Is this a “Trumpian” going after the media? It’s hardly unprecedented for a Govt rebuttal of a story to contain a criticism of the organisation making it. A “”Trumpian” response would be to make no attempt at rebuttal at all, but simply declare any story “fake news” simply on account of it being critical of himself.
If anything, the responses of the likes of Campbell in Blair days were far more “Trumpian” albeit his approach was generally (but not always) not to deny potentially damaging stories by implying they were factually wrong but simply to respond by saying that the only people interested in them were the Westminster bubble. Ie. trying to shut down a story by not engaging with it at all.
Why is the vast amount of empty hospital beds (four times more than normal according to the hsj) not being more widely reported? Or the increasing deaths from non-covid causes (due to people not being treated/seeking help for other conditions)? An undertaker told me this week they were very busy - but only a slim percentage were from covid. This lockdown is probably killing more people than the virus.
Main story on Sky News this morning. Obviously we don't have the counterfactual for COVID-19 without lockdown, but we do have a rough idea of what normally happens in the health service. Plenty of people go to A&E who probably shouldn't, but the doctors at Warrington Hospital seem to think that people aren't going to hospital when they should.
The problem is not demand from patients not being met, the services are mostly running. The problem is that patients don't want to come.
Elective surgery has stopped too and won't be easy to restart. Dentistry, Max Fax, ENT are all aerosol generating so a massive requirement for PPE. Then there is the problem that all the anaesthetists are working in ICU, and the operating theatres converted to overflow ICU.
Waiting areas, daycase units, wards all make social distancing impossible without major building redesign, or greatly reduced numbers.
I don’t buy the Guardian story. There are too many holes in it. But we know from the US how those giving scientific advice to government can be subsumed into acquiescence in the face of politics. https://twitter.com/tomswarbrick1/status/1253489000897282052?s=21
Why is the vast amount of Waiting areas, daycase units, wards all make social distancing impossible without major building redesign, or greatly reduced numbers.
On the other hand - superfluous use of the NHS for trivial and non essential conditions must be at zero - and may not return.
Should imagine sport and pubs being closed help keep A&E quieter too.
Is this a story? I don’t know, quite probably. But does the journalist realise that putting the quote at the heart of it only serves to undermine what may be a serious issue? Because, let’s face it, if PPE was really made for a 6 ft 3 rugby player then there’s a hell of a lot of men that it’s not going to fit either....
Oh great, so now we have China threatening everyone who doesn’t agree to promote their own view of how they let a nasty virus out to infect the world. Poor show for the EU if the story is true, although I suspect they are not the last organisation to be targeted in this way. The WHO are already going full-on with the Sinophilia.
It wasn’t a “non denial denial”. Such an argument means any disputing of a published story containing a mixture of facts, exaggerations, innuendo and speculation could be thus characterised.
The Guardian story was an attempt to exaggerate an undisputed fact (Cummings sometimes attends/observes SAGE meetings and sometimes asks questions of those there) into something deep and sinister and drawing unfounded speculative conclusions that this attendance has changed the basis for the scientific advice to imply that when the Govt say they are “following the scientific advice”, they are actually following their own path under the bogus cover of science. Speculative conclusions for which they have no basis, but which they know will grab headlines and be lapped up by those who share their world view.
If the issue of substance was his being there at all then the Guardian wouldn’t have felt the need to pad it up to the extent that they did.
What about Lewis" point that there is a Trumpian going after the media? Public support for the media has not collapsed, so that's a lie for a start, if you believe the polling someone posted here the other day
Public support for the media is and always had been poor..and its getting worse. I think there was a poll about it a few days ago. Thats why people dont buy paperz anymore. The only newspaper worth its salt is the Times. The BBC nonsense about the NHS head trying to get Burberry head office tel no.was appalling... the Grauniad story is nonsense....
There's a rhyme; You cannot hope to bribe or twist, thank God, The British journalist. For when you see what he will do Unbribed There's no occasion to!
'Twas written of course in the days when there were few I any female journalists!
The YouGov poll doesn’t show confidence in journalists has fallen, it just shows its low, just as it has always been. Yet for decades we have allowed journalists to shape the debate while governments, including this one, have used them as conduits for leaks, kite-flying and unattributable quotes. Even now, journalists are being used to place stories, settle scores, brief against political opponents and so on. We are all complicit in the media we have. The politicians most of all. https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1253592227512832001?s=21
"Meanwhile, President Jair Bolsonaro has shown no sign of wavering from his insistence that COVID-19 is a relatively minor disease and that broad social-distancing measures are not needed to stop it."
The outcode for countries seems to depend heavily on their leaders.
The YouGov poll doesn’t show confidence in journalists has fallen, it just shows its low, just as it has always been. Yet for decades we have allowed journalists to shape the debate while governments, including this one, have used them as conduits for leaks, kite-flying and unattributable quotes. Even now, journalists are being used to place stories, settle scores, brief against political opponents and so on. We are all complicit in the media we have. The politicians most of all. https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1253592227512832001?s=21
I think probably there used to be a larger gap between the different types of media. The tabloids were obviously always at rock bottom. But the quality dailies? And the broadcast media (with the BBC at its heart)? Not so much I think.
Civil Service figures are pretty astonishing - what could explain that? Did Yes-Minister do that much damage in the early eighties?
The YouGov poll doesn’t show confidence in journalists has fallen, it just shows its low, just as it has always been. Yet for decades we have allowed journalists to shape the debate while governments, including this one, have used them as conduits for leaks, kite-flying and unattributable quotes. Even now, journalists are being used to place stories, settle scores, brief against political opponents and so on. We are all complicit in the media we have. The politicians most of all. https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1253592227512832001?s=21
I think probably there used to be a larger gap between the different types of media. The tabloids were obviously always at rock bottom. But the quality dailies? And the broadcast media (with the BBC at its heart)? Not so much I think.
Dare I suggest that the 2020 numbers are going to show a very sharp decline. It’s clear that even the top end of the media are having a very bad crisis as they struggle for revenue in a declining market - see the hatchet jobs in the Guardian and even the Sunday Times last week. The less said about the performances of the TV hacks at the daily press conferences, the better.
I don’t buy the Guardian story. There are too many holes in it. But we know from the US how those giving scientific advice to government can be subsumed into acquiescence in the face of politics. https://twitter.com/tomswarbrick1/status/1253489000897282052?s=21
Southam, this is the bit that I find concerning. "The government’s former chief scientific adviser Sir David King said he was “shocked” to discover there were political advisers on Sage. “If you are giving science advice, your advice should be free of any political bias,” he said. “That is just so critically important.” Told that Cummings was in the 23 March meeting, King replied: “Oh my goodness. Isn’t this maybe why they don’t want us to know who was there?” King said political advisers were never on the equivalent committees of Sage when he chaired them and argued that Cummings, who is not a scientist, could report his own interpretation of Sage advice back to the prime minister."
The YouGov poll doesn’t show confidence in journalists has fallen, it just shows its low, just as it has always been. Yet for decades we have allowed journalists to shape the debate while governments, including this one, have used them as conduits for leaks, kite-flying and unattributable quotes. Even now, journalists are being used to place stories, settle scores, brief against political opponents and so on. We are all complicit in the media we have. The politicians most of all. https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1253592227512832001?s=21
I think probably there used to be a larger gap between the different types of media. The tabloids were obviously always at rock bottom. But the quality dailies? And the broadcast media (with the BBC at its heart)? Not so much I think.
Cummings probably uses the media to brief anonymously more than any senior Downing Street figure since Campbell. He lashes out at ministers, officials, opponents and countless others. Unfortunately, senior journalists have played along and have undoubtedly damaged their reputations. The need to fill the spaces in the 24 hour news cycle has a lot to answer for.
I don’t buy the Guardian story. There are too many holes in it. But we know from the US how those giving scientific advice to government can be subsumed into acquiescence in the face of politics. https://twitter.com/tomswarbrick1/status/1253489000897282052?s=21
Southam, this is the bit that I find concerning. "The government’s former chief scientific adviser Sir David King said he was “shocked” to discover there were political advisers on Sage. “If you are giving science advice, your advice should be free of any political bias,” he said. “That is just so critically important.” Told that Cummings was in the 23 March meeting, King replied: “Oh my goodness. Isn’t this maybe why they don’t want us to know who was there?” King said political advisers were never on the equivalent committees of Sage when he chaired them and argued that Cummings, who is not a scientist, could report his own interpretation of Sage advice back to the prime minister."
Indeed - that's the killer paragraph. It just goes to reinforce the narrative that this Government has handled this pandemic in a sub-optimal manner. There is a long way yet to run on this...
Oh great, so now we have China threatening everyone who doesn’t agree to promote their own view of how they let a nasty virus out to infect the world. Poor show for the EU if the story is true, although I suspect they are not the last organisation to be targeted in this way. The WHO are already going full-on with the Sinophilia.
Brexiteers are going to have to make choices. EU or China? They are in charge and will now need a consistent and long term relationship with at least one of those. Grandstanding to the press about what they dont like about them wont cut it.
Journalism at an all.time low? BBC Wales showed the Brighton Pavilion thinking it was a mosque during a piece about Ramadan.. in the Sun p23
I just showed my (non-English) wife a photo of the Pavilion and asked what she thought it was. Her first answer - a mosque. It does look a little mosque-ish to be fair.
No excuse for a BBC picture editor to get it wrong though.
Oh great, so now we have China threatening everyone who doesn’t agree to promote their own view of how they let a nasty virus out to infect the world. Poor show for the EU if the story is true, although I suspect they are not the last organisation to be targeted in this way. The WHO are already going full-on with the Sinophilia.
China will be adopting a Plata O Plomo approach to targeting each of the top 'beyond reaproach' WHO officials.
Why is the vast amount of empty hospital beds (four times more than normal according to the hsj) not being more widely reported? Or the increasing deaths from non-covid causes (due to people not being treated/seeking help for other conditions)? An undertaker told me this week they were very busy - but only a slim percentage were from covid. This lockdown is probably killing more people than the virus.
Main story on Sky News this morning. Obviously we don't have the counterfactual for COVID-19 without lockdown, but we do have a rough idea of what normally happens in the health service. Plenty of people go to A&E who probably shouldn't, but the doctors at Warrington Hospital seem to think that people aren't going to hospital when they should.
The problem is not demand from patients not being met, the services are mostly running. The problem is that patients don't want to come.
Elective surgery has stopped too and won't be easy to restart. Dentistry, Max Fax, ENT are all aerosol generating so a massive requirement for PPE. Then there is the problem that all the anaesthetists are working in ICU, and the operating theatres converted to overflow ICU.
Waiting areas, daycase units, wards all make social distancing impossible without major building redesign, or greatly reduced numbers.
Especially in the big cities can we not start to reduce the number of building where covid 19 is treated as the number of cases drop? And also push out other types of care into other buildings (loads of empty hotels, offices etc that can be requisitioned easily if needed on top of existing healthcare buildings).
It looks like there are about 100 hospitals in London, surely at least 10 of them could be kept covid 19 free?
Oh great, so now we have China threatening everyone who doesn’t agree to promote their own view of how they let a nasty virus out to infect the world. Poor show for the EU if the story is true, although I suspect they are not the last organisation to be targeted in this way. The WHO are already going full-on with the Sinophilia.
The story is, I'm sure, true. China is very aggressive in diplomatic channels in encouraging countries not to publish negative stories about them. While none of this is recent, the UK has suppressed reports about China's treatment of ethnic minorities and in Tibet.
Full credit, though, to the authors of the report. Upon realising they were going to get censored they leaked the story to the NY Times, ensuring that it probably gets more coverage than an eminently ignorable EU report.
Journalism at an all.time low? BBC Wales showed the Brighton Pavilion thinking it was a mosque during a piece about Ramadan.. in the Sun p23
I just showed my (non-English) wife a photo of the Pavilion and asked what she thought it was. Her first answer - a mosque. It does look a little mosque-ish to be fair.
No excuse for a BBC picture editor to get it wrong though.
It is the most fabulous mix of oriental styles as misunderstood by designers who had only ever seen pictures.
It was used as a military hospital for Indian troops in WW1 for a bit, so that they could feel at home.
I don’t buy the Guardian story. There are too many holes in it. But we know from the US how those giving scientific advice to government can be subsumed into acquiescence in the face of politics. https://twitter.com/tomswarbrick1/status/1253489000897282052?s=21
Southam, this is the bit that I find concerning. "The government’s former chief scientific adviser Sir David King said he was “shocked” to discover there were political advisers on Sage. “If you are giving science advice, your advice should be free of any political bias,” he said. “That is just so critically important.” Told that Cummings was in the 23 March meeting, King replied: “Oh my goodness. Isn’t this maybe why they don’t want us to know who was there?” King said political advisers were never on the equivalent committees of Sage when he chaired them and argued that Cummings, who is not a scientist, could report his own interpretation of Sage advice back to the prime minister."
Indeed - that's the killer paragraph. It just goes to reinforce the narrative that this Government has handled this pandemic in a sub-optimal manner. There is a long way yet to run on this...
Oh, piss off with your politicised "killer paragraphs" and your "narratives". There has never in our lifetimes been a pandemic that has required the level of political intervention required of Covid-19. It has required our entire economic, social and politcal norms to be upended. So Number 10 had their guy there. And?
You are determined to do harm to Boris Johnson. He had the temerity to take us out the EU. So he must be attacked, regardless. Even when he is doing what it takes to save the lives of tens of thousands of our citizens across government. If you think that is fair game, then frankly you deserve nothing but our scorn.
Mr. Above, it's an ironic forced choice (we have no trade agreement with the US, with whom we do plenty of business) some Remainer types are now employing.
The EU is the one that wants to directly impose laws on us in perpetuity via the 'level playing field'.
China's obviously untrustworthy.
If the EU agrees to a reasonable trade agreement that's fine. But the notion we should roll over to the EU's unacceptable demands because China's worse is crackers.
The YouGov poll doesn’t show confidence in journalists has fallen, it just shows its low, just as it has always been. Yet for decades we have allowed journalists to shape the debate while governments, including this one, have used them as conduits for leaks, kite-flying and unattributable quotes. Even now, journalists are being used to place stories, settle scores, brief against political opponents and so on. We are all complicit in the media we have. The politicians most of all. https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1253592227512832001?s=21
I think probably there used to be a larger gap between the different types of media. The tabloids were obviously always at rock bottom. But the quality dailies? And the broadcast media (with the BBC at its heart)? Not so much I think.
Cummings probably uses the media to brief anonymously more than any senior Downing Street figure since Campbell. He lashes out at ministers, officials, opponents and countless others. Unfortunately, senior journalists have played along and have undoubtedly damaged their reputations. The need to fill the spaces in the 24 hour news cycle has a lot to answer for.
Oh absolutely. It’s ludicrous the amount of times in the last 9 months there have been reports that began “a no10 source is quoted as saying...” which then conclude with “Downing Street denied the story”.
Oh great, so now we have China threatening everyone who doesn’t agree to promote their own view of how they let a nasty virus out to infect the world. Poor show for the EU if the story is true, although I suspect they are not the last organisation to be targeted in this way. The WHO are already going full-on with the Sinophilia.
Brexiteers are going to have to make choices. EU or China? They are in charge and will now need a consistent and long term relationship with at least one of those. Grandstanding to the press about what they dont like about them wont cut it.
The choice has been made: no to the EU, no to China, all in with a bloke who believes you can cure the coronavirus by injecting yourself with bleach.
The YouGov poll doesn’t show confidence in journalists has fallen, it just shows its low, just as it has always been. Yet for decades we have allowed journalists to shape the debate while governments, including this one, have used them as conduits for leaks, kite-flying and unattributable quotes. Even now, journalists are being used to place stories, settle scores, brief against political opponents and so on. We are all complicit in the media we have. The politicians most of all. https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1253592227512832001?s=21
I think probably there used to be a larger gap between the different types of media. The tabloids were obviously always at rock bottom. But the quality dailies? And the broadcast media (with the BBC at its heart)? Not so much I think.
Civil Service figures are pretty astonishing - what could explain that? Did Yes-Minister do that much damage in the early eighties?
Just a logical result of anti-eu propaganda, I suspect. If unelected Brussels bureaucrats are ruining Britain you have to ease off on the the attacks on the unelected British bureaucrats. At least until Brexit is done and dusted, then normal service will be resumed.
I don’t buy the Guardian story. There are too many holes in it. But we know from the US how those giving scientific advice to government can be subsumed into acquiescence in the face of politics. https://twitter.com/tomswarbrick1/status/1253489000897282052?s=21
Southam, this is the bit that I find concerning. "The government’s former chief scientific adviser Sir David King said he was “shocked” to discover there were political advisers on Sage. “If you are giving science advice, your advice should be free of any political bias,” he said. “That is just so critically important.” Told that Cummings was in the 23 March meeting, King replied: “Oh my goodness. Isn’t this maybe why they don’t want us to know who was there?” King said political advisers were never on the equivalent committees of Sage when he chaired them and argued that Cummings, who is not a scientist, could report his own interpretation of Sage advice back to the prime minister."
Indeed - that's the killer paragraph. It just goes to reinforce the narrative that this Government has handled this pandemic in a sub-optimal manner. There is a long way yet to run on this...
Oh, piss off with your politicised "killer paragraphs" and your "narratives". There has never in our lifetimes been a pandemic that has required the level of political intervention required of Covid-19. It has required our entire economic, social and politcal norms to be upended. So Number 10 had their guy there. And?
You are determined to do harm to Boris Johnson. He had the temerity to take us out the EU. So he must be attacked, regardless. Even when he is doing what it takes to save the lives of tens of thousands of our citizens across government. If you think that is fair game, then frankly you deserve nothing but our scorn.
Oh dear hit a nerve there. I don't want to "do harm to Boris" and why are you still fighting the referendum? The point about the scientific committee is that they should be able to give unbiased advice and when so much is unknown about the virus the last thing we want is spin from Cummings.
Journalism at an all.time low? BBC Wales showed the Brighton Pavilion thinking it was a mosque during a piece about Ramadan.. in the Sun p23
I just showed my (non-English) wife a photo of the Pavilion and asked what she thought it was. Her first answer - a mosque. It does look a little mosque-ish to be fair.
No excuse for a BBC picture editor to get it wrong though.
It is the most fabulous mix of oriental styles as misunderstood by designers who had only ever seen pictures.
It was used as a military hospital for Indian troops in WW1 for a bit, so that they could feel at home.
There is the Chattri on the Downs on the outskirts of Brighton id est Patcham .. a memorial to Indian troops who died in WW1. IIRC Chattri literally means "Umbrella"
I don’t buy the Guardian story. There are too many holes in it. But we know from the US how those giving scientific advice to government can be subsumed into acquiescence in the face of politics. https://twitter.com/tomswarbrick1/status/1253489000897282052?s=21
Southam, this is the bit that I find concerning. "The government’s former chief scientific adviser Sir David King said he was “shocked” to discover there were political advisers on Sage. “If you are giving science advice, your advice should be free of any political bias,” he said. “That is just so critically important.” Told that Cummings was in the 23 March meeting, King replied: “Oh my goodness. Isn’t this maybe why they don’t want us to know who was there?” King said political advisers were never on the equivalent committees of Sage when he chaired them and argued that Cummings, who is not a scientist, could report his own interpretation of Sage advice back to the prime minister."
Indeed - that's the killer paragraph. It just goes to reinforce the narrative that this Government has handled this pandemic in a sub-optimal manner. There is a long way yet to run on this...
Oh, piss off with your politicised "killer paragraphs" and your "narratives". There has never in our lifetimes been a pandemic that has required the level of political intervention required of Covid-19. It has required our entire economic, social and politcal norms to be upended. So Number 10 had their guy there. And?
You are determined to do harm to Boris Johnson. He had the temerity to take us out the EU. So he must be attacked, regardless. Even when he is doing what it takes to save the lives of tens of thousands of our citizens across government. If you think that is fair game, then frankly you deserve nothing but our scorn.
The YouGov poll doesn’t show confidence in journalists has fallen, it just shows its low, just as it has always been. Yet for decades we have allowed journalists to shape the debate while governments, including this one, have used them as conduits for leaks, kite-flying and unattributable quotes. Even now, journalists are being used to place stories, settle scores, brief against political opponents and so on. We are all complicit in the media we have. The politicians most of all. https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1253592227512832001?s=21
I think probably there used to be a larger gap between the different types of media. The tabloids were obviously always at rock bottom. But the quality dailies? And the broadcast media (with the BBC at its heart)? Not so much I think.
Civil Service figures are pretty astonishing - what could explain that? Did Yes-Minister do that much damage in the early eighties?
Just a logical result of anti-eu propaganda, I suspect. If unelected Brussels bureaucrats are ruining Britain you have to ease off on the the attacks on the unelected British bureaucrats. At least until Brexit is done and dusted, then normal service will be resumed.
Given the amount of bile chucked at the civil service for being closest remainers wanting to frustrate Brexit it doesn’t seem to me to be a rationale explanation for the difference. Unless the rise in trust is entirely down to Remainers in the polarised atmosphere. I’ll stick with Yes Minister unless someone can come up with something else! Civil servants in 1983 less trusted than journalists today? Doesn’t add up. We’re they actually asking the same question?
Mr. Above, it's an ironic forced choice (we have no trade agreement with the US, with whom we do plenty of business) some Remainer types are now employing.
The EU is the one that wants to directly impose laws on us in perpetuity via the 'level playing field'.
China's obviously untrustworthy.
If the EU agrees to a reasonable trade agreement that's fine. But the notion we should roll over to the EU's unacceptable demands because China's worse is crackers.
It is holding people to account. Just like we were promised a trade deal with the EU is easy, we were told to expect much higher trade with China.
The way to get much higher trade with China is not to say we wont trade with you because of coronavirus. It just isnt!
Why is the vast amount of empty hospital beds (four times more than normal according to the hsj) not being more widely reported? Or the increasing deaths from non-covid causes (due to people not being treated/seeking help for other conditions)? An undertaker told me this week they were very busy - but only a slim percentage were from covid. This lockdown is probably killing more people than the virus.
Main story on Sky News this morning. Obviously we don't have the counterfactual for COVID-19 without lockdown, but we do have a rough idea of what normally happens in the health service. Plenty of people go to A&E who probably shouldn't, but the doctors at Warrington Hospital seem to think that people aren't going to hospital when they should.
The problem is not demand from patients not being met, the services are mostly running. The problem is that patients don't want to come.
Elective surgery has stopped too and won't be easy to restart. Dentistry, Max Fax, ENT are all aerosol generating so a massive requirement for PPE. Then there is the problem that all the anaesthetists are working in ICU, and the operating theatres converted to overflow ICU.
Waiting areas, daycase units, wards all make social distancing impossible without major building redesign, or greatly reduced numbers.
Especially in the big cities can we not start to reduce the number of building where covid 19 is treated as the number of cases drop? And also push out other types of care into other buildings (loads of empty hotels, offices etc that can be requisitioned easily if needed on top of existing healthcare buildings).
It looks like there are about 100 hospitals in London, surely at least 10 of them could be kept covid 19 free?
The separation is not that straightforward, as there is clearly a problem with asymptomatc spread. We see lots of cross infection in care homes, and in other multiple occupancy places. Can wards and clinics be socially distanced? Not at present.
Now that Leicester seems a couple of weeks past its peak admissions, my colleagues and I are working on recovery plans for other services. It won't just be business as usual.
I don’t buy the Guardian story. There are too many holes in it. But we know from the US how those giving scientific advice to government can be subsumed into acquiescence in the face of politics. https://twitter.com/tomswarbrick1/status/1253489000897282052?s=21
Southam, this is the bit that I find concerning. "The government’s former chief scientific adviser Sir David King said he was “shocked” to discover there were political advisers on Sage. “If you are giving science advice, your advice should be free of any political bias,” he said. “That is just so critically important.” Told that Cummings was in the 23 March meeting, King replied: “Oh my goodness. Isn’t this maybe why they don’t want us to know who was there?” King said political advisers were never on the equivalent committees of Sage when he chaired them and argued that Cummings, who is not a scientist, could report his own interpretation of Sage advice back to the prime minister."
Indeed - that's the killer paragraph. It just goes to reinforce the narrative that this Government has handled this pandemic in a sub-optimal manner. There is a long way yet to run on this...
Oh, piss off with your politicised "killer paragraphs" and your "narratives". There has never in our lifetimes been a pandemic that has required the level of political intervention required of Covid-19. It has required our entire economic, social and politcal norms to be upended. So Number 10 had their guy there. And?
You are determined to do harm to Boris Johnson. He had the temerity to take us out the EU. So he must be attacked, regardless. Even when he is doing what it takes to save the lives of tens of thousands of our citizens across government. If you think that is fair game, then frankly you deserve nothing but our scorn.
Why have you suddely become so grumpy?
Because a former chief scientific advisor, Sir David King, said "he was “shocked” to discover there were political advisers on Sage. “If you are giving science advice, your advice should be free of any political bias,” he said. “That is just so critically important.”
The YouGov poll doesn’t show confidence in journalists has fallen, it just shows its low, just as it has always been. Yet for decades we have allowed journalists to shape the debate while governments, including this one, have used them as conduits for leaks, kite-flying and unattributable quotes. Even now, journalists are being used to place stories, settle scores, brief against political opponents and so on. We are all complicit in the media we have. The politicians most of all. https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1253592227512832001?s=21
I think probably there used to be a larger gap between the different types of media. The tabloids were obviously always at rock bottom. But the quality dailies? And the broadcast media (with the BBC at its heart)? Not so much I think.
Civil Service figures are pretty astonishing - what could explain that? Did Yes-Minister do that much damage in the early eighties?
Just a logical result of anti-eu propaganda, I suspect. If unelected Brussels bureaucrats are ruining Britain you have to ease off on the the attacks on the unelected British bureaucrats. At least until Brexit is done and dusted, then normal service will be resumed.
Given the amount of bile chucked at the civil service for being closest remainers wanting to frustrate Brexit it doesn’t seem to me to be a rationale explanation for the difference.
I remember the eighties. Endless stories in the tabloids attacking British civil servants. In the 90s and noughties these were largely replaced by endless stories in the tabloids attacking the EU.
The style of ‘gotcha’ journalism to which British journalism has increasingly stooped and relied upon in recent years is beyond inadequate. Of course, hacks pretending that they are experts in ventilator-acquisition will struggle to earn respect. Just as bad, though, are those journalists who, sensing the approaching tumbrils, succumb to a different temptation: the temptation to preach. For at the moment there are journalists — television presenters, in particular — who are assuming the mantel of moral arbiter. They are making their stance the story.
The YouGov poll doesn’t show confidence in journalists has fallen, it just shows its low, just as it has always been. Yet for decades we have allowed journalists to shape the debate while governments, including this one, have used them as conduits for leaks, kite-flying and unattributable quotes. Even now, journalists are being used to place stories, settle scores, brief against political opponents and so on. We are all complicit in the media we have. The politicians most of all. https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1253592227512832001?s=21
I think probably there used to be a larger gap between the different types of media. The tabloids were obviously always at rock bottom. But the quality dailies? And the broadcast media (with the BBC at its heart)? Not so much I think.
Civil Service figures are pretty astonishing - what could explain that? Did Yes-Minister do that much damage in the early eighties?
Just a logical result of anti-eu propaganda, I suspect. If unelected Brussels bureaucrats are ruining Britain you have to ease off on the the attacks on the unelected British bureaucrats. At least until Brexit is done and dusted, then normal service will be resumed.
Given the amount of bile chucked at the civil service for being closest remainers wanting to frustrate Brexit it doesn’t seem to me to be a rationale explanation for the difference.
I remember the eighties. Endless stories in the tabloids attacking British civil servants. In the 90s and noughties these were largely replaced by endless stories in the tabloids attacking the EU.
There is something of an irony in the concept of perception of professional groups being determined (negatively) by what is written about them in the tabloids!
The main story on the Beeb this morning is the dramatic fall in the number of patients presenting with all conditions other than the coronavirus.
I'm more convinced than ever that the number of casualties precipitated by the lockdown will exceed those of Covid-19 itself - it's just that this'll take a long time to happen, of course.
The main story on the Beeb this morning is the dramatic fall in the number of patients presenting with all conditions other than the coronavirus.
I'm more convinced than ever that the number of casualties precipitated by the lockdown will exceed those of Covid-19 itself - it's just that this'll take a long time to happen, of course.
Fear of the virus has of course stopped the usual wave of hypochondriacs and time wasters (except for SeanT types with colds) who plague GPs and the NHS unnecessarily, so it's not all bad news.
Mr. Above, lots of things about the EU turn out to be false.
Like a promised referendum on Lisbon.
For months (years?), the EU insisted the only off the shelf trade deal possible was Canada style. Then the PM said that was fine and suddenly Canada is impossible because the UK is so close to the EU, presumably having migrated since the 2016 referendum result.
Part of the point about the Cummings story is that Cummings is a celebrity. Discovering a celebrity is on a secret committee is always going to be news, especially when the celebrity is someone as controversial as Cummings.
And pretending Cummings is just some official witnessing proceedings just makes it look even more like they've got something to hide.
The government claims to want people to trust that they are just following the scientific advice, this is a strange way of trying to gain that trust.
The YouGov poll doesn’t show confidence in journalists has fallen, it just shows its low, just as it has always been. Yet for decades we have allowed journalists to shape the debate while governments, including this one, have used them as conduits for leaks, kite-flying and unattributable quotes. Even now, journalists are being used to place stories, settle scores, brief against political opponents and so on. We are all complicit in the media we have. The politicians most of all. https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1253592227512832001?s=21
I think probably there used to be a larger gap between the different types of media. The tabloids were obviously always at rock bottom. But the quality dailies? And the broadcast media (with the BBC at its heart)? Not so much I think.
Civil Service figures are pretty astonishing - what could explain that? Did Yes-Minister do that much damage in the early eighties?
Just a logical result of anti-eu propaganda, I suspect. If unelected Brussels bureaucrats are ruining Britain you have to ease off on the the attacks on the unelected British bureaucrats. At least until Brexit is done and dusted, then normal service will be resumed.
Given the amount of bile chucked at the civil service for being closest remainers wanting to frustrate Brexit it doesn’t seem to me to be a rationale explanation for the difference.
I remember the eighties. Endless stories in the tabloids attacking British civil servants. In the 90s and noughties these were largely replaced by endless stories in the tabloids attacking the EU.
“Yes, Minister” has been proven over time to have been a pretty good documentary about the inner workings of government.
The people that the public want in charge, actually making the decisions, are those whom they elected - and can choose to fire at the ballot box should they desire. Not some unaccountable civil servant in Whitehall or Brussels, who never has to fear for his job and gets to retire with a big pension no matter how much he screws up.
I'm reposting this, because I thought it was good comment...
I'm going to quote George W Bush here: “Too often we judge other groups by their worst examples, while judging ourselves by our best intentions.”
The reality is that while the EU has been bad, we've been fucking atrocious too. We signed up, just a few months ago, which Johnson was already PM, to a political declaration. And we've publicly decried large chunks of that declaration. If I was an EU negotiatior, I'd be feeling like the UK was Perfidious Albion.
I'm not saying the EU is blameless (they're clearly not), but the GWB quote is apposite, we're seeing the bad things they're doing while excusing ourselves. And I'm sure in Brussels they're doing it the other way around.
It's not a very encouraging start.
I agree with this completely. We need to approach any discussions and deals with the EU openly, candidly and offering a genuine hand of friendship looking for win win solutions. The days of politicians playing the Eurosausage to score points with a rabid and incoherent domestic press must be over. We have left, it is over, now grow up and sort out the practicalities so that they impinge on both parties' lives as little as possible. We have far more important things to worry about.
I don’t buy the Guardian story. There are too many holes in it. But we know from the US how those giving scientific advice to government can be subsumed into acquiescence in the face of politics. https://twitter.com/tomswarbrick1/status/1253489000897282052?s=21
Southam, this is the bit that I find concerning. "The government’s former chief scientific adviser Sir David King said he was “shocked” to discover there were political advisers on Sage. “If you are giving science advice, your advice should be free of any political bias,” he said. “That is just so critically important.” Told that Cummings was in the 23 March meeting, King replied: “Oh my goodness. Isn’t this maybe why they don’t want us to know who was there?” King said political advisers were never on the equivalent committees of Sage when he chaired them and argued that Cummings, who is not a scientist, could report his own interpretation of Sage advice back to the prime minister."
Indeed - that's the killer paragraph. It just goes to reinforce the narrative that this Government has handled this pandemic in a sub-optimal manner. There is a long way yet to run on this...
Oh, piss off with your politicised "killer paragraphs" and your "narratives". There has never in our lifetimes been a pandemic that has required the level of political intervention required of Covid-19. It has required our entire economic, social and politcal norms to be upended. So Number 10 had their guy there. And?
You are determined to do harm to Boris Johnson. He had the temerity to take us out the EU. So he must be attacked, regardless. Even when he is doing what it takes to save the lives of tens of thousands of our citizens across government. If you think that is fair game, then frankly you deserve nothing but our scorn.
Why have you suddely become so grumpy?
Because a former chief scientific advisor, Sir David King, said "he was “shocked” to discover there were political advisers on Sage. “If you are giving science advice, your advice should be free of any political bias,” he said. “That is just so critically important.”
Enough to make anyone grumpy ;-)
I see he's taking a break to get a cup of coffee. Quite right.
When he's calmed down perhaps he can let us know when The Great One will make an appearance and start to run the country again.
Anyone who thinks Cummings, rightly or wrongly because perhaps that's what he did since before the crisis, isn't now dictating events, isn't what I'd call a critical thinker.
The main story on the Beeb this morning is the dramatic fall in the number of patients presenting with all conditions other than the coronavirus.
I'm more convinced than ever that the number of casualties precipitated by the lockdown will exceed those of Covid-19 itself - it's just that this'll take a long time to happen, of course.
It is going to be very hard to say. The lack of testing means that we cannot know whether community deaths are due to Covid-19 or something else entirely.
Mr. Above, lots of things about the EU turn out to be false.
Like a promised referendum on Lisbon.
For months (years?), the EU insisted the only off the shelf trade deal possible was Canada style. Then the PM said that was fine and suddenly Canada is impossible because the UK is so close to the EU, presumably having migrated since the 2016 referendum result.
Agreed. The EU is forever moving the goalposts, to its long-term detriment as well as ours.
It's quite possible that we'll have agreements signed with both the US and the Pacific trade area long before anything substantial has been agreed with the EU.
I'm reposting this, because I thought it was good comment...
I'm going to quote George W Bush here: “Too often we judge other groups by their worst examples, while judging ourselves by our best intentions.”
The reality is that while the EU has been bad, we've been fucking atrocious too. We signed up, just a few months ago, which Johnson was already PM, to a political declaration. And we've publicly decried large chunks of that declaration. If I was an EU negotiatior, I'd be feeling like the UK was Perfidious Albion.
I'm not saying the EU is blameless (they're clearly not), but the GWB quote is apposite, we're seeing the bad things they're doing while excusing ourselves. And I'm sure in Brussels they're doing it the other way around.
It's not a very encouraging start.
I agree with this completely. We need to approach any discussions and deals with the EU openly, candidly and offering a genuine hand of friendship looking for win win solutions. The days of politicians playing the Eurosausage to score points with a rabid and incoherent domestic press must be over. We have left, it is over, now grow up and sort out the practicalities so that they impinge on both parties' lives as little as possible. We have far more important things to worry about.
Not going to happen. There are far too many votes in pandering to the unreasoning and infinite hatred that Leavers have for the EU, an unreasoning and infinite hatred shared by those in power.
The main story on the Beeb this morning is the dramatic fall in the number of patients presenting with all conditions other than the coronavirus.
I'm more convinced than ever that the number of casualties precipitated by the lockdown will exceed those of Covid-19 itself - it's just that this'll take a long time to happen, of course.
Fear of the virus has of course stopped the usual wave of hypochondriacs and time wasters (except for SeanT types with colds) who plague GPs and the NHS unnecessarily, so it's not all bad news.
Kind of strange reply, you seem to be implying that the people not showing up in hospital are timewasters?
OK there are fewer time wasters. But there is a massive reduction in people coming in with serious conditions, including things that would normally require urgent lifesaving treatment. Not good news.
The main story on the Beeb this morning is the dramatic fall in the number of patients presenting with all conditions other than the coronavirus.
I'm more convinced than ever that the number of casualties precipitated by the lockdown will exceed those of Covid-19 itself - it's just that this'll take a long time to happen, of course.
Fear of the virus has of course stopped the usual wave of hypochondriacs and time wasters (except for SeanT types with colds) who plague GPs and the NHS unnecessarily, so it's not all bad news.
The silver lining to a very big dark thundercloud.
The YouGov poll doesn’t show confidence in journalists has fallen, it just shows its low, just as it has always been. Yet for decades we have allowed journalists to shape the debate while governments, including this one, have used them as conduits for leaks, kite-flying and unattributable quotes. Even now, journalists are being used to place stories, settle scores, brief against political opponents and so on. We are all complicit in the media we have. The politicians most of all. https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1253592227512832001?s=21
I think probably there used to be a larger gap between the different types of media. The tabloids were obviously always at rock bottom. But the quality dailies? And the broadcast media (with the BBC at its heart)? Not so much I think.
Civil Service figures are pretty astonishing - what could explain that? Did Yes-Minister do that much damage in the early eighties?
Just a logical result of anti-eu propaganda, I suspect. If unelected Brussels bureaucrats are ruining Britain you have to ease off on the the attacks on the unelected British bureaucrats. At least until Brexit is done and dusted, then normal service will be resumed.
Given the amount of bile chucked at the civil service for being closest remainers wanting to frustrate Brexit it doesn’t seem to me to be a rationale explanation for the difference.
I remember the eighties. Endless stories in the tabloids attacking British civil servants. In the 90s and noughties these were largely replaced by endless stories in the tabloids attacking the EU.
There is something of an irony in the concept of perception of professional groups being determined (negatively) by what is written about them in the tabloids!
Is there? People tend to trust the newspapers they choose to read, and mistrust the others.
Mr. Above, lots of things about the EU turn out to be false.
Like a promised referendum on Lisbon.
For months (years?), the EU insisted the only off the shelf trade deal possible was Canada style. Then the PM said that was fine and suddenly Canada is impossible because the UK is so close to the EU, presumably having migrated since the 2016 referendum result.
Agreed. The EU is forever moving the goalposts, to its long-term detriment as well as ours.
It's quite possible that we'll have agreements signed with both the US and the Pacific trade area long before anything substantial has been agreed with the EU.
The Political Declaration that we signed up to (and supported by all Tory MPs) includes Level Playing Field provisions doesn't it?
Like all international trade agreements an EU trade arrangement requires dispute resolution mechanisms.
I see the Insurance Industry is saying it is facing its biggest ever payout this year, because of the various reasons connected with the pandemic.
I recall a discussion here when someone from inside the industry had some apparently convincing reasons why it wouldn't be so bad?
Some bits of the insurance industry will be in terrible trouble: US health care, for example, business continuity guys, or those people that sold you insurance on your concert tickets. Others, in areas like auto insurance, will be laughing. Fewer cars, fewer accidents, fewer payouts.
I expect this will be a bad year for the insurance industry in aggregate. But not as bad as the 1989 or 1994 California earthquakes.
Mr. Above, lots of things about the EU turn out to be false.
Like a promised referendum on Lisbon.
For months (years?), the EU insisted the only off the shelf trade deal possible was Canada style. Then the PM said that was fine and suddenly Canada is impossible because the UK is so close to the EU, presumably having migrated since the 2016 referendum result.
Im not sure what that has to do with me!
My point is railing against the injustice of geo-politics by brexiteers is going to be no more practically effective than Corbyn railing against the injustices of UK society.
Now they are in charge, the Brexiteers have to deliver. It will involve making choices where they dont get everything they want.
I'm reposting this, because I thought it was good comment...
I'm going to quote George W Bush here: “Too often we judge other groups by their worst examples, while judging ourselves by our best intentions.”
The reality is that while the EU has been bad, we've been fucking atrocious too. We signed up, just a few months ago, which Johnson was already PM, to a political declaration. And we've publicly decried large chunks of that declaration. If I was an EU negotiatior, I'd be feeling like the UK was Perfidious Albion.
I'm not saying the EU is blameless (they're clearly not), but the GWB quote is apposite, we're seeing the bad things they're doing while excusing ourselves. And I'm sure in Brussels they're doing it the other way around.
It's not a very encouraging start.
I agree with this completely. We need to approach any discussions and deals with the EU openly, candidly and offering a genuine hand of friendship looking for win win solutions. The days of politicians playing the Eurosausage to score points with a rabid and incoherent domestic press must be over. We have left, it is over, now grow up and sort out the practicalities so that they impinge on both parties' lives as little as possible. We have far more important things to worry about.
Not going to happen. There are far too many votes in pandering to the unreasoning and infinite hatred that Leavers have for the EU, an unreasoning and infinite hatred shared by those in power.
Problem is as we know most Leavers are not really able to work things out for themselves and now with Covid 19 the government has exploited their essentially docile nature and hence has a bit of a free pass with its negotiations, such as they are, with the EU.
Mr. Above, lots of things about the EU turn out to be false.
Like a promised referendum on Lisbon.
For months (years?), the EU insisted the only off the shelf trade deal possible was Canada style. Then the PM said that was fine and suddenly Canada is impossible because the UK is so close to the EU, presumably having migrated since the 2016 referendum result.
Agreed. The EU is forever moving the goalposts, to its long-term detriment as well as ours.
It's quite possible that we'll have agreements signed with both the US and the Pacific trade area long before anything substantial has been agreed with the EU.
I always enjoy seeing the same sort of people who before the referendum were angrily insisting that a very favourable deal could be struck with the EU before supper time now defiantly insist that the EU is being wholly unreasonable.
Welcome to machtpolitik. Any deal struck with the US will be at least as one-sided against Britain as anything the EU offers and probably worse.
I have no problem with government appointees hearing the discussions of scientific committees directly.
I would have a problem if those government appointees were guiding the debate. So far as I can see, that is not being alleged yet.
There might also be a risk that a political appointee might recommend appointments to or dismissal from committees of particular experts on political rather than scientific grounds.
Or that said appointee misunderstands or incorrectly summarises scientific discussions conducted at a technical level, rather than lets the experts brief ministers directly.
@Foxy how long do you think it will be before elective procedures are restarted or is it impossible to say?
I’m going to email my gastro dr on Monday to ask if there’s any plans to reschedule my cancelled colonoscopy yet...
Cases are being rescheduled along the lines of how time critical they are. Some will be slower than others, particularly when hygiene rules and procedures require review, revision and equipping.
It will vary from place to place too, depending on local pressures and resources.
I'm reposting this, because I thought it was good comment...
I'm going to quote George W Bush here: “Too often we judge other groups by their worst examples, while judging ourselves by our best intentions.”
The reality is that while the EU has been bad, we've been fucking atrocious too. We signed up, just a few months ago, which Johnson was already PM, to a political declaration. And we've publicly decried large chunks of that declaration. If I was an EU negotiatior, I'd be feeling like the UK was Perfidious Albion.
I'm not saying the EU is blameless (they're clearly not), but the GWB quote is apposite, we're seeing the bad things they're doing while excusing ourselves. And I'm sure in Brussels they're doing it the other way around.
It's not a very encouraging start.
I agree with this completely. We need to approach any discussions and deals with the EU openly, candidly and offering a genuine hand of friendship looking for win win solutions. The days of politicians playing the Eurosausage to score points with a rabid and incoherent domestic press must be over. We have left, it is over, now grow up and sort out the practicalities so that they impinge on both parties' lives as little as possible. We have far more important things to worry about.
Not going to happen. There are far too many votes in pandering to the unreasoning and infinite hatred that Leavers have for the EU, an unreasoning and infinite hatred shared by those in power.
Problem is as we know most Leavers are not really able to work things out for themselves and now with Covid 19 the government has exploited their essentially docile nature and hence has a bit of a free pass with its negotiations, such as they are, with the EU.
They don’t care. They would rather eat grass than reach any deal with the EU. By definition, any deal which the EU would accept is unacceptable to Leavers.
Mr. Above, lots of things about the EU turn out to be false.
Like a promised referendum on Lisbon.
For months (years?), the EU insisted the only off the shelf trade deal possible was Canada style. Then the PM said that was fine and suddenly Canada is impossible because the UK is so close to the EU, presumably having migrated since the 2016 referendum result.
Agreed. The EU is forever moving the goalposts, to its long-term detriment as well as ours.
It's quite possible that we'll have agreements signed with both the US and the Pacific trade area long before anything substantial has been agreed with the EU.
The Political Declaration that we signed up to (and supported by all Tory MPs) includes Level Playing Field provisions doesn't it?
Like all international trade agreements an EU trade arrangement requires dispute resolution mechanisms.
The point to which I originally replied, concerning the Canadian agreement, is valid: the EU is demanding minimum divergence and maximum control, which is why, IIRC, it is insisting on using its courts to police the agreement, rather than a neutral arbiter.
As a general point of principle, it doesn't help to point out the deficiencies in the UK Government's position whilst insisting that the EU is whiter-than-white, because it's not true.
All that's liable to happen at the end of all this is that there will be a skeletal agreement or none at all, and then *neither* side will get much of what it wants.
Mr. Meeks, the EU said Canada-style was the only trade deal possible. Then, when such a deal became desired by the new PM, it was apparently not possible.
@Foxy how long do you think it will be before elective procedures are restarted or is it impossible to say?
I’m going to email my gastro dr on Monday to ask if there’s any plans to reschedule my cancelled colonoscopy yet...
Cases are being rescheduled along the lines of how time critical they are. Some will be slower than others, particularly when hygiene rules and procedures require review, revision and equipping.
It will vary from place to place too, depending on local pressures and resources.
Some of this is worrying. A friend is sitting at home with a burst appendix, managing it with rest and antibiotics.
Why can’t we put the private hospitals to work on this sort of thing now?
I have no problem with government appointees hearing the discussions of scientific committees directly.
I would have a problem if those government appointees were guiding the debate. So far as I can see, that is not being alleged yet.
That is exactly what is being alleged (by the Guardian, if not by their “source’ isn’t it? Admittedly to some extent by insinuation and innuendo, but what else is the basis for the prominence of the story?
Mr. Meeks, the EU said Canada-style was the only trade deal possible. Then, when such a deal became desired by the new PM, it was apparently not possible.
That's not exactly reasonable behaviour.
You have this naive idea that reasonableness is a relevant test in any negotiation.
I have no problem with government appointees hearing the discussions of scientific committees directly.
I would have a problem if those government appointees were guiding the debate. So far as I can see, that is not being alleged yet.
I do have a problem with anyone outside of the committee listening in. You want to have an open debate, throwing ideas into the mix and being supportive or critical of what is being suggested until reaching an agreed position to present to government.
Having someone listening in will inhibit the debate and, if he is asking questions, even shape the direction of the discussion.
@Foxy how long do you think it will be before elective procedures are restarted or is it impossible to say?
I’m going to email my gastro dr on Monday to ask if there’s any plans to reschedule my cancelled colonoscopy yet...
I think that will be hospital by hospital depending on load, circs in the region (eg London running ahead in time), and where each hospital can be adjusted for separation between Conid / non Covid.
That will be relatively easy at my local District Hospital, but perhaps more difficult at ones which are more centralised in their design.
I see the Insurance Industry is saying it is facing its biggest ever payout this year, because of the various reasons connected with the pandemic.
I recall a discussion here when someone from inside the industry had some apparently convincing reasons why it wouldn't be so bad?
Some bits of the insurance industry will be in terrible trouble: US health care, for example, business continuity guys, or those people that sold you insurance on your concert tickets. Others, in areas like auto insurance, will be laughing. Fewer cars, fewer accidents, fewer payouts.
I expect this will be a bad year for the insurance industry in aggregate. But not as bad as the 1989 or 1994 California earthquakes.
Travel insurance will be having an utter nightmare of a year. Home insurance about even (fewer burglaries but more DIY screwups), car insurance sitting pretty.
How do you think your flexible car insurance would have worked - lots of cancellations as cars stay off the road?
I have no problem with government appointees hearing the discussions of scientific committees directly.
I would have a problem if those government appointees were guiding the debate. So far as I can see, that is not being alleged yet.
That is exactly what is being alleged (by the Guardian, if not by their “source’ isn’t it? Admittedly to some extent by insinuation and innuendo, but what else is the basis for the prominence of the story?
It’s the innuendo. There’s no evidence provided for it though.
Mr. Meeks, the EU said Canada-style was the only trade deal possible. Then, when such a deal became desired by the new PM, it was apparently not possible.
That's not exactly reasonable behaviour.
Other countries not being exactly reasonable with each other has happened since countries started to exist. It is how you deal with it that matters.
Mr. Above, lots of things about the EU turn out to be false.
Like a promised referendum on Lisbon.
For months (years?), the EU insisted the only off the shelf trade deal possible was Canada style. Then the PM said that was fine and suddenly Canada is impossible because the UK is so close to the EU, presumably having migrated since the 2016 referendum result.
Agreed. The EU is forever moving the goalposts, to its long-term detriment as well as ours.
It's quite possible that we'll have agreements signed with both the US and the Pacific trade area long before anything substantial has been agreed with the EU.
The Political Declaration that we signed up to (and supported by all Tory MPs) includes Level Playing Field provisions doesn't it?
Like all international trade agreements an EU trade arrangement requires dispute resolution mechanisms.
The point to which I originally replied, concerning the Canadian agreement, is valid: the EU is demanding minimum divergence and maximum control, which is why, IIRC, it is insisting on using its courts to police the agreement, rather than a neutral arbiter.
As a general point of principle, it doesn't help to point out the deficiencies in the UK Government's position whilst insisting that the EU is whiter-than-white, because it's not true.
All that's liable to happen at the end of all this is that there will be a skeletal agreement or none at all, and then *neither* side will get much of what it wants.
I would point out that in exactly no US trade agreements is there a neutral dispute arbiter. I don't know about China, but I expect that they also stuff Isds tribunals.
I have no problem with government appointees hearing the discussions of scientific committees directly.
I would have a problem if those government appointees were guiding the debate. So far as I can see, that is not being alleged yet.
That is exactly what is being alleged (by the Guardian, if not by their “source’ isn’t it? Admittedly to some extent by insinuation and innuendo, but what else is the basis for the prominence of the story?
It is just a gotcha. It would be more compelling if it weren't a variation on the "Boris didn't chair COBRA" theme.
Mr. Meeks, you just criticised Leavers as unreasonable and unwilling to accept any deal the EU would want, yet are happy to ignore the fact that the EU itself is now unwilling to accept a deal the EU offered up until the point the UK wanted it.
You said: "You have this naive idea that reasonableness is a relevant test in any negotiation."
I also have the naive idea that reasonableness is a relevant aspect for people.
@Foxy how long do you think it will be before elective procedures are restarted or is it impossible to say?
I’m going to email my gastro dr on Monday to ask if there’s any plans to reschedule my cancelled colonoscopy yet...
Cases are being rescheduled along the lines of how time critical they are. Some will be slower than others, particularly when hygiene rules and procedures require review, revision and equipping.
It will vary from place to place too, depending on local pressures and resources.
Some of this is worrying. A friend is sitting at home with a burst appendix, managing it with rest and antibiotics.
Why can’t we put the private hospitals to work on this sort of thing now?
Err, I’m no doctor but people die of that. I’d be calling 999 if I had a burst appendix.
Dominic Cummings is listening in to SAGE? So what? He will have nothing to add to the scientific discussions and if he tried, they'd laugh at him. The Guardian is just miffed that none of their journalist can add anything either, and would be laughed at too. They just want to add their inner Trump.
Comments
If anything, the responses of the likes of Campbell in Blair days were far more “Trumpian” albeit his approach was generally (but not always) not to deny potentially damaging stories by implying they were factually wrong but simply to respond by saying that the only people interested in them were the Westminster bubble. Ie. trying to shut down a story by not engaging with it at all.
Elective surgery has stopped too and won't be easy to restart. Dentistry, Max Fax, ENT are all aerosol generating so a massive requirement for PPE. Then there is the problem that all the anaesthetists are working in ICU, and the operating theatres converted to overflow ICU.
Waiting areas, daycase units, wards all make social distancing impossible without major building redesign, or greatly reduced numbers.
https://twitter.com/tomswarbrick1/status/1253489000897282052?s=21
“Journalism”.
Is this a story? I don’t know, quite probably. But does the journalist realise that putting the quote at the heart of it only serves to undermine what may be a serious issue? Because, let’s face it, if PPE was really made for a 6 ft 3 rugby player then there’s a hell of a lot of men that it’s not going to fit either....
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Jong-un
https://twitter.com/pressgazette/status/1253626713298305024
Mr. Sandpit, I agree. Not sure we'll do much better either.
You cannot hope to bribe or twist, thank God,
The British journalist.
For when you see what he will do
Unbribed
There's no occasion to!
'Twas written of course in the days when there were few I any female journalists!
https://www.engadget.com/israel-halts-phone-tracking-for-covid-19-quarantine-184622314.html
The outcode for countries seems to depend heavily on their leaders.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/24/care-homes-ordered-take-patients-suspected-coronavirus-nhs-hospitals/
Civil Service figures are pretty astonishing - what could explain that? Did Yes-Minister do that much damage in the early eighties?
"The government’s former chief scientific adviser Sir David King said he was “shocked” to discover there were political advisers on Sage. “If you are giving science advice, your advice should be free of any political bias,” he said. “That is just so critically important.”
Told that Cummings was in the 23 March meeting, King replied: “Oh my goodness. Isn’t this maybe why they don’t want us to know who was there?”
King said political advisers were never on the equivalent committees of Sage when he chaired them and argued that Cummings, who is not a scientist, could report his own interpretation of Sage advice back to the prime minister."
He was a heavy chain smoker and obese.
Whole West (and India too) needs to unite as one to stop it.
EU is chickenshit.
No excuse for a BBC picture editor to get it wrong though.
It looks like there are about 100 hospitals in London, surely at least 10 of them could be kept covid 19 free?
Full credit, though, to the authors of the report. Upon realising they were going to get censored they leaked the story to the NY Times, ensuring that it probably gets more coverage than an eminently ignorable EU report.
It was used as a military hospital for Indian troops in WW1 for a bit, so that they could feel at home.
You are determined to do harm to Boris Johnson. He had the temerity to take us out the EU. So he must be attacked, regardless. Even when he is doing what it takes to save the lives of tens of thousands of our citizens across government. If you think that is fair game, then frankly you deserve nothing but our scorn.
The EU is the one that wants to directly impose laws on us in perpetuity via the 'level playing field'.
China's obviously untrustworthy.
If the EU agrees to a reasonable trade agreement that's fine. But the notion we should roll over to the EU's unacceptable demands because China's worse is crackers.
I don't want to "do harm to Boris" and why are you still fighting the referendum?
The point about the scientific committee is that they should be able to give unbiased advice and when so much is unknown about the virus the last thing we want is spin from Cummings.
IIRC Chattri literally means "Umbrella"
Why have you suddely become so grumpy?
The way to get much higher trade with China is not to say we wont trade with you because of coronavirus. It just isnt!
Now that Leicester seems a couple of weeks past its peak admissions, my colleagues and I are working on recovery plans for other services. It won't just be business as usual.
Enough to make anyone grumpy ;-)
So Cumstain has been channelling his inner Jezza: He was present but not involved.
https://unherd.com/2020/04/can-british-media-steer-clear-of-the-american-sewer/
The style of ‘gotcha’ journalism to which British journalism has increasingly stooped and relied upon in recent years is beyond inadequate. Of course, hacks pretending that they are experts in ventilator-acquisition will struggle to earn respect. Just as bad, though, are those journalists who, sensing the approaching tumbrils, succumb to a different temptation: the temptation to preach. For at the moment there are journalists — television presenters, in particular — who are assuming the mantel of moral arbiter. They are making their stance the story.
I recall a discussion here when someone from inside the industry had some apparently convincing reasons why it wouldn't be so bad?
I'm more convinced than ever that the number of casualties precipitated by the lockdown will exceed those of Covid-19 itself - it's just that this'll take a long time to happen, of course.
https://twitter.com/jessphoenix2018/status/1253944157384540161
Like a promised referendum on Lisbon.
For months (years?), the EU insisted the only off the shelf trade deal possible was Canada style. Then the PM said that was fine and suddenly Canada is impossible because the UK is so close to the EU, presumably having migrated since the 2016 referendum result.
And pretending Cummings is just some official witnessing proceedings just makes it look even more like they've got something to hide.
The government claims to want people to trust that they are just following the scientific advice, this is a strange way of trying to gain that trust.
The people that the public want in charge, actually making the decisions, are those whom they elected - and can choose to fire at the ballot box should they desire. Not some unaccountable civil servant in Whitehall or Brussels, who never has to fear for his job and gets to retire with a big pension no matter how much he screws up.
I’m going to email my gastro dr on Monday to ask if there’s any plans to reschedule my cancelled colonoscopy yet...
When he's calmed down perhaps he can let us know when The Great One will make an appearance and start to run the country again.
Anyone who thinks Cummings, rightly or wrongly because perhaps that's what he did since before the crisis, isn't now dictating events, isn't what I'd call a critical thinker.
It is going to be very hard to say. The lack of testing means that we cannot know whether community deaths are due to Covid-19 or something else entirely.
It's quite possible that we'll have agreements signed with both the US and the Pacific trade area long before anything substantial has been agreed with the EU.
OK there are fewer time wasters. But there is a massive reduction in people coming in with serious conditions, including things that would normally require urgent lifesaving treatment. Not good news.
I would have a problem if those government appointees were guiding the debate. So far as I can see, that is not being alleged yet.
Like all international trade agreements an EU trade arrangement requires dispute resolution mechanisms.
I expect this will be a bad year for the insurance industry in aggregate. But not as bad as the 1989 or 1994 California earthquakes.
My point is railing against the injustice of geo-politics by brexiteers is going to be no more practically effective than Corbyn railing against the injustices of UK society.
Now they are in charge, the Brexiteers have to deliver. It will involve making choices where they dont get everything they want.
Welcome to machtpolitik. Any deal struck with the US will be at least as one-sided against Britain as anything the EU offers and probably worse.
Or that said appointee misunderstands or incorrectly summarises scientific discussions conducted at a technical level, rather than lets the experts brief ministers directly.
It will vary from place to place too, depending on local pressures and resources.
As a general point of principle, it doesn't help to point out the deficiencies in the UK Government's position whilst insisting that the EU is whiter-than-white, because it's not true.
All that's liable to happen at the end of all this is that there will be a skeletal agreement or none at all, and then *neither* side will get much of what it wants.
That's not exactly reasonable behaviour.
Why can’t we put the private hospitals to work on this sort of thing now?
Having someone listening in will inhibit the debate and, if he is asking questions, even shape the direction of the discussion.
Not good.
That will be relatively easy at my local District Hospital, but perhaps more difficult at ones which are more centralised in their design.
How do you think your flexible car insurance would have worked - lots of cancellations as cars stay off the road?
You said: "You have this naive idea that reasonableness is a relevant test in any negotiation."
I also have the naive idea that reasonableness is a relevant aspect for people.