Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Biden’s national poll lead remains and the swing state surveys are looking positive – politicalbetti

1246711

Comments

  • Hmmm...not holding out much hope for the reboot of spitting image if that is the trailer. Matt Lucas was funnier at the start of bake off.

  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 5,777
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Second!

    FPT

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The sub-heading says it all:

    He thought making it upriver would fulfil his dream – instead it’s turned into a cruel form of humiliation

    Although I liked the description of Cummings as Johnson’s emotional support psycho
    Today, British people were invited to enjoy the spectacle of Johnson shutting pubs – for an hour – and the irony of being hectored that they are “in the last chance saloon” by the very people who herded them back to the saloon and bought them half-price lunches there.
    YET AGAIN

    Boris has NOT shut the pubs FOR AN HOUR.

    Pubs haven't closed at 11pm for a generation – the law was changed 15 years ago.

    FIFTEEN YEARS AGO.

    Why is the fiction endlessly repeated on PB and elsewhere?
    Because most of us are tucked up in bed well before and have no idea when pubs close, innit?
    Or never or very rarely visit pubs and bars, which is the case with many PBers.

    No wonder very few people on here have the first clue about the hospitality sector.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 2,152
    @Dura_Ace my condolences. And terribly illustrative that wherever a disease spreads, however just in the community amongst young people it is and however well segmented and cleaned the hospitals are, sooner rather than later any disease of the ill unavoidably gravitates towards a hospital setting.
  • Nigelb said:

    MaxPB said:

    Nigelb said:

    @Philip_Thompson the claim that any other country would want to copy our testing regime is very funny.

    Considering we're testing more per capita than any other large country on the entire planet, I don't see the joke.
    For the resources we’ve thrown at it, our testing is deeply unimpressive.
    We could be doing a far better job.

    And what ‘world beating’ regime have we developed ?
    The new rapid antigen tests aren’t from here; pooled testing was successfully implemented months ago but several countries; there are literally dozens of new testing modalities being looked at - how many British ones have been deployed ?
    Even the swabs come from Italy.
    Yup, it comes from not having someone who know what they're doing in charge.

    We probably have the best antibody testing regime in the world too, but there's clearly no point in it because the testing hasn't been ramped up in those areas likely to see new outbreaks.

    At the moment, the testing just seems to be being wasted. We're adopting a siege mentality of repeatedly testing certain groups which now accounts fit 60-70% of overall capacity leaving community testing without enough resources to quickly see where the outbreaks are. Without the ability to find localised outbreaks, quarantine everyone in the area we're going to have a full second lockdown of "stay home" which will destroy the economy.

    On pooled testing, it seems like such an easy win for hospitals, schools and care homes. We could probably quadruple the capacity of P1 testing which frees up P2 for community testing.
    Agreed.
    And I don't see the point of the 'moonshot' program as described, given that such tests have already been developed in the US. The price estimate of £100bn is utterly absurd.
    We just need to try them out over here.
    I've been sent some information on a 15 minutes Covid test which will be available from a UK company. I'm not sure exactly how many they might have available, but the technology is definitely there.

    We used this company to do environmental DNA testing (for newts), so I'm not sure we're the right market for Covid testing, but still...
  • RobDRobD Posts: 49,733

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Second!

    FPT

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The sub-heading says it all:

    He thought making it upriver would fulfil his dream – instead it’s turned into a cruel form of humiliation

    Although I liked the description of Cummings as Johnson’s emotional support psycho
    Today, British people were invited to enjoy the spectacle of Johnson shutting pubs – for an hour – and the irony of being hectored that they are “in the last chance saloon” by the very people who herded them back to the saloon and bought them half-price lunches there.
    YET AGAIN

    Boris has NOT shut the pubs FOR AN HOUR.

    Pubs haven't closed at 11pm for a generation – the law was changed 15 years ago.

    FIFTEEN YEARS AGO.

    Why is the fiction endlessly repeated on PB and elsewhere?
    Because most of us are tucked up in bed well before and have no idea when pubs close, innit?
    Or never or very rarely visit pubs and bars, which is the case with many PBers.

    No wonder very few people on here have the first clue about the hospitality sector.
    Are there stats on opening hours these days? My old local still closed around 11pm.
  • Cyclefree said:

    Hungary, here we come ...

    https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2020/09/23/ronan-cormacain-the-united-kingdom-internal-market-bill-and-breach-of-domestic-law/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    It's quite simple: if you value democracy and the rule of law, you cannot supprt the Internal Market Bill.

    What if you value democracy and the rule of law domestically but think that international law is more shall we say guidelines?

    Read the article, Phil. The bill does away with the rule of law domestically as it puts the government above the law.

    As does the Human Rights Act. The Human Rights Act puts itself above other laws blanketly and doesn't specifically repeal or disapply those laws it does so sweepingly. This Bill is just as important and follows the same precedent.

    No, this legislation gives the government unlimited power to do as it wishes with no recourse to law. The Human Rights Act does not do that. Application of the Human Rights Act is subject to judicial scrutiny. The Internal Market Bill specifically rules judicial scrutiny out.

    As was stated on here - https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/09/18/does-the-internal-markets-bill-compromise-work/

    “Look at the clause trying to oust the jurisdiction of the courts. This is a further clear breach of the WA. It seeks to stop any legal challenge to how it uses its powers; it plans to stop people with private rights given to them under the WA but taken away by this Bill from going to court to seek a remedy. Will such an ouster clause work? There is some doubt: leaving citizens without any legal remedy may in itself be a breach of the Human Rights Act. In any event, the courts are very resistant to any attempt to prevent the courts even considering whether a power is being used lawfully. Previous attempts to do so have not been successful.

    Regardless of what the outcome of such legal challenges might be, the government might well regard this too as a “win”: a battle with the judges, with human rights, with EU courts (remember the EU has reserved the right to take legal action against the British government) plays well into a mindset of Britain battling against obstructive foreigners and lawyers. And it helps provide yet further justification for what the government has already clearly signalled it wants to do: restricting or eliminating any scrutiny of – or legal restraints on – its actions.“

    Yep, this is what happened in Hungary and is now happening in Poland.



  • Another 2 pointer. The polls have aligned.

    Labour lead soon!
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 22,814
    Quick run down on the PMI figures.

    France - back under 50, this was expected France is definitely going to double dip, probably a big one too.
    Germany - still over 50, strength mainly in manufacturing but the German economy is driven by its manufacturing sector so that's a good thing.
    UK - still over 50, but I'm not sure how reliable the composite is going to be as a GDP predictor, I would be surprised if September gave us anything like the 2-3% growth that the figured point to but it should still be growth.

    Europe in general is probably heading for a double dip recession all because countries didn't get together and decide on who should and shouldn't be let into Europe over the summer. Portugal still let in Brazilians without quarantine, the UK had a terrible self-certifed quarantine, France had basically nothing, Spain had basically nothing and these four countries have seeded a new crisis across the whole continent.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 26,845
    edited September 23
    Pulpstar said:

    kinabalu said:

    On topic -

    Trump has drifted a little - around 2.3 now - but based on all of the evidence at our disposal I cannot for the life of me price him at shorter than 3.5. If the polls in early Oct - after the 1st debate on the 29th Sep - have not tightened significantly I expect the Trump price to collapse. I think it might happen quite dramatically when it does. Rather like a market crash as the penny drops with lots of people at about the same time.

    What's keeping me off the spreads is the possibility of serious interference with the polls - false rumours, discarded postal votes, ridiculous queues, etc. That will still be a worry even if Biden is leading by 6 on pollig day.
    I think that works in both directions though. Aside from the possibility that Trump has put together a brilliantly orchestrated conspiracy, involving all kinds of organizations he doesn't control, there's the possibility that he's gone and told his own electorate, consisting mainly of the elderly, not to vote by post, and there's a huge pandemic, so once they see a queue they're going to give up and go home. Meanwhile the Dems have got half their vote out by post already, their polling stations aren't too busy, and their GOTV has already mostly GOTVed, so they can concentrate on the people who are left.

    This could make quite wacky things happen in the House and Senate and statewide races as well.
    Against that, more Dem ballots WILL be chucked than GOP (Simply due to the higher mail in rates). But yes mail in does lead to a higher propensity, as the US has abysmally long queues.
    They dramatically overengineer their elections, the time honoured British simplicity of a pencil, paper and spare village hall is vastly superior to the US voting machines.
    Except that US ballots have many, many questions on them.
    Counting them all by hand would take forever - hence machines. (Ditto filling them all in by hand at polling stations.)
  • Hmmm...not holding out much hope for the reboot of spitting image if that is the trailer. Matt Lucas was funnier at the start of bake off.

    To be honest, I don't think the original has aged particularly well.
  • Hmmm...not holding out much hope for the reboot of spitting image if that is the trailer. Matt Lucas was funnier at the start of bake off.

    That is awful. There was just no humour there, it wasn't left or right, woke or asleep or whatever it was just dull and boring.

    What a shame.
  • IanB2 said:

    Second!

    FPT

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The sub-heading says it all:

    He thought making it upriver would fulfil his dream – instead it’s turned into a cruel form of humiliation

    Although I liked the description of Cummings as Johnson’s emotional support psycho
    Today, British people were invited to enjoy the spectacle of Johnson shutting pubs – for an hour – and the irony of being hectored that they are “in the last chance saloon” by the very people who herded them back to the saloon and bought them half-price lunches there.
    YET AGAIN

    Boris has NOT shut the pubs FOR AN HOUR.

    Pubs haven't closed at 11pm for a generation – the law was changed 15 years ago.

    FIFTEEN YEARS AGO.

    Why is the fiction endlessly repeated on PB and elsewhere?
    Most pubs still shut at 11, and some pubs were shutting later than 11 even before the law changes. Its a much higher proportion after 11 now than before, but 11 is still the default.
    I would speculate that it isn't the pubs that shut at 11pm that are the biggest covid problem.

    It is the town centre clubs and bars that remain open until 2am and beyond.

    So this is targeting the right establishments.

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 15,684
    Andy_JS said:

    kinabalu said:

    On topic -

    Trump has drifted a little - around 2.3 now - but based on all of the evidence at our disposal I cannot for the life of me price him at shorter than 3.5. If the polls in early Oct - after the 1st debate on the 29th Sep - have not tightened significantly I expect the Trump price to collapse. I think it might happen quite dramatically when it does. Rather like a market crash as the penny drops with lots of people at about the same time.

    According to 538 the current tipping point state is Pennsylvania, where Biden has a lead of 4% which means a 2% swing would make it neck-and-neck in the electoral college.

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/
    Yes I saw that. If the polls are wrong one way it's close again. If the polls are right it's comfortable Biden. If the polls are wrong the other way it's Biden landslide. This is why I cannot justify Trump as short as 2.3. I make him much longer. A 3 handle for sure and tbh closer to 4. And as we speak I'm very happy being long of Biden EC supremacy at 28. I'm not writing Trump off quite yet but I do think he's almost done.
  • Hmmm...not holding out much hope for the reboot of spitting image if that is the trailer. Matt Lucas was funnier at the start of bake off.

    To be honest, I don't think the original has aged particularly well.
    Not all humour ages but it should be at least funny at the time.
  • IanB2 said:

    Second!

    FPT

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The sub-heading says it all:

    He thought making it upriver would fulfil his dream – instead it’s turned into a cruel form of humiliation

    Although I liked the description of Cummings as Johnson’s emotional support psycho
    Today, British people were invited to enjoy the spectacle of Johnson shutting pubs – for an hour – and the irony of being hectored that they are “in the last chance saloon” by the very people who herded them back to the saloon and bought them half-price lunches there.
    YET AGAIN

    Boris has NOT shut the pubs FOR AN HOUR.

    Pubs haven't closed at 11pm for a generation – the law was changed 15 years ago.

    FIFTEEN YEARS AGO.

    Why is the fiction endlessly repeated on PB and elsewhere?
    Most pubs still shut at 11, and some pubs were shutting later than 11 even before the law changes. Its a much higher proportion after 11 now than before, but 11 is still the default.
    Evidence required.

    Very few pubs in London close at 11pm

    IanB2 said:

    Second!

    FPT

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The sub-heading says it all:

    He thought making it upriver would fulfil his dream – instead it’s turned into a cruel form of humiliation

    Although I liked the description of Cummings as Johnson’s emotional support psycho
    Today, British people were invited to enjoy the spectacle of Johnson shutting pubs – for an hour – and the irony of being hectored that they are “in the last chance saloon” by the very people who herded them back to the saloon and bought them half-price lunches there.
    YET AGAIN

    Boris has NOT shut the pubs FOR AN HOUR.

    Pubs haven't closed at 11pm for a generation – the law was changed 15 years ago.

    FIFTEEN YEARS AGO.

    Why is the fiction endlessly repeated on PB and elsewhere?
    Most pubs still shut at 11, and some pubs were shutting later than 11 even before the law changes. Its a much higher proportion after 11 now than before, but 11 is still the default.
    Some pubs shut earlier than 11pm – my country pub fave closes at 10pm every night – yet thousands of pubs hold licences to 12am, 1am and in some cases beyond that, and have done so for a generation.

    This is particularly true in larger cities, where much of the revenue is generated later in the evening.

    The idea that "pubs close at 11pm" is a work of fiction.

    Thousands open much later than that.
    Not sure why my assertion "requires evidence" whereas yours "Very few pubs in London close at 11pm" is to be assumed accurate. Most pubs around me in central London close at 11 most days of the week.

    If they didnt there wouldnt be a need for articles like this https://londonist.com/london/drink/pubs-bars-drinking-late-night-after-midnight-london
  • 16.75million tuned in to Boris 's address to the nation last night

    Interesting viewing figures

    BBC1 9.14
    ITV 3.51
    C4 2.80
    BBC News 0.82
    Sky 0.48

    Sky's figures are going to upset Boulton and Burley and Rigby and others
  • IanB2 said:

    Second!

    FPT

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The sub-heading says it all:

    He thought making it upriver would fulfil his dream – instead it’s turned into a cruel form of humiliation

    Although I liked the description of Cummings as Johnson’s emotional support psycho
    Today, British people were invited to enjoy the spectacle of Johnson shutting pubs – for an hour – and the irony of being hectored that they are “in the last chance saloon” by the very people who herded them back to the saloon and bought them half-price lunches there.
    YET AGAIN

    Boris has NOT shut the pubs FOR AN HOUR.

    Pubs haven't closed at 11pm for a generation – the law was changed 15 years ago.

    FIFTEEN YEARS AGO.

    Why is the fiction endlessly repeated on PB and elsewhere?
    Most pubs still shut at 11, and some pubs were shutting later than 11 even before the law changes. Its a much higher proportion after 11 now than before, but 11 is still the default.
    I would speculate that it isn't the pubs that shut at 11pm that are the biggest covid problem.

    It is the town centre clubs and bars that remain open until 2am and beyond.

    So this is targeting the right establishments.

    Plus its worth remembering that many of the town centre clubs and bars that are open until 2 and beyond get a lot of their customers from other bars that were open until 11 then people head into town to continue the evening. Who will then inevitably mingle more before heading home and then subsequently going back to their local before heading on into town and repeat.

    Given the nature of the virus pub crawls or getting people from one establishment to another is much, much riskier than people simply going to one and staying there.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 37,610
    Scott_xP said:
    Yet another in the series of occasional reminders of why Johnson will be plumbing new records in polling lows by Spring.
  • When asked about the UK government negotiating the future relationship with the EU, 57% of people think they are being handled fairly/very poorly (+12), compared to 24% who said very/fairly well (-7)

    Can't blame Labour for that!
  • 16.75million tuned in to Boris 's address to the nation last night

    Interesting viewing figures

    BBC1 9.14
    ITV 3.51
    C4 2.80
    BBC News 0.82
    Sky 0.48

    Sky's figures are going to upset Boulton and Burley and Rigby and others

    Those figures are absolutely massive overall for a PM speech. We're getting into Dirty Den and Angie Christmas special numbers.

    It helps explain why the Tories' polling numbers are still holding up.

    People read the endless miserable whining on social media about the Tories then watch Boris and think he's probably not doing such a bad job after all.
  • 16.75million tuned in to Boris 's address to the nation last night

    Interesting viewing figures

    BBC1 9.14
    ITV 3.51
    C4 2.80
    BBC News 0.82
    Sky 0.48

    Sky's figures are going to upset Boulton and Burley and Rigby and others

    The BBC's figures are going to upset a lot of people in the government!

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 15,684

    Hmmm...not holding out much hope for the reboot of spitting image if that is the trailer. Matt Lucas was funnier at the start of bake off.

    To be honest, I don't think the original has aged particularly well.
    I recall some classic bits but on the whole I never liked it that much. Same with this clip. Mostly missed the mark with me but with a couple of hits. Best for me being the sauna scene with "Boris", Trump and Putin. That made me laugh.
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 2,628
    edited September 23

    16.75million tuned in to Boris 's address to the nation last night

    Interesting viewing figures

    BBC1 9.14
    ITV 3.51
    C4 2.80
    BBC News 0.82
    Sky 0.48

    Sky's figures are going to upset Boulton and Burley and Rigby and others

    It has always been the case that, for big national events, people turn to the Beeb.

    The defund the BBC, scrap the licence fee Twitter warriors don't particularly like it. But it remains the reality.

    It doesn't mean there's no role for others - there clearly is - and doesn't mean criticisms of the BBC are all invalid. But it is interesting to take a step back and reflect on how the BBC is regarded outside the social media bubble when you look at actual viewer behaviour.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 7,831
    edited September 23

    IanB2 said:

    Second!

    FPT

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The sub-heading says it all:

    He thought making it upriver would fulfil his dream – instead it’s turned into a cruel form of humiliation

    Although I liked the description of Cummings as Johnson’s emotional support psycho
    Today, British people were invited to enjoy the spectacle of Johnson shutting pubs – for an hour – and the irony of being hectored that they are “in the last chance saloon” by the very people who herded them back to the saloon and bought them half-price lunches there.
    YET AGAIN

    Boris has NOT shut the pubs FOR AN HOUR.

    Pubs haven't closed at 11pm for a generation – the law was changed 15 years ago.

    FIFTEEN YEARS AGO.

    Why is the fiction endlessly repeated on PB and elsewhere?
    Most pubs still shut at 11, and some pubs were shutting later than 11 even before the law changes. Its a much higher proportion after 11 now than before, but 11 is still the default.
    I would speculate that it isn't the pubs that shut at 11pm that are the biggest covid problem.

    It is the town centre clubs and bars that remain open until 2am and beyond.

    So this is targeting the right establishments.

    Pub crawls are clearly problematic (from a virus spreading point of view), if there was a way of limiting people to one or two hospitality venues per day that would be a big help. Not sure how it could effectively be done though.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 43,212
    Starmer going on Testing & Tracing......and Johnson's volte face on the importance of it to the spread of the epidemic....
  • 16.75million tuned in to Boris 's address to the nation last night

    Interesting viewing figures

    BBC1 9.14
    ITV 3.51
    C4 2.80
    BBC News 0.82
    Sky 0.48

    Sky's figures are going to upset Boulton and Burley and Rigby and others

    The BBC's figures are going to upset a lot of people in the government!

    I prefer the BBC to Sky at times
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,588

    DavidL said:

    Hungary, here we come ...

    https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2020/09/23/ronan-cormacain-the-united-kingdom-internal-market-bill-and-breach-of-domestic-law/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    It's quite simple: if you value democracy and the rule of law, you cannot supprt the Internal Market Bill.

    What if you value democracy and the rule of law domestically but think that international law is more shall we say guidelines?

    Read the article, Phil. The bill does away with the rule of law domestically as it puts the government above the law.

    As does the Human Rights Act. The Human Rights Act puts itself above other laws blanketly and doesn't specifically repeal or disapply those laws it does so sweepingly. This Bill is just as important and follows the same precedent.

    No, this legislation gives the government unlimited power to do as it wishes with no recourse to law. The Human Rights Act does not do that. Application of the Human Rights Act is subject to judicial scrutiny. The Internal Market Bill specifically rules judicial scrutiny out.

    Unlimited power? Are you for real? It is a bill regulating the internal transfer of goods within the UK, that's it. The bill is a very bad idea in my opinion but please, a sense of proportion.

    Yes, unlimited power, David. All a minister need do is make an order under section 45 of the Act and it cannot be challenged - not even the decsion to invoke section 45 in the first place. That is unlimited power as it puts the minister above the rule of law.
    Have you read it? The provisions of clause 45 provide that nothing in a variety of sources, including the WA, will override orders made under clauses 42 and 43. Clause 42 is the untrammelled power to, err, remove export declarations on goods going to NI. Clause 43 is the power to make provisions for State Aid in NI even if these contradict the agreement in article 10 of the WA.

    It is far from clear that the ouster provisions will work but they may stop JR based on the earlier provisions or the WA. Such provisions are always read very restrictively by the courts. This is unlimited power to do next to nothing.
  • Actually Boris much better today and Starmer struggling
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 29,904

    IanB2 said:

    Second!

    FPT

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The sub-heading says it all:

    He thought making it upriver would fulfil his dream – instead it’s turned into a cruel form of humiliation

    Although I liked the description of Cummings as Johnson’s emotional support psycho
    Today, British people were invited to enjoy the spectacle of Johnson shutting pubs – for an hour – and the irony of being hectored that they are “in the last chance saloon” by the very people who herded them back to the saloon and bought them half-price lunches there.
    YET AGAIN

    Boris has NOT shut the pubs FOR AN HOUR.

    Pubs haven't closed at 11pm for a generation – the law was changed 15 years ago.

    FIFTEEN YEARS AGO.

    Why is the fiction endlessly repeated on PB and elsewhere?
    Most pubs still shut at 11, and some pubs were shutting later than 11 even before the law changes. Its a much higher proportion after 11 now than before, but 11 is still the default.
    I would speculate that it isn't the pubs that shut at 11pm that are the biggest covid problem.

    It is the town centre clubs and bars that remain open until 2am and beyond.

    So this is targeting the right establishments.

    Pub crawls are clearly problematic (from a virus spreading point of view), if there was a way of limiting people to one or two hospitality venues per day that would be a big help. Not sure how it could effectively be done though.
    Those people who got carried away in the 70s and installed a bar corner in their lounge must laughing at last.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 18,842
    My daughter’s place has a licence until 2 am. And yes people do stay that late. It’s a sociable place the only place for the 4 villages it serves where people can meet - for a chat, quiz nights, announcing the winner of the leek-growing competition, meetings of the local historical and other societies, the village hall meetings, music events etc etc.

    There are four distinct groups who go there in an evening: the early drinkers, those who go there for a meal and a drink, the 2-3 post-meal pints and the late-nighters. The effect of shutting at 10 will be either to lose the trade from the last group or they will come earlier and the pub will need to prioritise between them using a table or eaters, unless it is still warm enough to sit outside. What it won’t do is stop that drinking because the likelihood will be that they will drink at home. And good luck to anyone trying to police whether they’re in a group of 6 or not. So the effect on virus spreading is likely to be marginal.

    The effect on the hospitality sector is not going to be marginal, however, especially on top of all the other lost trade.

    If Sunak does not come up with a support package, the hospitality sector will be crucified long before the 6 months is up.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 2,547
    edited September 23

    Actually Boris much better today and Starmer struggling

    Are we watching the same PMQs? Maybe I am watching a previously recorded one?
  • 16.75million tuned in to Boris 's address to the nation last night

    Interesting viewing figures

    BBC1 9.14
    ITV 3.51
    C4 2.80
    BBC News 0.82
    Sky 0.48

    Sky's figures are going to upset Boulton and Burley and Rigby and others

    It has always been the case that, for big national events, people turn to the Beeb.

    The defund the BBC, scrap the licence fee Twitter warriors don't particularly like it. But it remains the reality.

    It doesn't mean there's no role for others - there clearly is - and doesn't mean criticisms of the BBC are all invalid. But it is interesting to take a step back and reflect on how the BBC is regarded outside the social media bubble when you look at actual viewer behaviour.
    It also shows the limits of a potential "independent quality news provider to usurp the BBC" (that just happens to seem likely to be very right wing). Everyone has free access to Sky news, it's a big newsy event, Sky gets half a million viewers. Any new network isn't just going to struggle to pay its way, it's going to struggle to get enough eyeballs to work as a vanity project or pulpit.
  • Scott_xP said:
    I dont understand how they can come to six days, the police would have to be involved and blocking access to new traffic well before then. It probably just weakens the point that it will be grid lock and chaos as those Brexiteers with their head in their sands will see it as just project fear. Six days is project fear hyperbole, yet grid lock and chaos is very likely. Good job lots of Kentish folk will be able to work from home as they arent to be getting around the county easily next year.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Hungary, here we come ...

    https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2020/09/23/ronan-cormacain-the-united-kingdom-internal-market-bill-and-breach-of-domestic-law/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    It's quite simple: if you value democracy and the rule of law, you cannot supprt the Internal Market Bill.

    What if you value democracy and the rule of law domestically but think that international law is more shall we say guidelines?

    Read the article, Phil. The bill does away with the rule of law domestically as it puts the government above the law.

    As does the Human Rights Act. The Human Rights Act puts itself above other laws blanketly and doesn't specifically repeal or disapply those laws it does so sweepingly. This Bill is just as important and follows the same precedent.

    No, this legislation gives the government unlimited power to do as it wishes with no recourse to law. The Human Rights Act does not do that. Application of the Human Rights Act is subject to judicial scrutiny. The Internal Market Bill specifically rules judicial scrutiny out.

    Unlimited power? Are you for real? It is a bill regulating the internal transfer of goods within the UK, that's it. The bill is a very bad idea in my opinion but please, a sense of proportion.

    Yes, unlimited power, David. All a minister need do is make an order under section 45 of the Act and it cannot be challenged - not even the decsion to invoke section 45 in the first place. That is unlimited power as it puts the minister above the rule of law.
    Have you read it? The provisions of clause 45 provide that nothing in a variety of sources, including the WA, will override orders made under clauses 42 and 43. Clause 42 is the untrammelled power to, err, remove export declarations on goods going to NI. Clause 43 is the power to make provisions for State Aid in NI even if these contradict the agreement in article 10 of the WA.

    It is far from clear that the ouster provisions will work but they may stop JR based on the earlier provisions or the WA. Such provisions are always read very restrictively by the courts. This is unlimited power to do next to nothing.

    The whole point of S.45 is that the courts are removed from the equation. That puts the government above the rule of law. Once that happens, the government can act in any way it wishes.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 29,904

    Scott_xP said:
    Yet another in the series of occasional reminders of why Johnson will be plumbing new records in polling lows by Spring.
    At least people know he remained faithful to his new young financee during her pregnancy and after the birth of his child. That is something.
  • MaxPB said:

    Quick run down on the PMI figures.

    France - back under 50, this was expected France is definitely going to double dip, probably a big one too.
    Germany - still over 50, strength mainly in manufacturing but the German economy is driven by its manufacturing sector so that's a good thing.
    UK - still over 50, but I'm not sure how reliable the composite is going to be as a GDP predictor, I would be surprised if September gave us anything like the 2-3% growth that the figured point to but it should still be growth.

    Europe in general is probably heading for a double dip recession all because countries didn't get together and decide on who should and shouldn't be let into Europe over the summer. Portugal still let in Brazilians without quarantine, the UK had a terrible self-certifed quarantine, France had basically nothing, Spain had basically nothing and these four countries have seeded a new crisis across the whole continent.

    The inability to restrict travel is just unfathomable. You can't track and trace if you are letting in loads of people without knowing if they have it when they arrice and their movements beforehand and it too late after they have spent 2 weeks wandering around potentially infecting people.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 29,904
    murali_s said:

    Actually Boris much better today and Starmer struggling

    Are we watching the same PMQs? Maybe I am watching a previously recorded one?
    I don't remember seeing that one?
  • 16.75million tuned in to Boris 's address to the nation last night

    Interesting viewing figures

    BBC1 9.14
    ITV 3.51
    C4 2.80
    BBC News 0.82
    Sky 0.48

    Sky's figures are going to upset Boulton and Burley and Rigby and others

    Those figures are absolutely massive overall for a PM speech. We're getting into Dirty Den and Angie Christmas special numbers.
    We're absolutely not getting to those levels! That edition of Eastenders had over 30 million viewers - almost twice those total numbers.

    You're not making a totally unreasonable point, but no need to exaggerate to quite that degree. This is at the level of Gavin & Stacey Xmas Special last year - so clearly important and relevant to viewers, but not close to the "nation glued to the set" level.
  • DeClareDeClare Posts: 419

    16.75million tuned in to Boris 's address to the nation last night

    Interesting viewing figures

    BBC1 9.14
    ITV 3.51
    C4 2.80
    BBC News 0.82
    Sky 0.48

    Sky's figures are going to upset Boulton and Burley and Rigby and others

    It has always been the case that, for big national events, people turn to the Beeb.

    The defund the BBC, scrap the licence fee Twitter warriors don't particularly like it. But it remains the reality.

    It doesn't mean there's no role for others - there clearly is - and doesn't mean criticisms of the BBC are all invalid. But it is interesting to take a step back and reflect on how the BBC is regarded outside the social media bubble when you look at actual viewer behaviour.
    This is true. I remember when the FA Cup final was a big deal back in the 1970s half the nation would watch it on TV even people who never watched any other football.

    The match used to kick off at 3pm on a Saturday afternoon and both BBC1 and ITV used to screen it simultaneously, only BBC2 offered an alternative usually an old black and white film.

    It was found that 80% of viewers who watched the game watched it on the BBC, since that was discovered simultaneous broadcasting has become very rare.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 35,061
    "Keep the faith" sounds like a Cummings' three word slogan for the next election.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,941
    RobD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    kinabalu said:

    On topic -

    Trump has drifted a little - around 2.3 now - but based on all of the evidence at our disposal I cannot for the life of me price him at shorter than 3.5. If the polls in early Oct - after the 1st debate on the 29th Sep - have not tightened significantly I expect the Trump price to collapse. I think it might happen quite dramatically when it does. Rather like a market crash as the penny drops with lots of people at about the same time.

    What's keeping me off the spreads is the possibility of serious interference with the polls - false rumours, discarded postal votes, ridiculous queues, etc. That will still be a worry even if Biden is leading by 6 on pollig day.
    I think that works in both directions though. Aside from the possibility that Trump has put together a brilliantly orchestrated conspiracy, involving all kinds of organizations he doesn't control, there's the possibility that he's gone and told his own electorate, consisting mainly of the elderly, not to vote by post, and there's a huge pandemic, so once they see a queue they're going to give up and go home. Meanwhile the Dems have got half their vote out by post already, their polling stations aren't too busy, and their GOTV has already mostly GOTVed, so they can concentrate on the people who are left.

    This could make quite wacky things happen in the House and Senate and statewide races as well.
    Against that, more Dem ballots WILL be chucked than GOP (Simply due to the higher mail in rates). But yes mail in does lead to a higher propensity, as the US has abysmally long queues.
    They dramatically overengineer their elections, the time honoured British simplicity of a pencil, paper and spare village hall is vastly superior to the US voting machines.
    Except that US ballots have many, many questions on them.
    Counting them all by hand would take forever - hence machines. (Ditto filling them all in by hand at polling stations.)
    Simple. Have ballot papers for the presidency, house and senate separate from all the local offices and count the those first. The UK does it with simultaneous general and local elections.
    The UK is quite slow at counting ballot papers. Bringing them to one central place once the polling stations have closed and then everything counted in large batches costs quite a lot of time.

    A friend of mine volunteers at a polling station in Berlin. Once the polling station closes. The ballot papers are counted there straight away. After one hour both the first (FPTP) and the second (PR) votes have been counted and checked and phoned through to the central office, these days the info is sent electronically. Almost all the results are known and publishe within 2 hours, with just a few close constituencies needing a recount or waiting for the arrival of non-local votes (e.g. military personell).
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 20,333
    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Yet another in the series of occasional reminders of why Johnson will be plumbing new records in polling lows by Spring.
    At least people know he remained faithful to his new young financee during her pregnancy and after the birth of his child. That is something.
    We're sure about that? Just asking.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 29,904
    Cyclefree said:

    My daughter’s place has a licence until 2 am. And yes people do stay that late. It’s a sociable place the only place for the 4 villages it serves where people can meet - for a chat, quiz nights, announcing the winner of the leek-growing competition, meetings of the local historical and other societies, the village hall meetings, music events etc etc.

    There are four distinct groups who go there in an evening: the early drinkers, those who go there for a meal and a drink, the 2-3 post-meal pints and the late-nighters. The effect of shutting at 10 will be either to lose the trade from the last group or they will come earlier and the pub will need to prioritise between them using a table or eaters, unless it is still warm enough to sit outside. What it won’t do is stop that drinking because the likelihood will be that they will drink at home. And good luck to anyone trying to police whether they’re in a group of 6 or not. So the effect on virus spreading is likely to be marginal.

    The effect on the hospitality sector is not going to be marginal, however, especially on top of all the other lost trade.

    If Sunak does not come up with a support package, the hospitality sector will be crucified long before the 6 months is up.

    My brother's is the same. And the late drinkers bring in a lot of profit, at the cost of some very late nights for him.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 5,777
    edited September 23

    IanB2 said:

    Second!

    FPT

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The sub-heading says it all:

    He thought making it upriver would fulfil his dream – instead it’s turned into a cruel form of humiliation

    Although I liked the description of Cummings as Johnson’s emotional support psycho
    Today, British people were invited to enjoy the spectacle of Johnson shutting pubs – for an hour – and the irony of being hectored that they are “in the last chance saloon” by the very people who herded them back to the saloon and bought them half-price lunches there.
    YET AGAIN

    Boris has NOT shut the pubs FOR AN HOUR.

    Pubs haven't closed at 11pm for a generation – the law was changed 15 years ago.

    FIFTEEN YEARS AGO.

    Why is the fiction endlessly repeated on PB and elsewhere?
    Most pubs still shut at 11, and some pubs were shutting later than 11 even before the law changes. Its a much higher proportion after 11 now than before, but 11 is still the default.
    I would speculate that it isn't the pubs that shut at 11pm that are the biggest covid problem.

    It is the town centre clubs and bars that remain open until 2am and beyond.

    So this is targeting the right establishments.

    Agreed! Hence why I on balance support the measure –– and that this nonsense that "Boris has closed the pubs for an hour" is exactly that –– nonsense!

    Edit: but @Cyclefree is 100% when she says it must be accompanied by state support for pubs/bars/hotels
  • The problem with Boris half measures, each time he has to come back and give another address to the nation the weaker the response.

    So in 3 weeks when he is back on saying well cases are still increasing too fast, now no mixing between households, gyms and cinemas closed etc, it has less gravitas.
  • kinabalu said:

    Hmmm...not holding out much hope for the reboot of spitting image if that is the trailer. Matt Lucas was funnier at the start of bake off.

    To be honest, I don't think the original has aged particularly well.
    I recall some classic bits but on the whole I never liked it that much. Same with this clip. Mostly missed the mark with me but with a couple of hits. Best for me being the sauna scene with "Boris", Trump and Putin. That made me laugh.
    TV comedy is a black hole for material at the best of times; it's hard to think of a sitcom (even a great one, written on a US writing team basis) that doesn't have quite a lot of filler.

    Add the constraint that you need to write a new show each week, and it has to be topical, and it's not surprising that there's quite a lot of dross in shows like Spitting Image.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 5,777

    IanB2 said:

    Second!

    FPT

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The sub-heading says it all:

    He thought making it upriver would fulfil his dream – instead it’s turned into a cruel form of humiliation

    Although I liked the description of Cummings as Johnson’s emotional support psycho
    Today, British people were invited to enjoy the spectacle of Johnson shutting pubs – for an hour – and the irony of being hectored that they are “in the last chance saloon” by the very people who herded them back to the saloon and bought them half-price lunches there.
    YET AGAIN

    Boris has NOT shut the pubs FOR AN HOUR.

    Pubs haven't closed at 11pm for a generation – the law was changed 15 years ago.

    FIFTEEN YEARS AGO.

    Why is the fiction endlessly repeated on PB and elsewhere?
    Most pubs still shut at 11, and some pubs were shutting later than 11 even before the law changes. Its a much higher proportion after 11 now than before, but 11 is still the default.
    Evidence required.

    Very few pubs in London close at 11pm

    IanB2 said:

    Second!

    FPT

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The sub-heading says it all:

    He thought making it upriver would fulfil his dream – instead it’s turned into a cruel form of humiliation

    Although I liked the description of Cummings as Johnson’s emotional support psycho
    Today, British people were invited to enjoy the spectacle of Johnson shutting pubs – for an hour – and the irony of being hectored that they are “in the last chance saloon” by the very people who herded them back to the saloon and bought them half-price lunches there.
    YET AGAIN

    Boris has NOT shut the pubs FOR AN HOUR.

    Pubs haven't closed at 11pm for a generation – the law was changed 15 years ago.

    FIFTEEN YEARS AGO.

    Why is the fiction endlessly repeated on PB and elsewhere?
    Most pubs still shut at 11, and some pubs were shutting later than 11 even before the law changes. Its a much higher proportion after 11 now than before, but 11 is still the default.
    Some pubs shut earlier than 11pm – my country pub fave closes at 10pm every night – yet thousands of pubs hold licences to 12am, 1am and in some cases beyond that, and have done so for a generation.

    This is particularly true in larger cities, where much of the revenue is generated later in the evening.

    The idea that "pubs close at 11pm" is a work of fiction.

    Thousands open much later than that.
    Not sure why my assertion "requires evidence" whereas yours "Very few pubs in London close at 11pm" is to be assumed accurate. Most pubs around me in central London close at 11 most days of the week.

    If they didnt there wouldnt be a need for articles like this https://londonist.com/london/drink/pubs-bars-drinking-late-night-after-midnight-london
    From your own article:

    While most of our great metropolis shuts down by midnight

    12am is a very common closing time.

    Agreed.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 29,904

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Yet another in the series of occasional reminders of why Johnson will be plumbing new records in polling lows by Spring.
    At least people know he remained faithful to his new young financee during her pregnancy and after the birth of his child. That is something.
    We're sure about that? Just asking.
    Shh.
  • IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Yet another in the series of occasional reminders of why Johnson will be plumbing new records in polling lows by Spring.
    At least people know he remained faithful to his new young financee during her pregnancy and after the birth of his child. That is something.
    We're sure about that? Just asking.
    Surely you're not arguing our PM is the sort of cad who would fiddle about with that sort of caper at such a time? I can't see it myself.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,941
    DeClare said:

    16.75million tuned in to Boris 's address to the nation last night

    Interesting viewing figures

    BBC1 9.14
    ITV 3.51
    C4 2.80
    BBC News 0.82
    Sky 0.48

    Sky's figures are going to upset Boulton and Burley and Rigby and others

    It has always been the case that, for big national events, people turn to the Beeb.

    The defund the BBC, scrap the licence fee Twitter warriors don't particularly like it. But it remains the reality.

    It doesn't mean there's no role for others - there clearly is - and doesn't mean criticisms of the BBC are all invalid. But it is interesting to take a step back and reflect on how the BBC is regarded outside the social media bubble when you look at actual viewer behaviour.
    This is true. I remember when the FA Cup final was a big deal back in the 1970s half the nation would watch it on TV even people who never watched any other football.

    The match used to kick off at 3pm on a Saturday afternoon and both BBC1 and ITV used to screen it simultaneously, only BBC2 offered an alternative usually an old black and white film.

    It was found that 80% of viewers who watched the game watched it on the BBC, since that was discovered simultaneous broadcasting has become very rare.
    It was because Motty was so much better than Brian Moore.
  • PMQs review from a relatively balanced POV please?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,588

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Hungary, here we come ...

    https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2020/09/23/ronan-cormacain-the-united-kingdom-internal-market-bill-and-breach-of-domestic-law/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    It's quite simple: if you value democracy and the rule of law, you cannot supprt the Internal Market Bill.

    What if you value democracy and the rule of law domestically but think that international law is more shall we say guidelines?

    Read the article, Phil. The bill does away with the rule of law domestically as it puts the government above the law.

    As does the Human Rights Act. The Human Rights Act puts itself above other laws blanketly and doesn't specifically repeal or disapply those laws it does so sweepingly. This Bill is just as important and follows the same precedent.

    No, this legislation gives the government unlimited power to do as it wishes with no recourse to law. The Human Rights Act does not do that. Application of the Human Rights Act is subject to judicial scrutiny. The Internal Market Bill specifically rules judicial scrutiny out.

    Unlimited power? Are you for real? It is a bill regulating the internal transfer of goods within the UK, that's it. The bill is a very bad idea in my opinion but please, a sense of proportion.

    Yes, unlimited power, David. All a minister need do is make an order under section 45 of the Act and it cannot be challenged - not even the decsion to invoke section 45 in the first place. That is unlimited power as it puts the minister above the rule of law.
    Have you read it? The provisions of clause 45 provide that nothing in a variety of sources, including the WA, will override orders made under clauses 42 and 43. Clause 42 is the untrammelled power to, err, remove export declarations on goods going to NI. Clause 43 is the power to make provisions for State Aid in NI even if these contradict the agreement in article 10 of the WA.

    It is far from clear that the ouster provisions will work but they may stop JR based on the earlier provisions or the WA. Such provisions are always read very restrictively by the courts. This is unlimited power to do next to nothing.

    The whole point of S.45 is that the courts are removed from the equation. That puts the government above the rule of law. Once that happens, the government can act in any way it wishes.
    No it can't. It can use the powers given to it by the legislation which are extremely limited. It cannot use the powers for any other purpose. If it purported to it could be judicially reviewed because it would not fall within the protections given by the section. This is really, really basic stuff.

    I agree that there is an issue of principle here. The provisions of clauses 42 and 43 give the Minister (or Parliament if this is amended) the power to breach an international agreement signed only a few months ago. We don't do that sort of thing, not because we can't but because it is wrong to do so and undermines the international order. But this is absolutely not a Henry VIII type clause allowing Ministers to amend things at will in whatever area they think fit. It just isn't.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Hungary, here we come ...

    https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2020/09/23/ronan-cormacain-the-united-kingdom-internal-market-bill-and-breach-of-domestic-law/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    It's quite simple: if you value democracy and the rule of law, you cannot supprt the Internal Market Bill.

    What if you value democracy and the rule of law domestically but think that international law is more shall we say guidelines?

    Read the article, Phil. The bill does away with the rule of law domestically as it puts the government above the law.

    As does the Human Rights Act. The Human Rights Act puts itself above other laws blanketly and doesn't specifically repeal or disapply those laws it does so sweepingly. This Bill is just as important and follows the same precedent.

    No, this legislation gives the government unlimited power to do as it wishes with no recourse to law. The Human Rights Act does not do that. Application of the Human Rights Act is subject to judicial scrutiny. The Internal Market Bill specifically rules judicial scrutiny out.

    Unlimited power? Are you for real? It is a bill regulating the internal transfer of goods within the UK, that's it. The bill is a very bad idea in my opinion but please, a sense of proportion.

    Yes, unlimited power, David. All a minister need do is make an order under section 45 of the Act and it cannot be challenged - not even the decsion to invoke section 45 in the first place. That is unlimited power as it puts the minister above the rule of law.
    Have you read it? The provisions of clause 45 provide that nothing in a variety of sources, including the WA, will override orders made under clauses 42 and 43. Clause 42 is the untrammelled power to, err, remove export declarations on goods going to NI. Clause 43 is the power to make provisions for State Aid in NI even if these contradict the agreement in article 10 of the WA.

    It is far from clear that the ouster provisions will work but they may stop JR based on the earlier provisions or the WA. Such provisions are always read very restrictively by the courts. This is unlimited power to do next to nothing.

    The whole point of S.45 is that the courts are removed from the equation. That puts the government above the rule of law. Once that happens, the government can act in any way it wishes.
    No it can't.

    Do you seriously think that under Clause 42 a Minister could eg pass an order to get Starmer arrested for opposing Boris and that Clause 45 means that the Courts can't say "no, that doesn't fall within Clause 42's powers"?
  • eristdoof said:

    DeClare said:

    16.75million tuned in to Boris 's address to the nation last night

    Interesting viewing figures

    BBC1 9.14
    ITV 3.51
    C4 2.80
    BBC News 0.82
    Sky 0.48

    Sky's figures are going to upset Boulton and Burley and Rigby and others

    It has always been the case that, for big national events, people turn to the Beeb.

    The defund the BBC, scrap the licence fee Twitter warriors don't particularly like it. But it remains the reality.

    It doesn't mean there's no role for others - there clearly is - and doesn't mean criticisms of the BBC are all invalid. But it is interesting to take a step back and reflect on how the BBC is regarded outside the social media bubble when you look at actual viewer behaviour.
    This is true. I remember when the FA Cup final was a big deal back in the 1970s half the nation would watch it on TV even people who never watched any other football.

    The match used to kick off at 3pm on a Saturday afternoon and both BBC1 and ITV used to screen it simultaneously, only BBC2 offered an alternative usually an old black and white film.

    It was found that 80% of viewers who watched the game watched it on the BBC, since that was discovered simultaneous broadcasting has become very rare.
    It was because Motty was so much better than Brian Moore.
    I know he's touted as some kind of national treasure, but personally I never rated John Motson.
  • DeClareDeClare Posts: 419

    Scott_xP said:
    Yet another in the series of occasional reminders of why Johnson will be plumbing new records in polling lows by Spring.
    If you read that story it says that is an absolute worst case scenario, which means there must also be a best case scenario, the outcome will probably be somewhere in between and the problems will be sorted out when people learn the new protocols and paperwork.

    I can't understand why anyone, knowing that there is a 50 mile tailback would even leave their depot.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 29,904

    PMQs review from a relatively balanced POV please?

    Critical: he was s**t
    Neutral: he was s**t
    Sympathetic: he is lulling SKS into a false sense of security
    Our PT: a knockout performance!
  • Boris - 'looking at a massive package of financial support '

    I expect Rishi to announce a German style job scheme and other support in the next few days
  • DeClare said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Yet another in the series of occasional reminders of why Johnson will be plumbing new records in polling lows by Spring.
    If you read that story it says that is an absolute worst case scenario, which means there must also be a best case scenario, the outcome will probably be somewhere in between and the problems will be sorted out when people learn the new protocols and paperwork.

    I can't understand why anyone, knowing that there is a 50 mile tailback would even leave their depot.
    Presumably because they need to get a thing to a place, because that's what is required for businesses to survive.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,941

    eristdoof said:

    DeClare said:

    16.75million tuned in to Boris 's address to the nation last night

    Interesting viewing figures

    BBC1 9.14
    ITV 3.51
    C4 2.80
    BBC News 0.82
    Sky 0.48

    Sky's figures are going to upset Boulton and Burley and Rigby and others

    It has always been the case that, for big national events, people turn to the Beeb.

    The defund the BBC, scrap the licence fee Twitter warriors don't particularly like it. But it remains the reality.

    It doesn't mean there's no role for others - there clearly is - and doesn't mean criticisms of the BBC are all invalid. But it is interesting to take a step back and reflect on how the BBC is regarded outside the social media bubble when you look at actual viewer behaviour.
    This is true. I remember when the FA Cup final was a big deal back in the 1970s half the nation would watch it on TV even people who never watched any other football.

    The match used to kick off at 3pm on a Saturday afternoon and both BBC1 and ITV used to screen it simultaneously, only BBC2 offered an alternative usually an old black and white film.

    It was found that 80% of viewers who watched the game watched it on the BBC, since that was discovered simultaneous broadcasting has become very rare.
    It was because Motty was so much better than Brian Moore.
    I know he's touted as some kind of national treasure, but personally I never rated John Motson.
    I only said that he was so much better than Moore. :-)

    Motty was good at covering the match, but did come out with lots of stupid side comments.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 43,212

    MaxPB said:

    Quick run down on the PMI figures.

    France - back under 50, this was expected France is definitely going to double dip, probably a big one too.
    Germany - still over 50, strength mainly in manufacturing but the German economy is driven by its manufacturing sector so that's a good thing.
    UK - still over 50, but I'm not sure how reliable the composite is going to be as a GDP predictor, I would be surprised if September gave us anything like the 2-3% growth that the figured point to but it should still be growth.

    Europe in general is probably heading for a double dip recession all because countries didn't get together and decide on who should and shouldn't be let into Europe over the summer. Portugal still let in Brazilians without quarantine, the UK had a terrible self-certifed quarantine, France had basically nothing, Spain had basically nothing and these four countries have seeded a new crisis across the whole continent.

    The inability to restrict travel is just unfathomable. You can't track and trace if you are letting in loads of people without knowing if they have it when they arrice and their movements beforehand and it too late after they have spent 2 weeks wandering around potentially infecting people.
    The only cases in Guernsey are from inbound travel - 5 in the last 4 months - all caught by quarantine/testing.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,588

    The problem with Boris half measures, each time he has to come back and give another address to the nation the weaker the response.

    So in 3 weeks when he is back on saying well cases are still increasing too fast, now no mixing between households, gyms and cinemas closed etc, it has less gravitas.

    I really don't see how you avoid this. We want to fine tune things with the minimum economic consequences. That inevitably means a bit of suck it and see.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 11,624
    edited September 23

    PMQs review from a relatively balanced POV please?

    First four? questions on testing, but I think Starmer has already extracted partisan tactical goodness out of that subject. Scored a hit with two questions on shutting furlough without considering what happens next in a resurgent epidemic. Johnson went into bluster mode indicating a problem for him. I think it would have been more effective for Starmer to have led on furlough from the off.

    Starmer win, but not quite so one sided as sometimes.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 18,842
    IanB2 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    My daughter’s place has a licence until 2 am. And yes people do stay that late. It’s a sociable place the only place for the 4 villages it serves where people can meet - for a chat, quiz nights, announcing the winner of the leek-growing competition, meetings of the local historical and other societies, the village hall meetings, music events etc etc.

    There are four distinct groups who go there in an evening: the early drinkers, those who go there for a meal and a drink, the 2-3 post-meal pints and the late-nighters. The effect of shutting at 10 will be either to lose the trade from the last group or they will come earlier and the pub will need to prioritise between them using a table or eaters, unless it is still warm enough to sit outside. What it won’t do is stop that drinking because the likelihood will be that they will drink at home. And good luck to anyone trying to police whether they’re in a group of 6 or not. So the effect on virus spreading is likely to be marginal.

    The effect on the hospitality sector is not going to be marginal, however, especially on top of all the other lost trade.

    If Sunak does not come up with a support package, the hospitality sector will be crucified long before the 6 months is up.

    My brother's is the same. And the late drinkers bring in a lot of profit, at the cost of some very late nights for him.
    Exactly. So if the government refuses support - on the basis that hospitality venues are still open - without realising that government measures mean that they have lost most of their business, they will kill the sector.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 29,904
    DeClare said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Yet another in the series of occasional reminders of why Johnson will be plumbing new records in polling lows by Spring.
    If you read that story it says that is an absolute worst case scenario, which means there must also be a best case scenario, the outcome will probably be somewhere in between and the problems will be sorted out when people learn the new protocols and paperwork.

    I can't understand why anyone, knowing that there is a 50 mile tailback would even leave their depot.
    There are still experts who suggest that UK businesses are so unprepared for the new paperwork and non tariff barriers to exporting that, actually, Dover will fall eerily quiet
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,588
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 43,212

    PMQs review from a relatively balanced POV please?

    Boris better than before. Starmer doing Mr Angry - but rather than trying to pin down Boris on data "what's the evidence for 10pm closing"? or "rule of 6" spent his time going over Boris changed positions - while I'm sure that plays to a longer term strategy, felt like a bit of a missed opportunity.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 35,061

    Boris - 'looking at a massive package of financial support '

    I expect Rishi to announce a German style job scheme and other support in the next few days

    Will Rishi also be the one to announce a German-style EU trade deal?
  • My judgment on PMQs is that Johnson seemed more steady than in recent weeks, so will be pleased with that, but it couldn't be classified as a "win" just an improvement.
  • That's awful, that's French levels of positive rate. Very worrying.

    Hope its a abberation and not a trend.
  • Boris - 'looking at a massive package of financial support '

    I expect Rishi to announce a German style job scheme and other support in the next few days

    Will Rishi also be the one to announce a German-style EU trade deal?
    I would be delighted
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 26,845

    My judgment on PMQs is that Johnson seemed more steady than in recent weeks, so will be pleased with that, but it couldn't be classified as a "win" just an improvement.

    Both poor (full disclosure, I gave up watching half way through as it was painful) - which is, I suppose, a relative improvement for Johnson.
  • DeClareDeClare Posts: 419

    IanB2 said:

    Second!

    FPT

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The sub-heading says it all:

    He thought making it upriver would fulfil his dream – instead it’s turned into a cruel form of humiliation

    Although I liked the description of Cummings as Johnson’s emotional support psycho
    Today, British people were invited to enjoy the spectacle of Johnson shutting pubs – for an hour – and the irony of being hectored that they are “in the last chance saloon” by the very people who herded them back to the saloon and bought them half-price lunches there.
    YET AGAIN

    Boris has NOT shut the pubs FOR AN HOUR.

    Pubs haven't closed at 11pm for a generation – the law was changed 15 years ago.

    FIFTEEN YEARS AGO.

    Why is the fiction endlessly repeated on PB and elsewhere?
    Most pubs still shut at 11, and some pubs were shutting later than 11 even before the law changes. Its a much higher proportion after 11 now than before, but 11 is still the default.
    I would speculate that it isn't the pubs that shut at 11pm that are the biggest covid problem.

    It is the town centre clubs and bars that remain open until 2am and beyond.

    So this is targeting the right establishments.

    Pub crawls are clearly problematic (from a virus spreading point of view), if there was a way of limiting people to one or two hospitality venues per day that would be a big help. Not sure how it could effectively be done though.
    I remember when pubs were only allowed to open between 11am and 3pm (12noon and 2pm on Sundays) and again from 5pm to 11pm (6-10.30pm Sundays) in some areas they used to close at 10.30pm (10pm Sundays) but they still managed to earn a living.

    People who want to go to pubs will have to learn to go earlier and come home earlier that's all.
  • DavidL said:

    The problem with Boris half measures, each time he has to come back and give another address to the nation the weaker the response.

    So in 3 weeks when he is back on saying well cases are still increasing too fast, now no mixing between households, gyms and cinemas closed etc, it has less gravitas.

    I really don't see how you avoid this. We want to fine tune things with the minimum economic consequences. That inevitably means a bit of suck it and see.
    I want(ed) to see a clear 6 month plan. Outline exactly what extra restrictions will come into place if cases exceed a certain amount (or another specific set of metrics based on data), rule out obvious things like ski holdiays, new year parties can't happen.

    Basically i wanted to see a proactive thought out plan of action for the next 6 months. Instead we will again get lots of reactive statements and restrictions.
  • Scott_xP said:
    I've posted and reposted and reposted exactly this - even the most efficient of customs checks will create vast tailbacks. All lies say the hard Brexiteers...
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 1,414

    That's awful, that's French levels of positive rate. Very worrying.

    Hope its a abberation and not a trend.
    The NATs will think its great
  • theakestheakes Posts: 490
    But latest ABC polls have Trump leading 51-47 in Florida and 49-48 in Arizona.
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 3,943
    My wife knows someone who works for the company that produces the"Boris boxes" for people who are shielding. Apparently they've been put on notice to be ready to start producing the boxes again.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 1,325
    Only if Starmer commits to another Scottish referendum. If the SNP win that, Starmer has done himself out of a job because the Tories have a majority again. Strange business.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 26,845
    IanB2 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    My daughter’s place has a licence until 2 am. And yes people do stay that late. It’s a sociable place the only place for the 4 villages it serves where people can meet - for a chat, quiz nights, announcing the winner of the leek-growing competition, meetings of the local historical and other societies, the village hall meetings, music events etc etc.

    There are four distinct groups who go there in an evening: the early drinkers, those who go there for a meal and a drink, the 2-3 post-meal pints and the late-nighters. The effect of shutting at 10 will be either to lose the trade from the last group or they will come earlier and the pub will need to prioritise between them using a table or eaters, unless it is still warm enough to sit outside. What it won’t do is stop that drinking because the likelihood will be that they will drink at home. And good luck to anyone trying to police whether they’re in a group of 6 or not. So the effect on virus spreading is likely to be marginal.

    The effect on the hospitality sector is not going to be marginal, however, especially on top of all the other lost trade.

    If Sunak does not come up with a support package, the hospitality sector will be crucified long before the 6 months is up.

    My brother's is the same. And the late drinkers bring in a lot of profit, at the cost of some very late nights for him.
    I've seen estimates that early closing will cost pubs around half their trade. Does that sound right ?
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 419
    edited September 23
    Ouch! Going to be a lot of missed cases again...

    Does the tracing programme release any data on where people testing positive are supposed to have caught the virus? It would be very interesting to know.
  • Considering the EU has a trade surplus with us it would be in their interests to start taking the trade talks seriously and give a clean, simple, Canada style trade deal then wouldn't it?

    But it takes two to tango, if they don't want to, we can't make them, so no deal it can be.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 2,733
    edited September 23

    More or Less on R4 very interesting listening on both the Whitty graph (the doubling rate was based on early September hospital admissions) and the “False Positive” misunderstanding. The “False Positive” numbers are roundings in the current numbers - the “FP rate” quoted is based on random testing, not testing of the symptomatic- so the numbers of “False Positives” among the true positives is trivial.

    To give a direct link and very quick summary:

    More or Less, from 9:00 to 15:30

    - The base rate (against a random population) isn’t 0.8% but can't really be higher than 0.04% from ONS surveys (if every single positive they got in July from their random survey was a false positive, it would suggest this rate)

    - False positive rates must be compared to the sample positivity (the ones being bandied around of "almost all are false positives!" are assuming a random sample with a 0.1% or lower true positivity rate and a 0.8% false positive rate. Both are incorrect), which is about 4.5% in the Pillar in question - so of every 450 true positives, we’d expect a maximum of 4 false positives as well. So 450 out of 454 results would be true positives.

    (Which number, interestingly, states that just over 0.8% (0.89% to be precise) of all the positives in that Pillar are false (991 out of a thousand positives are true positives; 9 are false positives). Which could be the source of the confusion, when mediated through a confused Cabinet Minister's brain)
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 18,842
    edited September 23

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Hungary, here we come ...

    https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2020/09/23/ronan-cormacain-the-united-kingdom-internal-market-bill-and-breach-of-domestic-law/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    It's quite simple: if you value democracy and the rule of law, you cannot supprt the Internal Market Bill.

    What if you value democracy and the rule of law domestically but think that international law is more shall we say guidelines?

    Read the article, Phil. The bill does away with the rule of law domestically as it puts the government above the law.

    As does the Human Rights Act. The Human Rights Act puts itself above other laws blanketly and doesn't specifically repeal or disapply those laws it does so sweepingly. This Bill is just as important and follows the same precedent.

    No, this legislation gives the government unlimited power to do as it wishes with no recourse to law. The Human Rights Act does not do that. Application of the Human Rights Act is subject to judicial scrutiny. The Internal Market Bill specifically rules judicial scrutiny out.

    Unlimited power? Are you for real? It is a bill regulating the internal transfer of goods within the UK, that's it. The bill is a very bad idea in my opinion but please, a sense of proportion.

    Yes, unlimited power, David. All a minister need do is make an order under section 45 of the Act and it cannot be challenged - not even the decsion to invoke section 45 in the first place. That is unlimited power as it puts the minister above the rule of law.
    Have you read it? The provisions of clause 45 provide that nothing in a variety of sources, including the WA, will override orders made under clauses 42 and 43. Clause 42 is the untrammelled power to, err, remove export declarations on goods going to NI. Clause 43 is the power to make provisions for State Aid in NI even if these contradict the agreement in article 10 of the WA.

    It is far from clear that the ouster provisions will work but they may stop JR based on the earlier provisions or the WA. Such provisions are always read very restrictively by the courts. This is unlimited power to do next to nothing.

    The whole point of S.45 is that the courts are removed from the equation. That puts the government above the rule of law. Once that happens, the government can act in any way it wishes.
    No it can't.

    Do you seriously think that under Clause 42 a Minister could eg pass an order to get Starmer arrested for opposing Boris and that Clause 45 means that the Courts can't say "no, that doesn't fall within Clause 42's powers"?
    The courts would certainly try to intervene on the basis that the government has gone beyond its powers but you are missing 2 key points I think:-

    1. The government is determined to remove any legal restraint on its actions. If it gets its way with this Bill, it will try to do this in other situations. That is why this Bill - in its current form - is so toxic and must be stopped.
    2. It could use the clause 45 powers for a clause 42 purpose but do so in such a way that breaches other provisions of domestic law eg on sex or race discrimination and clause 45 is an attempt to stop scrutiny of even this.

    How successful this will be is another matter. But in a sense the government wins no matter what: it either gets away with putting itself above the law - a very dangerous precedent - or it gets a fight with the courts and poses as the victim in a concocted fight between The Will of the People and The Law.

    A government with this sort of mindset and attitude is one that does not really believe in democracy and checks and balances in its bones and that is a very dangerous thing for our country and our political system.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 35,061
    tlg86 said:
    His views were somewhat misrepresented initially. He never advocated a laissez faire approach.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,588

    DavidL said:

    The problem with Boris half measures, each time he has to come back and give another address to the nation the weaker the response.

    So in 3 weeks when he is back on saying well cases are still increasing too fast, now no mixing between households, gyms and cinemas closed etc, it has less gravitas.

    I really don't see how you avoid this. We want to fine tune things with the minimum economic consequences. That inevitably means a bit of suck it and see.
    I want(ed) to see a clear 6 month plan. Outline exactly what extra restrictions will come into place if cases exceed a certain amount (or another specific set of metrics based on data), rule out obvious things like ski holdiays, new year parties can't happen.

    Basically i wanted to see a proactive thought out plan of action for the next 6 months. Instead we will again get lots of reactive statements and restrictions.
    But think that through. That means we stick with things shown not to have worked and don't do things that might work. I get the desire for certainty to allow people to plan but we live in an extremely uncertain situation.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 9,291
    edited September 23

    PMQs review from a relatively balanced POV please?

    OK.
    A test and trace too far from Starmer. Boris was prepared for it and batted it away without really scoring.
    Starmer's best bit was outlining how many if his relatives work for the NHS.
    A maiden over only beating the bat once.
    By contrast he was weaker on 2 topics. Football came up twice. Just platitudes. The government will have to act somehow. @TSE pointed out yesterday how many EFL clubs are in Tory or marginal seats.
    More importantly on furlough and other financial help.
    It became clear they are determined to end it, but haven't reached a consensus on what will replace it.
    So the PM resorted to waffle. He was vulnerable here. Nothing to say and Sir Keir missed the opportunity to really expose the fact by only using 2 of the 6 on it.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 35,061

    Considering the EU has a trade surplus with us it would be in their interests to start taking the trade talks seriously and give a clean, simple, Canada style trade deal then wouldn't it?

    But it takes two to tango, if they don't want to, we can't make them, so no deal it can be.
    Many of these issues apply even with an FTA.
  • My wife knows someone who works for the company that produces the"Boris boxes" for people who are shielding. Apparently they've been put on notice to be ready to start producing the boxes again.

    Again, as far as my elderly parents were concerned they would be free to go away over the winter and won't be shielding.

    I had to tell them it is extremely likely you won't be allowed to travel anywhere (nor should you) and that you will be asked to shield again for 3+ months.

    The PM should have been clear that vulnerable people need to prepare themselves for this. SAGE will have already discussed this and outlined at what level the handbrake needs to be pulled.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 11,317

    Considering the EU has a trade surplus with us it would be in their interests to start taking the trade talks seriously and give a clean, simple, Canada style trade deal then wouldn't it?

    But it takes two to tango, if they don't want to, we can't make them, so no deal it can be.
    We hold all the cards.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 11,317
    edited September 23
    I notice @Philip_Thompson that you have yet to provide any evidence that other countries are queuing up to copy our world-beating test and trace system. I’m still waiting.
  • Considering the EU has a trade surplus with us it would be in their interests to start taking the trade talks seriously and give a clean, simple, Canada style trade deal then wouldn't it?

    But it takes two to tango, if they don't want to, we can't make them, so no deal it can be.
    We hold all the cards.
    We do indeed. We can walk away and make a clean break quite confidently.
This discussion has been closed.