Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Boris fan club sticks with their man but other national pa

1235789

Comments

  • Options
    BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    IshmaelZ said:

    Brom said:

    Scott_xP said:
    It's going really well for those fabled comms experts brought in from Vote Leave.
    Very parachocial of South Lakes police. No everyone won't be flooding to the Lake District but we are in this together as a nation so perhaps they should drop the I'm alright Jack attitude.
    I am not confident that you know where the lake District is
    Sadly I have to go that way for Barrow away. The police do not own the land. If I want to travel from Preston for a walk in the lakes and social distance then why shouldn't I? If people are driving there from Devon or hanging around in massive groups then fair enough but otherwise they are just acting like nimbies. It is far bettter that people in nearby urban areas get exercise in remote areas than all stick to the same busy parks.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,067
    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    DavidL said:

    There really is a lot of hysterical nonsense about this morning. It is absolutely impossible for the government to regulate or micro manage everything. There have been absurdities in the Stay at Home stage, such as preventing sunbathing in parks whilst maintaining social distancing. What on earth was ever wrong with that? In my neck of the woods the trustees of the woods had blocked off the carpark because they believed people should not drive there for their walk. Why on earth not? How do you catch CV in a car?

    What Boris started yesterday was the unwinding of this nonsense. We need to take responsibility for our own safety. We need to ensure that our particular work place is safe with adequate social distancing, sterilisation, limits on numbers etc. Governments simply cannot work this out for us beyond some very general guidelines.

    But we need to go to work. We need to pay for this somehow. We need to preserve what jobs we can. We just need to do so carefully.

    Some people don't want to take any responsibility.

    What they want instead is to stay home on full money and have other people do the work and take any risks.
    Indeed I've heard people complain elsewhere "Why should I go back to work? I'm happy at home on 80%" as if that's a viable long term alternative.
    Yep. Massive problem. With opposition parties and the unions playing holier-than-thou to further their own ends with no care whatsoever for the public finances - which are properly screwed.
    What Johnson has shut down, he will have the devil's own job opening up.

    Given reluctance of people to go back to work, opposition opportunism, social distancing rules and the extension of the furlough, a v shaped recovery is a mirage. Not only is debt ballooning but the deficit is opening up like the grand canyon. A size of deficit barely imaginable, and I daresay, almost impossible to recover.

    I think we should look at our last calculation of the hock we are in, and add a nought.
    Agreed. What can this populist government do? Opposition parties and unions are going to make hay with "nasty Tories" narrative, uncaring of the damage THEY are doing to our country by mischief-making in this way. The government should use its majority to make the decisions needed to get us out of this mess. But they lack the balls to be unpopular.

    Out political system can`t cope with this. The end game may have to be some sort of national unity government.
    The endgame will be the fall of Johnson and his replacement by someone who can weather a bad headline or two. Its coming sooner than everybody thinks.

    The economic numbers are going to be just insane.

    The stage is already set for this. The current “mainstream” criticism is that HMG cares more about money than people’s lives and that’s why they want to lift the lockdown. However, when the economic reckoning comes along the blame will also go to HMG for not locking down early enough.

    There’s no easy answers to anything in this current situation.
    What's the government's response? Delay the reckoning until September at even vaster expense.

    After all, something might, you know, turn up......
    Some of my friends want lockdown to continue until we have a vaccine, even if that takes years. Any lifting of the lockdown is considered Boris risking the lives of people in the name of the economy...
    Yes - exactly - that`s the narrative. Let my guess though - I bet these friends assume they will continue to receive cash from the government for the whole period?
    Some of them are furloughed, others are working from home, but they all have comfortable middle-class professional jobs with large amounts of savings. I’ve tried to point this out, but no dice.
    Public ignorance around this astonishes me. They literally think that the government has mounds of cash - cash that is unconnected to the taxes it raises.

    All government money comes from the private sector. Destroy that and we are done.
    Lot of numpties out there I am afraid. Will be a shock to lots of them for sure.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    MaxPB said:

    Sandpit said:

    The latest bit of cronyism by the government in the Covid-19 crisis is that Dido Harding (she of TalkTalk data scandal fame, and wife of Tory MP John Penrose) has been put in charge of the new App !

    The IT community is going nuts! It is going to be Dyson and the ventilators all over again.

    You do know that precisely no public money was given to Dyson, and they spent a couple of dozen million of their own resources on the project?
    Having spent my career in medical technology I can tell you that public money or no, it was a big unnecessary distraction. The government would have been better focusing on dozens of other areas rather than trying to give their cronies a PR coup for an area that they have zero competence in.
    And yet Mercedes formula one team who also have no medical tech competence came up trumps. Casting a wide net was a good thing, the whole scheme was a huge success. Nitpicking over it shows that you clearly don't care about the result and would rather see the country fail because your hated politicians would fail with it.
    Sorry to correct you, but McLaren has been involved in adaptations for medical devices for the last decade to my recollection. Dyson makes vacuum cleaners. JCB makes diggers. Medical device companies make medical devices. It was a PR stunt for cronies at best, or a level of stupidity at worst. take your pick.
    He said Mercedes.

    There's many companies that became involved due to this scheme yet you harp on about Dyson like you have some sort of weird obsession with them. I wonder why?
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,618
    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    The latest bit of cronyism by the government in the Covid-19 crisis is that Dido Harding (she of TalkTalk data scandal fame, and wife of Tory MP John Penrose) has been put in charge of the new App !

    The IT community is going nuts! It is going to be Dyson and the ventilators all over again.

    You do know that precisely no public money was given to Dyson, and they spent a couple of dozen million of their own resources on the project?
    I think you miss the point, picking one of your donors to lead something rather than using experts who know what they are doing , and repeating yet again is pretty crass and stupid.
    The net was cast very wide, and it's not a stretch to say a company that has expertise in vacuum technology could adapt it to make a ventilator. That Gtech guy was also asked and he's not a donor afaik.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,578
    CD13 said:


    From the HSJ ...

    https://www.hsj.co.uk/exclusive-deaths-of-nhs-staff-from-covid-19-analysed/7027471.article

    Interesting, but the press will never allow facts to ruin a good story


    Interesting -

    "This is because both caring for the sickest patients with covid-19 and undertaking airway management (so-called aerosol generating procedures) are associated with high risk of viral exposure and transmission. It is therefore notable that all of these groups are completely absent from the data set.

    Again, the reason for this is not known and data on infections and serious illnesses are important to consider as well as fatalities, but these data also are currently lacking. What is likely is that these groups of healthcare staff are rigorous about use of personal protective equipment and the associated practices known to reduce risk.

    It may be that this rigour is protecting staff better than some fear and the results can be considered cautiously reassuring. However, this finding is not a reason to slacken off on the appropriately rigorous use of PPE, but rather to wonder why others, who are likely involved in what are generally considered to be lower risk activities, are becoming infected and consider whether wider use of rigorous PPE is indicated."

    My bold...
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,941
    edited May 2020
    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    The latest bit of cronyism by the government in the Covid-19 crisis is that Dido Harding (she of TalkTalk data scandal fame, and wife of Tory MP John Penrose) has been put in charge of the new App !

    The IT community is going nuts! It is going to be Dyson and the ventilators all over again.

    You do know that precisely no public money was given to Dyson, and they spent a couple of dozen million of their own resources on the project?
    I think you miss the point, picking one of your donors to lead something rather than using experts who know what they are doing , and repeating yet again is pretty crass and stupid.
    There was no 'picking' involved, and no public money.

    Several teams of people from high-tech engineering companies all over the country volunteered to work to specifications for medical devices given by the NHS - at a time when the usual suppliers of such devices were completely overwhelmed and it was thought that we would need to produce tens of thousands of ventilators in only a couple of months.

    Everyone involved should be roundly applauded, they dropped what they were doing and offered to do anything they could, to help the country in their hour of need.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    CD13 said:


    From the HSJ ...

    https://www.hsj.co.uk/exclusive-deaths-of-nhs-staff-from-covid-19-analysed/7027471.article

    Interesting, but the press will never allow facts to ruin a good story

    Surprisingly the fact healthcare workers aren't over represented is in the Currant Bun today.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11593691/taxi-drivers-shop-staff-security-guards-most-likely-coronavirus-deaths/
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,403

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1259751595681746944

    No, you see we're all just idiots on this site unless we're Tories

    The "Stay ALERT" slogan cannot make it clear what people are supposed to do* because it is a slogan for a period of time when what we are allowed to do will change as we move between the different ALERT levels.

    * Except insofar as it directs people to the ALERT level to follow the directions for the appropriate level.
    Indeed. Why on earth do you need a slogan to tell you what to DO?

    What is wrong with a slogan about actually thinking for yourself?
    Because, Phil me old mucker, actions taken as a result of thinking for yourself might be illegal in this new phase. And the police are about to have greater powers to sanction you if so.
    I would be opposed to the Police getting involved unless something is egregious and clearly illegal.
    Ahhh grasshopper. You are edging towards why we are so interested in all this. There is a new phase, I get it. We might be allowed to do more than previously, we'll wait to see the legislation. And when there is legislation the police will be empowered to enforce it. I would be interested to hear the legal distinction between egregious and illegal but I suspect you don't know it. Neither do I. Hence we need the law to tell us, and the police because it's not the police's job to take your advice about when they should get involved.

    So hahaha one parent, two parents, golf, tiddlywinks all a big joke for many PB-ers happily sitting with their families in big houses.

    But for many people, perhaps some without the wherewithal to go to the primary legislation, this shit matters. It is the difference between things which will help or hinder their sanity.
    Again what is the law and what is the advice are not the same thing. Nor should they be. The law should be what is egregious and that should be what the Police get involved in.

    So one parent, two parents, golf, tiddlywinks etc - I would be amazed if any of that is in the law. Exercising twice a day wasn't and quite right too.

    The law and the advice are not the same thing nor should they be.
    I couldn't agree more. As I have said since yesterday at 7.14pm we will wait to see what the SI says as amended or replaced.

    But just as @MaxPB took from the briefing that he will be able to go to sit in the park with his friend, so did the PM make clear that the police will have stronger powers to deal with lawbreakers.

    So we will wait to see what the law says. It might set a limit on the number of people allowed to congregate (I note that the govt included basketball as a sport which would be ok to take part in...with members of your family...wtf...). Or it might not and it might allow the guidance to do the heavy lifting.

    Whatever the law says, whatever the guidance says, however, what we will not be able to do is to think for ourselves. As the one/two parent gathering conundrum has illustrated.
    I'm glad we're agreed.

    Power to deal with lawbreakers is quite right but only with lawbreakers. And lawbreakers doesn't (nor should it) necessarily mean everyone breaking "advice".

    To make another driving analogy the Highway Code includes a lot of "you must do ..." and a lot of "you should do ..." for different scenarios. EG for driving in wet weather it says you should leave a bigger gap between cars in wet weather. That is sound advice and quite right too. While saying you need to keep to the left is a must so it is the law and the Police can get involved if you don't.

    Not all cases of should ought to be must in the law.
    Indeed or the mother of all advice which is not law: Don't drink and drive.

    What we can't do when we drink and drive, though, is think for ourselves. It is a very clearly defined limit to blood alcohol levels. You might think you are the safest driver on earth after a bottle of Proper Twelve but the law would say otherwise.
    Absolutely as I said the law should deal with what is egregious.

    If you want to drink and drive and be under the limit you need to think for yourself how to do that. There is no answer to "can I drink a pint and drive" or "can I drink two pints and drive" which is what the media are blathering on about with all these hypotheticals expecting set answers to every question they can come up with.
    Your use of the word egregious is meaningless. You either break the law or you don't. Please define egregious behaviour, let's say under the current legislation. Please pretend I am a newly-qualified constable about to head out to Hyde Park (London or Leeds) to go to police this Coronavirus thing.

    TIA
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Brom said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Brom said:

    Scott_xP said:
    It's going really well for those fabled comms experts brought in from Vote Leave.
    Very parachocial of South Lakes police. No everyone won't be flooding to the Lake District but we are in this together as a nation so perhaps they should drop the I'm alright Jack attitude.
    I am not confident that you know where the lake District is
    Sadly I have to go that way for Barrow away. The police do not own the land. If I want to travel from Preston for a walk in the lakes and social distance then why shouldn't I? If people are driving there from Devon or hanging around in massive groups then fair enough but otherwise they are just acting like nimbies. It is far bettter that people in nearby urban areas get exercise in remote areas than all stick to the same busy parks.
    So how do you get 'i m alright Jack" from a map showing that they are completely unalright?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,067
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,005
    Mr. Shark, welcome to PB.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    MaxPB said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    The latest bit of cronyism by the government in the Covid-19 crisis is that Dido Harding (she of TalkTalk data scandal fame, and wife of Tory MP John Penrose) has been put in charge of the new App !

    The IT community is going nuts! It is going to be Dyson and the ventilators all over again.

    You do know that precisely no public money was given to Dyson, and they spent a couple of dozen million of their own resources on the project?
    I think you miss the point, picking one of your donors to lead something rather than using experts who know what they are doing , and repeating yet again is pretty crass and stupid.
    The net was cast very wide, and it's not a stretch to say a company that has expertise in vacuum technology could adapt it to make a ventilator. That Gtech guy was also asked and he's not a donor afaik.
    Exactly. The worry was we'd need a lot in short time. "Existing expertise" was insufficient to meet that demand so a very wide net was cast and it got lots involved. Yes including Dyson who spent millions of his own money, and Mercedes and McLaren and many, many more.

    Being experts at manufacturing means you can adapt to manufacturing other things.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,324

    kinabalu said:

    My take on Johnson's address -

    1. He looked and sounded fine. We can cease worrying about his health.

    2. I have no problem with the "Stay Home" to "Stay Alert" message change. To me the meaning is obvious. Get out and about a bit more if you wish but keep to distancing and elevated hygiene.

    3. The overall vibe is of a government not in control. They are in the dark about the virus and unsure how to proceed. There is no confidence we can open up without a second spike and many many deaths. The "plan" therefore is to encourage baby steps and watch the numbers with fingers crossed.

    Watch out - that's just what I've been saying so maybe you'll be accused of being a Tory loyalist now ;)
    I am objective to a fault on serious sober matters. All know that.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,618
    Ok, got an email from the golf club saying they have slots open and tee times will be spaced 30 mins apart and maximum two players per tee time. No mention of same household requirement. Tee times reserved for club members as they will have a limited number.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,374

    It appears that there are two types of people.
    The first considers themselves intelligent and educated, yet want to have their hand held at all times.
    The second is considered by the first to be thick and uneducated, but they appear to understand advice and what they need to do to keep safe.

    Fun fact: The first group brought the virus here because of their lifestyle, but they haven't admitted it yet. They are however very happy to demonise the second group.

    The first group are also somewhat addicted to telling the second group what they can and cannot do. It is the usual order of things and they are disturbed that there was an aberration. It has reduced their trust levels.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,067
    IshmaelZ said:

    Brom said:

    Scott_xP said:
    It's going really well for those fabled comms experts brought in from Vote Leave.
    Very parachocial of South Lakes police. No everyone won't be flooding to the Lake District but we are in this together as a nation so perhaps they should drop the I'm alright Jack attitude.
    I am not confident that you know where the lake District is
    I am not confident he could tie his own shoelaces
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1259751595681746944

    No, you see we're all just idiots on this site unless we're Tories

    The "Stay ALERT" slogan cannot make it clear what people are supposed to do* because it is a slogan for a period of time when what we are allowed to do will change as we move between the different ALERT levels.

    * Except insofar as it directs people to the ALERT level to follow the directions for the appropriate level.
    Indeed. Why on earth do you need a slogan to tell you what to DO?

    What is wrong with a slogan about actually thinking for yourself?
    Because, Phil me old mucker, actions taken as a result of thinking for yourself might be illegal in this new phase. And the police are about to have greater powers to sanction you if so.
    I would be opposed to the Police getting involved unless something is egregious and clearly illegal.
    Ahhh grasshopper. You are edging towards why we are so interested in all this. There is a new phase, I get it. We might be allowed to do more than previously, we'll wait to see the legislation. And when there is legislation the police will be empowered to enforce it. I would be interested to hear the legal distinction between egregious and illegal but I suspect you don't know it. Neither do I. Hence we need the law to tell us, and the police because it's not the police's job to take your advice about when they should get involved.

    So hahaha one parent, two parents, golf, tiddlywinks all a big joke for many PB-ers happily sitting with their families in big houses.

    But for many people, perhaps some without the wherewithal to go to the primary legislation, this shit matters. It is the difference between things which will help or hinder their sanity.
    Again what is the law and what is the advice are not the same thing. Nor should they be. The law should be what is egregious and that should be what the Police get involved in.

    So one parent, two parents, golf, tiddlywinks etc - I would be amazed if any of that is in the law. Exercising twice a day wasn't and quite right too.

    The law and the advice are not the same thing nor should they be.
    I couldn't agree more. As I have said since yesterday at 7.14pm we will wait to see what the SI says as amended or replaced.

    But just as @MaxPB took from the briefing that he will be able to go to sit in the park with his friend, so did the PM make clear that the police will have stronger powers to deal with lawbreakers.

    So we will wait to see what the law says. It might set a limit on the number of people allowed to congregate (I note that the govt included basketball as a sport which would be ok to take part in...with members of your family...wtf...). Or it might not and it might allow the guidance to do the heavy lifting.

    Whatever the law says, whatever the guidance says, however, what we will not be able to do is to think for ourselves. As the one/two parent gathering conundrum has illustrated.
    I'm glad we're agreed.

    Power to deal with lawbreakers is quite right but only with lawbreakers. And lawbreakers doesn't (nor should it) necessarily mean everyone breaking "advice".

    To make another driving analogy the Highway Code includes a lot of "you must do ..." and a lot of "you should do ..." for different scenarios. EG for driving in wet weather it says you should leave a bigger gap between cars in wet weather. That is sound advice and quite right too. While saying you need to keep to the left is a must so it is the law and the Police can get involved if you don't.

    Not all cases of should ought to be must in the law.
    Indeed or the mother of all advice which is not law: Don't drink and drive.

    What we can't do when we drink and drive, though, is think for ourselves. It is a very clearly defined limit to blood alcohol levels. You might think you are the safest driver on earth after a bottle of Proper Twelve but the law would say otherwise.
    Absolutely as I said the law should deal with what is egregious.

    If you want to drink and drive and be under the limit you need to think for yourself how to do that. There is no answer to "can I drink a pint and drive" or "can I drink two pints and drive" which is what the media are blathering on about with all these hypotheticals expecting set answers to every question they can come up with.
    Your use of the word egregious is meaningless. You either break the law or you don't. Please define egregious behaviour, let's say under the current legislation. Please pretend I am a newly-qualified constable about to head out to Hyde Park (London or Leeds) to go to police this Coronavirus thing.

    TIA
    The law. The law should be what is egregious.

    The advice should be different. Common sense should be different.

    My advice to the constable would be to follow the law. My advice to the public would be to follow the advice. Horses for courses.
  • Options
    MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    MaxPB said:

    Ok, got an email from the golf club saying they have slots open and tee times will be spaced 30 mins apart and maximum two players per tee time. No mention of same household requirement. Tee times reserved for club members as they will have a limited number.

    Have a great round. Really pleased for you.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    I see we are back on the Dyson nonsense.

    If the UK government had run the same schemes for PPE and testing from the beginning, we would have been on a far better position.

    That along with the food box system have been two of the better ideas and successes by the government.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,403
    MaxPB said:

    Ok, got an email from the golf club saying they have slots open and tee times will be spaced 30 mins apart and maximum two players per tee time. No mention of same household requirement. Tee times reserved for club members as they will have a limited number.

    Will your first golf partner be one Rt. Hon D. Raab, Esq?
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,351
    Mr Malmesbury,

    " ...these groups of healthcare staff are rigorous about use of personal protective equipment and the associated practices known to reduce risk."

    I'd agree with this. The worst are the Piers Morgan type who know it's only 'common sense'. The effectiveness of any PPE is down to a combination of the wearer and the equipment. .
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    I don't know who in the government thinks Raab is a good idea for any of this. He is both poor on detail and gets run over by the media.

    Gove is much better choice.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,419

    The winding down of the furlough scheme is by far the most important point to have emerged over the last 24 hours. The implications are multiple and huge from both a political and economic perspective. This is what we should all be talking about and trying to understand more. Here are a few observations and questions:
    1. A lot of businesses are going to have to start making some very tough decsions soon.
    2. The likelihood is that this will lead to a lot of people losing their jobs and, therefore, their incomes.
    3. Where do the replacement jobs come from and over what timescale?
    4. Who will be affected most by this and in what parts of the country?
    5. Does this lead to fundamental reform of the welfare system - and quickly?
    6. A transition extension is clearly not going to happen, but what impact is this going to have in practical terms - it seems likely to mean, at a minimum, higher prices in the shops?
    I am sure there are penty of other things to consider, too.

    Has the winding down of the furlough scheme actually been announced?

    Since they've confirmed some industries will be kept closed until at least July I can't see it winding down until then.
    Isn’t July when it starts to be wound down?
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,205
    edited May 2020
    malcolmg said:
    The ONS data suggest the outbreak is in Kendal.
  • Options

    malcolmg said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1259751595681746944

    No, you see we're all just idiots on this site unless we're Tories

    The "Stay ALERT" slogan cannot make it clear what people are supposed to do* because it is a slogan for a period of time when what we are allowed to do will change as we move between the different ALERT levels.

    * Except insofar as it directs people to the ALERT level to follow the directions for the appropriate level.
    Indeed. Why on earth do you need a slogan to tell you what to DO?

    What is wrong with a slogan about actually thinking for yourself?
    Because, Phil me old mucker, actions taken as a result of thinking for yourself might be illegal in this new phase. And the police are about to have greater powers to sanction you if so.
    I would be opposed to the Police getting involved unless something is egregious and clearly illegal.
    Ahhh grasshopper. You are edging towards why we are so interested in all this. There is a new phase, I get it. We might be allowed to do more than previously, we'll wait to see the legislation. And when there is legislation the police will be empowered to enforce it. I would be interested to hear the legal distinction between egregious and illegal but I suspect you don't know it. Neither do I. Hence we need the law to tell us, and the police because it's not the police's job to take your advice about when they should get involved.

    So hahaha one parent, two parents, golf, tiddlywinks all a big joke for many PB-ers happily sitting with their families in big houses.

    But for many people, perhaps some without the wherewithal to go to the primary legislation, this shit matters. It is the difference between things which will help or hinder their sanity.
    Again what is the law and what is the advice are not the same thing. Nor should they be. The law should be what is egregious and that should be what the Police get involved in.

    So one parent, two parents, golf, tiddlywinks etc - I would be amazed if any of that is in the law. Exercising twice a day wasn't and quite right too.

    The law and the advice are not the same thing nor should they be.
    I couldn't agree more. As I have said since yesterday at 7.14pm we will wait to see what the SI says as amended or replaced.

    But just as @MaxPB took from the briefing that he will be able to go to sit in the park with his friend, so did the PM make clear that the police will have stronger powers to deal with lawbreakers.

    So we will wait to see what the law says. It might set a limit on the number of people allowed to congregate (I note that the govt included basketball as a sport which would be ok to take part in...with members of your family...wtf...). Or it might not and it might allow the guidance to do the heavy lifting.

    Whatever the law says, whatever the guidance says, however, what we will not be able to do is to think for ourselves. As the one/two parent gathering conundrum has illustrated.
    I'm glad we're agreed.

    Power to deal with lawbreakers is quite right but only with lawbreakers. And lawbreakers doesn't (nor should it) necessarily mean everyone breaking "advice".

    To make another driving analogy the Highway Code includes a lot of "you must do ..." and a lot of "you should do ..." for different scenarios. EG for driving in wet weather it says you should leave a bigger gap between cars in wet weather. That is sound advice and quite right too. While saying you need to keep to the left is a must so it is the law and the Police can get involved if you don't.

    Not all cases of should ought to be must in the law.
    The problem is Philip, is that even if the government does the complete opposite of what you’ve just suggested (which I agree with), you’ll still defend it.
    No I won't!

    I am not a party loyalist. I defend what I believe in and criticise what I oppose. When the government does illiberal nonsense that goes against my beliefs I criticise it. And I've criticised it at times during the epidemic too.

    But I'm glad you agree with what I wrote. :)
    Quite amazing that you think everything the Tories have done has been perfect mind you.
    I don't. 😕
    You're as partisan as me, you should accept it.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,067
    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    The latest bit of cronyism by the government in the Covid-19 crisis is that Dido Harding (she of TalkTalk data scandal fame, and wife of Tory MP John Penrose) has been put in charge of the new App !

    The IT community is going nuts! It is going to be Dyson and the ventilators all over again.

    You do know that precisely no public money was given to Dyson, and they spent a couple of dozen million of their own resources on the project?
    I think you miss the point, picking one of your donors to lead something rather than using experts who know what they are doing , and repeating yet again is pretty crass and stupid.
    There was no 'picking' involved, and no public money.

    Several teams of people from high-tech engineering companies all over the country volunteered to work to specifications for medical devices given by the NHS - at a time when the usual suppliers of such devices were completely overwhelmed and it was thought that we would need to produce tens of thousands of ventilators in only a couple of months.

    Everyone involved should be roundly applauded, they dropped what they were doing and offered to do anything they could, to help the country in their hour of need.
    just chance that Dyson and JCB , Tory favourites got all the publicity yet companies that could and did actually produce the goods were not even at the races. Call me cynical.
  • Options
    MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    FF43 said:

    Adding to the Twitter posting diversity, this is an interesting thread on the different types of ventilators that more of us will be on, as the UK government lets the epidemic go out of control.

    https://twitter.com/andymoz78/status/1259029829137190913

    The good doctor's Covid 19 advice: "Stay the f*** at home and don’t use our inventiveness and ability to cobble together solutions as an excuse for a street party.

    In actual fact that photo was famously misleading. The camera angle appeared to show that they were all Covidiots.

    In reality it seems they were all at the correct social distance.

    I'm tired of the vigilantism. Police should break up indoor house parties. Otherwise they should fuck off out of our lives and get back to their normal work.
  • Options

    Mr. Shark, welcome to PB.

    Thank you. Long time lurker.
  • Options
    contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    IanB2 said:

    The winding down of the furlough scheme is by far the most important point to have emerged over the last 24 hours. The implications are multiple and huge from both a political and economic perspective. This is what we should all be talking about and trying to understand more. Here are a few observations and questions:
    1. A lot of businesses are going to have to start making some very tough decsions soon.
    2. The likelihood is that this will lead to a lot of people losing their jobs and, therefore, their incomes.
    3. Where do the replacement jobs come from and over what timescale?
    4. Who will be affected most by this and in what parts of the country?
    5. Does this lead to fundamental reform of the welfare system - and quickly?
    6. A transition extension is clearly not going to happen, but what impact is this going to have in practical terms - it seems likely to mean, at a minimum, higher prices in the shops?
    I am sure there are penty of other things to consider, too.

    Has the winding down of the furlough scheme actually been announced?

    Since they've confirmed some industries will be kept closed until at least July I can't see it winding down until then.
    Isn’t July when it starts to be wound down?
    There is a report in the Telegraph it is to extended until September.
  • Options
    BantermanBanterman Posts: 287
    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    The latest bit of cronyism by the government in the Covid-19 crisis is that Dido Harding (she of TalkTalk data scandal fame, and wife of Tory MP John Penrose) has been put in charge of the new App !

    The IT community is going nuts! It is going to be Dyson and the ventilators all over again.

    You do know that precisely no public money was given to Dyson, and they spent a couple of dozen million of their own resources on the project?
    I think you miss the point, picking one of your donors to lead something rather than using experts who know what they are doing , and repeating yet again is pretty crass and stupid.
    There was no 'picking' involved, and no public money.

    Several teams of people from high-tech engineering companies all over the country volunteered to work to specifications for medical devices given by the NHS - at a time when the usual suppliers of such devices were completely overwhelmed and it was thought that we would need to produce tens of thousands of ventilators in only a couple of months.

    Everyone involved should be roundly applauded, they dropped what they were doing and offered to do anything they could, to help the country in their hour of need.
    just chance that Dyson and JCB , Tory favourites got all the publicity yet companies that could and did actually produce the goods were not even at the races. Call me cynical.
    I doubt it had anything to do with HMG. Dyson and JCB both have super slick PR operations that would have sold their stories to the media.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,067
    MaxPB said:

    Ok, got an email from the golf club saying they have slots open and tee times will be spaced 30 mins apart and maximum two players per tee time. No mention of same household requirement. Tee times reserved for club members as they will have a limited number.

    If weather like here it is a lovely day for it, remember to take your own refreshments as bar is closed.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    malcolmg said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1259751595681746944

    No, you see we're all just idiots on this site unless we're Tories

    The "Stay ALERT" slogan cannot make it clear what people are supposed to do* because it is a slogan for a period of time when what we are allowed to do will change as we move between the different ALERT levels.

    * Except insofar as it directs people to the ALERT level to follow the directions for the appropriate level.
    Indeed. Why on earth do you need a slogan to tell you what to DO?

    What is wrong with a slogan about actually thinking for yourself?
    Because, Phil me old mucker, actions taken as a result of thinking for yourself might be illegal in this new phase. And the police are about to have greater powers to sanction you if so.
    I would be opposed to the Police getting involved unless something is egregious and clearly illegal.
    Ahhh grasshopper. You are edging towards why we are so interested in all this. There is a new phase, I get it. We might be allowed to do more than previously, we'll wait to see the legislation. And when there is legislation the police will be empowered to enforce it. I would be interested to hear the legal distinction between egregious and illegal but I suspect you don't know it. Neither do I. Hence we need the law to tell us, and the police because it's not the police's job to take your advice about when they should get involved.

    So hahaha one parent, two parents, golf, tiddlywinks all a big joke for many PB-ers happily sitting with their families in big houses.

    But for many people, perhaps some without the wherewithal to go to the primary legislation, this shit matters. It is the difference between things which will help or hinder their sanity.
    Again what is the law and what is the advice are not the same thing. Nor should they be. The law should be what is egregious and that should be what the Police get involved in.

    So one parent, two parents, golf, tiddlywinks etc - I would be amazed if any of that is in the law. Exercising twice a day wasn't and quite right too.

    The law and the advice are not the same thing nor should they be.
    I couldn't agree more. As I have said since yesterday at 7.14pm we will wait to see what the SI says as amended or replaced.

    But just as @MaxPB took from the briefing that he will be able to go to sit in the park with his friend, so did the PM make clear that the police will have stronger powers to deal with lawbreakers.

    So we will wait to see what the law says. It might set a limit on the number of people allowed to congregate (I note that the govt included basketball as a sport which would be ok to take part in...with members of your family...wtf...). Or it might not and it might allow the guidance to do the heavy lifting.

    Whatever the law says, whatever the guidance says, however, what we will not be able to do is to think for ourselves. As the one/two parent gathering conundrum has illustrated.
    I'm glad we're agreed.

    Power to deal with lawbreakers is quite right but only with lawbreakers. And lawbreakers doesn't (nor should it) necessarily mean everyone breaking "advice".

    To make another driving analogy the Highway Code includes a lot of "you must do ..." and a lot of "you should do ..." for different scenarios. EG for driving in wet weather it says you should leave a bigger gap between cars in wet weather. That is sound advice and quite right too. While saying you need to keep to the left is a must so it is the law and the Police can get involved if you don't.

    Not all cases of should ought to be must in the law.
    The problem is Philip, is that even if the government does the complete opposite of what you’ve just suggested (which I agree with), you’ll still defend it.
    No I won't!

    I am not a party loyalist. I defend what I believe in and criticise what I oppose. When the government does illiberal nonsense that goes against my beliefs I criticise it. And I've criticised it at times during the epidemic too.

    But I'm glad you agree with what I wrote. :)
    Quite amazing that you think everything the Tories have done has been perfect mind you.
    I don't. 😕
    You're as partisan as me, you should accept it.
    Of course I'm partisan! I believe in libertarian, small state, trust the public, dry economics politics and I'm strident in my beliefs. The only people who aren't partisan are those who don't have strong beliefs.

    I don't believe "everything the Tories have done has been perfect".
  • Options
    BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    edited May 2020
    malcolmg said:
    About as rough as your old dear. Seriously anyone who has an issue doesnt have to travel there
    IshmaelZ said:

    Brom said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Brom said:

    Scott_xP said:
    It's going really well for those fabled comms experts brought in from Vote Leave.
    Very parachocial of South Lakes police. No everyone won't be flooding to the Lake District but we are in this together as a nation so perhaps they should drop the I'm alright Jack attitude.
    I am not confident that you know where the lake District is
    Sadly I have to go that way for Barrow away. The police do not own the land. If I want to travel from Preston for a walk in the lakes and social distance then why shouldn't I? If people are driving there from Devon or hanging around in massive groups then fair enough but otherwise they are just acting like nimbies. It is far bettter that people in nearby urban areas get exercise in remote areas than all stick to the same busy parks.
    So how do you get 'i m alright Jack" from a map showing that they are completely unalright?
    They have an incredibly low population that is spread out. You do realise that if people adhere to the social distancing rules they are highly unlikely to transmit or catch it? Common sense is seemingly lacking here. The idea of creating no go counties and districts of the UK will take us back to the dark ages.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,785

    I see we are back on the Dyson nonsense.

    If the UK government had run the same schemes for PPE and testing from the beginning, we would have been on a far better position.

    That along with the food box system have been two of the better ideas and successes by the government.

    Problem was Johnson running the ventilator exercise as a design competition rather than a procurement. In the end it didn't matter because, thank Goodness, the infections ran slightly behind ventilator availability, unlike Italy. Pure luck, not judgment.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,618
    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    Ok, got an email from the golf club saying they have slots open and tee times will be spaced 30 mins apart and maximum two players per tee time. No mention of same household requirement. Tee times reserved for club members as they will have a limited number.

    Will your first golf partner be one Rt. Hon D. Raab, Esq?
    Definitely not!
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,715
    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    The latest bit of cronyism by the government in the Covid-19 crisis is that Dido Harding (she of TalkTalk data scandal fame, and wife of Tory MP John Penrose) has been put in charge of the new App !

    The IT community is going nuts! It is going to be Dyson and the ventilators all over again.

    You do know that precisely no public money was given to Dyson, and they spent a couple of dozen million of their own resources on the project?
    I think you miss the point, picking one of your donors to lead something rather than using experts who know what they are doing , and repeating yet again is pretty crass and stupid.
    There was no 'picking' involved, and no public money.

    Several teams of people from high-tech engineering companies all over the country volunteered to work to specifications for medical devices given by the NHS - at a time when the usual suppliers of such devices were completely overwhelmed and it was thought that we would need to produce tens of thousands of ventilators in only a couple of months.

    Everyone involved should be roundly applauded, they dropped what they were doing and offered to do anything they could, to help the country in their hour of need.
    just chance that Dyson and JCB , Tory favourites got all the publicity yet companies that could and did actually produce the goods were not even at the races. Call me cynical.
    You really need to stop your dedicated chewing on this imaginary bone.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    IanB2 said:

    The winding down of the furlough scheme is by far the most important point to have emerged over the last 24 hours. The implications are multiple and huge from both a political and economic perspective. This is what we should all be talking about and trying to understand more. Here are a few observations and questions:
    1. A lot of businesses are going to have to start making some very tough decsions soon.
    2. The likelihood is that this will lead to a lot of people losing their jobs and, therefore, their incomes.
    3. Where do the replacement jobs come from and over what timescale?
    4. Who will be affected most by this and in what parts of the country?
    5. Does this lead to fundamental reform of the welfare system - and quickly?
    6. A transition extension is clearly not going to happen, but what impact is this going to have in practical terms - it seems likely to mean, at a minimum, higher prices in the shops?
    I am sure there are penty of other things to consider, too.

    Has the winding down of the furlough scheme actually been announced?

    Since they've confirmed some industries will be kept closed until at least July I can't see it winding down until then.
    Isn’t July when it starts to be wound down?
    I think its all speculation at the minute. Until there's an announcement and the announcement will surely have to give enough notice to wind down.
  • Options
    KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,850
    edited May 2020

    FF43 said:

    Adding to the Twitter posting diversity, this is an interesting thread on the different types of ventilators that more of us will be on, as the UK government lets the epidemic go out of control.

    https://twitter.com/andymoz78/status/1259029829137190913

    The good doctor's Covid 19 advice: "Stay the f*** at home and don’t use our inventiveness and ability to cobble together solutions as an excuse for a street party.

    In actual fact that photo was famously misleading. The camera angle appeared to show that they were all Covidiots.

    In reality it seems they were all at the correct social distance.

    I'm tired of the vigilantism. Police should break up indoor house parties. Otherwise they should fuck off out of our lives and get back to their normal work.
    Anyone who watches cricket will know of the foreshortening effect of the camera lens. It makes things seem far closer than they in fact are, like the wicketkeeper standing 20 yards back from the stumps looking like he's standing just behind them.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    FF43 said:

    I see we are back on the Dyson nonsense.

    If the UK government had run the same schemes for PPE and testing from the beginning, we would have been on a far better position.

    That along with the food box system have been two of the better ideas and successes by the government.

    Problem was Johnson running the ventilator exercise as a design competition rather than a procurement. In the end it didn't matter because, thank Goodness, the infections ran slightly behind ventilator availability, unlike Italy. Pure luck, not judgment.
    Which is verifable bollocks...there was several strands to the approach, procurement from existing UK suppliers, procurement from abroad, expanded capacity by copying existing design and the new designs.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,067

    IanB2 said:

    The winding down of the furlough scheme is by far the most important point to have emerged over the last 24 hours. The implications are multiple and huge from both a political and economic perspective. This is what we should all be talking about and trying to understand more. Here are a few observations and questions:
    1. A lot of businesses are going to have to start making some very tough decsions soon.
    2. The likelihood is that this will lead to a lot of people losing their jobs and, therefore, their incomes.
    3. Where do the replacement jobs come from and over what timescale?
    4. Who will be affected most by this and in what parts of the country?
    5. Does this lead to fundamental reform of the welfare system - and quickly?
    6. A transition extension is clearly not going to happen, but what impact is this going to have in practical terms - it seems likely to mean, at a minimum, higher prices in the shops?
    I am sure there are penty of other things to consider, too.

    Has the winding down of the furlough scheme actually been announced?

    Since they've confirmed some industries will be kept closed until at least July I can't see it winding down until then.
    Isn’t July when it starts to be wound down?
    There is a report in the Telegraph it is to extended until September.
    Hard to believe they can afford to pay it till September, if that is case they would be as well moving them to unemployment benefit now.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,374
    malcolmg said:
    Tayside HB are pretty unchuffed with this map. They have the darkest piece of Scotland but have pointed out repeatedly that this is because they have been doing far more testing than other areas and found more cases. It shows its limitations.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    FF43 said:

    I see we are back on the Dyson nonsense.

    If the UK government had run the same schemes for PPE and testing from the beginning, we would have been on a far better position.

    That along with the food box system have been two of the better ideas and successes by the government.

    Problem was Johnson running the ventilator exercise as a design competition rather than a procurement. In the end it didn't matter because, thank Goodness, the infections ran slightly behind ventilator availability, unlike Italy. Pure luck, not judgment.
    No it was ran as a procurement. Hence Mercedes and others got orders under procurement despite the fact they don't normally produce that.

    Dyson chose to redesign rather than going with the existing design. Fair enough, that's what Dyson does. Turns out it wasn't needed but if vast numbers had been needed and their design was approved then they could have got a very big order and been able to produce very high numbers. But it wasn't needed.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    You know what, it rather seems to me that the government has become more chaotic since Boris returned to work.

    Are you making the case for Raab?
    Aaagh, no!
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,578
    Banterman said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    The latest bit of cronyism by the government in the Covid-19 crisis is that Dido Harding (she of TalkTalk data scandal fame, and wife of Tory MP John Penrose) has been put in charge of the new App !

    The IT community is going nuts! It is going to be Dyson and the ventilators all over again.

    You do know that precisely no public money was given to Dyson, and they spent a couple of dozen million of their own resources on the project?
    I think you miss the point, picking one of your donors to lead something rather than using experts who know what they are doing , and repeating yet again is pretty crass and stupid.
    There was no 'picking' involved, and no public money.

    Several teams of people from high-tech engineering companies all over the country volunteered to work to specifications for medical devices given by the NHS - at a time when the usual suppliers of such devices were completely overwhelmed and it was thought that we would need to produce tens of thousands of ventilators in only a couple of months.

    Everyone involved should be roundly applauded, they dropped what they were doing and offered to do anything they could, to help the country in their hour of need.
    just chance that Dyson and JCB , Tory favourites got all the publicity yet companies that could and did actually produce the goods were not even at the races. Call me cynical.
    I doubt it had anything to do with HMG. Dyson and JCB both have super slick PR operations that would have sold their stories to the media.
    Compounded by the inability of researching stories proactively.

    We had to wait more than a month for someone to mention that a leading UK manufacturer of ventilators (a) existed, (b) had a a capacity of 50-60 per month. I thought that those facts vital to understanding what was going on.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 25,020

    FF43 said:

    I see we are back on the Dyson nonsense.

    If the UK government had run the same schemes for PPE and testing from the beginning, we would have been on a far better position.

    That along with the food box system have been two of the better ideas and successes by the government.

    Problem was Johnson running the ventilator exercise as a design competition rather than a procurement. In the end it didn't matter because, thank Goodness, the infections ran slightly behind ventilator availability, unlike Italy. Pure luck, not judgment.
    Which is verifable bollocks...there was several strands to the approach, procurement from existing UK suppliers, procurement from abroad, expanded capacity by copying existing design and the new designs.
    The one thing this crisis has been good for is identifying the few posters who care to check what they post is accurate rather than posting the first bit of rubbish that enters their head.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,067
    MattW said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    The latest bit of cronyism by the government in the Covid-19 crisis is that Dido Harding (she of TalkTalk data scandal fame, and wife of Tory MP John Penrose) has been put in charge of the new App !

    The IT community is going nuts! It is going to be Dyson and the ventilators all over again.

    You do know that precisely no public money was given to Dyson, and they spent a couple of dozen million of their own resources on the project?
    I think you miss the point, picking one of your donors to lead something rather than using experts who know what they are doing , and repeating yet again is pretty crass and stupid.
    There was no 'picking' involved, and no public money.

    Several teams of people from high-tech engineering companies all over the country volunteered to work to specifications for medical devices given by the NHS - at a time when the usual suppliers of such devices were completely overwhelmed and it was thought that we would need to produce tens of thousands of ventilators in only a couple of months.

    Everyone involved should be roundly applauded, they dropped what they were doing and offered to do anything they could, to help the country in their hour of need.
    just chance that Dyson and JCB , Tory favourites got all the publicity yet companies that could and did actually produce the goods were not even at the races. Call me cynical.
    You really need to stop your dedicated chewing on this imaginary bone.
    I am allowed my thoughts on how it looked Matt, very fishy that their two biggest favourites get all the publicity, Tories trying to shutdown opinion tells me there is something in my thinking.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,131
    Has Roger Helmer been a parody all along?

    https://twitter.com/RogerHelmerMEP/status/1259475806310617088
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,941
    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    The latest bit of cronyism by the government in the Covid-19 crisis is that Dido Harding (she of TalkTalk data scandal fame, and wife of Tory MP John Penrose) has been put in charge of the new App !

    The IT community is going nuts! It is going to be Dyson and the ventilators all over again.

    You do know that precisely no public money was given to Dyson, and they spent a couple of dozen million of their own resources on the project?
    I think you miss the point, picking one of your donors to lead something rather than using experts who know what they are doing , and repeating yet again is pretty crass and stupid.
    There was no 'picking' involved, and no public money.

    Several teams of people from high-tech engineering companies all over the country volunteered to work to specifications for medical devices given by the NHS - at a time when the usual suppliers of such devices were completely overwhelmed and it was thought that we would need to produce tens of thousands of ventilators in only a couple of months.

    Everyone involved should be roundly applauded, they dropped what they were doing and offered to do anything they could, to help the country in their hour of need.
    just chance that Dyson and JCB , Tory favourites got all the publicity yet companies that could and did actually produce the goods were not even at the races. Call me cynical.
    Companies who volunteer to help out the country see this as good marketing? No sh!t, Sherlock - every single medium and large company does Corporate Social Responsibility to some extent, and it's all marketing and brand positioning.

    Here's the German parent company of one of the teams, loudly telling the world how good they were for helping out!
    https://twitter.com/Daimler/status/1251178676584153090
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,618
    FF43 said:

    I see we are back on the Dyson nonsense.

    If the UK government had run the same schemes for PPE and testing from the beginning, we would have been on a far better position.

    That along with the food box system have been two of the better ideas and successes by the government.

    Problem was Johnson running the ventilator exercise as a design competition rather than a procurement. In the end it didn't matter because, thank Goodness, the infections ran slightly behind ventilator availability, unlike Italy. Pure luck, not judgment.
    Actually it wasn't luck, it was the Mercedes CPAP that allowed the NHS to move away from full on ventilator intervention. That was part of the challenge and a new design that we wouldn't otherwise have had.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 25,020
    Brom said:

    malcolmg said:
    About as rough as your old dear. Seriously anyone who has an issue doesnt have to travel there
    IshmaelZ said:

    Brom said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Brom said:

    Scott_xP said:
    It's going really well for those fabled comms experts brought in from Vote Leave.
    Very parachocial of South Lakes police. No everyone won't be flooding to the Lake District but we are in this together as a nation so perhaps they should drop the I'm alright Jack attitude.
    I am not confident that you know where the lake District is
    Sadly I have to go that way for Barrow away. The police do not own the land. If I want to travel from Preston for a walk in the lakes and social distance then why shouldn't I? If people are driving there from Devon or hanging around in massive groups then fair enough but otherwise they are just acting like nimbies. It is far bettter that people in nearby urban areas get exercise in remote areas than all stick to the same busy parks.
    So how do you get 'i m alright Jack" from a map showing that they are completely unalright?
    They have an incredibly low population that is spread out. You do realise that if people adhere to the social distancing rules they are highly unlikely to transmit or catch it? Common sense is seemingly lacking here. The idea of creating no go counties and districts of the UK will take us back to the dark ages.
    So could you explain how an area with very low population density per sq km / mile has the highest Covid 19 rate per population in the country?
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,419

    IanB2 said:

    The winding down of the furlough scheme is by far the most important point to have emerged over the last 24 hours. The implications are multiple and huge from both a political and economic perspective. This is what we should all be talking about and trying to understand more. Here are a few observations and questions:
    1. A lot of businesses are going to have to start making some very tough decsions soon.
    2. The likelihood is that this will lead to a lot of people losing their jobs and, therefore, their incomes.
    3. Where do the replacement jobs come from and over what timescale?
    4. Who will be affected most by this and in what parts of the country?
    5. Does this lead to fundamental reform of the welfare system - and quickly?
    6. A transition extension is clearly not going to happen, but what impact is this going to have in practical terms - it seems likely to mean, at a minimum, higher prices in the shops?
    I am sure there are penty of other things to consider, too.

    Has the winding down of the furlough scheme actually been announced?

    Since they've confirmed some industries will be kept closed until at least July I can't see it winding down until then.
    Isn’t July when it starts to be wound down?
    I think its all speculation at the minute. Until there's an announcement and the announcement will surely have to give enough notice to wind down.
    The problem is that the Government is doing what Blair/Campbell used to do and spinning stuff to the press first - a mix of testing the water and genuine pre-briefing. That's why people are paying so much attention to the 'speculation' and partly why things are becoming so confused, the other being all the changes of direction.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,785
    edited May 2020

    FF43 said:

    I see we are back on the Dyson nonsense.

    If the UK government had run the same schemes for PPE and testing from the beginning, we would have been on a far better position.

    That along with the food box system have been two of the better ideas and successes by the government.

    Problem was Johnson running the ventilator exercise as a design competition rather than a procurement. In the end it didn't matter because, thank Goodness, the infections ran slightly behind ventilator availability, unlike Italy. Pure luck, not judgment.
    Which is verifable bollocks...there was several strands to the approach, procurement from existing UK suppliers, procurement from abroad, expanded capacity by copying existing design and the new designs.
    New designs, no. Expanding production of existing designs, yes with inevitable ramp up time. Procurement from abroad, limited. Italy did comparably better with army production of existing designs. Unfortunately for Italy, it wasn't enough.

    Edit, I should say the big boost was in repurposing existing equipment. See my post from the ICU doctor downthread.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,006
    FF43 said:

    I see we are back on the Dyson nonsense.

    If the UK government had run the same schemes for PPE and testing from the beginning, we would have been on a far better position.

    That along with the food box system have been two of the better ideas and successes by the government.

    Problem was Johnson running the ventilator exercise as a design competition rather than a procurement. In the end it didn't matter because, thank Goodness, the infections ran slightly behind ventilator availability, unlike Italy. Pure luck, not judgment.
    Shame you are resorting to just making stuff up now.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,403

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1259751595681746944

    No, you see we're all just idiots on this site unless we're Tories

    The "Stay ALERT" slogan cannot make it clear what people are supposed to do* because it is a slogan for a period of time when what we are allowed to do will change as we move between the different ALERT levels.

    * Except insofar as it directs people to the ALERT level to follow the directions for the appropriate level.
    Indeed. Why on earth do you need a slogan to tell you what to DO?

    What is wrong with a slogan about actually thinking for yourself?
    Because, Phil me old mucker, actions taken as a result of thinking for yourself might be illegal in this new phase. And the police are about to have greater powers to sanction you if so.
    I would be opposed to the Police getting involved unless something is egregious and clearly illegal.
    Ahhh grasshopper. You are edging towards why we are so interested in all this. There is a new phase, I get it. We might be allowed to do more than previously, we'll wait to see the legislation. And when there is legislation the police will be empowered to enforce it. I would be interested to hear the legal distinction between egregious and illegal but I suspect you don't know it. Neither do I. Hence we need the law to tell us, and the police because it's not the police's job to take your advice about when they should get involved.

    So hahaha one parent, two parents, golf, tiddlywinks all a big joke for many PB-ers happily sitting with their families in big houses.

    But for many people, perhaps some without the wherewithal to go to the primary legislation, this shit matters. It is the difference between things which will help or hinder their sanity.
    Again what is the law and what is the advice are not the same thing. Nor should they be. The law should be what is egregious and that should be what the Police get involved in.

    So one parent, two parents, golf, tiddlywinks etc - I would be amazed if any of that is in the law. Exercising twice a day wasn't and quite right too.

    The law and the advice are not the same thing nor should they be.
    I couldn't agree more. As I have said since yesterday at 7.14pm we will wait to see what the SI says as amended or replaced.

    But just as @MaxPB took from the briefing that he will be able to go to sit in the park with his friend, so did the PM make clear that the police will have stronger powers to deal with lawbreakers.

    So we will wait to see what the law says. It might set a limit on the number of people allowed to congregate (I note that the govt included basketball as a sport which would be ok to take part in...with members of your family...wtf...). Or it might not and it might allow the guidance to do the heavy lifting.

    Whatever the law says, whatever the guidance says, however, what we will not be able to do is to think for ourselves. As the one/two parent gathering conundrum has illustrated.
    I'm glad we're agreed.

    Power to deal with lawbreakers is quite right but only with lawbreakers. And lawbreakers doesn't (nor should it) necessarily mean everyone breaking "advice".

    To make another driving analogy the Highway Code includes a lot of "you must do ..." and a lot of "you should do ..." for different scenarios. EG for driving in wet weather it says you should leave a bigger gap between cars in wet weather. That is sound advice and quite right too. While saying you need to keep to the left is a must so it is the law and the Police can get involved if you don't.

    Not all cases of should ought to be must in the law.
    Indeed or the mother of all advice which is not law: Don't drink and drive.

    What we can't do when we drink and drive, though, is think for ourselves. It is a very clearly defined limit to blood alcohol levels. You might think you are the safest driver on earth after a bottle of Proper Twelve but the law would say otherwise.
    Absolutely as I said the law should deal with what is egregious.

    If you want to drink and drive and be under the limit you need to think for yourself how to do that. There is no answer to "can I drink a pint and drive" or "can I drink two pints and drive" which is what the media are blathering on about with all these hypotheticals expecting set answers to every question they can come up with.
    Your use of the word egregious is meaningless. You either break the law or you don't. Please define egregious behaviour, let's say under the current legislation. Please pretend I am a newly-qualified constable about to head out to Hyde Park (London or Leeds) to go to police this Coronavirus thing.

    TIA
    The law. The law should be what is egregious.

    The advice should be different. Common sense should be different.

    My advice to the constable would be to follow the law. My advice to the public would be to follow the advice. Horses for courses.
    But that's not how it works. The government can advise what it wants but we are not obligated to follow that advice. We need the law to guide us which, ultimately, as you agree from your advice to the constable, is all that matters.

    What doesn't come into it at all is thinking for yourself about it all. You can think for yourself all you want right up until the limit of the law. At which point you can't think for yourself; the police will think for you.

    And hence, we need to know what the law is.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    My biggest concern is that the science is far from settled a out transmission. The 2m rule is basically like the 5 a day fruits / veg, there is kinda of some science behind i.e. we need a decent amount of those, by eating 5 apples isn't it.

    If transmission is via large droplets, 2m is probably far enough, however it is smaller droplets, it isn't.

    Slightly concerned that everybody thinks a bit like if i eat 5 bits of fruit and veg that means i have a healthy diet, that if i just stand 2m away all the time, i am safe as houses.

    Shouting at somebody 2m away might be just as dangerous, especially with no mask.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,790
    edited May 2020
    "Coronavirus: 'Do not drive from England to Wales to exercise'"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-52614204

    Mind you, why would you, given this map?:

    image

  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,067
    FF43 said:

    I see we are back on the Dyson nonsense.

    If the UK government had run the same schemes for PPE and testing from the beginning, we would have been on a far better position.

    That along with the food box system have been two of the better ideas and successes by the government.

    Problem was Johnson running the ventilator exercise as a design competition rather than a procurement. In the end it didn't matter because, thank Goodness, the infections ran slightly behind ventilator availability, unlike Italy. Pure luck, not judgment.
    Food box system is excellent thing for sure. We could have taken 2 boxes a week if we needed/wanted and they had a reasonable selection of food in them. Great for anyone struggling for sure.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,403

    FF43 said:

    Adding to the Twitter posting diversity, this is an interesting thread on the different types of ventilators that more of us will be on, as the UK government lets the epidemic go out of control.

    https://twitter.com/andymoz78/status/1259029829137190913

    The good doctor's Covid 19 advice: "Stay the f*** at home and don’t use our inventiveness and ability to cobble together solutions as an excuse for a street party.

    In actual fact that photo was famously misleading. The camera angle appeared to show that they were all Covidiots.

    In reality it seems they were all at the correct social distance.

    I'm tired of the vigilantism. Police should break up indoor house parties. Otherwise they should fuck off out of our lives and get back to their normal work.
    What about house parties which have self-declared themselves one household?
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,324

    kinabalu said:

    Humble pie from me. I always think if you call something wrong - especially when it happens as infrequently as it does with yours truly - you should promptly admit the fact. Own the bad call rather than stay quiet and hope everyone forgets. So on that principle - garden centres. I was sure that their re-opening this week would be the centrepiece of Johnson's address to the nation. It wasn't. Garden centres were not even mentioned. I was wrong. Apologies to anybody whose hopes were raised or - worse - had made concrete plans based on my forecast.

    Don't be daft - not your fault. Number 10 briefed The Sun that pubs would open their beer gardens today. They spaffed out a whole load of hope and then forgot they had run out of tissues to mop up.
    Thanks. I never thought all of that nonsense in the Sun was happening but I did think garden centres - looked like a clear and obvious 'easy win' to me. Ah well.

    The main takeway for me, though, was the theme of 'muddle along and hope for the best'.

    Track & Trace at scale - not happening IMO. It will prove beyond us and I sense the government know this too.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,374

    I don't know who in the government thinks Raab is a good idea for any of this. He is both poor on detail and gets run over by the media.

    Gove is much better choice.

    No one would say that this is easy but Raab has looked seriously out of his depth in the last few weeks.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,067
    Brom said:

    malcolmg said:
    About as rough as your old dear. Seriously anyone who has an issue doesnt have to travel there
    IshmaelZ said:

    Brom said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Brom said:

    Scott_xP said:
    It's going really well for those fabled comms experts brought in from Vote Leave.
    Very parachocial of South Lakes police. No everyone won't be flooding to the Lake District but we are in this together as a nation so perhaps they should drop the I'm alright Jack attitude.
    I am not confident that you know where the lake District is
    Sadly I have to go that way for Barrow away. The police do not own the land. If I want to travel from Preston for a walk in the lakes and social distance then why shouldn't I? If people are driving there from Devon or hanging around in massive groups then fair enough but otherwise they are just acting like nimbies. It is far bettter that people in nearby urban areas get exercise in remote areas than all stick to the same busy parks.
    So how do you get 'i m alright Jack" from a map showing that they are completely unalright?
    They have an incredibly low population that is spread out. You do realise that if people adhere to the social distancing rules they are highly unlikely to transmit or catch it? Common sense is seemingly lacking here. The idea of creating no go counties and districts of the UK will take us back to the dark ages.
    Bit nasty re my wife, what an absolute arsehole you are.
  • Options
    BantermanBanterman Posts: 287

    FF43 said:

    I see we are back on the Dyson nonsense.

    If the UK government had run the same schemes for PPE and testing from the beginning, we would have been on a far better position.

    That along with the food box system have been two of the better ideas and successes by the government.

    Problem was Johnson running the ventilator exercise as a design competition rather than a procurement. In the end it didn't matter because, thank Goodness, the infections ran slightly behind ventilator availability, unlike Italy. Pure luck, not judgment.
    No it was ran as a procurement. Hence Mercedes and others got orders under procurement despite the fact they don't normally produce that.

    Dyson chose to redesign rather than going with the existing design. Fair enough, that's what Dyson does. Turns out it wasn't needed but if vast numbers had been needed and their design was approved then they could have got a very big order and been able to produce very high numbers. But it wasn't needed.
    Didn't James Dyson pick up the entire development cost himself?
  • Options
    Ave_itAve_it Posts: 2,411
    According to RAAB on Sky, pubs and restaurants may be considered for re-opening 4 July. Good news if so.
  • Options
    SockySocky Posts: 404

    You know what, it rather seems to me that the government has become more chaotic since Boris returned to work.

    Or is it just that the critics are more shrill?

    I wonder if Boris's old career as a journo works against him?
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1259751595681746944

    No, you see we're all just idiots on this site unless we're Tories

    The "Stay ALERT" slogan cannot make it clear what people are supposed to do* because it is a slogan for a period of time when what we are allowed to do will change as we move between the different ALERT levels.

    * Except insofar as it directs people to the ALERT level to follow the directions for the appropriate level.
    Indeed. Why on earth do you need a slogan to tell you what to DO?

    What is wrong with a slogan about actually thinking for yourself?
    Because, Phil me old mucker, actions taken as a result of thinking for yourself might be illegal in this new phase. And the police are about to have greater powers to sanction you if so.
    I would be opposed to the Police getting involved unless something is egregious and clearly illegal.
    Ahhh grasshopper. You are edging towards why we are so interested in all this. There is a new phase, I get it. We might be allowed to do more than previously, we'll wait to see the legislation. And when there is legislation the police will be empowered to enforce it. I would be interested to hear the legal distinction between egregious and illegal but I suspect you don't know it. Neither do I. Hence we need the law to tell us, and the police because it's not the police's job to take your advice about when they should get involved.

    So hahaha one parent, two parents, golf, tiddlywinks all a big joke for many PB-ers happily sitting with their families in big houses.

    But for many people, perhaps some without the wherewithal to go to the primary legislation, this shit matters. It is the difference between things which will help or hinder their sanity.
    Again what is the law and what is the advice are not the same thing. Nor should they be. The law should be what is egregious and that should be what the Police get involved in.

    So one parent, two parents, golf, tiddlywinks etc - I would be amazed if any of that is in the law. Exercising twice a day wasn't and quite right too.

    The law and the advice are not the same thing nor should they be.
    I couldn't agree more. As I have said since yesterday at 7.14pm we will wait to see what the SI says as amended or replaced.

    But just as @MaxPB took from the briefing that he will be able to go to sit in the park with his friend, so did the PM make clear that the police will have stronger powers to deal with lawbreakers.

    So we will wait to see what the law says. It might set a limit on the number of people allowed to congregate (I note that the govt included basketball as a sport which would be ok to take part in...with members of your family...wtf...). Or it might not and it might allow the guidance to do the heavy lifting.

    Whatever the law says, whatever the guidance says, however, what we will not be able to do is to think for ourselves. As the one/two parent gathering conundrum has illustrated.
    I'm glad we're agreed.

    Power to deal with lawbreakers is quite right but only with lawbreakers. And lawbreakers doesn't (nor should it) necessarily mean everyone breaking "advice".

    To make another driving analogy the Highway Code includes a lot of "you must do ..." and a lot of "you should do ..." for different scenarios. EG for driving in wet weather it says you should leave a bigger gap between cars in wet weather. That is sound advice and quite right too. While saying you need to keep to the left is a must so it is the law and the Police can get involved if you don't.

    Not all cases of should ought to be must in the law.
    Indeed or the mother of all advice which is not law: Don't drink and drive.

    What we can't do when we drink and drive, though, is think for ourselves. It is a very clearly defined limit to blood alcohol levels. You might think you are the safest driver on earth after a bottle of Proper Twelve but the law would say otherwise.
    Absolutely as I said the law should deal with what is egregious.

    If you want to drink and drive and be under the limit you need to think for yourself how to do that. There is no answer to "can I drink a pint and drive" or "can I drink two pints and drive" which is what the media are blathering on about with all these hypotheticals expecting set answers to every question they can come up with.
    Your use of the word egregious is meaningless. You either break the law or you don't. Please define egregious behaviour, let's say under the current legislation. Please pretend I am a newly-qualified constable about to head out to Hyde Park (London or Leeds) to go to police this Coronavirus thing.

    TIA
    The law. The law should be what is egregious.

    The advice should be different. Common sense should be different.

    My advice to the constable would be to follow the law. My advice to the public would be to follow the advice. Horses for courses.
    But that's not how it works. The government can advise what it wants but we are not obligated to follow that advice. We need the law to guide us which, ultimately, as you agree from your advice to the constable, is all that matters.

    What doesn't come into it at all is thinking for yourself about it all. You can think for yourself all you want right up until the limit of the law. At which point you can't think for yourself; the police will think for you.

    And hence, we need to know what the law is.
    That doesn't contradict what I wrote at all.

    The law rules out egregious behaviour as illegal. The Police enforce that.

    The advice is set at best practice recommendations.

    The public think for themselves what to do within the law knowing the advice.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    Banterman said:

    FF43 said:

    I see we are back on the Dyson nonsense.

    If the UK government had run the same schemes for PPE and testing from the beginning, we would have been on a far better position.

    That along with the food box system have been two of the better ideas and successes by the government.

    Problem was Johnson running the ventilator exercise as a design competition rather than a procurement. In the end it didn't matter because, thank Goodness, the infections ran slightly behind ventilator availability, unlike Italy. Pure luck, not judgment.
    No it was ran as a procurement. Hence Mercedes and others got orders under procurement despite the fact they don't normally produce that.

    Dyson chose to redesign rather than going with the existing design. Fair enough, that's what Dyson does. Turns out it wasn't needed but if vast numbers had been needed and their design was approved then they could have got a very big order and been able to produce very high numbers. But it wasn't needed.
    Didn't James Dyson pick up the entire development cost himself?
    £25 million quid out of his own pocket.
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,140
    This is like watching a slasher movie where there's an overwhelming vote for everyone to go down to the basement individually at half-hourly inrervals.
  • Options
    BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    eek said:

    Brom said:

    malcolmg said:
    About as rough as your old dear. Seriously anyone who has an issue doesnt have to travel there
    IshmaelZ said:

    Brom said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Brom said:

    Scott_xP said:
    It's going really well for those fabled comms experts brought in from Vote Leave.
    Very parachocial of South Lakes police. No everyone won't be flooding to the Lake District but we are in this together as a nation so perhaps they should drop the I'm alright Jack attitude.
    I am not confident that you know where the lake District is
    Sadly I have to go that way for Barrow away. The police do not own the land. If I want to travel from Preston for a walk in the lakes and social distance then why shouldn't I? If people are driving there from Devon or hanging around in massive groups then fair enough but otherwise they are just acting like nimbies. It is far bettter that people in nearby urban areas get exercise in remote areas than all stick to the same busy parks.
    So how do you get 'i m alright Jack" from a map showing that they are completely unalright?
    They have an incredibly low population that is spread out. You do realise that if people adhere to the social distancing rules they are highly unlikely to transmit or catch it? Common sense is seemingly lacking here. The idea of creating no go counties and districts of the UK will take us back to the dark ages.
    So could you explain how an area with very low population density per sq km / mile has the highest Covid 19 rate per population in the country?
    Possibly it's focused within Kendal as others have said, possibly there is a much higher level of testing. Some chart on twitter proves very little. If people seriously think its dangerous or irresponsible to go walking in remote/barely inhabited parts of the Lake District then we might as well close off all rural areas for the next year or two.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 25,020
    Ave_it said:

    According to RAAB on Sky, pubs and restaurants may be considered for re-opening 4 July. Good news if so.

    Will social distancing rules be abandoned by then or is this because the furlough scheme finishes on that date?

  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,419

    My biggest concern is that the science is far from settled a out transmission. The 2m rule is basically like the 5 a day fruits / veg, there is kinda of some science behind i.e. we need a decent amount of those, by eating 5 apples isn't it.

    If transmission is via large droplets, 2m is probably far enough, however it is smaller droplets, it isn't.

    Slightly concerned that everybody thinks a bit like if i eat 5 bits of fruit and veg that means i have a healthy diet, that if i just stand 2m away all the time, i am safe as houses.

    Shouting at somebody 2m away might be just as dangerous, especially with no mask.

    The cyclists and joggers passing close and leaving a trail of breath behind them seem the most dangerous. That separated conga that went viral recently was idiotic.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,618
    Ave_it said:

    According to RAAB on Sky, pubs and restaurants may be considered for re-opening 4 July. Good news if so.

    Lol it's Raab, it will be walked back within minutes.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    ClippP said:


    Fair enough. Given that the function of the civil service is administration, rather than decision-making, I wonder if Mr Meeks could be more specific about the failings of the civil service? These would seem to be the implementation of a firm policy decision taken by the politicians in government.

    I am ready to be persuaded that the civil service has failed us, but cannot think of any examples myself.

    It is the civil service's job to translate policy decisions into procedures. To do this, it should be taking cases and identifying how the policy decisions will work in relation to each.

    Very often this is done by so-called strawmen. So, for example:

    A 19 year old woman home from Exeter University staying with her parents (53 and 47) in Watford. Her mother's parents are both still alive, aged 83 and 78 and live 10 miles away. Her grandfather has type 2 diabetes. She has a long term boyfriend who lives 75 miles from her. She's a member of the university women's rugby club.

    Can she visit her boyfriend, and if so where?
    Can she visit one or both of her grandparents, and if so where?
    Can she go back to her halls of residence?
    Can she play rugby again and if so with whom?
    Can she claim universal credit?

    There would be many such strawmen, and the answers from all of those should be at the fingertips of ministers. They aren't.

    That is a failure of the civil servants, who don't seem to have worked through all the detail. It is also a failure of the ministers who didn't notice what they were missing.
  • Options
    BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    malcolmg said:

    Brom said:

    malcolmg said:
    About as rough as your old dear. Seriously anyone who has an issue doesnt have to travel there
    IshmaelZ said:

    Brom said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Brom said:

    Scott_xP said:
    It's going really well for those fabled comms experts brought in from Vote Leave.
    Very parachocial of South Lakes police. No everyone won't be flooding to the Lake District but we are in this together as a nation so perhaps they should drop the I'm alright Jack attitude.
    I am not confident that you know where the lake District is
    Sadly I have to go that way for Barrow away. The police do not own the land. If I want to travel from Preston for a walk in the lakes and social distance then why shouldn't I? If people are driving there from Devon or hanging around in massive groups then fair enough but otherwise they are just acting like nimbies. It is far bettter that people in nearby urban areas get exercise in remote areas than all stick to the same busy parks.
    So how do you get 'i m alright Jack" from a map showing that they are completely unalright?
    They have an incredibly low population that is spread out. You do realise that if people adhere to the social distancing rules they are highly unlikely to transmit or catch it? Common sense is seemingly lacking here. The idea of creating no go counties and districts of the UK will take us back to the dark ages.
    Bit nasty re my wife, what an absolute arsehole you are.
    Perhaps don't make insults personal then Malky. Pot and kettle fella. You have a lot of growing up to do.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    Ave_it said:

    According to RAAB on Sky, pubs and restaurants may be considered for re-opening 4 July. Good news if so.

    I can't see how that is going to be possible, unless people are massive spaced apart...then the problem comes, can an establishment make a profit running at say 25% capacity.
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,088
    IanB2 said:

    My biggest concern is that the science is far from settled a out transmission. The 2m rule is basically like the 5 a day fruits / veg, there is kinda of some science behind i.e. we need a decent amount of those, by eating 5 apples isn't it.

    If transmission is via large droplets, 2m is probably far enough, however it is smaller droplets, it isn't.

    Slightly concerned that everybody thinks a bit like if i eat 5 bits of fruit and veg that means i have a healthy diet, that if i just stand 2m away all the time, i am safe as houses.

    Shouting at somebody 2m away might be just as dangerous, especially with no mask.

    The cyclists and joggers passing close and leaving a trail of breath behind them seem the most dangerous. That separated conga that went viral recently was idiotic.
    I thought the evidence suggested the virus was transferred via droplets rather than vapour? Therefore there would be no “trail of breath” as droplets instantly fall to the ground.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    ClippP said:


    Fair enough. Given that the function of the civil service is administration, rather than decision-making, I wonder if Mr Meeks could be more specific about the failings of the civil service? These would seem to be the implementation of a firm policy decision taken by the politicians in government.

    I am ready to be persuaded that the civil service has failed us, but cannot think of any examples myself.

    It is the civil service's job to translate policy decisions into procedures. To do this, it should be taking cases and identifying how the policy decisions will work in relation to each.

    Very often this is done by so-called strawmen. So, for example:

    A 19 year old woman home from Exeter University staying with her parents (53 and 47) in Watford. Her mother's parents are both still alive, aged 83 and 78 and live 10 miles away. Her grandfather has type 2 diabetes. She has a long term boyfriend who lives 75 miles from her. She's a member of the university women's rugby club.

    Can she visit her boyfriend, and if so where?
    Can she visit one or both of her grandparents, and if so where?
    Can she go back to her halls of residence?
    Can she play rugby again and if so with whom?
    Can she claim universal credit?

    There would be many such strawmen, and the answers from all of those should be at the fingertips of ministers. They aren't.

    That is a failure of the civil servants, who don't seem to have worked through all the detail. It is also a failure of the ministers who didn't notice what they were missing.
    My point in the thread header about whether men in their 50s would be able to visit their mistresses was not a flippant one.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,941

    Banterman said:

    FF43 said:

    I see we are back on the Dyson nonsense.

    If the UK government had run the same schemes for PPE and testing from the beginning, we would have been on a far better position.

    That along with the food box system have been two of the better ideas and successes by the government.

    Problem was Johnson running the ventilator exercise as a design competition rather than a procurement. In the end it didn't matter because, thank Goodness, the infections ran slightly behind ventilator availability, unlike Italy. Pure luck, not judgment.
    No it was ran as a procurement. Hence Mercedes and others got orders under procurement despite the fact they don't normally produce that.

    Dyson chose to redesign rather than going with the existing design. Fair enough, that's what Dyson does. Turns out it wasn't needed but if vast numbers had been needed and their design was approved then they could have got a very big order and been able to produce very high numbers. But it wasn't needed.
    Didn't James Dyson pick up the entire development cost himself?
    £25 million quid out of his own pocket.
    Exactly, what sort of evil fecker would spend £25m on medical research in the middle of a global pandemic?
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,321

    Off topic, my first law “eExam” is tomorrow and I’m struggling to concentrate at all - working from home is rubbish.

    Totally. Its not WFH thats the problem. Its WFH and try to supervise my children so that they actually do some online lessons whilst my wife goes to work to supervise other kids at school - thats the problem.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,403

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1259751595681746944

    No, you see we're all just idiots on this site unless we're Tories

    The "Stay ALERT" slogan cannot make it clear what people are supposed to do* because it is a slogan for a period of time when what we are allowed to do will change as we move between the different ALERT levels.

    * Except insofar as it directs people to the ALERT level to follow the directions for the appropriate level.
    Indeed. Why on earth do you need a slogan to tell you what to DO?

    What is wrong with a slogan about actually thinking for yourself?
    Because, Phil me old mucker, actions taken as a result of thinking for yourself might be illegal in this new phase. And the police are about to have greater powers to sanction you if so.
    I would be opposed to the Police getting involved unless something is egregious and clearly illegal.
    Ahhh grasshopper. You are edging towards why we are so interested in all this. There is a new phase, I get it. We might be allowed to do more than previously, we'll wait to see the legislation. And when there is legislation the police will be empowered to enforce it. I would be interested to hear the legal distinction between egregious and illegal but I suspect you don't know it. Neither do I. Hence we need the law to tell us, and the police because it's not the police's job to take your advice about when they should get involved.

    So hahaha one parent, two parents, golf, tiddlywinks all a big joke for many PB-ers happily sitting with their families in big houses.

    But for many people, perhaps some without the wherewithal to go to the primary legislation, this shit matters. It is the difference between things which will help or hinder their sanity.
    Again what is the law and what is the advice are not the same thing. Nor should they be. The law should be what is egregious and that should be what the Police get involved in.

    So one parent, two parents, golf, tiddlywinks etc - I would be amazed if any of that is in the law. Exercising twice a day wasn't and quite right too.

    The law and the advice are not the same thing nor should they be.
    I couldn't agree more. As I have said since yesterday at 7.14pm we will wait to see what the SI says as amended or replaced.

    But just as @MaxPB took from the briefing that he will be able to go to sit in the park with his friend, so did the PM make clear that the police will have stronger powers to deal with lawbreakers.

    So we will wait to see what the law says. It might set a limit on the number of people allowed to congregate (I note that the govt included basketball as a sport which would be ok to take part in...with members of your family...wtf...). Or it might not and it might allow the guidance to do the heavy lifting.

    Whatever the law says, whatever the guidance says, however, what we will not be able to do is to think for ourselves. As the one/two parent gathering conundrum has illustrated.
    I'm glad we're agreed.

    Power to deal with lawbreakers is quite right but only with lawbreakers. And lawbreakers doesn't (nor should it) necessarily mean everyone breaking "advice".

    To make another driving analogy the Highway Code includes a lot of "you must do ..." and a lot of "you should do ..." for different scenarios. EG for driving in wet weather it says you should leave a bigger gap between cars in wet weather. That is sound advice and quite right too. While saying you need to keep to the left is a must so it is the law and the Police can get involved if you don't.

    Not all cases of should ought to be must in the law.
    Indeed or the mother of all advice which is not law: Don't drink and drive.

    What we can't do when we drink and drive, though, is think for ourselves. It is a very clearly defined limit to blood alcohol levels. You might think you are the safest driver on earth after a bottle of Proper Twelve but the law would say otherwise.
    Absolutely as I said the law should deal with what is egregious.

    If you want to drink and drive and be under the limit you need to think for yourself how to do that. There is no answer to "can I drink a pint and drive" or "can I drink two pints and drive" which is what the media are blathering on about with all these hypotheticals expecting set answers to every question they can come up with.
    Your use of the word egregious is meaningless. You either break the law or you don't. Please define egregious behaviour, let's say under the current legislation. Please pretend I am a newly-qualified constable about to head out to Hyde Park (London or Leeds) to go to police this Coronavirus thing.

    TIA
    The law. The law should be what is egregious.

    The advice should be different. Common sense should be different.

    My advice to the constable would be to follow the law. My advice to the public would be to follow the advice. Horses for courses.
    But that's not how it works. The government can advise what it wants but we are not obligated to follow that advice. We need the law to guide us which, ultimately, as you agree from your advice to the constable, is all that matters.

    What doesn't come into it at all is thinking for yourself about it all. You can think for yourself all you want right up until the limit of the law. At which point you can't think for yourself; the police will think for you.

    And hence, we need to know what the law is.
    That doesn't contradict what I wrote at all.

    The law rules out egregious behaviour as illegal. The Police enforce that.

    The advice is set at best practice recommendations.

    The public think for themselves what to do within the law knowing the advice.
    They can't do that until they know the advice and the law. Nothing that has been said yet has given them that information or indeed any clarity. I hope we can get that today at 2pm.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292

    IanB2 said:

    My biggest concern is that the science is far from settled a out transmission. The 2m rule is basically like the 5 a day fruits / veg, there is kinda of some science behind i.e. we need a decent amount of those, by eating 5 apples isn't it.

    If transmission is via large droplets, 2m is probably far enough, however it is smaller droplets, it isn't.

    Slightly concerned that everybody thinks a bit like if i eat 5 bits of fruit and veg that means i have a healthy diet, that if i just stand 2m away all the time, i am safe as houses.

    Shouting at somebody 2m away might be just as dangerous, especially with no mask.

    The cyclists and joggers passing close and leaving a trail of breath behind them seem the most dangerous. That separated conga that went viral recently was idiotic.
    I thought the evidence suggested the virus was transferred via droplets rather than vapour? Therefore there would be no “trail of breath” as droplets instantly fall to the ground.
    It is far from known at the moment. There are papers like the Chinese bus study that claimed to show people much further than 2m apart become infected.

    Now granted that was an enclosed space and i think outdoors much much lower risk, but it isn't certain that this 2m distance is some magic shield.
  • Options
    BromBrom Posts: 3,760

    IanB2 said:

    My biggest concern is that the science is far from settled a out transmission. The 2m rule is basically like the 5 a day fruits / veg, there is kinda of some science behind i.e. we need a decent amount of those, by eating 5 apples isn't it.

    If transmission is via large droplets, 2m is probably far enough, however it is smaller droplets, it isn't.

    Slightly concerned that everybody thinks a bit like if i eat 5 bits of fruit and veg that means i have a healthy diet, that if i just stand 2m away all the time, i am safe as houses.

    Shouting at somebody 2m away might be just as dangerous, especially with no mask.

    The cyclists and joggers passing close and leaving a trail of breath behind them seem the most dangerous. That separated conga that went viral recently was idiotic.
    I thought the evidence suggested the virus was transferred via droplets rather than vapour? Therefore there would be no “trail of breath” as droplets instantly fall to the ground.
    Perhaps they should test everyone in the social distancing conga this week. Could learn a few things. I'd hazard a reality that without physical touching in an indoor environment your chances of contracting the virus are slim, but it's a shame the science is yet to conclusively prove that.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,374

    My biggest concern is that the science is far from settled a out transmission. The 2m rule is basically like the 5 a day fruits / veg, there is kinda of some science behind i.e. we need a decent amount of those, by eating 5 apples isn't it.

    If transmission is via large droplets, 2m is probably far enough, however it is smaller droplets, it isn't.

    Slightly concerned that everybody thinks a bit like if i eat 5 bits of fruit and veg that means i have a healthy diet, that if i just stand 2m away all the time, i am safe as houses.

    Shouting at somebody 2m away might be just as dangerous, especially with no mask.

    The German research linked to yesterday showing different distances depending on whether you were stationary, walking or running was interesting and seems inherently sensible.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,067

    Banterman said:

    FF43 said:

    I see we are back on the Dyson nonsense.

    If the UK government had run the same schemes for PPE and testing from the beginning, we would have been on a far better position.

    That along with the food box system have been two of the better ideas and successes by the government.

    Problem was Johnson running the ventilator exercise as a design competition rather than a procurement. In the end it didn't matter because, thank Goodness, the infections ran slightly behind ventilator availability, unlike Italy. Pure luck, not judgment.
    No it was ran as a procurement. Hence Mercedes and others got orders under procurement despite the fact they don't normally produce that.

    Dyson chose to redesign rather than going with the existing design. Fair enough, that's what Dyson does. Turns out it wasn't needed but if vast numbers had been needed and their design was approved then they could have got a very big order and been able to produce very high numbers. But it wasn't needed.
    Didn't James Dyson pick up the entire development cost himself?
    £25 million quid out of his own pocket.
    Yes but £50M worth of advertising and to be fair it will be loose change for him, but good on him anyway for not whinging and whining.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    MaxPB said:

    FF43 said:

    I see we are back on the Dyson nonsense.

    If the UK government had run the same schemes for PPE and testing from the beginning, we would have been on a far better position.

    That along with the food box system have been two of the better ideas and successes by the government.

    Problem was Johnson running the ventilator exercise as a design competition rather than a procurement. In the end it didn't matter because, thank Goodness, the infections ran slightly behind ventilator availability, unlike Italy. Pure luck, not judgment.
    Actually it wasn't luck, it was the Mercedes CPAP that allowed the NHS to move away from full on ventilator intervention. That was part of the challenge and a new design that we wouldn't otherwise have had.
    And worth noting that the medical results using CPAP are far better than those using full on ventilation.

    I wonder if Boris was on a CPAP machine? He was getting oxygen but not ventilation so its possible, I don't know.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,313
    Johnson's minders must have looked at the final presentation edit before it was aired, and thought, yes, that should do the trick.

    Or are we in an Emeror's new clothes situation where Johnson's team thought that really makes no sense but let's not upset Boris.
  • Options
    Ave_itAve_it Posts: 2,411

    Ave_it said:

    According to RAAB on Sky, pubs and restaurants may be considered for re-opening 4 July. Good news if so.

    I can't see how that is going to be possible, unless people are massive spaced apart...then the problem comes, can an establishment make a profit running at say 25% capacity.
    It should work outside. A pub near me has already made preparations for this by moving its outside tables apart. If applied with pragmatic rules on social distancing, ie one social group at the pub to be considered a 'bubble' ie no distancing needed within that group.

    Presumably we need to get to COVID stage 1 or low 2 (1.5?) to be able to scrap 2m rule??
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,618

    Off topic, my first law “eExam” is tomorrow and I’m struggling to concentrate at all - working from home is rubbish.

    Totally. Its not WFH thats the problem. Its WFH and try to supervise my children so that they actually do some online lessons whilst my wife goes to work to supervise other kids at school - thats the problem.
    It's time to get schools back.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,067
    Brom said:

    malcolmg said:

    Brom said:

    malcolmg said:
    About as rough as your old dear. Seriously anyone who has an issue doesnt have to travel there
    IshmaelZ said:

    Brom said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Brom said:

    Scott_xP said:
    It's going really well for those fabled comms experts brought in from Vote Leave.
    Very parachocial of South Lakes police. No everyone won't be flooding to the Lake District but we are in this together as a nation so perhaps they should drop the I'm alright Jack attitude.
    I am not confident that you know where the lake District is
    Sadly I have to go that way for Barrow away. The police do not own the land. If I want to travel from Preston for a walk in the lakes and social distance then why shouldn't I? If people are driving there from Devon or hanging around in massive groups then fair enough but otherwise they are just acting like nimbies. It is far bettter that people in nearby urban areas get exercise in remote areas than all stick to the same busy parks.
    So how do you get 'i m alright Jack" from a map showing that they are completely unalright?
    They have an incredibly low population that is spread out. You do realise that if people adhere to the social distancing rules they are highly unlikely to transmit or catch it? Common sense is seemingly lacking here. The idea of creating no go counties and districts of the UK will take us back to the dark ages.
    Bit nasty re my wife, what an absolute arsehole you are.
    Perhaps don't make insults personal then Malky. Pot and kettle fella. You have a lot of growing up to do.
    Feck off back under your rock
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 25,020
    MaxPB said:

    Off topic, my first law “eExam” is tomorrow and I’m struggling to concentrate at all - working from home is rubbish.

    Totally. Its not WFH thats the problem. Its WFH and try to supervise my children so that they actually do some online lessons whilst my wife goes to work to supervise other kids at school - thats the problem.
    It's time to get schools back.
    Guess what - that isn't happening until September.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1259751595681746944

    No, you see we're all just idiots on this site unless we're Tories

    The "Stay ALERT" slogan cannot make it clear what people are supposed to do* because it is a slogan for a period of time when what we are allowed to do will change as we move between the different ALERT levels.

    * Except insofar as it directs people to the ALERT level to follow the directions for the appropriate level.
    Indeed. Why on earth do you need a slogan to tell you what to DO?

    What is wrong with a slogan about actually thinking for yourself?
    Because, Phil me old mucker, actions taken as a result of thinking for yourself might be illegal in this new phase. And the police are about to have greater powers to sanction you if so.
    I would be opposed to the Police getting involved unless something is egregious and clearly illegal.
    Ahhh grasshopper. You are edging towards why we are so interested in all this. There is a new phase, I get it. We might be allowed to do more than previously, we'll wait to see the legislation. And when there is legislation the police will be empowered to enforce it. I would be interested to hear the legal distinction between egregious and illegal but I suspect you don't know it. Neither do I. Hence we need the law to tell us, and the police because it's not the police's job to take your advice about when they should get involved.

    So hahaha one parent, two parents, golf, tiddlywinks all a big joke for many PB-ers happily sitting with their families in big houses.

    But for many people, perhaps some without the wherewithal to go to the primary legislation, this shit matters. It is the difference between things which will help or hinder their sanity.
    Again what is the law and what is the advice are not the same thing. Nor should they be. The law should be what is egregious and that should be what the Police get involved in.

    So one parent, two parents, golf, tiddlywinks etc - I would be amazed if any of that is in the law. Exercising twice a day wasn't and quite right too.

    The law and the advice are not the same thing nor should they be.
    I couldn't agree more. As I have said since yesterday at 7.14pm we will wait to see what the SI says as amended or replaced.

    But just as @MaxPB took from the briefing that he will be able to go to sit in the park with his friend, so did the PM make clear that the police will have stronger powers to deal with lawbreakers.

    So we will wait to see what the law says. It might set a limit on the number of people allowed to congregate (I note that the govt included basketball as a sport which would be ok to take part in...with members of your family...wtf...). Or it might not and it might allow the guidance to do the heavy lifting.

    Whatever the law says, whatever the guidance says, however, what we will not be able to do is to think for ourselves. As the one/two parent gathering conundrum has illustrated.
    I'm glad we're agreed.

    Power to deal with lawbreakers is quite right but only with lawbreakers. And lawbreakers doesn't (nor should it) necessarily mean everyone breaking "advice".

    To make another driving analogy the Highway Code includes a lot of "you must do ..." and a lot of "you should do ..." for different scenarios. EG for driving in wet weather it says you should leave a bigger gap between cars in wet weather. That is sound advice and quite right too. While saying you need to keep to the left is a must so it is the law and the Police can get involved if you don't.

    Not all cases of should ought to be must in the law.
    Indeed or the mother of all advice which is not law: Don't drink and drive.

    What we can't do when we drink and drive, though, is think for ourselves. It is a very clearly defined limit to blood alcohol levels. You might think you are the safest driver on earth after a bottle of Proper Twelve but the law would say otherwise.
    Absolutely as I said the law should deal with what is egregious.

    If you want to drink and drive and be under the limit you need to think for yourself how to do that. There is no answer to "can I drink a pint and drive" or "can I drink two pints and drive" which is what the media are blathering on about with all these hypotheticals expecting set answers to every question they can come up with.
    Your use of the word egregious is meaningless. You either break the law or you don't. Please define egregious behaviour, let's say under the current legislation. Please pretend I am a newly-qualified constable about to head out to Hyde Park (London or Leeds) to go to police this Coronavirus thing.

    TIA
    The law. The law should be what is egregious.

    The advice should be different. Common sense should be different.

    My advice to the constable would be to follow the law. My advice to the public would be to follow the advice. Horses for courses.
    But that's not how it works. The government can advise what it wants but we are not obligated to follow that advice. We need the law to guide us which, ultimately, as you agree from your advice to the constable, is all that matters.

    What doesn't come into it at all is thinking for yourself about it all. You can think for yourself all you want right up until the limit of the law. At which point you can't think for yourself; the police will think for you.

    And hence, we need to know what the law is.
    That doesn't contradict what I wrote at all.

    The law rules out egregious behaviour as illegal. The Police enforce that.

    The advice is set at best practice recommendations.

    The public think for themselves what to do within the law knowing the advice.
    They can't do that until they know the advice and the law. Nothing that has been said yet has given them that information or indeed any clarity. I hope we can get that today at 2pm.
    Indeed which we agreed about 10 posts ago in this discussion chain.

    The public need to be thinking for themselves though either way. If what you think for yourself is an action that is illegal then your thinking is probably not very good. Most people think they should be far away from the boundaries of the law but the boundaries of the law should never be set at the boundaries of the advice, there is always a grey area between the two for good reason.
  • Options
    Ave_itAve_it Posts: 2,411
    MaxPB said:

    Ave_it said:

    According to RAAB on Sky, pubs and restaurants may be considered for re-opening 4 July. Good news if so.

    Lol it's Raab, it will be walked back within minutes.
    Quite possibly. Boris might clarify it as 1 June!!! :lol:
  • Options
    BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    malcolmg said:

    Brom said:

    malcolmg said:

    Brom said:

    malcolmg said:
    About as rough as your old dear. Seriously anyone who has an issue doesnt have to travel there
    IshmaelZ said:

    Brom said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Brom said:

    Scott_xP said:
    It's going really well for those fabled comms experts brought in from Vote Leave.
    Very parachocial of South Lakes police. No everyone won't be flooding to the Lake District but we are in this together as a nation so perhaps they should drop the I'm alright Jack attitude.
    I am not confident that you know where the lake District is
    Sadly I have to go that way for Barrow away. The police do not own the land. If I want to travel from Preston for a walk in the lakes and social distance then why shouldn't I? If people are driving there from Devon or hanging around in massive groups then fair enough but otherwise they are just acting like nimbies. It is far bettter that people in nearby urban areas get exercise in remote areas than all stick to the same busy parks.
    So how do you get 'i m alright Jack" from a map showing that they are completely unalright?
    They have an incredibly low population that is spread out. You do realise that if people adhere to the social distancing rules they are highly unlikely to transmit or catch it? Common sense is seemingly lacking here. The idea of creating no go counties and districts of the UK will take us back to the dark ages.
    Bit nasty re my wife, what an absolute arsehole you are.
    Perhaps don't make insults personal then Malky. Pot and kettle fella. You have a lot of growing up to do.
    Feck off back under your rock
    One of the best of your staggering 28,000 posts. A credit to Queen and country.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,205

    Ave_it said:

    According to RAAB on Sky, pubs and restaurants may be considered for re-opening 4 July. Good news if so.

    I can't see how that is going to be possible, unless people are massive spaced apart...then the problem comes, can an establishment make a profit running at say 25% capacity.
    Same for trains and buses. For trains, passengers pay something like £10bn a year and the tax payer pays the rest (about £4bn). If rail fares stay where they are now, the tax payer will have to make up the difference.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,578

    MaxPB said:

    FF43 said:

    I see we are back on the Dyson nonsense.

    If the UK government had run the same schemes for PPE and testing from the beginning, we would have been on a far better position.

    That along with the food box system have been two of the better ideas and successes by the government.

    Problem was Johnson running the ventilator exercise as a design competition rather than a procurement. In the end it didn't matter because, thank Goodness, the infections ran slightly behind ventilator availability, unlike Italy. Pure luck, not judgment.
    Actually it wasn't luck, it was the Mercedes CPAP that allowed the NHS to move away from full on ventilator intervention. That was part of the challenge and a new design that we wouldn't otherwise have had.
    And worth noting that the medical results using CPAP are far better than those using full on ventilation.

    I wonder if Boris was on a CPAP machine? He was getting oxygen but not ventilation so its possible, I don't know.
    IIRC, the full story went something like this -

    - The original companies managed to make a few more ventilators.
    - The original design was manufactured by new entrants in non-trivial numbers.
    - A number of ventilators were imported.
    - A number of ventilators were brought in from private hospitals etc.
    - The CPAP machines mentioned above were created and manufactured.
    - The new design/new manufacturer strand didn't produce ventilators in time
  • Options
    KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,850
    Ave_it said:

    Ave_it said:

    According to RAAB on Sky, pubs and restaurants may be considered for re-opening 4 July. Good news if so.

    I can't see how that is going to be possible, unless people are massive spaced apart...then the problem comes, can an establishment make a profit running at say 25% capacity.
    It should work outside. A pub near me has already made preparations for this by moving its outside tables apart. If applied with pragmatic rules on social distancing, ie one social group at the pub to be considered a 'bubble' ie no distancing needed within that group.

    Presumably we need to get to COVID stage 1 or low 2 (1.5?) to be able to scrap 2m rule??
    I don't think the 2m rule will be scrapped in public places until we get a vaccine.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    eek said:

    MaxPB said:

    Off topic, my first law “eExam” is tomorrow and I’m struggling to concentrate at all - working from home is rubbish.

    Totally. Its not WFH thats the problem. Its WFH and try to supervise my children so that they actually do some online lessons whilst my wife goes to work to supervise other kids at school - thats the problem.
    It's time to get schools back.
    Guess what - that isn't happening until September.
    That's not what Boris said last night. Though it depends upon years.

    One of my children will probably be going back to school next month. The other is pre-school and I doubt her nursery will be reopening.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,148

    Johnson's minders must have looked at the final presentation edit before it was aired, and thought, yes, that should do the trick.

    Or are we in an Emeror's new clothes situation where Johnson's team thought that really makes no sense but let's not upset Boris.

    Both

    Dom thought it would do the trick because the last time he got BoZo to spout a bunch of bullshit it worked

    Nobody else in Downing Street is willing to upset the boss. Or BoZo...
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,578
    Sandpit said:

    Banterman said:

    FF43 said:

    I see we are back on the Dyson nonsense.

    If the UK government had run the same schemes for PPE and testing from the beginning, we would have been on a far better position.

    That along with the food box system have been two of the better ideas and successes by the government.

    Problem was Johnson running the ventilator exercise as a design competition rather than a procurement. In the end it didn't matter because, thank Goodness, the infections ran slightly behind ventilator availability, unlike Italy. Pure luck, not judgment.
    No it was ran as a procurement. Hence Mercedes and others got orders under procurement despite the fact they don't normally produce that.

    Dyson chose to redesign rather than going with the existing design. Fair enough, that's what Dyson does. Turns out it wasn't needed but if vast numbers had been needed and their design was approved then they could have got a very big order and been able to produce very high numbers. But it wasn't needed.
    Didn't James Dyson pick up the entire development cost himself?
    £25 million quid out of his own pocket.
    Exactly, what sort of evil fecker would spend £25m on medical research in the middle of a global pandemic?
    £25 million pounds of *private* money spent on medical technology research?

    That is *privatisation*. Therefore J. Dyson is an EvulToryNHSPrivateeeeeeer...
This discussion has been closed.