Does it change everything? Really? If someone like Cummings is asserting himself in a room full of scientists then they should assert back. Grow a fucking backbone or resign.
Cummings is infamously a vicious bully who has a reputation for sacking people who dare to criticise him, including an occasion where he ordered somebody to be escorted from a building by police. There is at least one investigation into his inappropriate behaviour ongoing and there are rumours of several more. He also does not take kindly to being told when he is wrong - which, unfortunately, he usually is.
So I think that remark is out of order. He is the sort of person I can imagine people would be scared to stand up to, both by virtue of his position close to the PM and his personality.
Your comment should have started, ‘If Cummings is in a room full of scientific advisers, something is wrong with our system of government.’
So they are saying SAGE is unable to do its job, even though it already has to provide advice to the most powerful people in the land?
I maintain this is not about Cummings at all, but about undermining any government defence based on scientific advice it received by saying it cannot be trusted. But where does that leave us? What was the government now supposed to have done - it would be pilloried for not following advice, and it will be pilloried for following advice because the advisers bowed before almighty Cummings?
Does it change everything? Really? If someone like Cummings is asserting himself in a room full of scientists then they should assert back. Grow a fucking backbone or resign.
There is also no evidence in the last lot of weeks that the government has done anything other than listen to the scientists. In fact it may well have to go against some of their advice at some point for all we know.
Simple.
Name the sources and stop hiding behind anyone who may have an agenda
Does it change everything? Really? If someone like Cummings is asserting himself in a room full of scientists then they should assert back. Grow a fucking backbone or resign.
There is also no evidence in the last lot of weeks that the government has done anything other than listen to the scientists. In fact it may well have to go against some of their advice at some point for all we know.
Simple.
Name the sources and stop hiding behind anyone who may have an agenda
And frankly this is just flogging a dead horse
a bit rich coming from the party of "Downing St sources".
Does it change everything? Really? If someone like Cummings is asserting himself in a room full of scientists then they should assert back. Grow a fucking backbone or resign.
There is also no evidence in the last lot of weeks that the government has done anything other than listen to the scientists. In fact it may well have to go against some of their advice at some point for all we know.
Simple.
Name the sources and stop hiding behind anyone who may have an agenda
And frankly this is just flogging a dead horse
a bit rich coming from the party of "Downing St sources".
Does it change everything? Really? If someone like Cummings is asserting himself in a room full of scientists then they should assert back. Grow a fucking backbone or resign.
Cummings is infamously a vicious bully who has a reputation for sacking people who dare to criticise him, including an occasion where he ordered somebody to be escorted from a building by police. There is at least one investigation into his inappropriate behaviour ongoing and there are rumours of several more. He also does not take kindly to being told when he is wrong - which, unfortunately, he usually is.
So I think that remark is out of order. He is the sort of person I can imagine people would be scared to stand up to, both by virtue of his position close to the PM and his personality.
Your comment should have started, ‘If Cummings is in a room full of scientific advisers, something is wrong with our system of government.’
Yeah well it didn't start with that and nor will it but thanks for trying to tell me how to think and respond.
Cummings is man, he can be got to and he can be out thought. If everyone in SAGE said get him out, he'd go because he has to. The government could not afford that level of shit right now. Sitting behind someones skirt and some quotes to the Guardian are just a form of acquiescence whilst moaning about it. The scientists have a tremendous amount of support both within government and without. If the guy is genuinely causing a negative impact on public health policy then say so, upfront, in public as a group and he will have to go.
Does it change everything? Really? If someone like Cummings is asserting himself in a room full of scientists then they should assert back. Grow a fucking backbone or resign.
There is also no evidence in the last lot of weeks that the government has done anything other than listen to the scientists. In fact it may well have to go against some of their advice at some point for all we know.
Simple.
Name the sources and stop hiding behind anyone who may have an agenda
And frankly this is just flogging a dead horse
a bit rich coming from the party of "Downing St sources".
As a doctor you are prepared then to accept Cummings swayed the judgment of 23 experts on the Sage group thereby subverting their advice or are you just playing politics
The San Siro might as well have a roof by the way. It’s the most indoor stadium I’ve ever been in. That might be a factor
It's an excellent piece.
This sort of thing gives me optimism for the 2nd wave - even if we don't have a vaccine or some miracle treatment drug, we'll have drastically better information to craft policy with.
So they are saying SAGE is unable to do its job, even though it already has to provide advice to the most powerful people in the land?
I maintain this is not about Cummings at all, but about undermining any government defence based on scientific advice it received by saying it cannot be trusted. But where does that leave us? What was the government now supposed to have done - it would be pilloried for not following advice, and it will be pilloried for following advice because the advisers bowed before almighty Cummings?
Cummings is news. You do not need a conspiracy theory to explain why Cummings is news. You might need one to explain why Cummings was there in the first place.
It was supposed to allow the "independent scientific committee" to be composed entirely of independent scientists.
They screwed up the moment they deviated from that.
You are really expecting us to believe these scientists were swayed by the attendence of Cummings, thereby insulting each and every one of them while your real reason for your comments is your pathological hatred of Cummings over brexit
It was supposed to allow the "independent scientific committee" to be composed entirely of independent scientists.
They screwed up the moment they deviated from that.
As has been established base on the minutes of previous SAGE meetings, the presence of non-scientists is not unusual.
Has it? Serious question. When one set of minutes was posted on an earlier thread by a poster who pointed out the EA civil servants, I googled all the EA names and they turned out to be scientists or professionals on the subject under discussion. Has one of the papers done fuller research?
Has it? Serious question. When one set of minutes was posted on an earlier thread by a poster who pointed out the EA civil servants, I googled all the EA names and they turned out to be scientists or professionals on the subject under discussion. Has one of the papers done fuller research?
I have found over the last few years that I disagree with William on one very specific but important point regarding the status and importance of nation states. I believe our differing views on the EU stem from that. I must admit I have rarely seen any other postings that he has made that I have not agreed with at least in part and more usually completely.
It was supposed to allow the "independent scientific committee" to be composed entirely of independent scientists.
They screwed up the moment they deviated from that.
You are really expecting us to believe these scientists were swayed by the attendence of Cummings, thereby insulting each and every one of them while your real reason for your comments is your pathological hatred of Cummings over brexit
It is possible Cummings had no effect on the discussion but did give summary reports to ministers or the prime minister. It is possible that Cummings did steer the discussion in one direction or another. It is also possible Cummings did not say anything but his mere presence altered the nature of the discussion by causing scientists to dumb it down for lay persons. We just don't know.
Between 2002 and 2004 the then government carried out a number of trials with electronic and postal voting in local and European elections. (locals in the first two years and an all-postal in North West Region in the 2004 Euro-elections)
St Albans City and District Council, of whose cabinet I was at the time a member, was one of the councils who took part in the trial. We had an initial run with electronic voting in two wards in the May 2002 council elections and in the entire district in an all-out election in 2003.
It did work, though the systems only just coped and there were some very anxious moments indeed about whether we could deliver a robust and clearly secure and accurate outcome.
The original idea was to have remote voting only but there was a rebellion against that and we ended up with a trial in which every possible method of voting - internet, telephone (voters being sent a secure PIN which could be put into an online application or an automated system over the phone to validate identity and their vote), conventional postal vote, touch screen in the polling station and conventional ballot paper in the polling station - was available.
With all of those options and a huge publicity campaign there was a very slight increase in the turnout. Given the cost and trouble the then government decided not to pursue the idea at the time.
My main take from what I remember of the whole exercise is that electronic voting certainly can be used but it took an enormous of effort over two years to make it work.
If this is likely to be needed - and I have a horrible suspicion that TSE may be right and it could well be - planning to implement this in 2021 needs to start NOW beginning with digging up the results of the 2002 and 2003 trials in St Albans and elsewhere.
Now, I wonder whether I kept the cabinet papers with the report on that trial which I would have received nearly seventeen years ago ...
Does it change everything? Really? If someone like Cummings is asserting himself in a room full of scientists then they should assert back. Grow a fucking backbone or resign.
Cummings is infamously a vicious bully who has a reputation for sacking people who dare to criticise him, including an occasion where he ordered somebody to be escorted from a building by police. There is at least one investigation into his inappropriate behaviour ongoing and there are rumours of several more. He also does not take kindly to being told when he is wrong - which, unfortunately, he usually is.
So I think that remark is out of order. He is the sort of person I can imagine people would be scared to stand up to, both by virtue of his position close to the PM and his personality.
Your comment should have started, ‘If Cummings is in a room full of scientific advisers, something is wrong with our system of government.’
Yeah well it didn't start with that and nor will it but thanks for trying to tell me how to think and respond.
Cummings is man, he can be got to and he can be out thought. If everyone in SAGE said get him out, he'd go because he has to. The government could not afford that level of shit right now. Sitting behind someones skirt and some quotes to the Guardian are just a form of acquiescence whilst moaning about it. The scientists have a tremendous amount of support both within government and without. If the guy is genuinely causing a negative impact on public health policy then say so, upfront, in public as a group and he will have to go.
I am telling you that your comment is based on a totally false premise. It therefore was, at risk of sounding Flovian, meaningless.
Cummings is a thug. If he’s outmanoeuvred, because he’s spiteful he hits back, usually through getting people sacked. And because he’s pig ignorant and possessed of shocking judgement, he should not be in any way involved with a scientific committee on epidemiology. There is no need for him to advise, because that is their job, and therefore he should not be there at all. But because of who and what he is, people dare not say so in public.
I never trusted Johnson, or rated him, but even if I had his over-reliance on this loathsome fool would put me right off him.
Does it change everything? Really? If someone like Cummings is asserting himself in a room full of scientists then they should assert back. Grow a fucking backbone or resign.
There is also no evidence in the last lot of weeks that the government has done anything other than listen to the scientists. In fact it may well have to go against some of their advice at some point for all we know.
Simple.
Name the sources and stop hiding behind anyone who may have an agenda
And frankly this is just flogging a dead horse
a bit rich coming from the party of "Downing St sources".
As a doctor you are prepared then to accept Cummings swayed the judgment of 23 experts on the Sage group thereby subverting their advice or are you just playing politics
I don't believe "the science changed" if that is what you are asking. I believe the polling, focus groups and social media analysis did, which is the bit Cummings and his minion were there for.
I don't think the SAGE group had any information that wasn't already in the public domain. Indeed from what I have heard, the graphs on Newsnight at that period were identical. Whether because SAGE leaked, the government leaked or merely that any competent scientist could compile the same data.
It was supposed to allow the "independent scientific committee" to be composed entirely of independent scientists.
They screwed up the moment they deviated from that.
You are really expecting us to believe these scientists were swayed by the attendence of Cummings, thereby insulting each and every one of them while your real reason for your comments is your pathological hatred of Cummings over brexit
It is possible Cummings had no effect on the discussion but did give summary reports to ministers or the prime minister. It is possible that Cummings did steer the discussion in one direction or another. It is also possible Cummings did not say anything but his mere presence altered the nature of the discussion by causing scientists to dumb it down for lay persons. We just don't know.
Someday it will all out in an enquiry but right now it is a non story as far as the public are concerned, most just getting on with their lives
Additionally, the news agenda has moved on and as I said earlier it is flogging a dead horse
Does it change everything? Really? If someone like Cummings is asserting himself in a room full of scientists then they should assert back. Grow a fucking backbone or resign.
There is also no evidence in the last lot of weeks that the government has done anything other than listen to the scientists. In fact it may well have to go against some of their advice at some point for all we know.
Simple.
Name the sources and stop hiding behind anyone who may have an agenda
And frankly this is just flogging a dead horse
a bit rich coming from the party of "Downing St sources".
As a doctor you are prepared then to accept Cummings swayed the judgment of 23 experts on the Sage group thereby subverting their advice or are you just playing politics
It was supposed to allow the "independent scientific committee" to be composed entirely of independent scientists.
They screwed up the moment they deviated from that.
You are really expecting us to believe these scientists were swayed by the attendence of Cummings, thereby insulting each and every one of them while your real reason for your comments is your pathological hatred of Cummings over brexit
It is possible Cummings had no effect on the discussion but did give summary reports to ministers or the prime minister. It is possible that Cummings did steer the discussion in one direction or another. It is also possible Cummings did not say anything but his mere presence altered the nature of the discussion by causing scientists to dumb it down for lay persons. We just don't know.
Maybe so but, running to the Guardian ain't the way of dealing with him. If there is a collective concern amongst the scientists they need to go strong with that and go now. Get the facts and go heavy on the threat. The country is being run as much by the lab coats as they are by the politicians right now, with what appears to be a reasonable amount of public acceptance of their output. They should use that strength to get rid of Cummings if he is a genuine problem, rather than just an irritant with an opinion.
The answer to the goalkeeper question is Pat Jennings.
If you don’t want any other Arsenal or Tottenham players, or George Best in the XI
Personally I’d rather Hoddle, Bergkamp and Southall
Peter Schmeichel to fly the goalkeeping flag for Denmark and Manchester United, thus ruling out Denis Law who is surely one of the greatest Scottish players of all time but perhaps not the best in his role, and also George Best who was no Johan Cruyff from the same era.
So if Kim is dead then it looks like North Korea's answer to Priti Patel takes over.
One of the best arguments against wishing or indeed, performing ill on exceptionally horrible dictators is that their sudden demise almost always causes at least as many problems as it solves.
In this particular case, you wonder if Xi is weighing up the pros and cons of invasion and annexation should Kim have actually snuffed it.
It wouldn’t be a good outcome, but if it could be done quickly and unexpectedly it would probably be a better outcome than the alternatives.
It was supposed to allow the "independent scientific committee" to be composed entirely of independent scientists.
They screwed up the moment they deviated from that.
You are really expecting us to believe these scientists were swayed by the attendence of Cummings, thereby insulting each and every one of them while your real reason for your comments is your pathological hatred of Cummings over brexit
It is possible Cummings had no effect on the discussion but did give summary reports to ministers or the prime minister. It is possible that Cummings did steer the discussion in one direction or another. It is also possible Cummings did not say anything but his mere presence altered the nature of the discussion by causing scientists to dumb it down for lay persons. We just don't know.
Someday it will all out in an enquiry but right now it is a non story as far as the public are concerned, most just getting on with their lives
Additionally, the news agenda has moved on and as I said earlier it is flogging a dead horse
I see Trump is having a meltdown on Twitter about the Noble (sic) Prize awarded to journalists for the "fake Russia, Russia, Russia" story. No such prize exists as I'm sure you all know.
It is of course another great example of why Trump's lawyers wouldn't allow him to be questioned under oath. He just blurts out incriminating stuff at the drop of a hat.
Does it change everything? Really? If someone like Cummings is asserting himself in a room full of scientists then they should assert back. Grow a fucking backbone or resign.
There is also no evidence in the last lot of weeks that the government has done anything other than listen to the scientists. In fact it may well have to go against some of their advice at some point for all we know.
Simple.
Name the sources and stop hiding behind anyone who may have an agenda
And frankly this is just flogging a dead horse
Perhaps the current government should stop hiding behind 'sources' as an example.
It was supposed to allow the "independent scientific committee" to be composed entirely of independent scientists.
They screwed up the moment they deviated from that.
You are really expecting us to believe these scientists were swayed by the attendence of Cummings, thereby insulting each and every one of them while your real reason for your comments is your pathological hatred of Cummings over brexit
It is possible Cummings had no effect on the discussion but did give summary reports to ministers or the prime minister. It is possible that Cummings did steer the discussion in one direction or another. It is also possible Cummings did not say anything but his mere presence altered the nature of the discussion by causing scientists to dumb it down for lay persons. We just don't know.
Maybe so but, running to the Guardian ain't the way of dealing with him. If there is a collective concern amongst the scientists they need to go strong with that and go now. Get the facts and go heavy on the threat. The country is being run as much by the lab coats as they are by the politicians right now, with what appears to be a reasonable amount of public acceptance of their output. They should use that strength to get rid of Cummings if he is a genuine problem, rather than just an irritant with an opinion.
Cummings, like Caesar's Wife, should stop attending these meetings. It seems unlikely his contributions will be missed; it is not as if he will design a vaccine. At best, he is a distraction, to the scientists and to the government.
"41. Consideration should be given too: whether communication experts should be included to help SAGE communicate potential complex concepts and key messages to the general public, media and policy and decision makers; "
It was supposed to allow the "independent scientific committee" to be composed entirely of independent scientists.
They screwed up the moment they deviated from that.
You are really expecting us to believe these scientists were swayed by the attendence of Cummings, thereby insulting each and every one of them while your real reason for your comments is your pathological hatred of Cummings over brexit
It is possible Cummings had no effect on the discussion but did give summary reports to ministers or the prime minister. It is possible that Cummings did steer the discussion in one direction or another. It is also possible Cummings did not say anything but his mere presence altered the nature of the discussion by causing scientists to dumb it down for lay persons. We just don't know.
Someday it will all out in an enquiry but right now it is a non story as far as the public are concerned, most just getting on with their lives
Additionally, the news agenda has moved on and as I said earlier it is flogging a dead horse
It was supposed to allow the "independent scientific committee" to be composed entirely of independent scientists.
They screwed up the moment they deviated from that.
You are really expecting us to believe these scientists were swayed by the attendence of Cummings, thereby insulting each and every one of them while your real reason for your comments is your pathological hatred of Cummings over brexit
It is possible Cummings had no effect on the discussion but did give summary reports to ministers or the prime minister. It is possible that Cummings did steer the discussion in one direction or another. It is also possible Cummings did not say anything but his mere presence altered the nature of the discussion by causing scientists to dumb it down for lay persons. We just don't know.
Maybe so but, running to the Guardian ain't the way of dealing with him...They should use that strength to get rid of Cummings if he is a genuine problem, rather than just an irritant with an opinion.
The former sentence implies the latter. If there is briefing against Cummings, it is clearly with the goal of bringing public pressure to bear on Johnson - who, after all, is most concerned with his own popularity - to get rid of him.
Admittedly, going to the Mail or the Sun might be more effective in the court of popular opinion. But equally, those papers are sold on Cummings’ pet projects so may not want to listen.
Voting will largely stay the same - at worst, with an in person vote, its no different to going to the supermarket and needs to be done very infrequently.
Yes, the idea there is some need for a mass change is ridiculous, particularly with the other concerns that exist.
My day job is to predict future problems before they happen, ideally to eliminate them or minimise them before they happen.
From the day job we've highlighted future electoral events and their delivery as huge risk to the system.
I'm just glad the French Presidential election is in 2022.
America on the other hand, my biggest fear is the 79 days from election day to inauguration. Were Trump to lose he might cause havoc.
It was supposed to allow the "independent scientific committee" to be composed entirely of independent scientists.
They screwed up the moment they deviated from that.
You are really expecting us to believe these scientists were swayed by the attendence of Cummings, thereby insulting each and every one of them while your real reason for your comments is your pathological hatred of Cummings over brexit
It is possible Cummings had no effect on the discussion but did give summary reports to ministers or the prime minister. It is possible that Cummings did steer the discussion in one direction or another. It is also possible Cummings did not say anything but his mere presence altered the nature of the discussion by causing scientists to dumb it down for lay persons. We just don't know.
Maybe so but, running to the Guardian ain't the way of dealing with him. If there is a collective concern amongst the scientists they need to go strong with that and go now. Get the facts and go heavy on the threat. The country is being run as much by the lab coats as they are by the politicians right now, with what appears to be a reasonable amount of public acceptance of their output. They should use that strength to get rid of Cummings if he is a genuine problem, rather than just an irritant with an opinion.
Cummings, like Caesar's Wife, should stop attending these meetings. It seems unlikely his contributions will be missed; it is not as if he will design a vaccine. At best, he is a distraction, to the scientists and to the government.
Nothing happens unless something effective is done. So they need to do it and do it properly.
I see Trump is having a meltdown on Twitter about the Noble (sic) Prize awarded to journalists for the "fake Russia, Russia, Russia" story. No such prize exists as I'm sure you all know.
It is of course another great example of why Trump's lawyers wouldn't allow him to be questioned under oath. He just blurts out incriminating stuff at the drop of a hat.
If Coronavirus is a permanent thing, then we should just accept it's an occupational hazard. We should not shut down our social system over it.
It might not be the only permanent thing either. We might have to deal with antibiotic resistant bacteria in the not so distant future, or other similar viruses.
I walked around the churchyard today. It's striking how many of the older graves were of all ages, young people and children.
Until very recently (the last 80 years or so) we lived with far higher levels of infant mortality and disease than anyone would tolerate today.
So if Kim is dead then it looks like North Korea's answer to Priti Patel takes over.
One of the best arguments against wishing or indeed, performing ill on exceptionally horrible dictators is that their sudden demise almost always causes at least as many problems as it solves.
In this particular case, you wonder if Xi is weighing up the pros and cons of invasion and annexation should Kim have actually snuffed it.
It wouldn’t be a good outcome, but if it could be done quickly and unexpectedly it would probably be a better outcome than the alternatives.
I cannot see it myself. Koreans are not going to accept foreign domination again. Perhaps some sort of Chinese puppet state might be temporarily viable.
Ultimately though China gets on well with South Korea, and sees in the long term runification under Seoul as the solution. They may well facilitate that in exchange for closing US bases.
The answer to the goalkeeper question is Pat Jennings.
If you don’t want any other Arsenal or Tottenham players, or George Best in the XI
Personally I’d rather Hoddle, Bergkamp and Southall
Peter Schmeichel to fly the goalkeeping flag for Denmark and Manchester United, thus ruling out Denis Law who is surely one of the greatest Scottish players of all time but perhaps not the best in his role, and also George Best who was no Johan Cruyff from the same era.
For me Messi and Ronaldo are by far the best two players in my lifetime, and if that meant no other Barca, Utd, Juve and Real Madrid Argentinian or Portuguese players, fair enough.
I see Trump is having a meltdown on Twitter about the Noble (sic) Prize awarded to journalists for the "fake Russia, Russia, Russia" story. No such prize exists as I'm sure you all know.
It is of course another great example of why Trump's lawyers wouldn't allow him to be questioned under oath. He just blurts out incriminating stuff at the drop of a hat.
There is an "ig nobel prize" for strangely weird science. One of the winners is a theorist friend who, with a continental experimentalist, described the actual (harmless) levitation of a frog in a strong magnetic field. Trump has said more than once that he has a feel for science, but I don't think he makes the grade.
If Coronavirus is a permanent thing, then we should just accept it's an occupational hazard. We should not shut down our social system over it.
It might not be the only permanent thing either. We might have to deal with antibiotic resistant bacteria in the not so distant future, or other similar viruses.
I walked around the churchyard today. It's striking how many of the older graves were of all ages, young people and children.
Until very recently (the last 80 years or so) we lived with far higher levels of infant mortality and disease than anyone would tolerate today.
Have I got this right - that prolonged social distancing is the problem not the lock down? Queues into supermarkets don't cause a problem. But how do you keep people 2m apart in smaller ones that don't have the room?
Schools make 2m spacing almost impossible with full classes. Doctors surgeries have been mentioned as another impossible. We have the question as to how services like Dentists can function. Opticians?
I've read a few things now from the hospitality sector that "you can reopen, keep people 2m apart" is a literal death sentence for so many of them financially. So unless the government want to come across as ham fisted and with no idea of how things work in the real world - again- there's going to either have to be a long term support package to keep them shut or long term financial support to allow them to open...
So if Kim is dead then it looks like North Korea's answer to Priti Patel takes over.
One of the best arguments against wishing or indeed, performing ill on exceptionally horrible dictators is that their sudden demise almost always causes at least as many problems as it solves.
In this particular case, you wonder if Xi is weighing up the pros and cons of invasion and annexation should Kim have actually snuffed it.
It wouldn’t be a good outcome, but if it could be done quickly and unexpectedly it would probably be a better outcome than the alternatives.
I cannot see it myself. Koreans are not going to accept foreign domination again. Perhaps some sort of Chinese puppet state might be temporarily viable.
Ultimately though China gets on well with South Korea, and sees in the long term runification under Seoul as the solution. They may well facilitate that in exchange for closing US bases.
They'll facilitate it in exchange for the newly reunified Korea being a client state of China, with a pliant and only pseudo-democratic Government *and* no US bases.
If Coronavirus is a permanent thing, then we should just accept it's an occupational hazard. We should not shut down our social system over it.
The problem is when letting the disease spread freely the disease can "shut the system down" itself. Each active doctor or nurse taken out by the disease is a waste and shock to the economy, that is true for most people who work, and others who provide valuable unpaid support to society too, it's just not so obvious. When it gets out of control then consequences are worse than a lockdown.
The logic that our erstwhile @contrarian is unable to follow.
The economy is destroyed by exponential viral spread far more than it is by lockdown.
I think that when lockdown ends, a lot of businesses are going to be struggling to find customers. Anything travel related, hospitality based, sporting and musical events etc. A 14 quarantine on foreign travel is a bullet between the eyes for the airline industry.
Until I have confirmed antibodies, I am not eating in a restaurant, going to the theatre or to a concert.
I think there is definitely a generation gap, literally all of my friends can't wait to get back to the pub.
Agreed. But until there is a vaccine a pub/restaurant/ travel company/ hotel/ cinema/ theatre is going to have to devise a business plan that works without much income from the 60+ age group. It's not as easy as it sounds - outside of the big cities the grey pound is vital to many restaurants etc. Go to our nearest provincial theatre any evening and I reckon 70% of the audience are over 60. Pubs and gyms will probably manage but a lot of the leisure and entertainment industry won't.
Voting will largely stay the same - at worst, with an in person vote, its no different to going to the supermarket and needs to be done very infrequently.
Yes, the idea there is some need for a mass change is ridiculous, particularly with the other concerns that exist.
My day job is to predict future problems before they happen, ideally to eliminate them or minimise them before they happen.
From the day job we've highlighted future electoral events and their delivery as huge risk to the system.
I'm just glad the French Presidential election is in 2022.
America on the other hand, my biggest fear is the 79 days from election day to inauguration. Were Trump to lose he might cause havoc.
I wrote the same thing about Trump causing havoc and possibly refusing to leave on here a few days ago and got shot down.
So if Kim is dead then it looks like North Korea's answer to Priti Patel takes over.
One of the best arguments against wishing or indeed, performing ill on exceptionally horrible dictators is that their sudden demise almost always causes at least as many problems as it solves.
In this particular case, you wonder if Xi is weighing up the pros and cons of invasion and annexation should Kim have actually snuffed it.
It wouldn’t be a good outcome, but if it could be done quickly and unexpectedly it would probably be a better outcome than the alternatives.
I cannot see it myself. Koreans are not going to accept foreign domination again. Perhaps some sort of Chinese puppet state might be temporarily viable.
Ultimately though China gets on well with South Korea, and sees in the long term runification under Seoul as the solution. They may well facilitate that in exchange for closing US bases.
(1) What meetings Cummings did or didn't attend and what he may or may not have said (2) NHS doctors and nurses doing tik-tok videos
I am no great fan of the NHS (and have refused to join in the Stalinist weekly public clapping, for different reasons) but a bit of light relief for a few minutes at the end of a shift is crucial for staff morale in what must be a very stressful and traumatic environment.
It's harmless and I don't think anything less of them for it.
So if Kim is dead then it looks like North Korea's answer to Priti Patel takes over.
One of the best arguments against wishing or indeed, performing ill on exceptionally horrible dictators is that their sudden demise almost always causes at least as many problems as it solves.
In this particular case, you wonder if Xi is weighing up the pros and cons of invasion and annexation should Kim have actually snuffed it.
It wouldn’t be a good outcome, but if it could be done quickly and unexpectedly it would probably be a better outcome than the alternatives.
I cannot see it myself. Koreans are not going to accept foreign domination again. Perhaps some sort of Chinese puppet state might be temporarily viable.
Ultimately though China gets on well with South Korea, and sees in the long term runification under Seoul as the solution. They may well facilitate that in exchange for closing US bases.
They'll facilitate it in exchange for the newly reunified Korea being a client state of China, with a pliant and only pseudo-democratic Government *and* no US bases.
South Korea now has a vigorous democracy, but US bases would be obselete if North Korea was no longer a threat. China is South Korea's biggest trading partner, and there is little animosity between the countries now. Plenty of historical animosity for both with Japan though!
So if Kim is dead then it looks like North Korea's answer to Priti Patel takes over.
One of the best arguments against wishing or indeed, performing ill on exceptionally horrible dictators is that their sudden demise almost always causes at least as many problems as it solves.
In this particular case, you wonder if Xi is weighing up the pros and cons of invasion and annexation should Kim have actually snuffed it.
It wouldn’t be a good outcome, but if it could be done quickly and unexpectedly it would probably be a better outcome than the alternatives.
I cannot see it myself. Koreans are not going to accept foreign domination again. Perhaps some sort of Chinese puppet state might be temporarily viable.
Ultimately though China gets on well with South Korea, and sees in the long term runification under Seoul as the solution. They may well facilitate that in exchange for closing US bases.
It was supposed to allow the "independent scientific committee" to be composed entirely of independent scientists.
They screwed up the moment they deviated from that.
You are really expecting us to believe these scientists were swayed by the attendence of Cummings, thereby insulting each and every one of them while your real reason for your comments is your pathological hatred of Cummings over brexit
It is possible Cummings had no effect on the discussion but did give summary reports to ministers or the prime minister. It is possible that Cummings did steer the discussion in one direction or another. It is also possible Cummings did not say anything but his mere presence altered the nature of the discussion by causing scientists to dumb it down for lay persons. We just don't know.
Maybe so but, running to the Guardian ain't the way of dealing with him...They should use that strength to get rid of Cummings if he is a genuine problem, rather than just an irritant with an opinion.
The former sentence implies the latter. If there is briefing against Cummings, it is clearly with the goal of bringing public pressure to bear on Johnson - who, after all, is most concerned with his own popularity - to get rid of him.
Admittedly, going to the Mail or the Sun might be more effective in the court of popular opinion. But equally, those papers are sold on Cummings’ pet projects so may not want to listen.
Good night.
I'd have thought the Beeb, Sky..ITV, plenty of reach there. If as a group there's agreement it would take none of that just a conversation over Cummings head saying 'we are not going to work with him and we have the details of how this arse has negatively impacted on our response, so make up your mind'
He'd go because the government couldn't afford that level of exposure. Either they have the evidence to back what is an enormous level of strength they have right now or a) they don't or b) they haven't got the will or even c) they don't really have a collective agreement that Cummings is an actual problem.
I'm not here to shill for him and generally have no time for political bogeymen who get to enjoy their reputation to a point that its damaging all round but you have to act if its becoming an unbearable issue. In issues big and small its the only way to get anything done.
The answer to the goalkeeper question is Pat Jennings.
If you don’t want any other Arsenal or Tottenham players, or George Best in the XI
Personally I’d rather Hoddle, Bergkamp and Southall
Peter Schmeichel to fly the goalkeeping flag for Denmark and Manchester United, thus ruling out Denis Law who is surely one of the greatest Scottish players of all time but perhaps not the best in his role, and also George Best who was no Johan Cruyff from the same era.
For me Messi and Ronaldo are by far the best two players in my lifetime, and if that meant no other Barca, Utd, Juve and Real Madrid Argentinian or Portuguese players, fair enough.
With those two it is not just how good they are, it is just how many years they have done it for. Lots of players might be at the top of the game for 4-5-6 years, those two it is the whole of their careers and still doing well into their 30s.
Voting will largely stay the same - at worst, with an in person vote, its no different to going to the supermarket and needs to be done very infrequently.
Yes, the idea there is some need for a mass change is ridiculous, particularly with the other concerns that exist.
My day job is to predict future problems before they happen, ideally to eliminate them or minimise them before they happen.
From the day job we've highlighted future electoral events and their delivery as huge risk to the system.
I'm just glad the French Presidential election is in 2022.
America on the other hand, my biggest fear is the 79 days from election day to inauguration. Were Trump to lose he might cause havoc.
I wrote the same thing about Trump causing havoc and possibly refusing to leave on here a few days ago and got shot down.
He will leave office on the 20th January 2021 if he loses the election no matter what he tries, but it those 79 days between losing the election and the new President being inaugurated is where Trump could cause havoc, especially one so fond of ruling by executive order.
He might decide to bomb Iran or invade Saudi Arabia.
"Cummings went to a meeting" running for three days as a story is just more evidence that we need to put Journalism on Lockdown, allowing them one hour a day for publishing essential stories only.
Q: From where you stand, how is the UK handling the situation? A: It’s clear that testing was implemented a little bit too late in the UK. Public Health England was in a position to diagnose the disease very early on – we worked with them to make the diagnostic test – but rollout in Germany was driven in part by market forces, which made it fast, and that wasn’t the case in the UK. Now, though, I have the impression that the UK is really gaining momentum in this regard, and that it is coordinating testing efforts better than Germany.
Q: What keeps you awake at night? A: In Germany, people see that the hospitals are not overwhelmed, and they don’t understand why their shops have to shut. They only look at what’s happening here, not at the situation in, say, New York or Spain. This is the prevention paradox, and for many Germans I’m the evil guy who is crippling the economy. I get death threats, which I pass on to the police. More worrying to me are the other emails, the ones from people who say they have three kids and they’re worried about the future. It’s not my fault, but those ones keep me awake at night..
"– but rollout in Germany was driven in part by market forces, which made it fast, and that wasn’t the case in the UK."
I have had a lively discussion this evening with a guy about to receive his State Pension. It has emerged that after taking account of all sources of Income - dividends and Occupational Pensions etc - that he will now receive the gross equivalent of circa £60,000pa. I am telling him that he is pretty 'comfortably off' - but he disagrees. Any opinions?
I have had a lively discussion this evening with a guy about to receive his State Pension. It has emerged that after taking account of all sources of Income - dividends and Occupational Pensions etc - that he will now receive the gross equivalent of circa £60,000pa. I am telling him that he is pretty 'comfortably off' - but he disagrees. Any opinions?
It was supposed to allow the "independent scientific committee" to be composed entirely of independent scientists.
They screwed up the moment they deviated from that.
You are really expecting us to believe these scientists were swayed by the attendence of Cummings, thereby insulting each and every one of them while your real reason for your comments is your pathological hatred of Cummings over brexit
It is possible Cummings had no effect on the discussion but did give summary reports to ministers or the prime minister. It is possible that Cummings did steer the discussion in one direction or another. It is also possible Cummings did not say anything but his mere presence altered the nature of the discussion by causing scientists to dumb it down for lay persons. We just don't know.
The answer to the goalkeeper question is Pat Jennings.
If you don’t want any other Arsenal or Tottenham players, or George Best in the XI
Personally I’d rather Hoddle, Bergkamp and Southall
Peter Schmeichel to fly the goalkeeping flag for Denmark and Manchester United, thus ruling out Denis Law who is surely one of the greatest Scottish players of all time but perhaps not the best in his role, and also George Best who was no Johan Cruyff from the same era.
For me Messi and Ronaldo are by far the best two players in my lifetime, and if that meant no other Barca, Utd, Juve and Real Madrid Argentinian or Portuguese players, fair enough.
With those two it is not just how good they are, it is just how many years they have done it for. Lots of players might be at the top of the game for 4-5-6 years, those two it is the whole of their careers and still doing well into their 30s.
Maradona says hello. He did win the World Cup with a pub team in 1986, and against England produced the cheating "hand of God" goal and in the same match one of the finest goals of any World Cup as he dribbled past half the England team to score. Interestingly, both Maradona and Messi are very short for footballers; whether a low centre of gravity helps dribbling or it might be just coincidence, like two of the all-time greats being called Ronaldo.
If Coronavirus is a permanent thing, then we should just accept it's an occupational hazard. We should not shut down our social system over it.
It might not be the only permanent thing either. We might have to deal with antibiotic resistant bacteria in the not so distant future, or other similar viruses.
I walked around the churchyard today. It's striking how many of the older graves were of all ages, young people and children.
Until very recently (the last 80 years or so) we lived with far higher levels of infant mortality and disease than anyone would tolerate today.
Of course, through much of the world now, death from childbirth, dysentery, TB, Malaria, HIV and a myriad of other infections is the order of the day and always has been. Yet Nigeria, Ghana, Indonesia, Pakistan, India carry on.
I have had a lively discussion this evening with a guy about to receive his State Pension. It has emerged that after taking account of all sources of Income - dividends and Occupational Pensions etc - that he will now receive the gross equivalent of circa £60,000pa. I am telling him that he is pretty 'comfortably off' - but he disagrees. Any opinions?
He is very well off and of course must have a good private pension to be near that figure
"Cummings went to a meeting" running for three days as a story is just more evidence that we need to put Journalism on Lockdown, allowing them one hour a day for publishing essential stories only.
I'd make them file their copy using the medium of contemprary dance.
Voting will largely stay the same - at worst, with an in person vote, its no different to going to the supermarket and needs to be done very infrequently.
Yes, the idea there is some need for a mass change is ridiculous, particularly with the other concerns that exist.
My day job is to predict future problems before they happen, ideally to eliminate them or minimise them before they happen.
From the day job we've highlighted future electoral events and their delivery as huge risk to the system.
I'm just glad the French Presidential election is in 2022.
America on the other hand, my biggest fear is the 79 days from election day to inauguration. Were Trump to lose he might cause havoc.
I wrote the same thing about Trump causing havoc and possibly refusing to leave on here a few days ago and got shot down.
He will leave office on the 20th January 2021 if he loses the election no matter what he tries, but it those 79 days between losing the election and the new President being inaugurated is where Trump could cause havoc, especially one so fond of ruling by executive order.
He might decide to bomb Iran or invade Saudi Arabia.
So if Kim is dead then it looks like North Korea's answer to Priti Patel takes over.
One of the best arguments against wishing or indeed, performing ill on exceptionally horrible dictators is that their sudden demise almost always causes at least as many problems as it solves.
In this particular case, you wonder if Xi is weighing up the pros and cons of invasion and annexation should Kim have actually snuffed it.
It wouldn’t be a good outcome, but if it could be done quickly and unexpectedly it would probably be a better outcome than the alternatives.
I cannot see it myself. Koreans are not going to accept foreign domination again. Perhaps some sort of Chinese puppet state might be temporarily viable.
Ultimately though China gets on well with South Korea, and sees in the long term runification under Seoul as the solution. They may well facilitate that in exchange for closing US bases.
I have had a lively discussion this evening with a guy about to receive his State Pension. It has emerged that after taking account of all sources of Income - dividends and Occupational Pensions etc - that he will now receive the gross equivalent of circa £60,000pa. I am telling him that he is pretty 'comfortably off' - but he disagrees. Any opinions?
Quite obviously so in objective terms, but people do tend to live up to their income, and find reductions quite a squeeze. We see this sort of squealing whenever tax rises are mooted.
Voting will largely stay the same - at worst, with an in person vote, its no different to going to the supermarket and needs to be done very infrequently.
Yes, the idea there is some need for a mass change is ridiculous, particularly with the other concerns that exist.
My day job is to predict future problems before they happen, ideally to eliminate them or minimise them before they happen.
From the day job we've highlighted future electoral events and their delivery as huge risk to the system.
I'm just glad the French Presidential election is in 2022.
America on the other hand, my biggest fear is the 79 days from election day to inauguration. Were Trump to lose he might cause havoc.
I wrote the same thing about Trump causing havoc and possibly refusing to leave on here a few days ago and got shot down.
He will leave office on the 20th January 2021 if he loses the election no matter what he tries, but it those 79 days between losing the election and the new President being inaugurated is where Trump could cause havoc, especially one so fond of ruling by executive order.
He might decide to bomb Iran or invade Saudi Arabia.
Invade Saudi Arabia? Ok rate that one on a scale of 100% possibility if he loses.
If Coronavirus is a permanent thing, then we should just accept it's an occupational hazard. We should not shut down our social system over it.
It might not be the only permanent thing either. We might have to deal with antibiotic resistant bacteria in the not so distant future, or other similar viruses.
I walked around the churchyard today. It's striking how many of the older graves were of all ages, young people and children.
Until very recently (the last 80 years or so) we lived with far higher levels of infant mortality and disease than anyone would tolerate today.
Q: From where you stand, how is the UK handling the situation? A: It’s clear that testing was implemented a little bit too late in the UK. Public Health England was in a position to diagnose the disease very early on – we worked with them to make the diagnostic test – but rollout in Germany was driven in part by market forces, which made it fast, and that wasn’t the case in the UK. Now, though, I have the impression that the UK is really gaining momentum in this regard, and that it is coordinating testing efforts better than Germany.
Q: What keeps you awake at night? A: In Germany, people see that the hospitals are not overwhelmed, and they don’t understand why their shops have to shut. They only look at what’s happening here, not at the situation in, say, New York or Spain. This is the prevention paradox, and for many Germans I’m the evil guy who is crippling the economy. I get death threats, which I pass on to the police. More worrying to me are the other emails, the ones from people who say they have three kids and they’re worried about the future. It’s not my fault, but those ones keep me awake at night..
"– but rollout in Germany was driven in part by market forces, which made it fast, and that wasn’t the case in the UK."
The answer to the goalkeeper question is Pat Jennings.
If you don’t want any other Arsenal or Tottenham players, or George Best in the XI
Personally I’d rather Hoddle, Bergkamp and Southall
Peter Schmeichel to fly the goalkeeping flag for Denmark and Manchester United, thus ruling out Denis Law who is surely one of the greatest Scottish players of all time but perhaps not the best in his role, and also George Best who was no Johan Cruyff from the same era.
For me Messi and Ronaldo are by far the best two players in my lifetime, and if that meant no other Barca, Utd, Juve and Real Madrid Argentinian or Portuguese players, fair enough.
With those two it is not just how good they are, it is just how many years they have done it for. Lots of players might be at the top of the game for 4-5-6 years, those two it is the whole of their careers and still doing well into their 30s.
Maradona says hello. He did win the World Cup with a pub team in 1986, and against England produced the cheating "hand of God" goal and in the same match one of the finest goals of any World Cup as he dribbled past half the England team to score. Interestingly, both Maradona and Messi are very short for footballers; whether a low centre of gravity helps dribbling or it might be just coincidence, like two of the all-time greats being called Ronaldo.
Maradona is a great example of what i was talking about. The later part of his career, the carb loading was more about preparing for marathon sessions with hookers and drugs than doing it on the pitch.
So if Kim is dead then it looks like North Korea's answer to Priti Patel takes over.
One of the best arguments against wishing or indeed, performing ill on exceptionally horrible dictators is that their sudden demise almost always causes at least as many problems as it solves.
In this particular case, you wonder if Xi is weighing up the pros and cons of invasion and annexation should Kim have actually snuffed it.
It wouldn’t be a good outcome, but if it could be done quickly and unexpectedly it would probably be a better outcome than the alternatives.
I cannot see it myself. Koreans are not going to accept foreign domination again. Perhaps some sort of Chinese puppet state might be temporarily viable.
Ultimately though China gets on well with South Korea, and sees in the long term runification under Seoul as the solution. They may well facilitate that in exchange for closing US bases.
They'll facilitate it in exchange for the newly reunified Korea being a client state of China, with a pliant and only pseudo-democratic Government *and* no US bases.
South Korea now has a vigorous democracy, but US bases would be obselete if North Korea was no longer a threat. China is South Korea's biggest trading partner, and there is little animosity between the countries now. Plenty of historical animosity for both with Japan though!
China doesn't want strong independent democracies on its doorstep. It wants pliant client states who support or do its bidding.
It's interesting you don't draw any link between the strong Western presence and the vigour of the democracy.
"Cummings went to a meeting" running for three days as a story is just more evidence that we need to put Journalism on Lockdown, allowing them one hour a day for publishing essential stories only.
It amazes me that they're still going for 'business as usual, Westminster process' stories.
So if Kim is dead then it looks like North Korea's answer to Priti Patel takes over.
One of the best arguments against wishing or indeed, performing ill on exceptionally horrible dictators is that their sudden demise almost always causes at least as many problems as it solves.
In this particular case, you wonder if Xi is weighing up the pros and cons of invasion and annexation should Kim have actually snuffed it.
It wouldn’t be a good outcome, but if it could be done quickly and unexpectedly it would probably be a better outcome than the alternatives.
I cannot see it myself. Koreans are not going to accept foreign domination again. Perhaps some sort of Chinese puppet state might be temporarily viable.
Ultimately though China gets on well with South Korea, and sees in the long term runification under Seoul as the solution. They may well facilitate that in exchange for closing US bases.
I have had a lively discussion this evening with a guy about to receive his State Pension. It has emerged that after taking account of all sources of Income - dividends and Occupational Pensions etc - that he will now receive the gross equivalent of circa £60,000pa. I am telling him that he is pretty 'comfortably off' - but he disagrees. Any opinions?
better off than almost any academic south of SL level.
Voting will largely stay the same - at worst, with an in person vote, its no different to going to the supermarket and needs to be done very infrequently.
Yes, the idea there is some need for a mass change is ridiculous, particularly with the other concerns that exist.
My day job is to predict future problems before they happen, ideally to eliminate them or minimise them before they happen.
From the day job we've highlighted future electoral events and their delivery as huge risk to the system.
I'm just glad the French Presidential election is in 2022.
America on the other hand, my biggest fear is the 79 days from election day to inauguration. Were Trump to lose he might cause havoc.
I wrote the same thing about Trump causing havoc and possibly refusing to leave on here a few days ago and got shot down.
He will leave office on the 20th January 2021 if he loses the election no matter what he tries, but it those 79 days between losing the election and the new President being inaugurated is where Trump could cause havoc, especially one so fond of ruling by executive order.
He might decide to bomb Iran or invade Saudi Arabia.
He legally leaves office on 20th at noon. But will he leave without bloodshed?
If Coronavirus is a permanent thing, then we should just accept it's an occupational hazard. We should not shut down our social system over it.
It might not be the only permanent thing either. We might have to deal with antibiotic resistant bacteria in the not so distant future, or other similar viruses.
I walked around the churchyard today. It's striking how many of the older graves were of all ages, young people and children.
Until very recently (the last 80 years or so) we lived with far higher levels of infant mortality and disease than anyone would tolerate today.
Dickens is full of it.
And one of Winston Churchill's children, Marigold, tragically died of septicaemia aged only two years old.
Very upsetting to think about, more so now I'm a parent of a young daughter of about that age myself.
So if Kim is dead then it looks like North Korea's answer to Priti Patel takes over.
One of the best arguments against wishing or indeed, performing ill on exceptionally horrible dictators is that their sudden demise almost always causes at least as many problems as it solves.
In this particular case, you wonder if Xi is weighing up the pros and cons of invasion and annexation should Kim have actually snuffed it.
It wouldn’t be a good outcome, but if it could be done quickly and unexpectedly it would probably be a better outcome than the alternatives.
I cannot see it myself. Koreans are not going to accept foreign domination again. Perhaps some sort of Chinese puppet state might be temporarily viable.
Ultimately though China gets on well with South Korea, and sees in the long term runification under Seoul as the solution. They may well facilitate that in exchange for closing US bases.
Comments
https://twitter.com/HamillHimself/status/1254164333459734528?s=19
I reckon C3PO cannot be trusted with translating either. We are looking at a serious conspiracy here. Double Agents for the Dark Side, nailed on!
So I think that remark is out of order. He is the sort of person I can imagine people would be scared to stand up to, both by virtue of his position close to the PM and his personality.
Your comment should have started, ‘If Cummings is in a room full of scientific advisers, something is wrong with our system of government.’
https://twitter.com/JoshuaYJackson/status/1254349375335260160
I maintain this is not about Cummings at all, but about undermining any government defence based on scientific advice it received by saying it cannot be trusted. But where does that leave us? What was the government now supposed to have done - it would be pilloried for not following advice, and it will be pilloried for following advice because the advisers bowed before almighty Cummings?
Name the sources and stop hiding behind anyone who may have an agenda
And frankly this is just flogging a dead horse
The San Siro might as well have a roof by the way. It’s the most indoor stadium I’ve ever been in. That might be a factor
Senior Conservative MP Robert Halfon has launched an outspoken attack on the current political direction of the Board of Deputies [of British Jews] after accusing the communal organisation of becoming a "political broadcasting service" for the Labour Party.
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/senior-conservative-mp-attacks-board-of-deputies-s-left-of-centre-political-agenda-1.499202
I pulled the NHS England data, and built the following - interesting to see the pattern as the reporting changes day by day.
The spreadsheet I built is at -
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1WpHbYIFnbQhCwKd7CYzIktF9Im3sELTJ
https://twitter.com/BernieTranders/status/1254409968306008064?s=19
They screwed up the moment they deviated from that.
Personally I’d rather Hoddle, Bergkamp and Southall
Cummings is man, he can be got to and he can be out thought. If everyone in SAGE said get him out, he'd go because he has to. The government could not afford that level of shit right now. Sitting behind someones skirt and some quotes to the Guardian are just a form of acquiescence whilst moaning about it. The scientists have a tremendous amount of support both within government and without. If the guy is genuinely causing a negative impact on public health policy then say so, upfront, in public as a group and he will have to go.
This sort of thing gives me optimism for the 2nd wave - even if we don't have a vaccine or some miracle treatment drug, we'll have drastically better information to craft policy with.
https://twitter.com/Andrew_Adonis/status/1254320484776378369?s=19
Even though talking is less, the intimacy of the Tube must be a problematic area too.
Between 2002 and 2004 the then government carried out a number of trials with electronic and postal voting in local and European elections. (locals in the first two years and an all-postal in North West Region in the 2004 Euro-elections)
St Albans City and District Council, of whose cabinet I was at the time a member, was one of the councils who took part in the trial. We had an initial run with electronic voting in two wards in the May 2002 council elections and in the entire district in an all-out election in 2003.
It did work, though the systems only just coped and there were some very anxious moments indeed about whether we could deliver a robust and clearly secure and accurate outcome.
The original idea was to have remote voting only but there was a rebellion against that and we ended up with a trial in which every possible method of voting - internet, telephone (voters being sent a secure PIN which could be put into an online application or an automated system over the phone to validate identity and their vote), conventional postal vote, touch screen in the polling station and conventional ballot paper in the polling station - was available.
With all of those options and a huge publicity campaign there was a very slight increase in the turnout. Given the cost and trouble the then government decided not to pursue the idea at the time.
My main take from what I remember of the whole exercise is that electronic voting certainly can be used but it took an enormous of effort over two years to make it work.
If this is likely to be needed - and I have a horrible suspicion that TSE may be right and it could well be - planning to implement this in 2021 needs to start NOW beginning with digging up the results of the 2002 and 2003 trials in St Albans and elsewhere.
Now, I wonder whether I kept the cabinet papers with the report on that trial which I would have received nearly seventeen years ago ...
I wish
Cummings is a thug. If he’s outmanoeuvred, because he’s spiteful he hits back, usually through getting people sacked. And because he’s pig ignorant and possessed of shocking judgement, he should not be in any way involved with a scientific committee on epidemiology. There is no need for him to advise, because that is their job, and therefore he should not be there at all. But because of who and what he is, people dare not say so in public.
I never trusted Johnson, or rated him, but even if I had his over-reliance on this loathsome fool would put me right off him.
I don't think the SAGE group had any information that wasn't already in the public domain. Indeed from what I have heard, the graphs on Newsnight at that period were identical. Whether because SAGE leaked, the government leaked or merely that any competent scientist could compile the same data.
Additionally, the news agenda has moved on and as I said earlier it is flogging a dead horse
Even Sky have moved on
In this particular case, you wonder if Xi is weighing up the pros and cons of invasion and annexation should Kim have actually snuffed it.
It wouldn’t be a good outcome, but if it could be done quickly and unexpectedly it would probably be a better outcome than the alternatives.
It is of course another great example of why Trump's lawyers wouldn't allow him to be questioned under oath. He just blurts out incriminating stuff at the drop of a hat.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/80087/sage-guidance.pdf
"41. Consideration should be given too:
whether communication experts should be included to help SAGE
communicate potential complex concepts and key messages to the general public,
media and policy and decision makers; "
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkH2r-sNjQs
If that is too long, try this;
https://xkcd.com/2030/
Admittedly, going to the Mail or the Sun might be more effective in the court of popular opinion. But equally, those papers are sold on Cummings’ pet projects so may not want to listen.
Good night.
If only we could hear the flap of white coats.
I never get the tube anymore, it staggers me that rush hours are allowed to be so crammed.
I walked around the churchyard today. It's striking how many of the older graves were of all ages, young people and children.
Until very recently (the last 80 years or so) we lived with far higher levels of infant mortality and disease than anyone would tolerate today.
Ultimately though China gets on well with South Korea, and sees in the long term runification under Seoul as the solution. They may well facilitate that in exchange for closing US bases.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/29/wikileaks-cables-china-reunified-korea
Well engineered return to work.
Schools make 2m spacing almost impossible with full classes. Doctors surgeries have been mentioned as another impossible. We have the question as to how services like Dentists can function. Opticians?
I've read a few things now from the hospitality sector that "you can reopen, keep people 2m apart" is a literal death sentence for so many of them financially. So unless the government want to come across as ham fisted and with no idea of how things work in the real world - again- there's going to either have to be a long term support package to keep them shut or long term financial support to allow them to open...
(1) What meetings Cummings did or didn't attend and what he may or may not have said
(2) NHS doctors and nurses doing tik-tok videos
I am no great fan of the NHS (and have refused to join in the Stalinist weekly public clapping, for different reasons) but a bit of light relief for a few minutes at the end of a shift is crucial for staff morale in what must be a very stressful and traumatic environment.
It's harmless and I don't think anything less of them for it.
He'd go because the government couldn't afford that level of exposure. Either they have the evidence to back what is an enormous level of strength they have right now or a) they don't or b) they haven't got the will or even c) they don't really have a collective agreement that Cummings is an actual problem.
I'm not here to shill for him and generally have no time for political bogeymen who get to enjoy their reputation to a point that its damaging all round but you have to act if its becoming an unbearable issue. In issues big and small its the only way to get anything done.
https://www.itv.com/news/calendar/2020-04-26/man-describes-coronavirus-test-experience-at-doncaster-airport-as-carnage/
He might decide to bomb Iran or invade Saudi Arabia.
Touche.
Just to see Peston.....
Ahem .... *cough* ..... https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/03/27/the-past-is-not-another-country/
It's interesting you don't draw any link between the strong Western presence and the vigour of the democracy.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1254516600302075905?s=20
Very upsetting to think about, more so now I'm a parent of a young daughter of about that age myself.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1254515317335883778?s=19