I am not overtly concerned about continuity Corbyn Sir Keith the Brexit blocking lawyer.
He may have his 15 mins in the sun as the tail of Covid works its way round the u-bend but when the worst is over we will need optimism and fresh thinking around the economy.
Not blah blah from a "forensic" bore endlessly waffling about the latest woke fad, social justice and faux "consensus".
Methinks you are protesting too much, Starmer is going to look good in one to ones with bumbling Doris and the Tories know it. Look how the leadership favourable have shifted after just a couple of encounters. We are going to need a damn site more than than Doris's usually waffly optimism once this is over.
I didn't watch PMQs so I have no idea how either performed, but if someone refers to one of the participants as 'continuity Corbyn Sir Keith the Brexit blocking lawyer' I immediately get the impression that the observation from this observer is not unbiased.
The infamous "PB Tories" would be far better off admitting that Boris lost this one, and needs to up his game, than waste hours of our shortened lives looking for tiny small print that means his gaffe wasn't quite so bad. Ludicrous
Prof Ferguson quietly smiles in his eerie, undersea lair
Been heading this way for a while. A month ago they had a quarter of Belgium's weekly death rate, or half of Spain/UK, now they're about to overtake them all for top spot in the world.
OT, just watched last week's PMQ at long last. Johnson was hopeless and Starmer pulled him apart. If that happens every week and it gets coverage most people are going to wake up to the fact that it might not be a good idea to have a low on detail game show host as a PM. The Tories are going to find it difficult to undermine Starmer IMO, unless they find something that sticks that is currently unknown. A lot of PB Johnson fanbois on here have tried to suggest he is boring, which is hardly going to shift the needle much, even if it were true. One on here yesterday tried to suggest that "being forensic" was a bad thing. Maybe he ought to look at the forensic ability of Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair. Both would have run rings around The Clown. Johnson's advisors are going to have to do a lot better, and Johnson himself would be well advised to start looking at using some heavyweights to support him rather than surrounding himself with hopeless sycophants.
As always, one of Boris' greatest assets is his critics' unswerving dedication to underestimating him...
You are just too tribally blind to see what most other people can see. Starmer is going to do this to Johnson week in week out for the next 4 years.
I personally think that one of Boris Johnson's greatest assets (to himself) is his gullible fanbase's unswerving dedication to massively overestimating him 🤣🤣
The infamous "PB Tories" would be far better off admitting that Boris lost this one, and needs to up his game, than waste hours of our shortened lives looking for tiny small print that means his gaffe wasn't quite so bad. Ludicrous
I think PB Labour are in denial about the polls.
Why would polls matter when there's no election for 4 years.
Neither today's polls nor today's PMQs will matter one jot in 4 years time.
The PM is on a very sticky wicket. For all their deficiencies international comparisons are not flattering at the moment. Care Homes have proved to be a serious weak spot. The opposition to quarantine by the likes of Grant Shapps was and is bewildering. The consequences of having so many of our goods manufactured overseas have come home to bite in the supply of PPE, masks and indeed in testing. The NHS did well in increasing capacity quickly but it remains bureaucratic and top heavy with weak management. The longer this goes on the more evident it will be. The government has sought to rely on the advice of experts but that has proved problematic in several areas, the most recent of which is the development of the app where mistakes have been made and time lost. The government is trying to move the story on in terms of the economy without really having sufficient capacity to test quickly or an app that will facilitate tracing. This is unlikely to end well.
Quite frankly only an incompetent of Corbyn's level could fail to win PMQs in such a situation. The main problem for the LOTO is where do you start? How do you bring together a coherent narrative? Starmer is more than capable of doing that.
So is it Grant Shapps who has been opposing quarantine ?
So I have read. I understood he was only persuaded of the idiocy of this last Sunday. Presumably obsessed with being "open for business" or something. Maybe worried about whether there was going to be a solvent airline left. Who knows? Just stupid.
The infamous "PB Tories" would be far better off admitting that Boris lost this one, and needs to up his game, than waste hours of our shortened lives looking for tiny small print that means his gaffe wasn't quite so bad. Ludicrous
I think PB Labour are in denial about the polls.
Those are meaningless right now. Who in their right mind is thinking about who to vote for at the next election?
The PM is on a very sticky wicket. For all their deficiencies international comparisons are not flattering at the moment. Care Homes have proved to be a serious weak spot. The opposition to quarantine by the likes of Grant Shapps was and is bewildering. The consequences of having so many of our goods manufactured overseas have come home to bite in the supply of PPE, masks and indeed in testing. The NHS did well in increasing capacity quickly but it remains bureaucratic and top heavy with weak management. The longer this goes on the more evident it will be. The government has sought to rely on the advice of experts but that has proved problematic in several areas, the most recent of which is the development of the app where mistakes have been made and time lost. The government is trying to move the story on in terms of the economy without really having sufficient capacity to test quickly or an app that will facilitate tracing. This is unlikely to end well.
Quite frankly only an incompetent of Corbyn's level could fail to win PMQs in such a situation. The main problem for the LOTO is where do you start? How do you bring together a coherent narrative? Starmer is more than capable of doing that.
So is it Grant Shapps who has been opposing quarantine ?
Patel was in favour of it but was overruled in Cabinet.
Germany will start to open some border crossings from Saturday, Interior Minister Horst Seehofer has announced. They include the border with Luxembourg and possibly that with Denmark.
Border controls with France, Switzerland and Austria would be extended until 16 June, but as many crossings as possible will be opened, he said.
"The goal is that from mid-June we want to have free travel in Europe," Mr Seehofer said, but clarified that controls would be re-introduced if there were new outbreaks of coronavirus.
----------
"Our message is we will have a tourist season this summer," said economic affairs commissioner Paolo Gentiloni, "even if it's with security measures and limitations."
Even Boris cheerleader Staines thought they had Boris bang to rights, but perhaps not.
"UPDATE:Turns out there is wriggle room, Keir Starmer didn’t read the small print. Which is a basic task for a lawyer:
This guidance is intended for the current position in the UK where there is currently no transmission of COVID-19 in the community. It is therefore very unlikely that anyone receiving care in a care home or the community will become infected. This is the latest information and will be updated shortly."
it's irrelevant. It doesn't save Boris. Starmer correctly quoted the advice, Boris claimed that wasn't the advice. C'est tout. Yes Starmer was a bit clever with his quotations, but that's his job, he's an ex lawyer. Boris the genial journalist was inadequate to the task.
Starmer is like Howard so far, not particularly charismatic or likeable but competent and forensic and probing at PMQs using his legal background
I have to say I'm getting more worried that the government is coming to the end of being able to easily monetise debt without consequences. We could very quickly end up with a sterling crisis and then have to to call in the IMF to stabilise the economy.
More and more we need to look easing off QE, even if that means servicing costs rise a bit.
I just don't see how we avoid an IMF situation now.
even if Sunak imposes huge tax increases the economy will simply be too small and weak to give him much of a yield.
We simply cannot finance the debts and the deficits he is racking up. The economy is too small.
People thought I was mad when I suggested a sterling crisis might be on the cards.
Maybe I don't look so mad now.
You look stark, raving bonkers and like you don't understand international finance whatsoever.
If you think we need the IMF perhaps you can explain what interest rate the UK bonds we're issuing are going for on the free market. If the free market thought we couldn't pay for them our bond yields would be going up as they were when Gordon Brown got us into a hole . . . so what are they now?
They were lower under Gordon Brown than they were under John Major and Thatcher!
The infamous "PB Tories" would be far better off admitting that Boris lost this one, and needs to up his game, than waste hours of our shortened lives looking for tiny small print that means his gaffe wasn't quite so bad. Ludicrous
I think PB Labour are in denial about the polls.
Those are meaningless right now. Who in their right mind is thinking about who to vote for at the next election?
its the best barometer of how each party is doing. Without them this website would not exist.
The infamous "PB Tories" would be far better off admitting that Boris lost this one, and needs to up his game, than waste hours of our shortened lives looking for tiny small print that means his gaffe wasn't quite so bad. Ludicrous
I think PB Labour are in denial about the polls.
Those are meaningless right now. Who in their right mind is thinking about who to vote for at the next election?
its the best barometer of how each party is doing. Without them this website would not exist.
They may be the best barometer, but that doesn't mean they can't also be useless at a time like this.
The PM is on a very sticky wicket. For all their deficiencies international comparisons are not flattering at the moment. Care Homes have proved to be a serious weak spot. The opposition to quarantine by the likes of Grant Shapps was and is bewildering. The consequences of having so many of our goods manufactured overseas have come home to bite in the supply of PPE, masks and indeed in testing. The NHS did well in increasing capacity quickly but it remains bureaucratic and top heavy with weak management. The longer this goes on the more evident it will be. The government has sought to rely on the advice of experts but that has proved problematic in several areas, the most recent of which is the development of the app where mistakes have been made and time lost. The government is trying to move the story on in terms of the economy without really having sufficient capacity to test quickly or an app that will facilitate tracing. This is unlikely to end well.
Quite frankly only an incompetent of Corbyn's level could fail to win PMQs in such a situation. The main problem for the LOTO is where do you start? How do you bring together a coherent narrative? Starmer is more than capable of doing that.
So is it Grant Shapps who has been opposing quarantine ?
Patel was in favour of it but was overruled in Cabinet.
It would be interesting to know who by and why.
Who CAN overule a Home Secretary.
PM himself, Foreign and First Secretary of State are the only three jobs the same or higher.
So it's either Sunak who I don't think would rock the boat either way on this matter. Boris would have been leaning towards not closing the2m but perhaps could be persuaded. The combination of Dominic Raab and Grant Shapps would have swung Johnson against Patel is my guess.
Shocked....The next shocking revelation we be we will find out the Chinese have been at it as well...
You miss the point. Merkel is usually very emollient with Putin. This is a change
What's the gas situation like in Germany these days?
Maybe she feels that as Germany (like us) goes back to the Stone Age, and a barter system, they won't need any more Russian gas, so she can finally stick it to Vladimir
Ha! Quite possibly.
I wonder if they are regretting turning off their nuclear power. After all, it has now been conclusively proved that eating bats is more dangerous than blowing a reactor up...
The infamous "PB Tories" would be far better off admitting that Boris lost this one, and needs to up his game, than waste hours of our shortened lives looking for tiny small print that means his gaffe wasn't quite so bad. Ludicrous
I think PB Labour are in denial about the polls.
Those are meaningless right now. Who in their right mind is thinking about who to vote for at the next election?
PMQs is surely meaningless right now then. No one watches it and we're 5 years from an election.
"Britons were pictured packed like sardines on trains and buses today and warned that social distancing was 'next to impossible' as millions across the country went back to work for the first time after Boris Johnson eased the lockdown. .......................................................................................................................................... Passengers, the majority not wearing masks, were nose-to-nose on the Victoria Line in London this morning after services were suspended when a customer fell ill on a rush hour train. 'Social distancing during the peak was a joke. During the suspension our carriages were heaving - it will get worse,' said one worker, adding it was a 'complete shambles'."
Germany will start to open some border crossings from Saturday, Interior Minister Horst Seehofer has announced. They include the border with Luxembourg and possibly that with Denmark.
Border controls with France, Switzerland and Austria would be extended until 16 June, but as many crossings as possible will be opened, he said.
"The goal is that from mid-June we want to have free travel in Europe," Mr Seehofer said, but clarified that controls would be re-introduced if there were new outbreaks of coronavirus.
----------
"Our message is we will have a tourist season this summer," said economic affairs commissioner Paolo Gentiloni, "even if it's with security measures and limitations."
The infamous "PB Tories" would be far better off admitting that Boris lost this one, and needs to up his game, than waste hours of our shortened lives looking for tiny small print that means his gaffe wasn't quite so bad. Ludicrous
I think PB Labour are in denial about the polls.
Why would polls matter when there's no election for 4 years.
Neither today's polls nor today's PMQs will matter one jot in 4 years time.
Unless the stench of incompetence and sneering arrogant uncaringness has been nailed to the government as it was to Major's in September 1992. Black Wednesday was only economic damage. This is tens of thousands of deaths AND economic damage on a much larger scale.
There is an obvious get out for Johnson. "I have not fully recovered from CV19, its is a truly terrible thing, I will take a holiday to convalesce."
Boris Johnson being unaware of his own government's guidance shows he is not master of his brief. That is probably as damaging as the specific negligence Sir Keir highlighted.
The infamous "PB Tories" would be far better off admitting that Boris lost this one, and needs to up his game, than waste hours of our shortened lives looking for tiny small print that means his gaffe wasn't quite so bad. Ludicrous
I think PB Labour are in denial about the polls.
Those are meaningless right now. Who in their right mind is thinking about who to vote for at the next election?
PMQs is surely meaningless right now then. No one watches it and we're 5 years from an election.
The infamous "PB Tories" would be far better off admitting that Boris lost this one, and needs to up his game, than waste hours of our shortened lives looking for tiny small print that means his gaffe wasn't quite so bad. Ludicrous
The overwhelming opinion of "PB Tories" was that Starmer won this week. I said that, Big_G said that and so did many others.
I don't think the PM really can win right now when its such a sombre time.
He can't win at any time because he is hopeless. Maybe he will step aside for Gove. At least Gove knows how to demonstrate knowledge of his own brief. Sadly for the Tories and the country, it is jovial incompetent buffoon or Gove - a man that gives the impression he would sell his granny for another shot at the premiership.
1. Sweden should be worse (at this point) than countries that enforced lockdown -> seems to be the case, compared to near neighbours anyway. If not, then it would suggest (with hindsight, though at the time still sensible, I think) that full lockdown was over-reaction.
2. With normal behaviour, things in Sweden should be pretty horrendous, according to what we think we understand (i.e life as normal R ~ 3). They're not.
3. This is probably due to Swedes not being stupid and changing behaviour more than the fairly minimal legal restrictions and so getting R somewhere close to 1 (transport data do show major changes in behaviour)
4. Raises the question, would we (UK) still have levelled off (if not declined) without the full lockdown? We don't know. Depends on discipline and we probably had more initial cases (more through travel for business etc) so would have levelled off at a higher level. Even if we had levelled off at 8 April rather than starting decline, the extra deaths in this wave would be in the tens of thousands.
5. If health services are not overwhelmed without a lockdown then lockdown alone just pushes deaths into the future by delaying infection. But those deaths might be avoided completely if there is a vaccine or effective treatment before they happen. So its too early to judge whether Sweden will have more deaths in the end than if full lockdown had been enforced.
"Britons were pictured packed like sardines on trains and buses today and warned that social distancing was 'next to impossible' as millions across the country went back to work for the first time after Boris Johnson eased the lockdown. .......................................................................................................................................... Passengers, the majority not wearing masks, were nose-to-nose on the Victoria Line in London this morning after services were suspended when a customer fell ill on a rush hour train. 'Social distancing during the peak was a joke. During the suspension our carriages were heaving - it will get worse,' said one worker, adding it was a 'complete shambles'."
I commuted to, and worked in, London for decades without getting the tube. Walking is often not much slower, its more comfortable and, particularly in a pandemic, better for you.
OT, just watched last week's PMQ at long last. Johnson was hopeless and Starmer pulled him apart. If that happens every week and it gets coverage most people are going to wake up to the fact that it might not be a good idea to have a low on detail game show host as a PM. The Tories are going to find it difficult to undermine Starmer IMO, unless they find something that sticks that is currently unknown. A lot of PB Johnson fanbois on here have tried to suggest he is boring, which is hardly going to shift the needle much, even if it were true. One on here yesterday tried to suggest that "being forensic" was a bad thing. Maybe he ought to look at the forensic ability of Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair. Both would have run rings around The Clown. Johnson's advisors are going to have to do a lot better, and Johnson himself would be well advised to start looking at using some heavyweights to support him rather than surrounding himself with hopeless sycophants.
As always, one of Boris' greatest assets is his critics' unswerving dedication to underestimating him...
You are just too tribally blind to see what most other people can see. Starmer is going to do this to Johnson week in week out for the next 4 years.
Coronavirus won't last 4 years. More jovial times will return.
1. Sweden should be worse (at this point) than countries that enforced lockdown -> seems to be the case, compared to near neighbours anyway. If not, then it would suggest (with hindsight, though at the time still sensible, I think) that full lockdown was over-reaction.
2. With normal behaviour, things in Sweden should be pretty horrendous, according to what we think we understand (i.e life as normal R ~ 3). They're not.
3. This is probably due to Swedes not being stupid and changing behaviour more than the fairly minimal legal restrictions and so getting R somewhere close to 1 (transport data do show major changes in behaviour)
4. Raises the question, would we (UK) still have levelled off (if not declined) without the full lockdown? We don't know. Depends on discipline and we probably had more initial cases (more through travel for business etc) so would have levelled off at a higher level. Even if we had levelled off at 8 April rather than starting decline, the extra deaths in this wave would be in the tens of thousands.
5. If health services are not overwhelmed without a lockdown then lockdown alone just pushes deaths into the future by delaying infection. But those deaths might be avoided completely if there is a vaccine or effective treatment before they happen. So its too early to judge whether Sweden will have more deaths in the end than if full lockdown had been enforced.
Yes, what worries me about releasing us from lockdown now is this... I dont see how we are any better off than we were 2 months ago, and we have ruined the economy. Am I less likely to catch Covid tomorrow than I was in March?
1. Sweden should be worse (at this point) than countries that enforced lockdown -> seems to be the case, compared to near neighbours anyway. If not, then it would suggest (with hindsight, though at the time still sensible, I think) that full lockdown was over-reaction.
2. With normal behaviour, things in Sweden should be pretty horrendous, according to what we think we understand (i.e life as normal R ~ 3). They're not.
3. This is probably due to Swedes not being stupid and changing behaviour more than the fairly minimal legal restrictions and so getting R somewhere close to 1 (transport data do show major changes in behaviour)
4. Raises the question, would we (UK) still have levelled off (if not declined) without the full lockdown? We don't know. Depends on discipline and we probably had more initial cases (more through travel for business etc) so would have levelled off at a higher level. Even if we had levelled off at 8 April rather than starting decline, the extra deaths in this wave would be in the tens of thousands.
5. If health services are not overwhelmed without a lockdown then lockdown alone just pushes deaths into the future by delaying infection. But those deaths might be avoided completely if there is a vaccine or effective treatment before they happen. So its too early to judge whether Sweden will have more deaths in the end than if full lockdown had been enforced.
Yes, what worries me about releasing us from lockdown now is this... I dont see how we are any better off than we were 2 months ago, and we have ruined the economy. Am I less likely to catch Covid tomorrow than I was in March?
The EU seems to want to move very quickly now in reopening all borders and allowing movement throughout the various countries, including for holidays. Seems a big call, given some countries still far from out of the woods.
1. Sweden should be worse (at this point) than countries that enforced lockdown -> seems to be the case, compared to near neighbours anyway. If not, then it would suggest (with hindsight, though at the time still sensible, I think) that full lockdown was over-reaction.
2. With normal behaviour, things in Sweden should be pretty horrendous, according to what we think we understand (i.e life as normal R ~ 3). They're not.
3. This is probably due to Swedes not being stupid and changing behaviour more than the fairly minimal legal restrictions and so getting R somewhere close to 1 (transport data do show major changes in behaviour)
4. Raises the question, would we (UK) still have levelled off (if not declined) without the full lockdown? We don't know. Depends on discipline and we probably had more initial cases (more through travel for business etc) so would have levelled off at a higher level. Even if we had levelled off at 8 April rather than starting decline, the extra deaths in this wave would be in the tens of thousands.
5. If health services are not overwhelmed without a lockdown then lockdown alone just pushes deaths into the future by delaying infection. But those deaths might be avoided completely if there is a vaccine or effective treatment before they happen. So its too early to judge whether Sweden will have more deaths in the end than if full lockdown had been enforced.
Yes, what worries me about releasing us from lockdown now is this... I dont see how we are any better off than we were 2 months ago, and we have ruined the economy. Am I less likely to catch Covid tomorrow than I was in March?
More capacity in the NHS. That was one of the primary reasons, to buy time.
The infamous "PB Tories" would be far better off admitting that Boris lost this one, and needs to up his game, than waste hours of our shortened lives looking for tiny small print that means his gaffe wasn't quite so bad. Ludicrous
The overwhelming opinion of "PB Tories" was that Starmer won this week. I said that, Big_G said that and so did many others.
I don't think the PM really can win right now when its such a sombre time.
he has an open goal , if him and his donkeys manage anywhere near a decent job they are heroes , unfortunately they are pretty crap an so Starmer will pummel him.
Johnson is going to have to find a way of abolishing PMQs. He just cannot handle the relentless scrutiny that Starmer brings to it.
Starmer needs to find a way of getting normal people to watch it!
Normal people aren't interested, PMQs is a total irrelevance in terms of political popularity, as much as the anoraks wish it wasn't
If they are a total irrelevance how do you account for the changing favourability ratings of Starmer and Johnson since PMQs started up again?
I don't, but the favourability ratings more than 4 years from an election are irrelevant as well.
Look, I didn't see PMQs and I haven't watched it for years and I understand your man did well today, but if you think that makes one jot of difference I believe you're mistaken
COVID-19 Hospital Discharge Service Requirements 1.1 This document sets out the Hospital Discharge Service Requirements for all NHS trusts, community interest companies and private care providers of acute, community beds and community health services and social care staff in England, who must adhere to this from Thursday 19th March 2020. It also sets out requirements around discharge for health and social care commissioners (including Clinical Commissioning Groups and local authorities). 1.2 Unless required to be in hospital (see Annex B ), patients must not remain in an NHS bed. 1.3 Based on these criteria, acute and community hospitals must discharge all patients as soon as they are clinically safe to do so. Transfer from the ward should happen within one hour of that decision being made to a designated discharge area. Discharge from hospital should happen as soon after that as possible, normally within 2 hours. 1.4 Implementing these Service Requirements is expected to free up to at least 15,000 beds by Friday 27th March 2020, with discharge flows maintained after that. Acute and community hospitals must keep a list of all those suitable for discharge and report on the number and percentage of patients on the list who have left the hospital and the number of delayed discharges through the daily situation report...
1. Sweden should be worse (at this point) than countries that enforced lockdown -> seems to be the case, compared to near neighbours anyway. If not, then it would suggest (with hindsight, though at the time still sensible, I think) that full lockdown was over-reaction.
2. With normal behaviour, things in Sweden should be pretty horrendous, according to what we think we understand (i.e life as normal R ~ 3). They're not.
3. This is probably due to Swedes not being stupid and changing behaviour more than the fairly minimal legal restrictions and so getting R somewhere close to 1 (transport data do show major changes in behaviour)
4. Raises the question, would we (UK) still have levelled off (if not declined) without the full lockdown? We don't know. Depends on discipline and we probably had more initial cases (more through travel for business etc) so would have levelled off at a higher level. Even if we had levelled off at 8 April rather than starting decline, the extra deaths in this wave would be in the tens of thousands.
5. If health services are not overwhelmed without a lockdown then lockdown alone just pushes deaths into the future by delaying infection. But those deaths might be avoided completely if there is a vaccine or effective treatment before they happen. So its too early to judge whether Sweden will have more deaths in the end than if full lockdown had been enforced.
Yes, what worries me about releasing us from lockdown now is this... I dont see how we are any better off than we were 2 months ago, and we have ruined the economy. Am I less likely to catch Covid tomorrow than I was in March?
If R has been below 1 for 7 weeks then you should be at much less risk now.
PB Tories not so much for them 62k people tested is fine.
Which if they were all being tracked and traced it would be.
100k tests is so last month.
50k deaths and rising
Its actually the speed of tests / results that is the real issue here, and always has been. 75k a day is all done in a 1-2 days, is far better than 100k that take 3-4 days. Problem is they are doing 85k a day at 3-4 days.
That's a good point. I was thinking the same - Boris really needs to get out of the habit of flatly contradicting Sir Keir, who will have done his homework and will almost certainly be strictly correct in his carefully-chosen words. It seems strange to say it, but actually Boris needs to bluster more, not less, in exchanges like this, since he can't be expected to know the exact wording and dates of every government document.
Boris Johnson being unaware of his own government's guidance shows he is not master of his brief. That is probably as damaging as the specific negligence Sir Keir highlighted.
To be fair, Johnson not knowing his arse from his elbow was kind of factored into the equation. Where I think the Tories are struggling is that so much of their political strategy seems to have been based on Jeremy Corbyn being Labour leader. They just assumed that he would be or that Labour would choose someone equally as useless. They have time to reclaibrate, but they are going to have to. Johnson cannot wing it against Starmer. But Starmer does have his own points of vulnerability. Attacks on him as a too clever by half, PC fanatic might work for the Tories, for example.
The infamous "PB Tories" would be far better off admitting that Boris lost this one, and needs to up his game, than waste hours of our shortened lives looking for tiny small print that means his gaffe wasn't quite so bad. Ludicrous
I think PB Labour are in denial about the polls.
Those are meaningless right now. Who in their right mind is thinking about who to vote for at the next election?
PMQs is surely meaningless right now then. No one watches it and we're 5 years from an election.
I would not say meaningless. It's a niche habit, watching PMQs, but the people who do watch it tend to be opinionated and influential amongst their peers. So for example, there could be a group of guys hanging out (once that is allowed again) and only one might have seen Starmer and Johnson jousting, but he will pass on his view of it to the wider gathering, possibly even show it to them on his phone. In this way, perceptions formed by PMQs - e.g. Johnson the bumbler, Starmer sharp as a tack - spread far beyond what you might expect from the bare viewing figures.
COVID-19 Hospital Discharge Service Requirements 1.1 This document sets out the Hospital Discharge Service Requirements for all NHS trusts, community interest companies and private care providers of acute, community beds and community health services and social care staff in England, who must adhere to this from Thursday 19th March 2020. It also sets out requirements around discharge for health and social care commissioners (including Clinical Commissioning Groups and local authorities). 1.2 Unless required to be in hospital (see Annex B ), patients must not remain in an NHS bed. 1.3 Based on these criteria, acute and community hospitals must discharge all patients as soon as they are clinically safe to do so. Transfer from the ward should happen within one hour of that decision being made to a designated discharge area. Discharge from hospital should happen as soon after that as possible, normally within 2 hours. 1.4 Implementing these Service Requirements is expected to free up to at least 15,000 beds by Friday 27th March 2020, with discharge flows maintained after that. Acute and community hospitals must keep a list of all those suitable for discharge and report on the number and percentage of patients on the list who have left the hospital and the number of delayed discharges through the daily situation report...
Annex B:
Every patient on every general ward should be reviewed on a twice daily board round to determine the following. If the answer to each question is ‘no’, active consideration for discharge to a less acute setting must be made.
Requiring ITU or HDU care Requiring oxygen therapy/ NIV Requiring intravenous fluids NEWS2 > 3 (clinical judgement required in patients with AF &/or chronic respiratory disease) Diminished level of consciousness where recovery realistic Acute functional impairment in excess of home/community care provision Last hours of life Requiring intravenous medication > b.d. (including analgesia) Undergone lower limb surgery within 48hrs Undergone thorax-abdominal/pelvic surgery with 72 hrs Within 24hrs of an invasive procedure (with attendant risk of acute life threatening deterioration)...
What valid answer could there be to questions like "what caused the other 10,000 excess deaths"?
All nations with this epidemic are seeing excess deaths beyond confirmed cases. Starmer knows that, he is clever at asking an unanswerable question but what answer would there be?
Well. The simple answer would have been "I can't explain because they are unexplained!" Very sad, we are investigating...etc.
Trouble is Boris didn't think of that and reached into his waffle holster.
I love it when people put two words together in an usual combination, the best ones strike me as great names for band. Waffle holster is definitely up there.
My missus is good at coining them, often food related - ‘Concentrated Mince’ is my personal favourite.
This is wildly off topic but I just wanted to doff my cap to your pleasant phraseology!
No - it's an excellent description of the current cabinet.
The infamous "PB Tories" would be far better off admitting that Boris lost this one, and needs to up his game, than waste hours of our shortened lives looking for tiny small print that means his gaffe wasn't quite so bad. Ludicrous
I think PB Labour are in denial about the polls.
Those are meaningless right now. Who in their right mind is thinking about who to vote for at the next election?
PMQs is surely meaningless right now then. No one watches it and we're 5 years from an election.
I would not say meaningless. It's a niche habit, watching PMQs, but the people who do watch it tend to be opinionated and influential amongst their peers. So for example, there could be a group of guys hanging out (once that is allowed again) and only one might have seen Starmer and Johnson jousting, but he will pass on his view of it to the wider gathering, possibly even show it to them on his phone. In this way, perceptions formed by PMQs - e.g. Johnson the bumbler, Starmer sharp as a tack - spread far beyond what you might expect from the bare viewing figures.
More people are likely to have watched his response on Monday which would have sent an insomniac Covid-19 news junkie to sleep. But I reckon the polls will move towards him, as people who answer opinion polls are the kind of people who watch PMQs
OT, just watched last week's PMQ at long last. Johnson was hopeless and Starmer pulled him apart. If that happens every week and it gets coverage most people are going to wake up to the fact that it might not be a good idea to have a low on detail game show host as a PM. The Tories are going to find it difficult to undermine Starmer IMO, unless they find something that sticks that is currently unknown. A lot of PB Johnson fanbois on here have tried to suggest he is boring, which is hardly going to shift the needle much, even if it were true. One on here yesterday tried to suggest that "being forensic" was a bad thing. Maybe he ought to look at the forensic ability of Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair. Both would have run rings around The Clown. Johnson's advisors are going to have to do a lot better, and Johnson himself would be well advised to start looking at using some heavyweights to support him rather than surrounding himself with hopeless sycophants.
As always, one of Boris' greatest assets is his critics' unswerving dedication to underestimating him...
You are just too tribally blind to see what most other people can see. Starmer is going to do this to Johnson week in week out for the next 4 years.
Coronavirus won't last 4 years. More jovial times will return.
It won't last four years but the economic fallout will.
1. Sweden should be worse (at this point) than countries that enforced lockdown -> seems to be the case, compared to near neighbours anyway. If not, then it would suggest (with hindsight, though at the time still sensible, I think) that full lockdown was over-reaction.
2. With normal behaviour, things in Sweden should be pretty horrendous, according to what we think we understand (i.e life as normal R ~ 3). They're not.
3. This is probably due to Swedes not being stupid and changing behaviour more than the fairly minimal legal restrictions and so getting R somewhere close to 1 (transport data do show major changes in behaviour)
4. Raises the question, would we (UK) still have levelled off (if not declined) without the full lockdown? We don't know. Depends on discipline and we probably had more initial cases (more through travel for business etc) so would have levelled off at a higher level. Even if we had levelled off at 8 April rather than starting decline, the extra deaths in this wave would be in the tens of thousands.
5. If health services are not overwhelmed without a lockdown then lockdown alone just pushes deaths into the future by delaying infection. But those deaths might be avoided completely if there is a vaccine or effective treatment before they happen. So its too early to judge whether Sweden will have more deaths in the end than if full lockdown had been enforced.
Yes, what worries me about releasing us from lockdown now is this... I dont see how we are any better off than we were 2 months ago, and we have ruined the economy. Am I less likely to catch Covid tomorrow than I was in March?
Yes. The increase in testing capacity should make it easier to identify those with the virus and prevent them from passing it on.
This will be even better if/when they sort out the contact tracing app and the manual contact tracing to work with the testing.
Boris Johnson being unaware of his own government's guidance shows he is not master of his brief. That is probably as damaging as the specific negligence Sir Keir highlighted.
To be fair, Johnson not knowing his arse from his elbow was kind of factored into the equation. Where I think the Tories are struggling is that so much of their political strategy seems to have been based on Jeremy Corbyn being Labour leader. They just assumed that he would be or that Labour would choose someone equally as useless. They have time to reclaibrate, but they are going to have to. Johnson cannot wing it against Starmer. But Starmer does have his own points of vulnerability. Attacks on him as a too clever by half, PC fanatic might work for the Tories, for example.
In normal times I thought SKS might struggle a little to establish himself. There's not a lot of pizazz which seems to be a requirement in politics these days. However these aren't normal times, and straight bat factual takedowns of the insane clown posse seems to be doing the job
1. Sweden should be worse (at this point) than countries that enforced lockdown -> seems to be the case, compared to near neighbours anyway. If not, then it would suggest (with hindsight, though at the time still sensible, I think) that full lockdown was over-reaction.
2. With normal behaviour, things in Sweden should be pretty horrendous, according to what we think we understand (i.e life as normal R ~ 3). They're not.
3. This is probably due to Swedes not being stupid and changing behaviour more than the fairly minimal legal restrictions and so getting R somewhere close to 1 (transport data do show major changes in behaviour)
4. Raises the question, would we (UK) still have levelled off (if not declined) without the full lockdown? We don't know. Depends on discipline and we probably had more initial cases (more through travel for business etc) so would have levelled off at a higher level. Even if we had levelled off at 8 April rather than starting decline, the extra deaths in this wave would be in the tens of thousands.
5. If health services are not overwhelmed without a lockdown then lockdown alone just pushes deaths into the future by delaying infection. But those deaths might be avoided completely if there is a vaccine or effective treatment before they happen. So its too early to judge whether Sweden will have more deaths in the end than if full lockdown had been enforced.
Yes, what worries me about releasing us from lockdown now is this... I dont see how we are any better off than we were 2 months ago, and we have ruined the economy. Am I less likely to catch Covid tomorrow than I was in March?
Yes. The increase in testing capacity should make it easier to identify those with the virus and prevent them from passing it on.
This will be even better if/when they sort out the contact tracing app and the manual contact tracing to work with the testing.
They have gone very quiet on the app. Me thinks big trouble in little China.
The actual paragraph which Starmer is cleverly twisting both as regards content and date was this, issued on the 25th Feb:
This guidance is intended for the current position in the UK where there is currently no transmission of COVID-19 in the community. It is therefore very unlikely that anyone receiving care in a care home or the community will become infected. This is the latest information and will be updated shortly.
(My emphasis).
If you've been perusing many government documents recently, you'll realise that "shortly" has a meaning which can stretch a fair way.
I do not see how Starmer shifts Labour's big structural problem, which is the loss of its WWC support in the North and Midlands, and the loss of Scotland and, increasingly, Wales. He is another North London middle class lawyer representing an inner London seat and several of his DPP decisions are not exactly the type to endear him to these lost voters. I can see him strengthening Labour's position in well heeled / mixed urban areas with socially conscious voters who were scared of Corbyn's tax policies and Labour will probably pick up seats in the commuter belt but the risk is he accelerates declines in some of the more WWC areas.
Demographically we are becoming like the US, skilled white working class and lower middle class voters and voters in rural areas and small towns vote Tory/GOP, the poorest voters and ethnic minorities in big cities vote Labour/Democrat.
As in the US it is now suburban higher earning voters who are the key swing voters
Also the least educated voters support the Tories whilst Graduates vote Labour or other parties.
EU commision on guidance for resume of travel and tourism.
This would be followed by the opening of all internal borders, and countries should not “discriminate” against any other EU countries.
This seems very silly guidance. France currently has different rules for different areas, Germany has strict rules on if a particular regime case rate goes above a certain level, again restrictions change. A blanket one sized fit all rules across the whole of the EU seems like a recipe for disaster.
PB Tories not so much for them 62k people tested is fine.
Which if they were all being tracked and traced it would be.
100k tests is so last month.
50k deaths and rising
Its actually the speed of tests / results that is the real issue here, and always has been. 75k a day is all done in a 1-2 days, is far better than 100k that take 3-4 days. Problem is they are doing 85k a day at 3-4 days.
You know, I know, the Govt and Scientists know we needed testing capacity at the peak of the virus.
It wasnt there, we dropped track and trace as we didnt have the capacity impacting massively on the number of deaths.
Running to catch up is fine but the damage is mainly done.
"Britons were pictured packed like sardines on trains and buses today and warned that social distancing was 'next to impossible' as millions across the country went back to work for the first time after Boris Johnson eased the lockdown. .......................................................................................................................................... Passengers, the majority not wearing masks, were nose-to-nose on the Victoria Line in London this morning after services were suspended when a customer fell ill on a rush hour train. 'Social distancing during the peak was a joke. During the suspension our carriages were heaving - it will get worse,' said one worker, adding it was a 'complete shambles'."
I'm very surprised that so many can work full time from home.
Just shows what an absolute clusterfuck the office property market will be in short order.
69% of the workforce at work - are we seeing another LondonJournalist effect in reporting? The impression is being given (in the news, generally) that everyone is furloughed, with a few working from home.
That's a good point. I was thinking the same - Boris really needs to get out of the habit of flatly contradicting Sir Keir, who will have done his homework and will almost certainly be strictly correct in his carefully-chosen words. It seems strange to say it, but actually Boris needs to bluster more, not less, in exchanges like this, since he can't be expected to know the exact wording and dates of every government document.
No QC will ask a question to which the answer is unknown. Johnson will learn this and once his MPs are back will be able to roar his way out of most of these exchanges. But these few weeks have given Starmer a chance to establish a dynamic and Johnson will now be concerned about doing PMQs in a way that he wasn't before. From time to time, that means he will make mistakes. Importantly for Starmer, his performances will inspire confidence from both his MPs and Labour members. That will help him do a lot of the stuff he has to do to rebuild the party.
"Britons were pictured packed like sardines on trains and buses today and warned that social distancing was 'next to impossible' as millions across the country went back to work for the first time after Boris Johnson eased the lockdown. .......................................................................................................................................... Passengers, the majority not wearing masks, were nose-to-nose on the Victoria Line in London this morning after services were suspended when a customer fell ill on a rush hour train. 'Social distancing during the peak was a joke. During the suspension our carriages were heaving - it will get worse,' said one worker, adding it was a 'complete shambles'."
I do not see how Starmer shifts Labour's big structural problem, which is the loss of its WWC support in the North and Midlands, and the loss of Scotland and, increasingly, Wales. He is another North London middle class lawyer representing an inner London seat and several of his DPP decisions are not exactly the type to endear him to these lost voters. I can see him strengthening Labour's position in well heeled / mixed urban areas with socially conscious voters who were scared of Corbyn's tax policies and Labour will probably pick up seats in the commuter belt but the risk is he accelerates declines in some of the more WWC areas.
Demographically we are becoming like the US, skilled white working class and lower middle class voters and voters in rural areas and small towns vote Tory/GOP, the poorest voters and ethnic minorities in big cities vote Labour/Democrat.
As in the US it is now suburban higher earning voters who are the key swing voters
Also the least educated voters support the Tories whilst Graduates vote Labour or other parties.
That's always been the case. Better educated people tend to be more left wing. Certainly the extreme right attracts the less educated and intelligent people.
Boris Johnson being unaware of his own government's guidance shows he is not master of his brief. That is probably as damaging as the specific negligence Sir Keir highlighted.
To be fair, Johnson not knowing his arse from his elbow was kind of factored into the equation. Where I think the Tories are struggling is that so much of their political strategy seems to have been based on Jeremy Corbyn being Labour leader. They just assumed that he would be or that Labour would choose someone equally as useless. They have time to reclaibrate, but they are going to have to. Johnson cannot wing it against Starmer. But Starmer does have his own points of vulnerability. Attacks on him as a too clever by half, PC fanatic might work for the Tories, for example.
In normal times I thought SKS might struggle a little to establish himself. There's not a lot of pizazz which seems to be a requirement in politics these days. However these aren't normal times, and straight bat factual takedowns of the insane clown posse seems to be doing the job
It all goes in cycles. There will come a time when people want serious and intelligent, rather than flippant and half-baked. I am very comfortable with SKS as Labour leader. I did not vote for him, but I am glad he won.
1. Sweden should be worse (at this point) than countries that enforced lockdown -> seems to be the case, compared to near neighbours anyway. If not, then it would suggest (with hindsight, though at the time still sensible, I think) that full lockdown was over-reaction.
2. With normal behaviour, things in Sweden should be pretty horrendous, according to what we think we understand (i.e life as normal R ~ 3). They're not.
3. This is probably due to Swedes not being stupid and changing behaviour more than the fairly minimal legal restrictions and so getting R somewhere close to 1 (transport data do show major changes in behaviour)
4. Raises the question, would we (UK) still have levelled off (if not declined) without the full lockdown? We don't know. Depends on discipline and we probably had more initial cases (more through travel for business etc) so would have levelled off at a higher level. Even if we had levelled off at 8 April rather than starting decline, the extra deaths in this wave would be in the tens of thousands.
5. If health services are not overwhelmed without a lockdown then lockdown alone just pushes deaths into the future by delaying infection. But those deaths might be avoided completely if there is a vaccine or effective treatment before they happen. So its too early to judge whether Sweden will have more deaths in the end than if full lockdown had been enforced.
Yes, what worries me about releasing us from lockdown now is this... I dont see how we are any better off than we were 2 months ago, and we have ruined the economy. Am I less likely to catch Covid tomorrow than I was in March?
Yes. The increase in testing capacity should make it easier to identify those with the virus and prevent them from passing it on.
This will be even better if/when they sort out the contact tracing app and the manual contact tracing to work with the testing.
They have gone very quiet on the app. Me thinks big trouble in little China.
Yes.
I'm sure they'll get there in the end. We can probably just re-skin one built for another country if we have to, eventually.
OT, just watched last week's PMQ at long last. Johnson was hopeless and Starmer pulled him apart. If that happens every week and it gets coverage most people are going to wake up to the fact that it might not be a good idea to have a low on detail game show host as a PM. The Tories are going to find it difficult to undermine Starmer IMO, unless they find something that sticks that is currently unknown. A lot of PB Johnson fanbois on here have tried to suggest he is boring, which is hardly going to shift the needle much, even if it were true. One on here yesterday tried to suggest that "being forensic" was a bad thing. Maybe he ought to look at the forensic ability of Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair. Both would have run rings around The Clown. Johnson's advisors are going to have to do a lot better, and Johnson himself would be well advised to start looking at using some heavyweights to support him rather than surrounding himself with hopeless sycophants.
As always, one of Boris' greatest assets is his critics' unswerving dedication to underestimating him...
You are just too tribally blind to see what most other people can see. Starmer is going to do this to Johnson week in week out for the next 4 years.
Coronavirus won't last 4 years. More jovial times will return.
It won't last four years but the economic fallout will.
Not the same thing. PMQs is naturally different when you're quoting thousands of deaths.
COVID-19 Hospital Discharge Service Requirements 1.1 This document sets out the Hospital Discharge Service Requirements for all NHS trusts, community interest companies and private care providers of acute, community beds and community health services and social care staff in England, who must adhere to this from Thursday 19th March 2020. It also sets out requirements around discharge for health and social care commissioners (including Clinical Commissioning Groups and local authorities). 1.2 Unless required to be in hospital (see Annex B ), patients must not remain in an NHS bed. 1.3 Based on these criteria, acute and community hospitals must discharge all patients as soon as they are clinically safe to do so. Transfer from the ward should happen within one hour of that decision being made to a designated discharge area. Discharge from hospital should happen as soon after that as possible, normally within 2 hours. 1.4 Implementing these Service Requirements is expected to free up to at least 15,000 beds by Friday 27th March 2020, with discharge flows maintained after that. Acute and community hospitals must keep a list of all those suitable for discharge and report on the number and percentage of patients on the list who have left the hospital and the number of delayed discharges through the daily situation report...
Annex B:
Every patient on every general ward should be reviewed on a twice daily board round to determine the following. If the answer to each question is ‘no’, active consideration for discharge to a less acute setting must be made.
Requiring ITU or HDU care Requiring oxygen therapy/ NIV Requiring intravenous fluids NEWS2 > 3 (clinical judgement required in patients with AF &/or chronic respiratory disease) Diminished level of consciousness where recovery realistic Acute functional impairment in excess of home/community care provision Last hours of life Requiring intravenous medication > b.d. (including analgesia) Undergone lower limb surgery within 48hrs Undergone thorax-abdominal/pelvic surgery with 72 hrs Within 24hrs of an invasive procedure (with attendant risk of acute life threatening deterioration)...
I believe this was the policy which an anonymous No.10 source later described as a "Stiff Broom".
The EU seems to want to move very quickly now in reopening all borders and allowing movement throughout the various countries, including for holidays. Seems a big call, given some countries still far from out of the woods.
Yes, I think they are getting ahead of themselves there. It might be OK to open up borders between a small number of countries which have the situation under good control, but if they (for understandable political reasons) insist on opening up the entire EU area as one block, it is going to be very dangerous. It only takes one country to screw up the whole thing.
I do not see how Starmer shifts Labour's big structural problem, which is the loss of its WWC support in the North and Midlands, and the loss of Scotland and, increasingly, Wales. He is another North London middle class lawyer representing an inner London seat and several of his DPP decisions are not exactly the type to endear him to these lost voters. I can see him strengthening Labour's position in well heeled / mixed urban areas with socially conscious voters who were scared of Corbyn's tax policies and Labour will probably pick up seats in the commuter belt but the risk is he accelerates declines in some of the more WWC areas.
Demographically we are becoming like the US, skilled white working class and lower middle class voters and voters in rural areas and small towns vote Tory/GOP, the poorest voters and ethnic minorities in big cities vote Labour/Democrat.
As in the US it is now suburban higher earning voters who are the key swing voters
Also the least educated voters support the Tories whilst Graduates vote Labour or other parties.
That's always been the case. Better educated people tend to be more left wing. Certainly the extreme right attracts the less educated and intelligent people.
I'm quite new here, is this the sort of tripe I'll have to get used to?
I do not see how Starmer shifts Labour's big structural problem, which is the loss of its WWC support in the North and Midlands, and the loss of Scotland and, increasingly, Wales. He is another North London middle class lawyer representing an inner London seat and several of his DPP decisions are not exactly the type to endear him to these lost voters. I can see him strengthening Labour's position in well heeled / mixed urban areas with socially conscious voters who were scared of Corbyn's tax policies and Labour will probably pick up seats in the commuter belt but the risk is he accelerates declines in some of the more WWC areas.
Demographically we are becoming like the US, skilled white working class and lower middle class voters and voters in rural areas and small towns vote Tory/GOP, the poorest voters and ethnic minorities in big cities vote Labour/Democrat.
As in the US it is now suburban higher earning voters who are the key swing voters
Also the least educated voters support the Tories whilst Graduates vote Labour or other parties.
That's always been the case. Better educated people tend to be more left wing. Certainly the extreme right attracts the less educated and intelligent people.
I'm quite new here, is this the sort of tripe I'll have to get used to?
As long as you don't try to put it on a pizza then I think we're fine with tripe.
Of course Johnson shouldn't have said what he said. But the advice is from Public Health England, on a govt webpage, but clearly PHE an independent body, The govt is following the experts advice at the time. In the current febrile environment it is all about blaming politicians and political considerations however too often PHE, NHS Supply chains, care home owners and others have made errors but not been held to account for it because it is all about blaming Johnson and the govt.
Boris Johnson being unaware of his own government's guidance shows he is not master of his brief. That is probably as damaging as the specific negligence Sir Keir highlighted.
To be fair, Johnson not knowing his arse from his elbow was kind of factored into the equation. Where I think the Tories are struggling is that so much of their political strategy seems to have been based on Jeremy Corbyn being Labour leader. They just assumed that he would be or that Labour would choose someone equally as useless. They have time to reclaibrate, but they are going to have to. Johnson cannot wing it against Starmer. But Starmer does have his own points of vulnerability. Attacks on him as a too clever by half, PC fanatic might work for the Tories, for example.
In normal times I thought SKS might struggle a little to establish himself. There's not a lot of pizazz which seems to be a requirement in politics these days. However these aren't normal times, and straight bat factual takedowns of the insane clown posse seems to be doing the job
It all goes in cycles. There will come a time when people want serious and intelligent, rather than flippant and half-baked. I am very comfortable with SKS as Labour leader. I did not vote for him, but I am glad he won.
I voted for Nandy. Most Labour posters on here voted for Nandy. Every Labour member who I personally know voted for Nandy.
Yet Starmer won by a mile and Nandy came last. Quite odd.
Countering Starmer is difficult? Nah. Look at all these rich veins of electoral material:
1. Cultural. Starmer is the archetypal metropolitan elite Remainer, and his beliefs on a host of cultural issues are diametrically-opposed to electorally-important swathes of the country. He also wants to give all EU citizens the right to vote in General Elections, diluting the franchise enjoyed by existing citizens and granting the left a permanent electoral boost. Weaponise as usual.
2. Economics. Starmer hasn't specifically withdrawn a single one of Corbyn's loony policies, and will find it very difficult within his party to move away from the addiction to outright theft that motivates all their other actions. Contrary to what some on here believe, an economic crisis will make people _more_ desperate to hang on to their assets, not less. Attack, attack, attack.
3. Personal. Starmer is a boring charisma vacuum, a Mogadon Man. He's a sleeping aid, not a Prime Minister. Attack, attack, a ... snooze.
4. Party. The utter lunatics who tried desperately to propel Corbyn, McDonnell, and Abbott into power are all still snarling and gnashing away behind Mr. Boring. The far left, the communists, the anti-patriots, the Britain-haters, there'll all still there - put Starmer into power, and you put them into power. This may be Labour's most dangerous aspect.
So devising a political attack strategy is really not hard at all. I could do it in my sleep ... after listening to Sir Keith talk for a few minutes
I'm loving the complacency from the PB Tories.
Out of interest why do you think it's so hilarious to call Starmer Sir Keith?
Complacency? I just set out a detailed roadmap for how to destroy Starmer politically, which is a task of the utmost importance.
The complacent ones are those who think a good PMQs means that Starmer is nailed on for next PM and we should just give up and go home.
Boris Johnson being unaware of his own government's guidance shows he is not master of his brief. That is probably as damaging as the specific negligence Sir Keir highlighted.
To be fair, Johnson not knowing his arse from his elbow was kind of factored into the equation. Where I think the Tories are struggling is that so much of their political strategy seems to have been based on Jeremy Corbyn being Labour leader. They just assumed that he would be or that Labour would choose someone equally as useless. They have time to reclaibrate, but they are going to have to. Johnson cannot wing it against Starmer. But Starmer does have his own points of vulnerability. Attacks on him as a too clever by half, PC fanatic might work for the Tories, for example.
In normal times I thought SKS might struggle a little to establish himself. There's not a lot of pizazz which seems to be a requirement in politics these days. However these aren't normal times, and straight bat factual takedowns of the insane clown posse seems to be doing the job
It all goes in cycles. There will come a time when people want serious and intelligent, rather than flippant and half-baked. I am very comfortable with SKS as Labour leader. I did not vote for him, but I am glad he won.
I think we both voted Nandy.
I was fairly unimpressed with Starmer up to the weekend.
He has been really excellent in his LOTO response and the Parliamentary sessions on Monday and todays PMQs.
Keep it up and there will surely be a narrowing of the polls particularly when financial reality kicks in.
He needs to avoid being seen as Austerity Lite as we go forward IMO
PB Tories not so much for them 62k people tested is fine.
Which if they were all being tracked and traced it would be.
100k tests is so last month.
50k deaths and rising
Its actually the speed of tests / results that is the real issue here, and always has been. 75k a day is all done in a 1-2 days, is far better than 100k that take 3-4 days. Problem is they are doing 85k a day at 3-4 days.
Mate of mine, in the NHS, was tested yesterday and was told it could be 5 days before he got the result.
By which time he could have caught it even if the test is negative.
He did say it is very unpleasant having the swab all the way down to the tonsils then up the nose.
I do not see how Starmer shifts Labour's big structural problem, which is the loss of its WWC support in the North and Midlands, and the loss of Scotland and, increasingly, Wales. He is another North London middle class lawyer representing an inner London seat and several of his DPP decisions are not exactly the type to endear him to these lost voters. I can see him strengthening Labour's position in well heeled / mixed urban areas with socially conscious voters who were scared of Corbyn's tax policies and Labour will probably pick up seats in the commuter belt but the risk is he accelerates declines in some of the more WWC areas.
Demographically we are becoming like the US, skilled white working class and lower middle class voters and voters in rural areas and small towns vote Tory/GOP, the poorest voters and ethnic minorities in big cities vote Labour/Democrat.
As in the US it is now suburban higher earning voters who are the key swing voters
Also the least educated voters support the Tories whilst Graduates vote Labour or other parties.</blockquote
2015 General Election survey didn't show that big a difference between Graduates voting Labour and Tory.
I really don't care enough about this advice or not advice story to even understand it. And I'm engaged enough to be posting on a political betting website. If I were Starmer's Mum, I might care about my little boy doing really well at his new job today and writing a lovely letter on headed paper. Given that I'm not, I don't. And I struggle to see anyone else without a similar motivation caring, understanding, or caring enough to understand.
I do not see how Starmer shifts Labour's big structural problem, which is the loss of its WWC support in the North and Midlands, and the loss of Scotland and, increasingly, Wales. He is another North London middle class lawyer representing an inner London seat and several of his DPP decisions are not exactly the type to endear him to these lost voters. I can see him strengthening Labour's position in well heeled / mixed urban areas with socially conscious voters who were scared of Corbyn's tax policies and Labour will probably pick up seats in the commuter belt but the risk is he accelerates declines in some of the more WWC areas.
Demographically we are becoming like the US, skilled white working class and lower middle class voters and voters in rural areas and small towns vote Tory/GOP, the poorest voters and ethnic minorities in big cities vote Labour/Democrat.
As in the US it is now suburban higher earning voters who are the key swing voters
Also the least educated voters support the Tories whilst Graduates vote Labour or other parties.
That's always been the case. Better educated people tend to be more left wing. Certainly the extreme right attracts the less educated and intelligent people.
I'm quite new here, is this the sort of tripe I'll have to get used to?
That particular trope is quite fun because it explains why lefties get so very, very angry when they get landslided by those they consider to be their intellectual inferiors.
OT, just watched last week's PMQ at long last. Johnson was hopeless and Starmer pulled him apart. If that happens every week and it gets coverage most people are going to wake up to the fact that it might not be a good idea to have a low on detail game show host as a PM. The Tories are going to find it difficult to undermine Starmer IMO, unless they find something that sticks that is currently unknown. A lot of PB Johnson fanbois on here have tried to suggest he is boring, which is hardly going to shift the needle much, even if it were true. One on here yesterday tried to suggest that "being forensic" was a bad thing. Maybe he ought to look at the forensic ability of Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair. Both would have run rings around The Clown. Johnson's advisors are going to have to do a lot better, and Johnson himself would be well advised to start looking at using some heavyweights to support him rather than surrounding himself with hopeless sycophants.
As always, one of Boris' greatest assets is his critics' unswerving dedication to underestimating him...
You are just too tribally blind to see what most other people can see. Starmer is going to do this to Johnson week in week out for the next 4 years.
Coronavirus won't last 4 years. More jovial times will return.
Johnson, a pm for more jovial times.
That's a political epitaph, not a selling point.
No. You're deliberately misreading what I wrote.
The PM is managing very challenging circumstances and when PMQs is so sombre it's easy for a LOTO to ask challenging questions to which he knows there is no good answer. Especially when thousands are dying.
When we are in normal times and in a background of an economic recovery PMQs will be very different. Completely different.
I do not see how Starmer shifts Labour's big structural problem, which is the loss of its WWC support in the North and Midlands, and the loss of Scotland and, increasingly, Wales. He is another North London middle class lawyer representing an inner London seat and several of his DPP decisions are not exactly the type to endear him to these lost voters. I can see him strengthening Labour's position in well heeled / mixed urban areas with socially conscious voters who were scared of Corbyn's tax policies and Labour will probably pick up seats in the commuter belt but the risk is he accelerates declines in some of the more WWC areas.
Demographically we are becoming like the US, skilled white working class and lower middle class voters and voters in rural areas and small towns vote Tory/GOP, the poorest voters and ethnic minorities in big cities vote Labour/Democrat.
As in the US it is now suburban higher earning voters who are the key swing voters
Also the least educated voters support the Tories whilst Graduates vote Labour or other parties.
That's always been the case. Better educated people tend to be more left wing. Certainly the extreme right attracts the less educated and intelligent people.
I'm quite new here, is this the sort of tripe I'll have to get used to?
What, facts ?
I say it with no malice. It's just a fact the far right (of which there are no posters here who fall into that category) usually draws its support from less educated people.
Also education is not the same as intelligence. Older generation voters had less chance to go to university. It stands to reason more voters in the 65 and above demographic will not be educated to degree level than 25 to 34 age group. That doesn;t make them less intelligent
The group is a luvvie fest for Starmer at the moment. Apparently he's "forensic". Stick around to join in the love in. It's becoming North Korean. We'll all be clapping for Kier next.
Comments
Been heading this way for a while. A month ago they had a quarter of Belgium's weekly death rate, or half of Spain/UK, now they're about to overtake them all for top spot in the world.
They're all just football hooligans without the bottle for a proper tear up
Neither today's polls nor today's PMQs will matter one jot in 4 years time.
Border controls with France, Switzerland and Austria would be extended until 16 June, but as many crossings as possible will be opened, he said.
"The goal is that from mid-June we want to have free travel in Europe," Mr Seehofer said, but clarified that controls would be re-introduced if there were new outbreaks of coronavirus.
----------
"Our message is we will have a tourist season this summer," said economic affairs commissioner Paolo Gentiloni, "even if it's with security measures and limitations."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-52644816
------------
I have no idea how the UK government are going to make this 14 day quarantine, except for France / Ireland work if the above is the case.
PM himself, Foreign and First Secretary of State are the only three jobs the same or higher.
So it's either Sunak who I don't think would rock the boat either way on this matter.
Boris would have been leaning towards not closing the2m but perhaps could be persuaded.
The combination of Dominic Raab and Grant Shapps would have swung Johnson against Patel is my guess.
I wonder if they are regretting turning off their nuclear power. After all, it has now been conclusively proved that eating bats is more dangerous than blowing a reactor up...
But employers will have to restrict people returning to work if they suspect they have been in non-approved countries.
There is an obvious get out for Johnson. "I have not fully recovered from CV19, its is a truly terrible thing, I will take a holiday to convalesce."
1. Sweden should be worse (at this point) than countries that enforced lockdown -> seems to be the case, compared to near neighbours anyway. If not, then it would suggest (with hindsight, though at the time still sensible, I think) that full lockdown was over-reaction.
2. With normal behaviour, things in Sweden should be pretty horrendous, according to what we think we understand (i.e life as normal R ~ 3). They're not.
3. This is probably due to Swedes not being stupid and changing behaviour more than the fairly minimal legal restrictions and so getting R somewhere close to 1 (transport data do show major changes in behaviour)
4. Raises the question, would we (UK) still have levelled off (if not declined) without the full lockdown? We don't know. Depends on discipline and we probably had more initial cases (more through travel for business etc) so would have levelled off at a higher level. Even if we had levelled off at 8 April rather than starting decline, the extra deaths in this wave would be in the tens of thousands.
5. If health services are not overwhelmed without a lockdown then lockdown alone just pushes deaths into the future by delaying infection. But those deaths might be avoided completely if there is a vaccine or effective treatment before they happen. So its too early to judge whether Sweden will have more deaths in the end than if full lockdown had been enforced.
Deaths still coming in from March and early April.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/05/COVID-19-daily-announced-deaths-13-May-2020.xlsx
I commuted to, and worked in, London for decades without getting the tube. Walking is often not much slower, its more comfortable and, particularly in a pandemic, better for you.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1260531317286068232?s=20
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1260555502100140034?s=20
That's a political epitaph, not a selling point.
Look, I didn't see PMQs and I haven't watched it for years and I understand your man did well today, but if you think that makes one jot of difference I believe you're mistaken
PB Tories not so much for them 62k people tested is fine.
Which if they were all being tracked and traced it would be.
100k tests is so last month.
50k deaths and rising
COVID-19 Hospital Discharge Service Requirements
1.1 This document sets out the Hospital Discharge Service Requirements for all NHS trusts, community interest companies and private care providers of acute, community beds and community health services and social care staff in England, who must adhere to this from Thursday 19th March 2020. It also sets out requirements around discharge for health and social care commissioners (including Clinical Commissioning Groups and local authorities).
1.2 Unless required to be in hospital (see Annex B ), patients must not remain in an NHS bed.
1.3 Based on these criteria, acute and community hospitals must discharge all patients as soon as they are clinically safe to do so. Transfer from the ward should happen within one hour of that decision being made to a designated discharge area. Discharge from hospital should happen as soon after that as possible, normally within 2 hours.
1.4 Implementing these Service Requirements is expected to free up to at least 15,000 beds by Friday 27th March 2020, with discharge flows maintained after that. Acute and community hospitals must keep a list of all those suitable for discharge and report on the number and percentage of patients on the list who have left the hospital and the number of delayed discharges through the daily situation report...
Which means that 69% of employees are at work. *Before* more returning.
Every patient on every general ward should be reviewed on a twice daily board round to determine the following. If the answer to each question is ‘no’, active consideration for discharge to a less acute setting must be made.
Requiring ITU or HDU care Requiring oxygen therapy/ NIV
Requiring intravenous fluids
NEWS2 > 3
(clinical judgement required in patients with AF &/or chronic respiratory disease)
Diminished level of consciousness where recovery realistic
Acute functional impairment
in excess of home/community care provision
Last hours of life
Requiring intravenous medication > b.d. (including analgesia)
Undergone lower limb surgery within 48hrs
Undergone thorax-abdominal/pelvic surgery with 72 hrs
Within 24hrs of an invasive procedure
(with attendant risk of acute life threatening deterioration)...
This will be even better if/when they sort out the contact tracing app and the manual contact tracing to work with the testing.
This would be followed by the opening of all internal borders, and countries should not “discriminate” against any other EU countries.
This seems very silly guidance. France currently has different rules for different areas, Germany has strict rules on if a particular regime case rate goes above a certain level, again restrictions change. A blanket one sized fit all rules across the whole of the EU seems like a recipe for disaster.
It wasnt there, we dropped track and trace as we didnt have the capacity impacting massively on the number of deaths.
Running to catch up is fine but the damage is mainly done.
https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1260559962629181440?s=20
Do we know how the numbers compared with the corresponding working day last week ?
I've had some lingering chest problems since (possibly) having it, so I can well believe there is some sort of post-viral fall out.
I'm sure they'll get there in the end. We can probably just re-skin one built for another country if we have to, eventually.
The 47-year-old street works inspector said he saw "less than 10% of commuters wearing masks" on his London Underground journey.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52645366
What is this weird aversion to wearing one?
Yet Starmer won by a mile and Nandy came last. Quite odd.
The complacent ones are those who think a good PMQs means that Starmer is nailed on for next PM and we should just give up and go home.
Nope, not going to go it - not now, not ever.
I was fairly unimpressed with Starmer up to the weekend.
He has been really excellent in his LOTO response and the Parliamentary sessions on Monday and todays PMQs.
Keep it up and there will surely be a narrowing of the polls particularly when financial reality kicks in.
He needs to avoid being seen as Austerity Lite as we go forward IMO
By which time he could have caught it even if the test is negative.
He did say it is very unpleasant having the swab all the way down to the tonsils then up the nose.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8315091/Will-NHS-contact-tracing-app-ready-week-Expert-surprised.html
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/06/13/how-britain-voted-2017-general-election
Was Brexit a significant driver of change?
Oldies much more likely to vote Tory, youngsters Labour, and of course when oldies were 18, only ~10% went to uni, compared to 50% now.
So the "graduate" stats are heavily skewed.
The PM is managing very challenging circumstances and when PMQs is so sombre it's easy for a LOTO to ask challenging questions to which he knows there is no good answer. Especially when thousands are dying.
When we are in normal times and in a background of an economic recovery PMQs will be very different. Completely different.
https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2019-election
Ipsos - Mori Dec 2019 General election.
I say it with no malice. It's just a fact the far right (of which there are no posters here who fall into that category) usually draws its support from less educated people.
Also education is not the same as intelligence. Older generation voters had less chance to go to university. It stands to reason more voters in the 65 and above demographic will not be educated to degree level than 25 to 34 age group. That doesn;t make them less intelligent
The group is a luvvie fest for Starmer at the moment. Apparently he's "forensic". Stick around to join in the love in. It's becoming North Korean. We'll all be clapping for Kier next.