Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New YouGov polling finds Moggsy’s MP voting plan has gone down

123578

Comments

  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,226
    edited June 2020
    Re moments of fame -

    I was on Fifteen To One.

    Eliminated 1st round. 2 questions. 15 seconds of screen time. And they said my name wrong.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited June 2020

    Face coverings on public transport will be compulsory from 15 June in England to help stop the transmission of coronavirus as more people go back to work, Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, said on Thursday.

    The government will require people to wear face coverings on buses, trains, tubes and other modes of public transport from that date, when non-essential shops are likely to reopen.

    However, it will not apply to people entering shops, despite the current guidance saying face coverings should be worn in enclosed public places.

    Ministers are bringing in the policy due to concerns about the difficulties of physical distancing on crowded public transport, despite people being asked to use other ways of travelling, to space out, face away from each other and travel at staggered times.

    A senior government source said it would help stop asymptomatic people passing the virus on to others and also “act as a visible reminder” of the need for distancing and measures such as handwashing.

    Under the conditions of carriage, fines may be imposed for anyone who flouts the new rules.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/04/face-masks-to-be-made-compulsory-on-public-transport-in-england?CMP=twt_gu&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium#Echobox=1591286551

    Head in hands....why do the government keep making these things much more convoluted and dragged out than they need to be.

    When out and about, wear a mask, especially if you can't social distance, be it on a train or in a shop....simples. And like the quarantining arrivals, should have been policy 3 months ago.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,983

    malcolmg said:

    Andy_JS said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Brom said:

    Sandpit said:
    Wot about the leadership polls though? As Mike often points out these are a better indicator. Johnson is becoming an even bigger joke than I feared he would be. Memes about earpieces or empty skulls will eventually feed through to the popular subconscious. Those that follow things a little closer will realise the emperor has no leadership skills.

    Every week that goes past his incompetence will become more visible. Tories of today will join ex-Tories like myself who rue the day when the dumber section of the party membership foisted him on us.
    Not the twitter memes! how will they cope with their massive polling lead.

    It's as if the left never learn, Boris had endless memes last year too and won a landslide. Leadership polls will mean a lot less than VI if Boris doesn't fight 2024 so Im not sure Labour can take too much heart from that.
    Boris is still polling higher than any Tory leader has got at a general election since Thatcher
    Even you know that is only temporary. You must be realising gradually he is useless as a PM. He has no leadership skills.
    He is the most popular Tory leader on the doorstep I have ever campaigned for in my lifetime
    Just proves how stupid Tories are, superficial halfwitted cretins.
    Is it a good idea to insult 45% of voters?
    If the cap fits ............
    Irony alert. Adherent to the backward philosophy of nationalism, one of the dumbest hatefilled political perversions of the 19th Century calls other people halfwitted cretins. And the poster who wrote it is one of the most inarticulate ill informed buffoons who writes on here. He will now prove my point by his response no doubt!!
    If your belief in an illusory British nation state overrides your belief in sovereign European states cooperating within the European Union, you're a British nationalist. Your ranting against nationalists is deeply hypocritical.
    William , He is just a thick plank and nasty with it.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,284

    fox327 said:

    Foxy said:

    fox327 said:

    I've stopped paying attention to all the latest twists and turns. Social distancing is not a sustainable policy in the long term. This will soon become particularly obvious on public transport and in schools. All the hand-wringing over it will make not the slightest difference in the end. It will eventually go. The needs that we have as human beings cannot be met in a perpetually socially distanced society.

    For example, how are driving lessons and driving tests going to work? Or will people just stop learning to drive? For me, the time has come to switch off from these interminable discussions that cannot solve anything.

    Taxi drivers are amongst the highest risk occupations as I recall.

    Where social distancing is impossible, such as in cars, trains, some workplaces, masks should be compulsory for all.

    I am not a taxi driver, but I live near a driving instructor. Probably most taxi drivers and people in similar occupations are too busy working to post on forums like this.
    The taxi drivers are all busy ferrying the SeanTs around, while providing data to the hive mind, in the form of anecdotes.
    Those are only the imagined ones
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,952

    Pulpstar said:

    Rees Mogg is the worst. I remember reading about how as a child he turned up at a shareholders' meeting (GEC if I remember correctly) and started berating the chairman over the size of the dividend he'd received on the shares he'd been given by his father. I'm not sure which Viz character he reminds me of most - Spoiled Bastard or Victorian Dad. Either way, he really is a tosser.

    Didn't he say once that every time he opened his mouth it meant the Tories losing a vote? I'm not sure what changed between then and him becoming an MP.

    I remember him from the Oxford Union. His accent then was a lot "worse" than it is now. As someone from ooop noorth who hadn't met many public school types, it did grate just a little at the time...and he did have a lot to say.

    I have some time for the traditionalist approach though. Surely voting by phone takes away some of the supposedly serious nature of parliament? I would say the same for any remote voting (including elections).
    Crowding through division lobbies is 'serious'? What other legislature conducts it's voting like that? Apart possibly from the Democratic Party in Iowa?

    Most legislatures don't have people voting remotely from a phone whilst wandering about, though.

    Even the EU-style voting has its problems. Just sitting there pressing buttons as per your pre-prescribed voting list isn't great (especially when MEPs accidentally press the wrong button).
    Wandering about with a phone in hand isn't what I had in mind as an alternative. Might appeal to likes of Cummings of course
    Otherwise I take your point, although I believe people have been known to go through the wrong lobby on occasions.
    True, and quite recently too. You'd think it wouldn't be that hard to follow the "right" set of people.

    Perhaps those MPs who have to be remote from the chamber should only be able to vote from a registered office from which they 'attend' (either within Parliament or their constituency). I'm not sure how you would enforce that, though.




    Somewhat worrying that some at least of our MP's don't know who their friends are.

    If it's possible to identify exactly where someone was 13 years ago from their mobile phone usage, I'm sure it can't be that difficult to ensure someone always votes rom their 'appointed place'
    Google can do that already. In fact if I was accused of a crime I was sure I hadn't comitted I'd probably turn to Google Maps as my first point of alibi as to where I was on a particualr day.
    Wasn't that effectively what Cummings did in relation to the incorrect press report about a second return trip to Durham? He certainly offered to make electronic data available in evidence.

    He did not however make such an offer in respect of the rest of his story so maybe the evidence there wasn't quite so conclusive.
    He hadn't challenged the rest of the story. He had admitted both the initial journey to Durham and the trip to Barnard Castle along with its ridiculous excuse. Obviously he is not going to think it necessary to offer evidence to counter a claim he already admitted was correct.
    Thanks Richard but you are missing my point.

    Let me make it clear immediately that I have my doubts about the whole story and not just the Castle fairy tale element. There has been, as far as I know, no corroboration of his wife's illness, or his own, or indeed much about the dramatic visit with the son to the hospital. Nor is there any corroboration about the trip to Durham, exactly when it was made, whether there were any stops or detours, and likewise the return trip. Nor have the activities whilst staying 'on the farm' been corroborated.

    Cummings electronic records would be very helpful in such corroboration if they were offered. They were offered only in connection with the plainly incorrect story of the second trip. That suggests to me that handing over the said records for the whole period might prove awkward.

    Feel free to aim things at me. Happy to be Aunt Sally on this one.
    No not at all. I just don't see any evidence nor any support for such claims. As you know I think he should have resigned anyway as a matter of principle and still believe that. But since I come from a pro-Cummings position philosophically, I am not going looking for conspiracy theories to bring him down when, to my mind, he has already done enough to deserve sacking.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,571
    edited June 2020
    ..
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,011
    edited June 2020
    Shapps says facemasks to be compulsory on public transport
  • Options
    AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    edited June 2020
    220k new test today. Just short of Germany+France+Spain+Italy combined.

    Cases 1805 a little high, but that's affected by the testing increase.

    Deaths announced 176.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,722
    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    HYUFD said:

    Shapps says facemasks to be compulsory on public transport

    Are they available from a Mr Green owned and operated online company?
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,312

    Face coverings on public transport will be compulsory from 15 June in England to help stop the transmission of coronavirus as more people go back to work, Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, said on Thursday.

    The government will require people to wear face coverings on buses, trains, tubes and other modes of public transport from that date, when non-essential shops are likely to reopen.

    However, it will not apply to people entering shops, despite the current guidance saying face coverings should be worn in enclosed public places.

    Ministers are bringing in the policy due to concerns about the difficulties of physical distancing on crowded public transport, despite people being asked to use other ways of travelling, to space out, face away from each other and travel at staggered times.

    A senior government source said it would help stop asymptomatic people passing the virus on to others and also “act as a visible reminder” of the need for distancing and measures such as handwashing.

    Under the conditions of carriage, fines may be imposed for anyone who flouts the new rules.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/04/face-masks-to-be-made-compulsory-on-public-transport-in-england?CMP=twt_gu&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium#Echobox=1591286551

    Head in hands....why do the government keep making these things much more convoluted and dragged out than they need to be.

    When out and about, wear a mask, especially if you can't social distance, be it on a train or in a shop....simples. And like the quarantining arrivals, should have been policy 3 months ago.
    Because the Government hardly use public transport, if at all?
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    edited June 2020

    kle4 said:

    Boris Johnson is fighting on many fronts – but it’s the Scotland Question that could finish him
    - Why the biggest challenge to Johnson’s administration is the Scottish parliament election

    “Although No 10’s official position is that the Prime Minister would simply refuse to grant the Scottish government the right to hold another vote, most believe that position is contingent on public opinion north of the border.

    “We can reject a referendum as long as holding another one remains a priority only for the SNP’s conference floor,” one minister said to me recently. “Once it becomes an issue of fairness for the average Scottish voter, we’re in trouble.”

    The Union between Great Britain and Northern Ireland doesn’t concern most MPs, but the Union between England and Scotland certainly does“

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2020/06/boris-johnson-fighting-many-fronts-it-s-scotland-question-could-finish-him

    I know they insist they would not grant another under any circumstances, but I just don't think they can sustain that. I'd fear it being lost, but if they want one notwithstanding past events it cannot be put off long.
    They'll keep insisting it until the day after the next Scottish Parliament election. Not granting one would be Scottish Tory policy at that election so there won't be any prevaricating on the matter.

    If the SNP win a majority though then that'd be reason to change potentially. Whether they will then or not is another question, but it won't change before then.
    Agreed. Nothing changes til 7 May 2021. Which suits the SNP and SCons, and severely disadvantages SLab and SLD.

    The big unknown is how the chaos in London is going to affect Holyrood GE 2021.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,789

    Face coverings on public transport will be compulsory from 15 June in England to help stop the transmission of coronavirus as more people go back to work, Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, said on Thursday.

    The government will require people to wear face coverings on buses, trains, tubes and other modes of public transport from that date, when non-essential shops are likely to reopen.

    However, it will not apply to people entering shops, despite the current guidance saying face coverings should be worn in enclosed public places.

    Ministers are bringing in the policy due to concerns about the difficulties of physical distancing on crowded public transport, despite people being asked to use other ways of travelling, to space out, face away from each other and travel at staggered times.

    A senior government source said it would help stop asymptomatic people passing the virus on to others and also “act as a visible reminder” of the need for distancing and measures such as handwashing.

    Under the conditions of carriage, fines may be imposed for anyone who flouts the new rules.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/04/face-masks-to-be-made-compulsory-on-public-transport-in-england?CMP=twt_gu&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium#Echobox=1591286551

    Head in hands....why do the government keep making these things much more convoluted and dragged out than they need to be.

    When out and about, wear a mask, especially if you can't social distance, be it on a train or in a shop....simples. And like the quarantining arrivals, should have been policy 3 months ago.
    Because the Government hardly use public transport, if at all?
    Oh no, not with the smelly plebs. As one of them, or at least their predecessors, admitted.
  • Options
    OllyTOllyT Posts: 4,913

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    nico67 said:

    So the UK is set to sell out farmers .

    Even under the tariff plan chicken and beef imported from the USA will still be cheaper than that produced in the UK.

    Amazing how quickly the UK folded . Time to order the gimp suit !

    So we're going to get cheaper food is what you're saying?

    Good. That's what the Kiwis did - abolish tariffs, abolish subsidies, told their farmers to make do without any of that. And they're still exporters.

    The food will be cheaper because it will not meet current animal care standards. UK farmers will clearly have to have the standards they work to lowered as well if they are to compete. My guess is that this will not be popular even if it does lower prices a little. We shall see. Luckily - like the people inflicting this on us - I will still be able to buy the good stuff for my family.

    Or UK farmers will maintain current standards and consumers can make the choice to buy Red Tractor approved products. Just like we already can do.

    I buy Free Range eggs and Red Tractor food even though cheaper caged eggs and cheaper lower standard food is available. People can make a free choice in a free society.

    Doesn't the welfare of the animals figure anywhere in your argument or is that just irrelevant?

    I would have thought that the fact that all these avoidable viruses (Ebola, Covid-19, Sars, HIV-Aids, Swine Fever) have come from our treatment of animals might at least cause you to stop and think about the way we treat them for a minute.

    Yes they did factor. Red Tractor meat and Free Range eggs are about animal welfare not just being British for Red Tractor and that's what I said I choose to buy as do others.

    If people on a budget want to prioritise cheap food that meets basic standards but has lower welfare then that's their choice not mine. Caged eggs, Danish bacon etc are all perfectly legal to buy.
    Do you think that forgoing eating meat would be too high a price to pay to have avoided the economic havoc that Covid-19 alone has visited on the world?
    Yes.
    Interesting. And if the next virus we get from eating bats or pangolins or monkeys or whatever kills millions?
    I couldn't care less.

    Viruses don't discriminate between people who eat meat and vegetarians - and the entire world isn't going to become vegetarian.
    If your doctor told you personally to stop eating meat because it was killing you, would you?
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,314
    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited June 2020

    Face coverings on public transport will be compulsory from 15 June in England to help stop the transmission of coronavirus as more people go back to work, Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, said on Thursday.

    The government will require people to wear face coverings on buses, trains, tubes and other modes of public transport from that date, when non-essential shops are likely to reopen.

    However, it will not apply to people entering shops, despite the current guidance saying face coverings should be worn in enclosed public places.

    Ministers are bringing in the policy due to concerns about the difficulties of physical distancing on crowded public transport, despite people being asked to use other ways of travelling, to space out, face away from each other and travel at staggered times.

    A senior government source said it would help stop asymptomatic people passing the virus on to others and also “act as a visible reminder” of the need for distancing and measures such as handwashing.

    Under the conditions of carriage, fines may be imposed for anyone who flouts the new rules.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/04/face-masks-to-be-made-compulsory-on-public-transport-in-england?CMP=twt_gu&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium#Echobox=1591286551

    Head in hands....why do the government keep making these things much more convoluted and dragged out than they need to be.

    When out and about, wear a mask, especially if you can't social distance, be it on a train or in a shop....simples. And like the quarantining arrivals, should have been policy 3 months ago.
    Because the Government hardly use public transport, if at all?
    Very wise...those peasant wagons in particular are filthy contraptions.
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100
    Brom said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    It does not feel very Statesmanlike to post letters like this for the crowd on social media. Pure posturing from a man who probably won't ever have to worry about being PM at the same time as Trump is President.
    Starmer is a poseur's poseur
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Claims to fame: aged 9, I was one of a group of children interviewed by Ronald Blythe, author of Akenfield, for the Sunday Times. The name Alastair made a few appearances in the article - correctly spelt as well.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,952

    Face coverings on public transport will be compulsory from 15 June in England to help stop the transmission of coronavirus as more people go back to work, Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, said on Thursday.

    The government will require people to wear face coverings on buses, trains, tubes and other modes of public transport from that date, when non-essential shops are likely to reopen.

    However, it will not apply to people entering shops, despite the current guidance saying face coverings should be worn in enclosed public places.

    Ministers are bringing in the policy due to concerns about the difficulties of physical distancing on crowded public transport, despite people being asked to use other ways of travelling, to space out, face away from each other and travel at staggered times.

    A senior government source said it would help stop asymptomatic people passing the virus on to others and also “act as a visible reminder” of the need for distancing and measures such as handwashing.

    Under the conditions of carriage, fines may be imposed for anyone who flouts the new rules.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/04/face-masks-to-be-made-compulsory-on-public-transport-in-england?CMP=twt_gu&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium#Echobox=1591286551

    Head in hands....why do the government keep making these things much more convoluted and dragged out than they need to be.

    When out and about, wear a mask, especially if you can't social distance, be it on a train or in a shop....simples. And like the quarantining arrivals, should have been policy 3 months ago.
    Whilst I agree I suspect that once again this may be driven by the lack of masks.

    I was having a chat with one of my close friends last night who is Chief Pharmacist for a large NHS trust. He was wryly observing how often Government guidance just by chance, seems to match what PPE they have available. So when gloves were in short supply guidance was that they were not necessary but once a stable supply became available the guidance changed to them being a vital part of PPE.

    Much of the Government interpretation of scientific advice seems to be driven by expediency rather than sound science and I suspect this issue with masks is more of the same. .
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,121
    Pagan2 said:

    nico67 said:

    So the UK is set to sell out farmers .

    Even under the tariff plan chicken and beef imported from the USA will still be cheaper than that produced in the UK.

    Amazing how quickly the UK folded . Time to order the gimp suit !

    So we're going to get cheaper food is what you're saying?

    Good. That's what the Kiwis did - abolish tariffs, abolish subsidies, told their farmers to make do without any of that. And they're still exporters.

    The food will be cheaper because it will not meet current animal care standards. UK farmers will clearly have to have the standards they work to lowered as well if they are to compete. My guess is that this will not be popular even if it does lower prices a little. We shall see. Luckily - like the people inflicting this on us - I will still be able to buy the good stuff for my family.

    Or UK farmers will maintain current standards and consumers can make the choice to buy Red Tractor approved products. Just like we already can do.

    I buy Free Range eggs and Red Tractor food even though cheaper caged eggs and cheaper lower standard food is available. People can make a free choice in a free society.
    Except they won't be able to make a choice to ban cruel practices in farming if we do the kind of nasty deal with the US that American agribusiness interests are aggressively pushing for. Or are you advocating a free for all with no animal welfare standards at all?
    And we couldn't ban cruel practises like live export of animals in the eu and we have to accept meat from other eu countries with lower animal welfare standards for the last 40 years. The complaining you did was so loud no one heard it
    I thought that leaving the EU would lead to a lowering of standards, not an increase, and with the news that we are going to be importing chlorinated chicken it looks like I was right.
    I've been complaining about farming cruelty in the way that Mr Thompson would approve of, by not eating meat for the last thirty years.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Foxy said:

    OllyT said:

    eek said:

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    nico67 said:

    So the UK is set to sell out farmers .

    Even under the tariff plan chicken and beef imported from the USA will still be cheaper than that produced in the UK.

    Amazing how quickly the UK folded . Time to order the gimp suit !

    So we're going to get cheaper food is what you're saying?

    Good. That's what the Kiwis did - abolish tariffs, abolish subsidies, told their farmers to make do without any of that. And they're still exporters.

    The food will be cheaper because it will not meet current animal care standards. UK farmers will clearly have to have the standards they work to lowered as well if they are to compete. My guess is that this will not be popular even if it does lower prices a little. We shall see. Luckily - like the people inflicting this on us - I will still be able to buy the good stuff for my family.

    Or UK farmers will maintain current standards and consumers can make the choice to buy Red Tractor approved products. Just like we already can do.

    I buy Free Range eggs and Red Tractor food even though cheaper caged eggs and cheaper lower standard food is available. People can make a free choice in a free society.

    Doesn't the welfare of the animals figure anywhere in your argument or is that just irrelevant?

    I would have thought that the fact that all these avoidable viruses (Ebola, Covid-19, Sars, HIV-Aids, Swine Fever) have come from our treatment of animals might at least cause you to stop and think about the way we treat them for a minute.

    Yes they did factor. Red Tractor meat and Free Range eggs are about animal welfare not just being British for Red Tractor and that's what I said I choose to buy as do others.

    If people on a budget want to prioritise cheap food that meets basic standards but has lower welfare then that's their choice not mine. Caged eggs, Danish bacon etc are all perfectly legal to buy.
    Do you think that forgoing eating meat would be too high a price to pay to have avoided the economic havoc that Covid-19 alone has visited on the world?
    How does not eating meat save money? Protein is expensive no matter what form it comes in.
    I was alluding to the fact that Covid-19 (as well as Ebola, Sars, HIVAids) was caused by eating animals. I was just wondering if people felt it was worth the price (economic or deaths)

    The next one might be even more lethal and there will be a next one unless the world alters its ways.
    Animal protein is more expensive though, and not just in terms of money, but also in terms of land use and water etc.

    Though this was an interesting piece of news over recent weeks, and perhaps explains our obesity drive. A hunger for protein.

    https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1264060029956755457?s=19
    Indeed. Eating more meat and fewer carbs is a good answer for our diets.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,312
    edited June 2020

    Face coverings on public transport will be compulsory from 15 June in England to help stop the transmission of coronavirus as more people go back to work, Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, said on Thursday.

    The government will require people to wear face coverings on buses, trains, tubes and other modes of public transport from that date, when non-essential shops are likely to reopen.

    However, it will not apply to people entering shops, despite the current guidance saying face coverings should be worn in enclosed public places.

    Ministers are bringing in the policy due to concerns about the difficulties of physical distancing on crowded public transport, despite people being asked to use other ways of travelling, to space out, face away from each other and travel at staggered times.

    A senior government source said it would help stop asymptomatic people passing the virus on to others and also “act as a visible reminder” of the need for distancing and measures such as handwashing.

    Under the conditions of carriage, fines may be imposed for anyone who flouts the new rules.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/04/face-masks-to-be-made-compulsory-on-public-transport-in-england?CMP=twt_gu&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium#Echobox=1591286551

    Head in hands....why do the government keep making these things much more convoluted and dragged out than they need to be.

    When out and about, wear a mask, especially if you can't social distance, be it on a train or in a shop....simples. And like the quarantining arrivals, should have been policy 3 months ago.
    Because the Government hardly use public transport, if at all?
    Very wise...those peasant wagons in particular are filthy contraptions.
    Would be interesting to see how Shapps would cope with a rush-hour ride on the Central line...
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,952

    malcolmg said:

    Andy_JS said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Brom said:

    Sandpit said:
    Wot about the leadership polls though? As Mike often points out these are a better indicator. Johnson is becoming an even bigger joke than I feared he would be. Memes about earpieces or empty skulls will eventually feed through to the popular subconscious. Those that follow things a little closer will realise the emperor has no leadership skills.

    Every week that goes past his incompetence will become more visible. Tories of today will join ex-Tories like myself who rue the day when the dumber section of the party membership foisted him on us.
    Not the twitter memes! how will they cope with their massive polling lead.

    It's as if the left never learn, Boris had endless memes last year too and won a landslide. Leadership polls will mean a lot less than VI if Boris doesn't fight 2024 so Im not sure Labour can take too much heart from that.
    Boris is still polling higher than any Tory leader has got at a general election since Thatcher
    Even you know that is only temporary. You must be realising gradually he is useless as a PM. He has no leadership skills.
    He is the most popular Tory leader on the doorstep I have ever campaigned for in my lifetime
    Just proves how stupid Tories are, superficial halfwitted cretins.
    Is it a good idea to insult 45% of voters?
    If the cap fits ............
    Irony alert. Adherent to the backward philosophy of nationalism, one of the dumbest hatefilled political perversions of the 19th Century calls other people halfwitted cretins. And the poster who wrote it is one of the most inarticulate ill informed buffoons who writes on here. He will now prove my point by his response no doubt!!
    If your belief in an illusory British nation state overrides your belief in sovereign European states cooperating within the European Union, you're a British nationalist. Your ranting against nationalists is deeply hypocritical.
    Given my intense dislike of Nigel I can't believe I am going to defend him but, he is a strong opponent of Brexit. As such I think your attack on him is misplaced.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898
    edited June 2020
    Brom said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    It does not feel very Statesmanlike to post letters like this for the crowd on social media. Pure posturing from a man who probably won't ever have to worry about being PM at the same time as Trump is President.
    It's pure virtue signalling for the social media crowd, trying to goad the PM for not telling the leader of our closest ally that he's evil incarnate, straight to his face.

    It's the sort of publicity stunt we saw under the last Labour leader, and those of us who may be floating voters at the next election were hoping would have gone away.

    Also, why is everyone referring only to peaceful protests, when most of them in the US have clearly been anything but peaceful?
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,930
    Interesting interview with Jonathan Sumption from last year when he was the Remainer's hero rather than their anti-lockdown villain, and Leaver's out of touch elitist rather than champion of freedom

    https://soundcloud.com/unherd-confessions/jonathan-sumptions-confessions
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,312

    Pagan2 said:

    nico67 said:

    So the UK is set to sell out farmers .

    Even under the tariff plan chicken and beef imported from the USA will still be cheaper than that produced in the UK.

    Amazing how quickly the UK folded . Time to order the gimp suit !

    So we're going to get cheaper food is what you're saying?

    Good. That's what the Kiwis did - abolish tariffs, abolish subsidies, told their farmers to make do without any of that. And they're still exporters.

    The food will be cheaper because it will not meet current animal care standards. UK farmers will clearly have to have the standards they work to lowered as well if they are to compete. My guess is that this will not be popular even if it does lower prices a little. We shall see. Luckily - like the people inflicting this on us - I will still be able to buy the good stuff for my family.

    Or UK farmers will maintain current standards and consumers can make the choice to buy Red Tractor approved products. Just like we already can do.

    I buy Free Range eggs and Red Tractor food even though cheaper caged eggs and cheaper lower standard food is available. People can make a free choice in a free society.
    Except they won't be able to make a choice to ban cruel practices in farming if we do the kind of nasty deal with the US that American agribusiness interests are aggressively pushing for. Or are you advocating a free for all with no animal welfare standards at all?
    And we couldn't ban cruel practises like live export of animals in the eu and we have to accept meat from other eu countries with lower animal welfare standards for the last 40 years. The complaining you did was so loud no one heard it
    I thought that leaving the EU would lead to a lowering of standards, not an increase, and with the news that we are going to be importing chlorinated chicken it looks like I was right.
    I've been complaining about farming cruelty in the way that Mr Thompson would approve of, by not eating meat for the last thirty years.
    Will be 29 years this year for me :)
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    It does seem a bit that way. PMQs, I wrote to you, but you didn't write back. Well i phoned you....but there were other people on the call...and....arhhh see I got you....person in the street, huh.

    I have compiled a dossier of companies that tried to sell you PPE, but you ignored them....yes, we asked them to fill in a form to provide evidence of their supply chain and we found they were from Trotters Independent Trading...arhhh see got you.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOMhN-hfMtY
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,477

    Face coverings on public transport will be compulsory from 15 June in England to help stop the transmission of coronavirus as more people go back to work, Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, said on Thursday.

    The government will require people to wear face coverings on buses, trains, tubes and other modes of public transport from that date, when non-essential shops are likely to reopen.

    However, it will not apply to people entering shops, despite the current guidance saying face coverings should be worn in enclosed public places.

    Ministers are bringing in the policy due to concerns about the difficulties of physical distancing on crowded public transport, despite people being asked to use other ways of travelling, to space out, face away from each other and travel at staggered times.

    A senior government source said it would help stop asymptomatic people passing the virus on to others and also “act as a visible reminder” of the need for distancing and measures such as handwashing.

    Under the conditions of carriage, fines may be imposed for anyone who flouts the new rules.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/04/face-masks-to-be-made-compulsory-on-public-transport-in-england?CMP=twt_gu&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium#Echobox=1591286551

    Head in hands....why do the government keep making these things much more convoluted and dragged out than they need to be.

    When out and about, wear a mask, especially if you can't social distance, be it on a train or in a shop....simples. And like the quarantining arrivals, should have been policy 3 months ago.
    Because the Government hardly use public transport, if at all?
    Very wise...those peasant wagons in particular are filthy contraptions.
    From a few friends in Manchester who have been forced to use the peasant wagons to get to work, they reckon maybe only 10% of passengers use face coverings.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,930
    The use of "sceptic"

    When we were discussing Brexit "Eurosceptic" appeared to mean "Rabid Leaver". When discussing lockdown, I think it is more "not too sure about it either way" rather than "demand it end NOW", although Toby Young etc seem to see themselves as sceptics in the "Eurosceptic" way of understanding
  • Options
    SandraMcSandraMc Posts: 599
    kinabalu said:

    Re moments of fame -

    I was on Fifteen To One.

    Eliminated 1st round. 2 questions. 15 seconds of screen time. And they said my name wrong.

    Ditto. Although they did get my name right but because I competed under my maiden name, some people thought they had got my name wrong.
  • Options
    Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 13,320

    Pulpstar said:

    Rees Mogg is the worst. I remember reading about how as a child he turned up at a shareholders' meeting (GEC if I remember correctly) and started berating the chairman over the size of the dividend he'd received on the shares he'd been given by his father. I'm not sure which Viz character he reminds me of most - Spoiled Bastard or Victorian Dad. Either way, he really is a tosser.

    Didn't he say once that every time he opened his mouth it meant the Tories losing a vote? I'm not sure what changed between then and him becoming an MP.

    I remember him from the Oxford Union. His accent then was a lot "worse" than it is now. As someone from ooop noorth who hadn't met many public school types, it did grate just a little at the time...and he did have a lot to say.

    I have some time for the traditionalist approach though. Surely voting by phone takes away some of the supposedly serious nature of parliament? I would say the same for any remote voting (including elections).
    Crowding through division lobbies is 'serious'? What other legislature conducts it's voting like that? Apart possibly from the Democratic Party in Iowa?

    Most legislatures don't have people voting remotely from a phone whilst wandering about, though.

    Even the EU-style voting has its problems. Just sitting there pressing buttons as per your pre-prescribed voting list isn't great (especially when MEPs accidentally press the wrong button).
    Wandering about with a phone in hand isn't what I had in mind as an alternative. Might appeal to likes of Cummings of course
    Otherwise I take your point, although I believe people have been known to go through the wrong lobby on occasions.
    True, and quite recently too. You'd think it wouldn't be that hard to follow the "right" set of people.

    Perhaps those MPs who have to be remote from the chamber should only be able to vote from a registered office from which they 'attend' (either within Parliament or their constituency). I'm not sure how you would enforce that, though.




    Somewhat worrying that some at least of our MP's don't know who their friends are.

    If it's possible to identify exactly where someone was 13 years ago from their mobile phone usage, I'm sure it can't be that difficult to ensure someone always votes rom their 'appointed place'
    Google can do that already. In fact if I was accused of a crime I was sure I hadn't comitted I'd probably turn to Google Maps as my first point of alibi as to where I was on a particualr day.
    Wasn't that effectively what Cummings did in relation to the incorrect press report about a second return trip to Durham? He certainly offered to make electronic data available in evidence.

    He did not however make such an offer in respect of the rest of his story so maybe the evidence there wasn't quite so conclusive.
    He hadn't challenged the rest of the story. He had admitted both the initial journey to Durham and the trip to Barnard Castle along with its ridiculous excuse. Obviously he is not going to think it necessary to offer evidence to counter a claim he already admitted was correct.
    Thanks Richard but you are missing my point.

    Let me make it clear immediately that I have my doubts about the whole story and not just the Castle fairy tale element. There has been, as far as I know, no corroboration of his wife's illness, or his own, or indeed much about the dramatic visit with the son to the hospital. Nor is there any corroboration about the trip to Durham, exactly when it was made, whether there were any stops or detours, and likewise the return trip. Nor have the activities whilst staying 'on the farm' been corroborated.

    Cummings electronic records would be very helpful in such corroboration if they were offered. They were offered only in connection with the plainly incorrect story of the second trip. That suggests to me that handing over the said records for the whole period might prove awkward.

    Feel free to aim things at me. Happy to be Aunt Sally on this one.
    No not at all. I just don't see any evidence nor any support for such claims. As you know I think he should have resigned anyway as a matter of principle and still believe that. But since I come from a pro-Cummings position philosophically, I am not going looking for conspiracy theories to bring him down when, to my mind, he has already done enough to deserve sacking.
    Yes, I understand that perfectly, Richard, and have no quarrel with the view. Mine is not so much a conspiracy theory (on the whole I don't like them whatever the subject) but more a response to what I take to be a blatant lie (Barnard Castle.)

    As a general rule I tend to assume people are being honest with me but if it becomes clear I have been lied to, I then tend to assume the opposite and doubt everything they are saying. That's why I am sceptical about the entire Cummings account. Obviously I have no proof but as he clearly lied about one part of the story I feel justified in adopting a sceptical view of the rest, substituting my own plausible interpretation for his.

    Hope that makes my take clear, even if you don't entirely agree with it.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    nico67 said:

    So the UK is set to sell out farmers .

    Even under the tariff plan chicken and beef imported from the USA will still be cheaper than that produced in the UK.

    Amazing how quickly the UK folded . Time to order the gimp suit !

    So we're going to get cheaper food is what you're saying?

    Good. That's what the Kiwis did - abolish tariffs, abolish subsidies, told their farmers to make do without any of that. And they're still exporters.

    The food will be cheaper because it will not meet current animal care standards. UK farmers will clearly have to have the standards they work to lowered as well if they are to compete. My guess is that this will not be popular even if it does lower prices a little. We shall see. Luckily - like the people inflicting this on us - I will still be able to buy the good stuff for my family.

    Or UK farmers will maintain current standards and consumers can make the choice to buy Red Tractor approved products. Just like we already can do.

    I buy Free Range eggs and Red Tractor food even though cheaper caged eggs and cheaper lower standard food is available. People can make a free choice in a free society.

    Doesn't the welfare of the animals figure anywhere in your argument or is that just irrelevant?

    I would have thought that the fact that all these avoidable viruses (Ebola, Covid-19, Sars, HIV-Aids, Swine Fever) have come from our treatment of animals might at least cause you to stop and think about the way we treat them for a minute.

    Yes they did factor. Red Tractor meat and Free Range eggs are about animal welfare not just being British for Red Tractor and that's what I said I choose to buy as do others.

    If people on a budget want to prioritise cheap food that meets basic standards but has lower welfare then that's their choice not mine. Caged eggs, Danish bacon etc are all perfectly legal to buy.
    Do you think that forgoing eating meat would be too high a price to pay to have avoided the economic havoc that Covid-19 alone has visited on the world?
    Yes.
    Interesting. And if the next virus we get from eating bats or pangolins or monkeys or whatever kills millions?
    I couldn't care less.

    Viruses don't discriminate between people who eat meat and vegetarians - and the entire world isn't going to become vegetarian.
    If your doctor told you personally to stop eating meat because it was killing you, would you?
    I'd definitely want a second opinion and more details before deciding.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited June 2020
    https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1268351908449837061?s=20

    Police brutality, COVID and Fentanyl usage...3 of the major issues in US society.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,930
    edited June 2020
    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Brom said:

    Sandpit said:
    Wot about the leadership polls though? As Mike often points out these are a better indicator. Johnson is becoming an even bigger joke than I feared he would be. Memes about earpieces or empty skulls will eventually feed through to the popular subconscious. Those that follow things a little closer will realise the emperor has no leadership skills.

    Every week that goes past his incompetence will become more visible. Tories of today will join ex-Tories like myself who rue the day when the dumber section of the party membership foisted him on us.
    Not the twitter memes! how will they cope with their massive polling lead.

    It's as if the left never learn, Boris had endless memes last year too and won a landslide. Leadership polls will mean a lot less than VI if Boris doesn't fight 2024 so Im not sure Labour can take too much heart from that.
    Boris is still polling higher than any Tory leader has got at a general election since Thatcher
    Even you know that is only temporary. You must be realising gradually he is useless as a PM. He has no leadership skills.
    He is the most popular Tory leader on the doorstep I have ever campaigned for in my lifetime
    For now. Besides that’s quite a low bar.
    Eh? Why is it a low bar?

    Good answer on the Pretenders, btw - just listened to your clip.

    And also, for anyone who has seen The Americans, With or Without You will carry particular resonance.

    And as for fame, my slightest claim to media fame is that once, several years ago, to my great embarrassment one of the then new tv channels did a documentary on white collar boxing which included me when I was fighting. It is repeated every 3-5 years on Dave or somesuch.
    Cheers. I was in the car on my way to the bottle bank when they asked the question, and on my way back they asked it again as no one had got the right answer. I called when I got home and there I was! I was wondering what the prize was... and there wasn't one! (other than the first mention of the baby on regional radio)
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing
    Has anyone told him that it's pro bono
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898
    edited June 2020

    Face coverings on public transport will be compulsory from 15 June in England to help stop the transmission of coronavirus as more people go back to work, Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, said on Thursday.

    The government will require people to wear face coverings on buses, trains, tubes and other modes of public transport from that date, when non-essential shops are likely to reopen.

    However, it will not apply to people entering shops, despite the current guidance saying face coverings should be worn in enclosed public places.

    Ministers are bringing in the policy due to concerns about the difficulties of physical distancing on crowded public transport, despite people being asked to use other ways of travelling, to space out, face away from each other and travel at staggered times.

    A senior government source said it would help stop asymptomatic people passing the virus on to others and also “act as a visible reminder” of the need for distancing and measures such as handwashing.

    Under the conditions of carriage, fines may be imposed for anyone who flouts the new rules.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/04/face-masks-to-be-made-compulsory-on-public-transport-in-england?CMP=twt_gu&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium#Echobox=1591286551

    Head in hands....why do the government keep making these things much more convoluted and dragged out than they need to be.

    When out and about, wear a mask, especially if you can't social distance, be it on a train or in a shop....simples. And like the quarantining arrivals, should have been policy 3 months ago.
    Because the Government hardly use public transport, if at all?
    Do they think the Government Car Service is public transport?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,429
    IanB2 said:

    fox327 said:

    Foxy said:

    fox327 said:

    I've stopped paying attention to all the latest twists and turns. Social distancing is not a sustainable policy in the long term. This will soon become particularly obvious on public transport and in schools. All the hand-wringing over it will make not the slightest difference in the end. It will eventually go. The needs that we have as human beings cannot be met in a perpetually socially distanced society.

    For example, how are driving lessons and driving tests going to work? Or will people just stop learning to drive? For me, the time has come to switch off from these interminable discussions that cannot solve anything.

    Taxi drivers are amongst the highest risk occupations as I recall.

    Where social distancing is impossible, such as in cars, trains, some workplaces, masks should be compulsory for all.

    I am not a taxi driver, but I live near a driving instructor. Probably most taxi drivers and people in similar occupations are too busy working to post on forums like this.
    The taxi drivers are all busy ferrying the SeanTs around, while providing data to the hive mind, in the form of anecdotes.
    Those are only the imagined ones
    Come to think of it - maybe the ONS is counting all deaths, *including all persona*.

    So as the number of SeanTs falls, so the excess death number matches up with the COVID19 number
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Pagan2 said:

    nico67 said:

    So the UK is set to sell out farmers .

    Even under the tariff plan chicken and beef imported from the USA will still be cheaper than that produced in the UK.

    Amazing how quickly the UK folded . Time to order the gimp suit !

    So we're going to get cheaper food is what you're saying?

    Good. That's what the Kiwis did - abolish tariffs, abolish subsidies, told their farmers to make do without any of that. And they're still exporters.

    The food will be cheaper because it will not meet current animal care standards. UK farmers will clearly have to have the standards they work to lowered as well if they are to compete. My guess is that this will not be popular even if it does lower prices a little. We shall see. Luckily - like the people inflicting this on us - I will still be able to buy the good stuff for my family.

    Or UK farmers will maintain current standards and consumers can make the choice to buy Red Tractor approved products. Just like we already can do.

    I buy Free Range eggs and Red Tractor food even though cheaper caged eggs and cheaper lower standard food is available. People can make a free choice in a free society.
    Except they won't be able to make a choice to ban cruel practices in farming if we do the kind of nasty deal with the US that American agribusiness interests are aggressively pushing for. Or are you advocating a free for all with no animal welfare standards at all?
    And we couldn't ban cruel practises like live export of animals in the eu and we have to accept meat from other eu countries with lower animal welfare standards for the last 40 years. The complaining you did was so loud no one heard it
    I thought that leaving the EU would lead to a lowering of standards, not an increase, and with the news that we are going to be importing chlorinated chicken it looks like I was right.
    I've been complaining about farming cruelty in the way that Mr Thompson would approve of, by not eating meat for the last thirty years.
    You know me well, I 100% approve of making choices that way.

    If that's your choice then good for you. The law does not need changing to make choices, while others can make different choices. I don't require or expect you to make the same choices as me.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,937

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,429
    Andrew said:

    220k new test today. Just short of Germany+France+Spain+Italy combined.

    Cases 1805 a little high, but that's affected by the testing increase.

    Deaths announced 176.

    Does this mean that Boris has been hiding bodies at Chequers again?
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,930

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

    Because they never bothered attacking Jezza or Ed!
  • Options

    Pagan2 said:

    nico67 said:

    So the UK is set to sell out farmers .

    Even under the tariff plan chicken and beef imported from the USA will still be cheaper than that produced in the UK.

    Amazing how quickly the UK folded . Time to order the gimp suit !

    So we're going to get cheaper food is what you're saying?

    Good. That's what the Kiwis did - abolish tariffs, abolish subsidies, told their farmers to make do without any of that. And they're still exporters.

    The food will be cheaper because it will not meet current animal care standards. UK farmers will clearly have to have the standards they work to lowered as well if they are to compete. My guess is that this will not be popular even if it does lower prices a little. We shall see. Luckily - like the people inflicting this on us - I will still be able to buy the good stuff for my family.

    Or UK farmers will maintain current standards and consumers can make the choice to buy Red Tractor approved products. Just like we already can do.

    I buy Free Range eggs and Red Tractor food even though cheaper caged eggs and cheaper lower standard food is available. People can make a free choice in a free society.
    Except they won't be able to make a choice to ban cruel practices in farming if we do the kind of nasty deal with the US that American agribusiness interests are aggressively pushing for. Or are you advocating a free for all with no animal welfare standards at all?
    And we couldn't ban cruel practises like live export of animals in the eu and we have to accept meat from other eu countries with lower animal welfare standards for the last 40 years. The complaining you did was so loud no one heard it
    I thought that leaving the EU would lead to a lowering of standards, not an increase, and with the news that we are going to be importing chlorinated chicken it looks like I was right.
    I've been complaining about farming cruelty in the way that Mr Thompson would approve of, by not eating meat for the last thirty years.
    You know me well, I 100% approve of making choices that way.

    If that's your choice then good for you. The law does not need changing to make choices, while others can make different choices. I don't require or expect you to make the same choices as me.
    You don't think the law should set minimum animal welfare standards ?
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    That's not necessarily bad news. It may mean that they can adopt a less exacting test for admitting patients to hospitals.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,314

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

    I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth

    Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,937

    Pagan2 said:

    nico67 said:

    So the UK is set to sell out farmers .

    Even under the tariff plan chicken and beef imported from the USA will still be cheaper than that produced in the UK.

    Amazing how quickly the UK folded . Time to order the gimp suit !

    So we're going to get cheaper food is what you're saying?

    Good. That's what the Kiwis did - abolish tariffs, abolish subsidies, told their farmers to make do without any of that. And they're still exporters.

    The food will be cheaper because it will not meet current animal care standards. UK farmers will clearly have to have the standards they work to lowered as well if they are to compete. My guess is that this will not be popular even if it does lower prices a little. We shall see. Luckily - like the people inflicting this on us - I will still be able to buy the good stuff for my family.

    Or UK farmers will maintain current standards and consumers can make the choice to buy Red Tractor approved products. Just like we already can do.

    I buy Free Range eggs and Red Tractor food even though cheaper caged eggs and cheaper lower standard food is available. People can make a free choice in a free society.
    Except they won't be able to make a choice to ban cruel practices in farming if we do the kind of nasty deal with the US that American agribusiness interests are aggressively pushing for. Or are you advocating a free for all with no animal welfare standards at all?
    And we couldn't ban cruel practises like live export of animals in the eu and we have to accept meat from other eu countries with lower animal welfare standards for the last 40 years. The complaining you did was so loud no one heard it
    I thought that leaving the EU would lead to a lowering of standards, not an increase, and with the news that we are going to be importing chlorinated chicken it looks like I was right.
    I've been complaining about farming cruelty in the way that Mr Thompson would approve of, by not eating meat for the last thirty years.
    You know me well, I 100% approve of making choices that way.

    If that's your choice then good for you. The law does not need changing to make choices, while others can make different choices. I don't require or expect you to make the same choices as me.

    Yoiu are happy for the UK to bend the knee on animal welfare standards to President Trump in order to get a trade deal. My guess is that you will be in a minority. We shall see. But this was the Mail on Sunday this week:
    https://tounesnanews.com/2020/05/31/most-britons-oppose-ditching-animal-welfare-and-environmental-rules-in-us-trade-deal-says-mos-poll/


  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285

    That's not necessarily bad news. It may mean that they can adopt a less exacting test for admitting patients to hospitals.
    The massive continued reduction in those on ventilators would suggest that is likely explanation.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,340
    Sandpit said:



    Also, why is everyone referring only to peaceful protests, when most of them in the US have clearly been anything but peaceful?

    Are you sure? My impression is that most are indeed peaceful (unless one counts shouting as violence), but of course the media highlight the ones that aren't.

    I will say that the only demo that has really stuck in my mind in a good way was the utterly silent Tamil protest about Srti Lanka outside Parliament - thousands of dignified people quietly carrying banners. I remember a Tory MP and I both agreeing that it had made us look at the issue more closely than we had done.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,314
    Grant Shapps has improved his delivery recently
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Pagan2 said:

    nico67 said:

    So the UK is set to sell out farmers .

    Even under the tariff plan chicken and beef imported from the USA will still be cheaper than that produced in the UK.

    Amazing how quickly the UK folded . Time to order the gimp suit !

    So we're going to get cheaper food is what you're saying?

    Good. That's what the Kiwis did - abolish tariffs, abolish subsidies, told their farmers to make do without any of that. And they're still exporters.

    The food will be cheaper because it will not meet current animal care standards. UK farmers will clearly have to have the standards they work to lowered as well if they are to compete. My guess is that this will not be popular even if it does lower prices a little. We shall see. Luckily - like the people inflicting this on us - I will still be able to buy the good stuff for my family.

    Or UK farmers will maintain current standards and consumers can make the choice to buy Red Tractor approved products. Just like we already can do.

    I buy Free Range eggs and Red Tractor food even though cheaper caged eggs and cheaper lower standard food is available. People can make a free choice in a free society.
    Except they won't be able to make a choice to ban cruel practices in farming if we do the kind of nasty deal with the US that American agribusiness interests are aggressively pushing for. Or are you advocating a free for all with no animal welfare standards at all?
    And we couldn't ban cruel practises like live export of animals in the eu and we have to accept meat from other eu countries with lower animal welfare standards for the last 40 years. The complaining you did was so loud no one heard it
    I thought that leaving the EU would lead to a lowering of standards, not an increase, and with the news that we are going to be importing chlorinated chicken it looks like I was right.
    I've been complaining about farming cruelty in the way that Mr Thompson would approve of, by not eating meat for the last thirty years.
    You know me well, I 100% approve of making choices that way.

    If that's your choice then good for you. The law does not need changing to make choices, while others can make different choices. I don't require or expect you to make the same choices as me.
    You don't think the law should set minimum animal welfare standards ?
    Minimum? Yes I believe the law should set a minimum.

    I also believe standards can be better than the minimum but I don't think that needs a law to enforce it.

    I specifically gave the examples that I choose to buy free range eggs and I choose to buy Red Tractor meat both of which have higher welfare standards than eg caged eggs and Danish bacon etc

    It doesn't take a legal change for me to pick standards higher than a minimum nor should it take a legal change for others if they care. And if they don't, that's their choice.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited June 2020
    Coronavirus...social distancing...all so last month.

    Thousands join Birmingham protest

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-birmingham-52920826
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,429

    That's not necessarily bad news. It may mean that they can adopt a less exacting test for admitting patients to hospitals.
    The massive continued reduction in those on ventilators would suggest that is likely explanation.
    And would explain the convergences of the all settings number with the hospital numbers.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,786

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

    I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth

    Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
    If the future holds songs of 'let's hear it for Sir Kier Starmer' I'd be more than amazed.

    His main good point is that he's not Corbyn.
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,356

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

    I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth

    Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
    Its clear that Starmer is a shit of the highest order.. that continues with past 21st century Labour leaders .. Blair Brown. Miliband and Corbyn. Starmer will trip.up.over his own ego.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,462
    edited June 2020

    Coronavirus...social distancing...all so last month.

    Thousands join Birmingham protest

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-birmingham-52920826

    'Birmingham City Council said it supported the demonstration, but ***encouraged*** protesters to maintain social distancing' ???

    (My emphasis added)
  • Options
    Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,305
    edited June 2020

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

    I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth

    Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
    I don't remember Tone, also a lawyer, writing many letters when he was LotO. Why didn't Tone feel the need to?
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,312

    Coronavirus...social distancing...all so last month.

    Thousands join Birmingham protest

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-birmingham-52920826

    'Birmingham City Council said it supported the demonstration, but ***encouraged*** protesters to maintain social distancing' ???

    (My emphasis added)
    Socialist distancing!
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,689

    That's not necessarily bad news. It may mean that they can adopt a less exacting test for admitting patients to hospitals.
    One of the things I expect to come under scrutiny in the Inquiry has been our strategy of "stay at home until you're seriously ill". I wonder how many lives we have lost by "protecting the NHS"?
  • Options
    Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 13,790
    Omnium said:

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

    I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth

    Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
    If the future holds songs of 'let's hear it for Sir Kier Starmer' I'd be more than amazed.

    His main good point is that he's not Corbyn.
    Indeed, and that should be cause enough for the Tories to be worried; add to that he seems quite competent and add to that that it is apparent Johnson has no leadership skills, and is looking more idiotic by the day. Starmer is to Johnson what Cameron was to Brown. I would expect a similar result when the time comes, assuming Bozo lasts that long.
  • Options
    BannedinnParisBannedinnParis Posts: 1,884

    Grant Shapps has improved his delivery recently

    I thought he was good, some straight bat answers, some nice touches.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,314

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

    I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth

    Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
    I don't remember Tone, also a lawyer, writing many letters when he was LotO. Why didn't Tone feel the need to?
    He was labour's best pm in recent times
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,312

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

    I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth

    Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
    Its clear that Starmer is a shit of the highest order.. that continues with past 21st century Labour leaders .. Blair Brown. Miliband and Corbyn. Starmer will trip.up.over his own ego.
    image
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,071

    malcolmg said:

    Andy_JS said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Brom said:

    Sandpit said:
    Wot about the leadership polls though? As Mike often points out these are a better indicator. Johnson is becoming an even bigger joke than I feared he would be. Memes about earpieces or empty skulls will eventually feed through to the popular subconscious. Those that follow things a little closer will realise the emperor has no leadership skills.

    Every week that goes past his incompetence will become more visible. Tories of today will join ex-Tories like myself who rue the day when the dumber section of the party membership foisted him on us.
    Not the twitter memes! how will they cope with their massive polling lead.

    It's as if the left never learn, Boris had endless memes last year too and won a landslide. Leadership polls will mean a lot less than VI if Boris doesn't fight 2024 so Im not sure Labour can take too much heart from that.
    Boris is still polling higher than any Tory leader has got at a general election since Thatcher
    Even you know that is only temporary. You must be realising gradually he is useless as a PM. He has no leadership skills.
    He is the most popular Tory leader on the doorstep I have ever campaigned for in my lifetime
    Just proves how stupid Tories are, superficial halfwitted cretins.
    Is it a good idea to insult 45% of voters?
    If the cap fits ............
    Irony alert. Adherent to the backward philosophy of nationalism, one of the dumbest hatefilled political perversions of the 19th Century calls other people halfwitted cretins. And the poster who wrote it is one of the most inarticulate ill informed buffoons who writes on here. He will now prove my point by his response no doubt!!
    If your belief in an illusory British nation state overrides your belief in sovereign European states cooperating within the European Union, you're a British nationalist. Your ranting against nationalists is deeply hypocritical.
    Given my intense dislike of Nigel I can't believe I am going to defend him but, he is a strong opponent of Brexit. As such I think your attack on him is misplaced.
    Yes, but his opposition to Brexit is because it injures his sense of British identity. Britishness comes first.
  • Options
    FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 3,891

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

    He makes a good opposition leader. The polls suggest that. I suspect that the electorate will vote for him to stay as opposition leader for quite some time.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,340
    Quite a few bad polls for Trump in recent days:

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,689
    edited June 2020
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,786

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

    I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth

    Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
    Its clear that Starmer is a shit of the highest order.. that continues with past 21st century Labour leaders .. Blair Brown. Miliband and Corbyn. Starmer will trip.up.over his own ego.
    I don't see this argument at all with Blair, Milliband, or Starmer.

    Brown (particularly) and Corbyn are quite loathsome.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,462

    malcolmg said:

    Andy_JS said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Brom said:

    Sandpit said:
    Wot about the leadership polls though? As Mike often points out these are a better indicator. Johnson is becoming an even bigger joke than I feared he would be. Memes about earpieces or empty skulls will eventually feed through to the popular subconscious. Those that follow things a little closer will realise the emperor has no leadership skills.

    Every week that goes past his incompetence will become more visible. Tories of today will join ex-Tories like myself who rue the day when the dumber section of the party membership foisted him on us.
    Not the twitter memes! how will they cope with their massive polling lead.

    It's as if the left never learn, Boris had endless memes last year too and won a landslide. Leadership polls will mean a lot less than VI if Boris doesn't fight 2024 so Im not sure Labour can take too much heart from that.
    Boris is still polling higher than any Tory leader has got at a general election since Thatcher
    Even you know that is only temporary. You must be realising gradually he is useless as a PM. He has no leadership skills.
    He is the most popular Tory leader on the doorstep I have ever campaigned for in my lifetime
    Just proves how stupid Tories are, superficial halfwitted cretins.
    Is it a good idea to insult 45% of voters?
    If the cap fits ............
    Irony alert. Adherent to the backward philosophy of nationalism, one of the dumbest hatefilled political perversions of the 19th Century calls other people halfwitted cretins. And the poster who wrote it is one of the most inarticulate ill informed buffoons who writes on here. He will now prove my point by his response no doubt!!
    If your belief in an illusory British nation state overrides your belief in sovereign European states cooperating within the European Union, you're a British nationalist. Your ranting against nationalists is deeply hypocritical.
    Oh dear, has he departed from the true faith? Nigel has been one of the most vociferous remainers on this site. Do you all have to work toward the dismemberment of the British state now? No barneys with our new friends the SNP. :lol:
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,101

    That's not necessarily bad news. It may mean that they can adopt a less exacting test for admitting patients to hospitals.
    One of the things I expect to come under scrutiny in the Inquiry has been our strategy of "stay at home until you're seriously ill". I wonder how many lives we have lost by "protecting the NHS"?
    Together with its part in the care home deaths there's been a certain Moloch like aspect of the 'national religion'.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898
    edited June 2020

    Sandpit said:



    Also, why is everyone referring only to peaceful protests, when most of them in the US have clearly been anything but peaceful?

    Are you sure? My impression is that most are indeed peaceful (unless one counts shouting as violence), but of course the media highlight the ones that aren't.

    I will say that the only demo that has really stuck in my mind in a good way was the utterly silent Tamil protest about Srti Lanka outside Parliament - thousands of dignified people quietly carrying banners. I remember a Tory MP and I both agreeing that it had made us look at the issue more closely than we had done.
    Of course. To be fair, there are indeed large groups of peaceful protesters in the USA - they're rightly aggrieved and obviously have the right of free speech to air their grievances around deaths in police custody.

    There's also a number of idiots involved, who support a variety of causes and a variety of methods to make their point.

    My issue is more with the media reporting, conflating the various peaceful and violent groups - with some of the reporters looking like the Iraqi information minister saying that everything passed off peacefully, to a background of buildings on fire and looters smashing shop windows.

    Lovely anecdote about the Tamil protestors by the way, to many aggrieved people the only thing they have left to do is stand silently in front of Parliament and hope the MPs notice.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    That's not necessarily bad news. It may mean that they can adopt a less exacting test for admitting patients to hospitals.
    One of the things I expect to come under scrutiny in the Inquiry has been our strategy of "stay at home until you're seriously ill". I wonder how many lives we have lost by "protecting the NHS"?
    It's certainly on the list. Getting people to die in an orderly manner seems to have been among the highest priorities.
  • Options
    rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    edited June 2020
    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    Question on the US if anybody has a care -

    You know how we have manifestos telling us what somebody plans to do if they get into power - what is the equivalent over there?

    Is there something other than the rhetoric on the campaign trail?

    Newt Gingrich did his "Contract with America' in the 1994 Congressional elections
    Yes, I recall that. Turbo boost to partisanship, some say.

    But Trump, say, did we get a manifesto in 2016?

    Or was it just "Build That Wall" etc from his rallies?
    No, we don't have manifestos in the British/Commonwealth sense. What we do have is that one of the things that the party Conventions do, as well as formally elect the party's Presidential ticket, is write the party platform which notionally the Presidential and Congressional campaigns are fought on.

    Because of the separation of powers and because electoral candidates are elected by the people in primary elections, not selected by the party machine (and therefore can be "de-selected" for not adhering to the party line) party discipline is not like it is in the UK. This means that there's no practical way for the President, or even a Congressional majority of the same party, to push through legislation implementing a platform "plank" in the way that British governments, with a guaranteed parliamentary majority, can push passing a "manifesto commitment" as a moral obligation.

    That's not to say that the party platforms are meaningless: they do constitute general statements of intended policy over the next 2-4 years if elected, and many of the "planks" in practice do get implemented, but they don't carry the weight that an election manifesto does in the Westminster system.
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100
    Omnium said:

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

    I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth

    Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
    If the future holds songs of 'let's hear it for Sir Kier Starmer' I'd be more than amazed.

    His main good point is that he's not Corbyn.
    Let us all be thankful that there is only one Jeremy Corbyn.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,937

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

    I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth

    Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way

    Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.

  • Options
    FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 3,891
    edited June 2020
    Interesting that ventilator bed use is still falling very steadily.

    Perhaps the criteria for hospitalisation has relaxed a bit in some areas? There's a risk that we aren't seeing the same proportion of cases as we were during the peak.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,190
    Parts of the media are losing interest in COVID-19. The Guardian main story is George Floyd, while the Mail Online has four Madeleine McCann stories at the top of the site.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,722

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing
    No sensible person would choose Johnson over Starmer. I accept there are a lot of not at all sensible people out there. Also that we can conceive of candidates better than either Starmer or Johnson, but that's the choice at the moment.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited June 2020
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,477

    That's not necessarily bad news. It may mean that they can adopt a less exacting test for admitting patients to hospitals.
    One of the things I expect to come under scrutiny in the Inquiry has been our strategy of "stay at home until you're seriously ill". I wonder how many lives we have lost by "protecting the NHS"?
    It's certainly on the list. Getting people to die in an orderly manner seems to have been among the highest priorities.
    I think the driver of that might well be an assumption that the fatality rate was going to be much higher than it turned out to be.
  • Options
    contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818

    Coronavirus...social distancing...all so last month.

    Thousands join Birmingham protest

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-birmingham-52920826

    But YOU must wear a facemask on public transport - or be fined!

    People are going to get unhappy about this. And soon.
  • Options
    Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 13,790

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

    I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth

    Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
    I don't remember Tone, also a lawyer, writing many letters when he was LotO. Why didn't Tone feel the need to?
    Funny how anyone could think that polemic writing, gameshow hosting, or mediocre book writing are better credentials than a lawyer. Mr NorthWales, you perhaps ought to made aware that parliament is not about showbiz, it is about making laws. A legal background is probably about as good a background as you could have to be there. Unless you think "we have had enough of experts". We are certainly testing that idea to destruction by having Boris Johnson as our extremely amateur PM
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,897

    Grant Shapps has improved his delivery recently

    Has he subscribed to Amazon Prime?
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,952

    Sandpit said:



    Also, why is everyone referring only to peaceful protests, when most of them in the US have clearly been anything but peaceful?

    Are you sure? My impression is that most are indeed peaceful (unless one counts shouting as violence), but of course the media highlight the ones that aren't.

    I will say that the only demo that has really stuck in my mind in a good way was the utterly silent Tamil protest about Srti Lanka outside Parliament - thousands of dignified people quietly carrying banners. I remember a Tory MP and I both agreeing that it had made us look at the issue more closely than we had done.
    It is clear that there have been two very distinct sets of protests in the US. In the day time there have been huge, generally well behaved, well organised protests with mass support which have been commended by the police and the authorities. As those protests have eded and we have moved into the evening, they have been replaced by far more violent protests, often accompanied by looting and arson which are not supported by either the BLM movement or the vast majority of the protestors.

    One of the problems is it appears to me that Trump and others like him seem to be trying to conflate the two separate reactions into one so as to discredit the whole movement.
  • Options
    AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    edited June 2020


    Perhaps the criteria for hospitalisation has relaxed a bit in some areas? There's a risk that you aren't measuring the same proportion of cases if it has.

    Yep - you can dream up apples and oranges caveats for most of these. For me, total pillar 1 positives is probably the metric least prone to that now (although not the case going back more than 5 weeks).

  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,477
    Apple da best.
  • Options
    Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,602

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

    Indeed. Also the attacks seem quite scattergun, as if they don't realise that the purpose of the letter is the headline and pressure it generates rather than the fine detail of the content. It's a win win situation for Starmer - if Johnson belatedly acts he is following Starmer's prompting and if he doesn't then Johnson is effectively endorsing Trump by his silence.

    I also think that the more the Conservatives attack Starmer directly, the more it will marginalise those within Labour still seeking to undermine his authority. So it's all good as far as I'm concerned.
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

    I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth

    Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way

    Letters create evidence. You may not be rattled by Starmer, but Johnson clearly is, as are a number of posters on here. I can understand why. He is far smarter than the PM, more on top of his brief and not afraid of a bit of hard work. Since he has become leader, the polls have closed and his personal numbers have become steadily more positive, as have those for the Labour party. It's two months today that he became Labour leader. It's not a bad start.

    Lawyers are focused on looking backwards. Very little evidence of Starmer looking forwards
  • Options
    Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,818

    Mr. 86, there's also been much muttering about every case *with* COVID here being described statistically as a death *from* COVID (so if I pummel you to death with a stuff walrus, that counts as a COVID death if your corpse tests positive).

    Of course, if someone just happens to die of something else while suffering from Covid-19, they're rather unfortunate. Being ill tends to stop you from doing dangerous things like walrus-duelling, and if one is ill for, say, 2-3 weeks, the odds of randomly dying from something else during that period are probably very low indeed.

    A death during that period is pointing quite heavily to the virus, although, as you say, it could possibly be due to something else (while isolating at home).
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,786

    Omnium said:

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

    I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth

    Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
    If the future holds songs of 'let's hear it for Sir Kier Starmer' I'd be more than amazed.

    His main good point is that he's not Corbyn.
    Indeed, and that should be cause enough for the Tories to be worried; add to that he seems quite competent and add to that that it is apparent Johnson has no leadership skills, and is looking more idiotic by the day. Starmer is to Johnson what Cameron was to Brown. I would expect a similar result when the time comes, assuming Bozo lasts that long.
    I'd vote Boris over Starmer merely on character though. It's mostly all Boris has got, but that's enough.

  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,477

    Coronavirus...social distancing...all so last month.

    Thousands join Birmingham protest

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-birmingham-52920826

    But YOU must wear a facemask on public transport - or be fined!

    People are going to get unhappy about this. And soon.
    Nah, they don't want the plague.
  • Options
    nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    FF43 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Since his election as leader I have revised my opinion of sks upwards, and now back down again. This is being "forensic" in the sense that it feels as if he thinks these letters will be devastatingly effective when they form p.78 of documents bundle XVIIa in a High Court trial five years hence. They are his equivalent of calls for judge led inquiries into everything.
    The thing Starmer has in his favour is that he acts more like a Prime Minister than the Prime Minister does.
    He acts exactly as he is. Another lawyer

    Hence lots of pointless letter writing

    I like that we are getting these kinds of attacks on Starmer. He's clearly got the Tories rattled. They have had it easy for far too long.

    I am not rattled by Starmer and he has a long way to go to prove his worth

    Lots of letter writing is a lawyers way
    If the future holds songs of 'let's hear it for Sir Kier Starmer' I'd be more than amazed.

    His main good point is that he's not Corbyn.
    Indeed, and that should be cause enough for the Tories to be worried; add to that he seems quite competent and add to that that it is apparent Johnson has no leadership skills, and is looking more idiotic by the day. Starmer is to Johnson what Cameron was to Brown. I would expect a similar result when the time comes, assuming Bozo lasts that long.
    I'd vote Boris over Starmer merely on character though. It's mostly all Boris has got, but that's enough.

    What’s your definition of character...man of principle or a character good for a laugh?
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,288
    eristdoof said:

    Grant Shapps has improved his delivery recently

    Has he subscribed to Amazon Prime?
    He is still as lightweight as a helium balloon.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898
    edited June 2020

    Coronavirus...social distancing...all so last month.

    Thousands join Birmingham protest

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-birmingham-52920826

    But YOU must wear a facemask on public transport - or be fined!

    People are going to get unhappy about this. And soon.
    (Waves from a place where there's a £600 fine for leaving your house without wearing a face mask, no ifs or buts).

    If there's sufficient PPE available, it needs to be as compulsory as possible, with substantial fines for non-compliance. The Tube will be a massive virus-spreading mechanism otherwise.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,629

    Sandpit said:



    Also, why is everyone referring only to peaceful protests, when most of them in the US have clearly been anything but peaceful?

    Are you sure? My impression is that most are indeed peaceful (unless one counts shouting as violence), but of course the media highlight the ones that aren't.

    I will say that the only demo that has really stuck in my mind in a good way was the utterly silent Tamil protest about Srti Lanka outside Parliament - thousands of dignified people quietly carrying banners. I remember a Tory MP and I both agreeing that it had made us look at the issue more closely than we had done.
    It is clear that there have been two very distinct sets of protests in the US. In the day time there have been huge, generally well behaved, well organised protests with mass support which have been commended by the police and the authorities. As those protests have eded and we have moved into the evening, they have been replaced by far more violent protests, often accompanied by looting and arson...
    ... or not

    https://twitter.com/benyboi/status/1268342629395292166
This discussion has been closed.