It may just be me, but I'm not sure why folk on here continue to debate with Mr Thompson on whether or not Cummings broke the rules/laws. He is clearly not going to change his mind whatever arguments people put forward, so it seems rather pointless.
I enjoy reading the arguments here, but the volume of posting on this issue with Mr Thompson has made recent threads repetitive and a bit dull. Maybe he'd post a bit less if we left him alone?
To me, his comment on the virtue of selfishness sums it up anyway and I don't need to know any more.
Yes I wish he would post less as he dominates this site. Surely he has other things to do, than be on here all day.
I hate myself for constantly feeling compelled to counter what he writes.
The upper middle class in the UK may have more in common with Europe, hence they voted Remain.
The working class and lower middle classes here would certainly say they are closer culturally to Australia and New Zealand than continental Europe, hence they voted Leave
I wouldn't have thought that most people have given much thought to whether they are closer culturally to Australia or somewhere else. Have you ever actually heard even one working-class voter express a view on this? I've very little idea what Australian culture is like, apart from the random stereotype images of Waltzing Matilda and people drinking beer on beaches. You reckon that most people have studied it more closely?
+1 Unless you have been to Australia, you are very unlikely to know Australian culture, which is also completely different if metropolitan, rural or isolated on a scale far bigger than the divides we have seen exposed in the UK.
I saw a survey a while back in which people from various countries were asked which country, except their own, they'd recommend to a young person to have a good life.
Brits backed Australia, and having been there a few times, I can see why, though I'd prefer California myself. Obviously Australia has its ugly side, like all countries, but for decent middle class life, it must be one of the best places in the world. People are mostly friendly and they speak (a corruption of) English. And it's warm and sunny. Sydney has a stunningly beautiful setting, though Melbourne is a lot drabber.
I visited Australia some years back (Adelaide, Woomera, Sydney). What really struck me was that some of it seemed on the margin in terms of water supply, including big cities. It would worry me if I wanted to emigrate there.
That's true and it worries many Aussies too. Though I think Sydney actually gets twice as much rainfall as London, doesn't it? (4 inches vs 1.5 inches/month)
Their skin cancer rates are horrific as well.
But many people, including me, find mild desert climates good to live in. I mean, you wake up every morning, you feel the warm sun on you and you feel good about yourself. I couldn't live in the humidity and mosquitoes of tropical Queensland (or Mississippi), but coastal southern California or dry Australia are my ideal climates.
And in the English language and friendly people and you have a winning combination, and one that many English people buy into.
Thank you. We were staying with a friend in Adelaide and I was struck by the care she took to conserve water for all purposes - we even drank the stuff off the roof. But the street gutters etc are also designed for seasonal torrents. Fascinating place, Australia!
Somebody told me that Adelaide is the driest city in the driest state on the driest inhabited continent in the world.
I have to say, it struck me as a particularly dull town both times I visited, but I didn't know anybody there, so probably didn't get the best out of it. But my memory is of walking round endless blocks of the city looking for something interesting to do.
And I hear it really comes alive for the festival.
Bizarrely it rained on the day I visited. There was quite an interesting museum and art gallery if I recall correctly
Yep! Ain't going to happen. The Cummings Albatross is fixed around the BoJo neck for all to see and refer to at every available opportunity. Which, for those of us of an anti-Tory persuasion, is the best outcome.
Funny how so many anti-Tories (not necessarily you) have both demanded that Cummings go and expressed a fervent wish that he should stay.
That couldn't possibly be a transparent ploy to allow them to claim they were right no matter what the outcome? No, surely not.
I can't speak for them. You are trying to give the impression of refuting my argument, while actually refuting an argument that I did not present. Take your straw man elsewhere.
I'll take it to a forum where several posters have indeed made both cases simultaneously, namely ... this one!
Please stop winking at me. I'm not interested and have been married for 14 years.
Yep! Ain't going to happen. The Cummings Albatross is fixed around the BoJo neck for all to see and refer to at every available opportunity. Which, for those of us of an anti-Tory persuasion, is the best outcome.
Funny how so many anti-Tories (not necessarily you) have both demanded that Cummings go and expressed a fervent wish that he should stay.
That couldn't possibly be a transparent ploy to allow them to claim they were right no matter what the outcome? No, surely not.
They want him gone - and gone before the Brexit extension deadline. The sole aim.
You need to get over Brexit mate. It’s embarrassing. We’re going to leave on WTO terms with no extension. I’ve accepted it, why haven’t you?
I for one look forward very much to it! To quote a much wiser man "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake".
Still, Dom has broken America (as if it needs any more breaking). If BJ ever finds his balls, I'm sure there'll be roles aplenty in Trump's campaign even for a grifter with eyesight problems.
If you still see it totally in those terms you are just highlighting your political ineptitude. The papers have been reporting it in the way they have because of the reaction of their readers. Go look at comments on Mail online.
I've looked at the comments on the latest Mail article and they're very positive towards Cummings and very anti media. So maybe the opinion of their readers have changed or maybe as has been stated people are growing tired of a story that interests the media a lot more than it interests a lot of the public.
Big story yes, 6 days in the news nope. Likewise Telegraph readers very positive towards Dom staying on their comments. As I have argued before the chance for a scalp has more likely than not passed. Pippa Crear didn't quite do enough.
I see that we are still focused on the absolute trivia of Cummings travel plans rather than the scandal that several thousand more jobs will be lost today (and tomorrow, and the next day) because of a lockdown that can safely be lifted in at least the vast bulk of the country with social distancing and adequate precautions.
As it happens I gave an online talk on this yesterday. The government has (and has had since 11th May) excellent advice covering 8 sectors of the economy designed to mitigate risk. It is well written, clear and helpful. It can be found here for those interested: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-coronavirus-covid-19
This is more than enough for most of our economy to get back to work now and I have no doubt similar guidance could be produced for restaurants and cafes. Pubs without outdoor gardens may be a bit more challenging.
We need to move on from this. I can't help feeling that a public sector who have been cossetted from the pain is so risk adverse that they would rather burn endless businesses than have anyone asking a question of them.
We do need to move on
We will, but still with immense damage to track and trace, once Cummings has gone.
Until Boris demonstrates their is a penalty for birthday jollies against the rules we wont move on.
Simples
FFS get a sense of perspective. Thousands of jobs a day against 1. It is bizarre.
The problem is not out in the country @DavidL - the problem is that govt and media seem to be paralysed like a rabbit in the headlights. The Cummings Scandal seems to causing huge amount of diversion at Cabinet and PM level.
The thousands of job losses will catch the Media's attention when they figure out that they can use it as another stick with which to beat the hapless Boris.
And next month we have significant Brexit issues to hurl into the mix too. It is evolving into a Perfect Storm of political poop.
Lucky old Boris. He wanted the glory of being in charge....
Still a few Tories think it is perfectly acceptable to treat the public like morons , crap all over them and be able to ask they still give them 100% support to crap on them again.
He came down with symptoms after returning to Manchester, before the general lockdown was imposed and was not expecting to fall ill, unlike Cummings, or already ill.
For me, the real game changer could be the twenty-minute test. If it can be made self-contained and cheap and readily available AND numbers of infection are low at the time, the amount of possibilities it unlocks are astonishing.
Spit into this tube of gunk and put it in boiling water for twenty minutes and see if it changes colour. If not, you're clear; if it does, go and self-isolate for two weeks (not necessarily in Durham).
Visit your old Mum, do this and wait at the front door for twenty minutes. If all are clear; go in and don't worry about social distancing in that house.
Go to a sporting event or artistic event or theatre - set this up so it can be done outside and wait - everyone must pass to be allowed inside social distancing. Logistically challenging, but could be done.
Make it a part of the departure process to get on a plane; everyone must pass and if they are, no problem.
If you have it outside a restaurant, either stick to social distancing in the outside garden, or do this and wait for twenty minutes and if everyone passes, in you go and don't worry about social distancing.
Hell, if we get this and it's very common, we could hunt down and kill off the virus.
I wonder if in the medium term we could go further and in 5 years time the same process could be sped up to say 3 minutes, and used to get rid of most colds and flus.
I remember a 'classical liberal' that used to post on here who claimed that UK gun laws actually made us more unsafe than the USA and got very excited at the idea of 3D printed guns. He certainly added to the entertainment value of the place.
3d printed guns are mostly about trolling gun grabbers, they are crap pieces of engineering and you cannot 3D print ammunition (which is the difficult bit).
I see that we are still focused on the absolute trivia of Cummings travel plans rather than the scandal that several thousand more jobs will be lost today (and tomorrow, and the next day) because of a lockdown that can safely be lifted in at least the vast bulk of the country with social distancing and adequate precautions.
As it happens I gave an online talk on this yesterday. The government has (and has had since 11th May) excellent advice covering 8 sectors of the economy designed to mitigate risk. It is well written, clear and helpful. It can be found here for those interested: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-coronavirus-covid-19
This is more than enough for most of our economy to get back to work now and I have no doubt similar guidance could be produced for restaurants and cafes. Pubs without outdoor gardens may be a bit more challenging.
We need to move on from this. I can't help feeling that a public sector who have been cossetted from the pain is so risk adverse that they would rather burn endless businesses than have anyone asking a question of them.
We do need to move on
We will, but still with immense damage to track and trace, once Cummings has gone.
Until Boris demonstrates their is a penalty for birthday jollies against the rules we wont move on.
Simples
FFS get a sense of perspective. Thousands of jobs a day against 1. It is bizarre.
The problem is not out in the country @DavidL - the problem is that govt and media seem to be paralysed like a rabbit in the headlights. The Cummings Scandal seems to causing huge amount of diversion at Cabinet and PM level.
The thousands of job losses will catch the Media's attention when they figure out that they can use it as another stick with which to beat the hapless Boris.
And next month we have significant Brexit issues to hurl into the mix too. It is evolving into a Perfect Storm of political poop.
Lucky old Boris. He wanted the glory of being in charge....
Still a few Tories think it is perfectly acceptable to treat the public like morons , crap all over them and be able to ask they still give them 100% support to crap on them again.
The brighter tories have suddenly fouind they have other things than pb to occupy their time, or their internet is playing up...
@BluestBlue - As you know I was quite impressed by DCs press conference. I said so on here and you liked my comment. However I also said I was concerned that I also might be gullible and there are questions I would like answered. Here are 3:
a) Why didn't his wife drive home? He said she recovered quicker than him. Why?
b) Why wasn't a car and driver arranged to bring him home if there were concerns? My wife is considerably less important that DC, but when she broke her wrist at a conference a car and driver was organised to bring her home and we recovered the car later (from Wales to Surrey)
c) Why did DC amend his old blog post on the day he returned and why did he refer to it at the press session. Even if this has nothing to do with the event why is he manipulating something to make it look like he forecasted something (dishonestly) and why for goodness sake on the day he returned when he was supposedly busy and worried about work and if he did want to do it he could have done it anytime he choose?
It is c) that concerns me most as this is very odd indeed. It might be completely unrelated, but even if it is it is a very odd thing to do, unless you reference the change. It is altering history to make it look like you predicted something. And the timing is really, really odd.
I see that we are still focused on the absolute trivia of Cummings travel plans rather than the scandal that several thousand more jobs will be lost today (and tomorrow, and the next day) because of a lockdown that can safely be lifted in at least the vast bulk of the country with social distancing and adequate precautions.
As it happens I gave an online talk on this yesterday. The government has (and has had since 11th May) excellent advice covering 8 sectors of the economy designed to mitigate risk. It is well written, clear and helpful. It can be found here for those interested: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-coronavirus-covid-19
This is more than enough for most of our economy to get back to work now and I have no doubt similar guidance could be produced for restaurants and cafes. Pubs without outdoor gardens may be a bit more challenging.
We need to move on from this. I can't help feeling that a public sector who have been cossetted from the pain is so risk adverse that they would rather burn endless businesses than have anyone asking a question of them.
We do need to move on
We will, but still with immense damage to track and trace, once Cummings has gone.
Until Boris demonstrates their is a penalty for birthday jollies against the rules we wont move on.
Simples
FFS get a sense of perspective. Thousands of jobs a day against 1. It is bizarre.
The problem is not out in the country @DavidL - the problem is that govt and media seem to be paralysed like a rabbit in the headlights. The Cummings Scandal seems to causing huge amount of diversion at Cabinet and PM level.
The thousands of job losses will catch the Media's attention when they figure out that they can use it as another stick with which to beat the hapless Boris.
And next month we have significant Brexit issues to hurl into the mix too. It is evolving into a Perfect Storm of political poop.
Lucky old Boris. He wanted the glory of being in charge....
Still a few Tories think it is perfectly acceptable to treat the public like morons , crap all over them and be able to ask they still give them 100% support to crap on them again.
The brighter tories have suddenly fouind they have other things than pb to occupy their time, or their internet is playing up...
are there any bright people who aren't Tories? asking for a PB friend
I see that we are still focused on the absolute trivia of Cummings travel plans rather than the scandal that several thousand more jobs will be lost today (and tomorrow, and the next day) because of a lockdown that can safely be lifted in at least the vast bulk of the country with social distancing and adequate precautions.
As it happens I gave an online talk on this yesterday. The government has (and has had since 11th May) excellent advice covering 8 sectors of the economy designed to mitigate risk. It is well written, clear and helpful. It can be found here for those interested: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-coronavirus-covid-19
This is more than enough for most of our economy to get back to work now and I have no doubt similar guidance could be produced for restaurants and cafes. Pubs without outdoor gardens may be a bit more challenging.
We need to move on from this. I can't help feeling that a public sector who have been cossetted from the pain is so risk adverse that they would rather burn endless businesses than have anyone asking a question of them.
We do need to move on
We will, but still with immense damage to track and trace, once Cummings has gone.
Until Boris demonstrates their is a penalty for birthday jollies against the rules we wont move on.
Simples
FFS get a sense of perspective. Thousands of jobs a day against 1. It is bizarre.
The problem is not out in the country @DavidL - the problem is that govt and media seem to be paralysed like a rabbit in the headlights. The Cummings Scandal seems to causing huge amount of diversion at Cabinet and PM level.
The thousands of job losses will catch the Media's attention when they figure out that they can use it as another stick with which to beat the hapless Boris.
And next month we have significant Brexit issues to hurl into the mix too. It is evolving into a Perfect Storm of political poop.
Lucky old Boris. He wanted the glory of being in charge....
There is also a problem in the country. I couldn't get through to the managing agent, an estate agency, of my accommodation recently on the emergency number. Estate agents working from home are often not working at all. I have received my 6 month electricity bill. It is an estimated bill as meter readers are not working. It is time for people to write to their MPs to ask when the country is going back to work.
The point of the Cummings story is to distract attention from the continuing shutdown. That is all. Shutdown supporters seem to back down when it comes to the crunch. Action is not their thing. The government should continue getting the country back to normal. The real question is how long will this take?
There are going to be a whole slew of foul-ups like this. TBH, even if Cummings was gone (or the scandal was gone), we are making the assumption that the Govt would be up to the job.
People hailed the furlough as a near-miracle saving the economy. I am becoming less than sure about that. It might very will be the thing that destroys the economy because too many people like being paid to sit at home.
Deep thought: People are talking like Kier Starmer not calling for Cummings to resign is a sign of cunning tactical genius, but maybe it means Kier Starmer knows that someone important on the Labour side broke the lockdown.
You are not the first person to suggest this on this forum.
Let us imagine the alternate history version of this crisis but with Seamus and Corbyn in charge.
morning of the story breaking Corbyn has demanded an emergency session of parliament to demand Dominic Cummings is sacked. We haven't had the Barnard Castle stuff revealed yet. Immediately every Tory MP rallies round the flag. This is a partisan hitjob. Twitter is filled with Right wing talking heads decrying the Labour party. The Barnard Castle stuff then comes out and is dismissed due to slight imperfections in the witnesses recollection of events. This is all over by Monday.
Starmer is following the Napoleonic maxim to perfection. Never interrupt an enemy making a mistake. Corbyn would be all over this like a cheap suit.
Also, Starmer has called for Cummnigs to be sacked - but only have a suitably long amount of time and in a low key way (saying he would have sacked him)
I think Starmer is handling it pretty well, but in danger of overdoing the restraint. In your alternate hgistory, I disagree. Corbyn would be ignoring Cummings (he virtually never attacks individuals, even the obvious ones) but demanding a special session to examine the impact of easing lockdown on low-paid workers. Cummings would get away with it for that reason, rather than that Corbyn was zeroing in on him.
Not that it matters now!
Starmer should focus on two things now:-
1. The lockdown easing measures and, in particular, whether they are being applied fairly. Or intelligently. See what I have already said about the absurdity of opening indoor shops before outside venues. Or allowing people to congregate in gardens but not go to a pub with a garden. Plus why the 2-metre advice (it’s not a rule) when most of Europe has it down to 1 metre.
2. Sunak’s plans to stop furlough, particularly the rumoured idea of asking businesses legally prevented from opening to pay 20% of wages and NI when they don’t have any income.
Completely agree with both points. Allowing outside venues for pubs and restaurants and meeting up under strict guidelines would make people far happier with continuing social distancing, and looks to be significantly safer than small indoor shops.
One sensible step might be a relaxation of licensing laws, that would allow an existing licensee to set up a temporary bar in a nearby park, field or car park, using a van, tent or market stall structure. Anyone who’s walked up the hill from Twickenham station to the stadium on a match day will know what I mean
Sadly, I think Cummings is now likely to go. What got us here are those perennial Tory sins: hubris and arrogance. They thought they could do whatever they liked. And until the start of April they probably could. Now, though, a credible alternative is beginning to emerge. What’s notable about that Mail polling is not just that Tory negatives are rising but that Labour ones are falling. The Tories need a new playbook. And they have to find it against the backdrop of a worsening economy in which incomes are stagnant, job losses are mounting and, in the case of a no deal with the EU, prices are likely to be rising. It’s going to be fascinating. My guess is that the culture wars will go nuclear.
Of course they will. The Tories have become the US Republicans: a party in hock to billionaires and special interests, whose only appeal to the average voter is a platform of barely-concealed racism and resentment of the liberal middle class. The Brexit vote demonstrated that it works here too. Welcome to America.
The Americanisation of Europe is almost total. It’ll be over within a century.
Britain is not Europe, otherwise it would not have voted for Brexit.
Geographically it maybe separated only by the English channel, culturally it is closer to the Anglosphere
If you still see it totally in those terms you are just highlighting your political ineptitude. The papers have been reporting it in the way they have because of the reaction of their readers. Go look at comments on Mail online.
I've looked at the comments on the latest Mail article and they're very positive towards Cummings and very anti media. So maybe the opinion of their readers have changed or maybe as has been stated people are growing tired of a story that interests the media a lot more than it interests a lot of the public.
Big story yes, 6 days in the news nope. Likewise Telegraph readers very positive towards Dom staying on their comments. As I have argued before the chance for a scalp has more likely than not passed. Pippa Crear didn't quite do enough.
Are you sure you're reading the same Mail Online as I am?
As far as I can tell the government's "move on" line is making things worse. I think people have accepted that Dom is staying but it means the Tories have lost 3m+ voters. The whole party is now infected with it, even if Boris was to go before 2024 I don't see a route to majority government. The party has transformed itself from being on the side of the people to being the elite in about 7 days.
I actually think that Starmer now has a route to winning 100-120 seats. If he drops some of the socially lefty crazy culture war stuff like letting biological men into women's bathrooms etc... he might just be able to get a Blair style swing and end up with 320-340 seats in parliament.
None of this was possible a few days ago, the race is now completely open where it never was before, even after the bungling response to the virus.
Is this a PR balls-up of rare proportions? Yes. But you're making a lot of my case for me. In 4 years, are people who hate identity politics suddenly going to love it because of Dominic Cummings? Are they suddenly going to like sky-high taxes and socialism because of Cummings? Mass immigration because of Cummings? Political correctness because of Cummings? No, they're not.
There's no doubt that 'events' are capable of pissing voters off, perhaps even in the medium or long term (although I'm sceptical about the latter - no one gets angry about MPs' expenses now, and that was once a much bigger story than Dom).
Ultimately, if the recovery from the virus is good, then the Tories have a good chance of holding on to power. If it isn't, then it doesn't really matter what a single SpaD did or didn't do four years prior.
No you're underestimating Kier. He's not Corbyn and he's not beholden to the insane left. I think he's captured all of the party machinery at last count so he's now in a position to tell the insane left to like it or lump it. As you can see in the last few days he's clearly taking that line with them.
As I said, if Kier moves to the centre on social issues he has a shot at a Blair style swing and a working majority. If he doesn't then it's going to be a very tough race but I think he's still more likely to win if Boris is still there.
I don't underestimate Keir at all. He's definitely swinging to the centre on political culture, and making superficial noises about a similar swing on some cultural issues. Though he hasn't made any significant shift on the economy, and I don't ultimately believe he will.
He's doing this intelligently so far, but there are pitfalls even for him.
First, Labour politics is a crusade of moral fervour and 'passion' for many activists and voters - if you can't get the thrill of an extreme platform and hating the Tories openly, then a lot of the fun goes out of politics for these people, and they may despise him as much they did Miliband for being milquetoast.
Second - although this is more a pitfall for Labour values than its electoral prospects - if he becomes Blair then he _deserves_ to beat the Tories and win power. Many Conservatives will genuinely not be afraid to vote for him, nor will Lib Dems and others. A Labour Party that's not dangerous would be a massive win for the country.
I'm not yet convinced he'll get there, wish to get there, or be allowed to get there. But we'll see.
Be interesting to see what Starmer has to say about this
Something forensic ?
I suppose the fact that Turning Point UK have already deleted this tweet, presumably because it's libellous, would not persuade you to withdraw the smear?
As far as I can tell the government's "move on" line is making things worse. I think people have accepted that Dom is staying but it means the Tories have lost 3m+ voters. The whole party is now infected with it, even if Boris was to go before 2024 I don't see a route to majority government. The party has transformed itself from being on the side of the people to being the elite in about 7 days.
I actually think that Starmer now has a route to winning 100-120 seats. If he drops some of the socially lefty crazy culture war stuff like letting biological men into women's bathrooms etc... he might just be able to get a Blair style swing and end up with 320-340 seats in parliament.
None of this was possible a few days ago, the race is now completely open where it never was before, even after the bungling response to the virus.
Is this a PR balls-up of rare proportions? Yes. But you're making a lot of my case for me. In 4 years, are people who hate identity politics suddenly going to love it because of Dominic Cummings? Are they suddenly going to like sky-high taxes and socialism because of Cummings? Mass immigration because of Cummings? Political correctness because of Cummings? No, they're not.
There's no doubt that 'events' are capable of pissing voters off, perhaps even in the medium or long term (although I'm sceptical about the latter - no one gets angry about MPs' expenses now, and that was once a much bigger story than Dom).
Ultimately, if the recovery from the virus is good, then the Tories have a good chance of holding on to power. If it isn't, then it doesn't really matter what a single SpaD did or didn't do four years prior.
No you're underestimating Kier. He's not Corbyn and he's not beholden to the insane left. I think he's captured all of the party machinery at last count so he's now in a position to tell the insane left to like it or lump it. As you can see in the last few days he's clearly taking that line with them.
As I said, if Kier moves to the centre on social issues he has a shot at a Blair style swing and a working majority. If he doesn't then it's going to be a very tough race but I think he's still more likely to win if Boris is still there.
I am a Labour Party member and my very strong sense is that you are right. The "project" - if we can term it that - is over. I happen not to be overjoyed about this if it leads, as I fear it will, to a certain blandness on policy and a reluctance to push the equality agenda, but of course I will still be voting Labour. So, retain me and my ilk, plus win a ton of floaters and apoliticals - with the obvious caveat of the next election being yonks away, this IMO spells PM Starmer. This slightly dull but highly competent and palpably decent man is going to get his picture on the Downing St staircase. The big question is, will he be next to Boris Johnson or will there be another picture hanging there between them?
If you still see it totally in those terms you are just highlighting your political ineptitude. The papers have been reporting it in the way they have because of the reaction of their readers. Go look at comments on Mail online.
I've looked at the comments on the latest Mail article and they're very positive towards Cummings and very anti media. So maybe the opinion of their readers have changed or maybe as has been stated people are growing tired of a story that interests the media a lot more than it interests a lot of the public.
Big story yes, 6 days in the news nope. Likewise Telegraph readers very positive towards Dom staying on their comments. As I have argued before the chance for a scalp has more likely than not passed. Pippa Crear didn't quite do enough.
Everyone realises Dom is staying, it's why I quit the party on Saturday. The issue is how much the government has slashed and burned to keep him on and that it is now firmly in the "the rules are for you, not us" camp.
Outside of the political and media theatre, there is a basic issue of decency and moral authority. The government, by keeping Dom, has shown itself to have lost both. Again, it's why I couldn't stay in the party. We have a quarantine breaker in charge of telling people they have to go into quarantine if they come into contact with a person who has tested positive. That isn't going to work, people aren't going to listen and the idea that "civic duty" still exists while Dom is in charge of this is laughable.
I don't care about the scalp, I don't care about the political game. I was a member for 8 years, I've campaigned for Boris to be mayor and I've campaigned for him to be PM. This has absolutely shattered any pretense that Boris is one of the people. He's protecting his mates just like all the other corrupt politicians.
Is this a PR balls-up of rare proportions? Yes. But you're making a lot of my case for me. In 4 years, are people who hate identity politics suddenly going to love it because of Dominic Cummings? Are they suddenly going to like sky-high taxes and socialism because of Cummings? Mass immigration because of Cummings? Political correctness because of Cummings? No, they're not.
It is not Cummings that is the issue. Yes, people will remember him as a prat who wrote the rules and then broke them, but the real damage here is primarily to Boris who looks weaker and weaker as each day goes by. That cartoon of Boris in distress because Cummings has been cordoned off from him captures the issue very nicely.
The secondary damage is to the Cabinet, whose members look supine, but there is also the contrast effect where the whole mess makes SKS look good as long as no one trips up on the Labour side.
If you still see it totally in those terms you are just highlighting your political ineptitude. The papers have been reporting it in the way they have because of the reaction of their readers. Go look at comments on Mail online.
I've looked at the comments on the latest Mail article and they're very positive towards Cummings and very anti media. So maybe the opinion of their readers have changed or maybe as has been stated people are growing tired of a story that interests the media a lot more than it interests a lot of the public.
Big story yes, 6 days in the news nope. Likewise Telegraph readers very positive towards Dom staying on their comments. As I have argued before the chance for a scalp has more likely than not passed. Pippa Crear didn't quite do enough.
Are you sure you're reading the same Mail Online as I am?
Are not the Mail and the Mail Online run separately?
If you still see it totally in those terms you are just highlighting your political ineptitude. The papers have been reporting it in the way they have because of the reaction of their readers. Go look at comments on Mail online.
I've looked at the comments on the latest Mail article and they're very positive towards Cummings and very anti media. So maybe the opinion of their readers have changed or maybe as has been stated people are growing tired of a story that interests the media a lot more than it interests a lot of the public.
Big story yes, 6 days in the news nope. Likewise Telegraph readers very positive towards Dom staying on their comments. As I have argued before the chance for a scalp has more likely than not passed. Pippa Crear didn't quite do enough.
Are you sure you're reading the same Mail Online as I am?
Are not the Mail and the Mail Online run separately?
They are but I am not aware of two separate websites.
If you still see it totally in those terms you are just highlighting your political ineptitude. The papers have been reporting it in the way they have because of the reaction of their readers. Go look at comments on Mail online.
I've looked at the comments on the latest Mail article and they're very positive towards Cummings and very anti media. So maybe the opinion of their readers have changed or maybe as has been stated people are growing tired of a story that interests the media a lot more than it interests a lot of the public.
Big story yes, 6 days in the news nope. Likewise Telegraph readers very positive towards Dom staying on their comments. As I have argued before the chance for a scalp has more likely than not passed. Pippa Crear didn't quite do enough.
Are you sure you're reading the same Mail Online as I am?
Are not the Mail and the Mail Online run separately?
The right to bear arms, eh? What this country really needs is overweight incels with assault rifles turning up at places of government.
If you don't trust your fellow citizens with a rifle, why do you trust them with a car or a voting slip?
Who said anything about trusting my fellow citizens?
In general I'd say my highest level of distrust would be about my fellow citizens using stuff that's designed to kill things as opposed to stuff that isn't.
People hailed the furlough as a near-miracle saving the economy. I am becoming less than sure about that. It might very will be the thing that destroys the economy because too many people like being paid to sit at home.
Still a few Tories think it is perfectly acceptable to treat the public like morons , crap all over them and be able to ask they still give them 100% support to crap on them again.
People hailed the furlough as a near-miracle saving the economy. I am becoming less than sure about that. It might very will be the thing that destroys the economy because too many people like being paid to sit at home.
@BluestBlue - As you know I was quite impressed by DCs press conference. I said so on here and you liked my comment. However I also said I was concerned that I also might be gullible and there are questions I would like answered. Here are 3:
a) Why didn't his wife drive home? He said she recovered quicker than him. Why?
b) Why wasn't a car and driver arranged to bring him home if there were concerns? My wife is considerably less important that DC, but when she broke her wrist at a conference a car and driver was organised to bring her home and we recovered the car later (from Wales to Surrey)
c) Why did DC amend his old blog post on the day he returned and why did he refer to it at the press session. Even if this has nothing to do with the event why is he manipulating something to make it look like he forecasted something (dishonestly) and why for goodness sake on the day he returned when he was supposedly busy and worried about work and if he did want to do it he could have done it anytime he choose?
It is c) that concerns me most as this is very odd indeed. It might be completely unrelated, but even if it is it is a very odd thing to do, unless you reference the change. It is altering history to make it look like you predicted something. And the timing is really, really odd.
He is post truth - there is nothing wrong with reshaping reality and truth in the cause of the greater good.
The greater good just happens to be him making the decisions for the country. So lying about predicting the crisis, or why he did whatever is completely justified in his mind.
Once you understand that there is nothing odd about it at all. The question is are those who are aligned to his goals willing to put up with it? And the answer is yes, enough are.
If you still see it totally in those terms you are just highlighting your political ineptitude. The papers have been reporting it in the way they have because of the reaction of their readers. Go look at comments on Mail online.
Mike, I've made this point before, but no Conservative government ever does or should govern in accordance with the top comments in the Daily Mail. Here are some things that would have happened if we had:
1. Warships in the Channel to machine-gun migrant boats. 2. Treason charges for those who disagreed with the result of the EE Referendum. 3. The death penalty for loitering.
OK, I made the last one up. But not the first two!
Still want the Government to use the Daily Mail comments to make decisions?
Yep! Ain't going to happen. The Cummings Albatross is fixed around the BoJo neck for all to see and refer to at every available opportunity. Which, for those of us of an anti-Tory persuasion, is the best outcome.
Funny how so many anti-Tories (not necessarily you) have both demanded that Cummings go and expressed a fervent wish that he should stay.
That couldn't possibly be a transparent ploy to allow them to claim they were right no matter what the outcome? No, surely not.
I can't speak for them. You are trying to give the impression of refuting my argument, while actually refuting an argument that I did not present. Take your straw man elsewhere.
I'll take it to a forum where several posters have indeed made both cases simultaneously, namely ... this one!
Please stop winking at me. I'm not interested and have been married for 14 years.
Relax, this isn't that kind of chat room. Or at least I bloody well hope it isn't!
The right to bear arms, eh? What this country really needs is overweight incels with assault rifles turning up at places of government.
If you don't trust your fellow citizens with a rifle, why do you trust them with a car or a voting slip?
Who said anything about trusting my fellow citizens?
In general I'd say my highest level of distrust would be about my fellow citizens using stuff that's designed to kill things as oppose to things that aren't.
I am totally anti gun as is my wife. However over dinner a few weeks ago we both admitted to one another a secret desire to go to a gun range next time we are back in the States to see what it’s like and to blow off some steam. But I wouldn’t trust me with a gun, let alone anyone else.
As far as I can tell the government's "move on" line is making things worse. I think people have accepted that Dom is staying but it means the Tories have lost 3m+ voters. The whole party is now infected with it, even if Boris was to go before 2024 I don't see a route to majority government. The party has transformed itself from being on the side of the people to being the elite in about 7 days.
I actually think that Starmer now has a route to winning 100-120 seats. If he drops some of the socially lefty crazy culture war stuff like letting biological men into women's bathrooms etc... he might just be able to get a Blair style swing and end up with 320-340 seats in parliament.
None of this was possible a few days ago, the race is now completely open where it never was before, even after the bungling response to the virus.
Is this a PR balls-up of rare proportions? Yes. But you're making a lot of my case for me. In 4 years, are people who hate identity politics suddenly going to love it because of Dominic Cummings? Are they suddenly going to like sky-high taxes and socialism because of Cummings? Mass immigration because of Cummings? Political correctness because of Cummings? No, they're not.
There's no doubt that 'events' are capable of pissing voters off, perhaps even in the medium or long term (although I'm sceptical about the latter - no one gets angry about MPs' expenses now, and that was once a much bigger story than Dom).
Ultimately, if the recovery from the virus is good, then the Tories have a good chance of holding on to power. If it isn't, then it doesn't really matter what a single SpaD did or didn't do four years prior.
No you're underestimating Kier. He's not Corbyn and he's not beholden to the insane left. I think he's captured all of the party machinery at last count so he's now in a position to tell the insane left to like it or lump it. As you can see in the last few days he's clearly taking that line with them.
As I said, if Kier moves to the centre on social issues he has a shot at a Blair style swing and a working majority. If he doesn't then it's going to be a very tough race but I think he's still more likely to win if Boris is still there.
I don't underestimate Keir at all. He's definitely swinging to the centre on political culture, and making superficial noises about a similar swing on some cultural issues. Though he hasn't made any significant shift on the economy, and I don't ultimately believe he will.
He's doing this intelligently so far, but there are pitfalls even for him.
First, Labour politics is a crusade of moral fervour and 'passion' for many activists and voters - if you can't get the thrill of an extreme platform and hating the Tories openly, then a lot of the fun goes out of politics for these people, and they may despise him as much they did Miliband for being milquetoast.
Second - although this is more a pitfall for Labour values than its electoral prospects - if he becomes Blair then he _deserves_ to beat the Tories and win power. Many Conservatives will genuinely not be afraid to vote for him, nor will Lib Dems and others. A Labour Party that's not dangerous would be a massive win for the country.
I'm not yet convinced he'll get there, wish to get there, or be allowed to get there. But we'll see.
Calling BluestBlue - someone has logged on with your name and posted sensible and insightful non partisan analysis!
People hailed the furlough as a near-miracle saving the economy. I am becoming less than sure about that. It might very will be the thing that destroys the economy because too many people like being paid to sit at home.
As far as I can tell the government's "move on" line is making things worse. I think people have accepted that Dom is staying but it means the Tories have lost 3m+ voters. The whole party is now infected with it, even if Boris was to go before 2024 I don't see a route to majority government. The party has transformed itself from being on the side of the people to being the elite in about 7 days.
I actually think that Starmer now has a route to winning 100-120 seats. If he drops some of the socially lefty crazy culture war stuff like letting biological men into women's bathrooms etc... he might just be able to get a Blair style swing and end up with 320-340 seats in parliament.
None of this was possible a few days ago, the race is now completely open where it never was before, even after the bungling response to the virus.
Is this a PR balls-up of rare proportions? Yes. But you're making a lot of my case for me. In 4 years, are people who hate identity politics suddenly going to love it because of Dominic Cummings? Are they suddenly going to like sky-high taxes and socialism because of Cummings? Mass immigration because of Cummings? Political correctness because of Cummings? No, they're not.
There's no doubt that 'events' are capable of pissing voters off, perhaps even in the medium or long term (although I'm sceptical about the latter - no one gets angry about MPs' expenses now, and that was once a much bigger story than Dom).
Ultimately, if the recovery from the virus is good, then the Tories have a good chance of holding on to power. If it isn't, then it doesn't really matter what a single SpaD did or didn't do four years prior.
No you're underestimating Kier. He's not Corbyn and he's not beholden to the insane left. I think he's captured all of the party machinery at last count so he's now in a position to tell the insane left to like it or lump it. As you can see in the last few days he's clearly taking that line with them.
As I said, if Kier moves to the centre on social issues he has a shot at a Blair style swing and a working majority. If he doesn't then it's going to be a very tough race but I think he's still more likely to win if Boris is still there.
I don't underestimate Keir at all. He's definitely swinging to the centre on political culture, and making superficial noises about a similar swing on some cultural issues. Though he hasn't made any significant shift on the economy, and I don't ultimately believe he will.
He's doing this intelligently so far, but there are pitfalls even for him.
First, Labour politics is a crusade of moral fervour and 'passion' for many activists and voters - if you can't get the thrill of an extreme platform and hating the Tories openly, then a lot of the fun goes out of politics for these people, and they may despise him as much they did Miliband for being milquetoast.
Second - although this is more a pitfall for Labour values than its electoral prospects - if he becomes Blair then he _deserves_ to beat the Tories and win power. Many Conservatives will genuinely not be afraid to vote for him, nor will Lib Dems and others. A Labour Party that's not dangerous would be a massive win for the country.
I'm not yet convinced he'll get there, wish to get there, or be allowed to get there. But we'll see.
Calling BluestBlue - someone has logged on with your name and posted sensible and insightful non partisan analysis!
Eh? I was just running a random input generator programme - did the results get posted on here by mistake?
In general I'd say my highest level of distrust would be about my fellow citizens using stuff that's designed to kill things as opposed to stuff that isn't.
Most guns never kill anyone (unless paper targets get to self declare as people), cars and governments regulary commit slaughter.
If you still see it totally in those terms you are just highlighting your political ineptitude. The papers have been reporting it in the way they have because of the reaction of their readers. Go look at comments on Mail online.
I've looked at the comments on the latest Mail article and they're very positive towards Cummings and very anti media. So maybe the opinion of their readers have changed or maybe as has been stated people are growing tired of a story that interests the media a lot more than it interests a lot of the public.
Big story yes, 6 days in the news nope. Likewise Telegraph readers very positive towards Dom staying on their comments. As I have argued before the chance for a scalp has more likely than not passed. Pippa Crear didn't quite do enough.
Are you sure you're reading the same Mail Online as I am?
Are not the Mail and the Mail Online run separately?
They are but I am not aware of two separate websites.
There are 2 tiny preferences button that most people miss.
Did you prefer Boris's letter supporting remaining in the EU
Did you prefer Boris's letter supporting leaving the EU
I see that we are still focused on the absolute trivia of Cummings travel plans rather than the scandal that several thousand more jobs will be lost today (and tomorrow, and the next day) because of a lockdown that can safely be lifted in at least the vast bulk of the country with social distancing and adequate precautions.
As it happens I gave an online talk on this yesterday. The government has (and has had since 11th May) excellent advice covering 8 sectors of the economy designed to mitigate risk. It is well written, clear and helpful. It can be found here for those interested: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-coronavirus-covid-19
This is more than enough for most of our economy to get back to work now and I have no doubt similar guidance could be produced for restaurants and cafes. Pubs without outdoor gardens may be a bit more challenging.
We need to move on from this. I can't help feeling that a public sector who have been cossetted from the pain is so risk adverse that they would rather burn endless businesses than have anyone asking a question of them.
We do need to move on
We will, but still with immense damage to track and trace, once Cummings has gone.
Until Boris demonstrates their is a penalty for birthday jollies against the rules we wont move on.
Simples
FFS get a sense of perspective. Thousands of jobs a day against 1. It is bizarre.
The problem is not out in the country @DavidL - the problem is that govt and media seem to be paralysed like a rabbit in the headlights. The Cummings Scandal seems to causing huge amount of diversion at Cabinet and PM level.
The thousands of job losses will catch the Media's attention when they figure out that they can use it as another stick with which to beat the hapless Boris.
And next month we have significant Brexit issues to hurl into the mix too. It is evolving into a Perfect Storm of political poop.
Lucky old Boris. He wanted the glory of being in charge....
Still a few Tories think it is perfectly acceptable to treat the public like morons , crap all over them and be able to ask they still give them 100% support to crap on them again.
The brighter tories have suddenly fouind they have other things than pb to occupy their time, or their internet is playing up...
are there any bright people who aren't Tories? asking for a PB friend
Are there any tories who aren't bright people? would be a legitimate response to my post. You seem unable to detect, and refrain from committing, the fallacy of the undistributed middle. Yes to both questions btw.
In any case, and away from Cummings - although I'm not on in the evenings (I've found that any social media late in the day makes it very difficult to get a good night's sleep), I noticed both @Cyclefree and @Anabobazina asking about pubs and restaurants being able to open outside venues.
I agree with both of them. I think it's foolish to be opening small shops again before this. The weight of evidence has been piling up that staying 2 metres (or even 1.5 or 1 metres) apart outside is, if not perfectly safe, amongst the lowest risk things that you can do.
I've been banging on for several weeks about finding the low-hanging fruit, and given that we're social creatures and pubs and restaurants are genuinely important parts of our culture, then trying this first would be a good idea. After all, restrictions and social distancing can only last when we all comply with them, and making things more pleasant during social distancing would improve acceptance and maximise the period that we can sustain it if necessary.
I'd suggest starting it at 2 metre gaps between people, requiring a system where people get their own drinks and food while bar staff stand back from them (wearing masks), and having household groups all separated by 2m or more at all times and a time limit of one hour maximum at the site for the household groups, and staying outside at all times (yes, even if it rains). And have it emphasised that this is a trial thing only that will be withdrawn if it looks like it's being abused or R spikes up.
I truly think it would help the mental health of loads of people and help the chances of the relaxed-lockdown-level being sustained as long as necessary, while giving the least chance of a spike in Covid-19 cases. It does look very much like one of those low hanging fruits I've been banging on about until everyone's bored of me.
Cheers Andy – yes, it's baffling why the government prefers to liberate markets (very busy and crowded) to pub beer gardens (much more easily managed).
I hope they rethink this.
Unfortunately I think pubs will be at the back of the queue. Why? Because alcohol is involved and the drinking culture here has a reputation of 'get smashed' (at which point you forget there even is a virus) rather than that more European thing of imbibing one or two in a painfully leisurely fashion, possibly with a nibble to line the stomach and keep the exuberance in check.
Betfair Sportsbook's odds on Cummings still being in his present position on Sunday, 1 June 2020 have shortened further to 1/3, the passage of time of course being a factor. The contrary bet is currently priced at 2/1.
I see that we are still focused on the absolute trivia of Cummings travel plans rather than the scandal that several thousand more jobs will be lost today (and tomorrow, and the next day) because of a lockdown that can safely be lifted in at least the vast bulk of the country with social distancing and adequate precautions.
As it happens I gave an online talk on this yesterday. The government has (and has had since 11th May) excellent advice covering 8 sectors of the economy designed to mitigate risk. It is well written, clear and helpful. It can be found here for those interested: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-coronavirus-covid-19
This is more than enough for most of our economy to get back to work now and I have no doubt similar guidance could be produced for restaurants and cafes. Pubs without outdoor gardens may be a bit more challenging.
We need to move on from this. I can't help feeling that a public sector who have been cossetted from the pain is so risk adverse that they would rather burn endless businesses than have anyone asking a question of them.
Most small (and many large) businesses already operate on the margins of viability, and will probably only be running at 20-30 per cent capacity under the Covid Safe guidance.
Theatres which can only fill every sixth seat; cosy restaurants with their capacity down from 30 covers to 8, factories whose lines can't operate without wholescale re-engineering.
Rishi Sunak is generally accepted to have played a blinder in the support offered, and is rightly finding ways of getting people back asap given the ruinous cost. But even with successful, simple messaging to make that happen, I can't see it being anything but utter economic carnage.
I agree that businesses that deal with a lot of people are going to find this difficult but they will need to adjust. So in a café if you have half the number of covers the overhead per cup of coffee sold increases. So the cost must increase too. Where possible overhead should be reduced, rents are going to have to fall, for example. Fewer staff will be required. Some will not survive the changes but none will survive a lockdown that runs through the summer and into the autumn.
That is simply unrealistic. Margins are very tight in hospitality. You simply cannot reduce overheads just like that and some of the measures talked about will require more staff not fewer. Nor can you double your prices.
1. If businesses are legally forced to operate in a manner which reduces their turnover to 20-30% of what it was before then they need to continue being supported or be given compensation, closed down and the owners can use that money to do something else entrepreneurial.
2. IMO guidance should be given. Guidance - it should not be a legal requirement. And businesses should take reasonable steps - reasonable in the context of their business. It is reasonable to have hand gel available, tables cleaned down, paper towels instead of air dryers, decent ventilation etc but not reasonable to expect venues where their whole shtick is getting people together to force them apart. Social closeness is the point of such venues. Forcing them to do the opposite is to kill them.
People should be advised but learn to take their own decisions about how they live.
We really need a proper debate about whether we are willing to live in a world without all the venues and activities which bring people close. I tried to start one the other day with my header. It really is needed. Life without many of the cultural, artistic, sporting and socialising activities we know and love is not life. It is mere existence. And it harms people in very real ways, as my family know to their cost only too well.
3. The government needs to work with the insurance industry to make the business interruption insurance policies business bought - expensively - real. Some burden-sharing between government, insurance companies and businesses is needed. But insurers have not treated their customers fairly. This has caused some anger and we need real action now not some ineffectual hand-wringing by the FCA in a few years time.
I think one of the prime constraints on reopening is the failure to have a full track and trace infrastructure up and running. I simply don't believe the 'world beating by June 1st' nonsense - and in any event, a more proactive government could have had something up and running many weeks ago.
Reopening comes with risks. I agree with the principle that people should make their own decisions about how they live - but those decisions have consequences for everyone else. Having a system in place to mitigate outbreaks goes a long way to reconciling the interests of the individual with those of the rest of society.
And having a population willing to stay at home if they have a respiratory infection is perhaps just as important.
Unfortunately I think pubs will be at the back of the queue. Why? Because alcohol is involved and the drinking culture here has a reputation of 'get smashed' (at which point you forget there even is a virus) rather than that more European thing of imbibing one or two in a painfully leisurely fashion, possibly with a nibble to line the stomach and keep the exuberance in check.
I think you are right about alcohol being seen as a risk factor, although it's not just a British thing - in Paris they had to hurriedly introduce regulations to stop people drinking alcohol as they sat by the Seine.
In general I'd say my highest level of distrust would be about my fellow citizens using stuff that's designed to kill things as opposed to stuff that isn't.
Most guns never kill anyone (unless paper targets get to self declare as people), cars and governments regulary commit slaughter.
Betfair Sportsbook's odds on Cummings still being in his present position on Sunday, 1 June 2020 have shortened further to 1/3, the passage of time of course being a factor. The contrary bet is currently priced at 2/1.
In general I'd say my highest level of distrust would be about my fellow citizens using stuff that's designed to kill things as opposed to stuff that isn't.
Most guns never kill anyone (unless paper targets get to self declare as people), cars and governments regulary commit slaughter.
As far as I can tell the government's "move on" line is making things worse. I think people have accepted that Dom is staying but it means the Tories have lost 3m+ voters. The whole party is now infected with it, even if Boris was to go before 2024 I don't see a route to majority government. The party has transformed itself from being on the side of the people to being the elite in about 7 days.
I actually think that Starmer now has a route to winning 100-120 seats. If he drops some of the socially lefty crazy culture war stuff like letting biological men into women's bathrooms etc... he might just be able to get a Blair style swing and end up with 320-340 seats in parliament.
None of this was possible a few days ago, the race is now completely open where it never was before, even after the bungling response to the virus.
Is this a PR balls-up of rare proportions? Yes. But you're making a lot of my case for me. In 4 years, are people who hate identity politics suddenly going to love it because of Dominic Cummings? Are they suddenly going to like sky-high taxes and socialism because of Cummings? Mass immigration because of Cummings? Political correctness because of Cummings? No, they're not.
There's no doubt that 'events' are capable of pissing voters off, perhaps even in the medium or long term (although I'm sceptical about the latter - no one gets angry about MPs' expenses now, and that was once a much bigger story than Dom).
Ultimately, if the recovery from the virus is good, then the Tories have a good chance of holding on to power. If it isn't, then it doesn't really matter what a single SpaD did or didn't do four years prior.
No you're underestimating Kier. He's not Corbyn and he's not beholden to the insane left. I think he's captured all of the party machinery at last count so he's now in a position to tell the insane left to like it or lump it. As you can see in the last few days he's clearly taking that line with them.
As I said, if Kier moves to the centre on social issues he has a shot at a Blair style swing and a working majority. If he doesn't then it's going to be a very tough race but I think he's still more likely to win if Boris is still there.
I am a Labour Party member and my very strong sense is that you are right. The "project" - if we can term it that - is over. I happen not to be overjoyed about this if it leads, as I fear it will, to a certain blandness on policy and a reluctance to push the equality agenda, but of course I will still be voting Labour. So, retain me and my ilk, plus win a ton of floaters and apoliticals - with the obvious caveat of the next election being yonks away, this IMO spells PM Starmer. This slightly dull but highly competent and palpably decent man is going to get his picture on the Downing St staircase. The big question is, will he be next to Boris Johnson or will there be another picture hanging there between them?
His stance on the equality agenda could be a key to his success. I'd like him to be strong on pride for Labours history in liberalising the right to be different and not be penalised for it, firm that he will advance equality by legislating where needed, but also be clear that that should be done in a way that genuinely advances human dignity and that his support will not be forthcoming for measures that do not meet that test - and there are aspects of transgender and other campaigns at the more militant end that do not meet that test. He should also be clear that equality is for everyone - where egregious injustices are done against men or the WWC they should be seen for what they are, and neither diminished nor overegged because of who they are done to. Equal treatment for all inequalities based on how bad they are.
For those who think Kier needs a clause 4 type battle, this is where it probably lies and being tough on militancy and playing the tough on PC gone mad part whilst doing lots on equality is something that could very much suit him personally.
I don't mind if Americans want guns. Just don't ask me to feel appalled at the next lunatic slaughters children at their school desks incident. It happens time and time again with people reacting by voting in politicians who protect the rights of the lunatic over the children.
I don't get it. Its almost incomprehensible to me. On a human level of course you grieve for the victims. But at a societal level? You get what you vote for, and they vote for slaughter of the innocents.
As far as I can tell the government's "move on" line is making things worse. I think people have accepted that Dom is staying but it means the Tories have lost 3m+ voters. The whole party is now infected with it, even if Boris was to go before 2024 I don't see a route to majority government. The party has transformed itself from being on the side of the people to being the elite in about 7 days.
I actually think that Starmer now has a route to winning 100-120 seats. If he drops some of the socially lefty crazy culture war stuff like letting biological men into women's bathrooms etc... he might just be able to get a Blair style swing and end up with 320-340 seats in parliament.
None of this was possible a few days ago, the race is now completely open where it never was before, even after the bungling response to the virus.
Is this a PR balls-up of rare proportions? Yes. But you're making a lot of my case for me. In 4 years, are people who hate identity politics suddenly going to love it because of Dominic Cummings? Are they suddenly going to like sky-high taxes and socialism because of Cummings? Mass immigration because of Cummings? Political correctness because of Cummings? No, they're not.
There's no doubt that 'events' are capable of pissing voters off, perhaps even in the medium or long term (although I'm sceptical about the latter - no one gets angry about MPs' expenses now, and that was once a much bigger story than Dom).
Ultimately, if the recovery from the virus is good, then the Tories have a good chance of holding on to power. If it isn't, then it doesn't really matter what a single SpaD did or didn't do four years prior.
No you're underestimating Kier. He's not Corbyn and he's not beholden to the insane left. I think he's captured all of the party machinery at last count so he's now in a position to tell the insane left to like it or lump it. As you can see in the last few days he's clearly taking that line with them.
As I said, if Kier moves to the centre on social issues he has a shot at a Blair style swing and a working majority. If he doesn't then it's going to be a very tough race but I think he's still more likely to win if Boris is still there.
I don't underestimate Keir at all. He's definitely swinging to the centre on political culture, and making superficial noises about a similar swing on some cultural issues. Though he hasn't made any significant shift on the economy, and I don't ultimately believe he will.
He's doing this intelligently so far, but there are pitfalls even for him.
First, Labour politics is a crusade of moral fervour and 'passion' for many activists and voters - if you can't get the thrill of an extreme platform and hating the Tories openly, then a lot of the fun goes out of politics for these people, and they may despise him as much they did Miliband for being milquetoast.
Second - although this is more a pitfall for Labour values than its electoral prospects - if he becomes Blair then he _deserves_ to beat the Tories and win power. Many Conservatives will genuinely not be afraid to vote for him, nor will Lib Dems and others. A Labour Party that's not dangerous would be a massive win for the country.
I'm not yet convinced he'll get there, wish to get there, or be allowed to get there. But we'll see.
Calling BluestBlue - someone has logged on with your name and posted sensible and insightful non partisan analysis!
Relatively speaking, yes. But note the message. Labour can win an election if they drop those pesky Labour values. That, to me, does not sound like somebody who wants to meet in the middle and kick a ball about. It sounds like somebody still very much in the trenches.
They seem to be largely blaming the company that runs it on my reading. It sounds hellish for residents and staff.
'Soon after a nationwide lockdown went into effect in March, a new deputy manager arrived from Kent, in southeastern England. HC-One has said she isolated before starting work. But that was before she made the 650-mile journey to the island, the employees and HC-One said. She eventually became sick and stopped working, the company said. Feeling unprotected by management, employees cleaned the home obsessively and enforced their own distancing rules. When residents were startled, as they often were, aides held their hands and stroked them. Sometimes employees broke down crying.
“People were petrified,” one of the employees said.
For HC-One, the nursing home business has been lucrative, as the company paid more than 50 million pounds, or nearly $61 million, in dividends from 2017 to 2019.'
'...HC-One warned that its “ability to continue as a going concern” was in jeopardy. But nursing home finances are difficult to trace. The HC-One group includes 62 companies, 19 of them registered offshore, and its parent company is based in the Cayman Islands. “It’s money before care all the time,” Ms. Harris said. “The staff they did have worked so hard, but they’ve been let down.”'
As far as I can tell the government's "move on" line is making things worse. I think people have accepted that Dom is staying but it means the Tories have lost 3m+ voters. The whole party is now infected with it, even if Boris was to go before 2024 I don't see a route to majority government. The party has transformed itself from being on the side of the people to being the elite in about 7 days.
I actually think that Starmer now has a route to winning 100-120 seats. If he drops some of the socially lefty crazy culture war stuff like letting biological men into women's bathrooms etc... he might just be able to get a Blair style swing and end up with 320-340 seats in parliament.
None of this was possible a few days ago, the race is now completely open where it never was before, even after the bungling response to the virus.
Is this a PR balls-up of rare proportions? Yes. But you're making a lot of my case for me. In 4 years, are people who hate identity politics suddenly going to love it because of Dominic Cummings? Are they suddenly going to like sky-high taxes and socialism because of Cummings? Mass immigration because of Cummings? Political correctness because of Cummings? No, they're not.
There's no doubt that 'events' are capable of pissing voters off, perhaps even in the medium or long term (although I'm sceptical about the latter - no one gets angry about MPs' expenses now, and that was once a much bigger story than Dom).
Ultimately, if the recovery from the virus is good, then the Tories have a good chance of holding on to power. If it isn't, then it doesn't really matter what a single SpaD did or didn't do four years prior.
No you're underestimating Kier. He's not Corbyn and he's not beholden to the insane left. I think he's captured all of the party machinery at last count so he's now in a position to tell the insane left to like it or lump it. As you can see in the last few days he's clearly taking that line with them.
As I said, if Kier moves to the centre on social issues he has a shot at a Blair style swing and a working majority. If he doesn't then it's going to be a very tough race but I think he's still more likely to win if Boris is still there.
Deep thought: People are talking like Kier Starmer not calling for Cummings to resign is a sign of cunning tactical genius, but maybe it means Kier Starmer knows that someone important on the Labour side broke the lockdown.
You are not the first person to suggest this on this forum.
Let us imagine the alternate history version of this crisis but with Seamus and Corbyn in charge.
morning of the story breaking Corbyn has demanded an emergency session of parliament to demand Dominic Cummings is sacked. We haven't had the Barnard Castle stuff revealed yet. Immediately every Tory MP rallies round the flag. This is a partisan hitjob. Twitter is filled with Right wing talking heads decrying the Labour party. The Barnard Castle stuff then comes out and is dismissed due to slight imperfections in the witnesses recollection of events. This is all over by Monday.
Starmer is following the Napoleonic maxim to perfection. Never interrupt an enemy making a mistake. Corbyn would be all over this like a cheap suit.
Also, Starmer has called for Cummnigs to be sacked - but only have a suitably long amount of time and in a low key way (saying he would have sacked him)
I think Starmer is handling it pretty well, but in danger of overdoing the restraint. In your alternate hgistory, I disagree. Corbyn would be ignoring Cummings (he virtually never attacks individuals, even the obvious ones) but demanding a special session to examine the impact of easing lockdown on low-paid workers. Cummings would get away with it for that reason, rather than that Corbyn was zeroing in on him.
Not that it matters now!
Starmer should focus on two things now:-
1. The lockdown easing measures and, in particular, whether they are being applied fairly. Or intelligently. See what I have already said about the absurdity of opening indoor shops before outside venues. Or allowing people to congregate in gardens but not go to a pub with a garden. Plus why the 2-metre advice (it’s not a rule) when most of Europe has it down to 1 metre.
2. Sunak’s plans to stop furlough, particularly the rumoured idea of asking businesses legally prevented from opening to pay 20% of wages and NI when they don’t have any income.
Completely agree with both points. Allowing outside venues for pubs and restaurants and meeting up under strict guidelines would make people far happier with continuing social distancing, and looks to be significantly safer than small indoor shops.
One sensible step might be a relaxation of licensing laws, that would allow an existing licensee to set up a temporary bar in a nearby park, field or car park, using a van, tent or market stall structure. Anyone who’s walked up the hill from Twickenham station to the stadium on a match day will know what I mean
My daughter has applied to vary her licence so that she can sell alcohol as an off licence and the authorities insisted that it can only be with food. Why? No good reason given.
It is absurd. The authorities are deliberately making it hard for such businesses to have a fighting chance to survive.
And to answer @Richard_Nabavi’s point: people who drink alcohol in their garden can get just as smashed as easily as in a pub. There is no logical or scientific rationale for allowing people to meet and drink in their gardens and not allowing them to meet and drink in a pub or restaurant garden. None.
I see that we are still focused on the absolute trivia of Cummings travel plans rather than the scandal that several thousand more jobs will be lost today (and tomorrow, and the next day) because of a lockdown that can safely be lifted in at least the vast bulk of the country with social distancing and adequate precautions.
As it happens I gave an online talk on this yesterday. The government has (and has had since 11th May) excellent advice covering 8 sectors of the economy designed to mitigate risk. It is well written, clear and helpful. It can be found here for those interested: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-coronavirus-covid-19
This is more than enough for most of our economy to get back to work now and I have no doubt similar guidance could be produced for restaurants and cafes. Pubs without outdoor gardens may be a bit more challenging.
We need to move on from this. I can't help feeling that a public sector who have been cossetted from the pain is so risk adverse that they would rather burn endless businesses than have anyone asking a question of them.
Most small (and many large) businesses already operate on the margins of viability, and will probably only be running at 20-30 per cent capacity under the Covid Safe guidance.
Theatres which can only fill every sixth seat; cosy restaurants with their capacity down from 30 covers to 8, factories whose lines can't operate without wholescale re-engineering.
Rishi Sunak is generally accepted to have played a blinder in the support offered, and is rightly finding ways of getting people back asap given the ruinous cost. But even with successful, simple messaging to make that happen, I can't see it being anything but utter economic carnage.
I agree that businesses that deal with a lot of people are going to find this difficult but they will need to adjust. So in a café if you have half the number of covers the overhead per cup of coffee sold increases. So the cost must increase too. Where possible overhead should be reduced, rents are going to have to fall, for example. Fewer staff will be required. Some will not survive the changes but none will survive a lockdown that runs through the summer and into the autumn.
That is simply unrealistic. Margins are very tight in hospitality. You simply cannot reduce overheads just like that and some of the measures talked about will require more staff not fewer. Nor can you double your prices.
1. If businesses are legally forced to operate in a manner which reduces their turnover to 20-30% of what it was before then they need to continue being supported or be given compensation, closed down and the owners can use that money to do something else entrepreneurial.
2. IMO guidance should be given. Guidance - it should not be a legal requirement. And businesses should take reasonable steps - reasonable in the context of their business. It is reasonable to have hand gel available, tables cleaned down, paper towels instead of air dryers, decent ventilation etc but not reasonable to expect venues where their whole shtick is getting people together to force them apart. Social closeness is the point of such venues. Forcing them to do the opposite is to kill them.
People should be advised but learn to take their own decisions about how they live.
We really need a proper debate about whether we are willing to live in a world without all the venues and activities which bring people close. I tried to start one the other day with my header. It really is needed. Life without many of the cultural, artistic, sporting and socialising activities we know and love is not life. It is mere existence. And it harms people in very real ways, as my family know to their cost only too well.
3. The government needs to work with the insurance industry to make the business interruption insurance policies business bought - expensively - real. Some burden-sharing between government, insurance companies and businesses is needed. But insurers have not treated their customers fairly. This has caused some anger and we need real action now not some ineffectual hand-wringing by the FCA in a few years time.
That`s an excellent post Cyclefree. You say: "IMO guidance should be given. Guidance - it should not be a legal requirement". Personally, I`d go further and say that it should be made clear that employers cannot be held liable for virus infections which are a risk to us all.
Put it to a referendum then, I would be happy to accept the result.
It may have passed you by, but referendums need a lot of widespread public support and government willpower before they take place in this country. You could always start a petition..
Betfair Sportsbook's odds on Cummings still being in his present position on Sunday, 1 June 2020 have shortened further to 1/3, the passage of time of course being a factor. The contrary bet is currently priced at 2/1.
As far as I can tell the government's "move on" line is making things worse. I think people have accepted that Dom is staying but it means the Tories have lost 3m+ voters. The whole party is now infected with it, even if Boris was to go before 2024 I don't see a route to majority government. The party has transformed itself from being on the side of the people to being the elite in about 7 days.
I actually think that Starmer now has a route to winning 100-120 seats. If he drops some of the socially lefty crazy culture war stuff like letting biological men into women's bathrooms etc... he might just be able to get a Blair style swing and end up with 320-340 seats in parliament.
None of this was possible a few days ago, the race is now completely open where it never was before, even after the bungling response to the virus.
Is this a PR balls-up of rare proportions? Yes. But you're making a lot of my case for me. In 4 years, are people who hate identity politics suddenly going to love it because of Dominic Cummings? Are they suddenly going to like sky-high taxes and socialism because of Cummings? Mass immigration because of Cummings? Political correctness because of Cummings? No, they're not.
There's no doubt that 'events' are capable of pissing voters off, perhaps even in the medium or long term (although I'm sceptical about the latter - no one gets angry about MPs' expenses now, and that was once a much bigger story than Dom).
Ultimately, if the recovery from the virus is good, then the Tories have a good chance of holding on to power. If it isn't, then it doesn't really matter what a single SpaD did or didn't do four years prior.
No you're underestimating Kier. He's not Corbyn and he's not beholden to the insane left. I think he's captured all of the party machinery at last count so he's now in a position to tell the insane left to like it or lump it. As you can see in the last few days he's clearly taking that line with them.
As I said, if Kier moves to the centre on social issues he has a shot at a Blair style swing and a working majority. If he doesn't then it's going to be a very tough race but I think he's still more likely to win if Boris is still there.
I am a Labour Party member and my very strong sense is that you are right. The "project" - if we can term it that - is over. I happen not to be overjoyed about this if it leads, as I fear it will, to a certain blandness on policy and a reluctance to push the equality agenda, but of course I will still be voting Labour. So, retain me and my ilk, plus win a ton of floaters and apoliticals - with the obvious caveat of the next election being yonks away, this IMO spells PM Starmer. This slightly dull but highly competent and palpably decent man is going to get his picture on the Downing St staircase. The big question is, will he be next to Boris Johnson or will there be another picture hanging there between them?
I agree with most of this, but I think you may be pleasantly surprised. I see Starmer as centre left, rather than centre. In due course I'd expect a policy programme that is quite redistributive on economics, fairly radical on social policy, and reasonably challenging to entrenched power. Currently he is, rightly in my view, focusing on putting some clear blue (or red) water between the party and the groups that sought to hijack it under Corbyn with their focus on identitarian politics, their view that Israel/Palestine was the biggest issue in British politics, and so on. He knows full well that to win back the red wall he has to move the party - not so much away from the left, but away from the factional left, many of whom were never Labour supporters before Corbyn. And yes I think he will push the equality agenda, but not in a way that alienates those who do not think that views on transexualism, for example, are the touchstone for being a socialist.
I don't mind if Americans want guns. Just don't ask me to feel appalled at the next lunatic slaughters children at their school desks incident. It happens time and time again with people reacting by voting in politicians who protect the rights of the lunatic over the children.
I don't get it. Its almost incomprehensible to me. On a human level of course you grieve for the victims. But at a societal level? You get what you vote for, and they vote for slaughter of the innocents.
It certainly makes one skeptical about thinking and religion, what with all those thoughts and prayers not making gnat's piss of a difference.
I see that we are still focused on the absolute trivia of Cummings travel plans rather than the scandal that several thousand more jobs will be lost today (and tomorrow, and the next day) because of a lockdown that can safely be lifted in at least the vast bulk of the country with social distancing and adequate precautions.
As it happens I gave an online talk on this yesterday. The government has (and has had since 11th May) excellent advice covering 8 sectors of the economy designed to mitigate risk. It is well written, clear and helpful. It can be found here for those interested: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-coronavirus-covid-19
This is more than enough for most of our economy to get back to work now and I have no doubt similar guidance could be produced for restaurants and cafes. Pubs without outdoor gardens may be a bit more challenging.
We need to move on from this. I can't help feeling that a public sector who have been cossetted from the pain is so risk adverse that they would rather burn endless businesses than have anyone asking a question of them.
Most small (and many large) businesses already operate on the margins of viability, and will probably only be running at 20-30 per cent capacity under the Covid Safe guidance.
Theatres which can only fill every sixth seat; cosy restaurants with their capacity down from 30 covers to 8, factories whose lines can't operate without wholescale re-engineering.
Rishi Sunak is generally accepted to have played a blinder in the support offered, and is rightly finding ways of getting people back asap given the ruinous cost. But even with successful, simple messaging to make that happen, I can't see it being anything but utter economic carnage.
I agree that businesses that deal with a lot of people are going to find this difficult but they will need to adjust. So in a café if you have half the number of covers the overhead per cup of coffee sold increases. So the cost must increase too. Where possible overhead should be reduced, rents are going to have to fall, for example. Fewer staff will be required. Some will not survive the changes but none will survive a lockdown that runs through the summer and into the autumn.
That is simply unrealistic. Margins are very tight in hospitality. You simply cannot reduce overheads just like that and some of the measures talked about will require more staff not fewer. Nor can you double your prices.
1. If businesses are legally forced to operate in a manner which reduces their turnover to 20-30% of what it was before then they need to continue being supported or be given compensation, closed down and the owners can use that money to do something else entrepreneurial.
2. IMO guidance should be given. Guidance - it should not be a legal requirement. And businesses should take reasonable steps - reasonable in the context of their business. It is reasonable to have hand gel available, tables cleaned down, paper towels instead of air dryers, decent ventilation etc but not reasonable to expect venues where their whole shtick is getting people together to force them apart. Social closeness is the point of such venues. Forcing them to do the opposite is to kill them.
People should be advised but learn to take their own decisions about how they live.
We really need a proper debate about whether we are willing to live in a world without all the venues and activities which bring people close. I tried to start one the other day with my header. It really is needed. Life without many of the cultural, artistic, sporting and socialising activities we know and love is not life. It is mere existence. And it harms people in very real ways, as my family know to their cost only too well.
3. The government needs to work with the insurance industry to make the business interruption insurance policies business bought - expensively - real. Some burden-sharing between government, insurance companies and businesses is needed. But insurers have not treated their customers fairly. This has caused some anger and we need real action now not some ineffectual hand-wringing by the FCA in a few years time.
I think one of the prime constraints on reopening is the failure to have a full track and trace infrastructure up and running. I simply don't believe the 'world beating by June 1st' nonsense - and in any event, a more proactive government could have had something up and running many weeks ago.
Reopening comes with risks. I agree with the principle that people should make their own decisions about how they live - but those decisions have consequences for everyone else. Having a system in place to mitigate outbreaks goes a long way to reconciling the interests of the individual with those of the rest of society.
And having a population willing to stay at home if they have a respiratory infection is perhaps just as important.
Maybe. But government needs to realise that if such venues cannot open during the summer season when they earn the majority of the year’s income, the majority will likely never reopen at all.
Is the government prepared for the wave of bankruptcies and unemployment that will follow, the economic, social and health consequences of the destruction of large parts of the tourism and hospitality sectors in parts of the country where there are few alternative industries - and which, coincidentally, have just elected a load of Tory MPs, some of them for the first time?
For me, the real game changer could be the twenty-minute test. If it can be made self-contained and cheap and readily available AND numbers of infection are low at the time, the amount of possibilities it unlocks are astonishing.
Spit into this tube of gunk and put it in boiling water for twenty minutes and see if it changes colour. If not, you're clear; if it does, go and self-isolate for two weeks (not necessarily in Durham).
Visit your old Mum, do this and wait at the front door for twenty minutes. If all are clear; go in and don't worry about social distancing in that house.
Go to a sporting event or artistic event or theatre - set this up so it can be done outside and wait - everyone must pass to be allowed inside social distancing. Logistically challenging, but could be done.
Make it a part of the departure process to get on a plane; everyone must pass and if they are, no problem.
If you have it outside a restaurant, either stick to social distancing in the outside garden, or do this and wait for twenty minutes and if everyone passes, in you go and don't worry about social distancing.
Hell, if we get this and it's very common, we could hunt down and kill off the virus.
I wonder if in the medium term we could go further and in 5 years time the same process could be sped up to say 3 minutes, and used to get rid of most colds and flus.
Would be very welcome. The common cold ruins people's social lives. I have seen umpteen friends have miserable Christmases because they are struggling with a cold.
Deep thought: People are talking like Kier Starmer not calling for Cummings to resign is a sign of cunning tactical genius, but maybe it means Kier Starmer knows that someone important on the Labour side broke the lockdown.
You are not the first person to suggest this on this forum.
Let us imagine the alternate history version of this crisis but with Seamus and Corbyn in charge.
morning of the story breaking Corbyn has demanded an emergency session of parliament to demand Dominic Cummings is sacked. We haven't had the Barnard Castle stuff revealed yet. Immediately every Tory MP rallies round the flag. This is a partisan hitjob. Twitter is filled with Right wing talking heads decrying the Labour party. The Barnard Castle stuff then comes out and is dismissed due to slight imperfections in the witnesses recollection of events. This is all over by Monday.
Starmer is following the Napoleonic maxim to perfection. Never interrupt an enemy making a mistake. Corbyn would be all over this like a cheap suit.
Also, Starmer has called for Cummnigs to be sacked - but only have a suitably long amount of time and in a low key way (saying he would have sacked him)
I think Starmer is handling it pretty well, but in danger of overdoing the restraint. In your alternate hgistory, I disagree. Corbyn would be ignoring Cummings (he virtually never attacks individuals, even the obvious ones) but demanding a special session to examine the impact of easing lockdown on low-paid workers. Cummings would get away with it for that reason, rather than that Corbyn was zeroing in on him.
Not that it matters now!
Starmer should focus on two things now:-
1. The lockdown easing measures and, in particular, whether they are being applied fairly. Or intelligently. See what I have already said about the absurdity of opening indoor shops before outside venues. Or allowing people to congregate in gardens but not go to a pub with a garden. Plus why the 2-metre advice (it’s not a rule) when most of Europe has it down to 1 metre.
2. Sunak’s plans to stop furlough, particularly the rumoured idea of asking businesses legally prevented from opening to pay 20% of wages and NI when they don’t have any income.
Completely agree with both points. Allowing outside venues for pubs and restaurants and meeting up under strict guidelines would make people far happier with continuing social distancing, and looks to be significantly safer than small indoor shops.
One sensible step might be a relaxation of licensing laws, that would allow an existing licensee to set up a temporary bar in a nearby park, field or car park, using a van, tent or market stall structure. Anyone who’s walked up the hill from Twickenham station to the stadium on a match day will know what I mean
My daughter has applied to vary her licence so that she can sell alcohol as an off licence and the authorities insisted that it can only be with food. Why? No good reason given.
It is absurd. The authorities are deliberately making it hard for such businesses to have a fighting chance to survive.
And to answer @Richard_Nabavi’s point: people who drink alcohol in their garden can get just as smashed as easily as in a pub. There is no logical or scientific rationale for allowing people to meet and drink in their gardens and not allowing them to meet and drink in a pub or restaurant garden. None.
They seem to be largely blaming the company that runs it on my reading. It sounds hellish for residents and staff.
'Soon after a nationwide lockdown went into effect in March, a new deputy manager arrived from Kent, in southeastern England. HC-One has said she isolated before starting work. But that was before she made the 650-mile journey to the island, the employees and HC-One said. She eventually became sick and stopped working, the company said. Feeling unprotected by management, employees cleaned the home obsessively and enforced their own distancing rules. When residents were startled, as they often were, aides held their hands and stroked them. Sometimes employees broke down crying.
“People were petrified,” one of the employees said.
For HC-One, the nursing home business has been lucrative, as the company paid more than 50 million pounds, or nearly $61 million, in dividends from 2017 to 2019.'
'...HC-One warned that its “ability to continue as a going concern” was in jeopardy. But nursing home finances are difficult to trace. The HC-One group includes 62 companies, 19 of them registered offshore, and its parent company is based in the Cayman Islands. “It’s money before care all the time,” Ms. Harris said. “The staff they did have worked so hard, but they’ve been let down.”'
The Commonweal report was very damning of Care Homes too - but no mention of the politician actually responsible for Scottish Care Homes (in this and her previous job) for over a dozen years is quite a free pass!
I don't want to get into another argument over Cummings as I think I have spent enough time on that matter but I do want to criticise the governments handling of this now.
It's too apologetic, too weak and too equivocal.
I keep hearing people get asked if others should use their judgement and there's equivocation and it looks weak and dodgy. FFS there should be no question the answer should have always been yes! A clear, unequivocal yes.
Stay at home is a guideline but of course there'll be exceptions. If your house is on fire then get out. There has to be a line drawn somewhere but that line is grey and will have grey cases either side.
What's so difficult to say to people: "yes of course, use your common sense"?
Either you accept people using their common sense - in which case that must apply to everyone - or you don't. This equivocation is weak.
First minister out betting. In reshuffles, most books use dead-heat rules but Starsports settle on the first one announced. Probably worth bearing in mind.
As far as I can tell the government's "move on" line is making things worse. I think people have accepted that Dom is staying but it means the Tories have lost 3m+ voters. The whole party is now infected with it, even if Boris was to go before 2024 I don't see a route to majority government. The party has transformed itself from being on the side of the people to being the elite in about 7 days.
I actually think that Starmer now has a route to winning 100-120 seats. If he drops some of the socially lefty crazy culture war stuff like letting biological men into women's bathrooms etc... he might just be able to get a Blair style swing and end up with 320-340 seats in parliament.
None of this was possible a few days ago, the race is now completely open where it never was before, even after the bungling response to the virus.
Is this a PR balls-up of rare proportions? Yes. But you're making a lot of my case for me. In 4 years, are people who hate identity politics suddenly going to love it because of Dominic Cummings? Are they suddenly going to like sky-high taxes and socialism because of Cummings? Mass immigration because of Cummings? Political correctness because of Cummings? No, they're not.
There's no doubt that 'events' are capable of pissing voters off, perhaps even in the medium or long term (although I'm sceptical about the latter - no one gets angry about MPs' expenses now, and that was once a much bigger story than Dom).
Ultimately, if the recovery from the virus is good, then the Tories have a good chance of holding on to power. If it isn't, then it doesn't really matter what a single SpaD did or didn't do four years prior.
No you're underestimating Kier. He's not Corbyn and he's not beholden to the insane left. I think he's captured all of the party machinery at last count so he's now in a position to tell the insane left to like it or lump it. As you can see in the last few days he's clearly taking that line with them.
As I said, if Kier moves to the centre on social issues he has a shot at a Blair style swing and a working majority. If he doesn't then it's going to be a very tough race but I think he's still more likely to win if Boris is still there.
I don't underestimate Keir at all. He's definitely swinging to the centre on political culture, and making superficial noises about a similar swing on some cultural issues. Though he hasn't made any significant shift on the economy, and I don't ultimately believe he will.
He's doing this intelligently so far, but there are pitfalls even for him.
First, Labour politics is a crusade of moral fervour and 'passion' for many activists and voters - if you can't get the thrill of an extreme platform and hating the Tories openly, then a lot of the fun goes out of politics for these people, and they may despise him as much they did Miliband for being milquetoast.
Second - although this is more a pitfall for Labour values than its electoral prospects - if he becomes Blair then he _deserves_ to beat the Tories and win power. Many Conservatives will genuinely not be afraid to vote for him, nor will Lib Dems and others. A Labour Party that's not dangerous would be a massive win for the country.
I'm not yet convinced he'll get there, wish to get there, or be allowed to get there. But we'll see.
Calling BluestBlue - someone has logged on with your name and posted sensible and insightful non partisan analysis!
Relatively speaking, yes. But note the message. Labour can win an election if they drop those pesky Labour values. That, to me, does not sound like somebody who wants to meet in the middle and kick a ball about. It sounds like somebody still very much in the trenches.
I disagree. The point about the emotional side of Labour activists is very important. The passion, moralising and certainty that drives many to join Labour to bring about change, is a turn off for many voters, even if they quite like some or many of the policies.
Hating the Tories and showing it with passion is a pathetic position for a major party in a mostly 2 party country.
I dislike the PM and this govt very much, but I couldnt dream of hating someone just because they voted for it. And even if I could I would know with certainty it isnt a good way to convince them to change their minds.
Radical policies are needed for the country, the coming decade is not going to be bland because of the rate of technical change and international turbulence. They will be needed whoever is in power.
Deep thought: People are talking like Kier Starmer not calling for Cummings to resign is a sign of cunning tactical genius, but maybe it means Kier Starmer knows that someone important on the Labour side broke the lockdown.
You are not the first person to suggest this on this forum.
Let us imagine the alternate history version of this crisis but with Seamus and Corbyn in charge.
morning of the story breaking Corbyn has demanded an emergency session of parliament to demand Dominic Cummings is sacked. We haven't had the Barnard Castle stuff revealed yet. Immediately every Tory MP rallies round the flag. This is a partisan hitjob. Twitter is filled with Right wing talking heads decrying the Labour party. The Barnard Castle stuff then comes out and is dismissed due to slight imperfections in the witnesses recollection of events. This is all over by Monday.
Starmer is following the Napoleonic maxim to perfection. Never interrupt an enemy making a mistake. Corbyn would be all over this like a cheap suit.
Also, Starmer has called for Cummnigs to be sacked - but only have a suitably long amount of time and in a low key way (saying he would have sacked him)
I think Starmer is handling it pretty well, but in danger of overdoing the restraint. In your alternate hgistory, I disagree. Corbyn would be ignoring Cummings (he virtually never attacks individuals, even the obvious ones) but demanding a special session to examine the impact of easing lockdown on low-paid workers. Cummings would get away with it for that reason, rather than that Corbyn was zeroing in on him.
Not that it matters now!
Starmer should focus on two things now:-
1. The lockdown easing measures and, in particular, whether they are being applied fairly. Or intelligently. See what I have already said about the absurdity of opening indoor shops before outside venues. Or allowing people to congregate in gardens but not go to a pub with a garden. Plus why the 2-metre advice (it’s not a rule) when most of Europe has it down to 1 metre.
2. Sunak’s plans to stop furlough, particularly the rumoured idea of asking businesses legally prevented from opening to pay 20% of wages and NI when they don’t have any income.
Completely agree with both points. Allowing outside venues for pubs and restaurants and meeting up under strict guidelines would make people far happier with continuing social distancing, and looks to be significantly safer than small indoor shops.
One sensible step might be a relaxation of licensing laws, that would allow an existing licensee to set up a temporary bar in a nearby park, field or car park, using a van, tent or market stall structure. Anyone who’s walked up the hill from Twickenham station to the stadium on a match day will know what I mean
My daughter has applied to vary her licence so that she can sell alcohol as an off licence and the authorities insisted that it can only be with food. Why? No good reason given.
It is absurd. The authorities are deliberately making it hard for such businesses to have a fighting chance to survive.
And to answer @Richard_Nabavi’s point: people who drink alcohol in their garden can get just as smashed as easily as in a pub. There is no logical or scientific rationale for allowing people to meet and drink in their gardens and not allowing them to meet and drink in a pub or restaurant garden. None.
That's madness. Utter madness.
Shouldn't even need to apply. Should be automatic for everyone. Insanity and the government needs to do a better job on this.
So I finally looked up this Emilie Oldknow report last night.
It seems someone hacked her phone and read a bunch of private messages – it's no wonder some were rather rude about her colleagues.
They were bitchy, yes, but is that really that unusual in business? Someone on here said they were racist and sexist. Really? They just seemed like standard office bitchiness to me.
Deep thought: People are talking like Kier Starmer not calling for Cummings to resign is a sign of cunning tactical genius, but maybe it means Kier Starmer knows that someone important on the Labour side broke the lockdown.
You are not the first person to suggest this on this forum.
Let us imagine the alternate history version of this crisis but with Seamus and Corbyn in charge.
morning of the story breaking Corbyn has demanded an emergency session of parliament to demand Dominic Cummings is sacked. We haven't had the Barnard Castle stuff revealed yet. Immediately every Tory MP rallies round the flag. This is a partisan hitjob. Twitter is filled with Right wing talking heads decrying the Labour party. The Barnard Castle stuff then comes out and is dismissed due to slight imperfections in the witnesses recollection of events. This is all over by Monday.
Starmer is following the Napoleonic maxim to perfection. Never interrupt an enemy making a mistake. Corbyn would be all over this like a cheap suit.
Also, Starmer has called for Cummnigs to be sacked - but only have a suitably long amount of time and in a low key way (saying he would have sacked him)
I think Starmer is handling it pretty well, but in danger of overdoing the restraint. In your alternate hgistory, I disagree. Corbyn would be ignoring Cummings (he virtually never attacks individuals, even the obvious ones) but demanding a special session to examine the impact of easing lockdown on low-paid workers. Cummings would get away with it for that reason, rather than that Corbyn was zeroing in on him.
Not that it matters now!
Starmer should focus on two things now:-
1. The lockdown easing measures and, in particular, whether they are being applied fairly. Or intelligently. See what I have already said about the absurdity of opening indoor shops before outside venues. Or allowing people to congregate in gardens but not go to a pub with a garden. Plus why the 2-metre advice (it’s not a rule) when most of Europe has it down to 1 metre.
2. Sunak’s plans to stop furlough, particularly the rumoured idea of asking businesses legally prevented from opening to pay 20% of wages and NI when they don’t have any income.
Completely agree with both points. Allowing outside venues for pubs and restaurants and meeting up under strict guidelines would make people far happier with continuing social distancing, and looks to be significantly safer than small indoor shops.
One sensible step might be a relaxation of licensing laws, that would allow an existing licensee to set up a temporary bar in a nearby park, field or car park, using a van, tent or market stall structure. Anyone who’s walked up the hill from Twickenham station to the stadium on a match day will know what I mean
My daughter has applied to vary her licence so that she can sell alcohol as an off licence and the authorities insisted that it can only be with food. Why? No good reason given.
It is absurd. The authorities are deliberately making it hard for such businesses to have a fighting chance to survive.
And to answer @Richard_Nabavi’s point: people who drink alcohol in their garden can get just as smashed as easily as in a pub. There is no logical or scientific rationale for allowing people to meet and drink in their gardens and not allowing them to meet and drink in a pub or restaurant garden. None.
Surely it is the shared toilet facilities that is the problem? The more people you have in one place, the more mixing there is going to be. In a garden you are at least limiting contacts to a single group.
Deep thought: People are talking like Kier Starmer not calling for Cummings to resign is a sign of cunning tactical genius, but maybe it means Kier Starmer knows that someone important on the Labour side broke the lockdown.
You are not the first person to suggest this on this forum.
Let us imagine the alternate history version of this crisis but with Seamus and Corbyn in charge.
morning of the story breaking Corbyn has demanded an emergency session of parliament to demand Dominic Cummings is sacked. We haven't had the Barnard Castle stuff revealed yet. Immediately every Tory MP rallies round the flag. This is a partisan hitjob. Twitter is filled with Right wing talking heads decrying the Labour party. The Barnard Castle stuff then comes out and is dismissed due to slight imperfections in the witnesses recollection of events. This is all over by Monday.
Starmer is following the Napoleonic maxim to perfection. Never interrupt an enemy making a mistake. Corbyn would be all over this like a cheap suit.
Also, Starmer has called for Cummnigs to be sacked - but only have a suitably long amount of time and in a low key way (saying he would have sacked him)
I think Starmer is handling it pretty well, but in danger of overdoing the restraint. In your alternate hgistory, I disagree. Corbyn would be ignoring Cummings (he virtually never attacks individuals, even the obvious ones) but demanding a special session to examine the impact of easing lockdown on low-paid workers. Cummings would get away with it for that reason, rather than that Corbyn was zeroing in on him.
Not that it matters now!
Starmer should focus on two things now:-
1. The lockdown easing measures and, in particular, whether they are being applied fairly. Or intelligently. See what I have already said about the absurdity of opening indoor shops before outside venues. Or allowing people to congregate in gardens but not go to a pub with a garden. Plus why the 2-metre advice (it’s not a rule) when most of Europe has it down to 1 metre.
2. Sunak’s plans to stop furlough, particularly the rumoured idea of asking businesses legally prevented from opening to pay 20% of wages and NI when they don’t have any income.
Completely agree with both points. Allowing outside venues for pubs and restaurants and meeting up under strict guidelines would make people far happier with continuing social distancing, and looks to be significantly safer than small indoor shops.
One sensible step might be a relaxation of licensing laws, that would allow an existing licensee to set up a temporary bar in a nearby park, field or car park, using a van, tent or market stall structure. Anyone who’s walked up the hill from Twickenham station to the stadium on a match day will know what I mean
My daughter has applied to vary her licence so that she can sell alcohol as an off licence and the authorities insisted that it can only be with food. Why? No good reason given.
It is absurd. The authorities are deliberately making it hard for such businesses to have a fighting chance to survive.
And to answer @Richard_Nabavi’s point: people who drink alcohol in their garden can get just as smashed as easily as in a pub. There is no logical or scientific rationale for allowing people to meet and drink in their gardens and not allowing them to meet and drink in a pub or restaurant garden. None.
Good luck to your daughter, hopefully she can eventually persuade the authorities to hear her case, if it looks like she’ll otherwise miss the summer season. Sadly, the hospitality industry is going to join aviation as the last industry back on its feet.
If we are not going to be allowed to loiter indoors, and it’s looking like a good summer, then surely the least we can do is allow a beer tent to set up in everyone’s local park?
If you still see it totally in those terms you are just highlighting your political ineptitude. The papers have been reporting it in the way they have because of the reaction of their readers. Go look at comments on Mail online.
I've looked at the comments on the latest Mail article and they're very positive towards Cummings and very anti media. So maybe the opinion of their readers have changed or maybe as has been stated people are growing tired of a story that interests the media a lot more than it interests a lot of the public.
Big story yes, 6 days in the news nope. Likewise Telegraph readers very positive towards Dom staying on their comments. As I have argued before the chance for a scalp has more likely than not passed. Pippa Crear didn't quite do enough.
Are you sure you're reading the same Mail Online as I am?
Are not the Mail and the Mail Online run separately?
They are but I am not aware of two separate websites.
Not sure what you you're looking at but the 2 biggest articles 'Tory Civil War' and about 'Emily Maitilis' certainly are not anti Cummings comment wise. Perhaps you had not looked at top rated comments.
Deep thought: People are talking like Kier Starmer not calling for Cummings to resign is a sign of cunning tactical genius, but maybe it means Kier Starmer knows that someone important on the Labour side broke the lockdown.
You are not the first person to suggest this on this forum.
Let us imagine the alternate history version of this crisis but with Seamus and Corbyn in charge.
morning of the story breaking Corbyn has demanded an emergency session of parliament to demand Dominic Cummings is sacked. We haven't had the Barnard Castle stuff revealed yet. Immediately every Tory MP rallies round the flag. This is a partisan hitjob. Twitter is filled with Right wing talking heads decrying the Labour party. The Barnard Castle stuff then comes out and is dismissed due to slight imperfections in the witnesses recollection of events. This is all over by Monday.
Starmer is following the Napoleonic maxim to perfection. Never interrupt an enemy making a mistake. Corbyn would be all over this like a cheap suit.
Also, Starmer has called for Cummnigs to be sacked - but only have a suitably long amount of time and in a low key way (saying he would have sacked him)
I think Starmer is handling it pretty well, but in danger of overdoing the restraint. In your alternate hgistory, I disagree. Corbyn would be ignoring Cummings (he virtually never attacks individuals, even the obvious ones) but demanding a special session to examine the impact of easing lockdown on low-paid workers. Cummings would get away with it for that reason, rather than that Corbyn was zeroing in on him.
Not that it matters now!
Starmer should focus on two things now:-
1. The lockdown easing measures and, in particular, whether they are being applied fairly. Or intelligently. See what I have already said about the absurdity of opening indoor shops before outside venues. Or allowing people to congregate in gardens but not go to a pub with a garden. Plus why the 2-metre advice (it’s not a rule) when most of Europe has it down to 1 metre.
2. Sunak’s plans to stop furlough, particularly the rumoured idea of asking businesses legally prevented from opening to pay 20% of wages and NI when they don’t have any income.
Completely agree with both points. Allowing outside venues for pubs and restaurants and meeting up under strict guidelines would make people far happier with continuing social distancing, and looks to be significantly safer than small indoor shops.
One sensible step might be a relaxation of licensing laws, that would allow an existing licensee to set up a temporary bar in a nearby park, field or car park, using a van, tent or market stall structure. Anyone who’s walked up the hill from Twickenham station to the stadium on a match day will know what I mean
My daughter has applied to vary her licence so that she can sell alcohol as an off licence and the authorities insisted that it can only be with food. Why? No good reason given.
It is absurd. The authorities are deliberately making it hard for such businesses to have a fighting chance to survive.
And to answer @Richard_Nabavi’s point: people who drink alcohol in their garden can get just as smashed as easily as in a pub. There is no logical or scientific rationale for allowing people to meet and drink in their gardens and not allowing them to meet and drink in a pub or restaurant garden. None.
Hmm. I wondered if the logic lies in the need to track and trace, in the absence of a decent app. I'd remember who came to visit me at home, but wouldn't have a clue who was in the table next to me in the local pub, or even always what times I had been a week before. But if the t&t scheme was using things like credit/debit card data anyway, that difference isn't so strong.
Republicans feel that Social Media Platforms totally silence conservatives voices. We will strongly regulate, or close them down, before we can ever allow this to happen. We saw what they attempted to do, and failed, in 2016. We can’t let a more sophisticated version of that....
Comments
https://twitter.com/kwr66/status/1265583012630138880?s=20
Big story yes, 6 days in the news nope. Likewise Telegraph readers very positive towards Dom staying on their comments. As I have argued before the chance for a scalp has more likely than not passed. Pippa Crear didn't quite do enough.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/30/coronavirus-i-feel-a-tremendous-sense-of-humility-mp-tony-lloyd-on-how-nhs-saved-his-life
He came down with symptoms after returning to Manchester, before the general lockdown was imposed and was not expecting to fall ill, unlike Cummings, or already ill.
Pathetic attempt at a smear.
a) Why didn't his wife drive home? He said she recovered quicker than him. Why?
b) Why wasn't a car and driver arranged to bring him home if there were concerns? My wife is considerably less important that DC, but when she broke her wrist at a conference a car and driver was organised to bring her home and we recovered the car later (from Wales to Surrey)
c) Why did DC amend his old blog post on the day he returned and why did he refer to it at the press session. Even if this has nothing to do with the event why is he manipulating something to make it look like he forecasted something (dishonestly) and why for goodness sake on the day he returned when he was supposedly busy and worried about work and if he did want to do it he could have done it anytime he choose?
It is c) that concerns me most as this is very odd indeed. It might be completely unrelated, but even if it is it is a very odd thing to do, unless you reference the change. It is altering history to make it look like you predicted something. And the timing is really, really odd.
There are going to be a whole slew of foul-ups like this. TBH, even if Cummings was gone (or the scandal was gone), we are making the assumption that the Govt would be up to the job.
People hailed the furlough as a near-miracle saving the economy. I am becoming less than sure about that. It might very will be the thing that destroys the economy because too many people like being paid to sit at home.
Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
Napoleon is not a pig.
Water is not wet.
The Pope is not a Catholic.
Tories are not dunderheids.
He's doing this intelligently so far, but there are pitfalls even for him.
First, Labour politics is a crusade of moral fervour and 'passion' for many activists and voters - if you can't get the thrill of an extreme platform and hating the Tories openly, then a lot of the fun goes out of politics for these people, and they may despise him as much they did Miliband for being milquetoast.
Second - although this is more a pitfall for Labour values than its electoral prospects - if he becomes Blair then he _deserves_ to beat the Tories and win power. Many Conservatives will genuinely not be afraid to vote for him, nor will Lib Dems and others. A Labour Party that's not dangerous would be a massive win for the country.
I'm not yet convinced he'll get there, wish to get there, or be allowed to get there. But we'll see.
Outside of the political and media theatre, there is a basic issue of decency and moral authority. The government, by keeping Dom, has shown itself to have lost both. Again, it's why I couldn't stay in the party. We have a quarantine breaker in charge of telling people they have to go into quarantine if they come into contact with a person who has tested positive. That isn't going to work, people aren't going to listen and the idea that "civic duty" still exists while Dom is in charge of this is laughable.
I don't care about the scalp, I don't care about the political game. I was a member for 8 years, I've campaigned for Boris to be mayor and I've campaigned for him to be PM. This has absolutely shattered any pretense that Boris is one of the people. He's protecting his mates just like all the other corrupt politicians.
The secondary damage is to the Cabinet, whose members look supine, but there is also the contrast effect where the whole mess makes SKS look good as long as no one trips up on the Labour side.
In general I'd say my highest level of distrust would be about my fellow citizens using stuff that's designed to kill things as opposed to stuff that isn't.
The greater good just happens to be him making the decisions for the country. So lying about predicting the crisis, or why he did whatever is completely justified in his mind.
Once you understand that there is nothing odd about it at all. The question is are those who are aligned to his goals willing to put up with it? And the answer is yes, enough are.
1. Warships in the Channel to machine-gun migrant boats.
2. Treason charges for those who disagreed with the result of the EE Referendum.
3. The death penalty for loitering.
OK, I made the last one up. But not the first two!
Still want the Government to use the Daily Mail comments to make decisions?
At £500, lets have the conversation.
Most guns never kill anyone (unless paper targets get to self declare as people), cars and governments regulary commit slaughter.
Did you prefer Boris's letter supporting remaining in the EU
Did you prefer Boris's letter supporting leaving the EU
https://twitter.com/RishiSunak/status/1265592505724256257?s=20
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/25/world/europe/coronavirus-uk-nursing-homes.html
I simply don't believe the 'world beating by June 1st' nonsense - and in any event, a more proactive government could have had something up and running many weeks ago.
Reopening comes with risks. I agree with the principle that people should make their own decisions about how they live - but those decisions have consequences for everyone else. Having a system in place to mitigate outbreaks goes a long way to reconciling the interests of the individual with those of the rest of society.
And having a population willing to stay at home if they have a respiratory infection is perhaps just as important.
I have been saying this for days.
Of course, I am Tony Blair.
Has Sir Keir heard of Nandos ? Probably thinks it was one of his leadership opponents - the one who kept prattling on about gender neutral toilets.
We had that debate, and decided not.
For those who think Kier needs a clause 4 type battle, this is where it probably lies and being tough on militancy and playing the tough on PC gone mad part whilst doing lots on equality is something that could very much suit him personally.
I don't get it. Its almost incomprehensible to me. On a human level of course you grieve for the victims. But at a societal level? You get what you vote for, and they vote for slaughter of the innocents.
'Soon after a nationwide lockdown went into effect in March, a new deputy manager arrived from Kent, in southeastern England. HC-One has said she isolated before starting work. But that was before she made the 650-mile journey to the island, the employees and HC-One said. She eventually became sick and stopped working, the company said.
Feeling unprotected by management, employees cleaned the home obsessively and enforced their own distancing rules. When residents were startled, as they often were, aides held their hands and stroked them. Sometimes employees broke down crying.
“People were petrified,” one of the employees said.
For HC-One, the nursing home business has been lucrative, as the company paid more than 50 million pounds, or nearly $61 million, in dividends from 2017 to 2019.'
'...HC-One warned that its “ability to continue as a going concern” was in jeopardy.
But nursing home finances are difficult to trace. The HC-One group includes 62 companies, 19 of them registered offshore, and its parent company is based in the Cayman Islands.
“It’s money before care all the time,” Ms. Harris said. “The staff they did have worked so hard, but they’ve been let down.”'
For example: I suggest that there is better evidence for banning motorbikes than handguns. Put it to a referendum then, I would be happy to accept the result.
Will be your "civic duty" to stay home after a holiday - where possible. But not law.
K
E
I
R
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1265473520294903808?s=20
It is absurd. The authorities are deliberately making it hard for such businesses to have a fighting chance to survive.
And to answer @Richard_Nabavi’s point: people who drink alcohol in their garden can get just as smashed as easily as in a pub. There is no logical or scientific rationale for allowing people to meet and drink in their gardens and not allowing them to meet and drink in a pub or restaurant garden. None.
Ladbrokes: 13/8 go, 4/9 stay
PP/Betfair: 2/1 go, 1/3 stay
Starsports: 15/8 go, 4/11 stay
Is the government prepared for the wave of bankruptcies and unemployment that will follow, the economic, social and health consequences of the destruction of large parts of the tourism and hospitality sectors in parts of the country where there are few alternative industries - and which, coincidentally, have just elected a load of Tory MPs, some of them for the first time?
It's a horrible thing to have.
Heart of stone etc..
It's too apologetic, too weak and too equivocal.
I keep hearing people get asked if others should use their judgement and there's equivocation and it looks weak and dodgy. FFS there should be no question the answer should have always been yes! A clear, unequivocal yes.
Stay at home is a guideline but of course there'll be exceptions. If your house is on fire then get out. There has to be a line drawn somewhere but that line is grey and will have grey cases either side.
What's so difficult to say to people: "yes of course, use your common sense"?
Either you accept people using their common sense - in which case that must apply to everyone - or you don't. This equivocation is weak.
https://twitter.com/GrayInGlasgow/status/1265236947808763909
Prof Tomkins did try something of the sort a few years back.
Hating the Tories and showing it with passion is a pathetic position for a major party in a mostly 2 party country.
I dislike the PM and this govt very much, but I couldnt dream of hating someone just because they voted for it. And even if I could I would know with certainty it isnt a good way to convince them to change their minds.
Radical policies are needed for the country, the coming decade is not going to be bland because of the rate of technical change and international turbulence. They will be needed whoever is in power.
Shouldn't even need to apply. Should be automatic for everyone. Insanity and the government needs to do a better job on this.
It seems someone hacked her phone and read a bunch of private messages – it's no wonder some were rather rude about her colleagues.
They were bitchy, yes, but is that really that unusual in business? Someone on here said they were racist and sexist. Really? They just seemed like standard office bitchiness to me.
There is definitely a difference.
If we are not going to be allowed to loiter indoors, and it’s looking like a good summer, then surely the least we can do is allow a beer tent to set up in everyone’s local park?
I've bolded the key bit.