On topic, surely this is because the economic impact of coronavirus has not really been felt?
The weather is lovely. We haven’t run out of food. The government is paying everyone’s wages. Life is actually quite pleasant, certainly tolerable, at the moment, for many.
Wait til people move from furlough to the dole.
Yes. Many people are enjoying it. And with most of those who aren't, or who are very concerned about the economy, the message that it is saving lives RIGHT NOW will still be in the box seat.
Quite. At the moment it is uneconomic to make anyone redundant when you can furlough them. I’ve been advising my employer clients that it’s pointless making anyone redundant at the moment. Many are just waiting until July to do it.
Say you furlough somebody who is on £120,000 per annum.
Government pays £2,500 of their £10,000 per month salary.
You don't top up. So they take a £7,500 per month cut.
Is that legal under a normal employment contract?
I believe you can’t be automatically furloughed. You have to agree to it.
So it would need to be presented as furlough or fire, then, I guess.
That must have led to some interesting interaction between companies and their highly paid but perhaps not truly essential executives and managers.
I saw someone point out that Sweden, with coronavirus, is in fact two stories: - Stockholm - Rest of Sweden
... which marches well with the suggestion that the local population density really has to be taken into account.
As of today, Stockholm passed the figure of 500 deaths per million. (1,192 deaths in a population of 2.377 million).
The rest of Sweden has a figure of 122 deaths per million (960 deaths out of 7.85 million)
Quite a difference.
If you applied that to the UK, and exluded London, then that would be interesting.
Looking at mortality per 100 000 population, all of London is at the top end, but very top is the Black Country and Birmingham. In England at least it seems more evenly spread. Leics continues at about half the national rate, a quarter of the West Midlands.
There are some anomalies. Bristol area looks quite low for its degree of population density, as does Stoke and Staffs.
A lot of the Home Counties has high rates for its population density. Commuters I suppose.
The very lowest areas are places with very little commuting, Devon, Lincs, Dorset Humber etc. I note Hartlepool is low, but Newcastle and Sunderland high.
Trains, trams and buses must have been teeming with the virus. Take care Sunil!
One of our first virus clusters was in Devon, but that seems to have been stamped on by the lockdown.
She must have amazing skills and spent all of April on it to visually see such a small week to week difference and be able to note its statistical significance.
Or her "seeing" it for herself might be meaningless.
The media have already blown up their own argument about going into the lockdown too slowly and too late, because they now ask every day when it will end and we have only done a month.
With all due respect he is hardly going to say that the boffins called the lockdown wrong is he?
What is there to be won by these numbers going down further?
Also, do these "appalling" journalists fall randomly fall from the sky and are then imposed on the news outlets, or is it possible that news outlets spend considerable effort on finding out what their customers want to be fed with, and then select and instruct their journalists what to say and write to please their audiences? Who's at fault then, news outlets, customers or the "appalling journalists"?
The media management need to look at themselves and the widespread criticism and take action to become relevant and useful.
Be careful what you wish for. You may not approve of a media critical of the current government, but equally would you be comfortable with our own version of Fox News?
There is still a good deal of investigative journalism that highlights political wrongdoing. Cast your mind back to the (before it became a comic) Telegraph's expose of the Labour MPs expenses scandal. And Guido has caught Starmer out several times already! To an extent what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
What is there to be won by these numbers going down further?
Also, do these "appalling" journalists fall randomly fall from the sky and are then imposed on the news outlets, or is it possible that news outlets spend considerable effort on finding out what their customers want to be fed with, and then select and instruct their journalists what to say and write to please their audiences? Who's at fault then, news outlets, customers or the "appalling journalists"?
The media management need to look at themselves and the widespread criticism and take action to become relevant and useful.
Be careful what you wish for. You may not approve of a media critical of the current government, but equally would you be comfortable with our own version of Fox News?
There is still a good deal of investigative journalism that highlights political wrongdoing. Cast your mind back to the (before it became a comic) Telegraph's expose of the Labour MPs expenses scandal.
I do agree and Fox news is the opposite of what is needed
And good investigative journalism is essential but that is not 'gotcha' journalism
What is there to be won by these numbers going down further?
Also, do these "appalling" journalists fall randomly fall from the sky and are then imposed on the news outlets, or is it possible that news outlets spend considerable effort on finding out what their customers want to be fed with, and then select and instruct their journalists what to say and write to please their audiences? Who's at fault then, news outlets, customers or the "appalling journalists"?
The media management need to look at themselves and the widespread criticism and take action to become relevant and useful.
I'm a somewhat firm believer in the principle that the market place should sort (many, not all) things out. Given that, I would argue that media management will only ever react to changes of their customers' behaviour. That leads to the conclusion that by consuming the media they like they get the media they deserve.
What is there to be won by these numbers going down further?
Also, do these "appalling" journalists fall randomly fall from the sky and are then imposed on the news outlets, or is it possible that news outlets spend considerable effort on finding out what their customers want to be fed with, and then select and instruct their journalists what to say and write to please their audiences? Who's at fault then, news outlets, customers or the "appalling journalists"?
The media management need to look at themselves and the widespread criticism and take action to become relevant and useful.
The most astonishing thing is that the senior management of the media companies are watching their output and thinking it's good. They must be thinking this, else the attitude of the hacks on the front line would have changed by now.
Massive props to the first media outlet who switches out a Lobby hack for someone with a medical or scientific background.
What is there to be won by these numbers going down further?
Also, do these "appalling" journalists fall randomly fall from the sky and are then imposed on the news outlets, or is it possible that news outlets spend considerable effort on finding out what their customers want to be fed with, and then select and instruct their journalists what to say and write to please their audiences? Who's at fault then, news outlets, customers or the "appalling journalists"?
The media management need to look at themselves and the widespread criticism and take action to become relevant and useful.
I'm a somewhat firm believer in the principle that the market place should sort (many, not all) things out. Given that, I would argue that media management will only ever react to changes of their customers' behaviour. That leads to the conclusion that by consuming the media they like they get the media they deserve.
As far as the BBC is concerned it can do whatever it likes, it is quaranteed tax payer funding
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Canada isn’t next door to the EU and the UK refuses to put guarantees about a level playing field . The EU are supposed to accept vague reassurances and would be mad to trust any of those given the UK has been trying to walk away from its commitments to NI and Ireland . The UK can keep droning on about independence, everyone’s bored now!
The one entity everyone wants you to think is in charge, though, is The Science. Of all the seven phrases of magnetic fridge poetry that are rearranged each day to fashion a 5pm briefing, the most ominous is surely “We have, at all times, been led by the science.” This is untrue, no matter how many times they say it. We have, at all times, been led by the government, whose job it is to take the scientific advice and make political decisions based on it. The ministers do not, in fact, all work for “The Science”, the most suspiciously shadowy overlord since Keyser Söze.
“The Science” is not some monolithic stone tablet that gets handed to Raab to read out to the masses – and all scientists themselves know this. The claim that government would be “led by the science” was reassuring many weeks ago, at the start of all this. But now, through suspicious overuse to the exclusion of all other considerations, it has become troubling. Whenever some politician standing next to him says it these days, my overactive imagination fancies it sees a flicker behind the eyes of Chris Whitty. Is he realising that they are fitting him up to be the guy who needs at least 36 changes of shirt for the inevitable public inquiry?
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
Another encouraging drop (577) in hospital admissions related to Covid-19 today - down 3.5% (was similar yesterday). Hopefully this continues over the next few days.
Admissions and ICU utilisation down in Leicester day on day.
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we'll have been completely out of the EU for 3 years. Any Brexit effects will have been overwhelmed by the COVID recession.
Canada isn’t next door to the EU and the UK refuses to put guarantees about a level playing field . The EU are supposed to accept vague reassurances and would be mad to trust any of those given the UK has been trying to walk away from its commitments to NI and Ireland . The UK can keep droning on about independence, everyone’s bored now!
I am not bored and this is a very serious issue
An article yesterday suggests that the EU may be in danger of breaching the wording in the WDA requiring best endeavours and the UK could have grounds to stop the payment in that agreement backed in international law.
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway. S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.
Yep, but the media narrative is such that it has to be 100k per day no matter the cost, no matter the science.
South Korea has also had the virus far more under control than we've ever managed.
The UK is painfully slowly moving in the right direction with testing and surveillance. I wonder how much of a distraction this testing target has been though.
I bet it has been a distraction. Targets should be kept for the gun range IMO. I have never come across one in other matters that has led to anything but needless stress, false measurement, linguistic contortions and poor outcomes.
I would actually say the reverse. A target is a good way of communicating across an organisation, if used correctly.
In which case they are rarely used correctly. You should always focus on process and people not outcomes. Get the process and people right, outcomes look after themselves.
Sure, throw some targets in there too, adds colour, but never allow a target to dominate and take on a life of its own. Or I'll put it another way - never set a hard target that simply has to be met. It's very counterproductive.
What is there to be won by these numbers going down further?
Also, do these "appalling" journalists fall randomly fall from the sky and are then imposed on the news outlets, or is it possible that news outlets spend considerable effort on finding out what their customers want to be fed with, and then select and instruct their journalists what to say and write to please their audiences? Who's at fault then, news outlets, customers or the "appalling journalists"?
The media management need to look at themselves and the widespread criticism and take action to become relevant and useful.
I'm a somewhat firm believer in the principle that the market place should sort (many, not all) things out. Given that, I would argue that media management will only ever react to changes of their customers' behaviour. That leads to the conclusion that by consuming the media they like they get the media they deserve.
As far as the BBC is concerned it can do whatever it likes, it is quaranteed tax payer funding
I agree that a strong argument can be made for a state broadcaster outside of the market place, which then should be held to the highest standards of its profession. I recall that there were discussions on that topic on PB.com where the majority was shouting rather loudly that the BBC needs to be abolished. I wonder whether the views of some people have changed on that.
"More than 2.6million people in London may have already caught the coronavirus and recovered from it, data suggests.
Early results from antibody surveys - which reveal how many people have had the illness already - suggest the true death rate for COVID-19 may be anywhere between 0.1 and 0.6 per cent."
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
Interesting hint from Dr Harries that arrival traveller checks/quarantine may evolve from currently "none" to "something" if we get to "test/track/trace".
Canada isn’t next door to the EU and the UK refuses to put guarantees about a level playing field . The EU are supposed to accept vague reassurances and would be mad to trust any of those given the UK has been trying to walk away from its commitments to NI and Ireland . The UK can keep droning on about independence, everyone’s bored now!
I am not bored and this is a very serious issue
An article yesterday suggests that the EU may be in danger of breaching the wording in the WDA requiring best endeavours and the UK could have grounds to stop the payment in that agreement backed in international law.
Nice new avatar of you walking the plank there BigG
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By 2024 the matter will be resolved one way or another
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we'll have been completely out of the EU for 3 years. Any Brexit effects will have been overwhelmed by the COVID recession.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we'll have been completely out of the EU for 3 years. Any Brexit effects will have been overwhelmed by the COVID recession.
Though by then one would hope most businesses were operating normally again
Another encouraging drop (577) in hospital admissions related to Covid-19 today - down 3.5% (was similar yesterday). Hopefully this continues over the next few days.
Admissions and ICU utilisation down in Leicester day on day.
Great news! Hopefully starting to turn the corner.
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
It's pretty clear that's where we are heading to. I genuinely don't understand what benefits the government believes it will deliver over an extension, but I imagine I am in a minority on that. It will be fascinating to see how we all cope.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
"More than 2.6million people in London may have already caught the coronavirus and recovered from it, data suggests.
Early results from antibody surveys - which reveal how many people have had the illness already - suggest the true death rate for COVID-19 may be anywhere between 0.1 and 0.6 per cent."
What is there to be won by these numbers going down further?
Also, do these "appalling" journalists fall randomly fall from the sky and are then imposed on the news outlets, or is it possible that news outlets spend considerable effort on finding out what their customers want to be fed with, and then select and instruct their journalists what to say and write to please their audiences? Who's at fault then, news outlets, customers or the "appalling journalists"?
The media management need to look at themselves and the widespread criticism and take action to become relevant and useful.
I'm a somewhat firm believer in the principle that the market place should sort (many, not all) things out. Given that, I would argue that media management will only ever react to changes of their customers' behaviour. That leads to the conclusion that by consuming the media they like they get the media they deserve.
As far as the BBC is concerned it can do whatever it likes, it is quaranteed tax payer funding
I agree that a strong argument can be made for a state broadcaster outside of the market place, which then should be held to the highest standards of its profession. I recall that there were discussions on that topic on PB.com where the majority was shouting rather loudly that the BBC needs to be abolished. I wonder whether the views of some people have changed on that.
The BBC is very far from perfect, but still better than other media outlets both in terms of consistent quality and value.
One of the nation’s strategic priorities should be to avoid any further Americanisation of British media.
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway. S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.
Yep, but the media narrative is such that it has to be 100k per day no matter the cost, no matter the science.
South Korea has also had the virus far more under control than we've ever managed.
The UK is painfully slowly moving in the right direction with testing and surveillance. I wonder how much of a distraction this testing target has been though.
I bet it has been a distraction. Targets should be kept for the gun range IMO. I have never come across one in other matters that has led to anything but needless stress, false measurement, linguistic contortions and poor outcomes.
They can be great if used to inspire (the BHAGs like 'we shall land a man on the moon and return him safely to earth by the end of this decade'), deadly when used to reward 'performance'.
I hammer into participants in my biorisk workshops that metrics should only be used for learning purposes, and targets solely for goal orientation and inspiration purpose; but neither should be used for either performance measurement or remuneration calculations.
Canada isn’t next door to the EU and the UK refuses to put guarantees about a level playing field . The EU are supposed to accept vague reassurances and would be mad to trust any of those given the UK has been trying to walk away from its commitments to NI and Ireland . The UK can keep droning on about independence, everyone’s bored now!
I am not bored and this is a very serious issue
An article yesterday suggests that the EU may be in danger of breaching the wording in the WDA requiring best endeavours and the UK could have grounds to stop the payment in that agreement backed in international law.
Yep, I have no doubt that the government will seek ways to not pay the money. My expectation is that our relationship with Europe is going to get even worse than it is nowl Again, I do not see the benefit there is to us in that, but I am in a minority.
Canada isn’t next door to the EU and the UK refuses to put guarantees about a level playing field . The EU are supposed to accept vague reassurances and would be mad to trust any of those given the UK has been trying to walk away from its commitments to NI and Ireland . The UK can keep droning on about independence, everyone’s bored now!
I am not bored and this is a very serious issue
An article yesterday suggests that the EU may be in danger of breaching the wording in the WDA requiring best endeavours and the UK could have grounds to stop the payment in that agreement backed in international law.
Nice new avatar of you walking the plank there BigG
Actually doing my 'titanic' impression on Bras d'Or lake in Nova Scotia in a very precarious position in a strong wind on a lovely sailing yacht
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
It's pretty clear that's where we are heading to. I genuinely don't understand what benefits the government believes it will deliver over an extension, but I imagine I am in a minority on that. It will be fascinating to see how we all cope.
I guess the Government views the Coronavirus aftermath as a handy cloak for a WTO trade arrangement.
A statement that comes to mind is this: 'No Deal Brexit would have been fantastic but for Covid-19'!
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway. S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.
Yep, but the media narrative is such that it has to be 100k per day no matter the cost, no matter the science.
South Korea has also had the virus far more under control than we've ever managed.
The UK is painfully slowly moving in the right direction with testing and surveillance. I wonder how much of a distraction this testing target has been though.
I bet it has been a distraction. Targets should be kept for the gun range IMO. I have never come across one in other matters that has led to anything but needless stress, false measurement, linguistic contortions and poor outcomes.
I would actually say the reverse. A target is a good way of communicating across an organisation, if used correctly.
In which case they are rarely used correctly. You should always focus on process and people not outcomes. Get the process and people right, outcomes look after themselves.
Sure, throw some targets in there too, adds colour, but never allow a target to dominate and take on a life of its own. Or I'll put it another way - never set a hard target that simply has to be met. It's very counterproductive.
I have seen the "no target" approach become "well, we have no target to meet, so insert job security process until the time_ts wrap"
The daughter of a friend of mine who is a primary school teacher has been finding the same. People are simply not willing to risk their kids attending school even when it is available. Similarly, can anyone imagine going (as opposed to missing) to a busy pub and pushing your way to the bar? Just not going to happen whether these restrictions are removed or not.
Much more practical is back to work in construction, offices, courts (please) and other environments where social distancing can largely if not completely be maintained.
Will be compulsory masks and staggered release of lockdown.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
If you're going to go for a Hard Brexit after transition then now is the perfect time to do so. The chaos of COVID19 is going to lead to a restructuring of the economy anyway, may as well get that over and done with at the same time and have our economic recovery be on our new trading arrangements.
What is there to be won by these numbers going down further?
Also, do these "appalling" journalists fall randomly fall from the sky and are then imposed on the news outlets, or is it possible that news outlets spend considerable effort on finding out what their customers want to be fed with, and then select and instruct their journalists what to say and write to please their audiences? Who's at fault then, news outlets, customers or the "appalling journalists"?
The media management need to look at themselves and the widespread criticism and take action to become relevant and useful.
Be careful what you wish for. You may not approve of a media critical of the current government, but equally would you be comfortable with our own version of Fox News?
There is still a good deal of investigative journalism that highlights political wrongdoing. Cast your mind back to the (before it became a comic) Telegraph's expose of the Labour MPs expenses scandal. And Guido has caught Starmer out several times already! To an extent what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
they are few and very far between , journalism in UK is pretty pathetic.
The daughter of a friend of mine who is a primary school teacher has been finding the same. People are simply not willing to risk their kids attending school even when it is available. Similarly, can anyone imagine going (as opposed to missing) to a busy pub and pushing your way to the bar? Just not going to happen whether these restrictions are removed or not.
Much more practical is back to work in construction, offices, courts (please) and other environments where social distancing can largely if not completely be maintained.
I am sure we will all have masks when the lockdown is relaxed. By have masks, I mean of course the capacity to have masks.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
1. However you might view the leaking of govt material, I hope their source was 100% domestic and direct rather than say sourced via someone or somewhere who sourced it from someone who may have been working for a foreign government
2. Can they get the 2018, 2017 & 2016 assessments to see how much more this issue went up in risk versus the 2019 assessment
3,. Could they contextualise whether the assessment was written late enough to be aware of occurances in China (doubtful)
RE: US VP pick, a small amount of the money that is moving Klobuchar in recent days is mine, I have mentioned a couple of times now that Klobuchar and Harris were at the top for a reason. There is a thread within Biden's team for picking Klobuchar and has been just before she dropped out. The obvious imagery of female and racial minority is I think a substantive why Harris is in the position in the betting and of course it has its attractions for the Biden campaign. In reality though I think they should be joint favourites so to that extent Amy was value.
I'm lucky that I steadfastly stuck with Biden the whole way along as nominee, as my irritation on here with those claiming he was this or that probably showed. Its been profitable (assuming he closes as I haven't traded out) so I have spare to play with but my betting history on nominees is rather more successful than my VP picks. I am greened out on both Harris and Klobuchar but the profit potential on Klobuchar is much more.
You speak of "broad acceptance of the reasons why this [locking down] is having to be done". What would seem to have been broadly accepted is our Government's account of the reasons. I mean: there was considerable acceptance of what the Conservatives said were reasons to vote for them in December. But one can wonder whether they were reasons to do so.
Interesting hint from Dr Harries that arrival traveller checks/quarantine may evolve from currently "none" to "something" if we get to "test/track/trace".
We should by now have a plan of how we do traveller checks and quarantine ready.
I agree it is the wrong time to introduce it, and it may never be needed, but if it is we will probably start thinking about the implementation then and it will take us a month or so to sort out.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
A good trade deal with China perhaps?
Australia, Canada, African and other Asian nations like India and the USA of course, our largest single export destination
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By 2024 the matter will be resolved one way or another
I agree to the extent that I believe that Brexit will not feature as a prominent issue in 2024 -less so than at any election since 2010
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
A good trade deal with China perhaps?
Very much so. Even before the CV saga China was extremely keen on importing the kinds of services, financial and otherwise, that the UK is looking to export.
Canada isn’t next door to the EU and the UK refuses to put guarantees about a level playing field . The EU are supposed to accept vague reassurances and would be mad to trust any of those given the UK has been trying to walk away from its commitments to NI and Ireland . The UK can keep droning on about independence, everyone’s bored now!
I am not bored and this is a very serious issue
An article yesterday suggests that the EU may be in danger of breaching the wording in the WDA requiring best endeavours and the UK could have grounds to stop the payment in that agreement backed in international law.
Nice new avatar of you walking the plank there BigG
Actually doing my 'titanic' impression on Bras d'Or lake in Nova Scotia in a very precarious position in a strong wind on a lovely sailing yacht
All 5,000 home testing kits for key workers ran out within two minutes. The spokesman added the government hoped to have 18,000 daily home testing kits available for key workers by the “end of next week”.
So lets say all strands go well, that 20k home tests, 20k hospital tests, 20k drive-throughs...still not going to get to the 100k tests a day.
That's because capacity was only at 50k yesterday. They are confident of getting capacity up to 100k. All they need to do is offer more tests tomorrow.
No, I am saying, lets imagine capacity is still increased, they are saying they will only do 18k home test kits next week. I don't see how they get more than 20k from hospitals, as admissions starting to fall. And there aren't enough drive-throughs to be doing be doing 50-60-70k tests a day from that approach.
So, even optimistically, 20k for each strand.
I thought they were going from 20 to 50 drive-throughs before the end of the month? That might provide enough.
26 to 50 yes. But you need people to be aware of them and of the mindset to go to one. It takes times for people to start doing this.
I though they were getting appointments at the drive-throughs via the government website.
They won't be getting 100k tests a day done, if they insist on websites and appointments. They need as many centres as possible, and telling everyone who thinks they would benefit from a test to turn up. Demand needs to exceed supply.
The increasingly desperate media will be spinning 90k test this time next week as a massive failure on the part of the government.
If they get to 80k+ a day and spin the "we have capacity for 100k", they will be fine. The media nitpicking over that will look even more petty than usual.
If it is only 50-60k a day, the 100k capacity spin won't wash.
I think that is probably right. Missing the target will be a story regardless, but getting close and having 'capacity' will muddy the waters about what is being complained about versus what the promises were.
Canada isn’t next door to the EU and the UK refuses to put guarantees about a level playing field . The EU are supposed to accept vague reassurances and would be mad to trust any of those given the UK has been trying to walk away from its commitments to NI and Ireland . The UK can keep droning on about independence, everyone’s bored now!
I am not bored and this is a very serious issue
An article yesterday suggests that the EU may be in danger of breaching the wording in the WDA requiring best endeavours and the UK could have grounds to stop the payment in that agreement backed in international law.
Yep, I have no doubt that the government will seek ways to not pay the money. My expectation is that our relationship with Europe is going to get even worse than it is nowl Again, I do not see the benefit there is to us in that, but I am in a minority.
Reneging on the payments agreed in the "oven ready" Brexit deal would seem pretty stupid and short termist to me. Even more so if the section on the Irish Sea checks was also torn up and thrown away. Remember how every Conservative candidate was required to sign up to it?
A trade war in the middle of a recession, with other countries concentrating on protecting their producers over trade deals seems pretty idiotic to me.
Worth remembering that the only criteria required for a cabinet position was willingness to kamikaze.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
If you're going to go for a Hard Brexit after transition then now is the perfect time to do so. The chaos of COVID19 is going to lead to a restructuring of the economy anyway, may as well get that over and done with at the same time and have our economic recovery be on our new trading arrangements.
Yeah, the post- Covid economic recovery will be a breeze on the unicorn grazed uplands of WTO Brexit.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By 2024 the matter will be resolved one way or another
I agree to the extent that I believe that Brexit will not feature as a prominent issue in 2024 -less so than at any election since 2010
Brexit won't as it has been done, rejoining the single market will though as Starmer and the LDs and SNP will all push for that
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
A good trade deal with China perhaps?
Australia, Canada, African and other Asian nations like India and the USA of course, our largest single export destination
India are going for India first, the USA for USA first, the idea that we can get good trade deals from them whilst giving the cold shoulder to the EU & China is simply ridiculous.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
A good trade deal with China perhaps?
Australia, Canada, African and other Asian nations like India and the USA of course, our largest single export destination
India are going for India first, the USA for USA first, the idea that we can get good trade deals from them whilst giving the cold shoulder to the EU & China is simply ridiculous.
As we currently have no trade deals with the US or India any trade deal will be an improvement
1. However you might view the leaking of govt material, I hope their source was 100% domestic and direct rather than say sourced via someone or somewhere who sourced it from someone who may have been working for a foreign government
2. Can they get the 2018, 2017 & 2016 assessments to see how much more this issue went up in risk versus the 2019 assessment
3,. Could they contextualise whether the assessment was written late enough to be aware of occurances in China (doubtful)
RE: US VP pick, a small amount of the money that is moving Klobuchar in recent days is mine, I have mentioned a couple of times now that Klobuchar and Harris were at the top for a reason. There is a thread within Biden's team for picking Klobuchar and has been just before she dropped out. The obvious imagery of female and racial minority is I think a substantive why Harris is in the position in the betting and of course it has its attractions for the Biden campaign. In reality though I think they should be joint favourites so to that extent Amy was value.
I'm lucky that I steadfastly stuck with Biden the whole way along as nominee, as my irritation on here with those claiming he was this or that probably showed. Its been profitable (assuming he closes as I haven't traded out) so I have spare to play with but my betting history on nominees is rather more successful than my VP picks. I am greened out on both Harris and Klobuchar but the profit potential on Klobuchar is much more.
I kept green on Biden the whole way through, likewise. But I have traded out some profit now that he is almost there.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Post Brexit trade. Can I quote Boris Johnson? 'It will be fantastic!'
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
It's pretty clear that's where we are heading to. I genuinely don't understand what benefits the government believes it will deliver over an extension, but I imagine I am in a minority on that. It will be fascinating to see how we all cope.
I guess the Government views the Coronavirus aftermath as a handy cloak for a WTO trade arrangement.
A statement that comes to mind is this: 'No Deal Brexit would have been fantastic but for Covid-19'!
Quite. If you’re tanking by double digits in 2020, WTO is a rounding figure, at worst.
The EU are going to overplay their hand yet again if they are not careful. They are playing chicken with an opponent that doesn’t care. Add in they were getting nowhere on their budget pre (!) corona, and the tables are a lot more even than a year ago.
Barnier sounded a bit non plussed today, as if he’s pressing the buttons he pressed with May and doesn’t understand why it’s not working.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
A good trade deal with China perhaps?
Very much so. Even before the CV saga China was extremely keen on importing the kinds of services, financial and otherwise, that the UK is looking to export.
I thought we didn't want to trade with the Covid-19 exporting Chinese anymore?
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
If you're going to go for a Hard Brexit after transition then now is the perfect time to do so. The chaos of COVID19 is going to lead to a restructuring of the economy anyway, may as well get that over and done with at the same time and have our economic recovery be on our new trading arrangements.
Essentially a 1950s style economy, minus the heavy industry and manufacturing?
Its OK for me, I have my safe job and holiday on the Isle of Wight. It is going to be pretty tough on the other survivors.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
A good trade deal with China perhaps?
Australia, Canada, African and other Asian nations like India and the USA of course, our largest single export destination
India are going for India first, the USA for USA first, the idea that we can get good trade deals from them whilst giving the cold shoulder to the EU & China is simply ridiculous.
As we currently have no trade deals with the US or India any trade deal will be an improvement
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
If you're going to go for a Hard Brexit after transition then now is the perfect time to do so. The chaos of COVID19 is going to lead to a restructuring of the economy anyway, may as well get that over and done with at the same time and have our economic recovery be on our new trading arrangements.
Essentially a 1950s style economy, minus the heavy industry and manufacturing?
Its OK for me, I have my safe job and holiday on the Isle of Wight. It is going to be pretty tough on the other survivors.
They will be queuing up for government/public jobs in future.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
A good trade deal with China perhaps?
Very much so. Even before the CV saga China was extremely keen on importing the kinds of services, financial and otherwise, that the UK is looking to export.
I thought we didn't want to trade with the Covid-19 exporting Chinese anymore?
Define "trade". You only want to boycott their exports, but somehow entice them to buy what you want to sell. I can see no problem there.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By 2024 the matter will be resolved one way or another
I agree to the extent that I believe that Brexit will not feature as a prominent issue in 2024 -less so than at any election since 2010
Brexit won't as it has been done, rejoining the single market will though as Starmer and the LDs and SNP will all push for that
I do not expect that the EU will be at the fore of a 2024 election campaign - it will be relegated to a minor issue on a par with the elections of 1992 - 2010 inclusive.
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
It's pretty clear that's where we are heading to. I genuinely don't understand what benefits the government believes it will deliver over an extension, but I imagine I am in a minority on that. It will be fascinating to see how we all cope.
I guess the Government views the Coronavirus aftermath as a handy cloak for a WTO trade arrangement.
A statement that comes to mind is this: 'No Deal Brexit would have been fantastic but for Covid-19'!
Quite. If you’re tanking by double digits in 2020, WTO is a rounding figure, at worst.
The EU are going to overplay their hand yet again if they are not careful. They are playing chicken with an opponent that doesn’t care. Add in they were getting nowhere on their budget pre (!) corona, and the tables are a lot more even than a year ago.
Barnier sounded a bit non plussed today, as if he’s pressing the buttons he pressed with May and doesn’t understand why it’s not working.
YOU people do not seem to be able to take it in, the EU is not going to be a patsy to England. They will look after the EU and once you dummies get it then it will be far too late. All you will have is gruel and your blue passports, enjoy the fruit picking.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
If you're going to go for a Hard Brexit after transition then now is the perfect time to do so. The chaos of COVID19 is going to lead to a restructuring of the economy anyway, may as well get that over and done with at the same time and have our economic recovery be on our new trading arrangements.
Essentially a 1950s style economy, minus the heavy industry and manufacturing?
Its OK for me, I have my safe job and holiday on the Isle of Wight. It is going to be pretty tough on the other survivors.
As demand for our goods and services expands beyond the EU far from it
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway. S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.
Yep, but the media narrative is such that it has to be 100k per day no matter the cost, no matter the science.
Yes, but on this at least the media can be somewhat forgiven as the goverment set it and insisted upon it.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Philip, I sometimes wonder if you are for real, you come out with some real crackers at time.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By 2024 the matter will be resolved one way or another
I agree to the extent that I believe that Brexit will not feature as a prominent issue in 2024 -less so than at any election since 2010
Brexit won't as it has been done, rejoining the single market will though as Starmer and the LDs and SNP will all push for that
I do not expect that the EU will be at the fore of a 2024 election campaign - it will be relegated to a minor issue on a par with the elections of 1992 - 2010 inclusive.
We will be trading with the EU most likely on WTO terms by 2024, if that proves successful then no it will not be a big issue, if it is less successful then a return to the single market will be a big issue
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
If you're going to go for a Hard Brexit after transition then now is the perfect time to do so. The chaos of COVID19 is going to lead to a restructuring of the economy anyway, may as well get that over and done with at the same time and have our economic recovery be on our new trading arrangements.
Essentially a 1950s style economy, minus the heavy industry and manufacturing?
Its OK for me, I have my safe job and holiday on the Isle of Wight. It is going to be pretty tough on the other survivors.
There is already a major issue with food, in the sense of a lot of queuing and problems with the vulnerable getting home delivery. Although some panic buying and some supply problems with certain types of item e.g. flour, mostly it has been ok on the supply side.
Adding actual shortages especially fresh food, fuel etc because of problems at Dover, trade arrangement messes etc etc is just pouring petrol on the fire, as we keep being told there may well be a 2nd virus peak next winter.
Only an insane bunch of ideologists would go down that route.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
A good trade deal with China perhaps?
Australia, Canada, African and other Asian nations like India and the USA of course, our largest single export destination
India are going for India first, the USA for USA first, the idea that we can get good trade deals from them whilst giving the cold shoulder to the EU & China is simply ridiculous.
Some of the people on here are nuts, they live in a fantasy world of Rule Britannia, you could not make up the rubbish they come away with.
As men, in general, have a poorer immune system than women (missing a piece of chromosome 23) and are therefore more suspectible to Covid-19, surely the solution to the partial lifting of the lockdown is for the women to go out to work while the men stay at home and look after the children?
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By 2024 the matter will be resolved one way or another
I agree to the extent that I believe that Brexit will not feature as a prominent issue in 2024 -less so than at any election since 2010
Brexit won't as it has been done, rejoining the single market will though as Starmer and the LDs and SNP will all push for that
I do not expect that the EU will be at the fore of a 2024 election campaign - it will be relegated to a minor issue on a par with the elections of 1992 - 2010 inclusive.
We will be trading with the EU most likely on WTO terms by 2024, if that proves successful then no it will not be a big issue, if it is less successful then a return to the single market will be a big issue
I doubt that even in the latter scenario that it will be a major issue - any more than was the case at the elections of 1970 , 1966 and 1964.
That's fair, although I certainly get the impression that journalists, even though they know that context, think they are a lot more trusted by the public than they are. Especially the partisan ones who think they are the only ones holding anyone to account.
The media have already blown up their own argument about going into the lockdown too slowly and too late, because they now ask every day when it will end and we have only done a month.
At the very least people just shouting 'you should have gone earlier!' need to engage with the explanations of why it was not done, if they are to figure out if that was wrong.
boogeyman alert... twitter meltdown on 5...4...3...2...1...
The prime minister’s chief political adviser, Dominic Cummings, and a data scientist he worked with on the Vote Leave campaign for Brexit are on the secret scientific group advising the government on the coronavirus pandemic, according to a list leaked to the Guardian.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
A good trade deal with China perhaps?
Australia, Canada, African and other Asian nations like India and the USA of course, our largest single export destination
India are going for India first, the USA for USA first, the idea that we can get good trade deals from them whilst giving the cold shoulder to the EU &
China is simply ridiculous.
Some of the people on here are nuts, they live in a fantasy world of Rule Britannia, you could not make up the rubbish they come away with.
I have been in hundreds of meetings all over the world since the 80’s talking about selling UK manufactured goods. The sum total of how many times I’ve been asked about a trade deal is zero. Price quality delivery are far far far more important.
I’ve never believed the bollocks of the sky will fall if we vote to leave/leave the Eu/leave the single market or whatever other horseshit the remain camp has thrown up in increasingly desperate attempts to thwart us going, and anyway it’s all a walk in the park compared with the present situation.
That's fair, although I certainly get the impression that journalists, even though they know that context, think they are a lot more trusted by the public than they are. Especially the partisan ones who think they are the only ones holding anyone to account.
That's just the underdog yet god syndrome that some journalists have have that they are fighting this amazing fight for truth and justice, a single figure standing up against mighty institutions on behalf of others (who may or may not have actually asked them to help) and that everyone should recognise it.
Bit like some in the legal profession
Both professions are very important but as ever its the practitioners who sometimes are the problem.
That's fair, although I certainly get the impression that journalists, even though they know that context, think they are a lot more trusted by the public than they are. Especially the partisan ones who think they are the only ones holding anyone to account.
That's just the underdog yet god syndrome that some journalists have have that they are fighting this amazing fight for truth and justice, a single figure standing up against mighty institutions on behalf of others (who may or may not have actually asked them to help) and that everyone should recognise it.
Bit like some in the legal profession
Oh God yes!!!!!!
Both professions are very important but as ever its the practitioners who sometimes are the problem.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
A good trade deal with China perhaps?
Australia, Canada, African and other Asian nations like India and the USA of course, our largest single export destination
India are going for India first, the USA for USA first, the idea that we can get good trade deals from them whilst giving the cold shoulder to the EU &
China is simply ridiculous.
Some of the people on here are nuts, they live in a fantasy world of Rule Britannia, you could not make up the rubbish they come away with.
I have been in hundreds of meetings all over the world since the 80’s talking about selling UK manufactured goods. The sum total of how many times I’ve been asked about a trade deal is zero. Price quality delivery are far far far more important.
I’ve never believed the bollocks of the sky will fall if we vote to leave/leave the Eu/leave the single market or whatever other horseshit the remain camp has thrown up in increasingly desperate attempts to thwart us going, and anyway it’s all a walk in the park compared with the present situation.
So jog on.
Price (tarrifs) quality (meeting approved standards) and delivery (no customs delays) are all pretty key, in any deal.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By 2024 the matter will be resolved one way or another
I agree to the extent that I believe that Brexit will not feature as a prominent issue in 2024 -less so than at any election since 2010
Brexit won't as it has been done, rejoining the single market will though as Starmer and the LDs and SNP will all push for that
I do not expect that the EU will be at the fore of a 2024 election campaign - it will be relegated to a minor issue on a par with the elections of 1992 - 2010 inclusive.
We will be trading with the EU most likely on WTO terms by 2024, if that proves successful then no it will not be a big issue, if it is less successful then a return to the single market will be a big issue
I doubt that even in the latter scenario that it will be a major issue - any more than was the case at the elections of 1970 , 1966 and 1964.
Good to see you have such confidence in WTO terms then Justin
That's fair, although I certainly get the impression that journalists, even though they know that context, think they are a lot more trusted by the public than they are. Especially the partisan ones who think they are the only ones holding anyone to account.
That's just the underdog yet god syndrome that some journalists have have that they are fighting this amazing fight for truth and justice, a single figure standing up against mighty institutions on behalf of others (who may or may not have actually asked them to help) and that everyone should recognise it.
Bit like some in the legal profession
Oh God yes!!!!!!
Both professions are very important but as ever its the practitioners who sometimes are the problem.
Buggered up block quotes! 🙄
Journalists and lawyers against the wall come the revolution.
Accountants and anyone else charging by the minute in some middle class 18th century style had better watch out too.
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway. S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.
Yep, but the media narrative is such that it has to be 100k per day no matter the cost, no matter the science.
South Korea has also had the virus far more under control than we've ever managed.
The UK is painfully slowly moving in the right direction with testing and surveillance. I wonder how much of a distraction this testing target has been though.
I bet it has been a distraction. Targets should be kept for the gun range IMO. I have never come across one in other matters that has led to anything but needless stress, false measurement, linguistic contortions and poor outcomes.
I would actually say the reverse. A target is a good way of communicating across an organisation, if used correctly.
In which case they are rarely used correctly. You should always focus on process and people not outcomes. Get the process and people right, outcomes look after themselves.
Sure, throw some targets in there too, adds colour, but never allow a target to dominate and take on a life of its own. Or I'll put it another way - never set a hard target that simply has to be met. It's very counterproductive.
I have seen the "no target" approach become "well, we have no target to meet, so insert job security process until the time_ts wrap"
Meaning you have got the people wrong. Recommend a kick up the arse.
My golden rule for targets -
Has to be (i) meaningful and (ii) achievable.
By meaningful, I mean has a genuine and important real world consequence You test this by asking what happens if the target is not met. Examples of answers which pass the test. "Millions will be badly inconvenienced". Or "We will lose a great deal of money". Examples which fail. "The CEO will be livid." Or "It will be embarrassing." Or "Matty will get a roasting at the presser."
Achievable means can be done without sacrificing other equally or more important objectives. And without unduly compromising the mental or physical health of the people charged with the task.
If these criteria are met, a target can IMO add value. But they rarely are met.
Comments
That must have led to some interesting interaction between companies and their highly paid but perhaps not truly essential executives and managers.
There is still a good deal of investigative journalism that highlights political wrongdoing. Cast your mind back to the (before it became a comic) Telegraph's expose of the Labour MPs expenses scandal. And Guido has caught Starmer out several times already! To an extent what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
And good investigative journalism is essential but that is not 'gotcha' journalism
Given that, I would argue that media management will only ever react to changes of their customers' behaviour.
That leads to the conclusion that by consuming the media they like they get the media they deserve.
Massive props to the first media outlet who switches out a Lobby hack for someone with a medical or scientific background.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
An article yesterday suggests that the EU may be in danger of breaching the wording in the WDA requiring best endeavours and the UK could have grounds to stop the payment in that agreement backed in international law.
Sure, throw some targets in there too, adds colour, but never allow a target to dominate and take on a life of its own. Or I'll put it another way - never set a hard target that simply has to be met. It's very counterproductive.
I recall that there were discussions on that topic on PB.com where the majority was shouting rather loudly that the BBC needs to be abolished.
I wonder whether the views of some people have changed on that.
Daily Mail
'may'
'suggests'
'survey'
'suggest'
'may'
Not far off 'sources say'.
https://twitter.com/GaryLineker/status/1253721197164072961?s=19
One of the nation’s strategic priorities should be to avoid any further Americanisation of British media.
The situation in the states is dire.
I hammer into participants in my biorisk workshops that metrics should only be used for learning purposes, and targets solely for goal orientation and inspiration purpose; but neither should be used for either performance measurement or remuneration calculations.
A statement that comes to mind is this: 'No Deal Brexit would have been fantastic but for Covid-19'!
Who can we cross off the list next?
1. However you might view the leaking of govt material, I hope their source was 100% domestic and direct rather than say sourced via someone or somewhere who sourced it from someone who may have been working for a foreign government
2. Can they get the 2018, 2017 & 2016 assessments to see how much more this issue went up in risk versus the 2019 assessment
3,. Could they contextualise whether the assessment was written late enough to be aware of occurances in China (doubtful)
RE: US VP pick, a small amount of the money that is moving Klobuchar in recent days is mine, I have mentioned a couple of times now that Klobuchar and Harris were at the top for a reason. There is a thread within Biden's team for picking Klobuchar and has been just before she dropped out. The obvious imagery of female and racial minority is I think a substantive why Harris is in the position in the betting and of course it has its attractions for the Biden campaign. In reality though I think they should be joint favourites so to that extent Amy was value.
I'm lucky that I steadfastly stuck with Biden the whole way along as nominee, as my irritation on here with those claiming he was this or that probably showed. Its been profitable (assuming he closes as I haven't traded out) so I have spare to play with but my betting history on nominees is rather more successful than my VP picks. I am greened out on both Harris and Klobuchar but the profit potential on Klobuchar is much more.
I agree it is the wrong time to introduce it, and it may never be needed, but if it is we will probably start thinking about the implementation then and it will take us a month or so to sort out.
A trade war in the middle of a recession, with other countries concentrating on protecting their producers over trade deals seems pretty idiotic to me.
Worth remembering that the only criteria required for a cabinet position was willingness to kamikaze.
Elect clowns, expect a circus.
The EU are going to overplay their hand yet again if they are not careful. They are playing chicken with an opponent that doesn’t care. Add in they were getting nowhere on their budget pre (!) corona, and the tables are a lot more even than a year ago.
Barnier sounded a bit non plussed today, as if he’s pressing the buttons he pressed with May and doesn’t understand why it’s not working.
Its OK for me, I have my safe job and holiday on the Isle of Wight. It is going to be pretty tough on the other survivors.
https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1253606271288311808
https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1253606282097025026
You only want to boycott their exports, but somehow entice them to buy what you want to sell. I can see no problem there.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
Adding actual shortages especially fresh food, fuel etc because of problems at Dover, trade arrangement messes etc etc is just pouring petrol on the fire, as we keep being told there may well be a 2nd virus peak next winter.
Only an insane bunch of ideologists would go down that route.
Oh wait...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8253151/Coronavirus-Bundesliga-stars-play-MASKS-games-STOPPED-slip-off.html
The prime minister’s chief political adviser, Dominic Cummings, and a data scientist he worked with on the Vote Leave campaign for Brexit are on the secret scientific group advising the government on the coronavirus pandemic, according to a list leaked to the Guardian.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I’ve never believed the bollocks of the sky will fall if we vote to leave/leave the Eu/leave the single market or whatever other horseshit the remain camp has thrown up in increasingly desperate attempts to thwart us going, and anyway it’s all a walk in the park compared with the present situation.
So jog on.
Bit like some in the legal profession
Both professions are very important but as ever its the practitioners who sometimes are the problem.
Journalists and lawyers against the wall come the revolution.
Accountants and anyone else charging by the minute in some middle class 18th century style had better watch out too.
Sooner computers replace them all the better.
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1253690107762098176?s=20
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1253691107298308102?s=20
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1253731936188727297?s=20
My golden rule for targets -
Has to be (i) meaningful and (ii) achievable.
By meaningful, I mean has a genuine and important real world consequence You test this by asking what happens if the target is not met. Examples of answers which pass the test. "Millions will be badly inconvenienced". Or "We will lose a great deal of money". Examples which fail. "The CEO will be livid." Or "It will be embarrassing." Or "Matty will get a roasting at the presser."
Achievable means can be done without sacrificing other equally or more important objectives. And without unduly compromising the mental or physical health of the people charged with the task.
If these criteria are met, a target can IMO add value. But they rarely are met.