I cannot see this government ordering an enquiry into its actions, and it would be pretty pointless for the next government. The search for blame is a natural instinct, but not a particularly productive one, as the partisans on either side have drawn their conclusions already, and just want a rubber stamp to confirm them.
The time would be better spent on planning to cope with an endemic virus, as it looks that we will have that for the summer.
Governors already saying they won't agree to Trump sending military personnel...setting up the dividing line.
Trump is Head of the US military as President, governors are only in charge of state police and guards
Isn't there a law regarding the use of military domestically in the US?
Posse Comitatus Act. @TSE predicted we'd become experts. Good call from someone who can't spot a decent goalkeeper.
Posse Comitatus does not overrule the President's powers under the Insurrection Act of 1807 to quell civil disorder
Actually it quite specifically does: it was passed at the end of Reconstruction specifically to stop the federal government from enforcing the Reconstruction laws in the Southern states, allowing them to bring in the Jim Crow era.
Trump can only impose federal troops on the states if a state government has been rendered unable to act by insurrection.
Posse Comitatus only limits the power of the President to enforce laws using the military without Congressional approval.
It does not stop the President's powers under the Insurrection and Enforcement Acts to deploy the military to quell civil disorder.
Indeed the military were deployed during the 1992 LA riots under the Insurrection Act
Did the state governor have to approve it?
Explicit consent of the state governor is not required if the state government is clearly unable to maintain civil order
I dare say Trump might try to argue that, but I doubt the courts would agree.
I would not be so sure, the Supreme Court now has a narrow conservative majority after Justice Kavanaugh was appointed under Trump to replace Justice Kennedy
I don't think either Gorsuch or Roberts would be particularly biddable. Gorsuch, in particular, has been very sceptical of Federal government overreach.
And Roberts on more than one occasion has broken with the conservative judges when he thinks the ruling is going to be wrong in the sense that it clearly would thwart the wishes of the electorate as expressed through whom they've elected to do what.
Roberts has impressed me enormously since becoming Chief Justice. He never rules on more than he has to. And he has no hesitation in standing up for an independent judiciary.
By contrast, I have very little time for Kavanaugh.
Interesting to see a thread header about coronavirus and everyone talking about something else.
For the past three months it's usually been the other way round.
Yesterday I switched on r5 at around 8am to hear a very interesting discussion about racism, institutional and otherwise, and it took me some time to realise that it had been ages since a news radio item hadn't been about Coronavirus.
One thing the government should plan for is some similar riots here. Such hot weather, money getting tight, boredom and people losing jobs is a recipe for such things. All it takes is the right spark.
One thing the government should plan for is some similar riots here. Such hot weather, money getting tight, boredom and people losing jobs is a recipe for such things. All it takes is the right spark.
If it kicks off in London, Boris should leave it to Sadiq.
One thing the government should plan for is some similar riots here. Such hot weather, money getting tight, boredom and people losing jobs is a recipe for such things. All it takes is the right spark.
Today looks to be the last of the hot weather for a while, with rain forecast for tomorrow.
One thing the government should plan for is some similar riots here. Such hot weather, money getting tight, boredom and people losing jobs is a recipe for such things. All it takes is the right spark.
Today looks to be the last of the hot weather for a while, with rain forecast for tomorrow.
Let's hope we have plenty of rain over the next few weeks.
Interesting to see a thread header about coronavirus and everyone talking about something else.
For the past three months it's usually been the other way round.
Yesterday I switched on r5 at around 8am to hear a very interesting discussion about racism, institutional and otherwise, and it took me some time to realise that it had been ages since a news radio item hadn't been about Coronavirus.
In fact half the news items on the main news page of the BBC website this morning were non-virus-related.
One thing the government should plan for is some similar riots here. Such hot weather, money getting tight, boredom and people losing jobs is a recipe for such things. All it takes is the right spark.
Today looks to be the last of the hot weather for a while, with rain forecast for tomorrow.
Let's hope we have plenty of rain over the next few weeks.
In the south of England where I am it looks like there will be a fair bit, particularly next week. In northern Scotland it is raining at the moment.
I cannot see this government ordering an enquiry into its actions, and it would be pretty pointless for the next government. The search for blame is a natural instinct, but not a particularly productive one, as the partisans on either side have drawn their conclusions already, and just want a rubber stamp to confirm them.
The time would be better spent on planning to cope with an endemic virus, as it looks that we will have that for the summer.
The frame of an enquiry should be more like a transport accident investigation, looking closely at everything that led up to the crisis, and especially noting the opportunities where a different decision would have materially changed the outcome.
It should include everyone who was involved in both the key decisions and the day-to-day management, from the Prime Minister to the most junior advisor, reflecting back on how things were managed and why decisions were made the way they were, and where with the benefit of hindsight mistakes were made.
If it's set up with the idea that people are going to be 'blamed', then it can only have negative effects on a future incident, with everyone involved way more interested in covering their own arses than actually addressing the problem. There's already a reasonable amount of evidence that this was to some extent an issue with this pandemic, especially within the senior ranks of the civil service and the quangos.
That's not what the politicians nor the media want from an enquiry, but the focus needs to be on learning from the crisis - doubly so when there could be a second wave coming down the line.
One thing the government should plan for is some similar riots here. Such hot weather, money getting tight, boredom and people losing jobs is a recipe for such things. All it takes is the right spark.
Yes, it's surprising we haven't seen similar troubles in many other places, as unemployment rises and we move into the summer.
Not much of a surprise that it eventually kicked off in the USA though, it's been bubbling under for quite a while, and as you say only needs one spark. Most of the people now on the streets clearly aren't the genuine protestors, but a variety of organised extremist groups.
I cannot see this government ordering an enquiry into its actions, and it would be pretty pointless for the next government. The search for blame is a natural instinct, but not a particularly productive one, as the partisans on either side have drawn their conclusions already, and just want a rubber stamp to confirm them.
The time would be better spent on planning to cope with an endemic virus, as it looks that we will have that for the summer.
The frame of an enquiry should be more like a transport accident investigation, looking closely at everything that led up to the crisis, and especially noting the opportunities where a different decision would have materially changed the outcome.
It should include everyone who was involved in both the key decisions and the day-to-day management, from the Prime Minister to the most junior advisor, reflecting back on how things were managed and why decisions were made the way they were, and where with the benefit of hindsight mistakes were made.
If it's set up with the idea that people are going to be 'blamed', then it can only have negative effects on a future incident, with everyone involved way more interested in covering their own arses than actually addressing the problem. There's already a reasonable amount of evidence that this was to some extent an issue with this pandemic, especially within the senior ranks of the civil service and the quangos.
That's not what the politicians nor the media want from an enquiry, but the focus needs to be on learning from the crisis - doubly so when there could be a second wave coming down the line.
Other than in the transport industry Britain doesn't do those though, does it?
As in 'Albert and the Lion' 'Somebody's got to be summonsed"! Although the magistrate in the case was very sensible.
This is just him being deliberately antagonistic because he can.
The govt will win all their votes either way.
It is just the govt showing how much contempt they have even for their own MPs. They think it makes them look strong, but the observant know it is a sign of weakness.
One thing the government should plan for is some similar riots here. Such hot weather, money getting tight, boredom and people losing jobs is a recipe for such things. All it takes is the right spark.
Today looks to be the last of the hot weather for a while, with rain forecast for tomorrow.
Let's hope we have plenty of rain over the next few weeks.
About a 40% chance, according the BBC in N Essex on Thursday. 5-2 against. Hmm.
Only a matter of time before we have civil unrest. A lack of money, nothing to do, hot weather will all contribute. It will just take a trigger point similar to the Duggan incident in Tottenham.
I cannot see this government ordering an enquiry into its actions, and it would be pretty pointless for the next government. The search for blame is a natural instinct, but not a particularly productive one, as the partisans on either side have drawn their conclusions already, and just want a rubber stamp to confirm them.
The time would be better spent on planning to cope with an endemic virus, as it looks that we will have that for the summer.
The frame of an enquiry should be more like a transport accident investigation, looking closely at everything that led up to the crisis, and especially noting the opportunities where a different decision would have materially changed the outcome.
It should include everyone who was involved in both the key decisions and the day-to-day management, from the Prime Minister to the most junior advisor, reflecting back on how things were managed and why decisions were made the way they were, and where with the benefit of hindsight mistakes were made.
If it's set up with the idea that people are going to be 'blamed', then it can only have negative effects on a future incident, with everyone involved way more interested in covering their own arses than actually addressing the problem. There's already a reasonable amount of evidence that this was to some extent an issue with this pandemic, especially within the senior ranks of the civil service and the quangos.
That's not what the politicians nor the media want from an enquiry, but the focus needs to be on learning from the crisis - doubly so when there could be a second wave coming down the line.
Other than in the transport industry Britain doesn't do those though, does it?
As in 'Albert and the Lion' 'Somebody's got to be summonsed"! Although the magistrate in the case was very sensible.
Indeed, which is why it's even more important to conduct the enquiry in this way.
It's not like the Iraq war, for example, which was an explicit government policy, it's dealing with a crisis that hit the country domestically, so the focus needs to be much less political and more looking towards managing the next similar crisis.
I cannot see this government ordering an enquiry into its actions, and it would be pretty pointless for the next government. The search for blame is a natural instinct, but not a particularly productive one, as the partisans on either side have drawn their conclusions already, and just want a rubber stamp to confirm them.
The time would be better spent on planning to cope with an endemic virus, as it looks that we will have that for the summer.
The frame of an enquiry should be more like a transport accident investigation, looking closely at everything that led up to the crisis, and especially noting the opportunities where a different decision would have materially changed the outcome.
It should include everyone who was involved in both the key decisions and the day-to-day management, from the Prime Minister to the most junior advisor, reflecting back on how things were managed and why decisions were made the way they were, and where with the benefit of hindsight mistakes were made.
If it's set up with the idea that people are going to be 'blamed', then it can only have negative effects on a future incident, with everyone involved way more interested in covering their own arses than actually addressing the problem. There's already a reasonable amount of evidence that this was to some extent an issue with this pandemic, especially within the senior ranks of the civil service and the quangos.
That's not what the politicians nor the media want from an enquiry, but the focus needs to be on learning from the crisis - doubly so when there could be a second wave coming down the line.
Other than in the transport industry Britain doesn't do those though, does it?
As in 'Albert and the Lion' 'Somebody's got to be summonsed"! Although the magistrate in the case was very sensible.
Indeed, which is why it's even more important to conduct the enquiry in this way.
It's not like the Iraq war, for example, which was an explicit government policy, it's dealing with a crisis that hit the country domestically, so the focus needs to be much less political and more looking towards managing the next similar crisis.
Agreed; it's been a major failing in the NHS, and medicine is somewhere where things can go wrong without anyone being much, if at all, 'at fault'.
It stems, I suggest, from our confrontational legal system. At least in part.
I cannot see this government ordering an enquiry into its actions, and it would be pretty pointless for the next government. The search for blame is a natural instinct, but not a particularly productive one, as the partisans on either side have drawn their conclusions already, and just want a rubber stamp to confirm them.
The time would be better spent on planning to cope with an endemic virus, as it looks that we will have that for the summer.
The frame of an enquiry should be more like a transport accident investigation, looking closely at everything that led up to the crisis, and especially noting the opportunities where a different decision would have materially changed the outcome.
It should include everyone who was involved in both the key decisions and the day-to-day management, from the Prime Minister to the most junior advisor, reflecting back on how things were managed and why decisions were made the way they were, and where with the benefit of hindsight mistakes were made.
If it's set up with the idea that people are going to be 'blamed', then it can only have negative effects on a future incident, with everyone involved way more interested in covering their own arses than actually addressing the problem. There's already a reasonable amount of evidence that this was to some extent an issue with this pandemic, especially within the senior ranks of the civil service and the quangos.
That's not what the politicians nor the media want from an enquiry, but the focus needs to be on learning from the crisis - doubly so when there could be a second wave coming down the line.
Other than in the transport industry Britain doesn't do those though, does it?
As in 'Albert and the Lion' 'Somebody's got to be summonsed"! Although the magistrate in the case was very sensible.
Indeed, which is why it's even more important to conduct the enquiry in this way.
It's not like the Iraq war, for example, which was an explicit government policy, it's dealing with a crisis that hit the country domestically, so the focus needs to be much less political and more looking towards managing the next similar crisis.
Or perhaps the next dissimilar crisis. One handicap this time round was the way we stuck rigidly to the influenza plan; the next zero day virus will likely be different again.
Broad capabilities of public health infrastructure, and biomedical production capacity to go alongside our existing strong research capability are a couple of items on the list.
A couple of ministers in government who have some kind of clue about this stuff might also be a plus....
One thing the government should plan for is some similar riots here. Such hot weather, money getting tight, boredom and people losing jobs is a recipe for such things. All it takes is the right spark.
Today looks to be the last of the hot weather for a while, with rain forecast for tomorrow.
Let's hope we have plenty of rain over the next few weeks.
About a 40% chance, according the BBC in N Essex on Thursday. 5-2 against. Hmm.
One thing the government should plan for is some similar riots here. Such hot weather, money getting tight, boredom and people losing jobs is a recipe for such things. All it takes is the right spark.
Today looks to be the last of the hot weather for a while, with rain forecast for tomorrow.
Let's hope we have plenty of rain over the next few weeks.
About a 40% chance, according the BBC in N Essex on Thursday. 5-2 against. Hmm.
Here it looks like some light rain tomorrow afternoon and possibly again Thursday afternoon, and then nothing until possibly a repeat performance in the middle of next week. The weather from the Med is being replaced by a return to a reasonably decent British early summer.
Governors already saying they won't agree to Trump sending military personnel...setting up the dividing line.
Trump is Head of the US military as President, governors are only in charge of state police and guards
Isn't there a law regarding the use of military domestically in the US?
Posse Comitatus Act. @TSE predicted we'd become experts. Good call from someone who can't spot a decent goalkeeper.
Posse Comitatus does not overrule the President's powers under the Insurrection Act of 1807 to quell civil disorder
Actually it quite specifically does: it was passed at the end of Reconstruction specifically to stop the federal government from enforcing the Reconstruction laws in the Southern states, allowing them to bring in the Jim Crow era.
Trump can only impose federal troops on the states if a state government has been rendered unable to act by insurrection.
Posse Comitatus only limits the power of the President to enforce laws using the military without Congressional approval.
It does not stop the President's powers under the Insurrection and Enforcement Acts to deploy the military to quell civil disorder.
Indeed the military were deployed during the 1992 LA riots under the Insurrection Act
Did the state governor have to approve it?
Explicit consent of the state governor is not required if the state government is clearly unable to maintain civil order
I dare say Trump might try to argue that, but I doubt the courts would agree.
I would not be so sure, the Supreme Court now has a narrow conservative majority after Justice Kavanaugh was appointed under Trump to replace Justice Kennedy
I don't think either Gorsuch or Roberts would be particularly biddable. Gorsuch, in particular, has been very sceptical of Federal government overreach.
And Roberts on more than one occasion has broken with the conservative judges when he thinks the ruling is going to be wrong in the sense that it clearly would thwart the wishes of the electorate as expressed through whom they've elected to do what.
Roberts has impressed me enormously since becoming Chief Justice. He never rules on more than he has to. And he has no hesitation in standing up for an independent judiciary.
By contrast, I have very little time for Kavanaugh.
Roberts has presided over and sided with some of the absolute worst decisions of all time.
Shelby County vs Holder is the equivalent of lighting the constitution on fire then shitting on the ashes.
One thing the government should plan for is some similar riots here. Such hot weather, money getting tight, boredom and people losing jobs is a recipe for such things. All it takes is the right spark.
Plan for preventing/dealing with them, I hope you mean ?
This is just him being deliberately antagonistic because he can.
The govt will win all their votes either way.
It is just the govt showing how much contempt they have even for their own MPs. They think it makes them look strong, but the observant know it is a sign of weakness.
For the observant... read....those who do not agree with them.
I cannot see this government ordering an enquiry into its actions, and it would be pretty pointless for the next government. The search for blame is a natural instinct, but not a particularly productive one, as the partisans on either side have drawn their conclusions already, and just want a rubber stamp to confirm them.
The time would be better spent on planning to cope with an endemic virus, as it looks that we will have that for the summer.
The frame of an enquiry should be more like a transport accident investigation, looking closely at everything that led up to the crisis, and especially noting the opportunities where a different decision would have materially changed the outcome.
It should include everyone who was involved in both the key decisions and the day-to-day management, from the Prime Minister to the most junior advisor, reflecting back on how things were managed and why decisions were made the way they were, and where with the benefit of hindsight mistakes were made.
If it's set up with the idea that people are going to be 'blamed', then it can only have negative effects on a future incident, with everyone involved way more interested in covering their own arses than actually addressing the problem. There's already a reasonable amount of evidence that this was to some extent an issue with this pandemic, especially within the senior ranks of the civil service and the quangos.
That's not what the politicians nor the media want from an enquiry, but the focus needs to be on learning from the crisis - doubly so when there could be a second wave coming down the line.
Other than in the transport industry Britain doesn't do those though, does it?
As in 'Albert and the Lion' 'Somebody's got to be summonsed"! Although the magistrate in the case was very sensible.
As in Albert and the Lion, the eventual finding, no matter how sensible, is not going to change hearts and minds.
Governors already saying they won't agree to Trump sending military personnel...setting up the dividing line.
Trump is Head of the US military as President, governors are only in charge of state police and guards
Isn't there a law regarding the use of military domestically in the US?
Posse Comitatus Act. @TSE predicted we'd become experts. Good call from someone who can't spot a decent goalkeeper.
Posse Comitatus does not overrule the President's powers under the Insurrection Act of 1807 to quell civil disorder
Actually it quite specifically does: it was passed at the end of Reconstruction specifically to stop the federal government from enforcing the Reconstruction laws in the Southern states, allowing them to bring in the Jim Crow era.
Trump can only impose federal troops on the states if a state government has been rendered unable to act by insurrection.
Posse Comitatus only limits the power of the President to enforce laws using the military without Congressional approval.
It does not stop the President's powers under the Insurrection and Enforcement Acts to deploy the military to quell civil disorder.
Indeed the military were deployed during the 1992 LA riots under the Insurrection Act
Did the state governor have to approve it?
Explicit consent of the state governor is not required if the state government is clearly unable to maintain civil order
I dare say Trump might try to argue that, but I doubt the courts would agree.
I would not be so sure, the Supreme Court now has a narrow conservative majority after Justice Kavanaugh was appointed under Trump to replace Justice Kennedy
I don't think either Gorsuch or Roberts would be particularly biddable. Gorsuch, in particular, has been very sceptical of Federal government overreach.
And Roberts on more than one occasion has broken with the conservative judges when he thinks the ruling is going to be wrong in the sense that it clearly would thwart the wishes of the electorate as expressed through whom they've elected to do what.
Roberts has impressed me enormously since becoming Chief Justice. He never rules on more than he has to. And he has no hesitation in standing up for an independent judiciary.
By contrast, I have very little time for Kavanaugh.
Roberts has presided over and sided with some of the absolute worst decisions of all time.
Shelby County vs Holder is the equivalent of lighting the constitution on fire then shitting on the ashes.
Indeed. But he is the least worst of the conservative judges.
One thing the government should plan for is some similar riots here. Such hot weather, money getting tight, boredom and people losing jobs is a recipe for such things. All it takes is the right spark.
Yes, it's surprising we haven't seen similar troubles in many other places, as unemployment rises and we move into the summer.
Not much of a surprise that it eventually kicked off in the USA though, it's been bubbling under for quite a while, and as you say only needs one spark. Most of the people now on the streets clearly aren't the genuine protestors, but a variety of organised extremist groups.
No, I think that by and large these have been peaceful demonstrators, righteously angry at yet another example of police brutality. FFS, this was an attempted arrest for passing a suspected counterfeit $20.
Of course there are opportunists who exploit the demos as cover for looting, and political agitation, but that is more newsworthy for televised visuals.
People have a need, and a Constitutional right, for public assembly, to raise their grievances.
That's always a hit with the luvvies, anybody remember Godwin's Law?
Godwin's law says that eventually Nazis will be mentioned. It doesn't state anything more than that.
Godwin has specifically said its fine to mention Nazis if the actions you are comparing to a pretty Nazi ish.
From wiki
Godwin's law is an Internet adage asserting that "as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"
Its inevitable that Trump will be compared to Hitler, all he has to do now is invade a few countries and start gassing millions to death, which is only a matter of time as you know
I can't understand and don't agree with the governments desire to end work from home for Parliament. It's ridiculous.
The last thing JRM wants is the idea that parliament could be modernized to gain momentum, he wants to return to the confrontational bear pit that they think the supreme leader propers in. For goodness sake they will be demanding enough Room to seat everyone next and modernizing the procedures to make the place fit for the 21st centuary rather than the 18th
Governors already saying they won't agree to Trump sending military personnel...setting up the dividing line.
Trump is Head of the US military as President, governors are only in charge of state police and guards
Isn't there a law regarding the use of military domestically in the US?
Posse Comitatus Act. @TSE predicted we'd become experts. Good call from someone who can't spot a decent goalkeeper.
Posse Comitatus does not overrule the President's powers under the Insurrection Act of 1807 to quell civil disorder
Actually it quite specifically does: it was passed at the end of Reconstruction specifically to stop the federal government from enforcing the Reconstruction laws in the Southern states, allowing them to bring in the Jim Crow era.
Trump can only impose federal troops on the states if a state government has been rendered unable to act by insurrection.
Posse Comitatus only limits the power of the President to enforce laws using the military without Congressional approval.
It does not stop the President's powers under the Insurrection and Enforcement Acts to deploy the military to quell civil disorder.
Indeed the military were deployed during the 1992 LA riots under the Insurrection Act
Did the state governor have to approve it?
Explicit consent of the state governor is not required if the state government is clearly unable to maintain civil order
I dare say Trump might try to argue that, but I doubt the courts would agree.
I would not be so sure, the Supreme Court now has a narrow conservative majority after Justice Kavanaugh was appointed under Trump to replace Justice Kennedy
I don't think either Gorsuch or Roberts would be particularly biddable. Gorsuch, in particular, has been very sceptical of Federal government overreach.
And Roberts on more than one occasion has broken with the conservative judges when he thinks the ruling is going to be wrong in the sense that it clearly would thwart the wishes of the electorate as expressed through whom they've elected to do what.
Roberts has impressed me enormously since becoming Chief Justice. He never rules on more than he has to. And he has no hesitation in standing up for an independent judiciary.
By contrast, I have very little time for Kavanaugh.
Roberts has presided over and sided with some of the absolute worst decisions of all time.
Shelby County vs Holder is the equivalent of lighting the constitution on fire then shitting on the ashes.
Indeed. But he is the least worst of the conservative judges.
I find his staggering hypocrisy totally galling.
I found it even worse than Scalia's "strict originalism except when it conflicts with my beliefs" hypocrisy.
All the media's fault apparently: on the one hand asking our wonderful HMG stupid questions which makes them look bad, on the other hand giving wee Jimmy Krankie Mcnippyface an easy ride.
Two electorates brainwashed in entirely different directions.
I can't understand and don't agree with the governments desire to end work from home for Parliament. It's ridiculous.
Its the govt showing that they can and that MPs are underlings who should do as they are told. The sort of thing that happens when we elect a government with no respect of the rule of law or democracy. Understanding it is easy.
All the media's fault apparently: on the one hand asking our wonderful HMG stupid questions which makes them look bad, on the other hand giving wee Jimmy Krankie Mcnippyface an easy ride.
Two electorates brainwashed in entirely different directions.
To be honest I don't understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
She hasn't done anything substantially different policy wise. She's just presented it better.
All the media's fault apparently: on the one hand asking our wonderful HMG stupid questions which makes them look bad, on the other hand giving wee Jimmy Krankie Mcnippyface an easy ride.
Two electorates brainwashed in entirely different directions.
To be honest I don't understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
She hasn't done anything substantially different policy wise. She's just presented it better.
Both faced the same key challenge. Nicola Sturgeon fathomed that principles weren’t worth anything unless they cost you something. Boris Johnson did not. And he even had her example to follow.
One thing the government should plan for is some similar riots here. Such hot weather, money getting tight, boredom and people losing jobs is a recipe for such things. All it takes is the right spark.
Yes, it's surprising we haven't seen similar troubles in many other places, as unemployment rises and we move into the summer.
Not much of a surprise that it eventually kicked off in the USA though, it's been bubbling under for quite a while, and as you say only needs one spark. Most of the people now on the streets clearly aren't the genuine protestors, but a variety of organised extremist groups.
No, I think that by and large these have been peaceful demonstrators, righteously angry at yet another example of police brutality. FFS, this was an attempted arrest for passing a suspected counterfeit $20.
Of course there are opportunists who exploit the demos as cover for looting, and political agitation, but that is more newsworthy for televised visuals.
People have a need, and a Constitutional right, for public assembly, to raise their grievances.
It is not like the issue has never been raised before in peaceful protests, or via incremental change, or the ballot box (as well as sporadic violent protests) for a couple of hundred years. If those who disapprove of the protests could just point out exactly how the police killings, brutality and overreactions can be stopped then Im sure they would give it a go.
I can't understand and don't agree with the governments desire to end work from home for Parliament. It's ridiculous.
Presumably they are up to something. Question is what? Barracking at PMQs? Is there a debate they want to avoid by making divisions take forever? Are they banking on differential return from regional parties?
One thing the government should plan for is some similar riots here. Such hot weather, money getting tight, boredom and people losing jobs is a recipe for such things. All it takes is the right spark.
I'm not sure government planning is required. They usually kick off spontaneously. Plus, they don't need them to get re-elec....
All the media's fault apparently: on the one hand asking our wonderful HMG stupid questions which makes them look bad, on the other hand giving wee Jimmy Krankie Mcnippyface an easy ride.
Two electorates brainwashed in entirely different directions.
To be honest I don't understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
She hasn't done anything substantially different policy wise. She's just presented it better.
Both faced the same key challenge. Nicola Sturgeon fathomed that principles weren’t worth anything unless they cost you something. Boris Johnson did not. And he even had her example to follow.
Oh, that's right. She cost me my 8/1 bet that there would be an IndyRef in 2020.
Other than in the transport industry Britain doesn't do those though, does it?
As in 'Albert and the Lion' 'Somebody's got to be summonsed"! Although the magistrate in the case was very sensible.
Indeed, which is why it's even more important to conduct the enquiry in this way.
It's not like the Iraq war, for example, which was an explicit government policy, it's dealing with a crisis that hit the country domestically, so the focus needs to be much less political and more looking towards managing the next similar crisis.
Or perhaps the next dissimilar crisis. One handicap this time round was the way we stuck rigidly to the influenza plan; the next zero day virus will likely be different again.
Broad capabilities of public health infrastructure, and biomedical production capacity to go alongside our existing strong research capability are a couple of items on the list.
A couple of ministers in government who have some kind of clue about this stuff might also be a plus....
Yes, looking from afar it appears the UK govt took too long to adapt the existing pandemic plan to the specifics of this disease.
The obvious failings to me are:
1. Medical equipment shortages. The planning didn't cover a collapse of international supply chains for low-level equipment such as PPE, so we need to ensure they can be supplied domestically in a future crisis, with enough raw materials stored and manufacturers retained. High-tech medical equipment worked well, with engineering companies such as the F1 teams quickly prototyping mass-producible ventilators. We need to look at other equipment types that might be needed for a future pandemic, and secure design and manufacturing capability for these ahead of time.
2. Testing. Took way too long to ramp up testing volumes, on the face of it due to a centralised approach by PHE rather than using private and university resources. Required the Health Secretary's April 100k target to wake everyone up, this should have been done in March.
3. Quarantining of people. Issue with this specific disease of infectious yet asymptomatic carriers. Other countries have commandeered hotels for positively-tested people who aren't sick, often on a non-voluntary basis. Huge problems with community transmissions, especially within households, care homes and HMOs. Quarantine of UK arrivals should have been done earlier and continue for the summer, over objections of holiday industry and press, with only limited exceptions for business travel that involve lots of testing. Such quarantine needs to be at dedicated facilities and charged back to the individual, not done at home.
It's almost as if a separate, seemingly partisan, non-government group using almost exactly the same name as the official scientific advisory group is a deliberate recipe for confusion.
Hope things calm down in the US, but suspect they won't.
Mogg's stance on remote voting appears to be total nonsense. I'm against electronic voting as a general principle but as these votes are on the record anyway and given the current situation (and there must be many MPs in vulnerable groups, if only due to age) there's no good reason for a blanket ban on them continuing.
It's another trick to avoid scrutiny, they're going to join the front end of the queue to the back end and just leave then going round and round in an enormous circle
All the media's fault apparently: on the one hand asking our wonderful HMG stupid questions which makes them look bad, on the other hand giving wee Jimmy Krankie Mcnippyface an easy ride.
Two electorates brainwashed in entirely different directions.
The media has lost authority in Scotland, and is rapidly doing so in England too.
As recently as the 1980s and 90s BBC Scotland, the Scotsman and the Herald were still widely respected. Nowadays almost nobody gives a fig what they pump out.
This is a key weakness of the BritNat strategy: what are they going to do when folk stop obeying the state propaganda unit?
One thing the government should plan for is some similar riots here. Such hot weather, money getting tight, boredom and people losing jobs is a recipe for such things. All it takes is the right spark.
Yes, it's surprising we haven't seen similar troubles in many other places, as unemployment rises and we move into the summer.
Not much of a surprise that it eventually kicked off in the USA though, it's been bubbling under for quite a while, and as you say only needs one spark. Most of the people now on the streets clearly aren't the genuine protestors, but a variety of organised extremist groups.
No, I think that by and large these have been peaceful demonstrators, righteously angry at yet another example of police brutality. FFS, this was an attempted arrest for passing a suspected counterfeit $20.
Of course there are opportunists who exploit the demos as cover for looting, and political agitation, but that is more newsworthy for televised visuals.
People have a need, and a Constitutional right, for public assembly, to raise their grievances.
No doubt there's a lot of peaceful protestors around, but there's also an awful lot of violence. The difficulty is in sorting out the two groups, such as to allow the protestors on the streets but not the violent element. Governments generally tend to over-react to this sort of situation, which is likely what's going to end up happening in the USA.
One thing the government should plan for is some similar riots here. Such hot weather, money getting tight, boredom and people losing jobs is a recipe for such things. All it takes is the right spark.
Yes, it's surprising we haven't seen similar troubles in many other places, as unemployment rises and we move into the summer.
Not much of a surprise that it eventually kicked off in the USA though, it's been bubbling under for quite a while, and as you say only needs one spark. Most of the people now on the streets clearly aren't the genuine protestors, but a variety of organised extremist groups.
No, I think that by and large these have been peaceful demonstrators, righteously angry at yet another example of police brutality. FFS, this was an attempted arrest for passing a suspected counterfeit $20.
Of course there are opportunists who exploit the demos as cover for looting, and political agitation, but that is more newsworthy for televised visuals.
People have a need, and a Constitutional right, for public assembly, to raise their grievances.
No doubt there's a lot of peaceful protestors around, but there's also an awful lot of violence. The difficulty is in sorting out the two groups, such as to allow the protestors on the streets but not the violent element. Governments generally tend to over-react to this sort of situation, which is likely what's going to end up happening in the USA.
A serious problem in the US is the (non) training of the police in de-excalation.
When combined with the "force protection" mentality - the belief that every single person *may* be a Die Hard style terrorist and that the only possible response is to go first....
All the media's fault apparently: on the one hand asking our wonderful HMG stupid questions which makes them look bad, on the other hand giving wee Jimmy Krankie Mcnippyface an easy ride.
Two electorates brainwashed in entirely different directions.
To be honest I don't understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
She hasn't done anything substantially different policy wise. She's just presented it better.
Both faced the same key challenge. Nicola Sturgeon fathomed that principles weren’t worth anything unless they cost you something. Boris Johnson did not. And he even had her example to follow.
Boris, of course, started off with the disadvantage that he had no principles to which to stick.
All the media's fault apparently: on the one hand asking our wonderful HMG stupid questions which makes them look bad, on the other hand giving wee Jimmy Krankie Mcnippyface an easy ride.
Two electorates brainwashed in entirely different directions.
To be honest I don't understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
She hasn't done anything substantially different policy wise. She's just presented it better.
I understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
Politics is, unfortunately, 90% trappings and 10% substance.
So, even if the substantive differences are small (but arguably important), they are vastly outweighed by the zeitgeist.
BoZo is a diminished, untrustworthy and confused dud. Sturgeon is a reasonable, pleasant and competent leader.
Other than in the transport industry Britain doesn't do those though, does it?
As in 'Albert and the Lion' 'Somebody's got to be summonsed"! Although the magistrate in the case was very sensible.
Indeed, which is why it's even more important to conduct the enquiry in this way.
It's not like the Iraq war, for example, which was an explicit government policy, it's dealing with a crisis that hit the country domestically, so the focus needs to be much less political and more looking towards managing the next similar crisis.
Or perhaps the next dissimilar crisis. One handicap this time round was the way we stuck rigidly to the influenza plan; the next zero day virus will likely be different again.
Broad capabilities of public health infrastructure, and biomedical production capacity to go alongside our existing strong research capability are a couple of items on the list.
A couple of ministers in government who have some kind of clue about this stuff might also be a plus....
Yes, looking from afar it appears the UK govt took too long to adapt the existing pandemic plan to the specifics of this disease.
The obvious failings to me are:
1. Medical equipment shortages. The planning didn't cover a collapse of international supply chains for low-level equipment such as PPE, so we need to ensure they can be supplied domestically in a future crisis, with enough raw materials stored and manufacturers retained. High-tech medical equipment worked well, with engineering companies such as the F1 teams quickly prototyping mass-producible ventilators. We need to look at other equipment types that might be needed for a future pandemic, and secure design and manufacturing capability for these ahead of time.
2. Testing. Took way too long to ramp up testing volumes, on the face of it due to a centralised approach by PHE rather than using private and university resources. Required the Health Secretary's April 100k target to wake everyone up, this should have been done in March.
3. Quarantining of people. Issue with this specific disease of infectious yet asymptomatic carriers. Other countries have commandeered hotels for positively-tested people who aren't sick, often on a non-voluntary basis. Huge problems with community transmissions, especially within households, care homes and HMOs. Quarantine of UK arrivals should have been done earlier and continue for the summer, over objections of holiday industry and press, with only limited exceptions for business travel that involve lots of testing. Such quarantine needs to be at dedicated facilities and charged back to the individual, not done at home.
A good summary.
On 1 I think every big country has struggled. Over a 100 year run I am not convinced having capability that you only use in a pandemic is necessarily correct. It should be looked at, but it may still be better to just rely on the international market.
On 3 I agree wholly with the first part - requisitioning hotels seems completely obvious, I expected it to happen in the first week. The second bit is either hindsight bias or would have been ineffective. UK arrivals dropped 99% during lockdown and we have had above average rates of infection so quarantining then would have made no difference. Starting early February would have worked but no-one has been able to explain the basis for doing that for this virus but not having done it for MERs, SARs, Ebola, Zeka etc.
4 should be communication which started well but has collapsed into a lack of trust and confidence.
I can't understand and don't agree with the governments desire to end work from home for Parliament. It's ridiculous.
I agree, but I can see a couple of reasons why they would have thought about it - given the reluctance expressed by parents and teachers to reopen schools showing a willingness to share in the risk and leading by example is not a bad instinct, and the desire to have his backbenchers supporting Johnson is understandable, if cynical.
However, given the effect on MPs who are shielding for health reasons, and the Speaker's refusal to allow more MPs into the chamber it's pig-headed stubbornness to proceed.
Will there be pairing on the vote today, so that those MPs unable or unwilling to attend due to health reasons can be paired with a government loyalist?
This will only stop when they start shooting the looters. Which they will
Surprised they have not so far. Need to state anyone on street after curfew will be shot , stop pussyfooting about.
We tried that in Basra. At one point we were shooting anyone with a beard (so males 10 and over, females 50 and over) who was on the street after the dusk call to prayer. To the great surprise of the self styled counter-insurgency experts of the British Army this did not calm the city.
I can't understand and don't agree with the governments desire to end work from home for Parliament. It's ridiculous.
It’s a combination of wanting to show everyone else that people are going back to work, and many technical issues with the remote voting system they were using.
IMO it would be easier to either expand proxy voting, such that a few whips can vote on behalf of most of their party, or to expand the number of voting lobbies.
That said, the idea of the 800m queue is silly, just because people are keeping further apart doesn’t massively slow them down.
One thing the government should plan for is some similar riots here. Such hot weather, money getting tight, boredom and people losing jobs is a recipe for such things. All it takes is the right spark.
Yes, it's surprising we haven't seen similar troubles in many other places, as unemployment rises and we move into the summer.
Not much of a surprise that it eventually kicked off in the USA though, it's been bubbling under for quite a while, and as you say only needs one spark. Most of the people now on the streets clearly aren't the genuine protestors, but a variety of organised extremist groups.
No, I think that by and large these have been peaceful demonstrators, righteously angry at yet another example of police brutality. FFS, this was an attempted arrest for passing a suspected counterfeit $20.
Of course there are opportunists who exploit the demos as cover for looting, and political agitation, but that is more newsworthy for televised visuals.
People have a need, and a Constitutional right, for public assembly, to raise their grievances.
No doubt there's a lot of peaceful protestors around, but there's also an awful lot of violence. The difficulty is in sorting out the two groups, such as to allow the protestors on the streets but not the violent element. Governments generally tend to over-react to this sort of situation, which is likely what's going to end up happening in the USA.
A serious problem in the US is the (non) training of the police in de-excalation.
When combined with the "force protection" mentality - the belief that every single person *may* be a Die Hard style terrorist and that the only possible response is to go first....
I have seen 3 examples of police/national guard addressing the crowd in a way that makes one proud. Shows true bravery and leadership. If Trump focused on the problem that way it would make a huge difference.
There is no way he could enter the crowd, but he could meet with community leaders in a public forum. Make a speech in support of civil rights etc. He needs to work on splitting out the rioters from the protesters and not inflame protesters into reacting with violence.
He is useless and is shamed by those law enforcement officers who successfully and bravely control a crowd without violence.
This will only stop when they start shooting the looters. Which they will
Surprised they have not so far. Need to state anyone on street after curfew will be shot , stop pussyfooting about.
We tried that in Basra. At one point we were shooting anyone with a beard (so males 10 and over, females 50 and over) who was on the street after the dusk call to prayer. To the great surprise of the self styled counter-insurgency experts of the British Army this did not calm the city.
All the media's fault apparently: on the one hand asking our wonderful HMG stupid questions which makes them look bad, on the other hand giving wee Jimmy Krankie Mcnippyface an easy ride.
Two electorates brainwashed in entirely different directions.
To be honest I don't understand why Nicola is getting such great ratings compared to Boris.
She hasn't done anything substantially different policy wise. She's just presented it better.
Though there are limits to how much we will actually behave like adults, most of us like and are flattered by being treated as such. Also the sincerity, walk-the-walk thing: CMO breaks lockdown, gone within a day, chief adviser breaks quarantine, BJ finally finds a ditch to die in.
I cannot see this government ordering an enquiry into its actions, and it would be pretty pointless for the next government. The search for blame is a natural instinct, but not a particularly productive one, as the partisans on either side have drawn their conclusions already, and just want a rubber stamp to confirm them.
The time would be better spent on planning to cope with an endemic virus, as it looks that we will have that for the summer.
The frame of an enquiry should be more like a transport accident investigation, looking closely at everything that led up to the crisis, and especially noting the opportunities where a different decision would have materially changed the outcome.
It should include everyone who was involved in both the key decisions and the day-to-day management, from the Prime Minister to the most junior advisor, reflecting back on how things were managed and why decisions were made the way they were, and where with the benefit of hindsight mistakes were made.
If it's set up with the idea that people are going to be 'blamed', then it can only have negative effects on a future incident, with everyone involved way more interested in covering their own arses than actually addressing the problem. There's already a reasonable amount of evidence that this was to some extent an issue with this pandemic, especially within the senior ranks of the civil service and the quangos.
That's not what the politicians nor the media want from an enquiry, but the focus needs to be on learning from the crisis - doubly so when there could be a second wave coming down the line.
Other than in the transport industry Britain doesn't do those though, does it?
As in 'Albert and the Lion' 'Somebody's got to be summonsed"! Although the magistrate in the case was very sensible.
Indeed, which is why it's even more important to conduct the enquiry in this way.
It's not like the Iraq war, for example, which was an explicit government policy, it's dealing with a crisis that hit the country domestically, so the focus needs to be much less political and more looking towards managing the next similar crisis.
Agreed; it's been a major failing in the NHS, and medicine is somewhere where things can go wrong without anyone being much, if at all, 'at fault'.
It stems, I suggest, from our confrontational legal system. At least in part.
One thing to watch for in the enquiries into COVID19 -
1) It is difficult to say who made that decision 2) It is covered by ministerial responsibility 3) etc
This will only stop when they start shooting the looters. Which they will
Surprised they have not so far. Need to state anyone on street after curfew will be shot , stop pussyfooting about.
We tried that in Basra. At one point we were shooting anyone with a beard (so males 10 and over, females 50 and over) who was on the street after the dusk call to prayer. To the great surprise of the self styled counter-insurgency experts of the British Army this did not calm the city.
Indeed.
Experience tells us that extrajudicial military execution of civilians never works out well. The Gàidhealtachd is still trying to recover from the horrific events 1746-48 at the hands of the king’s son Prince William, Duke of Cumberland. Events which resulted in his Tory opponents naming him Butcher Cumberland.
One thing the government should plan for is some similar riots here. Such hot weather, money getting tight, boredom and people losing jobs is a recipe for such things. All it takes is the right spark.
Yes, it's surprising we haven't seen similar troubles in many other places, as unemployment rises and we move into the summer.
Not much of a surprise that it eventually kicked off in the USA though, it's been bubbling under for quite a while, and as you say only needs one spark. Most of the people now on the streets clearly aren't the genuine protestors, but a variety of organised extremist groups.
No, I think that by and large these have been peaceful demonstrators, righteously angry at yet another example of police brutality. FFS, this was an attempted arrest for passing a suspected counterfeit $20.
Of course there are opportunists who exploit the demos as cover for looting, and political agitation, but that is more newsworthy for televised visuals.
People have a need, and a Constitutional right, for public assembly, to raise their grievances.
No doubt there's a lot of peaceful protestors around, but there's also an awful lot of violence. The difficulty is in sorting out the two groups, such as to allow the protestors on the streets but not the violent element. Governments generally tend to over-react to this sort of situation, which is likely what's going to end up happening in the USA.
A serious problem in the US is the (non) training of the police in de-excalation.
When combined with the "force protection" mentality - the belief that every single person *may* be a Die Hard style terrorist and that the only possible response is to go first....
I have seen 3 examples of police/national guard addressing the crowd in a way that makes one proud. Shows true bravery and leadership. If Trump focused on the problem that way it would make a huge difference.
There is no way he could enter the crowd, but he could meet with community leaders in a public forum. Make a speech in support of civil rights etc. He needs to work on splitting out the rioters from the protesters and not inflame protesters into reacting with violence.
He is useless and is shamed by those law enforcement officers who successfully and bravely control a crowd without violence.
Donald Trump is a white nationalist leader. Why would he do such things? He doesn’t believe in them and he doesn’t get votes from the people who believe in such things.
This will only stop when they start shooting the looters. Which they will
Surprised they have not so far. Need to state anyone on street after curfew will be shot , stop pussyfooting about.
We tried that in Basra. At one point we were shooting anyone with a beard (so males 10 and over, females 50 and over) who was on the street after the dusk call to prayer. To the great surprise of the self styled counter-insurgency experts of the British Army this did not calm the city.
Indeed.
Experience tells us that extrajudicial military execution of civilians never works out well. The Gàidhealtachd is still trying to recover from the horrific events 1746-48 at the hands of the king’s son Prince William, Duke of Cumberland. Events which resulted in his Tory opponents naming him Butcher Cumberland.
The wholesale sell-out of their leaders resulting in the Highland Clearances didn't help the recovery, either.
This will only stop when they start shooting the looters. Which they will
Surprised they have not so far. Need to state anyone on street after curfew will be shot , stop pussyfooting about.
We tried that in Basra. At one point we were shooting anyone with a beard (so males 10 and over, females 50 and over) who was on the street after the dusk call to prayer. To the great surprise of the self styled counter-insurgency experts of the British Army this did not calm the city.
I can't understand and don't agree with the governments desire to end work from home for Parliament. It's ridiculous.
Its desperation. Shagger needs a braying mob behind him to be able to bluster his way through. SKS keeps tearing him apart with brutal dispatch box cross-examinations and follow-up statements and pressure. Jacob Lounge-Lizard hopes that the mob will be able to roar Shagger into calling SKS the establishment or something.
As a tweet said upthread, they think they are acting from a position of strength, when all can see weakness
This will only stop when they start shooting the looters. Which they will
Surprised they have not so far. Need to state anyone on street after curfew will be shot , stop pussyfooting about.
We tried that in Basra. At one point we were shooting anyone with a beard (so males 10 and over, females 50 and over) who was on the street after the dusk call to prayer. To the great surprise of the self styled counter-insurgency experts of the British Army this did not calm the city.
Indeed.
Experience tells us that extrajudicial military execution of civilians never works out well. The Gàidhealtachd is still trying to recover from the horrific events 1746-48 at the hands of the king’s son Prince William, Duke of Cumberland. Events which resulted in his Tory opponents naming him Butcher Cumberland.
The wholesale sell-out of their leaders resulting in the Highland Clearances didn't help the recovery, either.
Why did it not work out well? It silenced the Scots and stopped them invading England
I thought that remote procedural rules had lapsed, deliberately, so its not about voting to end them as needing to vote in an unusual way on how to vote in future?
Comments
For the past three months it's usually been the other way round.
https://twitter.com/fullfact/status/1267693930151178241?s=21
The time would be better spent on planning to cope with an endemic virus, as it looks that we will have that for the summer.
By contrast, I have very little time for Kavanaugh.
I wonder, is he a natural Roundhead?
*Thinks*
Sorry, your venerable cheerful majesty, that doesn’t work.
It should include everyone who was involved in both the key decisions and the day-to-day management, from the Prime Minister to the most junior advisor, reflecting back on how things were managed and why decisions were made the way they were, and where with the benefit of hindsight mistakes were made.
If it's set up with the idea that people are going to be 'blamed', then it can only have negative effects on a future incident, with everyone involved way more interested in covering their own arses than actually addressing the problem. There's already a reasonable amount of evidence that this was to some extent an issue with this pandemic, especially within the senior ranks of the civil service and the quangos.
That's not what the politicians nor the media want from an enquiry, but the focus needs to be on learning from the crisis - doubly so when there could be a second wave coming down the line.
Not much of a surprise that it eventually kicked off in the USA though, it's been bubbling under for quite a while, and as you say only needs one spark. Most of the people now on the streets clearly aren't the genuine protestors, but a variety of organised extremist groups.
As in 'Albert and the Lion' 'Somebody's got to be summonsed"! Although the magistrate in the case was very sensible.
The govt will win all their votes either way.
It is just the govt showing how much contempt they have even for their own MPs. They think it makes them look strong, but the observant know it is a sign of weakness.
Normal. Completely normal.
It's not like the Iraq war, for example, which was an explicit government policy, it's dealing with a crisis that hit the country domestically, so the focus needs to be much less political and more looking towards managing the next similar crisis.
It stems, I suggest, from our confrontational legal system. At least in part.
One handicap this time round was the way we stuck rigidly to the influenza plan; the next zero day virus will likely be different again.
Broad capabilities of public health infrastructure, and biomedical production capacity to go alongside our existing strong research capability are a couple of items on the list.
A couple of ministers in government who have some kind of clue about this stuff might also be a plus....
Shelby County vs Holder is the equivalent of lighting the constitution on fire then shitting on the ashes.
https://twitter.com/sfmnemonic/status/1267682219314655233?s=20
England 14%
Scotland 44%
They have both handled it the same 25%
Don’t know 17%
(YouGov surveyed 2883 GB adults
Conducted May 29, 2020)
... and the Scottish respondents were even clearer:
England 7%
Scotland 68%
They have both handled it the same 17%
Don’t know 8%
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2020/05/29/9742c/2
Godwin has specifically said its fine to mention Nazis if the actions you are comparing to a pretty Nazi ish.
Of course there are opportunists who exploit the demos as cover for looting, and political agitation, but that is more newsworthy for televised visuals.
People have a need, and a Constitutional right, for public assembly, to raise their grievances.
Godwin's law is an Internet adage asserting that "as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"
Its inevitable that Trump will be compared to Hitler, all he has to do now is invade a few countries and start gassing millions to death, which is only a matter of time as you know
Room to seat everyone next and modernizing the procedures to make the place fit for the 21st centuary rather than the 18th
I found it even worse than Scalia's "strict originalism except when it conflicts with my beliefs" hypocrisy.
Two electorates brainwashed in entirely different directions.
She hasn't done anything substantially different policy wise. She's just presented it better.
Oh, I see.
Boo that woman
The obvious failings to me are:
1. Medical equipment shortages. The planning didn't cover a collapse of international supply chains for low-level equipment such as PPE, so we need to ensure they can be supplied domestically in a future crisis, with enough raw materials stored and manufacturers retained. High-tech medical equipment worked well, with engineering companies such as the F1 teams quickly prototyping mass-producible ventilators. We need to look at other equipment types that might be needed for a future pandemic, and secure design and manufacturing capability for these ahead of time.
2. Testing. Took way too long to ramp up testing volumes, on the face of it due to a centralised approach by PHE rather than using private and university resources. Required the Health Secretary's April 100k target to wake everyone up, this should have been done in March.
3. Quarantining of people. Issue with this specific disease of infectious yet asymptomatic carriers. Other countries have commandeered hotels for positively-tested people who aren't sick, often on a non-voluntary basis. Huge problems with community transmissions, especially within households, care homes and HMOs. Quarantine of UK arrivals should have been done earlier and continue for the summer, over objections of holiday industry and press, with only limited exceptions for business travel that involve lots of testing. Such quarantine needs to be at dedicated facilities and charged back to the individual, not done at home.
It's almost as if a separate, seemingly partisan, non-government group using almost exactly the same name as the official scientific advisory group is a deliberate recipe for confusion.
Hope things calm down in the US, but suspect they won't.
Mogg's stance on remote voting appears to be total nonsense. I'm against electronic voting as a general principle but as these votes are on the record anyway and given the current situation (and there must be many MPs in vulnerable groups, if only due to age) there's no good reason for a blanket ban on them continuing.
As recently as the 1980s and 90s BBC Scotland, the Scotsman and the Herald were still widely respected. Nowadays almost nobody gives a fig what they pump out.
This is a key weakness of the BritNat strategy: what are they going to do when folk stop obeying the state propaganda unit?
When combined with the "force protection" mentality - the belief that every single person *may* be a Die Hard style terrorist and that the only possible response is to go first....
Add some racism into the pot, stir.....
It can be done differently - https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/31/us/flint-michigan-protest-police-trnd/index.html
Politics is, unfortunately, 90% trappings and 10% substance.
So, even if the substantive differences are small (but arguably important), they are vastly outweighed by the zeitgeist.
BoZo is a diminished, untrustworthy and confused dud.
Sturgeon is a reasonable, pleasant and competent leader.
In the harsh world of politics, that is enough.
On 1 I think every big country has struggled. Over a 100 year run I am not convinced having capability that you only use in a pandemic is necessarily correct. It should be looked at, but it may still be better to just rely on the international market.
On 3 I agree wholly with the first part - requisitioning hotels seems completely obvious, I expected it to happen in the first week. The second bit is either hindsight bias or would have been ineffective. UK arrivals dropped 99% during lockdown and we have had above average rates of infection so quarantining then would have made no difference. Starting early February would have worked but no-one has been able to explain the basis for doing that for this virus but not having done it for MERs, SARs, Ebola, Zeka etc.
4 should be communication which started well but has collapsed into a lack of trust and confidence.
However, given the effect on MPs who are shielding for health reasons, and the Speaker's refusal to allow more MPs into the chamber it's pig-headed stubbornness to proceed.
Will there be pairing on the vote today, so that those MPs unable or unwilling to attend due to health reasons can be paired with a government loyalist?
IMO it would be easier to either expand proxy voting, such that a few whips can vote on behalf of most of their party, or to expand the number of voting lobbies.
That said, the idea of the 800m queue is silly, just because people are keeping further apart doesn’t massively slow them down.
There is no way he could enter the crowd, but he could meet with community leaders in a public forum. Make a speech in support of civil rights etc. He needs to work on splitting out the rioters from the protesters and not inflame protesters into reacting with violence.
He is useless and is shamed by those law enforcement officers who successfully and bravely control a crowd without violence.
1) It is difficult to say who made that decision
2) It is covered by ministerial responsibility
3) etc
Experience tells us that extrajudicial military execution of civilians never works out well. The Gàidhealtachd is still trying to recover from the horrific events 1746-48 at the hands of the king’s son Prince William, Duke of Cumberland. Events which resulted in his Tory opponents naming him Butcher Cumberland.
Still no, I'm afraid.
Remember, this is the man who did this:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/29/jacob-rees-mogg-language-rules
As a tweet said upthread, they think they are acting from a position of strength, when all can see weakness
It has not been well handled.