a false positive rate) that officials are trying to keep track of?
I think false positives are much more rare than false negatives. Numbers of tests performed yesterday will include considerable numbers of second tests performed on people who were first tested a week or so ago. Therefor the numbers of tests performed will be higher than the numbers of people tested.
I think you're assuming that people tested twice on different days are only counted in the "daily" stats on the first occasion, which is possibly a fair assumption, but not immediately obvious from the data provided.
"Police in North Yorkshire have stepped up patrols in Harrogate amid reports of reports of people having picnics, residents drinking in the streets, groups congregating in the town centre and people meeting up to go for walks in the spa town."
Meanwhile, across town they are building an emergency virus hospital in the convention centre.
Harrogate is a beautiful town, and the Convention centre is lovely too actually. Lovely place for a picnic!
Does anyone think she has been competent during current events ?
I don't think she's been either competent or incompetent. I was reassured by her reasonably sensible proposals for a post-EU immigration system, but she's been basically invisible (and probably rightly so) during this crisis.
The issue I have with Ms Patel is that, during the May administration, she went and pursued a parallel foreign policy. And then lied about it twice to the Prime Minister.
If she had had the balls to say "Prime Minister, yes I went to Israel and had meetings with senior politicians there in my role as a Minister, and should have informed the Foreign Office ahead of time", then it would be one thing.
But first she denied the meetings. Then she claimed it was just a holiday where meetings had miraculously happened. And it was only on the third set of questioning that she admitted that she'd prearranged the meeting, and the trip had always had that purpose.
It's not the meetings I have an issue with. It's her career, after all. It was the fact that she lied, twice, to the Prime Minister. That is a level of dishonesty I cannot accept from a Senior Minister.
I was quite confidant that government would continue to function with the PM in Hospital, however now that Mrs May has sead this I'm a lot less confidant.
Him posting it now when it's so out of date almost seems irresponsible. Trying to propagate a view that it is nothing to worry about.
I wouldn’t say so, because he is using the latest data we have. What it does tell us is we are well under par so far this year, going into the hazardous last round
The other team equalised in the last minute. There's a replay. We're going to be massively below full strength for the replay.
For @isam I've added details of the declared covid-19 deaths to date for the various weeks in that graph - and for today's date over to the right. They're in the black bars. Prior to the 20th, they're not visible. On the 20th of March one, it's just discernible. The effects of the 27th of March are pretty vivid. The ones for now (over to the right) are pretty bad.
Does anyone think she has been competent during current events ?
Not sure? The police seem to have dealt with the lockdown quite well so far (a few exceptions aside)
What do you think?
The casual attitude to entering this country and the lack of quarantine for new arrivals suggests a lack of awareness that it is not business as usual.
Why are almost 50% of those tested getting more than one test in a day? Or am I misreading the difference between tests and people tested?
People will probably not be tested twice on the same day. When there is a reason to administer a second test that will be done a couple of days later.
That wouldn't result in the daily stats showing more tests than people, though, unless I'm missing something.
Isn't it that a big part of this is testing on front line medical staff, and the test has a high false negative rate (and possibly a false positive rate) that officials are trying to keep track of?
I think false positives are much more rare than false negatives. Numbers of tests performed yesterday will include considerable numbers of second tests performed on people who were first tested a week or so ago. Therefor the numbers of tests performed will be higher than the numbers of people tested.
I think you're assuming that people tested twice on different days are only counted in the "daily" stats on the first occasion, which is possibly a fair assumption, but not immediately obvious from the data provided.
I'm assuming that people tested twice are being counted as "tested people" in the daily stats on the first occasion, but their second tests will be counted in the "total tests performed" on the occasion of their second tests.
Him posting it now when it's so out of date almost seems irresponsible. Trying to propagate a view that it is nothing to worry about.
I wouldn’t say so, because he is using the latest data we have. What it does tell us is we are well under par so far this year, going into the hazardous last round
The other team equalised in the last minute. There's a replay. We're going to be massively below full strength for the replay.
For @isam I've added details of the declared covid-19 deaths to date for the various weeks in that graph - and for today's date over to the right. They're in the black bars. Prior to the 20th, they're not visible. On the 20th of March one, it's just discernible. The effects of the 27th of March are pretty vivid. The ones for now (over to the right) are pretty bad.
Hope that helps.
Thanks for this. That's why I think the original plot is misleading.
Does anyone think she has been competent during current events ?
Not sure? The police seem to have dealt with the lockdown quite well so far (a few exceptions aside)
What do you think?
The casual attitude to entering this country and the lack of quarantine for new arrivals suggests a lack of awareness that it is not business as usual.
It's consistent with an attitude that this is here now, it doesn't really matter who else arrives with it.
Very impressive. If Starmer carries on like this, he'll remove one of the main fears people have that in electing a Labour government, they would also be electing an army of nutjobs along with them.
Does anyone think she has been competent during current events ?
Not sure? The police seem to have dealt with the lockdown quite well so far (a few exceptions aside)
What do you think?
The casual attitude to entering this country and the lack of quarantine for new arrivals suggests a lack of awareness that it is not business as usual.
It's consistent with an attitude that this is here now, it doesn't really matter who else arrives with it.
That might change in a few months' time.
It doesn't give me confidence that it would change in future.
Very impressive. If Starmer carries on like this, he'll remove one of the main fears people have that in electing a Labour government, they would also be electing an army of nutjobs along with them.
He gets a 'Sir Keir' from me for that one!
He doesn't even need to do all that much, as the right actions and words, done non-grudgingly, will see swathes of awful people voluntarily leave the party in outrage. Works for any party really.
Very impressive. If Starmer carries on like this, he'll remove one of the main fears people have that in electing a Labour government, they would also be electing an army of nutjobs along with them.
He gets a 'Sir Keir' from me for that one!
Yes, me too.
With apologies to @kinbalu, though, I will still laugh when people call him Keith. That's not laughing at him though. It's just that calling people Keith is funny. Even people genuinely called Keith.
Mark Austin now blaming Boris and Gove's family for catching the virus.
He should have followed up by asking if anything special is being done to prevent it spreading amongst the Cabinet, above and beyond the government's advice.
Excellent work from Raab at 5pm. I am confident from the statement that Boris is beginning to turn the corner. A great relief.
I wouldn't be surprised if it was the lack of rest that caused this. What a nincompoop.
Hmm, I have sympathy here. We all face moments of high stress when we may ignore what our body tells us and continue to push on. I’m not sure we’re all nincompoops for doing so, we are just so tunnel visioned in that moment because of our aims and/or desires that we try to fight through it.
I can’t think of anything more stressful than leading the country through this and it’s clear that Boris has wanted to do a good job. Of course with all the benefit of hindsight he should have taken it easier but I’m sure his experience is similar to many (obviously most of these instances won’t be covid-19 related!)
Whilst Boris does benefit politically from his personality he also suffers from a “damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t” media narrative a lot of the time. Not sure when this started, but it does seem like everything he does is wrong in someone’s eyes (I’m not singling you out here, it’s a trend I’ve noticed quite widely). He doesn’t want a lockdown, so he’s negligent. He orders a lockdown and it’s too severe. He didn’t rest up with coronavirus which was damaging, if he did rest up the government would be directionless, etc etc.
Does anyone think she has been competent during current events ?
I don't think she's been either competent or incompetent. I was reassured by her reasonably sensible proposals for a post-EU immigration system, but she's been basically invisible (and probably rightly so) during this crisis.
The issue I have with Ms Patel is that, during the May administration, she went and pursued a parallel foreign policy. And then lied about it twice to the Prime Minister.
If she had had the balls to say "Prime Minister, yes I went to Israel and had meetings with senior politicians there in my role as a Minister, and should have informed the Foreign Office ahead of time", then it would be one thing.
But first she denied the meetings. Then she claimed it was just a holiday where meetings had miraculously happened. And it was only on the third set of questioning that she admitted that she'd prearranged the meeting, and the trip had always had that purpose.
It's not the meetings I have an issue with. It's her career, after all. It was the fact that she lied, twice, to the Prime Minister. That is a level of dishonesty I cannot accept from a Senior Minister.
The thing which annoys me about the continuation of flights / lack of quarantine of incomers was it made harder to impress on people the seriousness of the situation.
Two / three weeks ago when I was telling my oldies to stay at home they were responding with "but the government is allowing flights from Italy, Spain and China still".
Agreed. I gave up watching. They are deliberately trying to create a sense of alarm and panic. The calm and measured tones of the panel make them look completely redundant and ridiculous. Have to say 2/3 conferences a week would be more than adequate.
Very impressive. If Starmer carries on like this, he'll remove one of the main fears people have that in electing a Labour government, they would also be electing an army of nutjobs along with them.
He gets a 'Sir Keir' from me for that one!
He doesn't even need to do all that much, as the right actions and words, done non-grudgingly, will see swathes of awful people voluntarily leave the party in outrage. Works for any party really.
Not sure many will leave over this, but I do think some/many might think twice about putting their repellent opinions in public so much. witch will make a big difference, especially if combined with a handful of the worst leaving.
Having this opportunity to do this at the start of his time as leader, will/might set the tone.
Accusing them all of being responsible for catching CV and loads of implying that the government hasn't "levelled" with the public about the response being a very long term thing.
I wish they would just do a Cuomo and be extremely robust in answering the moronic questions.
Excellent work from Raab at 5pm. I am confident from the statement that Boris is beginning to turn the corner. A great relief.
It is too soon to say. I'll be relieved when the PM leaves hospital alive and well, and not before.
I think every day he doesn't deteriorate further might be classed as a positive
Yes, but... I may be misunderstanding what happens with the people who fall seriously ill with this disease, but there seems typically to be a significant lag between hospitalisation and the end result (either death or recovery) and it can take some time for very sick patients to deteriorate to the point where they require support for their breathing.
I'm not saying that I anticipate that this will end up happening to the Prime Minister - hopefully it won't, apart from anything else he's not particularly old, which helps - but one would've thought it was too early to feel optimistic that the worst case has been avoided.
Does anyone think she has been competent during current events ?
Not sure? The police seem to have dealt with the lockdown quite well so far (a few exceptions aside)
What do you think?
The casual attitude to entering this country and the lack of quarantine for new arrivals suggests a lack of awareness that it is not business as usual.
It's consistent with an attitude that this is here now, it doesn't really matter who else arrives with it.
That might change in a few months' time.
It doesn't give me confidence that it would change in future.
Well, no. I have very little faith in that. Hopefully no one will want to travel so it won't be much of an issue for some time.
Accusing them all of being responsible for catching CV and loads of implying that the government hasn't "levelled" with the public about the response being a very long term thing.
I’ve decided to stop watching, or only watch the statements and turn off the press questions. They are unbelievable.
Him posting it now when it's so out of date almost seems irresponsible. Trying to propagate a view that it is nothing to worry about.
I wouldn’t say so, because he is using the latest data we have. What it does tell us is we are well under par so far this year, going into the hazardous last round
The other team equalised in the last minute. There's a replay. We're going to be massively below full strength for the replay.
For @isam I've added details of the declared covid-19 deaths to date for the various weeks in that graph - and for today's date over to the right. They're in the black bars. Prior to the 20th, they're not visible. On the 20th of March one, it's just discernible. The effects of the 27th of March are pretty vivid. The ones for now (over to the right) are pretty bad.
Hope that helps.
Have to admit I don’t understand. The black bar on the right is 16,000 and the smaller is 11,000?
Raab has smashed this. Confident and to the point. No shrill insincerity such as we get from Gove. He is doing very well, and personally speaking I normally can't stand the bloke!
Him posting it now when it's so out of date almost seems irresponsible. Trying to propagate a view that it is nothing to worry about.
I wouldn’t say so, because he is using the latest data we have. What it does tell us is we are well under par so far this year, going into the hazardous last round
The other team equalised in the last minute. There's a replay. We're going to be massively below full strength for the replay.
For @isam I've added details of the declared covid-19 deaths to date for the various weeks in that graph - and for today's date over to the right. They're in the black bars. Prior to the 20th, they're not visible. On the 20th of March one, it's just discernible. The effects of the 27th of March are pretty vivid. The ones for now (over to the right) are pretty bad.
Hope that helps.
Have to admit I don’t understand. The black bar on the right is over 16,000 and the smaller is 11,000?
The black bar is showing where the green curve (bottom) and red curve (top) will be next week.
Just noted on the Racing Post site Royal Ascot will take place this year, if at all, behind closed doors.
I'm slightly surprised given how much of the meeting is about the Queen, the Royal Family and the fashion but money talks both in terms of the global media rights for showing the races and from the commercial bloodstock industry which relies on good horses winning black type at the big meetings.
In related news, the Guineas and Derby meetings are also going to be moved but where and when hasn't been decided. The summer schedule is going to have to be considerably re-vamped whatever happens.
Obviously, any resumption will be based on Government guidance and availability of medical support (Irish racing sources its medical cover privately which is why it was able to go on for a week after Britain stopped). There is talk of a limited resumption behind closed doors based on courses at or near training centres so Newmarket an obvious option though the open nature of the course may provide some problems.
Raab has smashed this. Confident and to the point. No shrill insincerity such as we get from Gove. He is doing very well, and personally speaking I normally can't stand the bloke!
Crisis is meat and drink for most politicians. Sound authoritative - defer to the experts when required and look confident.
Whatever you think of her politics, her HR, or her friends, there is no denying this lady is one impressive performer. Gracious, intelligent and perfectly pitched. Coronavirus: Nicola Sturgeon sends get well message to Boris Johnson https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52197047
Comments
https://i2-prod.derbytelegraph.co.uk/incoming/article4026673.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/1_TBR_TEM_070420Oakes_01.jpg
Whatever happened to The Jezziah...? I asked the other day and didn't see an answer (sorry if there was one that I missed)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_the_United_Kingdom#/media/File:CoViD-19_GB.svg
If you don’t follow due process it blows up in your face later, after the plaudits for good job that wasn’t.
The problem areas are a) arguing that the State of Israel shouldn't exist at all (and more generally holding it to a higher standard than other countries), and b) where it's clear that someone actually wants to express anti-Semitic viewpoints but thinks that's socially unacceptable, so has hit upon the wizard wheeze of saying the same things but with "Israel" and "Israelis" instead of "Judaism" and "Jews".
Theres also potentially a difference between a process not properly followed and one some might think precipitate.
So if you get a negative, you may well need to re-test.
Doubt many governments will be immune to the fall out... Next few years will not be a good time for incumbents at general elections.
It's a 16 word social media post. How long do you need to spend on it? The only possible defence is if someone hacked her account.
Does anyone think she has been competent during current events ?
Isn't this showing a bad thing, that's getting worse?
Isn't it that a big part of this is testing on front line medical staff, and the test has a high false negative rate (and possibly a false positive rate) that officials are trying to keep track of?
What do you think?
I'm prepared to criticise any organised religion - or any other institution - that tolerates and covers up the abuse of children by paedophilic priests. That's not limited to the Roman Catholic Church.
The idea that is "discrimination" or comparable to "anti-Semitism" is just the fevered workings of @Nigel_Foremain 's own fevered two brain cells burning out trying desperately to make a point.
Eh?
One important caveat: this graph looks like it has automatic line smoothing between points, which I think may be exaggerating some of the trends.
For example, I don't think 2020 ever actually goes below the 5yr min - it just looks that way because of the way the software interpolates the curves in between points (note the crossovers between the two lines - I think these are the actual data points).
This may be affecting the bump right at the end of the 2020 data series as well, making it look worse than it really was (albeit that it'll almost certainly get worse from hereon out).
"Labour MP admits they are innumerate"
Deflecting is of course a key political skill.
Numbers of tests performed yesterday will include considerable numbers of second tests performed on people who were first tested a week or so ago. Therefor the overall numbers of tests performed will be higher than the numbers of people tested.
"Police in North Yorkshire have stepped up patrols in Harrogate amid reports of reports of people having picnics, residents drinking in the streets, groups congregating in the town centre and people meeting up to go for walks in the spa town."
Meanwhile, across town they are building an emergency virus hospital in the convention centre.
https://twitter.com/aria606/status/1247367346223820801?s=21
The issue I have with Ms Patel is that, during the May administration, she went and pursued a parallel foreign policy. And then lied about it twice to the Prime Minister.
If she had had the balls to say "Prime Minister, yes I went to Israel and had meetings with senior politicians there in my role as a Minister, and should have informed the Foreign Office ahead of time", then it would be one thing.
But first she denied the meetings. Then she claimed it was just a holiday where meetings had miraculously happened. And it was only on the third set of questioning that she admitted that she'd prearranged the meeting, and the trip had always had that purpose.
It's not the meetings I have an issue with. It's her career, after all. It was the fact that she lied, twice, to the Prime Minister. That is a level of dishonesty I cannot accept from a Senior Minister.
Prior to the 20th, they're not visible. On the 20th of March one, it's just discernible. The effects of the 27th of March are pretty vivid. The ones for now (over to the right) are pretty bad.
Hope that helps.
That might change in a few months' time.
He gets a 'Sir Keir' from me for that one!
Active cases: 94.067 (+880) including 3792 in ICU (-106)
Deaths: 604 for a total of 17.127
Healed/discharged: 1555 for a total of 24.392
New cases: 3039
With apologies to @kinbalu, though, I will still laugh when people call him Keith. That's not laughing at him though. It's just that calling people Keith is funny. Even people genuinely called Keith.
I can’t think of anything more stressful than leading the country through this and it’s clear that Boris has wanted to do a good job. Of course with all the benefit of hindsight he should have taken it easier but I’m sure his experience is similar to many (obviously most of these instances won’t be covid-19 related!)
Whilst Boris does benefit politically from his personality he also suffers from a “damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t” media narrative a lot of the time. Not sure when this started, but it does seem like everything he does is wrong in someone’s eyes (I’m not singling you out here, it’s a trend I’ve noticed quite widely). He doesn’t want a lockdown, so he’s negligent. He orders a lockdown and it’s too severe. He didn’t rest up with coronavirus which was damaging, if he did rest up the government would be directionless, etc etc.
Two / three weeks ago when I was telling my oldies to stay at home they were responding with "but the government is allowing flights from Italy, Spain and China still".
Having this opportunity to do this at the start of his time as leader, will/might set the tone.
Accusing them all of being responsible for catching CV and loads of implying that the government hasn't "levelled" with the public about the response being a very long term thing.
I wish they would just do a Cuomo and be extremely robust in answering the moronic questions.
I'm not saying that I anticipate that this will end up happening to the Prime Minister - hopefully it won't, apart from anything else he's not particularly old, which helps - but one would've thought it was too early to feel optimistic that the worst case has been avoided.
Just noted on the Racing Post site Royal Ascot will take place this year, if at all, behind closed doors.
I'm slightly surprised given how much of the meeting is about the Queen, the Royal Family and the fashion but money talks both in terms of the global media rights for showing the races and from the commercial bloodstock industry which relies on good horses winning black type at the big meetings.
In related news, the Guineas and Derby meetings are also going to be moved but where and when hasn't been decided. The summer schedule is going to have to be considerably re-vamped whatever happens.
Obviously, any resumption will be based on Government guidance and availability of medical support (Irish racing sources its medical cover privately which is why it was able to go on for a week after Britain stopped). There is talk of a limited resumption behind closed doors based on courses at or near training centres so Newmarket an obvious option though the open nature of the course may provide some problems.
Elementary politics.
Coronavirus: Nicola Sturgeon sends get well message to Boris Johnson
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52197047
https://twitter.com/DavidGHFrost/status/1247561824062656513?s=20