Nicola live just now seems to admit the R range is high and she cannot change the advice. I do not know but maybe Wales is the same and of course this complicates the position
Nicola expects difference to the advice post Boris speech tonight will be minor
Boris has to look to the advice and as far as I am concerned stay alert is sensible and I am not sure that the conflicting advice will be that helpful to the first ministers as many seem to think
It will of course be best to align the processes but Nicola does not want stay alert advertising in Scotland. There are real dangers here for Nicola to be painting Scotland's present position to be poor and of course the NHS in Scotland is her responsibility
What does stay alert actually mean? Stay at home means stay at home.
Nicola doesn't have to explain her position other than acknowledging she has erred on the side of caution. She may well be wrong and Boris may well be right. When the post Covid political post mortems are in Nicola can say she was wrong, the already shot economy might take a little longer to recover but she felt the risk was worth it if it saved lives. If the opposite turns out to be true Boris will have rather a lot of fatalities to justify.
Stay alert. Control the virus. Save lives
Basically it means don’t become complacent.
It is a vacuous statement. Stay alert whilst you party like it's 1999.
That's not going to be happening.
...or whilst you travel to work on a packed tube train.
The advice is still to work from home where possible, so let's see how busy they get.
On topic, we have poor decision-making because the government and the party from which it is formed is too much of a personality cult around Boris. And Boris himself is not exactly someone with much experience of effective implementation of anything, commercial or economic understanding or an attention to detail. His skills are not the ones you need at such a time. And he does not have a strong Cabinet around him.
Add to that the fact that he may not be at his best and it is not surprising that we are not well governed and that we are being briefed on a speech on a Sunday evening rather than a proper announcement to Parliament.
Of course he should get better properly. Whether a fit Boris would be any more effective than now, God knows. I don’t get the impression that anyone in government really knows what they are doing or is prepared to be honest with us.
I’m usually a stickler for constitutional proprietary.
But on this occasion the PM should be speaking to the nation, live. It’s too important.
He should, of course, follow up with a statement to Parliament on Monday with MPs having the opportunity to hold him to account.
Why? Parliament on Monday. Then a TV address if needed.
This is all about making it about him and avoiding scrutiny. It is too important for him to be allowed to get away with it.
How will he be getting away with it? Either it's a TV announcement or a announcement in the Commons, nothing in the package would be different.
Scrutiny and questioning. We are a Parliamentary democracy. Changes to the regulations under which we live, on pain of criminal enforcement, should be announced to Parliament and the PM should answer questions about them.
That'll still happen this week, won't it?
Will it?
Why the need for a TV speech at all? Budgets get announced in Parliament. Why should this be any different?
He’s not the Queen.
Because we need people to see what is changing and understand it fully. A 7pm Sunday address to the nation will reach 60-70% of households, a 3pm commons debate might get 10% reach and then another 20-30% from secondary reporting.
Nicola live just now seems to admit the R range is high and she cannot change the advice. I do not know but maybe Wales is the same and of course this complicates the position
Nicola expects difference to the advice post Boris speech tonight will be minor
Boris has to look to the advice and as far as I am concerned stay alert is sensible and I am not sure that the conflicting advice will be that helpful to the first ministers as many seem to think
It will of course be best to align the processes but Nicola does not want stay alert advertising in Scotland. There are real dangers here for Nicola to be painting Scotland's present position to be poor and of course the NHS in Scotland is her responsibility
What does stay alert actually mean? Stay at home means stay at home.
Nicola doesn't have to explain her position other than acknowledging she has erred on the side of caution. She may well be wrong and Boris may well be right. When the post Covid political post mortems are in Nicola can say she was wrong, the already shot economy might take a little longer to recover but she felt the risk was worth it if it saved lives. If the opposite turns out to be true Boris will have rather a lot of fatalities to justify.
Stay alert is a sensible move away from stay at home
However, Nicola is admitting Scotland is de facto in a worse position than England
It's curious that the argument is advanced that Scotland is 2 - 3 weeks behind England (which is quite likely the case) yet may have had an even worse crisis in Care Homes.
I look forward to those arguing that "England should have learned from Italy, it had a 2 - 3 week head start" advancing the same argument for Scotland vis a vis England.
Where is the evidence that it has had worse crisis in care homes, do you have comparative data that shows that is the case or is it just reading from unionist media.
I thought devolution was a mistake in 1997 and still think it was.
What was the alternative - a continuation of the status quo? The other main Scottish parties had, through the Constiutional Convention, agreed a way forward providing for a degree of autonomy for a new Scottish Parliament if agreed by the Scottish people in a referendum which it was convincingly.
I recall a few weeks ago someone (I can't remember whom) theorised then that covid-19 would prove to be a 120 day epidemic, reaching its peak approximately 60 days after first appearing in a particular country or area and largely disappearing after a further period of 60 days. I realise that this sounds incredibly simple, naive even, but strangely, give or take, this seems to the way things seem to have been working out so far, notwithstanding that different countries have adopted different policies in dealing with the epidemic in their own country. If this theory were to prove broadly accurate, the UK should be largely rid of significant numbers of new cases being identified beyond mid-June. Please God let this be the case.
I never thought it was naive, it was always a pretty likely scenario.
It was proposed by an Israeli professor, based on the fall away from exponential growth:
I don't know why we're changing the message if we don't really want the public to change anything.
But they do want behaviour to change, otherwise they wouldn't be changing it.
What do we want to change? Government advice remains to stay at home.
But not as religiously as previously as things will start to be slowly reopened.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
But the process is going to be a slow reopening. Starting with a few things this week but with an expanding list. The idea that nothing has changed is for the birds.
Stay alert to me implies life as normal but being more aware of what is going on. Life is not returning to normal.
How does it imply life is normal? If things are normal you wouldn't have to be alert for coronavirus.
They say to be aware of the step when you're getting on the Tube, it's going about your business but being more careful about what's going on around you. The advice remains to stay at home, it is not a good message. When people are allowed to go back to work, things are normal again, then perhaps you can see be aware of Coronavirus - but right now it's the wrong time and the wrong message.
That is my perception and interpretation of the message. You aren't going to change my mind.
Well we were talking about whether nothing had changed, not whether the message was good or bad.
Nothing has changed for me, that is what I said.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
On topic, we have poor decision-making because the government and the party from which it is formed is too much of a personality cult around Boris. And Boris himself is not exactly someone with much experience of effective implementation of anything, commercial or economic understanding or an attention to detail. His skills are not the ones you need at such a time. And he does not have a strong Cabinet around him.
Add to that the fact that he may not be at his best and it is not surprising that we are not well governed and that we are being briefed on a speech on a Sunday evening rather than a proper announcement to Parliament.
Of course he should get better properly. Whether a fit Boris would be any more effective than now, God knows. I don’t get the impression that anyone in government really knows what they are doing or is prepared to be honest with us.
I’m usually a stickler for constitutional proprietary.
But on this occasion the PM should be speaking to the nation, live. It’s too important.
He should, of course, follow up with a statement to Parliament on Monday with MPs having the opportunity to hold him to account.
Why? Parliament on Monday. Then a TV address if needed.
This is all about making it about him and avoiding scrutiny. It is too important for him to be allowed to get away with it.
How will he be getting away with it? Either it's a TV announcement or a announcement in the Commons, nothing in the package would be different.
Scrutiny and questioning. We are a Parliamentary democracy. Changes to the regulations under which we live, on pain of criminal enforcement, should be announced to Parliament and the PM should answer questions about them.
That'll still happen this week, won't it?
Will it?
Why the need for a TV speech at all? Budgets get announced in Parliament. Why should this be any different?
He’s not the Queen.
Yes, it's scheduled for 3pm on Monday. How that is Boris "getting away with it" is beyond me, frankly.
Nicola live just now seems to admit the R range is high and she cannot change the advice. I do not know but maybe Wales is the same and of course this complicates the position
Nicola expects difference to the advice post Boris speech tonight will be minor
Boris has to look to the advice and as far as I am concerned stay alert is sensible and I am not sure that the conflicting advice will be that helpful to the first ministers as many seem to think
It will of course be best to align the processes but Nicola does not want stay alert advertising in Scotland. There are real dangers here for Nicola to be painting Scotland's present position to be poor and of course the NHS in Scotland is her responsibility
What does stay alert actually mean? Stay at home means stay at home.
Nicola doesn't have to explain her position other than acknowledging she has erred on the side of caution. She may well be wrong and Boris may well be right. When the post Covid political post mortems are in Nicola can say she was wrong, the already shot economy might take a little longer to recover but she felt the risk was worth it if it saved lives. If the opposite turns out to be true Boris will have rather a lot of fatalities to justify.
Stay alert. Control the virus. Save lives
Basically it means don’t become complacent.
It is a vacuous statement. Stay alert whilst you party like it's 1999.
That's not going to be happening.
...or whilst you travel to work on a packed tube train.
The advice is still to work from home where possible, so let's see how busy they get.
Stay alert? I thought catchy Cummings slogans worked best in groups of three words. How about 'fill yet boots', ' but stay alert'?
I don't know why we're changing the message if we don't really want the public to change anything.
But they do want behaviour to change, otherwise they wouldn't be changing it.
What do we want to change? Government advice remains to stay at home.
But not as religiously as previously as things will start to be slowly reopened.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
But the process is going to be a slow reopening. Starting with a few things this week but with an expanding list. The idea that nothing has changed is for the birds.
Stay alert to me implies life as normal but being more aware of what is going on. Life is not returning to normal.
How does it imply life is normal? If things are normal you wouldn't have to be alert for coronavirus.
They say to be aware of the step when you're getting on the Tube, it's going about your business but being more careful about what's going on around you. The advice remains to stay at home, it is not a good message. When people are allowed to go back to work, things are normal again, then perhaps you can see be aware of Coronavirus - but right now it's the wrong time and the wrong message.
That is my perception and interpretation of the message. You aren't going to change my mind.
I don't know why we're changing the message if we don't really want the public to change anything.
But they do want behaviour to change, otherwise they wouldn't be changing it.
What do we want to change? Government advice remains to stay at home.
But not as religiously as previously as things will start to be slowly reopened.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
But the process is going to be a slow reopening. Starting with a few things this week but with an expanding list. The idea that nothing has changed is for the birds.
Stay alert to me implies life as normal but being more aware of what is going on. Life is not returning to normal.
How does it imply life is normal? If things are normal you wouldn't have to be alert for coronavirus.
They say to be aware of the step when you're getting on the Tube, it's going about your business but being more careful about what's going on around you. The advice remains to stay at home, it is not a good message. When people are allowed to go back to work, things are normal again, then perhaps you can see be aware of Coronavirus - but right now it's the wrong time and the wrong message.
That is my perception and interpretation of the message. You aren't going to change my mind.
Well we were talking about whether nothing had changed, not whether the message was good or bad.
Nothing has changed for me, that is what I said.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
Nothing has changed?
Theresa May is probably rocking with merriment right now.
It is becoming fairly stark in this conference that Nicola is admitting Scotland is in a worse position than England
Health care is devolved isn't it?
Yes and that is a real problem for her
The Scottish NHS is doing very well, and it has done better than English and Welsh equivalents over last few years. Not perfect but good job being done. Imaginary problems for SNP are laughable, look at the polls , they are on an ever rising slope after 13 years in power. I doubt Nicola will have much to worry about going into next election.
I recall a few weeks ago someone (I can't remember whom) theorised then that covid-19 would prove to be a 120 day epidemic, reaching its peak approximately 60 days after first appearing in a particular country or area and largely disappearing after a further period of 60 days. I realise that this sounds incredibly simple, naive even, but strangely, give or take, this seems to the way things seem to have been working out so far, notwithstanding that different countries have adopted different policies in dealing with the epidemic in their own country. If this theory were to prove broadly accurate, the UK should be largely rid of significant numbers of new cases being identified beyond mid-June. Please God let this be the case.
I'm fairly confidant that will be the case for Sweden,
For almost everywhere else, I think sporadic outbreaks for the nest year or two are probable.
I don't know why we're changing the message if we don't really want the public to change anything.
But they do want behaviour to change, otherwise they wouldn't be changing it.
What do we want to change? Government advice remains to stay at home.
But not as religiously as previously as things will start to be slowly reopened.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
But the process is going to be a slow reopening. Starting with a few things this week but with an expanding list. The idea that nothing has changed is for the birds.
Stay alert to me implies life as normal but being more aware of what is going on. Life is not returning to normal.
How does it imply life is normal? If things are normal you wouldn't have to be alert for coronavirus.
They say to be aware of the step when you're getting on the Tube, it's going about your business but being more careful about what's going on around you. The advice remains to stay at home, it is not a good message. When people are allowed to go back to work, things are normal again, then perhaps you can see be aware of Coronavirus - but right now it's the wrong time and the wrong message.
That is my perception and interpretation of the message. You aren't going to change my mind.
Well we were talking about whether nothing had changed, not whether the message was good or bad.
Nothing has changed for me, that is what I said.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
You said that the reality is nothing has changed. That's different.
Yet the public (or the people who do opinion polls) rate him 48-19 better than Starmer in terms of who they'd like to lead us through the covid crisis.
Someone who shook hands with people before telling us not to, was late to lockdown, responsible for tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths, caught the disease along with his closest allies in the fight against it, nearly died, looks like shit, and is forensically picked apart by Sir Keir at PMQs (to take his opponents view on all the aforementioned as legit)
Either the polls are nonsense, or the public always prefer charisma to nerdiness. The polls may well be nonsense, but in real elections...
When has the nerdier option won?
1997 Blair vs Major - Nerd lost 2001 Blair vs Hague - Nerd lost 2005 Blair vs Howard - Nerd lost 2010 Brown vs Cameron - Nerd lost 2015 Cameron vs Miliband - Nerd lost 2016 EU Ref Cameron & Osborne vs Boris & Farage - Nerds lost 2017 May vs Corbyn - Nerd won narrowly after polls gave unassailable lead 2019 Boris vs Corbyn - Nerd lost 2024 Boris vs Starmer...
Hmm...
Although, you might argue that nerds won internal party elections (the battle of the Millibands). You also have to explain why Ashdown (facing two nerds) did so poorly relative to nerdy Clegg, and why the SNP has been more successful with its current nerdy leader.
Salmond won an outright SNP majority in 2011, Sturgeon did not in 2016 but needed the Greens
You're confounding parliaments and voting systems (the Holyrood one designed to prevent the SNP from getting a majority, with some success).
I recall a few weeks ago someone (I can't remember whom) theorised then that covid-19 would prove to be a 120 day epidemic, reaching its peak approximately 60 days after first appearing in a particular country or area and largely disappearing after a further period of 60 days. I realise that this sounds incredibly simple, naive even, but strangely, give or take, this seems to the way things seem to have been working out so far, notwithstanding that different countries have adopted different policies in dealing with the epidemic in their own country. If this theory were to prove broadly accurate, the UK should be largely rid of significant numbers of new cases being identified beyond mid-June. Please God let this be the case.
I never thought it was naive, it was always a pretty likely scenario.
It is a very unlikely scenario. The likely scenario is, even if there is no "second wave" the number of new cases will carry on dropping like an exponential decay curve, with variability, ie good and bad weeks.
It is becoming fairly stark in this conference that Nicola is admitting Scotland is in a worse position than England
Health care is devolved isn't it?
Yes and that is a real problem for her
The Scottish NHS is doing very well, and it has done better than English and Welsh equivalents over last few years. Not perfect but good job being done. Imaginary problems for SNP are laughable, look at the polls , they are on an ever rising slope after 13 years in power. I doubt Nicola will have much to worry about going into next election.
You tempted at all by the new indy party Malc? I can't even tell if the one that's floating around this weekend is the one and only or if there will be several. All seems a bit messy in any case.
This is exactly what the EU doesn't need, to piss off its wealthiest member and largest contributor to the budget when it is about to ask it to underwrite €1.5tn in new loans. What a completely stupid thing to do.
Not sure the EC has much choice. Germany has directly challenged the primacy of EU law, and has humiliated the ECJ in the process. The EU has to bring Germany to heel, and to be seen doing so. Whether they can do that is a different matter
Mich as people may not like the EU.. its bery important bothe economicslly
I don't know why we're changing the message if we don't really want the public to change anything.
But they do want behaviour to change, otherwise they wouldn't be changing it.
What do we want to change? Government advice remains to stay at home.
But not as religiously as previously as things will start to be slowly reopened.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
But the process is going to be a slow reopening. Starting with a few things this week but with an expanding list. The idea that nothing has changed is for the birds.
Stay alert to me implies life as normal but being more aware of what is going on. Life is not returning to normal.
How does it imply life is normal? If things are normal you wouldn't have to be alert for coronavirus.
They say to be aware of the step when you're getting on the Tube, it's going about your business but being more careful about what's going on around you. The advice remains to stay at home, it is not a good message. When people are allowed to go back to work, things are normal again, then perhaps you can see be aware of Coronavirus - but right now it's the wrong time and the wrong message.
That is my perception and interpretation of the message. You aren't going to change my mind.
Well we were talking about whether nothing had changed, not whether the message was good or bad.
Nothing has changed for me, that is what I said.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
You said that the reality is nothing has changed. That's different.
The reality is that nothing has changed. Name something that changed for me, you can't.
I don't know why we're changing the message if we don't really want the public to change anything.
But they do want behaviour to change, otherwise they wouldn't be changing it.
What do we want to change? Government advice remains to stay at home.
But not as religiously as previously as things will start to be slowly reopened.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
You might not leave the house, but you are not everyone.
I await in awe for the PB Tories to rationally explain Jenrick's apparant contradiction.
Jenrick is the guy with so many houses he forgot which one was home, and drove hundreds of miles to be there while the rest of us were locked down. #StayAlert #FollowTheSatNav
I don't know why we're changing the message if we don't really want the public to change anything.
But they do want behaviour to change, otherwise they wouldn't be changing it.
What do we want to change? Government advice remains to stay at home.
But not as religiously as previously as things will start to be slowly reopened.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
You might not leave the house, but you are not everyone.
We are talking about MY interpretation of the message and its impact on ME. Please look at the discussion we have had.
Can I leave the house more than I can now. No.
Can I go back to work. No.
Can I see my friends. No.
Therefore, nothing has changed for me - the message doesn't make sense. I am sure I am not alone.
The reality is that nothing has changed. Name something that changed for me, you can't.
You are not the only person that exists in this reality.
No but in the context of the impact on people, I am well within my rights to discuss the impact of a message on me.
The old message clearly applied to everyone, this one doesn't. So at best it's confusing to send it to everyone. At worst it's dangerous and putting lives at risk.
This is exactly what the EU doesn't need, to piss off its wealthiest member and largest contributor to the budget when it is about to ask it to underwrite €1.5tn in new loans. What a completely stupid thing to do.
Not sure the EC has much choice. Germany has directly challenged the primacy of EU law, and has humiliated the ECJ in the process. The EU has to bring Germany to heel, and to be seen doing so. Whether they can do that is a different matter
They absolutely have a choice, just ignore it and let the ECB "clarify" their policy and pretend it was completely unrelated to the German constitutional court. Now they have set themselves on a collision course with Germany, at the best of times it would be stupid, right now the last thing the EU needs is for Germans to start losing faith in the EU and turning to the likes of AfD who will legitimately be able to say "we were right, the other parties lied to you".
It's the same stupid short term approach that led them to force May into a humiliation of a deal which has resulted in Britain looking like it will leave without a trade deal.
In response to the suggestion on the previous thread that closing down a restaurant without compensation is no different to closing down a takeaway with E-coli:-
A nonsense comparison. A takeaway which is infected is at fault. It is only temporarily shut down and can remedy the situation. A restaurant which cannot operate because of this virus is not at fault. It is closed because of a government decision. It should either be supported until it can. Or compensated so that those running and working in it can use the compensation to do something else that is legal and viable.
If you close whole sectors of the economy without some form of compensation, expect a major depression, social unrest and never again to win an election in your newly won seats.
Similarly, the idea that Covid-19 is just another risk which a business has to bear is also idiotic.
The reason why this risk should be paid for by the government - and not others - is because other risks, such as the risk of fire, can be insured against. This one can’t.
Comments noted, thank you.
I did say support was justifiable - just that I had problems accepting that it should be justified narrowly on the government's alleged liability for stopping businesses from operating in an unsafe manner.
And as for insurance, we have the tennis at Wimbledon as an example of pandemic insurance. Though I am sure most businesses are in the position of a shop in the lower parts of York or Bridgnorth whose flood insyrance premiums have gone through the roof.
My daughter’s business interruption insurance would have covered her if she got the illness at her restaurant and had to be shut down. But not if she was shut down because of a government order. The government should in my view either act as insurer of last resort or compensate her for the fact that she cannot operate her business at all now or viably in future.
We have been discussing her future. If furlough is withdrawn or reduced at the end of June or ealier but the 2 metre rule is still in place, her business is no longer viable.
At that point she will close it down. 4 jobs lost - 3 of them for people in their 20’s. One will have difficulties paying rent and has 3 children to look after. The local pub for 2 villages and the surrounding area is closed. The landlord loses his rental income and the value of his property is affected. The village loses its only communal gathering place. Local suppliers lose business.
Her business will not be the only one In the area making similar calculations. The consequences will be similar. Multiply that by the thousands of cafes, pubs, hotels restaurants and other visitor attractions which make the bulk of the tourism industry here - one of the main parts of the Lakeland economy - and work out what that means. Then ask yourself what the alternative is.
Tourism is often the alternative to earlier industries. What is the alternative now? Sellafield? Agriculture? Farmers are throwing away milk because of the loss of orders from the hospitality trade. They have the end of the Brexit transition to worry about. What is the alternative?
It is very possible that there will be a vaccine. At which point tourism is viable again. So does it not make sense to support businesses until then in some way? 2 years of economic depression in relatively poor areas will be no picnic for anyone concerned, let alone the government.
It could actually be worse than that. If your daughter's business isn't a limited company then she could well be personally liable for the rent until the landlord finds a new tenant, or she finds someone to take over the lease. Being a limited company may actually not provide security if she, as the major shareholder, has been guarantor for the lease. Happened to me. Quite a few years ago now, but it was hard work getting it sorted.
She operates via a limited company and is not a guarantor of the lease. The landlord who lives locally and used to be the previous tenant is no keener than anyone else to see the pub closed down. But a part-time takeaway is not viable. That point is rapidly being reached.
It must be very, very difficult for your daughter, and I really feel for her.
IMO the govt should in the short term work towards forgiving, or at least, ameliorate, the burden of costs, but not guarantee profits, of the businesses it has mandated closed.
Thus, the furlough scheme covers wages. The waiving of rates. The cash grants to SMEs who occupy commercial property.
I also run a Ltd company, and the vast majority of my income comes via dividends. BUT I don't expect to make any real money this year. Nor do I expect the Govt to cushion me from not making a profit. I see profits as the reward for taking risk in setting up a business. The sad reality is that part of business is luck and timing. It is never more evident than now.
I think, therefore, that the Government has trod a difficult tightrope quite well.
I do, however, feel very sorry for those with businesses who are unlucky enough to be in a bad position here - whether it is a pub, a gym, or a shop that can't open but won't be able to go online.
I don't know why we're changing the message if we don't really want the public to change anything.
But they do want behaviour to change, otherwise they wouldn't be changing it.
What do we want to change? Government advice remains to stay at home.
But not as religiously as previously as things will start to be slowly reopened.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
You might not leave the house, but you are not everyone.
We are talking about MY interpretation of the message and its impact on ME. Please look at the discussion we have had.
Can I leave the house more than I can now. No.
Can I go back to work. No.
Can I see my friends. No.
Therefore, nothing has changed for me - the message doesn't make sense. I am sure I am not alone.
It depends on what is announced, you may be able to sit outside a cafe with a coffee and go to a garden centre. Those two things are not possible at the moment. Just because you don't want to do them, it doesn't mean others won't appreciate it.
The reality is that nothing has changed. Name something that changed for me, you can't.
You are not the only person that exists in this reality.
No but in the context of the impact on people, I am well within my rights to discuss the impact of a message on me.
The old message clearly applied to everyone, this one doesn't. So at best it's confusing to send it to everyone. At worst it's dangerous and putting lives at risk.
Yes, but I was disputing your claim that "in reality nothing has changed", which was a sentence on its own not referring to yourself personally.
It is becoming fairly stark in this conference that Nicola is admitting Scotland is in a worse position than England
Today you have justified Boris' handling of Covid-19 by first saying we are not as bad as Italy because they have cooked the books and Boris has done a good job because the fatality rate is higher in Scotland. I find your arguments to be very distasteful.
Excrement still smells like excrement even if you coat it in sugar.
Especially when it is horse manure and the opposite of the evidence
I don't know why we're changing the message if we don't really want the public to change anything.
But they do want behaviour to change, otherwise they wouldn't be changing it.
What do we want to change? Government advice remains to stay at home.
But not as religiously as previously as things will start to be slowly reopened.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
You might not leave the house, but you are not everyone.
We are talking about MY interpretation of the message and its impact on ME. Please look at the discussion we have had.
Can I leave the house more than I can now. No.
Can I go back to work. No.
Can I see my friends. No.
Therefore, nothing has changed for me - the message doesn't make sense. I am sure I am not alone.
You will in all likelihood be able to do some of those things. Whether you want to is another matter.
I don't know why we're changing the message if we don't really want the public to change anything.
But they do want behaviour to change, otherwise they wouldn't be changing it.
What do we want to change? Government advice remains to stay at home.
But not as religiously as previously as things will start to be slowly reopened.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
You might not leave the house, but you are not everyone.
We are talking about MY interpretation of the message and its impact on ME. Please look at the discussion we have had.
Can I leave the house more than I can now. No.
Can I go back to work. No.
Can I see my friends. No.
Therefore, nothing has changed for me - the message doesn't make sense. I am sure I am not alone.
You will in all likelihood be able to do some of those things. Whether you want to is another matter.
I wasn't aware Johnson was going to announce that I can leave the house more than I can already tonight? Or that I can go back to work, or that I can see my friends.
I don't know why we're changing the message if we don't really want the public to change anything.
But they do want behaviour to change, otherwise they wouldn't be changing it.
What do we want to change? Government advice remains to stay at home.
But not as religiously as previously as things will start to be slowly reopened.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
You might not leave the house, but you are not everyone.
We are talking about MY interpretation of the message and its impact on ME. Please look at the discussion we have had.
Can I leave the house more than I can now. No.
Can I go back to work. No.
Can I see my friends. No.
Therefore, nothing has changed for me - the message doesn't make sense. I am sure I am not alone.
You will in all likelihood be able to do some of those things. Whether you want to is another matter.
I wasn't aware Johnson was going to announce that I can leave the house more than I can already tonight? Or that I can go back to work, or that I can see my friends.
Do you have any sources for that?
Given that the advice currently is to ONLY leave home for food shopping and once for daily exercise I am fairly confident you will have more freedom to go outside afterwards. Even if it is only to do one or two other new things. As I said earlier, it'll be a slow process.
I don't know why we're changing the message if we don't really want the public to change anything.
But they do want behaviour to change, otherwise they wouldn't be changing it.
What do we want to change? Government advice remains to stay at home.
But not as religiously as previously as things will start to be slowly reopened.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
You might not leave the house, but you are not everyone.
We are talking about MY interpretation of the message and its impact on ME. Please look at the discussion we have had.
Can I leave the house more than I can now. No.
Can I go back to work. No.
Can I see my friends. No.
Therefore, nothing has changed for me - the message doesn't make sense. I am sure I am not alone.
It depends on what is announced, you may be able to sit outside a cafe with a coffee and go to a garden centre. Those two things are not possible at the moment. Just because you don't want to do them, it doesn't mean others won't appreciate it.
We don't know what will be announced, that's true.
But my understanding is that garden centres will be able to open and you'll be able to exercise more. That's it.
That is not a return to remotely normal for me - and neither have any impact on me, hence like I said the message doesn't make sense. Unlike the old one which applied to everyone.
I thought devolution was a mistake in 1997 and still think it was.
I dont have a strong view on devolution, happy to go along with the majority.
But it is really weird to hear the same people in favour of devolution and localism also complaining that different parts of the country have different policies and outcomes. Isnt that the whole point of it?
I don't know why we're changing the message if we don't really want the public to change anything.
But they do want behaviour to change, otherwise they wouldn't be changing it.
What do we want to change? Government advice remains to stay at home.
But not as religiously as previously as things will start to be slowly reopened.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
You might not leave the house, but you are not everyone.
We are talking about MY interpretation of the message and its impact on ME. Please look at the discussion we have had.
Can I leave the house more than I can now. No.
Can I go back to work. No.
Can I see my friends. No.
Therefore, nothing has changed for me - the message doesn't make sense. I am sure I am not alone.
You will in all likelihood be able to do some of those things. Whether you want to is another matter.
I wasn't aware Johnson was going to announce that I can leave the house more than I can already tonight? Or that I can go back to work, or that I can see my friends.
Do you have any sources for that?
Given that the advice currently is to ONLY leave home for food shopping and once for daily exercise I am fairly confident you will have more freedom to go outside afterwards. Even if it is only to do one or two other new things. As I said earlier, it'll be a slow process.
Tonight, the freedom to go outside more will be limited to going to the garden centre. That is my understanding of what will be announced from various sources.
Like I said, that doesn't apply to me. So as I keep saying, the new message doesn't apply consistently.
I don't know why we're changing the message if we don't really want the public to change anything.
But they do want behaviour to change, otherwise they wouldn't be changing it.
What do we want to change? Government advice remains to stay at home.
But not as religiously as previously as things will start to be slowly reopened.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
You might not leave the house, but you are not everyone.
We are talking about MY interpretation of the message and its impact on ME. Please look at the discussion we have had.
Can I leave the house more than I can now. No.
Can I go back to work. No.
Can I see my friends. No.
Therefore, nothing has changed for me - the message doesn't make sense. I am sure I am not alone.
It depends on what is announced, you may be able to sit outside a cafe with a coffee and go to a garden centre. Those two things are not possible at the moment. Just because you don't want to do them, it doesn't mean others won't appreciate it.
We don't know what will be announced, that's true.
But my understanding is that garden centres will be able to open and you'll be able to exercise more. That's it.
That is not a return to remotely normal for me - and neither have any impact on me, hence like I said the message doesn't make sense. Unlike the old one which applied to everyone.
So, something has changed? Glad we are on the same page.
I await in awe for the PB Tories to rationally explain Jenrick's apparant contradiction.
Not sure if I count as a PB Tory, but, I understand that as, you can take slightly more risks to do important things, like earning a living, but please don't take to many risk, like hosting a wife swapping party.
It seems to be a step towards treating us like adults, who can a do asses risk and make judgements every day, accepting that different people risk appetite will be different. for good reasons, an 80 year old with a hart condition, but a good pension, verses a 25 year entrepreneur who lives alone but started a bissness in January and will go bust if he cant do bissness.
On topic, we have poor decision-making because the government and the party from which it is formed is too much of a personality cult around Boris. And Boris himself is not exactly someone with much experience of effective implementation of anything, commercial or economic understanding or an attention to detail. His skills are not the ones you need at such a time. And he does not have a strong Cabinet around him.
Add to that the fact that he may not be at his best and it is not surprising that we are not well governed and that we are being briefed on a speech on a Sunday evening rather than a proper announcement to Parliament.
Of course he should get better properly. Whether a fit Boris would be any more effective than now, God knows. I don’t get the impression that anyone in government really knows what they are doing or is prepared to be honest with us.
Well put, I have been prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt. My view is that Boris instinct is to get things back to "normal" asap, but the so called experts and polls saying keep the lockdown are hampering what he'd really like to do.
Hancock just seems awful
That's what being all things to all people buys you. A projecction of ones own views on to that person. Trouble is it can't last forever with big decisions coming at you thick and fast. There is zero evidence Boris is being influenced against his better judgement in such a way.Indeed the Buzzfeed article explicitly stated the opposite. And what is more he is the PM. His call.
Understandable not to have one today but Sky EPG shows return to normal BBC1 programming from tomorrow - no BBC1 News Special at 4.30pm each day for the briefing. Ditto BBC News Channel has no special programme either.
Has anyone picked up on this? Just stopping the Daily Briefing will change the atmosphere significantly. Presumably daily stats will still be issued - but the tests number normally only gets posted online about 7pm.
That’s the lowest (if confirmed) since March 29, and the lowest Sunday death toll in five weeks
Can all agree that's good news.
Yes and no, we need to see reported deaths on Tuesday. Weekend reporting is not helpful.
But it’s also the lowest Sunday total for many weeks. It’s not just a weekend effect
Oh I know that, it's clear that WoW deaths are falling by about 30%, but I'd like to see what the absolute numbers are by death date before declaring victory.
It's possible that by this time next week we will move into a zone of around 2k new cases per day and fewer than 200 all settings deaths per day. The permanent locksown advocates may need to change their tunes.
I don't know why we're changing the message if we don't really want the public to change anything.
But they do want behaviour to change, otherwise they wouldn't be changing it.
What do we want to change? Government advice remains to stay at home.
But not as religiously as previously as things will start to be slowly reopened.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
You might not leave the house, but you are not everyone.
We are talking about MY interpretation of the message and its impact on ME. Please look at the discussion we have had.
Can I leave the house more than I can now. No.
Can I go back to work. No.
Can I see my friends. No.
Therefore, nothing has changed for me - the message doesn't make sense. I am sure I am not alone.
It depends on what is announced, you may be able to sit outside a cafe with a coffee and go to a garden centre. Those two things are not possible at the moment. Just because you don't want to do them, it doesn't mean others won't appreciate it.
We don't know what will be announced, that's true.
But my understanding is that garden centres will be able to open and you'll be able to exercise more. That's it.
That is not a return to remotely normal for me - and neither have any impact on me, hence like I said the message doesn't make sense. Unlike the old one which applied to everyone.
So, something has changed? Glad we are on the same page.
What has changed? What?
I keep trying to explain to you, that if you have a message that implies things have changed for everyone, then that is what they will think.
But they haven't, as I keep trying to say, nothing will have changed for me by the end of today (from what has been rumoured to have been announced).
I accept everyone is different. But my point is that the old message applied consistently, the new one does not. That is a deep flaw, in my view.
Anyway, we're going round in circles, so we'll have to agree to disagree.
It is becoming fairly stark in this conference that Nicola is admitting Scotland is in a worse position than England
Today you have justified Boris' handling of Covid-19 by first saying we are not as bad as Italy because they have cooked the books and Boris has done a good job because the fatality rate is higher in Scotland. I find your arguments to be very distasteful.
Excrement still smells like excrement even if you coat it in sugar.
Especially when it is horse manure and the opposite of the evidence
As I mentioned in an earlier post Malcolm, entirely my error I should have referred to Nicola's referencing of the R factor not the relative per capita death rate.
My point was that people are clutching at all sorts of straws to stand Boris Johnson in a good light.
I don't know why we're changing the message if we don't really want the public to change anything.
But they do want behaviour to change, otherwise they wouldn't be changing it.
What do we want to change? Government advice remains to stay at home.
But not as religiously as previously as things will start to be slowly reopened.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
You might not leave the house, but you are not everyone.
We are talking about MY interpretation of the message and its impact on ME. Please look at the discussion we have had.
Can I leave the house more than I can now. No.
Can I go back to work. No.
Can I see my friends. No.
Therefore, nothing has changed for me - the message doesn't make sense. I am sure I am not alone.
It depends on what is announced, you may be able to sit outside a cafe with a coffee and go to a garden centre. Those two things are not possible at the moment. Just because you don't want to do them, it doesn't mean others won't appreciate it.
We don't know what will be announced, that's true.
But my understanding is that garden centres will be able to open and you'll be able to exercise more. That's it.
That is not a return to remotely normal for me - and neither have any impact on me, hence like I said the message doesn't make sense. Unlike the old one which applied to everyone.
No, obviously it's not a return to normal, but who is saying that a return to normal is going to be announced?
I don't know why we're changing the message if we don't really want the public to change anything.
But they do want behaviour to change, otherwise they wouldn't be changing it.
What do we want to change? Government advice remains to stay at home.
But not as religiously as previously as things will start to be slowly reopened.
What will be announced tonight that means that I will be leaving the house. Nothing. The reality is nothing has changed, the message has just got more confusing.
You might not leave the house, but you are not everyone.
We are talking about MY interpretation of the message and its impact on ME. Please look at the discussion we have had.
Can I leave the house more than I can now. No.
Can I go back to work. No.
Can I see my friends. No.
Therefore, nothing has changed for me - the message doesn't make sense. I am sure I am not alone.
It depends on what is announced, you may be able to sit outside a cafe with a coffee and go to a garden centre. Those two things are not possible at the moment. Just because you don't want to do them, it doesn't mean others won't appreciate it.
We don't know what will be announced, that's true.
But my understanding is that garden centres will be able to open and you'll be able to exercise more. That's it.
That is not a return to remotely normal for me - and neither have any impact on me, hence like I said the message doesn't make sense. Unlike the old one which applied to everyone.
So, something has changed? Glad we are on the same page.
What has changed? What?
I keep trying to explain to you, that if you have a message that implies things have changed for everyone, then that is what they will think.
But they haven't, as I keep trying to say, nothing will have changed for me by the end of today (from what has been rumoured to have been announced).
I accept everyone is different. But my point is that the old message applied consistently, the new one does not. That is a deep flaw, in my view.
Anyway, we're going round in circles, so we'll have to agree to disagree.
You are the one who was claiming that in reality nothing has changed... but yet you also have highlighted two ways in which things have changed. It isn't going to revert back to normal overnight, but rather it will be a gradual process where restrictions are slowly lifted. What it is not doing is staying exactly the same as before as you claimed.
On topic, we have poor decision-making because the government and the party from which it is formed is too much of a personality cult around Boris. And Boris himself is not exactly someone with much experience of effective implementation of anything, commercial or economic understanding or an attention to detail. His skills are not the ones you need at such a time. And he does not have a strong Cabinet around him.
Add to that the fact that he may not be at his best and it is not surprising that we are not well governed and that we are being briefed on a speech on a Sunday evening rather than a proper announcement to Parliament.
Of course he should get better properly. Whether a fit Boris would be any more effective than now, God knows. I don’t get the impression that anyone in government really knows what they are doing or is prepared to be honest with us.
I’m usually a stickler for constitutional proprietary.
But on this occasion the PM should be speaking to the nation, live. It’s too important.
He should, of course, follow up with a statement to Parliament on Monday with MPs having the opportunity to hold him to account.
Why? Parliament on Monday. Then a TV address if needed.
This is all about making it about him and avoiding scrutiny. It is too important for him to be allowed to get away with it.
How will he be getting away with it? Either it's a TV announcement or a announcement in the Commons, nothing in the package would be different.
Scrutiny and questioning. We are a Parliamentary democracy. Changes to the regulations under which we live, on pain of criminal enforcement, should be announced to Parliament and the PM should answer questions about them.
That'll still happen this week, won't it?
Will it?
Why the need for a TV speech at all? Budgets get announced in Parliament. Why should this be any different?
He’s not the Queen.
Chamberlain announced the Declaration of War over the radio before meeting Parliament. In November 1967 Devaluation was announced late on Saturday with Wilson broadcasting on Sunday.
I await in awe for the PB Tories to rationally explain Jenrick's apparant contradiction.
Not sure if I count as a PB Tory, but, I understand that as, you can take slightly more risks to do important things, like earning a living, but please don't take to many risk, like hosting a wife swapping party.
It seems to be a step towards treating us like adults, who can a do asses risk and make judgements every day, accepting that different people risk appetite will be different. for good reasons, an 80 year old with a hart condition, but a good pension, verses a 25 year entrepreneur who lives alone but started a bissness in January and will go bust if he cant do bissness.
Nicola live just now seems to admit the R range is high and she cannot change the advice. I do not know but maybe Wales is the same and of course this complicates the position
Nicola expects difference to the advice post Boris speech tonight will be minor
Boris has to look to the advice and as far as I am concerned stay alert is sensible and I am not sure that the conflicting advice will be that helpful to the first ministers as many seem to think
It will of course be best to align the processes but Nicola does not want stay alert advertising in Scotland. There are real dangers here for Nicola to be painting Scotland's present position to be poor and of course the NHS in Scotland is her responsibility
What does stay alert actually mean? Stay at home means stay at home.
Nicola doesn't have to explain her position other than acknowledging she has erred on the side of caution. She may well be wrong and Boris may well be right. When the post Covid political post mortems are in Nicola can say she was wrong, the already shot economy might take a little longer to recover but she felt the risk was worth it if it saved lives. If the opposite turns out to be true Boris will have rather a lot of fatalities to justify.
Stay alert is a sensible move away from stay at home
However, Nicola is admitting Scotland is de facto in a worse position than England
G, you must be deaf or did not hear what she said, we are at different stages given England got their infections weeks before Scotland so by any measure we are 2-3 weeks behind. Still if you look at the numbers per capita then Scotland's death rate is currently well below England. How did you deduce it was worse.
My fault I am afraid Malcolm. Frustration at BigGs criticism of Sturgeon c.f. Boris in the heat of the moment. I should have refered to the R value.
I am sick and tired of posters supporting Johnson just for the sake of it.
I meant defending Johnson rather than supporting Johnson.
no problem, I am hoping it is just fact we are behind the curve of London in general, I presume a few areas of England may be a bit similar to Scotland. Some of the Tories on here are pathetic with their blind worship of their hero Boris. Definitely not the time for us to be relaxing it.
It is becoming fairly stark in this conference that Nicola is admitting Scotland is in a worse position than England
Today you have justified Boris' handling of Covid-19 by first saying we are not as bad as Italy because they have cooked the books and Boris has done a good job because the fatality rate is higher in Scotland. I find your arguments to be very distasteful.
Excrement still smells like excrement even if you coat it in sugar.
Especially when it is horse manure and the opposite of the evidence
From Wednesday in England going out to buy horse manure will be considered to be an essential journey.
More important than being able to talk to family members from 2m away.
It is becoming fairly stark in this conference that Nicola is admitting Scotland is in a worse position than England
Today you have justified Boris' handling of Covid-19 by first saying we are not as bad as Italy because they have cooked the books and Boris has done a good job because the fatality rate is higher in Scotland. I find your arguments to be very distasteful.
Excrement still smells like excrement even if you coat it in sugar.
Especially when it is horse manure and the opposite of the evidence
From Wednesday in England going out to buy horse manure will be considered to be an essential journey.
More important than being able to talk to family members from 2m away.
Why buy it when the PM and POTUS spew it from their mouths for free?
Nicola live just now seems to admit the R range is high and she cannot change the advice. I do not know but maybe Wales is the same and of course this complicates the position
Nicola expects difference to the advice post Boris speech tonight will be minor
Boris has to look to the advice and as far as I am concerned stay alert is sensible and I am not sure that the conflicting advice will be that helpful to the first ministers as many seem to think
It will of course be best to align the processes but Nicola does not want stay alert advertising in Scotland. There are real dangers here for Nicola to be painting Scotland's present position to be poor and of course the NHS in Scotland is her responsibility
What does stay alert actually mean? Stay at home means stay at home.
Nicola doesn't have to explain her position other than acknowledging she has erred on the side of caution. She may well be wrong and Boris may well be right. When the post Covid political post mortems are in Nicola can say she was wrong, the already shot economy might take a little longer to recover but she felt the risk was worth it if it saved lives. If the opposite turns out to be true Boris will have rather a lot of fatalities to justify.
Stay alert is a sensible move away from stay at home
However, Nicola is admitting Scotland is de facto in a worse position than England
G, you must be deaf or did not hear what she said, we are at different stages given England got their infections weeks before Scotland so by any measure we are 2-3 weeks behind. Still if you look at the numbers per capita then Scotland's death rate is currently well below England. How did you deduce it was worse.
My fault I am afraid Malcolm. Frustration at BigGs criticism of Sturgeon c.f. Boris in the heat of the moment. I should have refered to the R value.
I am sick and tired of posters supporting Johnson just for the sake of it.
I meant defending Johnson rather than supporting Johnson.
no problem, I am hoping it is just fact we are behind the curve of London in general, I presume a few areas of England may be a bit similar to Scotland. Some of the Tories on here are pathetic with their blind worship of their hero Boris. Definitely not the time for us to be relaxing it.
I believe Nicola will endeavour to do what she genuinely believes to be best for the people of Scotland irrespective of the consequences. Drakeford has been remarkably and unusually forthright here in Wales.
I maybe completely wrong but I am not sure that the science is what is leading Mr Johnson today.
It is becoming fairly stark in this conference that Nicola is admitting Scotland is in a worse position than England
Health care is devolved isn't it?
Yes and that is a real problem for her
The Scottish NHS is doing very well, and it has done better than English and Welsh equivalents over last few years. Not perfect but good job being done. Imaginary problems for SNP are laughable, look at the polls , they are on an ever rising slope after 13 years in power. I doubt Nicola will have much to worry about going into next election.
You tempted at all by the new indy party Malc? I can't even tell if the one that's floating around this weekend is the one and only or if there will be several. All seems a bit messy in any case.
You can tell how well this one has been thought out by the fact that it's acronym is totally un-googleable.
John Rentoul who had to shamefacedly admit that English PPE companies had made garbled and conflicting statements about only supplying England? Cast iron, solid source on such matters.
I mean he's not reporting on private discussions or anything here, rather a view on public pronouncements.
He was caught telling fibs, at least he had the courage to admit it, obviously not a real Tory.
Understandable not to have one today but Sky EPG shows return to normal BBC1 programming from tomorrow - no BBC1 News Special at 4.30pm each day for the briefing. Ditto BBC News Channel has no special programme either.
Has anyone picked up on this? Just stopping the Daily Briefing will change the atmosphere significantly. Presumably daily stats will still be issued - but the tests number normally only gets posted online about 7pm.
I don't believe that they will just stop. I've noticed before that it's quite normal to have standard daytime telly on the Freeview planner for the briefing slot; it seems to get removed and replaced with the briefing shortly in advance, but I can't remember off the top of my head if that is normally done on the day, or one day in advance.
It might also be, in this particular instance, that the exact time for tomorrow's briefing hasn't been confirmed yet, but I'd be guessing. Regardless, I'd expect Monday's briefing to have appeared in its usual slot on the planner by tomorrow morning.
John Rentoul who had to shamefacedly admit that English PPE companies had made garbled and conflicting statements about only supplying England? Cast iron, solid source on such matters.
If anyone was 'shamefaced' over that incident it certainly wasn't John Rentoul.
Nicola live just now seems to admit the R range is high and she cannot change the advice. I do not know but maybe Wales is the same and of course this complicates the position
Nicola expects difference to the advice post Boris speech tonight will be minor
Boris has to look to the advice and as far as I am concerned stay alert is sensible and I am not sure that the conflicting advice will be that helpful to the first ministers as many seem to think
It will of course be best to align the processes but Nicola does not want stay alert advertising in Scotland. There are real dangers here for Nicola to be painting Scotland's present position to be poor and of course the NHS in Scotland is her responsibility
What does stay alert actually mean? Stay at home means stay at home.
Nicola doesn't have to explain her position other than acknowledging she has erred on the side of caution. She may well be wrong and Boris may well be right. When the post Covid political post mortems are in Nicola can say she was wrong, the already shot economy might take a little longer to recover but she felt the risk was worth it if it saved lives. If the opposite turns out to be true Boris will have rather a lot of fatalities to justify.
Stay alert is a sensible move away from stay at home
However, Nicola is admitting Scotland is de facto in a worse position than England
G, you must be deaf or did not hear what she said, we are at different stages given England got their infections weeks before Scotland so by any measure we are 2-3 weeks behind. Still if you look at the numbers per capita then Scotland's death rate is currently well below England. How did you deduce it was worse.
Malc.
I have not mentioned death rates at anytime
I listened to Nicola and she was frank Scotland's R number is too high
It is clear that the UK may need to diverge at different speeds but that has it's own problems, especially for those living near the borders of the devolved adminstration
G it was criticism for the sake of it , she state what was good for Scotland and border is easily closed , only a few roads.
On topic, we have poor decision-making because the government and the party from which it is formed is too much of a personality cult around Boris. And Boris himself is not exactly someone with much experience of effective implementation of anything, commercial or economic understanding or an attention to detail. His skills are not the ones you need at such a time. And he does not have a strong Cabinet around him.
Add to that the fact that he may not be at his best and it is not surprising that we are not well governed and that we are being briefed on a speech on a Sunday evening rather than a proper announcement to Parliament.
Of course he should get better properly. Whether a fit Boris would be any more effective than now, God knows. I don’t get the impression that anyone in government really knows what they are doing or is prepared to be honest with us.
I’m usually a stickler for constitutional proprietary.
But on this occasion the PM should be speaking to the nation, live. It’s too important.
He should, of course, follow up with a statement to Parliament on Monday with MPs having the opportunity to hold him to account.
Why? Parliament on Monday. Then a TV address if needed.
This is all about making it about him and avoiding scrutiny. It is too important for him to be allowed to get away with it.
How will he be getting away with it? Either it's a TV announcement or a announcement in the Commons, nothing in the package would be different.
Scrutiny and questioning. We are a Parliamentary democracy. Changes to the regulations under which we live, on pain of criminal enforcement, should be announced to Parliament and the PM should answer questions about them.
That'll still happen this week, won't it?
Will it?
Why the need for a TV speech at all? Budgets get announced in Parliament. Why should this be any different?
He’s not the Queen.
Chamberlain announced the Declaration of War over the radio before meeting Parliament. In November 1967 Devaluation was announced late on Saturday with Wilson broadcasting on Sunday.
And as we heard on Friday, Churchill announced the end of the war in Europe to the public before making the statement to the Commons.
I thought devolution was a mistake in 1997 and still think it was.
I dont have a strong view on devolution, happy to go along with the majority.
But it is really weird to hear the same people in favour of devolution and localism also complaining that different parts of the country have different policies and outcomes. Isnt that the whole point of it?
Oh yes - and look at the flat denial of the principle by Alister Jack for instance.
The apparent conflict arises because in part nobody wants an outbreak next door when they can't close the border. But more generally it arises from the confusion caused by the equation of England = UK in many things, and in media coverage, because the English don't have their own parliament or government an d have the UK government to do it for them.
Mr Johnson speaks only for English health matters, in principle, but he is also PM of the UK. The changing messaging he is producing is liable to cause confusion as to what is applicable in Scotland, NI and so on.
It is becoming fairly stark in this conference that Nicola is admitting Scotland is in a worse position than England
Health care is devolved isn't it?
Yes and that is a real problem for her
The Scottish NHS is doing very well, and it has done better than English and Welsh equivalents over last few years. Not perfect but good job being done. Imaginary problems for SNP are laughable, look at the polls , they are on an ever rising slope after 13 years in power. I doubt Nicola will have much to worry about going into next election.
I hear that hospital with no patients is breaking all records for cleanliness.
John Rentoul who had to shamefacedly admit that English PPE companies had made garbled and conflicting statements about only supplying England? Cast iron, solid source on such matters.
If anyone was 'shamefaced' over that incident it certainly wasn't John Rentoul.
You're right, it should have been Andra blusteringly unrepentant Neil that had the real beamer. Though tbf it would be difficult to tell if a girlish blush did appear on that pan.
That’s the lowest (if confirmed) since March 29, and the lowest Sunday death toll in five weeks
Yes, but being a Sunday after a bank holiday Friday, may have had some 'double weekend effect' (sorry to create a new term)
But overall the trend is in a good direction and today's death numbers is probably also a continuations of that trend.
I wonder which country will replace us in second spot for highest daily death tolls
I’d bet on Brazil. Mexico or Russia.
It was nice being silver medalists, but all winning streaks meet their end
If it's Russia then we can be quite confident that Vladimir and friends won't let the world know about it.
Russian Covid doctors having this mysterious habit of throwing themselves from tall buildings, driving at high speeds into brick walls, spontaneously self-combusting and suffering other bizarre and inexplicable deaths can't be helping their patients' survival rates, either...
It is becoming fairly stark in this conference that Nicola is admitting Scotland is in a worse position than England
Health care is devolved isn't it?
Yes and that is a real problem for her
The Scottish NHS is doing very well, and it has done better than English and Welsh equivalents over last few years. Not perfect but good job being done. Imaginary problems for SNP are laughable, look at the polls , they are on an ever rising slope after 13 years in power. I doubt Nicola will have much to worry about going into next election.
You tempted at all by the new indy party Malc? I can't even tell if the one that's floating around this weekend is the one and only or if there will be several. All seems a bit messy in any case.
Lots of noise about at minute TUD but no real big hitters or money involved yet. I think SNP are only hope at present but if polls remain where they are then 2nd vote is definitely better going elsewhere for sure. Think this is last chance saloon for current leadership if they last till election , they do not seem very interested in their main purpose. If they do not make this next one a referendum then they will be toppled, too many careerists and chancers at top now. I will see what happens in near future, my preference would be to see Salmond involved with any new party in some fashion even if not taking a front seat. The Rev seems to have lost the plot completely of late as well so not sure which way it will go and without a figurehead I do not see an alternative getting far.
It's a good slogan for the next phase. There's a lot of echo chamber party politicking going on. There's also sheer fear. People are being steered away from their 80% furlough money to a world where you might catch something which kills you.
That's why there's a backlash. Not the slogan. The concept.
The deaths have come down steadily and significantly and we need to get the economy going again and the cost of the furlough scheme will fast run out of control (if it hasn`t already). Only ease lockdown cautiously and incrementally - keeping NHS within capacity - which was the stated aim of lockdown in the first place - I think that`s the plan.
John Rentoul who had to shamefacedly admit that English PPE companies had made garbled and conflicting statements about only supplying England? Cast iron, solid source on such matters.
If anyone was 'shamefaced' over that incident it certainly wasn't John Rentoul.
He made a right clown of himself , it was all in the public letters , despite Leitch trying to be polite and say it was rubbish. We also know orders have been given not to help Scotland get any PPE from abroad as well.
The deaths have come down steadily and significantly and we need to get the economy going again and the cost of the furlough scheme will fast run out of control (if it hasn`t already). Only ease lockdown cautiously and incrementally - keeping NHS within capacity - which was the stated aim of lockdown in the first place - I think that`s the plan.
They're still far too high to be doing anything like going back to normal.
The deaths have come down steadily and significantly and we need to get the economy going again and the cost of the furlough scheme will fast run out of control (if it hasn`t already). Only ease lockdown cautiously and incrementally - keeping NHS within capacity - which was the stated aim of lockdown in the first place - I think that`s the plan.
They're still far too high to be doing anything like going back to normal.
Nicola live just now seems to admit the R range is high and she cannot change the advice. I do not know but maybe Wales is the same and of course this complicates the position
Nicola expects difference to the advice post Boris speech tonight will be minor
Boris has to look to the advice and as far as I am concerned stay alert is sensible and I am not sure that the conflicting advice will be that helpful to the first ministers as many seem to think
It will of course be best to align the processes but Nicola does not want stay alert advertising in Scotland. There are real dangers here for Nicola to be painting Scotland's present position to be poor and of course the NHS in Scotland is her responsibility
What does stay alert actually mean? Stay at home means stay at home.
Nicola doesn't have to explain her position other than acknowledging she has erred on the side of caution. She may well be wrong and Boris may well be right. When the post Covid political post mortems are in Nicola can say she was wrong, the already shot economy might take a little longer to recover but she felt the risk was worth it if it saved lives. If the opposite turns out to be true Boris will have rather a lot of fatalities to justify.
Stay alert is a sensible move away from stay at home
However, Nicola is admitting Scotland is de facto in a worse position than England
G, you must be deaf or did not hear what she said, we are at different stages given England got their infections weeks before Scotland so by any measure we are 2-3 weeks behind. Still if you look at the numbers per capita then Scotland's death rate is currently well below England. How did you deduce it was worse.
My fault I am afraid Malcolm. Frustration at BigGs criticism of Sturgeon c.f. Boris in the heat of the moment. I should have refered to the R value.
I am sick and tired of posters supporting Johnson just for the sake of it.
I meant defending Johnson rather than supporting Johnson.
no problem, I am hoping it is just fact we are behind the curve of London in general, I presume a few areas of England may be a bit similar to Scotland. Some of the Tories on here are pathetic with their blind worship of their hero Boris. Definitely not the time for us to be relaxing it.
I believe Nicola will endeavour to do what she genuinely believes to be best for the people of Scotland irrespective of the consequences. Drakeford has been remarkably and unusually forthright here in Wales.
I maybe completely wrong but I am not sure that the science is what is leading Mr Johnson today.
For certain Scotland and Wales will not be anywhere in his thoughts or plans.
I await in awe for the PB Tories to rationally explain Jenrick's apparant contradiction.
Easy. Go to work if you can, but that work should be at home if its possible.
Its a loosening of the stay at home message but still an emphasis of being at home more but not being a prisoner of your own home - and be alert to the risks when you leave.
What about that don't you understand? Which bit are you struggling with? Some people here seem to want either all black or all white.
I thought devolution was a mistake in 1997 and still think it was.
I dont have a strong view on devolution, happy to go along with the majority.
But it is really weird to hear the same people in favour of devolution and localism also complaining that different parts of the country have different policies and outcomes. Isnt that the whole point of it?
Oh yes - and look at the flat denial of the principle by Alister Jack for instance.
The apparent conflict arises because in part nobody wants an outbreak next door when they can't close the border. But more generally it arises from the confusion caused by the equation of England = UK in many things, and in media coverage, because the English don't have their own parliament or government an d have the UK government to do it for them.
Mr Johnson speaks only for English health matters, in principle, but he is also PM of the UK. The changing messaging he is producing is liable to cause confusion as to what is applicable in Scotland, NI and so on.
Thus, the Government is stuck with managing the ongoing fallout from Blair's dog's breakfast of a devolution settlement.
But they won't concede the necessity for an English Parliament, so I have absolutely zero sympathy for them.
Comments
Independence wasn't on the table.
What would you have suggested?
https://www.timesofisrael.com/the-end-of-exponential-growth-the-decline-in-the-spread-of-coronavirus/
Theresa May is probably rocking with merriment right now.
For almost everywhere else, I think sporadic outbreaks for the nest year or two are probable.
https://twitter.com/Frances_Coppola/status/1259501608519585793?s=20
Hell has frozen over.
The reality is that nothing has changed. Name something that changed for me, you can't.
Oh, it's a joke account. Very funny.
Can I leave the house more than I can now. No.
Can I go back to work. No.
Can I see my friends. No.
Therefore, nothing has changed for me - the message doesn't make sense. I am sure I am not alone.
Morgan has been committing genus-cide for years.
The old message clearly applied to everyone, this one doesn't. So at best it's confusing to send it to everyone. At worst it's dangerous and putting lives at risk.
It's the same stupid short term approach that led them to force May into a humiliation of a deal which has resulted in Britain looking like it will leave without a trade deal.
IMO the govt should in the short term work towards forgiving, or at least, ameliorate, the burden of costs, but not guarantee profits, of the businesses it has mandated closed.
Thus, the furlough scheme covers wages. The waiving of rates. The cash grants to SMEs who occupy commercial property.
I also run a Ltd company, and the vast majority of my income comes via dividends. BUT I don't expect to make any real money this year. Nor do I expect the Govt to cushion me from not making a profit. I see profits as the reward for taking risk in setting up a business. The sad reality is that part of business is luck and timing. It is never more evident than now.
I think, therefore, that the Government has trod a difficult tightrope quite well.
I do, however, feel very sorry for those with businesses who are unlucky enough to be in a bad position here - whether it is a pub, a gym, or a shop that can't open but won't be able to go online.
Do you have any sources for that?
But my understanding is that garden centres will be able to open and you'll be able to exercise more. That's it.
That is not a return to remotely normal for me - and neither have any impact on me, hence like I said the message doesn't make sense. Unlike the old one which applied to everyone.
But it is really weird to hear the same people in favour of devolution and localism also complaining that different parts of the country have different policies and outcomes. Isnt that the whole point of it?
Like I said, that doesn't apply to me. So as I keep saying, the new message doesn't apply consistently.
It seems to be a step towards treating us like adults, who can a do asses risk and make judgements every day, accepting that different people risk appetite will be different. for good reasons, an 80 year old with a hart condition, but a good pension, verses a 25 year entrepreneur who lives alone but started a bissness in January and will go bust if he cant do bissness.
There is zero evidence Boris is being influenced against his better judgement in such a way.Indeed the Buzzfeed article explicitly stated the opposite.
And what is more he is the PM. His call.
Understandable not to have one today but Sky EPG shows return to normal BBC1 programming from tomorrow - no BBC1 News Special at 4.30pm each day for the briefing. Ditto BBC News Channel has no special programme either.
Has anyone picked up on this? Just stopping the Daily Briefing will change the atmosphere significantly. Presumably daily stats will still be issued - but the tests number normally only gets posted online about 7pm.
It's possible that by this time next week we will move into a zone of around 2k new cases per day and fewer than 200 all settings deaths per day. The permanent locksown advocates may need to change their tunes.
I keep trying to explain to you, that if you have a message that implies things have changed for everyone, then that is what they will think.
But they haven't, as I keep trying to say, nothing will have changed for me by the end of today (from what has been rumoured to have been announced).
I accept everyone is different. But my point is that the old message applied consistently, the new one does not. That is a deep flaw, in my view.
Anyway, we're going round in circles, so we'll have to agree to disagree.
My point was that people are clutching at all sorts of straws to stand Boris Johnson in a good light.
In November 1967 Devaluation was announced late on Saturday with Wilson broadcasting on Sunday.
But overall the trend is in a good direction and today's death numbers is probably also a continuations of that trend.
More important than being able to talk to family members from 2m away.
I maybe completely wrong but I am not sure that the science is what is leading Mr Johnson today.
It might also be, in this particular instance, that the exact time for tomorrow's briefing hasn't been confirmed yet, but I'd be guessing. Regardless, I'd expect Monday's briefing to have appeared in its usual slot on the planner by tomorrow morning.
Follow the Rules
Although I do prefer 'Careful Now'.
The apparent conflict arises because in part nobody wants an outbreak next door when they can't close the border. But more generally it arises from the confusion caused by the equation of England = UK in many things, and in media coverage, because the English don't have their own parliament or government an d have the UK government to do it for them.
Mr Johnson speaks only for English health matters, in principle, but he is also PM of the UK. The changing messaging he is producing is liable to cause confusion as to what is applicable in Scotland, NI and so on.
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1259497479650885632
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-5zEb1oS9A
Having said that, I do agree that Boris looks unwell.
Better to be like "OK go out but be smart about it and be alert" than "stay at home - nah f**k that"
Target missed yet again
Russian Covid doctors having this mysterious habit of throwing themselves from tall buildings, driving at high speeds into brick walls, spontaneously self-combusting and suffering other bizarre and inexplicable deaths can't be helping their patients' survival rates, either...
Think this is last chance saloon for current leadership if they last till election , they do not seem very interested in their main purpose. If they do not make this next one a referendum then they will be toppled, too many careerists and chancers at top now. I will see what happens in near future, my preference would be to see Salmond involved with any new party in some fashion even if not taking a front seat.
The Rev seems to have lost the plot completely of late as well so not sure which way it will go and without a figurehead I do not see an alternative getting far.
It's a good slogan for the next phase. There's a lot of echo chamber party politicking going on. There's also sheer fear. People are being steered away from their 80% furlough money to a world where you might catch something which kills you.
That's why there's a backlash. Not the slogan. The concept.
Its a loosening of the stay at home message but still an emphasis of being at home more but not being a prisoner of your own home - and be alert to the risks when you leave.
What about that don't you understand? Which bit are you struggling with? Some people here seem to want either all black or all white.
But they won't concede the necessity for an English Parliament, so I have absolutely zero sympathy for them.