Howdy, Stranger!

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

Undefined discussion subject.

1246

Comments

  • The Single Market was a large part of what we voted on five years ago. If you wanted to stay in the Single Market you should have voted for Remain. All leading campaigners on both sides of the fence were absolutely explicit that leaving the EU was a vote to leave the Single Market.

    And please don't share that discredited fake news video of out of context quotes that has been humiliatingly torn apart and discredited that tried to show the opposite.

    From Hard Brexiteer Owen Paterson:

    https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2015/01/owen-paterson-mp-why-ukip-is-wrong-about-immigration.html

    It is critical to remember that the economic single market and the political EU are not one and the same thing. We can participate in the market as members of the European Economic Area without being saddled with the EU as a political project. Those, such as the business chiefs of the CBI, who confuse the memberships of the single market and the EU are making a basic error and misleading the British people.

    This is where UKIP is wrong. Desperate to control immigration from the EU, the party has rejected continued membership of the single market within the EEA – which would place our economy at risk. In fact, as a member of the EEA but not the EU, we would not be bound by the European Court of Justice and its rulings on our benefits system. But, crucially, we could introduce “Safeguard Measures”, giving us an “emergency brake” on excessive migration – an option not available to us in the EU. We would get the benefits to business and the economy of free movement, with real power over our borders.
    Was January 2015 before or during the Referendum campaign? 🙄

    During the Referendum campaign the Leavers like Johnson united behind a proposal under Vote Leave and others like Farage united under an alternate one called Leave.EU and both were explicit and unequivocal that we would leave the Single Market.

    Michael Gove, Andrea Leadsom and Boris Johnson all explicitly said in the days before the vote on the BBC at prime time that we would leave the Single Market. No ifs, no buts, no equivocation. If you didn't understand that then don't cry now - if you did understand that but don't like it then tough.
    https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1110452473037275136
    Yes and Gove is still seeking that same free trade agreement.

    You are aware that a free trade agreement is not the same as the Single Market, are you not?
    He's referring to an existing free trade area that stretches from Iceland to the Russian border. What could that possibly mean other than the EEA?
    He's referring to the combination of the EU, the EEA and Free Trade Agreements - the latter of which we should be a part of.

    If you look at some of those countries on the Russian border like the Ukraine, Georgia as well as other countries like Switzerland that is outside of the EEA too then there are a plethora of mechanisms for free trade. Why should Switzerland, the Ukraine and Georgia be capable of having a free trade agreement without being in the EEA but the UK can't?
  • MaxPB said:

    Poor ratings for Boris, related to the news on his retirement at some point next year as well I'm sure. Whilst his positive ratings were in the low to mid 40s his pool of voters was large enough to win an election, now with them dropping it isn't. I'd say Boris has a potential pool of voters of 56% of the electorate while Starmer can reach 75% of the electorate, that alone is beginning to tell in the headline VI.

    This is before the Treasury starts to unwind what has made life easy for everyone. I'm not sure what will happen to the VI once the furlough has ended and a million or more people are moved to JSA and forced to find new work in fields they have no skills or training in. It may work out that this ends up like 2010-2019 and jobs are created out of the ashes of of a huge crash, but the people affected by it won't thank the government.

    Fascinating times ahead Max
    Ther'e evidence from back benchers comments the tories are more worried about the 1-4 points they are losing to the BP than the 30-odd starmer is getting.

    Its the former that's going to lose them their seats.
    I'll be interested to know whether BXP will consider standing down next time bearing in mind we've left
  • The Single Market was a large part of what we voted on five years ago. If you wanted to stay in the Single Market you should have voted for Remain. All leading campaigners on both sides of the fence were absolutely explicit that leaving the EU was a vote to leave the Single Market.

    And please don't share that discredited fake news video of out of context quotes that has been humiliatingly torn apart and discredited that tried to show the opposite.

    From Hard Brexiteer Owen Paterson:

    https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2015/01/owen-paterson-mp-why-ukip-is-wrong-about-immigration.html

    It is critical to remember that the economic single market and the political EU are not one and the same thing. We can participate in the market as members of the European Economic Area without being saddled with the EU as a political project. Those, such as the business chiefs of the CBI, who confuse the memberships of the single market and the EU are making a basic error and misleading the British people.

    This is where UKIP is wrong. Desperate to control immigration from the EU, the party has rejected continued membership of the single market within the EEA – which would place our economy at risk. In fact, as a member of the EEA but not the EU, we would not be bound by the European Court of Justice and its rulings on our benefits system. But, crucially, we could introduce “Safeguard Measures”, giving us an “emergency brake” on excessive migration – an option not available to us in the EU. We would get the benefits to business and the economy of free movement, with real power over our borders.
    Was January 2015 before or during the Referendum campaign? 🙄

    During the Referendum campaign the Leavers like Johnson united behind a proposal under Vote Leave and others like Farage united under an alternate one called Leave.EU and both were explicit and unequivocal that we would leave the Single Market.

    Michael Gove, Andrea Leadsom and Boris Johnson all explicitly said in the days before the vote on the BBC at prime time that we would leave the Single Market. No ifs, no buts, no equivocation. If you didn't understand that then don't cry now - if you did understand that but don't like it then tough.
    https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1110452473037275136
    Yes and Gove is still seeking that same free trade agreement.

    You are aware that a free trade agreement is not the same as the Single Market, are you not?
    He's referring to an existing free trade area that stretches from Iceland to the Russian border. What could that possibly mean other than the EEA?
    He's referring to the combination of the EU, the EEA and Free Trade Agreements - the latter of which we should be a part of.

    If you look at some of those countries on the Russian border like the Ukraine, Georgia as well as other countries like Switzerland that is outside of the EEA too then there are a plethora of mechanisms for free trade. Why should Switzerland, the Ukraine and Georgia be capable of having a free trade agreement without being in the EEA but the UK can't?
    I would love a Swiss-style relationship, let's do it
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,707

    The Single Market was a large part of what we voted on five years ago. If you wanted to stay in the Single Market you should have voted for Remain. All leading campaigners on both sides of the fence were absolutely explicit that leaving the EU was a vote to leave the Single Market.

    And please don't share that discredited fake news video of out of context quotes that has been humiliatingly torn apart and discredited that tried to show the opposite.

    From Hard Brexiteer Owen Paterson:

    https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2015/01/owen-paterson-mp-why-ukip-is-wrong-about-immigration.html

    It is critical to remember that the economic single market and the political EU are not one and the same thing. We can participate in the market as members of the European Economic Area without being saddled with the EU as a political project. Those, such as the business chiefs of the CBI, who confuse the memberships of the single market and the EU are making a basic error and misleading the British people.

    This is where UKIP is wrong. Desperate to control immigration from the EU, the party has rejected continued membership of the single market within the EEA – which would place our economy at risk. In fact, as a member of the EEA but not the EU, we would not be bound by the European Court of Justice and its rulings on our benefits system. But, crucially, we could introduce “Safeguard Measures”, giving us an “emergency brake” on excessive migration – an option not available to us in the EU. We would get the benefits to business and the economy of free movement, with real power over our borders.
    Was January 2015 before or during the Referendum campaign? 🙄

    During the Referendum campaign the Leavers like Johnson united behind a proposal under Vote Leave and others like Farage united under an alternate one called Leave.EU and both were explicit and unequivocal that we would leave the Single Market.

    Michael Gove, Andrea Leadsom and Boris Johnson all explicitly said in the days before the vote on the BBC at prime time that we would leave the Single Market. No ifs, no buts, no equivocation. If you didn't understand that then don't cry now - if you did understand that but don't like it then tough.
    https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1110452473037275136
    Yes and Gove is still seeking that same free trade agreement.

    You are aware that a free trade agreement is not the same as the Single Market, are you not?
    He's referring to an existing free trade area that stretches from Iceland to the Russian border. What could that possibly mean other than the EEA?
    He's referring to the combination of the EU, the EEA and Free Trade Agreements - the latter of which we should be a part of.

    If you look at some of those countries on the Russian border like the Ukraine, Georgia as well as other countries like Switzerland that is outside of the EEA too then there are a plethora of mechanisms for free trade. Why should Switzerland, the Ukraine and Georgia be capable of having a free trade agreement without being in the EEA but the UK can't?
    Countries like Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are in the EU and that's clearly what he's referring to, not every single country that borders Russia, which would include Belarus, China and North Korea.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 3,375

    FF43 said:

    My view on masks in schools is that we are taking a big risk on a second virus peak on children going back to school due to the sheer number of social interactions in that environment. I also think we need to make school work, which means being rigorous on hygiene everywhere - masks in schools, yes - but also in pubs etc. We have zero headroom on this virus.

    The are seven conditions killing more people than coronavirus in our country at the moment.

    count them.
    1.5% of deaths in the week ending 14th August had Covid on the death certificate. Huge areas of the Country have had no Covid positive cases for weeks. This protect yourself from Covid at all costs mantra needs to stop. 6 times as many people died from flu that week. What are we doing about that?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,837
    MaxPB said:

    Poor ratings for Boris, related to the news on his retirement at some point next year as well I'm sure. Whilst his positive ratings were in the low to mid 40s his pool of voters was large enough to win an election, now with them dropping it isn't. I'd say Boris has a potential pool of voters of 56% of the electorate while Starmer can reach 75% of the electorate, that alone is beginning to tell in the headline VI.

    This is before the Treasury starts to unwind what has made life easy for everyone. I'm not sure what will happen to the VI once the furlough has ended and a million or more people are moved to JSA and forced to find new work in fields they have no skills or training in. It may work out that this ends up like 2010-2019 and jobs are created out of the ashes of of a huge crash, but the people affected by it won't thank the government.

    Boris has a much bigger potential pool than 56% if he wants it. Get a trade deal, replace the cabinet members who are only in for blind loyalty, back away from the authoritarian nationalism and govern well and I could vote for him by 2024. It is a long time away and by then it will surely be his record he is judged on, good or bad, not his bluster and blunder which held zero appeal for me.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818

    MaxPB said:

    Poor ratings for Boris, related to the news on his retirement at some point next year as well I'm sure. Whilst his positive ratings were in the low to mid 40s his pool of voters was large enough to win an election, now with them dropping it isn't. I'd say Boris has a potential pool of voters of 56% of the electorate while Starmer can reach 75% of the electorate, that alone is beginning to tell in the headline VI.

    This is before the Treasury starts to unwind what has made life easy for everyone. I'm not sure what will happen to the VI once the furlough has ended and a million or more people are moved to JSA and forced to find new work in fields they have no skills or training in. It may work out that this ends up like 2010-2019 and jobs are created out of the ashes of of a huge crash, but the people affected by it won't thank the government.

    Fascinating times ahead Max
    Ther'e evidence from back benchers comments the tories are more worried about the 1-4 points they are losing to the BP than the 30-odd starmer is getting.

    Its the former that's going to lose them their seats.
    I'll be interested to know whether BXP will consider standing down next time bearing in mind we've left
    Depends how we leave Mr CHB. If we leave badly, cravenly and without honour, seas and fish, the BP will be right back.

    The fake row over Rule Britannia shows there are plenty of other grievances Farage can work on. Immigration too.

    To truly make a go of it, though, the BP needs an agreement with the EU that can be worked up into a 'Treaty of Versailles' Brexit. A Stab In The Back Brexit.

  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483

    Scott_xP said:
    The United Kingdom of London and Scotland has a certain ring to it.
    Up for that, would invite Manchester along too.
    And liverpool
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,317

    Cyclefree said:

    MattW said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    Cerchi per spaghetti
    I am not going to comment on this other than to say it would be “circoli di spaghetti” except nothing so horrible would be eaten by any Italian with taste.

    Circoli (il circolo) is more a circle as in a social circle, whereas il cerchio is a hoop.
    Neither are eaten - not in my circoli, anyway. 🙂
    Plus “per” means “for” rather than “of”. A hoop for spaghetti. It really should be pasta hoops.

    Though it really shouldn’t ....
    The "add water and microwave" pasta from Aldi at about 3p are surprisingly scrummy as the base of a meal.
    Please stop breaking my heart.

    Pasta is so easy to cook well and so delicious when it is, why muck around with it?

    It’s the whole “English turning coffee into Ovaltine” shtick again, isn’t it?
    Pasta is evil. Rice, OTOH .... ;)
    Oh Beverley ..... ! 😱
    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    eek said:

    One for TSE and Cyclefree

    https://twitter.com/davidmwessel/status/1298226154801901568


    Mind you it does answer the question who on earth would want to take over the complete mess that is Deutsche Bank

    That McKinsey due diligence on their client went well, then .......
    I'm sure that they had a concept and a vision and... other stuff.
    They had a vision of the enormous fees they could charge.
  • MaxPB said:

    Poor ratings for Boris, related to the news on his retirement at some point next year as well I'm sure. Whilst his positive ratings were in the low to mid 40s his pool of voters was large enough to win an election, now with them dropping it isn't. I'd say Boris has a potential pool of voters of 56% of the electorate while Starmer can reach 75% of the electorate, that alone is beginning to tell in the headline VI.

    This is before the Treasury starts to unwind what has made life easy for everyone. I'm not sure what will happen to the VI once the furlough has ended and a million or more people are moved to JSA and forced to find new work in fields they have no skills or training in. It may work out that this ends up like 2010-2019 and jobs are created out of the ashes of of a huge crash, but the people affected by it won't thank the government.

    Fascinating times ahead Max
    Ther'e evidence from back benchers comments the tories are more worried about the 1-4 points they are losing to the BP than the 30-odd starmer is getting.

    Its the former that's going to lose them their seats.
    I'll be interested to know whether BXP will consider standing down next time bearing in mind we've left
    Depends how we leave Mr CHB. If we leave badly, cravenly and without honour, seas and fish, the BP will be right back.

    The fake row over Rule Britannia shows there are plenty of other grievances Farage can work on. Immigration too.

    To truly make a go of it, though, the BP needs an agreement with the EU that can be worked up into a 'Treaty of Versailles' Brexit. A Stab In The Back Brexit.

    Please, call me Horse :)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,205

    Pulpstar said:

    Straight from Gove himself. Even has a big Vote Leave banner behind him.
    Yes he says we should trade with Europe, he still is saying that. That's not a case of being in the Single Market that he explicitly said we should leave - you do understand the difference don't you?
    If we accept you are correct and Vote Leave always stated we were going to leave the single market, the collolary was Gove committing to having a free trade agreement with the EU before he knew whether one could be negotiated ?!
    That's either an overpromise or a weak negotiating position.
  • If UKIP hadn't stood in 2015, 2019 would likely have happened then
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,222
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    FF43 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Having lunch in Spoons. Guy on the door won’t let people in who are wearing a mask, which I think makes sense. Either they think they might have it or they are worried they might get it. Either way they shouldn’t be going into a pub.

    That anecdote says more about Wetherspoons than about those wearing masks. Not in a good way.
    People were still wearing them inside, and they weren't getting chucked out or anything.

    But I can understand them explaining to people that you don't have to wear a mask and that they shouldn't expect others to do so.
    That's different to not letting people in who are wearing them, that makes no sense.

    Wearing one while you go through crowded passages like doorways and corridors until you sit at a table make sense. Telling people they don't need to is different to saying they're not allowed to.
    I think there's too much focus on space and not enough on time. I reckon you're more likely to catch it being sat in a pub or a class room for a couple of hours rather than walking through a corridor.
    The point is to avoid cross transmission between classes, surely ?

    And what about, for example, school toilets ?
    Shared by hundreds, often inadequately ventilated, and a very good location for airborne transmission.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868

    MaxPB said:

    Poor ratings for Boris, related to the news on his retirement at some point next year as well I'm sure. Whilst his positive ratings were in the low to mid 40s his pool of voters was large enough to win an election, now with them dropping it isn't. I'd say Boris has a potential pool of voters of 56% of the electorate while Starmer can reach 75% of the electorate, that alone is beginning to tell in the headline VI.

    This is before the Treasury starts to unwind what has made life easy for everyone. I'm not sure what will happen to the VI once the furlough has ended and a million or more people are moved to JSA and forced to find new work in fields they have no skills or training in. It may work out that this ends up like 2010-2019 and jobs are created out of the ashes of of a huge crash, but the people affected by it won't thank the government.

    Boris has a much bigger potential pool than 56% if he wants it. Get a trade deal, replace the cabinet members who are only in for blind loyalty, back away from the authoritarian nationalism and govern well and I could vote for him by 2024. It is a long time away and by then it will surely be his record he is judged on, good or bad, not his bluster and blunder which held zero appeal for me.
    All of that other than the trade deal seems unlikely though, Boris is hardly going to transform himself into a new style of leader overnight. He will still be the same lazy oaf in 2021 that he has been in 2020.
  • If we can decide our future and we hold all the cards why did the EU get the WA they wanted
  • MaxPB said:

    Poor ratings for Boris, related to the news on his retirement at some point next year as well I'm sure. Whilst his positive ratings were in the low to mid 40s his pool of voters was large enough to win an election, now with them dropping it isn't. I'd say Boris has a potential pool of voters of 56% of the electorate while Starmer can reach 75% of the electorate, that alone is beginning to tell in the headline VI.

    This is before the Treasury starts to unwind what has made life easy for everyone. I'm not sure what will happen to the VI once the furlough has ended and a million or more people are moved to JSA and forced to find new work in fields they have no skills or training in. It may work out that this ends up like 2010-2019 and jobs are created out of the ashes of of a huge crash, but the people affected by it won't thank the government.

    Boris has a much bigger potential pool than 56% if he wants it. Get a trade deal, replace the cabinet members who are only in for blind loyalty, back away from the authoritarian nationalism and govern well and I could vote for him by 2024. It is a long time away and by then it will surely be his record he is judged on, good or bad, not his bluster and blunder which held zero appeal for me.
    Doesn't that to-do list boil down to "stop being Boris"?

    (Surely he has to squash this story with a ten tonne weight? Once the idea of a PM retiring takes root, they're basically turned into zombies. Forget any sort of Eurodeal. Dom will have to spend the remaining time shredding files, because only Gove would keep him on.)
  • The Single Market was a large part of what we voted on five years ago. If you wanted to stay in the Single Market you should have voted for Remain. All leading campaigners on both sides of the fence were absolutely explicit that leaving the EU was a vote to leave the Single Market.

    And please don't share that discredited fake news video of out of context quotes that has been humiliatingly torn apart and discredited that tried to show the opposite.

    From Hard Brexiteer Owen Paterson:

    https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2015/01/owen-paterson-mp-why-ukip-is-wrong-about-immigration.html

    It is critical to remember that the economic single market and the political EU are not one and the same thing. We can participate in the market as members of the European Economic Area without being saddled with the EU as a political project. Those, such as the business chiefs of the CBI, who confuse the memberships of the single market and the EU are making a basic error and misleading the British people.

    This is where UKIP is wrong. Desperate to control immigration from the EU, the party has rejected continued membership of the single market within the EEA – which would place our economy at risk. In fact, as a member of the EEA but not the EU, we would not be bound by the European Court of Justice and its rulings on our benefits system. But, crucially, we could introduce “Safeguard Measures”, giving us an “emergency brake” on excessive migration – an option not available to us in the EU. We would get the benefits to business and the economy of free movement, with real power over our borders.
    Was January 2015 before or during the Referendum campaign? 🙄

    During the Referendum campaign the Leavers like Johnson united behind a proposal under Vote Leave and others like Farage united under an alternate one called Leave.EU and both were explicit and unequivocal that we would leave the Single Market.

    Michael Gove, Andrea Leadsom and Boris Johnson all explicitly said in the days before the vote on the BBC at prime time that we would leave the Single Market. No ifs, no buts, no equivocation. If you didn't understand that then don't cry now - if you did understand that but don't like it then tough.
    https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1110452473037275136
    Yes and Gove is still seeking that same free trade agreement.

    You are aware that a free trade agreement is not the same as the Single Market, are you not?

    David Cameron, Nick Clegg, Andrea Leadsom, Micheal Gove, Boris Johnson and George Osborne all explicitly said that leaving the EU was leaving the Single Market.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlF9STvLeDQ

    Andrew Marr: Let me ask you, just before we leave the
    economics actually, a very simple question I have tried to get an
    answer to from various people on your side – is should we or
    should we not be inside the single market? Do you want us to
    stay inside the single market? Yes or no.

    Michael Gove: No. We should be outside the single market.
    Andrea Leadsom didn't say we would 100% be outside, in your own video
    Well she said "that would almost certainly be the case, yes" - that's pretty explicit.

    But even if you discount Leadsom, who isn't PM, the rest of the video is extremely explicit isn't it? And its not my video it was done by the BBC.

    Then Prime Minister David Cameron: "The British public would be voting, if we were to Leave, to Leave the EU and Leave the Single Market". (his emphasis on the words Leave)

    Andrew Marr: Do you want us to be inside the Single Market? Yes or No?
    Michael Gove: No. We should be outside the Single Market.

    Andrew Marr: I had Michael Gove in that chair and I said would be be inside the Single Market, yes or no, and he said no.
    Boris Johnson: And he was right.
    Andrew Marr: So we won't be inside the Single Market?
    Boris Johnson: Absolutely.

    Then Chancellor George Osborne: We'd be outside of the Single Market, that is the reality, we'd be quitting, quitting the Single Market.

    Then Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg: To be fair the Brexit campaign have come clean now, we dislike it so much we actually want to tear up Margaret Thatcher's Single European Act, we don't want to have anything to do with the Single Market either.

    It was clear.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Nigelb said:

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    FF43 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Having lunch in Spoons. Guy on the door won’t let people in who are wearing a mask, which I think makes sense. Either they think they might have it or they are worried they might get it. Either way they shouldn’t be going into a pub.

    That anecdote says more about Wetherspoons than about those wearing masks. Not in a good way.
    People were still wearing them inside, and they weren't getting chucked out or anything.

    But I can understand them explaining to people that you don't have to wear a mask and that they shouldn't expect others to do so.
    That's different to not letting people in who are wearing them, that makes no sense.

    Wearing one while you go through crowded passages like doorways and corridors until you sit at a table make sense. Telling people they don't need to is different to saying they're not allowed to.
    I think there's too much focus on space and not enough on time. I reckon you're more likely to catch it being sat in a pub or a class room for a couple of hours rather than walking through a corridor.
    The point is to avoid cross transmission between classes, surely ?

    And what about, for example, school toilets ?
    Shared by hundreds, often inadequately ventilated, and a very good location for airborne transmission.
    Just as well we have a plan B with thousands of laptops on order for those without and a contract ready and waiting to deliver decent internet into Children’s homes without it.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    dr_spyn said:
    Isn't Humphrey Wakefield the holder of some "interesting" views?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWwxiiuIv_A
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676
    edited August 2020
    We have a start imminent
  • If we can decide our future and we hold all the cards why did the EU get the WA they wanted

    They didn't. They wanted a backstop, they wanted no way out from it, they said that a backstop with an exit was no backstop at all.

    They compromised and gave Stormont a unilateral exit, something they'd always said was impossible. That is why I was able to back Boris's deal unlike May's.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,720

    FF43 said:

    My view on masks in schools is that we are taking a big risk on a second virus peak on children going back to school due to the sheer number of social interactions in that environment. I also think we need to make school work, which means being rigorous on hygiene everywhere - masks in schools, yes - but also in pubs etc. We have zero headroom on this virus.

    The are seven conditions killing more people than coronavirus in our country at the moment.

    count them.
    1.5% of deaths in the week ending 14th August had Covid on the death certificate. Huge areas of the Country have had no Covid positive cases for weeks. This protect yourself from Covid at all costs mantra needs to stop. 6 times as many people died from flu that week. What are we doing about that?
    Masks help for flu too...

    Maskwearing is pretty cost free, and as a way to keep the virus under control an economical one, compared to shutting down swathes of the economy again.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    "They're trying to restrain me from saying this"

    https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1298254588160573440

    Who is restraining you? Who?

    'You wouldn't know them, they go to another school.'
    He’s being Eton alive with paranoia?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139

    If UKIP hadn't stood in 2015, 2019 would likely have happened then

    But they were always going to stand against Cameron and the Coalition, their vote only collapsed in the Tories favour once leave had won the referendum and Cameron had gone and that trend increased even further now Boris is PM.

    A fair number of Cameron 2010 and 2015 voters are now voting Labour or LD while the UKIP 2015 vote are now almost all voting Tory
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,720
    ydoethur said:

    "They're trying to restrain me from saying this"

    https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1298254588160573440

    Who is restraining you? Who?

    'You wouldn't know them, they go to another school.'
    He’s being Eton alive with paranoia?
    A Harrowing thought.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    dr_spyn said:
    There are very, very few human beings in the world more useless than Donald Trump.

    Amanda Spielman is however one of them.

    Things are somehow, unbelievably, getting worse for OFQUAL.
  • If we can decide our future and we hold all the cards why did the EU get the WA they wanted

    And on that inability to count, or to check the cards, or to consider that the EU couldn't do a mate's rates deal for the UK without compromising themselves for negotiations with every other country or bloc, the whole sorry fiasco rests.

  • Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Straight from Gove himself. Even has a big Vote Leave banner behind him.
    Yes he says we should trade with Europe, he still is saying that. That's not a case of being in the Single Market that he explicitly said we should leave - you do understand the difference don't you?
    If we accept you are correct and Vote Leave always stated we were going to leave the single market, the collolary was Gove committing to having a free trade agreement with the EU before he knew whether one could be negotiated ?!
    That's either an overpromise or a weak negotiating position.
    He was saying we would negotiate a free trade agreement yes, that is what I said.

    Sane Leave campaigners [I don't mean the likes of Farage] have always said they'd want a Free Trade Agreement with the EU. That's why negotiations for one are happening right now!
  • HYUFD said:

    If UKIP hadn't stood in 2015, 2019 would likely have happened then

    But they were always going to stand against Cameron and the Coalition, their vote only collapsed in the Tories favour once leave had won the referendum and Cameron had gone and that trend increased even further now Boris is PM.

    A fair number of Cameron 2010 and 2015 voters are now voting Labour or LD while the UKIP 2015 vote are now almost all voting Tory
    I wonder if they will return to their hero Nigel now Brexit has happened
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,464
    Carnyx said:

    Foxy said:

    FF43 said:

    My view on masks in schools is that we are taking a big risk on a second virus peak on children going back to school due to the sheer number of social interactions in that environment. I also think we need to make school work, which means being rigorous on hygiene everywhere - masks in schools, yes - but also in pubs etc. We have zero headroom on this virus.

    Masks in schools seems a no brainer.

    Wearing masks as a mitigating factor while reintroducing activities is a pretty benign intervention.

    Grauniad feed has just linked to this report implying a complete u-turn

    https://www.tes.com/news/coronavirus-exclusive-england-set-u-turn-masks-schools

    "The government is set to make a major U-turn by announcing that wearing face masks will be near-mandatory in communal areas of secondary schools, according to sources.

    Tes understands that both Public Health England and the Department for Education have signed off on this new policy."
    Looks more like 'following the science' than a U turn. To be fair!!
  • Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    "They're trying to restrain me from saying this"

    https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1298254588160573440

    Who is restraining you? Who?

    'You wouldn't know them, they go to another school.'
    He’s being Eton alive with paranoia?
    A Harrowing thought.
    But he did WIn Chester.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,205



    Depends how we leave Mr CHB. If we leave badly, cravenly and without honour, seas and fish, the BP will be right back.

    The fake row over Rule Britannia shows there are plenty of other grievances Farage can work on. Immigration too.

    To truly make a go of it, though, the BP needs an agreement with the EU that can be worked up into a 'Treaty of Versailles' Brexit. A Stab In The Back Brexit.

    To have any chance of that particular strategy working, we need to head into quite desperate economic times.
    Farage's oratory skills are good but are they quite that good.
  • The Single Market was a large part of what we voted on five years ago. If you wanted to stay in the Single Market you should have voted for Remain. All leading campaigners on both sides of the fence were absolutely explicit that leaving the EU was a vote to leave the Single Market.

    And please don't share that discredited fake news video of out of context quotes that has been humiliatingly torn apart and discredited that tried to show the opposite.

    From Hard Brexiteer Owen Paterson:

    https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2015/01/owen-paterson-mp-why-ukip-is-wrong-about-immigration.html

    It is critical to remember that the economic single market and the political EU are not one and the same thing. We can participate in the market as members of the European Economic Area without being saddled with the EU as a political project. Those, such as the business chiefs of the CBI, who confuse the memberships of the single market and the EU are making a basic error and misleading the British people.

    This is where UKIP is wrong. Desperate to control immigration from the EU, the party has rejected continued membership of the single market within the EEA – which would place our economy at risk. In fact, as a member of the EEA but not the EU, we would not be bound by the European Court of Justice and its rulings on our benefits system. But, crucially, we could introduce “Safeguard Measures”, giving us an “emergency brake” on excessive migration – an option not available to us in the EU. We would get the benefits to business and the economy of free movement, with real power over our borders.
    Was January 2015 before or during the Referendum campaign? 🙄

    During the Referendum campaign the Leavers like Johnson united behind a proposal under Vote Leave and others like Farage united under an alternate one called Leave.EU and both were explicit and unequivocal that we would leave the Single Market.

    Michael Gove, Andrea Leadsom and Boris Johnson all explicitly said in the days before the vote on the BBC at prime time that we would leave the Single Market. No ifs, no buts, no equivocation. If you didn't understand that then don't cry now - if you did understand that but don't like it then tough.
    https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1110452473037275136
    Yes and Gove is still seeking that same free trade agreement.

    You are aware that a free trade agreement is not the same as the Single Market, are you not?
    He's referring to an existing free trade area that stretches from Iceland to the Russian border. What could that possibly mean other than the EEA?
    He's referring to the combination of the EU, the EEA and Free Trade Agreements - the latter of which we should be a part of.

    If you look at some of those countries on the Russian border like the Ukraine, Georgia as well as other countries like Switzerland that is outside of the EEA too then there are a plethora of mechanisms for free trade. Why should Switzerland, the Ukraine and Georgia be capable of having a free trade agreement without being in the EEA but the UK can't?
    Countries like Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are in the EU and that's clearly what he's referring to, not every single country that borders Russia, which would include Belarus, China and North Korea.
    Bullshit. You're making that up, he explicitly said "No" to would we be in the Single Market. Not maybe, not yes, no ifs or buts he said No.

    So don't tell lies, it doesn't make you look big or clever. Others maybe you can say what you like but but he was explicitly asked and he said No.
  • dr_spyn said:
    Shocked that civil servants are being sacked to save ministers.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    Nigelb said:

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    FF43 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Having lunch in Spoons. Guy on the door won’t let people in who are wearing a mask, which I think makes sense. Either they think they might have it or they are worried they might get it. Either way they shouldn’t be going into a pub.

    That anecdote says more about Wetherspoons than about those wearing masks. Not in a good way.
    People were still wearing them inside, and they weren't getting chucked out or anything.

    But I can understand them explaining to people that you don't have to wear a mask and that they shouldn't expect others to do so.
    That's different to not letting people in who are wearing them, that makes no sense.

    Wearing one while you go through crowded passages like doorways and corridors until you sit at a table make sense. Telling people they don't need to is different to saying they're not allowed to.
    I think there's too much focus on space and not enough on time. I reckon you're more likely to catch it being sat in a pub or a class room for a couple of hours rather than walking through a corridor.
    The point is to avoid cross transmission between classes, surely ?

    And what about, for example, school toilets ?
    Shared by hundreds, often inadequately ventilated, and a very good location for airborne transmission.
    If pubs haven't caused too many problems, why do we think schools will be worse? Is it a question of volume?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676

    We have a start imminent

    4.15pm bad light forecast at about 6.45 so we have nearly 40 overs potentially
  • dr_spyn said:
    Johnson with a 6% lead there on Favourable ratings.

    Remarkable all things considered that he's still leading on that metric.
    That's one way of looking at it if you are a Boris fanboy.

    44% of those polled disapprove of Johnson while just 25% of those polled disapprove of Starmer. That's a big gap.
    Actually credit goes to @isam who identified a while back that Favourable ratings were historically more accurate than Net Favourables - which makes sense considering votes vote for a party and not against one.

    Plus of course Johnson is polling as good or better than he was in approval ratings still today than he was before he won his landslide 80 seat majority.
    Have you got data to support that?

    No sorry but @isam did charts about it a while back that showed it. I don't want to take credit for his work and I didn't save his charts but it would make a very interesting Guest Article if you're interested in publishing it and if he's happy to write it up? I think he's done a Guest Article for you before so maybe you or @TheScreamingEagles could speak with him about it?
    Please link to the post in question.
    I don't have a link to the post in question but I have tagged isam so hopefully he might see it. I wonder if @MikeSmithson or @TheScreamingEagles will discuss with @isam the idea about a Guest Article on the subject as it is a fascinating subject with betting ramifications. Not just for the next election but for any UK one.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139

    HYUFD said:

    If UKIP hadn't stood in 2015, 2019 would likely have happened then

    But they were always going to stand against Cameron and the Coalition, their vote only collapsed in the Tories favour once leave had won the referendum and Cameron had gone and that trend increased even further now Boris is PM.

    A fair number of Cameron 2010 and 2015 voters are now voting Labour or LD while the UKIP 2015 vote are now almost all voting Tory
    I wonder if they will return to their hero Nigel now Brexit has happened
    Only if the Tories extend the transition period or compromise too far with the EU in their eyes for a FTA.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    "They're trying to restrain me from saying this"

    https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1298254588160573440

    Who is restraining you? Who?

    'You wouldn't know them, they go to another school.'
    He’s being Eton alive with paranoia?
    A Harrowing thought.
    But he did WIn Chester.
    No he didn’t. That was a rare example of a 2010 Tory gain that at the last election was a Labour hold.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862

    We have a start imminent

    4.15pm bad light forecast at about 6.45 so we have nearly 40 overs potentially
    20 overs unchanged for Jimmy? I will be amazed if they get half that many but hopefully it will be enough. This could have been a really good series but for the weather. Pakistan are definitely more competitive than the Windies.
  • Carnyx said:

    Foxy said:

    FF43 said:

    My view on masks in schools is that we are taking a big risk on a second virus peak on children going back to school due to the sheer number of social interactions in that environment. I also think we need to make school work, which means being rigorous on hygiene everywhere - masks in schools, yes - but also in pubs etc. We have zero headroom on this virus.

    Masks in schools seems a no brainer.

    Wearing masks as a mitigating factor while reintroducing activities is a pretty benign intervention.

    Grauniad feed has just linked to this report implying a complete u-turn

    https://www.tes.com/news/coronavirus-exclusive-england-set-u-turn-masks-schools

    "The government is set to make a major U-turn by announcing that wearing face masks will be near-mandatory in communal areas of secondary schools, according to sources.

    Tes understands that both Public Health England and the Department for Education have signed off on this new policy."
    Looks more like 'following the science' than a U turn. To be fair!!
    The media's obsession with u-turns really does them shame. The government's willingness to change course when the science changes does them credit.

    As someone famously once said "when the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    If UKIP hadn't stood in 2015, 2019 would likely have happened then

    But they were always going to stand against Cameron and the Coalition, their vote only collapsed in the Tories favour once leave had won the referendum and Cameron had gone and that trend increased even further now Boris is PM.

    A fair number of Cameron 2010 and 2015 voters are now voting Labour or LD while the UKIP 2015 vote are now almost all voting Tory
    I wonder if they will return to their hero Nigel now Brexit has happened
    Only if the Tories extend the transition period or compromise too far with the EU in their eyes for a FTA.

    Surely a proportion however small voted Tory specifically to get Brexit done and will either return to not voting or go elsewhere now it's no longer under threat
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    dr_spyn said:
    Shocked that civil servants are being sacked to save ministers.
    Well, hopefully it won’t save the ministers in question.

    That would make it a win-win if we could only remove Spielman in some way.
  • Would Nigel be angry if he caused a Labour Government by splitting the Tory vote if we've left, he never seemed to care prior to 2019
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,707

    The Single Market was a large part of what we voted on five years ago. If you wanted to stay in the Single Market you should have voted for Remain. All leading campaigners on both sides of the fence were absolutely explicit that leaving the EU was a vote to leave the Single Market.

    And please don't share that discredited fake news video of out of context quotes that has been humiliatingly torn apart and discredited that tried to show the opposite.

    From Hard Brexiteer Owen Paterson:

    https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2015/01/owen-paterson-mp-why-ukip-is-wrong-about-immigration.html

    It is critical to remember that the economic single market and the political EU are not one and the same thing. We can participate in the market as members of the European Economic Area without being saddled with the EU as a political project. Those, such as the business chiefs of the CBI, who confuse the memberships of the single market and the EU are making a basic error and misleading the British people.

    This is where UKIP is wrong. Desperate to control immigration from the EU, the party has rejected continued membership of the single market within the EEA – which would place our economy at risk. In fact, as a member of the EEA but not the EU, we would not be bound by the European Court of Justice and its rulings on our benefits system. But, crucially, we could introduce “Safeguard Measures”, giving us an “emergency brake” on excessive migration – an option not available to us in the EU. We would get the benefits to business and the economy of free movement, with real power over our borders.
    Was January 2015 before or during the Referendum campaign? 🙄

    During the Referendum campaign the Leavers like Johnson united behind a proposal under Vote Leave and others like Farage united under an alternate one called Leave.EU and both were explicit and unequivocal that we would leave the Single Market.

    Michael Gove, Andrea Leadsom and Boris Johnson all explicitly said in the days before the vote on the BBC at prime time that we would leave the Single Market. No ifs, no buts, no equivocation. If you didn't understand that then don't cry now - if you did understand that but don't like it then tough.
    https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1110452473037275136
    Yes and Gove is still seeking that same free trade agreement.

    You are aware that a free trade agreement is not the same as the Single Market, are you not?
    He's referring to an existing free trade area that stretches from Iceland to the Russian border. What could that possibly mean other than the EEA?
    He's referring to the combination of the EU, the EEA and Free Trade Agreements - the latter of which we should be a part of.

    If you look at some of those countries on the Russian border like the Ukraine, Georgia as well as other countries like Switzerland that is outside of the EEA too then there are a plethora of mechanisms for free trade. Why should Switzerland, the Ukraine and Georgia be capable of having a free trade agreement without being in the EEA but the UK can't?
    Countries like Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are in the EU and that's clearly what he's referring to, not every single country that borders Russia, which would include Belarus, China and North Korea.
    Bullshit. You're making that up, he explicitly said "No" to would we be in the Single Market. Not maybe, not yes, no ifs or buts he said No.

    So don't tell lies, it doesn't make you look big or clever. Others maybe you can say what you like but but he was explicitly asked and he said No.
    You are arguing that in the course of the campaign he changed his position?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,837
    edited August 2020
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Poor ratings for Boris, related to the news on his retirement at some point next year as well I'm sure. Whilst his positive ratings were in the low to mid 40s his pool of voters was large enough to win an election, now with them dropping it isn't. I'd say Boris has a potential pool of voters of 56% of the electorate while Starmer can reach 75% of the electorate, that alone is beginning to tell in the headline VI.

    This is before the Treasury starts to unwind what has made life easy for everyone. I'm not sure what will happen to the VI once the furlough has ended and a million or more people are moved to JSA and forced to find new work in fields they have no skills or training in. It may work out that this ends up like 2010-2019 and jobs are created out of the ashes of of a huge crash, but the people affected by it won't thank the government.

    Boris has a much bigger potential pool than 56% if he wants it. Get a trade deal, replace the cabinet members who are only in for blind loyalty, back away from the authoritarian nationalism and govern well and I could vote for him by 2024. It is a long time away and by then it will surely be his record he is judged on, good or bad, not his bluster and blunder which held zero appeal for me.
    All of that other than the trade deal seems unlikely though, Boris is hardly going to transform himself into a new style of leader overnight. He will still be the same lazy oaf in 2021 that he has been in 2020.
    Probably, but getting Brexit finally "done" (if he can) may lead to him reinventing himself. The people he has allied with are useful to him for delivering Brexit, not much beyond that, and he is not known for loyalty. It will be probably be easier to stick with that group of the party regardless but no-one should have much confidence in what he would do 2021-2024 if a Brexit deal can be done this year.

    Edit - I can also definitely live with him being a lazy oaf if surrounded by capable ministers who he is willing to delegate to. Much rather Sunak gets to decide on finances than Johnson spending a few hours extra and overruling Sunak. By 2024 it will be his record he is judged on, not his hours worked or attitude.
  • The Single Market was a large part of what we voted on five years ago. If you wanted to stay in the Single Market you should have voted for Remain. All leading campaigners on both sides of the fence were absolutely explicit that leaving the EU was a vote to leave the Single Market.

    And please don't share that discredited fake news video of out of context quotes that has been humiliatingly torn apart and discredited that tried to show the opposite.

    From Hard Brexiteer Owen Paterson:

    https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2015/01/owen-paterson-mp-why-ukip-is-wrong-about-immigration.html

    It is critical to remember that the economic single market and the political EU are not one and the same thing. We can participate in the market as members of the European Economic Area without being saddled with the EU as a political project. Those, such as the business chiefs of the CBI, who confuse the memberships of the single market and the EU are making a basic error and misleading the British people.

    This is where UKIP is wrong. Desperate to control immigration from the EU, the party has rejected continued membership of the single market within the EEA – which would place our economy at risk. In fact, as a member of the EEA but not the EU, we would not be bound by the European Court of Justice and its rulings on our benefits system. But, crucially, we could introduce “Safeguard Measures”, giving us an “emergency brake” on excessive migration – an option not available to us in the EU. We would get the benefits to business and the economy of free movement, with real power over our borders.
    Was January 2015 before or during the Referendum campaign? 🙄

    During the Referendum campaign the Leavers like Johnson united behind a proposal under Vote Leave and others like Farage united under an alternate one called Leave.EU and both were explicit and unequivocal that we would leave the Single Market.

    Michael Gove, Andrea Leadsom and Boris Johnson all explicitly said in the days before the vote on the BBC at prime time that we would leave the Single Market. No ifs, no buts, no equivocation. If you didn't understand that then don't cry now - if you did understand that but don't like it then tough.
    https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1110452473037275136
    Yes and Gove is still seeking that same free trade agreement.

    You are aware that a free trade agreement is not the same as the Single Market, are you not?
    He's referring to an existing free trade area that stretches from Iceland to the Russian border. What could that possibly mean other than the EEA?
    He's referring to the combination of the EU, the EEA and Free Trade Agreements - the latter of which we should be a part of.

    If you look at some of those countries on the Russian border like the Ukraine, Georgia as well as other countries like Switzerland that is outside of the EEA too then there are a plethora of mechanisms for free trade. Why should Switzerland, the Ukraine and Georgia be capable of having a free trade agreement without being in the EEA but the UK can't?
    Countries like Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are in the EU and that's clearly what he's referring to, not every single country that borders Russia, which would include Belarus, China and North Korea.
    Bullshit. You're making that up, he explicitly said "No" to would we be in the Single Market. Not maybe, not yes, no ifs or buts he said No.

    So don't tell lies, it doesn't make you look big or clever. Others maybe you can say what you like but but he was explicitly asked and he said No.
    You are arguing that in the course of the campaign he changed his position?
    No, I am arguing he was consistent. Yes to Free Trade, no to the Single Market.

    Find a single quote anywhere that explicitly goes against that, not you interpret it somehow twisting it into anything different please?
  • ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    "They're trying to restrain me from saying this"

    https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1298254588160573440

    Who is restraining you? Who?

    'You wouldn't know them, they go to another school.'
    He’s being Eton alive with paranoia?
    A Harrowing thought.
    But he did WIn Chester.
    No he didn’t. That was a rare example of a 2010 Tory gain that at the last election was a Labour hold.
    Dammit.

    Serves me right for not checking.
  • Would Nigel be angry if he caused a Labour Government by splitting the Tory vote if we've left, he never seemed to care prior to 2019

    Nigel is not a Tory so why would he?

    And I am of the belief that the BXP helped the Tories by existing in 2019. I think many seats would have stayed Labour had BXP not stood.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Poor ratings for Boris, related to the news on his retirement at some point next year as well I'm sure. Whilst his positive ratings were in the low to mid 40s his pool of voters was large enough to win an election, now with them dropping it isn't. I'd say Boris has a potential pool of voters of 56% of the electorate while Starmer can reach 75% of the electorate, that alone is beginning to tell in the headline VI.

    This is before the Treasury starts to unwind what has made life easy for everyone. I'm not sure what will happen to the VI once the furlough has ended and a million or more people are moved to JSA and forced to find new work in fields they have no skills or training in. It may work out that this ends up like 2010-2019 and jobs are created out of the ashes of of a huge crash, but the people affected by it won't thank the government.

    Boris has a much bigger potential pool than 56% if he wants it. Get a trade deal, replace the cabinet members who are only in for blind loyalty, back away from the authoritarian nationalism and govern well and I could vote for him by 2024. It is a long time away and by then it will surely be his record he is judged on, good or bad, not his bluster and blunder which held zero appeal for me.
    All of that other than the trade deal seems unlikely though, Boris is hardly going to transform himself into a new style of leader overnight. He will still be the same lazy oaf in 2021 that he has been in 2020.
    Probably, but getting Brexit finally "done" (if he can) may lead to him reinventing himself. The people he has allied with are useful to him for delivering Brexit, not much beyond that, and he is not known for loyalty. It will be probably be easier to stick with that group of the party regardless but no-one should have much confidence in what he would do 2021-2024 if a Brexit deal can be done this year.
    That feels like wishful thinking.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,707

    The Single Market was a large part of what we voted on five years ago. If you wanted to stay in the Single Market you should have voted for Remain. All leading campaigners on both sides of the fence were absolutely explicit that leaving the EU was a vote to leave the Single Market.

    And please don't share that discredited fake news video of out of context quotes that has been humiliatingly torn apart and discredited that tried to show the opposite.

    From Hard Brexiteer Owen Paterson:

    https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2015/01/owen-paterson-mp-why-ukip-is-wrong-about-immigration.html

    It is critical to remember that the economic single market and the political EU are not one and the same thing. We can participate in the market as members of the European Economic Area without being saddled with the EU as a political project. Those, such as the business chiefs of the CBI, who confuse the memberships of the single market and the EU are making a basic error and misleading the British people.

    This is where UKIP is wrong. Desperate to control immigration from the EU, the party has rejected continued membership of the single market within the EEA – which would place our economy at risk. In fact, as a member of the EEA but not the EU, we would not be bound by the European Court of Justice and its rulings on our benefits system. But, crucially, we could introduce “Safeguard Measures”, giving us an “emergency brake” on excessive migration – an option not available to us in the EU. We would get the benefits to business and the economy of free movement, with real power over our borders.
    Was January 2015 before or during the Referendum campaign? 🙄

    During the Referendum campaign the Leavers like Johnson united behind a proposal under Vote Leave and others like Farage united under an alternate one called Leave.EU and both were explicit and unequivocal that we would leave the Single Market.

    Michael Gove, Andrea Leadsom and Boris Johnson all explicitly said in the days before the vote on the BBC at prime time that we would leave the Single Market. No ifs, no buts, no equivocation. If you didn't understand that then don't cry now - if you did understand that but don't like it then tough.
    https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1110452473037275136
    Yes and Gove is still seeking that same free trade agreement.

    You are aware that a free trade agreement is not the same as the Single Market, are you not?
    He's referring to an existing free trade area that stretches from Iceland to the Russian border. What could that possibly mean other than the EEA?
    He's referring to the combination of the EU, the EEA and Free Trade Agreements - the latter of which we should be a part of.

    If you look at some of those countries on the Russian border like the Ukraine, Georgia as well as other countries like Switzerland that is outside of the EEA too then there are a plethora of mechanisms for free trade. Why should Switzerland, the Ukraine and Georgia be capable of having a free trade agreement without being in the EEA but the UK can't?
    Countries like Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are in the EU and that's clearly what he's referring to, not every single country that borders Russia, which would include Belarus, China and North Korea.
    Bullshit. You're making that up, he explicitly said "No" to would we be in the Single Market. Not maybe, not yes, no ifs or buts he said No.

    So don't tell lies, it doesn't make you look big or clever. Others maybe you can say what you like but but he was explicitly asked and he said No.
    You are arguing that in the course of the campaign he changed his position?
    No, I am arguing he was consistent. Yes to Free Trade, no to the Single Market.

    Find a single quote anywhere that explicitly goes against that, not you interpret it somehow twisting it into anything different please?
    The position of the Leave campaign clearly evolved for tactical reasons. Initially they were talking about staying in the 'free trade zone'. When they came under pressure over the Norway option, Gove started talking about an Albanian model, before finally settling on the line of being outside the single market.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    dr_spyn said:
    Johnson with a 6% lead there on Favourable ratings.

    Remarkable all things considered that he's still leading on that metric.
    That's one way of looking at it if you are a Boris fanboy.

    44% of those polled disapprove of Johnson while just 25% of those polled disapprove of Starmer. That's a big gap.
    Actually credit goes to @isam who identified a while back that Favourable ratings were historically more accurate than Net Favourables - which makes sense considering votes vote for a party and not against one.

    Plus of course Johnson is polling as good or better than he was in approval ratings still today than he was before he won his landslide 80 seat majority.
    Mike, from 2011


  • MaxPB said:

    Poor ratings for Boris, related to the news on his retirement at some point next year as well I'm sure. Whilst his positive ratings were in the low to mid 40s his pool of voters was large enough to win an election, now with them dropping it isn't. I'd say Boris has a potential pool of voters of 56% of the electorate while Starmer can reach 75% of the electorate, that alone is beginning to tell in the headline VI.

    This is before the Treasury starts to unwind what has made life easy for everyone. I'm not sure what will happen to the VI once the furlough has ended and a million or more people are moved to JSA and forced to find new work in fields they have no skills or training in. It may work out that this ends up like 2010-2019 and jobs are created out of the ashes of of a huge crash, but the people affected by it won't thank the government.

    Boris has a much bigger potential pool than 56% if he wants it. Get a trade deal, replace the cabinet members who are only in for blind loyalty, back away from the authoritarian nationalism and govern well and I could vote for him by 2024. It is a long time away and by then it will surely be his record he is judged on, good or bad, not his bluster and blunder which held zero appeal for me.
    What authoritarian nationalism?

    It was Theresa May that was the authoritarian. Boris Johnson has always hailed more from the libertarian wing of the Conservative Party, which is why I am such a big fan of his - and why things like lockdown etc are not things he would have wanted to do.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    Referring back to what Brexiteers said in 2016 about outcomes is pointless. The big contradiction at the heart of Brexit was that it was promoted as "taking control" when any workable arrangement with the continent we live in means a close relationship on the EU's terms.

    Crudely there were two possible outcomes to Brexit, both crap: Hermit State or Vassal State. All the nonsense since follows on from that conundrum.
  • isam said:

    dr_spyn said:
    Johnson with a 6% lead there on Favourable ratings.

    Remarkable all things considered that he's still leading on that metric.
    That's one way of looking at it if you are a Boris fanboy.

    44% of those polled disapprove of Johnson while just 25% of those polled disapprove of Starmer. That's a big gap.
    Actually credit goes to @isam who identified a while back that Favourable ratings were historically more accurate than Net Favourables - which makes sense considering votes vote for a party and not against one.

    Plus of course Johnson is polling as good or better than he was in approval ratings still today than he was before he won his landslide 80 seat majority.
    Mike, from 2011


    Oh wow that's interesting, so that's OGH himself saying that favourables are key? Very interesting, I hope that answers OGH's question - though your charts the other day were very fascinating.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,885

    Carnyx said:

    Foxy said:

    FF43 said:

    My view on masks in schools is that we are taking a big risk on a second virus peak on children going back to school due to the sheer number of social interactions in that environment. I also think we need to make school work, which means being rigorous on hygiene everywhere - masks in schools, yes - but also in pubs etc. We have zero headroom on this virus.

    Masks in schools seems a no brainer.

    Wearing masks as a mitigating factor while reintroducing activities is a pretty benign intervention.

    Grauniad feed has just linked to this report implying a complete u-turn

    https://www.tes.com/news/coronavirus-exclusive-england-set-u-turn-masks-schools

    "The government is set to make a major U-turn by announcing that wearing face masks will be near-mandatory in communal areas of secondary schools, according to sources.

    Tes understands that both Public Health England and the Department for Education have signed off on this new policy."
    Looks more like 'following the science' than a U turn. To be fair!!
    Point taken, but they have been so adamant about doing the opposite, presuimabnly to pander to a certain element, that there is something U-turny about it.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,837
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Poor ratings for Boris, related to the news on his retirement at some point next year as well I'm sure. Whilst his positive ratings were in the low to mid 40s his pool of voters was large enough to win an election, now with them dropping it isn't. I'd say Boris has a potential pool of voters of 56% of the electorate while Starmer can reach 75% of the electorate, that alone is beginning to tell in the headline VI.

    This is before the Treasury starts to unwind what has made life easy for everyone. I'm not sure what will happen to the VI once the furlough has ended and a million or more people are moved to JSA and forced to find new work in fields they have no skills or training in. It may work out that this ends up like 2010-2019 and jobs are created out of the ashes of of a huge crash, but the people affected by it won't thank the government.

    Boris has a much bigger potential pool than 56% if he wants it. Get a trade deal, replace the cabinet members who are only in for blind loyalty, back away from the authoritarian nationalism and govern well and I could vote for him by 2024. It is a long time away and by then it will surely be his record he is judged on, good or bad, not his bluster and blunder which held zero appeal for me.
    All of that other than the trade deal seems unlikely though, Boris is hardly going to transform himself into a new style of leader overnight. He will still be the same lazy oaf in 2021 that he has been in 2020.
    Probably, but getting Brexit finally "done" (if he can) may lead to him reinventing himself. The people he has allied with are useful to him for delivering Brexit, not much beyond that, and he is not known for loyalty. It will be probably be easier to stick with that group of the party regardless but no-one should have much confidence in what he would do 2021-2024 if a Brexit deal can be done this year.
    That feels like wishful thinking.
    The scenario where I vote for a govt I started off being very anti towards is inevitably going to include wishful thinking. It is clearly unlikely but also far from an implausible scenario though, Id back a 2021 Johnson pivot at 20/1 very happily. Beyond the trade deal, the rest of it is largely in the PMs hands.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,317
    DavidL said:

    dr_spyn said:
    Shocked that civil servants are being sacked to save ministers.
    Genuinely shocked some civil servants are being held accountable for their incompetence. And not even promoted.
    Just those people brought in from the private sector, eh!
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    dr_spyn said:

    Scottish 5 year olds might be wearing masks.

    https://www.itv.com/news/2020-08-25/secondary-school-students-in-scotland-to-start-wearing-face-coverings-in-corridors-and-communal-areas

    I'm not sure how many 5 year olds are on school buses, but it will be damn hard to get them to do it every day.

    From observation at my school all the children coming off the buses of any age are wearing masks.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 3,375
    Foxy said:

    FF43 said:

    My view on masks in schools is that we are taking a big risk on a second virus peak on children going back to school due to the sheer number of social interactions in that environment. I also think we need to make school work, which means being rigorous on hygiene everywhere - masks in schools, yes - but also in pubs etc. We have zero headroom on this virus.

    The are seven conditions killing more people than coronavirus in our country at the moment.

    count them.
    1.5% of deaths in the week ending 14th August had Covid on the death certificate. Huge areas of the Country have had no Covid positive cases for weeks. This protect yourself from Covid at all costs mantra needs to stop. 6 times as many people died from flu that week. What are we doing about that?
    Masks help for flu too...

    Maskwearing is pretty cost free, and as a way to keep the virus under control an economical one, compared to shutting down swathes of the economy again.
    There are millions of people with other illnesses who are not being treated because of the protect yourself from Covid culture. Surgeries are completely failing their communities using Covid as a reason for not seeing anyone. People did not suddenly get better from every other illness in March when the lockdown started. Covid is now a background disease. Most people who get it do not even get ill. People are not being treated for the numerous other illnesses that humans get to enable healthcare staff to "protect" themselves from this background disease. Its complete madness. The obsession needs to stop.
  • MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Poor ratings for Boris, related to the news on his retirement at some point next year as well I'm sure. Whilst his positive ratings were in the low to mid 40s his pool of voters was large enough to win an election, now with them dropping it isn't. I'd say Boris has a potential pool of voters of 56% of the electorate while Starmer can reach 75% of the electorate, that alone is beginning to tell in the headline VI.

    This is before the Treasury starts to unwind what has made life easy for everyone. I'm not sure what will happen to the VI once the furlough has ended and a million or more people are moved to JSA and forced to find new work in fields they have no skills or training in. It may work out that this ends up like 2010-2019 and jobs are created out of the ashes of of a huge crash, but the people affected by it won't thank the government.

    Boris has a much bigger potential pool than 56% if he wants it. Get a trade deal, replace the cabinet members who are only in for blind loyalty, back away from the authoritarian nationalism and govern well and I could vote for him by 2024. It is a long time away and by then it will surely be his record he is judged on, good or bad, not his bluster and blunder which held zero appeal for me.
    All of that other than the trade deal seems unlikely though, Boris is hardly going to transform himself into a new style of leader overnight. He will still be the same lazy oaf in 2021 that he has been in 2020.
    Probably, but getting Brexit finally "done" (if he can) may lead to him reinventing himself. The people he has allied with are useful to him for delivering Brexit, not much beyond that, and he is not known for loyalty. It will be probably be easier to stick with that group of the party regardless but no-one should have much confidence in what he would do 2021-2024 if a Brexit deal can be done this year.
    That feels like wishful thinking.
    The scenario where I vote for a govt I started off being very anti towards is inevitably going to include wishful thinking. It is clearly unlikely but also far from an implausible scenario though, Id back a 2021 Johnson pivot at 20/1 very happily. Beyond the trade deal, the rest of it is largely in the PMs hands.
    What do you want him to pivot on though?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,837

    MaxPB said:

    Poor ratings for Boris, related to the news on his retirement at some point next year as well I'm sure. Whilst his positive ratings were in the low to mid 40s his pool of voters was large enough to win an election, now with them dropping it isn't. I'd say Boris has a potential pool of voters of 56% of the electorate while Starmer can reach 75% of the electorate, that alone is beginning to tell in the headline VI.

    This is before the Treasury starts to unwind what has made life easy for everyone. I'm not sure what will happen to the VI once the furlough has ended and a million or more people are moved to JSA and forced to find new work in fields they have no skills or training in. It may work out that this ends up like 2010-2019 and jobs are created out of the ashes of of a huge crash, but the people affected by it won't thank the government.

    Boris has a much bigger potential pool than 56% if he wants it. Get a trade deal, replace the cabinet members who are only in for blind loyalty, back away from the authoritarian nationalism and govern well and I could vote for him by 2024. It is a long time away and by then it will surely be his record he is judged on, good or bad, not his bluster and blunder which held zero appeal for me.
    What authoritarian nationalism?

    It was Theresa May that was the authoritarian. Boris Johnson has always hailed more from the libertarian wing of the Conservative Party, which is why I am such a big fan of his - and why things like lockdown etc are not things he would have wanted to do.
    Lack of respect for the judiciary and rule of law. Cosying up to Steve Bannon et al.
  • FF43 said:

    Referring back to what Brexiteers said in 2016 about outcomes is pointless. The big contradiction at the heart of Brexit was that it was promoted as "taking control" when any workable arrangement with the continent we live in means a close relationship on the EU's terms.

    Crudely there were two possible outcomes to Brexit, both crap: Hermit State or Vassal State. All the nonsense since follows on from that conundrum.

    No it does not. We have no need to have a trading relationship with the EU on the EU's terms - that you haven't understood that reality yet doesn't make us hermits.
  • Will Jimmy get 600 ?


    Play to start at 4.15
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,065

    Foxy said:

    FF43 said:

    My view on masks in schools is that we are taking a big risk on a second virus peak on children going back to school due to the sheer number of social interactions in that environment. I also think we need to make school work, which means being rigorous on hygiene everywhere - masks in schools, yes - but also in pubs etc. We have zero headroom on this virus.

    The are seven conditions killing more people than coronavirus in our country at the moment.

    count them.
    1.5% of deaths in the week ending 14th August had Covid on the death certificate. Huge areas of the Country have had no Covid positive cases for weeks. This protect yourself from Covid at all costs mantra needs to stop. 6 times as many people died from flu that week. What are we doing about that?
    Masks help for flu too...

    Maskwearing is pretty cost free, and as a way to keep the virus under control an economical one, compared to shutting down swathes of the economy again.
    There are millions of people with other illnesses who are not being treated because of the protect yourself from Covid culture. Surgeries are completely failing their communities using Covid as a reason for not seeing anyone. People did not suddenly get better from every other illness in March when the lockdown started. Covid is now a background disease. Most people who get it do not even get ill. People are not being treated for the numerous other illnesses that humans get to enable healthcare staff to "protect" themselves from this background disease. Its complete madness. The obsession needs to stop.
    GP Surgeries being closed has absolutely nothing to do with wearing masks.
  • MaxPB said:

    Poor ratings for Boris, related to the news on his retirement at some point next year as well I'm sure. Whilst his positive ratings were in the low to mid 40s his pool of voters was large enough to win an election, now with them dropping it isn't. I'd say Boris has a potential pool of voters of 56% of the electorate while Starmer can reach 75% of the electorate, that alone is beginning to tell in the headline VI.

    This is before the Treasury starts to unwind what has made life easy for everyone. I'm not sure what will happen to the VI once the furlough has ended and a million or more people are moved to JSA and forced to find new work in fields they have no skills or training in. It may work out that this ends up like 2010-2019 and jobs are created out of the ashes of of a huge crash, but the people affected by it won't thank the government.

    Boris has a much bigger potential pool than 56% if he wants it. Get a trade deal, replace the cabinet members who are only in for blind loyalty, back away from the authoritarian nationalism and govern well and I could vote for him by 2024. It is a long time away and by then it will surely be his record he is judged on, good or bad, not his bluster and blunder which held zero appeal for me.
    What authoritarian nationalism?

    It was Theresa May that was the authoritarian. Boris Johnson has always hailed more from the libertarian wing of the Conservative Party, which is why I am such a big fan of his - and why things like lockdown etc are not things he would have wanted to do.
    Lack of respect for the judiciary and rule of law. Cosying up to Steve Bannon et al.
    I understand what you mean on judiciary and rule of law, but what cosying up to Steve Bannon et al has been done in the over a year now that Johnson has been in Downing Street? I've not seen anything like that.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Foxy said:

    FF43 said:

    My view on masks in schools is that we are taking a big risk on a second virus peak on children going back to school due to the sheer number of social interactions in that environment. I also think we need to make school work, which means being rigorous on hygiene everywhere - masks in schools, yes - but also in pubs etc. We have zero headroom on this virus.

    The are seven conditions killing more people than coronavirus in our country at the moment.

    count them.
    1.5% of deaths in the week ending 14th August had Covid on the death certificate. Huge areas of the Country have had no Covid positive cases for weeks. This protect yourself from Covid at all costs mantra needs to stop. 6 times as many people died from flu that week. What are we doing about that?
    Masks help for flu too...

    Maskwearing is pretty cost free, and as a way to keep the virus under control an economical one, compared to shutting down swathes of the economy again.
    There are millions of people with other illnesses who are not being treated because of the protect yourself from Covid culture. Surgeries are completely failing their communities using Covid as a reason for not seeing anyone. People did not suddenly get better from every other illness in March when the lockdown started. Covid is now a background disease. Most people who get it do not even get ill. People are not being treated for the numerous other illnesses that humans get to enable healthcare staff to "protect" themselves from this background disease. Its complete madness. The obsession needs to stop.
    Mask wearing seams orthogonal to your concerns
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    Will Jimmy get 600 ?


    Play to start at 4.15

    In 2011 I contemplated going to a Test match in Cardiff for the final afternoon, just to say I’d been to a Test (and seen Sangakkara bat).

    I decided it was too far, there wouldn’t be much play and it would be a boring draw.

    We all make mistakes.

    https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/12899/scorecard/474463/england-vs-sri-lanka-1st-test-sri-lanka-tour-of-england-and-scotland-2011

    Fingers crossed for a repeat.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,837

    MaxPB said:

    Poor ratings for Boris, related to the news on his retirement at some point next year as well I'm sure. Whilst his positive ratings were in the low to mid 40s his pool of voters was large enough to win an election, now with them dropping it isn't. I'd say Boris has a potential pool of voters of 56% of the electorate while Starmer can reach 75% of the electorate, that alone is beginning to tell in the headline VI.

    This is before the Treasury starts to unwind what has made life easy for everyone. I'm not sure what will happen to the VI once the furlough has ended and a million or more people are moved to JSA and forced to find new work in fields they have no skills or training in. It may work out that this ends up like 2010-2019 and jobs are created out of the ashes of of a huge crash, but the people affected by it won't thank the government.

    Boris has a much bigger potential pool than 56% if he wants it. Get a trade deal, replace the cabinet members who are only in for blind loyalty, back away from the authoritarian nationalism and govern well and I could vote for him by 2024. It is a long time away and by then it will surely be his record he is judged on, good or bad, not his bluster and blunder which held zero appeal for me.
    What authoritarian nationalism?

    It was Theresa May that was the authoritarian. Boris Johnson has always hailed more from the libertarian wing of the Conservative Party, which is why I am such a big fan of his - and why things like lockdown etc are not things he would have wanted to do.
    Lack of respect for the judiciary and rule of law. Cosying up to Steve Bannon et al.
    I understand what you mean on judiciary and rule of law, but what cosying up to Steve Bannon et al has been done in the over a year now that Johnson has been in Downing Street? I've not seen anything like that.
    Outside your timeline but very much cosying up to Bannon.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/22/boris-johnson-steve-bannon-texts-foreign-secretary-resignation-speech
  • So with Ofqual's chief going has her Scottish, Welsh or NI equivalent gone too? Or is it only in England that anyone gets held to account for their actions?
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,434
    edited August 2020

    The Single Market was a large part of what we voted on five years ago. If you wanted to stay in the Single Market you should have voted for Remain. All leading campaigners on both sides of the fence were absolutely explicit that leaving the EU was a vote to leave the Single Market.

    And please don't share that discredited fake news video of out of context quotes that has been humiliatingly torn apart and discredited that tried to show the opposite.

    From Hard Brexiteer Owen Paterson:

    https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2015/01/owen-paterson-mp-why-ukip-is-wrong-about-immigration.html

    It is critical to remember that the economic single market and the political EU are not one and the same thing. We can participate in the market as members of the European Economic Area without being saddled with the EU as a political project. Those, such as the business chiefs of the CBI, who confuse the memberships of the single market and the EU are making a basic error and misleading the British people.

    This is where UKIP is wrong. Desperate to control immigration from the EU, the party has rejected continued membership of the single market within the EEA – which would place our economy at risk. In fact, as a member of the EEA but not the EU, we would not be bound by the European Court of Justice and its rulings on our benefits system. But, crucially, we could introduce “Safeguard Measures”, giving us an “emergency brake” on excessive migration – an option not available to us in the EU. We would get the benefits to business and the economy of free movement, with real power over our borders.
    Was January 2015 before or during the Referendum campaign? 🙄

    During the Referendum campaign the Leavers like Johnson united behind a proposal under Vote Leave and others like Farage united under an alternate one called Leave.EU and both were explicit and unequivocal that we would leave the Single Market.

    Michael Gove, Andrea Leadsom and Boris Johnson all explicitly said in the days before the vote on the BBC at prime time that we would leave the Single Market. No ifs, no buts, no equivocation. If you didn't understand that then don't cry now - if you did understand that but don't like it then tough.
    https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1110452473037275136
    Yes and Gove is still seeking that same free trade agreement.

    You are aware that a free trade agreement is not the same as the Single Market, are you not?
    He's referring to an existing free trade area that stretches from Iceland to the Russian border. What could that possibly mean other than the EEA?
    He's referring to the combination of the EU, the EEA and Free Trade Agreements - the latter of which we should be a part of.

    If you look at some of those countries on the Russian border like the Ukraine, Georgia as well as other countries like Switzerland that is outside of the EEA too then there are a plethora of mechanisms for free trade. Why should Switzerland, the Ukraine and Georgia be capable of having a free trade agreement without being in the EEA but the UK can't?
    Countries like Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are in the EU and that's clearly what he's referring to, not every single country that borders Russia, which would include Belarus, China and North Korea.
    Bullshit. You're making that up, he explicitly said "No" to would we be in the Single Market. Not maybe, not yes, no ifs or buts he said No.

    So don't tell lies, it doesn't make you look big or clever. Others maybe you can say what you like but but he was explicitly asked and he said No.
    You are arguing that in the course of the campaign he changed his position?
    No, I am arguing he was consistent. Yes to Free Trade, no to the Single Market.

    Find a single quote anywhere that explicitly goes against that, not you interpret it somehow twisting it into anything different please?
    The position of the Leave campaign clearly evolved for tactical reasons. Initially they were talking about staying in the 'free trade zone'. When they came under pressure over the Norway option, Gove started talking about an Albanian model, before finally settling on the line of being outside the single market.
    I was out of the country for the latter stages of the campaign, so I wasn't following it, but if that's the case then it's an example of an unusually productive democratic debate, and we should welcome that debate led to a change in position, rather than contort ourselves in trying to hold the person to a position they abandoned.

    All I remember was Leave advocates refusing to commit to any specific plan, on the basis that the point was to regain the sovereign ability to choose, not to make that choice ahead of time. So it's always felt to me as though the referendum mandate has been redefined after the event, along the lines of Meeks' argument about Brexiter self-radicalisation.

    But, like I say, I wasn't following it in detail.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,837

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Poor ratings for Boris, related to the news on his retirement at some point next year as well I'm sure. Whilst his positive ratings were in the low to mid 40s his pool of voters was large enough to win an election, now with them dropping it isn't. I'd say Boris has a potential pool of voters of 56% of the electorate while Starmer can reach 75% of the electorate, that alone is beginning to tell in the headline VI.

    This is before the Treasury starts to unwind what has made life easy for everyone. I'm not sure what will happen to the VI once the furlough has ended and a million or more people are moved to JSA and forced to find new work in fields they have no skills or training in. It may work out that this ends up like 2010-2019 and jobs are created out of the ashes of of a huge crash, but the people affected by it won't thank the government.

    Boris has a much bigger potential pool than 56% if he wants it. Get a trade deal, replace the cabinet members who are only in for blind loyalty, back away from the authoritarian nationalism and govern well and I could vote for him by 2024. It is a long time away and by then it will surely be his record he is judged on, good or bad, not his bluster and blunder which held zero appeal for me.
    All of that other than the trade deal seems unlikely though, Boris is hardly going to transform himself into a new style of leader overnight. He will still be the same lazy oaf in 2021 that he has been in 2020.
    Probably, but getting Brexit finally "done" (if he can) may lead to him reinventing himself. The people he has allied with are useful to him for delivering Brexit, not much beyond that, and he is not known for loyalty. It will be probably be easier to stick with that group of the party regardless but no-one should have much confidence in what he would do 2021-2024 if a Brexit deal can be done this year.
    That feels like wishful thinking.
    The scenario where I vote for a govt I started off being very anti towards is inevitably going to include wishful thinking. It is clearly unlikely but also far from an implausible scenario though, Id back a 2021 Johnson pivot at 20/1 very happily. Beyond the trade deal, the rest of it is largely in the PMs hands.
    What do you want him to pivot on though?
    Given he is not going to do much work himself, trusting the better ministers to do their jobs without wanting to control it all thru Cummings and replacing the shit ones would be a wonderful start.
  • CorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorseBattery Posts: 21,436
    edited August 2020

    Argh

    The Single Market was a large part of what we voted on five years ago. If you wanted to stay in the Single Market you should have voted for Remain. All leading campaigners on both sides of the fence were absolutely explicit that leaving the EU was a vote to leave the Single Market.

    And please don't share that discredited fake news video of out of context quotes that has been humiliatingly torn apart and discredited that tried to show the opposite.

    From Hard Brexiteer Owen Paterson:

    https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2015/01/owen-paterson-mp-why-ukip-is-wrong-about-immigration.html

    It is critical to remember that the economic single market and the political EU are not one and the same thing. We can participate in the market as members of the European Economic Area without being saddled with the EU as a political project. Those, such as the business chiefs of the CBI, who confuse the memberships of the single market and the EU are making a basic error and misleading the British people.

    This is where UKIP is wrong. Desperate to control immigration from the EU, the party has rejected continued membership of the single market within the EEA – which would place our economy at risk. In fact, as a member of the EEA but not the EU, we would not be bound by the European Court of Justice and its rulings on our benefits system. But, crucially, we could introduce “Safeguard Measures”, giving us an “emergency brake” on excessive migration – an option not available to us in the EU. We would get the benefits to business and the economy of free movement, with real power over our borders.
    Was January 2015 before or during the Referendum campaign? 🙄

    During the Referendum campaign the Leavers like Johnson united behind a proposal under Vote Leave and others like Farage united under an alternate one called Leave.EU and both were explicit and unequivocal that we would leave the Single Market.

    Michael Gove, Andrea Leadsom and Boris Johnson all explicitly said in the days before the vote on the BBC at prime time that we would leave the Single Market. No ifs, no buts, no equivocation. If you didn't understand that then don't cry now - if you did understand that but don't like it then tough.
    https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1110452473037275136
    Yes and Gove is still seeking that same free trade agreement.

    You are aware that a free trade agreement is not the same as the Single Market, are you not?
    He's referring to an existing free trade area that stretches from Iceland to the Russian border. What could that possibly mean other than the EEA?
    He's referring to the combination of the EU, the EEA and Free Trade Agreements - the latter of which we should be a part of.

    If you look at some of those countries on the Russian border like the Ukraine, Georgia as well as other countries like Switzerland that is outside of the EEA too then there are a plethora of mechanisms for free trade. Why should Switzerland, the Ukraine and Georgia be capable of having a free trade agreement without being in the EEA but the UK can't?
    Countries like Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are in the EU and that's clearly what he's referring to, not every single country that borders Russia, which would include Belarus, China and North Korea.
    Bullshit. You're making that up, he explicitly said "No" to would we be in the Single Market. Not maybe, not yes, no ifs or buts he said No.

    So don't tell lies, it doesn't make you look big or clever. Others maybe you can say what you like but but he was explicitly asked and he said No.
    You are arguing that in the course of the campaign he changed his position?
    No, I am arguing he was consistent. Yes to Free Trade, no to the Single Market.

    Find a single quote anywhere that explicitly goes against that, not you interpret it somehow twisting it into anything different please?
    The position of the Leave campaign clearly evolved for tactical reasons. Initially they were talking about staying in the 'free trade zone'. When they came under pressure over the Norway option, Gove started talking about an Albanian model, before finally settling on the line of being outside the single market.
    I was out of the country for the latter stages of the campaign, so I wasn't following it, but if that's the case then it's an example of an unusually productive democratic debate, and we should welcome that debate led to a change in position, rather than contort ourselves in trying to hold the person to a position they abandoned.

    All I remember was Leave advocates refusing to commit to any specific plan, in the basis that the point was to regain the sovereign ability to choose, not to make that choice ahead of time. So it's always felt to me as though the referendum mandate has been redefined after the event, along the lines of Meeks' argument about Brexiter self-radicalisation.

    But, like I say, I wasn't following it in detail.
    I completely agree with every word.

    I think Brexit has been re-defined multiple times since we voted to Leave and it wasn't defined prior on purpose.

    I genuinely believe for a year+ after we voted, there would have been consensus and broad support for Norway by 60%+ of the electorate if May had gone for it
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    Cyclefree said:

    DavidL said:

    dr_spyn said:
    Shocked that civil servants are being sacked to save ministers.
    Genuinely shocked some civil servants are being held accountable for their incompetence. And not even promoted.
    Just those people brought in from the private sector, eh!
    Ah. There's always an explanation if you look hard enough.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862

    So with Ofqual's chief going has her Scottish, Welsh or NI equivalent gone too? Or is it only in England that anyone gets held to account for their actions?

    Its one of the frustrations of that prat Williamson hanging on. Its taken the pressure off Swinney.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 3,375
    eristdoof said:

    Foxy said:

    FF43 said:

    My view on masks in schools is that we are taking a big risk on a second virus peak on children going back to school due to the sheer number of social interactions in that environment. I also think we need to make school work, which means being rigorous on hygiene everywhere - masks in schools, yes - but also in pubs etc. We have zero headroom on this virus.

    The are seven conditions killing more people than coronavirus in our country at the moment.

    count them.
    1.5% of deaths in the week ending 14th August had Covid on the death certificate. Huge areas of the Country have had no Covid positive cases for weeks. This protect yourself from Covid at all costs mantra needs to stop. 6 times as many people died from flu that week. What are we doing about that?
    Masks help for flu too...

    Maskwearing is pretty cost free, and as a way to keep the virus under control an economical one, compared to shutting down swathes of the economy again.
    There are millions of people with other illnesses who are not being treated because of the protect yourself from Covid culture. Surgeries are completely failing their communities using Covid as a reason for not seeing anyone. People did not suddenly get better from every other illness in March when the lockdown started. Covid is now a background disease. Most people who get it do not even get ill. People are not being treated for the numerous other illnesses that humans get to enable healthcare staff to "protect" themselves from this background disease. Its complete madness. The obsession needs to stop.
    GP Surgeries being closed has absolutely nothing to do with wearing masks.
    I am aware of that, my point is why are the Government just worrying about Covid and ignoring all the other health issues that exist. Mask wearing in schools will be pointless. Getting people back into surgeries so that they can get treated for the numerous other issues that exist is far far more important, but it is being ignored by the Government and in many ways they are pleased that no one is going to the surgeries. It is a completely mad situation. I saw from the comments on here last week that people have experienced just how difficult it is to access a surgery. Many many more people will be dying from the failure of our health system to treat them than will ever be saved from wearing masks in schools.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,720

    Foxy said:

    FF43 said:

    My view on masks in schools is that we are taking a big risk on a second virus peak on children going back to school due to the sheer number of social interactions in that environment. I also think we need to make school work, which means being rigorous on hygiene everywhere - masks in schools, yes - but also in pubs etc. We have zero headroom on this virus.

    The are seven conditions killing more people than coronavirus in our country at the moment.

    count them.
    1.5% of deaths in the week ending 14th August had Covid on the death certificate. Huge areas of the Country have had no Covid positive cases for weeks. This protect yourself from Covid at all costs mantra needs to stop. 6 times as many people died from flu that week. What are we doing about that?
    Masks help for flu too...

    Maskwearing is pretty cost free, and as a way to keep the virus under control an economical one, compared to shutting down swathes of the economy again.
    There are millions of people with other illnesses who are not being treated because of the protect yourself from Covid culture. Surgeries are completely failing their communities using Covid as a reason for not seeing anyone. People did not suddenly get better from every other illness in March when the lockdown started. Covid is now a background disease. Most people who get it do not even get ill. People are not being treated for the numerous other illnesses that humans get to enable healthcare staff to "protect" themselves from this background disease. Its complete madness. The obsession needs to stop.
    Wearing a mask, and having patients wear them is helping me to treat non covid patients safely. It is a simple measure that allows normal service to be resumed.

    In what way do you think that wearing masks interferes with treatment.
  • houndtanghoundtang Posts: 450
    Alistair said:

    dr_spyn said:

    Scottish 5 year olds might be wearing masks.

    https://www.itv.com/news/2020-08-25/secondary-school-students-in-scotland-to-start-wearing-face-coverings-in-corridors-and-communal-areas

    I'm not sure how many 5 year olds are on school buses, but it will be damn hard to get them to do it every day.

    From observation at my school all the children coming off the buses of any age are wearing masks.
    How anyone can think that making kids wear masks is acceptable is beyond me. There is absolutely no questioning of the damage this lunacy is doing to childrens' mental wellbeing. It is an absolute disgrace as is the total fixation on Covid to the exclusion of other more serious illnesses.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,482
    DavidL said:

    So with Ofqual's chief going has her Scottish, Welsh or NI equivalent gone too? Or is it only in England that anyone gets held to account for their actions?

    Its one of the frustrations of that prat Williamson hanging on. Its taken the pressure off Swinney.
    In both cases, surely from the opposition's perspective it's better for them to remain in place.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,707
    Proof that Nerys's concerns about the government ignoring non-Covid medical procedures are misplaced.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    So with Ofqual's chief going has her Scottish, Welsh or NI equivalent gone too? Or is it only in England that anyone gets held to account for their actions?

    Fiona Robertson won’t be going anywhere merely for being totally incompetent. She’s a personal friend of Sturgeon’s. Won’t go bail for Swinney surviving much longer.

    Philip Blaker has been in post for years and will know where every body is buried. Nobody will be likely to try shifting him. Justin Edwards is in much the same position.

    But of course, the latter two are fortunate that nobody really paid the slightest attention to Wales or Northern Ireland because Scotland, then England drowned them out.
  • MaxPB said:

    Poor ratings for Boris, related to the news on his retirement at some point next year as well I'm sure. Whilst his positive ratings were in the low to mid 40s his pool of voters was large enough to win an election, now with them dropping it isn't. I'd say Boris has a potential pool of voters of 56% of the electorate while Starmer can reach 75% of the electorate, that alone is beginning to tell in the headline VI.

    This is before the Treasury starts to unwind what has made life easy for everyone. I'm not sure what will happen to the VI once the furlough has ended and a million or more people are moved to JSA and forced to find new work in fields they have no skills or training in. It may work out that this ends up like 2010-2019 and jobs are created out of the ashes of of a huge crash, but the people affected by it won't thank the government.

    Boris has a much bigger potential pool than 56% if he wants it. Get a trade deal, replace the cabinet members who are only in for blind loyalty, back away from the authoritarian nationalism and govern well and I could vote for him by 2024. It is a long time away and by then it will surely be his record he is judged on, good or bad, not his bluster and blunder which held zero appeal for me.
    What authoritarian nationalism?

    It was Theresa May that was the authoritarian. Boris Johnson has always hailed more from the libertarian wing of the Conservative Party, which is why I am such a big fan of his - and why things like lockdown etc are not things he would have wanted to do.
    Lack of respect for the judiciary and rule of law. Cosying up to Steve Bannon et al.
    I understand what you mean on judiciary and rule of law, but what cosying up to Steve Bannon et al has been done in the over a year now that Johnson has been in Downing Street? I've not seen anything like that.
    Outside your timeline but very much cosying up to Bannon.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/22/boris-johnson-steve-bannon-texts-foreign-secretary-resignation-speech
    An article by Carole Codswallop saying that known self-publicist, egotist and liar Steve Bannon claimed he spoke to Johnson? Is that it?

    If there were any cosying then there should be something clear from the year Johnson has been in charge surely? Not a claim of cosying by Carole Codswallop three years ago and nothing since?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676
    ydoethur said:

    Will Jimmy get 600 ?


    Play to start at 4.15

    In 2011 I contemplated going to a Test match in Cardiff for the final afternoon, just to say I’d been to a Test (and seen Sangakkara bat).

    I decided it was too far, there wouldn’t be much play and it would be a boring draw.

    We all make mistakes.

    https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/12899/scorecard/474463/england-vs-sri-lanka-1st-test-sri-lanka-tour-of-england-and-scotland-2011

    Fingers crossed for a repeat.
    Don't even think it!!
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    We have just received a letter from our son's school stating that it will be mandatory for senior school pupils to wear masks on buses, in corridors and inside school buildings (other than when in class) from Thursday. Masks to be stored in sterile bags when not in use. Kids to clean hands on arrival and departure from work stations before fitting/removing masks.
    Junior kids don't have to but are free to do so.
    Reflects the latest Scottish government guidance.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 3,375
    edited August 2020
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    FF43 said:

    My view on masks in schools is that we are taking a big risk on a second virus peak on children going back to school due to the sheer number of social interactions in that environment. I also think we need to make school work, which means being rigorous on hygiene everywhere - masks in schools, yes - but also in pubs etc. We have zero headroom on this virus.

    The are seven conditions killing more people than coronavirus in our country at the moment.

    count them.
    1.5% of deaths in the week ending 14th August had Covid on the death certificate. Huge areas of the Country have had no Covid positive cases for weeks. This protect yourself from Covid at all costs mantra needs to stop. 6 times as many people died from flu that week. What are we doing about that?
    Masks help for flu too...

    Maskwearing is pretty cost free, and as a way to keep the virus under control an economical one, compared to shutting down swathes of the economy again.
    There are millions of people with other illnesses who are not being treated because of the protect yourself from Covid culture. Surgeries are completely failing their communities using Covid as a reason for not seeing anyone. People did not suddenly get better from every other illness in March when the lockdown started. Covid is now a background disease. Most people who get it do not even get ill. People are not being treated for the numerous other illnesses that humans get to enable healthcare staff to "protect" themselves from this background disease. Its complete madness. The obsession needs to stop.
    Wearing a mask, and having patients wear them is helping me to treat non covid patients safely. It is a simple measure that allows normal service to be resumed.

    In what way do you think that wearing masks interferes with treatment.
    It is the failure of the Government to think about anything else other than Covid. How many health issues do you think have built up over the past 5 months with many surgeries basically closed to patients? My local surgery is like a prison. A study of 16,000 people in Southampton using the new saliva test over the past month found zero positive cases. Yet surgeries here remain shut to protect themselves.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    One slip? One slip? What on earth is Root doing?
  • I see the police endorsement of Trump in New York has brought the state into play. Oh

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1298238572777156608
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,065

    FF43 said:

    My view on masks in schools is that we are taking a big risk on a second virus peak on children going back to school due to the sheer number of social interactions in that environment. I also think we need to make school work, which means being rigorous on hygiene everywhere - masks in schools, yes - but also in pubs etc. We have zero headroom on this virus.

    The are seven conditions killing more people than coronavirus in our country at the moment.

    count them.
    1.5% of deaths in the week ending 14th August had Covid on the death certificate. Huge areas of the Country have had no Covid positive cases for weeks. This protect yourself from Covid at all costs mantra needs to stop. 6 times as many people died from flu that week. What are we doing about that?
    Have you not noticed that the drastic action worked? The country is now opening up in a controlled fashion. If all this is thrown away, as you clearly want, the UK will be back to 4000 new cases and 900 deaths every day before the end of September.
  • Argh

    The Single Market was a large part of what we voted on five years ago. If you wanted to stay in the Single Market you should have voted for Remain. All leading campaigners on both sides of the fence were absolutely explicit that leaving the EU was a vote to leave the Single Market.

    And please don't share that discredited fake news video of out of context quotes that has been humiliatingly torn apart and discredited that tried to show the opposite.

    From Hard Brexiteer Owen Paterson:

    https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2015/01/owen-paterson-mp-why-ukip-is-wrong-about-immigration.html

    It is critical to remember that the economic single market and the political EU are not one and the same thing. We can participate in the market as members of the European Economic Area without being saddled with the EU as a political project. Those, such as the business chiefs of the CBI, who confuse the memberships of the single market and the EU are making a basic error and misleading the British people.

    This is where UKIP is wrong. Desperate to control immigration from the EU, the party has rejected continued membership of the single market within the EEA – which would place our economy at risk. In fact, as a member of the EEA but not the EU, we would not be bound by the European Court of Justice and its rulings on our benefits system. But, crucially, we could introduce “Safeguard Measures”, giving us an “emergency brake” on excessive migration – an option not available to us in the EU. We would get the benefits to business and the economy of free movement, with real power over our borders.
    Was January 2015 before or during the Referendum campaign? 🙄

    During the Referendum campaign the Leavers like Johnson united behind a proposal under Vote Leave and others like Farage united under an alternate one called Leave.EU and both were explicit and unequivocal that we would leave the Single Market.

    Michael Gove, Andrea Leadsom and Boris Johnson all explicitly said in the days before the vote on the BBC at prime time that we would leave the Single Market. No ifs, no buts, no equivocation. If you didn't understand that then don't cry now - if you did understand that but don't like it then tough.
    https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1110452473037275136
    Yes and Gove is still seeking that same free trade agreement.

    You are aware that a free trade agreement is not the same as the Single Market, are you not?
    He's referring to an existing free trade area that stretches from Iceland to the Russian border. What could that possibly mean other than the EEA?
    He's referring to the combination of the EU, the EEA and Free Trade Agreements - the latter of which we should be a part of.

    If you look at some of those countries on the Russian border like the Ukraine, Georgia as well as other countries like Switzerland that is outside of the EEA too then there are a plethora of mechanisms for free trade. Why should Switzerland, the Ukraine and Georgia be capable of having a free trade agreement without being in the EEA but the UK can't?
    Countries like Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are in the EU and that's clearly what he's referring to, not every single country that borders Russia, which would include Belarus, China and North Korea.
    Bullshit. You're making that up, he explicitly said "No" to would we be in the Single Market. Not maybe, not yes, no ifs or buts he said No.

    So don't tell lies, it doesn't make you look big or clever. Others maybe you can say what you like but but he was explicitly asked and he said No.
    You are arguing that in the course of the campaign he changed his position?
    No, I am arguing he was consistent. Yes to Free Trade, no to the Single Market.

    Find a single quote anywhere that explicitly goes against that, not you interpret it somehow twisting it into anything different please?
    The position of the Leave campaign clearly evolved for tactical reasons. Initially they were talking about staying in the 'free trade zone'. When they came under pressure over the Norway option, Gove started talking about an Albanian model, before finally settling on the line of being outside the single market.
    I was out of the country for the latter stages of the campaign, so I wasn't following it, but if that's the case then it's an example of an unusually productive democratic debate, and we should welcome that debate led to a change in position, rather than contort ourselves in trying to hold the person to a position they abandoned.

    All I remember was Leave advocates refusing to commit to any specific plan, in the basis that the point was to regain the sovereign ability to choose, not to make that choice ahead of time. So it's always felt to me as though the referendum mandate has been redefined after the event, along the lines of Meeks' argument about Brexiter self-radicalisation.

    But, like I say, I wasn't following it in detail.
    I completely agree with every word.

    I think Brexit has been re-defined multiple times since we voted to Leave and it wasn't defined prior on purpose.

    I genuinely believe for a year+ after we voted, there would have been consensus and broad support for Norway by 60%+ of the electorate if May had gone for it
    Had Remainer May gone for it then and the Remainers in Parliament then yes it could have had broad consensus. Its what I expected would happen as I though the Remainers would switch to supporting that since they couldn't have EU membership and it was the next-best-thing.

    Even if a majority of Leavers didn't want it getting the support of 90% of former Remainers and 25% of former Leavers would have seen a clear majority in favour of EEA.

    But Remainers chose not to go for it - and Leavers didn't want it. So it didn't happen.
This discussion has been closed.