So today I have my first "face-to-face" lectures. I will be required to wear a mask the entire time and sit 2m away from my fellow students.
However if I chat to my fellow students outside the building afterwards I risk being thrown out of university, as we are required to follow not just the laws, but also the guidelines, that state no outdoor socialising with those outside my household.
Cool.
So don't chat afterwards then. What's the issue?
Because the new laws are fucking stupid. Its so dangerous for Gallowgate to stand and chat outdoors with the people he's spent hours in a room with that he faces a fine. My kids spend all day squashed together in a classroom but if they meet up in the park after school they're dangerous and illegal.
He said he had to sit 2 metres apart and with a mask so not exactly squashed together without restrictions?
My kids are squashed together. Their schools are designed to have students sat in clusters. That is contrary to the covid guidelines so tables and seats are now in rows which don't comfortably fit. Teachers have to squeeze round some desks. If those same kids gather in the park later? Dangerous and illegal.
And the NE? Can't meet anyone in your home. But can in the pub. Give over defending this Philip, even ministers have given it up as a bad job.
Actually in the NE you can't meet anyone in the pub either.
I don't defend everything but at least get the facts straight.
Incidentally for what its worth with schools they are operating a "bubble" principle. I've been offline more lately because with my kids back at school I've been able to get back to work more, but yesterday as I was heading out the door to take them to school I got a text saying that there has been a positive test in my youngest daughter's class so as a result the whole class have been told to stay at home. So my youngest daughter is back home with me today and I'm back at home, home schooling her again. Her sister is able to continue going to school unless any of us develop symptoms.
Britain has offered a three-year transition period for European fishing fleets to allow them to prepare for the post-Brexit changes as part of an 11th-hour deal sweetener.
Lol, an indefinite transition that will last forever.
But we hold all the cards, will Philip and HYUFD now resign from the Tory Party?
Eminently sensible and time dated
You do need to reduce your hyperbole
Not surprised to see you eating up the Government's words.
A three year transition is code for kick the can down the road.
I presume you opposed the backstop on the same grounds or is that Johnson is in charge so now transitions are a great idea?
It always seemed odd to me that the risks were ignored when the EOTHO policy was discussed.
"It will be tougher for many in Westminster to swallow than the subsidised food, but it increasingly looks as if the August Eat Out to Help Out scheme (EOTHO) was a costly economic and public health mistake.
Evidence now suggests that restaurants are important vectors in our current case uptick. More than that, the scheme has entrenched dining behaviours that threaten more transmission today. It is bizarre then that Rishi Sunak has avoided more critical scrutiny of the policy."
I'm a bit sceptical. It seems odd that more people say they ate out in the week before infection than went shopping, which I'd have thought would be a more-or-less universal activity. Collecting children from school seems quite high too, especially if schools had not reopened for part of this period and most of us do not have young children who need to be walked to school. So while the Chancellor might well be the Typhoid Mary of this government, I'd be looking for slightly more evidence (and maybe it is all there in the original research which I've not seen).
So today I have my first "face-to-face" lectures. I will be required to wear a mask the entire time and sit 2m away from my fellow students.
However if I chat to my fellow students outside the building afterwards I risk being thrown out of university, as we are required to follow not just the laws, but also the guidelines, that state no outdoor socialising with those outside my household.
Cool.
So don't chat afterwards then. What's the issue?
Because the new laws are fucking stupid. Its so dangerous for Gallowgate to stand and chat outdoors with the people he's spent hours in a room with that he faces a fine. My kids spend all day squashed together in a classroom but if they meet up in the park after school they're dangerous and illegal.
He said he had to sit 2 metres apart and with a mask so not exactly squashed together without restrictions?
My kids are squashed together. Their schools are designed to have students sat in clusters. That is contrary to the covid guidelines so tables and seats are now in rows which don't comfortably fit. Teachers have to squeeze round some desks. If those same kids gather in the park later? Dangerous and illegal.
And the NE? Can't meet anyone in your home. But can in the pub. Give over defending this Philip, even ministers have given it up as a bad job.
Actually in the NE you can't meet anyone in the pub either.
I don't defend everything but at least get the facts straight.
Incidentally for what its worth with schools they are operating a "bubble" principle. I've been offline more lately because with my kids back at school I've been able to get back to work more, but yesterday as I was heading out the door to take them to school I got a text saying that there has been a positive test in my youngest daughter's class so as a result the whole class have been told to stay at home. So my youngest daughter is back home with me today and I'm back at home, home schooling her again. Her sister is able to continue going to school unless any of us develop symptoms.
Ah, but we can meet other people in beer gardens, apparently. Not sure how that works, considering you have to go INTO the pub to get to the beer garden in many instances.
CNN had Clinton winning the first 2016 debate 62% to 27% so even with CNN Trump has done slightly better than he did in the first debate this time than he did in 2016.
Tickles me how few people realise the car industry as we know it is already dead, particularly the cross border supply chains for a technology that will be phased out completely in short order.
Yes, but where are the new car and battery plants being built ? Not here.
The new electric Jaguar XJ is going to be built in the UK. I mean, it'll be fucking garbage but it'll be built in the UK.
True, but not exactly mass market. A few years time, our car industry could easily be a fraction of its current size.
Really quite scary for the North East. I hope the government doesn’t underestimate how important the Sunderland factory is for the entire region.
Well, they were warned, but voted for Brexit anyway. I have limited sympathy.
Plenty of people in Sunderland and the wider North East voted to stay in the EU...
I know. Even in the most purple bits of Leaverstan about a third voted Remain.
But overall the region voted to Leave and then swing Blue to "Get Brexit Done". There is only so much you can do when people repeatedly vote for deliberate self harm.
I've tried to explain to @HYUFD before that leave voters in the NE believed the Leave campaign when they were told that suggestions that, amongst other things, Nissan would be negatively impacted by Brexit were lies and project fear. The fact is that leave voters voted for a better life, not simply "control of laws, money, fish" in the abstract.
His response was that basically it doesn't matter if the small factory in Labour voting Sunderland closed down because it's their own fault for voting Leave. Essentially exactly what you are saying.
He also, knowing nothing about the region whatsoever, seemed to think that workers in the Nissan factory and its supply chain only live in Labour voting constituencies. I hope the Government knows the facts in this regard.
Well, if they didn't know that the factory and its suppliers were at risk in 2016, then they certainly did by Dec 2019, yet swung by some of the biggest margins in the country to "Get Brexit Done" with an explicit policy of no Customs Union.
In the end, you have to allow people agency. They cared more for "Sovereignty" than they did for the Nissan factory.
Yes. Voting to leave the EU in 2016 was not a vote to leave the EEA and CU. But by 2019 the Tory manifesto was literal ruin for the factory and their area. If they voted Tory then thats their choice.
For what it is worth here is my opinion of last night:
I went to bed after 1 hour. I could not take it anymore. It was awful, but I couldn't decide who had won. Relieved to see the reviews this morning.
Chris Wallace: Appalling, but what could he do? At one point I thought he was about to get out of his seat and shout at Trump. I saw one review that compared it to being hit in the face by a frying pan for 90 min.
Biden: Whenever he actually got a word in edgeways it was bumbling. The one thing I did like was him looking in to the camera to make pleas to the audience at home. That worked well.
Trump: Just lied constantly and acted like a bully. No debating. And constantly dominating both the time and Biden/Wallace. I was concerned this might make him look strong and Biden weak, but that doesn't seem to be the view this morning, thankfully.
Trump might be better advised next time to STFU and let Biden ramble on until he loses his train of thought.
Britain has offered a three-year transition period for European fishing fleets to allow them to prepare for the post-Brexit changes as part of an 11th-hour deal sweetener.
Lol, an indefinite transition that will last forever.
But we hold all the cards, will Philip and HYUFD now resign from the Tory Party?
Eminently sensible and time dated
You do need to reduce your hyperbole
Not surprised to see you eating up the Government's words.
A three year transition is code for kick the can down the road.
I presume you opposed the backstop on the same grounds or is that Johnson is in charge so now transitions are a great idea?
Its not code for kick the can if there's a defined end point.
I have never opposed transitions with a defined end point.
It always seemed odd to me that the risks were ignored when the EOTHO policy was discussed.
"It will be tougher for many in Westminster to swallow than the subsidised food, but it increasingly looks as if the August Eat Out to Help Out scheme (EOTHO) was a costly economic and public health mistake.
Evidence now suggests that restaurants are important vectors in our current case uptick. More than that, the scheme has entrenched dining behaviours that threaten more transmission today. It is bizarre then that Rishi Sunak has avoided more critical scrutiny of the policy."
I'm a bit sceptical. It seems odd that more people say they ate out in the week before infection than went shopping, which I'd have thought would be a more-or-less universal activity. Collecting children from school seems quite high too, especially if schools had not reopened for part of this period and most of us do not have young children who need to be walked to school. So while the Chancellor might well be the Typhoid Mary of this government, I'd be looking for slightly more evidence (and maybe it is all there in the original research which I've not seen).
It's quite common for only one member of a family to go shopping - especially if the family is concerned about infection - and the other adult to stay with the children. Or the family may have food delivered and use the net for other shopping.
Britain has offered a three-year transition period for European fishing fleets to allow them to prepare for the post-Brexit changes as part of an 11th-hour deal sweetener.
Lol, an indefinite transition that will last forever.
But we hold all the cards, will Philip and HYUFD now resign from the Tory Party?
Eminently sensible and time dated
You do need to reduce your hyperbole
Not surprised to see you eating up the Government's words.
A three year transition is code for kick the can down the road.
I presume you opposed the backstop on the same grounds or is that Johnson is in charge so now transitions are a great idea?
You are all over the place
I am happy for concessions on either side to get a deal
And if a three year fishing transition is agreed and passes the European Parliament time to move on
Britain has offered a three-year transition period for European fishing fleets to allow them to prepare for the post-Brexit changes as part of an 11th-hour deal sweetener.
Lol, an indefinite transition that will last forever.
But we hold all the cards, will Philip and HYUFD now resign from the Tory Party?
Eminently sensible and time dated
You do need to reduce your hyperbole
Not surprised to see you eating up the Government's words.
A three year transition is code for kick the can down the road.
I presume you opposed the backstop on the same grounds or is that Johnson is in charge so now transitions are a great idea?
Its not code for kick the can if there's a defined end point.
I have never opposed transitions with a defined end point.
Three years is an awfully long time, it's absolutely kick the can down the road.
Tickles me how few people realise the car industry as we know it is already dead, particularly the cross border supply chains for a technology that will be phased out completely in short order.
Yes, but where are the new car and battery plants being built ? Not here.
The new electric Jaguar XJ is going to be built in the UK. I mean, it'll be fucking garbage but it'll be built in the UK.
True, but not exactly mass market. A few years time, our car industry could easily be a fraction of its current size.
Really quite scary for the North East. I hope the government doesn’t underestimate how important the Sunderland factory is for the entire region.
Well, they were warned, but voted for Brexit anyway. I have limited sympathy.
Plenty of people in Sunderland and the wider North East voted to stay in the EU...
I know. Even in the most purple bits of Leaverstan about a third voted Remain.
But overall the region voted to Leave and then swing Blue to "Get Brexit Done". There is only so much you can do when people repeatedly vote for deliberate self harm.
I've tried to explain to @HYUFD before that leave voters in the NE believed the Leave campaign when they were told that suggestions that, amongst other things, Nissan would be negatively impacted by Brexit were lies and project fear. The fact is that leave voters voted for a better life, not simply "control of laws, money, fish" in the abstract.
His response was that basically it doesn't matter if the small factory in Labour voting Sunderland closed down because it's their own fault for voting Leave. Essentially exactly what you are saying.
He also, knowing nothing about the region whatsoever, seemed to think that workers in the Nissan factory and its supply chain only live in Labour voting constituencies. I hope the Government knows the facts in this regard.
Voters in the North East voted Leave and then enough marginal seats in the North East and elsewhere in the country voted Tory on a manifesto of leaving the EU, reclaiming control of our own laws and reclaiming control of our fishing waters.
The Tory government will deliver that manifesto, end of conversation.
Even as you said Nissan is in Sunderland where every seat is still Labour so clearly Sunderland voted for Corbyn and will still vote for Starmer, if Starmer wins on a manifesto of rejoining the EEA next time or an EEA style deal fair enough, that is democracy and he will have a mandate for it. Until 2024 we have a Tory government with a majority of 80 that will deliver the platform it won on
A question Mr Essex. Do Nissan workers and workers at companies supplying Nissan live (a) exclusively in Sunderland Central or (b) across the North East.
For someone who know literally nothing about this area you can't seem to stop yourself pronouncing about it. As I have suggested previously why not get in your car, stick your blue rosette on and go knocking on doors to make statements like the above. I'll pre-book the ambulance for you.
Britain has offered a three-year transition period for European fishing fleets to allow them to prepare for the post-Brexit changes as part of an 11th-hour deal sweetener.
Lol, an indefinite transition that will last forever.
But we hold all the cards, will Philip and HYUFD now resign from the Tory Party?
Eminently sensible and time dated
You do need to reduce your hyperbole
Not surprised to see you eating up the Government's words.
A three year transition is code for kick the can down the road.
I presume you opposed the backstop on the same grounds or is that Johnson is in charge so now transitions are a great idea?
You are all over the place
I am happy for concessions on either side to get a deal
And if a three year fishing transition is agreed and passes the European Parliament time to move on
I see you're back to BoJo superfan status then, sad to see.
Tickles me how few people realise the car industry as we know it is already dead, particularly the cross border supply chains for a technology that will be phased out completely in short order.
Yes, but where are the new car and battery plants being built ? Not here.
The new electric Jaguar XJ is going to be built in the UK. I mean, it'll be fucking garbage but it'll be built in the UK.
True, but not exactly mass market. A few years time, our car industry could easily be a fraction of its current size.
Really quite scary for the North East. I hope the government doesn’t underestimate how important the Sunderland factory is for the entire region.
Well, they were warned, but voted for Brexit anyway. I have limited sympathy.
Plenty of people in Sunderland and the wider North East voted to stay in the EU...
I know. Even in the most purple bits of Leaverstan about a third voted Remain.
But overall the region voted to Leave and then swing Blue to "Get Brexit Done". There is only so much you can do when people repeatedly vote for deliberate self harm.
I've tried to explain to @HYUFD before that leave voters in the NE believed the Leave campaign when they were told that suggestions that, amongst other things, Nissan would be negatively impacted by Brexit were lies and project fear. The fact is that leave voters voted for a better life, not simply "control of laws, money, fish" in the abstract.
His response was that basically it doesn't matter if the small factory in Labour voting Sunderland closed down because it's their own fault for voting Leave. Essentially exactly what you are saying.
He also, knowing nothing about the region whatsoever, seemed to think that workers in the Nissan factory and its supply chain only live in Labour voting constituencies. I hope the Government knows the facts in this regard.
Well, if they didn't know that the factory and its suppliers were at risk in 2016, then they certainly did by Dec 2019, yet swung by some of the biggest margins in the country to "Get Brexit Done" with an explicit policy of no Customs Union.
In the end, you have to allow people agency. They cared more for "Sovereignty" than they did for the Nissan factory.
So what? They wanted to get Brexit done - of course they did. They were told is going to immeasurably improve their lives. They still believe that.
Abstract nonsense like "customs union" is neither here nor there.
They don't expect their lives to get worse. I don't think it's in the Tory's advantage to make their lives worse.
So today I have my first "face-to-face" lectures. I will be required to wear a mask the entire time and sit 2m away from my fellow students.
However if I chat to my fellow students outside the building afterwards I risk being thrown out of university, as we are required to follow not just the laws, but also the guidelines, that state no outdoor socialising with those outside my household.
Cool.
So don't chat afterwards then. What's the issue?
Because the new laws are fucking stupid. Its so dangerous for Gallowgate to stand and chat outdoors with the people he's spent hours in a room with that he faces a fine. My kids spend all day squashed together in a classroom but if they meet up in the park after school they're dangerous and illegal.
He said he had to sit 2 metres apart and with a mask so not exactly squashed together without restrictions?
My kids are squashed together. Their schools are designed to have students sat in clusters. That is contrary to the covid guidelines so tables and seats are now in rows which don't comfortably fit. Teachers have to squeeze round some desks. If those same kids gather in the park later? Dangerous and illegal.
And the NE? Can't meet anyone in your home. But can in the pub. Give over defending this Philip, even ministers have given it up as a bad job.
Actually in the NE you can't meet anyone in the pub either.
I don't defend everything but at least get the facts straight.
Incidentally for what its worth with schools they are operating a "bubble" principle. I've been offline more lately because with my kids back at school I've been able to get back to work more, but yesterday as I was heading out the door to take them to school I got a text saying that there has been a positive test in my youngest daughter's class so as a result the whole class have been told to stay at home. So my youngest daughter is back home with me today and I'm back at home, home schooling her again. Her sister is able to continue going to school unless any of us develop symptoms.
Ah, but we can meet other people in beer gardens, apparently. Not sure how that works, considering you have to go INTO the pub to get to the beer garden in many instances.
You're allowed in the pub but do not mingle while indoors. I'm not sure what's confusing about that?
You may not like it but its not confusing. Its like saying in normal times you can go to use the toilets but don't go into a cubicle if someone is already there. Inside stick to yourselves and away from others. Outside the rules are looser.
For what it is worth here is my opinion of last night:
I went to bed after 1 hour. I could not take it anymore. It was awful, but I couldn't decide who had won. Relieved to see the reviews this morning.
Chris Wallace: Appalling, but what could he do? At one point I thought he was about to get out of his seat and shout at Trump. I saw one review that compared it to being hit in the face by a frying pan for 90 min.
Biden: Whenever he actually got a word in edgeways it was bumbling. The one thing I did like was him looking in to the camera to make pleas to the audience at home. That worked well.
Trump: Just lied constantly and acted like a bully. No debating. And constantly dominating both the time and Biden/Wallace. I was concerned this might make him look strong and Biden weak, but that doesn't seem to be the view this morning, thankfully.
Trump might be better advised next time to STFU and let Biden ramble on until he loses his train of thought.
A number of Republican partisans said the same. I don’t think it would help him much - though the chances of his being able to contain himself like that for 90mins are slim to none.
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
Britain has offered a three-year transition period for European fishing fleets to allow them to prepare for the post-Brexit changes as part of an 11th-hour deal sweetener.
Lol, an indefinite transition that will last forever.
But we hold all the cards, will Philip and HYUFD now resign from the Tory Party?
Eminently sensible and time dated
You do need to reduce your hyperbole
Not surprised to see you eating up the Government's words.
A three year transition is code for kick the can down the road.
I presume you opposed the backstop on the same grounds or is that Johnson is in charge so now transitions are a great idea?
You are all over the place
I am happy for concessions on either side to get a deal
And if a three year fishing transition is agreed and passes the European Parliament time to move on
I see you're back to BoJo superfan status then, sad to see.
So today I have my first "face-to-face" lectures. I will be required to wear a mask the entire time and sit 2m away from my fellow students.
However if I chat to my fellow students outside the building afterwards I risk being thrown out of university, as we are required to follow not just the laws, but also the guidelines, that state no outdoor socialising with those outside my household.
Cool.
So don't chat afterwards then. What's the issue?
Because the new laws are fucking stupid. Its so dangerous for Gallowgate to stand and chat outdoors with the people he's spent hours in a room with that he faces a fine. My kids spend all day squashed together in a classroom but if they meet up in the park after school they're dangerous and illegal.
He said he had to sit 2 metres apart and with a mask so not exactly squashed together without restrictions?
My kids are squashed together. Their schools are designed to have students sat in clusters. That is contrary to the covid guidelines so tables and seats are now in rows which don't comfortably fit. Teachers have to squeeze round some desks. If those same kids gather in the park later? Dangerous and illegal.
And the NE? Can't meet anyone in your home. But can in the pub. Give over defending this Philip, even ministers have given it up as a bad job.
Actually in the NE you can't meet anyone in the pub either.
I don't defend everything but at least get the facts straight.
Incidentally for what its worth with schools they are operating a "bubble" principle. I've been offline more lately because with my kids back at school I've been able to get back to work more, but yesterday as I was heading out the door to take them to school I got a text saying that there has been a positive test in my youngest daughter's class so as a result the whole class have been told to stay at home. So my youngest daughter is back home with me today and I'm back at home, home schooling her again. Her sister is able to continue going to school unless any of us develop symptoms.
1. Yes you can. In the beer garden. What were you saying about facts? 2. With kids in 2 schools and a wife working in a 3rd I am well aware of the bubble principle. Answer the point I am making. It is illegal for students in said bubble to meet outside school despite spending all day squashed together - how does that make any sense at all?
Ladbrokes: 'China Virus' £30 @ 1.73 Lost £30 'Climate Change' £30@1.33 Lost £30 [that one's a surprise!] 'Law and Order' £30@1.44 Won £13 'Putin' £25@2.0 Won £25
SPIN: Sell 'China Virus' £5 @ 5: Won £25
Betfair Sports: 'Tax' £200@1.04 Won £8 Trump not to wear a mask £100@1.1 Won £10 [I think, not settled yet] Trum/Biden not to elbow-bump: £80@1.25 Won £20
Net Kerching!: £41 Contribution to Shadsy's Xmas bonus: £22
Britain has offered a three-year transition period for European fishing fleets to allow them to prepare for the post-Brexit changes as part of an 11th-hour deal sweetener.
Lol, an indefinite transition that will last forever.
But we hold all the cards, will Philip and HYUFD now resign from the Tory Party?
Eminently sensible and time dated
You do need to reduce your hyperbole
Not surprised to see you eating up the Government's words.
A three year transition is code for kick the can down the road.
I presume you opposed the backstop on the same grounds or is that Johnson is in charge so now transitions are a great idea?
Its not code for kick the can if there's a defined end point.
I have never opposed transitions with a defined end point.
Three years is an awfully long time, it's absolutely kick the can down the road.
Let Labour deal with it, eh Philip?
You keep missing the fact that there's a defined end point. Plus if its being phased in over three years then there would be changes over those three years. It isn't as you seem to be under the misapprehension about simply a status quo kicking of the can for three years. So the vast bulk of the changes would have already occured before the next election.
Britain has offered a three-year transition period for European fishing fleets to allow them to prepare for the post-Brexit changes as part of an 11th-hour deal sweetener.
Lol, an indefinite transition that will last forever.
But we hold all the cards, will Philip and HYUFD now resign from the Tory Party?
Eminently sensible and time dated
You do need to reduce your hyperbole
Not surprised to see you eating up the Government's words.
A three year transition is code for kick the can down the road.
I presume you opposed the backstop on the same grounds or is that Johnson is in charge so now transitions are a great idea?
You are all over the place
I am happy for concessions on either side to get a deal
And if a three year fishing transition is agreed and passes the European Parliament time to move on
I see you're back to BoJo superfan status then, sad to see.
I am not and this is more hyperbole from you
And from a Keir fanboy
At least I don't pretend to "lose confidence" in the Government every day before going back to them again the next.
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
No he is part of the community of people who think Donald Trump is marvellous. Not the community of fags, liberals and woke socialists. Proud Boys stand by...
So today I have my first "face-to-face" lectures. I will be required to wear a mask the entire time and sit 2m away from my fellow students.
However if I chat to my fellow students outside the building afterwards I risk being thrown out of university, as we are required to follow not just the laws, but also the guidelines, that state no outdoor socialising with those outside my household.
Cool.
So don't chat afterwards then. What's the issue?
Because the new laws are fucking stupid. Its so dangerous for Gallowgate to stand and chat outdoors with the people he's spent hours in a room with that he faces a fine. My kids spend all day squashed together in a classroom but if they meet up in the park after school they're dangerous and illegal.
He said he had to sit 2 metres apart and with a mask so not exactly squashed together without restrictions?
My kids are squashed together. Their schools are designed to have students sat in clusters. That is contrary to the covid guidelines so tables and seats are now in rows which don't comfortably fit. Teachers have to squeeze round some desks. If those same kids gather in the park later? Dangerous and illegal.
And the NE? Can't meet anyone in your home. But can in the pub. Give over defending this Philip, even ministers have given it up as a bad job.
Actually in the NE you can't meet anyone in the pub either.
I don't defend everything but at least get the facts straight.
Incidentally for what its worth with schools they are operating a "bubble" principle. I've been offline more lately because with my kids back at school I've been able to get back to work more, but yesterday as I was heading out the door to take them to school I got a text saying that there has been a positive test in my youngest daughter's class so as a result the whole class have been told to stay at home. So my youngest daughter is back home with me today and I'm back at home, home schooling her again. Her sister is able to continue going to school unless any of us develop symptoms.
1. Yes you can. In the beer garden. What were you saying about facts? 2. With kids in 2 schools and a wife working in a 3rd I am well aware of the bubble principle. Answer the point I am making. It is illegal for students in said bubble to meet outside school despite spending all day squashed together - how does that make any sense at all?
1. The beer garden is not in the pub, it is outside. 2. Because the idea is to have necessary interactions and not unnecessary ones. It is about managing and reducing risk not eliminating it.
Britain has offered a three-year transition period for European fishing fleets to allow them to prepare for the post-Brexit changes as part of an 11th-hour deal sweetener.
Lol, an indefinite transition that will last forever.
But we hold all the cards, will Philip and HYUFD now resign from the Tory Party?
Eminently sensible and time dated
You do need to reduce your hyperbole
Not surprised to see you eating up the Government's words.
A three year transition is code for kick the can down the road.
I presume you opposed the backstop on the same grounds or is that Johnson is in charge so now transitions are a great idea?
You are all over the place
I am happy for concessions on either side to get a deal
And if a three year fishing transition is agreed and passes the European Parliament time to move on
I see you're back to BoJo superfan status then, sad to see.
I am not and this is more hyperbole from you
And from a Keir fanboy
At least I don't pretend to "lose confidence" in the Government every day before going back to them again the next.
The boy who cried wolf comes to mind.
At least I know what I am.
One thing you need to learn is that everything HMG does is not wrong and credit applies where it is due
The fishing "concession" is a distraction, I think. What this proposal does, which looks significant, is to narrow the area of contention to governance. The EU has made it clear it will do what it takes to avoid being undercut by the UK, including going to No Deal if necessary. If it can't protect itself by getting the UK to commit to a EU rulebook, it will do so by applying sanctions on the UK whenever it perceives a breach.
A common rulebook protects the UK much better as you are protected as long as you follow the rules. The sanctions approach puts you at the whim of the counterparty. It's what you get when you decide to be a "sovereign equal" against a more powerful party. No Deal protects you even less.
CNN had Clinton winning the first 2016 debate 62% to 27% so even with CNN Trump has done slightly better than he did in the first debate this time than he did in 2016.
With 90% or so of the votes already decided it doesnt matter who won the debate with the general public, all that matters is who won with undecided swing voters.
Probably a draw, perhaps shading it to Biden on the angle that if fewer voters bother to take part after that shambles, it will be quicker and easier to count the votes accurately and speedily!
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
Of course. The IMB was a fanatastic instrument to bolster our negotiators and show the EU the cards that we hold if there isn't a deal. Now they're negotiating properly. Funny that!
I called it immediately that this would make a deal more likely when most here were losing their heads and considering it an act of bridge burning that made a deal impossible.
This is not a Catch 22 as Southam seems to believe. A deal will require the removal of the parts of the IMB that the EU dislike, a deal will make those parts superfluous, a deal will allow Johnson to remove them. Therefore the solution for everyone is to get a good deal. If there's not a good deal then we let the IMB stand and move on.
For what it is worth here is my opinion of last night:
I went to bed after 1 hour. I could not take it anymore. It was awful, but I couldn't decide who had won. Relieved to see the reviews this morning.
Chris Wallace: Appalling, but what could he do? At one point I thought he was about to get out of his seat and shout at Trump. I saw one review that compared it to being hit in the face by a frying pan for 90 min.
Biden: Whenever he actually got a word in edgeways it was bumbling. The one thing I did like was him looking in to the camera to make pleas to the audience at home. That worked well.
Trump: Just lied constantly and acted like a bully. No debating. And constantly dominating both the time and Biden/Wallace. I was concerned this might make him look strong and Biden weak, but that doesn't seem to be the view this morning, thankfully.
Trump might be better advised next time to STFU and let Biden ramble on until he loses his train of thought.
A number of Republican partisans said the same. I don’t think it would help him much - though the chances of his being able to contain himself like that for 90mins are slim to none.
Agree totally with DJL and you.
I wonder whether it is worth Biden cancelling the rest of the debates on the basis of what is the point; they aren't debates.
So today I have my first "face-to-face" lectures. I will be required to wear a mask the entire time and sit 2m away from my fellow students.
However if I chat to my fellow students outside the building afterwards I risk being thrown out of university, as we are required to follow not just the laws, but also the guidelines, that state no outdoor socialising with those outside my household.
Cool.
So don't chat afterwards then. What's the issue?
The issue is that it is fecking ridiculous and unnecessary. Outdoor socialising is massively less risky than indoors and if you are going to allow indoor mixing between households in offices, schools and universities then not allowing outdoor mixing makes absolutely no sense at all.
I have supported the Government for much of this pandemic and I take the whole thing very seriously. But the Government is turning the whole thing into a joke through utter ineptitude. If laws clearly don't make sense then they become counterproductive.
If mixing were being encouraged absolutely, though I may be wrong but I believe the guidance is that in the Northeast where Gallowgate is there isn't supposed to be either indoor or outdoor mixing?
Gallowgate said that inside they were required to wear a mask at all times and sit 2 metres away, so no indoor mixing from that.
And yet they are allowed to mix in classrooms, workplaces and universities. It is incoherent.
The govt is nudging us (we have had debates previously about whether a legal requirement is a nudge or not) and nudges work on us overall, not individually. What they should but for obvious reasons can't do - because it would negate the message - is say something along the lines of:
"Listen, our aim is to reduce the incidence of Covid while maintaining certain activities that we all value, such as the ability to socialise, and the maintenance of our children's and young people's education. However, this means that we must rein in other parts of the economy. Much of this won't make sense but please do try to adhere as much as possible to our laws and guidelines as you understand them because overall, it will make a huge difference".
Tickles me how few people realise the car industry as we know it is already dead, particularly the cross border supply chains for a technology that will be phased out completely in short order.
Yes, but where are the new car and battery plants being built ? Not here.
The new electric Jaguar XJ is going to be built in the UK. I mean, it'll be fucking garbage but it'll be built in the UK.
True, but not exactly mass market. A few years time, our car industry could easily be a fraction of its current size.
Really quite scary for the North East. I hope the government doesn’t underestimate how important the Sunderland factory is for the entire region.
Well, they were warned, but voted for Brexit anyway. I have limited sympathy.
Plenty of people in Sunderland and the wider North East voted to stay in the EU...
I know. Even in the most purple bits of Leaverstan about a third voted Remain.
But overall the region voted to Leave and then swing Blue to "Get Brexit Done". There is only so much you can do when people repeatedly vote for deliberate self harm.
I've tried to explain to @HYUFD before that leave voters in the NE believed the Leave campaign when they were told that suggestions that, amongst other things, Nissan would be negatively impacted by Brexit were lies and project fear. The fact is that leave voters voted for a better life, not simply "control of laws, money, fish" in the abstract.
His response was that basically it doesn't matter if the small factory in Labour voting Sunderland closed down because it's their own fault for voting Leave. Essentially exactly what you are saying.
He also, knowing nothing about the region whatsoever, seemed to think that workers in the Nissan factory and its supply chain only live in Labour voting constituencies. I hope the Government knows the facts in this regard.
Voters in the North East voted Leave and then enough marginal seats in the North East and elsewhere in the country voted Tory on a manifesto of leaving the EU, reclaiming control of our own laws and reclaiming control of our fishing waters.
The Tory government will deliver that manifesto, end of conversation.
Even as you said Nissan is in Sunderland where every seat is still Labour so clearly Sunderland voted for Corbyn and will still vote for Starmer, if Starmer wins on a manifesto of rejoining the EEA next time or an EEA style deal fair enough, that is democracy and he will have a mandate for it. Until 2024 we have a Tory government with a majority of 80 that will deliver the platform it won on
A question Mr Essex. Do Nissan workers and workers at companies supplying Nissan live (a) exclusively in Sunderland Central or (b) across the North East.
For someone who know literally nothing about this area you can't seem to stop yourself pronouncing about it. As I have suggested previously why not get in your car, stick your blue rosette on and go knocking on doors to make statements like the above. I'll pre-book the ambulance for you.
The majority of them live in Sunderland but regardless not enough of them who do live in Bishop Auckland or Blythe Valley etc voted Labour or LD as the Tories won those seats on an explicit manifesto commitment to live the EEA and Customs Union and with a Tory majority of 80 that will be delivered. End of conversation.
If Starmer wants to rejoin the EEA in 2024 that is up to him if he wins on a manifesto for that, until then the Tory manifesto will be delivered
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
The UK government negotiating the status of a piece of domestic UK legislation and agreeing to remove provisions the ERG has hailed as brilliant in order to secure a trade deal with the EU. I look forward to seeing how that may play out.
Tickles me how few people realise the car industry as we know it is already dead, particularly the cross border supply chains for a technology that will be phased out completely in short order.
Yes, but where are the new car and battery plants being built ? Not here.
The new electric Jaguar XJ is going to be built in the UK. I mean, it'll be fucking garbage but it'll be built in the UK.
True, but not exactly mass market. A few years time, our car industry could easily be a fraction of its current size.
Really quite scary for the North East. I hope the government doesn’t underestimate how important the Sunderland factory is for the entire region.
Well, they were warned, but voted for Brexit anyway. I have limited sympathy.
Plenty of people in Sunderland and the wider North East voted to stay in the EU...
I know. Even in the most purple bits of Leaverstan about a third voted Remain.
But overall the region voted to Leave and then swing Blue to "Get Brexit Done". There is only so much you can do when people repeatedly vote for deliberate self harm.
I've tried to explain to @HYUFD before that leave voters in the NE believed the Leave campaign when they were told that suggestions that, amongst other things, Nissan would be negatively impacted by Brexit were lies and project fear. The fact is that leave voters voted for a better life, not simply "control of laws, money, fish" in the abstract.
His response was that basically it doesn't matter if the small factory in Labour voting Sunderland closed down because it's their own fault for voting Leave. Essentially exactly what you are saying.
He also, knowing nothing about the region whatsoever, seemed to think that workers in the Nissan factory and its supply chain only live in Labour voting constituencies. I hope the Government knows the facts in this regard.
Voters in the North East voted Leave and then enough marginal seats in the North East and elsewhere in the country voted Tory on a manifesto of leaving the EU, reclaiming control of our own laws and reclaiming control of our fishing waters.
The Tory government will deliver that manifesto, end of conversation.
Even as you said Nissan is in Sunderland where every seat is still Labour so clearly Sunderland voted for Corbyn and will still vote for Starmer, if Starmer wins on a manifesto of rejoining the EEA next time or an EEA style deal fair enough, that is democracy and he will have a mandate for it. Until 2024 we have a Tory government with a majority of 80 that will deliver the platform it won on
A question Mr Essex. Do Nissan workers and workers at companies supplying Nissan live (a) exclusively in Sunderland Central or (b) across the North East.
For someone who know literally nothing about this area you can't seem to stop yourself pronouncing about it. As I have suggested previously why not get in your car, stick your blue rosette on and go knocking on doors to make statements like the above. I'll pre-book the ambulance for you.
The majority of them live in Sunderland but regardless not enough of them who do live in Bishop Auckland or Blythe Valley etc voted Labour or LD as the Tories won those seats on an explicit manifesto commitment to live the EEA and Customs Union and with a Tory majority of 80 that will be delivered. End of conversation.
If Starmer wants to rejoin the EEA in 2024 that is up to him if he wins on a manifesto for that, until then the Tory manifesto will be delivered
So you are happy that the Tory party are 100% responsible for the closure of the UK car industry...
Would you be so happy if I used your actual name and party position....
Tickles me how few people realise the car industry as we know it is already dead, particularly the cross border supply chains for a technology that will be phased out completely in short order.
Yes, but where are the new car and battery plants being built ? Not here.
The new electric Jaguar XJ is going to be built in the UK. I mean, it'll be fucking garbage but it'll be built in the UK.
True, but not exactly mass market. A few years time, our car industry could easily be a fraction of its current size.
Really quite scary for the North East. I hope the government doesn’t underestimate how important the Sunderland factory is for the entire region.
Well, they were warned, but voted for Brexit anyway. I have limited sympathy.
Plenty of people in Sunderland and the wider North East voted to stay in the EU...
I know. Even in the most purple bits of Leaverstan about a third voted Remain.
But overall the region voted to Leave and then swing Blue to "Get Brexit Done". There is only so much you can do when people repeatedly vote for deliberate self harm.
I've tried to explain to @HYUFD before that leave voters in the NE believed the Leave campaign when they were told that suggestions that, amongst other things, Nissan would be negatively impacted by Brexit were lies and project fear. The fact is that leave voters voted for a better life, not simply "control of laws, money, fish" in the abstract.
His response was that basically it doesn't matter if the small factory in Labour voting Sunderland closed down because it's their own fault for voting Leave. Essentially exactly what you are saying.
He also, knowing nothing about the region whatsoever, seemed to think that workers in the Nissan factory and its supply chain only live in Labour voting constituencies. I hope the Government knows the facts in this regard.
Voters in the North East voted Leave and then enough marginal seats in the North East and elsewhere in the country voted Tory on a manifesto of leaving the EU, reclaiming control of our own laws and reclaiming control of our fishing waters.
The Tory government will deliver that manifesto, end of conversation.
Even as you said Nissan is in Sunderland where every seat is still Labour so clearly Sunderland voted for Corbyn and will still vote for Starmer, if Starmer wins on a manifesto of rejoining the EEA next time or an EEA style deal fair enough, that is democracy and he will have a mandate for it. Until 2024 we have a Tory government with a majority of 80 that will deliver the platform it won on
A question Mr Essex. Do Nissan workers and workers at companies supplying Nissan live (a) exclusively in Sunderland Central or (b) across the North East.
For someone who know literally nothing about this area you can't seem to stop yourself pronouncing about it. As I have suggested previously why not get in your car, stick your blue rosette on and go knocking on doors to make statements like the above. I'll pre-book the ambulance for you.
The majority of them live in Sunderland but regardless not enough of them who do live in Bishop Auckland or Blythe Valley etc voted Labour or LD as the Tories won those seats on an explicit manifesto commitment to live the EEA and Customs Union and with a Tory majority of 80 that will be delivered. End of conversation.
If Starmer wants to rejoin the EEA in 2024 that is up to him if he wins on a manifesto for that, until then the Tory manifesto will be delivered
"The majority of them live in Sunderland" based on what, mate?
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
The UK government negotiating the status of a piece of domestic UK legislation and agreeing to remove provisions the ERG has hailed as brilliant in order to secure a trade deal with the EU. I look forward to seeing how that may play out.
Those provisions are only necessary if there is no deal. If there is a deal they become superflous so can be removed.
What was brilliant was it showed how comfortable we were with no deal, which makes a good deal more likely.
It was always the case that the better prepared you were for no deal then the better a deal you could get.
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
Of course. The IMB was a fanatastic instrument to bolster our negotiators and show the EU the cards that we hold if there isn't a deal. Now they're negotiating properly. Funny that!
I called it immediately that this would make a deal more likely when most here were losing their heads and considering it an act of bridge burning that made a deal impossible.
This is not a Catch 22 as Southam seems to believe. A deal will require the removal of the parts of the IMB that the EU dislike, a deal will make those parts superfluous, a deal will allow Johnson to remove them. Therefore the solution for everyone is to get a good deal. If there's not a good deal then we let the IMB stand and move on.
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
The UK government negotiating the status of a piece of domestic UK legislation and agreeing to remove provisions the ERG has hailed as brilliant in order to secure a trade deal with the EU. I look forward to seeing how that may play out.
We hold all the cars*.
(Apart from the engines and stuff that we have to import from the Ascension Islands, etc.)
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
Yep - the reality of the situation is about to be revealed - I suspect it's going to make the Tories position hideous as the consequences play out.
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
The UK government negotiating the status of a piece of domestic UK legislation and agreeing to remove provisions the ERG has hailed as brilliant in order to secure a trade deal with the EU. I look forward to seeing how that may play out.
Those provisions are only necessary if there is no deal. If there is a deal they become superflous so can be removed.
What was brilliant was it showed how comfortable we were with no deal, which makes a good deal more likely.
It was always the case that the better prepared you were for no deal then the better a deal you could get.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
This morning's news has shown that we were not prepared for no deal and hence we won't get no deal because we need a deal.
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
Of course. The IMB was a fanatastic instrument to bolster our negotiators and show the EU the cards that we hold if there isn't a deal. Now they're negotiating properly. Funny that!
I called it immediately that this would make a deal more likely when most here were losing their heads and considering it an act of bridge burning that made a deal impossible.
This is not a Catch 22 as Southam seems to believe. A deal will require the removal of the parts of the IMB that the EU dislike, a deal will make those parts superfluous, a deal will allow Johnson to remove them. Therefore the solution for everyone is to get a good deal. If there's not a good deal then we let the IMB stand and move on.
IMB has big costs even if there is a deal. The EU will tighten everything to the floor, when a lot of normal decision-making assumes a basis of trust.
Also the opposite - if there is No Deal IMB is guaranteed to stay - makes the No Deal environment even more difficult and toxic.
Britain has offered a three-year transition period for European fishing fleets to allow them to prepare for the post-Brexit changes as part of an 11th-hour deal sweetener.
Lol, an indefinite transition that will last forever.
But we hold all the cards, will Philip and HYUFD now resign from the Tory Party?
Eminently sensible and time dated
You do need to reduce your hyperbole
Not surprised to see you eating up the Government's words.
A three year transition is code for kick the can down the road.
I presume you opposed the backstop on the same grounds or is that Johnson is in charge so now transitions are a great idea?
Three year transition that's not a transition, you say?
So are we to expect a December 2023 "Brexit is still in peril" election, or a Spring 2024 "Brexit is a recent triumph" election?
I don't like the games Dom and Boris play, but sometimes they play them very well...
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
The UK government negotiating the status of a piece of domestic UK legislation and agreeing to remove provisions the ERG has hailed as brilliant in order to secure a trade deal with the EU. I look forward to seeing how that may play out.
Those provisions are only necessary if there is no deal. If there is a deal they become superflous so can be removed.
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
The UK government negotiating the status of a piece of domestic UK legislation and agreeing to remove provisions the ERG has hailed as brilliant in order to secure a trade deal with the EU. I look forward to seeing how that may play out.
Those provisions are only necessary if there is no deal. If there is a deal they become superflous so can be removed.
What was brilliant was it showed how comfortable we were with no deal, which makes a good deal more likely.
It was always the case that the better prepared you were for no deal then the better a deal you could get.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Sometimes, I guess, you just have to laugh.
There is no deal the UK government will do that you will regard as bad. Anything it comes back with you will regard as a triumph. But you are not a member of the ERG, who has just cheered the IMB through the lobbies. They may see things differently.
For what it is worth here is my opinion of last night:
I went to bed after 1 hour. I could not take it anymore. It was awful, but I couldn't decide who had won. Relieved to see the reviews this morning.
Chris Wallace: Appalling, but what could he do? At one point I thought he was about to get out of his seat and shout at Trump. I saw one review that compared it to being hit in the face by a frying pan for 90 min.
Biden: Whenever he actually got a word in edgeways it was bumbling. The one thing I did like was him looking in to the camera to make pleas to the audience at home. That worked well.
Trump: Just lied constantly and acted like a bully. No debating. And constantly dominating both the time and Biden/Wallace. I was concerned this might make him look strong and Biden weak, but that doesn't seem to be the view this morning, thankfully.
Trump might be better advised next time to STFU and let Biden ramble on until he loses his train of thought.
A number of Republican partisans said the same. I don’t think it would help him much - though the chances of his being able to contain himself like that for 90mins are slim to none.
Agree totally with DJL and you.
I wonder whether it is worth Biden cancelling the rest of the debates on the basis of what is the point; they aren't debates.
Biden’s not going to blink first. And anyway, I think he has to show up, if only to run down the clock.
CNN had Clinton winning the first 2016 debate 62% to 27% so even with CNN Trump has done slightly better than he did in the first debate this time than he did in 2016.
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
The UK government negotiating the status of a piece of domestic UK legislation and agreeing to remove provisions the ERG has hailed as brilliant in order to secure a trade deal with the EU. I look forward to seeing how that may play out.
Those provisions are only necessary if there is no deal. If there is a deal they become superflous so can be removed.
What was brilliant was it showed how comfortable we were with no deal, which makes a good deal more likely.
It was always the case that the better prepared you were for no deal then the better a deal you could get.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Sometimes, I guess, you just have to laugh.
There is no deal the UK government will do that you will regard as bad. Anything it comes back with you will regard as a triumph. But you are not a member of the ERG, who has just cheered the IMB through the lobbies. They may see things differently.
Are you kidding?
I vehemently opposed Theresa May's deal. I was one of the very few Tories here to oppose it at all 3 Meaningful Votes.
For what it is worth here is my opinion of last night:
I went to bed after 1 hour. I could not take it anymore. It was awful, but I couldn't decide who had won. Relieved to see the reviews this morning.
Chris Wallace: Appalling, but what could he do? At one point I thought he was about to get out of his seat and shout at Trump. I saw one review that compared it to being hit in the face by a frying pan for 90 min.
Biden: Whenever he actually got a word in edgeways it was bumbling. The one thing I did like was him looking in to the camera to make pleas to the audience at home. That worked well.
Trump: Just lied constantly and acted like a bully. No debating. And constantly dominating both the time and Biden/Wallace. I was concerned this might make him look strong and Biden weak, but that doesn't seem to be the view this morning, thankfully.
You probably saw the worst of it. Biden got better towards the end especially when talking about mail-in voting and the possibility of vote-rigging. Trump also made the mistake of going for Biden's sons which was a bad look. By that time, it was becoming increasingly obvious the constant interruption was a deliberate ploy and any positives he got from doing that were being lost by the sheer annoyance of it all.
I was puzzled at first by the drift in Trump's price after the event but I think I can understand it now. It was one of his last chances to land a killer blow. He didn't, so I guess to that extent Biden won.
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
The UK government negotiating the status of a piece of domestic UK legislation and agreeing to remove provisions the ERG has hailed as brilliant in order to secure a trade deal with the EU. I look forward to seeing how that may play out.
Those provisions are only necessary if there is no deal. If there is a deal they become superflous so can be removed.
What was brilliant was it showed how comfortable we were with no deal, which makes a good deal more likely.
It was always the case that the better prepared you were for no deal then the better a deal you could get.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Sometimes, I guess, you just have to laugh.
There is no deal the UK government will do that you will regard as bad. Anything it comes back with you will regard as a triumph. But you are not a member of the ERG, who has just cheered the IMB through the lobbies. They may see things differently.
Are you kidding?
I vehemently opposed Theresa May's deal. I was one of the very few Tories here to oppose it at all 3 Meaningful Votes.
You also vehemently supported Boris Johnson's deal and now you look like a fool.
So today I have my first "face-to-face" lectures. I will be required to wear a mask the entire time and sit 2m away from my fellow students.
However if I chat to my fellow students outside the building afterwards I risk being thrown out of university, as we are required to follow not just the laws, but also the guidelines, that state no outdoor socialising with those outside my household.
Cool.
So don't chat afterwards then. What's the issue?
Because the new laws are fucking stupid. Its so dangerous for Gallowgate to stand and chat outdoors with the people he's spent hours in a room with that he faces a fine. My kids spend all day squashed together in a classroom but if they meet up in the park after school they're dangerous and illegal.
He said he had to sit 2 metres apart and with a mask so not exactly squashed together without restrictions?
My kids are squashed together. Their schools are designed to have students sat in clusters. That is contrary to the covid guidelines so tables and seats are now in rows which don't comfortably fit. Teachers have to squeeze round some desks. If those same kids gather in the park later? Dangerous and illegal.
And the NE? Can't meet anyone in your home. But can in the pub. Give over defending this Philip, even ministers have given it up as a bad job.
Actually in the NE you can't meet anyone in the pub either.
I don't defend everything but at least get the facts straight.
Incidentally for what its worth with schools they are operating a "bubble" principle. I've been offline more lately because with my kids back at school I've been able to get back to work more, but yesterday as I was heading out the door to take them to school I got a text saying that there has been a positive test in my youngest daughter's class so as a result the whole class have been told to stay at home. So my youngest daughter is back home with me today and I'm back at home, home schooling her again. Her sister is able to continue going to school unless any of us develop symptoms.
1. Yes you can. In the beer garden. What were you saying about facts? 2. With kids in 2 schools and a wife working in a 3rd I am well aware of the bubble principle. Answer the point I am making. It is illegal for students in said bubble to meet outside school despite spending all day squashed together - how does that make any sense at all?
1. The beer garden is not in the pub, it is outside. 2. Because the idea is to have necessary interactions and not unnecessary ones. It is about managing and reducing risk not eliminating it.
Philip, I did ask you to stop dancing on pinheads. A pub beer garden is a pub. Its licensed premises.
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
The UK government negotiating the status of a piece of domestic UK legislation and agreeing to remove provisions the ERG has hailed as brilliant in order to secure a trade deal with the EU. I look forward to seeing how that may play out.
Those provisions are only necessary if there is no deal. If there is a deal they become superflous so can be removed.
What was brilliant was it showed how comfortable we were with no deal, which makes a good deal more likely.
It was always the case that the better prepared you were for no deal then the better a deal you could get.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Sometimes, I guess, you just have to laugh.
There is no deal the UK government will do that you will regard as bad. Anything it comes back with you will regard as a triumph. But you are not a member of the ERG, who has just cheered the IMB through the lobbies. They may see things differently.
Are you kidding?
I vehemently opposed Theresa May's deal. I was one of the very few Tories here to oppose it at all 3 Meaningful Votes.
You also vehemently supported Boris Johnson's deal and now you look like a fool.
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
The UK government negotiating the status of a piece of domestic UK legislation and agreeing to remove provisions the ERG has hailed as brilliant in order to secure a trade deal with the EU. I look forward to seeing how that may play out.
Those provisions are only necessary if there is no deal. If there is a deal they become superflous so can be removed.
What was brilliant was it showed how comfortable we were with no deal, which makes a good deal more likely.
It was always the case that the better prepared you were for no deal then the better a deal you could get.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Sometimes, I guess, you just have to laugh.
There is no deal the UK government will do that you will regard as bad. Anything it comes back with you will regard as a triumph. But you are not a member of the ERG, who has just cheered the IMB through the lobbies. They may see things differently.
Are you kidding?
I vehemently opposed Theresa May's deal. I was one of the very few Tories here to oppose it at all 3 Meaningful Votes.
You also vehemently supported Boris Johnson's deal and now you look like a fool.
So today I have my first "face-to-face" lectures. I will be required to wear a mask the entire time and sit 2m away from my fellow students.
However if I chat to my fellow students outside the building afterwards I risk being thrown out of university, as we are required to follow not just the laws, but also the guidelines, that state no outdoor socialising with those outside my household.
Cool.
So don't chat afterwards then. What's the issue?
Because the new laws are fucking stupid. Its so dangerous for Gallowgate to stand and chat outdoors with the people he's spent hours in a room with that he faces a fine. My kids spend all day squashed together in a classroom but if they meet up in the park after school they're dangerous and illegal.
He said he had to sit 2 metres apart and with a mask so not exactly squashed together without restrictions?
My kids are squashed together. Their schools are designed to have students sat in clusters. That is contrary to the covid guidelines so tables and seats are now in rows which don't comfortably fit. Teachers have to squeeze round some desks. If those same kids gather in the park later? Dangerous and illegal.
And the NE? Can't meet anyone in your home. But can in the pub. Give over defending this Philip, even ministers have given it up as a bad job.
Actually in the NE you can't meet anyone in the pub either.
I don't defend everything but at least get the facts straight.
Incidentally for what its worth with schools they are operating a "bubble" principle. I've been offline more lately because with my kids back at school I've been able to get back to work more, but yesterday as I was heading out the door to take them to school I got a text saying that there has been a positive test in my youngest daughter's class so as a result the whole class have been told to stay at home. So my youngest daughter is back home with me today and I'm back at home, home schooling her again. Her sister is able to continue going to school unless any of us develop symptoms.
1. Yes you can. In the beer garden. What were you saying about facts? 2. With kids in 2 schools and a wife working in a 3rd I am well aware of the bubble principle. Answer the point I am making. It is illegal for students in said bubble to meet outside school despite spending all day squashed together - how does that make any sense at all?
1. The beer garden is not in the pub, it is outside. 2. Because the idea is to have necessary interactions and not unnecessary ones. It is about managing and reducing risk not eliminating it.
Philip, I did ask you to stop dancing on pinheads. A pub beer garden is a pub. Its licensed premises.
A pub beer garden is not in the pub.
Where the virus spreads indoors much more than outdoors then the distinction absolutely matters and is not a pinhead. Outside is not inside.
Wondering what historians will call this nationalist, populist Trump/Boris era. Some kind of angry mid life crisis. A spasm of self loathing and self destruction.
Certainly self destruction. If Trump wins American democracy is over, at least at the federal level. We have seen nothing yet compared what he (and his sycophantic GOP fellow travellers) will do with four more years. Progressive leaning states will have to leave the union.
We could easily see near civil war frankly. Look at his comment for white supremacy militia to "stand by".
This feels like the most dangerous and politically important few weeks in my lifetime.
I think it may well be toast, whoever wins.
There has been decades of institutional decline. They have a huge mass of people who are beyond making decisions based on facts and evidence. I appreciate the robustness of the federal system, states' rights, and checks and balances, but they have been undermined for too long by legalised bribery, gerrymandering, and totalitarianism masquerading as religion.
President Biden is not going to turn that round. And Trump is not an outlier in the GOP. The next will be like him, but less moronic.
PS The UK is undergoing exactly the same process (albeit with Brexit and imperial nostalgia instead of Christianity).
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
The UK government negotiating the status of a piece of domestic UK legislation and agreeing to remove provisions the ERG has hailed as brilliant in order to secure a trade deal with the EU. I look forward to seeing how that may play out.
Those provisions are only necessary if there is no deal. If there is a deal they become superflous so can be removed.
What was brilliant was it showed how comfortable we were with no deal, which makes a good deal more likely.
It was always the case that the better prepared you were for no deal then the better a deal you could get.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Sometimes, I guess, you just have to laugh.
There is no deal the UK government will do that you will regard as bad. Anything it comes back with you will regard as a triumph. But you are not a member of the ERG, who has just cheered the IMB through the lobbies. They may see things differently.
Are you kidding?
I vehemently opposed Theresa May's deal. I was one of the very few Tories here to oppose it at all 3 Meaningful Votes.
May's deal was dreadful, but nonetheless infinitely better than anything Johnson has come up with.
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
The UK government negotiating the status of a piece of domestic UK legislation and agreeing to remove provisions the ERG has hailed as brilliant in order to secure a trade deal with the EU. I look forward to seeing how that may play out.
We hold all the cars*.
(Apart from the engines and stuff that we have to import from the Ascension Islands, etc.)
No no no. You see that Mini built in Oxford? Thats ENGLISH that is. You see that engine? Built in Birmingham. Yes it goes to krautland and back twice before being a finished English engine but no matter. And the bodyshell? Made in ENGLAND. OK from imported steel but no matter.
Next thing you will be telling me that the Hitachi factory which screws imported bits* into an imported bodyshell is going to be affected. Which is NONSENSE - its a 100% ENGLISH train because we make the seats.
Tickles me how few people realise the car industry as we know it is already dead, particularly the cross border supply chains for a technology that will be phased out completely in short order.
Yes, but where are the new car and battery plants being built ? Not here.
The new electric Jaguar XJ is going to be built in the UK. I mean, it'll be fucking garbage but it'll be built in the UK.
True, but not exactly mass market. A few years time, our car industry could easily be a fraction of its current size.
Really quite scary for the North East. I hope the government doesn’t underestimate how important the Sunderland factory is for the entire region.
Well, they were warned, but voted for Brexit anyway. I have limited sympathy.
Plenty of people in Sunderland and the wider North East voted to stay in the EU...
I know. Even in the most purple bits of Leaverstan about a third voted Remain.
But overall the region voted to Leave and then swing Blue to "Get Brexit Done". There is only so much you can do when people repeatedly vote for deliberate self harm.
I've tried to explain to @HYUFD before that leave voters in the NE believed the Leave campaign when they were told that suggestions that, amongst other things, Nissan would be negatively impacted by Brexit were lies and project fear. The fact is that leave voters voted for a better life, not simply "control of laws, money, fish" in the abstract.
His response was that basically it doesn't matter if the small factory in Labour voting Sunderland closed down because it's their own fault for voting Leave. Essentially exactly what you are saying.
He also, knowing nothing about the region whatsoever, seemed to think that workers in the Nissan factory and its supply chain only live in Labour voting constituencies. I hope the Government knows the facts in this regard.
Voters in the North East voted Leave and then enough marginal seats in the North East and elsewhere in the country voted Tory on a manifesto of leaving the EU, reclaiming control of our own laws and reclaiming control of our fishing waters.
The Tory government will deliver that manifesto, end of conversation.
Even as you said Nissan is in Sunderland where every seat is still Labour so clearly Sunderland voted for Corbyn and will still vote for Starmer, if Starmer wins on a manifesto of rejoining the EEA next time or an EEA style deal fair enough, that is democracy and he will have a mandate for it. Until 2024 we have a Tory government with a majority of 80 that will deliver the platform it won on
Funny how it's always regions (sic) that voted leave and Tory that matter when it comes to the importance of how they voted being respected.
Britain has offered a three-year transition period for European fishing fleets to allow them to prepare for the post-Brexit changes as part of an 11th-hour deal sweetener.
Lol, an indefinite transition that will last forever.
But we hold all the cards, will Philip and HYUFD now resign from the Tory Party?
Eminently sensible and time dated
You do need to reduce your hyperbole
Not surprised to see you eating up the Government's words.
A three year transition is code for kick the can down the road.
I presume you opposed the backstop on the same grounds or is that Johnson is in charge so now transitions are a great idea?
You are all over the place
I am happy for concessions on either side to get a deal
And if a three year fishing transition is agreed and passes the European Parliament time to move on
I see you're back to BoJo superfan status then, sad to see.
I am not and this is more hyperbole from you
And from a Keir fanboy
At least I don't pretend to "lose confidence" in the Government every day before going back to them again the next.
The boy who cried wolf comes to mind.
At least I know what I am.
One thing you need to learn is that everything HMG does is not wrong and credit applies where it is due
HMG has not done anything right since it was elected except for the first lockdown and the rule of 6
CNN had Clinton winning the first 2016 debate 62% to 27% so even with CNN Trump has done slightly better than he did in the first debate this time than he did in 2016.
Firstly, yes, Trump lost the first debate to Clinton in 2016 AND this was reflected in post-debate polls - she ticked up a couple of percentage points in the averages. Simply because she lost the election doesn't mean she lost every aspect of the campaign.
Secondly, if you look into the detail of the CNN poll in 2016, because more Democrats were watching than Republicans, only 26% of respondents identified as GOP compared with 41% Democrat and 33% independent. The CBS poll this time is much more (but not perfectly) balanced with 33%/39%/28%. Can't find the figures on Data for Progress.
My take on this is that both Trump and Biden are incredibly well known quantities on whom people have very settled views, and the post-debate polls reflect (surprise, surprise) the established divide. I don't think it'll shift the wider polls one bit. A slight proviso is that, because Trump set an incredibly low expectations bar for Biden for unfathomable reasons, and because Biden easily cleared that non-obstacle simply by remaining awake and upright, he might have won the expectations game.
Britain has offered a three-year transition period for European fishing fleets to allow them to prepare for the post-Brexit changes as part of an 11th-hour deal sweetener.
Lol, an indefinite transition that will last forever.
But we hold all the cards, will Philip and HYUFD now resign from the Tory Party?
Eminently sensible and time dated
You do need to reduce your hyperbole
Not surprised to see you eating up the Government's words.
A three year transition is code for kick the can down the road.
I presume you opposed the backstop on the same grounds or is that Johnson is in charge so now transitions are a great idea?
You are all over the place
I am happy for concessions on either side to get a deal
And if a three year fishing transition is agreed and passes the European Parliament time to move on
Any word from the fisher folk? Rejoicing on the streets of Fraserhead and Peterburgh at being able to play their part in breaking the deadlock?
Britain has offered a three-year transition period for European fishing fleets to allow them to prepare for the post-Brexit changes as part of an 11th-hour deal sweetener.
Lol, an indefinite transition that will last forever.
But we hold all the cards, will Philip and HYUFD now resign from the Tory Party?
Eminently sensible and time dated
You do need to reduce your hyperbole
Not surprised to see you eating up the Government's words.
A three year transition is code for kick the can down the road.
I presume you opposed the backstop on the same grounds or is that Johnson is in charge so now transitions are a great idea?
Three year transition that's not a transition, you say?
So are we to expect a December 2023 "Brexit is still in peril" election, or a Spring 2024 "Brexit is a recent triumph" election?
I don't like the games Dom and Boris play, but sometimes they play them very well...
So today I have my first "face-to-face" lectures. I will be required to wear a mask the entire time and sit 2m away from my fellow students.
However if I chat to my fellow students outside the building afterwards I risk being thrown out of university, as we are required to follow not just the laws, but also the guidelines, that state no outdoor socialising with those outside my household.
Cool.
So don't chat afterwards then. What's the issue?
Because the new laws are fucking stupid. Its so dangerous for Gallowgate to stand and chat outdoors with the people he's spent hours in a room with that he faces a fine. My kids spend all day squashed together in a classroom but if they meet up in the park after school they're dangerous and illegal.
He said he had to sit 2 metres apart and with a mask so not exactly squashed together without restrictions?
My kids are squashed together. Their schools are designed to have students sat in clusters. That is contrary to the covid guidelines so tables and seats are now in rows which don't comfortably fit. Teachers have to squeeze round some desks. If those same kids gather in the park later? Dangerous and illegal.
And the NE? Can't meet anyone in your home. But can in the pub. Give over defending this Philip, even ministers have given it up as a bad job.
Actually in the NE you can't meet anyone in the pub either.
I don't defend everything but at least get the facts straight.
Incidentally for what its worth with schools they are operating a "bubble" principle. I've been offline more lately because with my kids back at school I've been able to get back to work more, but yesterday as I was heading out the door to take them to school I got a text saying that there has been a positive test in my youngest daughter's class so as a result the whole class have been told to stay at home. So my youngest daughter is back home with me today and I'm back at home, home schooling her again. Her sister is able to continue going to school unless any of us develop symptoms.
1. Yes you can. In the beer garden. What were you saying about facts? 2. With kids in 2 schools and a wife working in a 3rd I am well aware of the bubble principle. Answer the point I am making. It is illegal for students in said bubble to meet outside school despite spending all day squashed together - how does that make any sense at all?
1. The beer garden is not in the pub, it is outside. 2. Because the idea is to have necessary interactions and not unnecessary ones. It is about managing and reducing risk not eliminating it.
Philip, I did ask you to stop dancing on pinheads. A pub beer garden is a pub. Its licensed premises.
A pub beer garden is not in the pub.
Where the virus spreads indoors much more than outdoors then the distinction absolutely matters and is not a pinhead. Outside is not inside.
Jesus Christ. A pub is not a pub. OK. You say outside is not inside - so why can't people meet their family outside? It is about managing and reducing risk so I hear. If the risk is managed and reduced outside in a fenced off pub garden then why is it not also managed and reduced outside in the fenced off house garden on the other side of the fence?
Incidentally. The pub beer garden that isn't a pub despite being a pub ? My local pub has the beer garden at the back so that you have to enter and exit the non-pub via the pub. I can sit in a managed and reduced manner in the non-pub at the back but have to illegally pass through the not managed and reduced pub to get to it.
A whole haystack full of pins you've got there mate. You're almost as ridiculous as HYUFD these days.
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
The UK government negotiating the status of a piece of domestic UK legislation and agreeing to remove provisions the ERG has hailed as brilliant in order to secure a trade deal with the EU. I look forward to seeing how that may play out.
Those provisions are only necessary if there is no deal. If there is a deal they become superflous so can be removed.
What was brilliant was it showed how comfortable we were with no deal, which makes a good deal more likely.
It was always the case that the better prepared you were for no deal then the better a deal you could get.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Sometimes, I guess, you just have to laugh.
There is no deal the UK government will do that you will regard as bad. Anything it comes back with you will regard as a triumph. But you are not a member of the ERG, who has just cheered the IMB through the lobbies. They may see things differently.
Are you kidding?
I vehemently opposed Theresa May's deal. I was one of the very few Tories here to oppose it at all 3 Meaningful Votes.
Theresa May is not Boris Johnson. I repeat, there is no deal the government can do that you will consider to be bad. You have already demonstrated this by lauding the brilliance of Boris Johnson in negotiating an agreement you now believe should be reneged upon.
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
A deal looks more likely now and of course negotiating the status of the IMB could be part of it
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
The UK government negotiating the status of a piece of domestic UK legislation and agreeing to remove provisions the ERG has hailed as brilliant in order to secure a trade deal with the EU. I look forward to seeing how that may play out.
Those provisions are only necessary if there is no deal. If there is a deal they become superflous so can be removed.
What was brilliant was it showed how comfortable we were with no deal, which makes a good deal more likely.
It was always the case that the better prepared you were for no deal then the better a deal you could get.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Sometimes, I guess, you just have to laugh.
There is no deal the UK government will do that you will regard as bad. Anything it comes back with you will regard as a triumph. But you are not a member of the ERG, who has just cheered the IMB through the lobbies. They may see things differently.
Are you kidding?
I vehemently opposed Theresa May's deal. I was one of the very few Tories here to oppose it at all 3 Meaningful Votes.
May's deal was dreadful, but nonetheless infinitely better than anything Johnson has come up with.
May's deal had bits in it that caused the EU problems as they hadn't fully comprehended it before signing it. Boris's deal has bits in it that cause us real problems as he hadn't read it before fighting an election on it.
So today I have my first "face-to-face" lectures. I will be required to wear a mask the entire time and sit 2m away from my fellow students.
However if I chat to my fellow students outside the building afterwards I risk being thrown out of university, as we are required to follow not just the laws, but also the guidelines, that state no outdoor socialising with those outside my household.
Cool.
So don't chat afterwards then. What's the issue?
Because the new laws are fucking stupid. Its so dangerous for Gallowgate to stand and chat outdoors with the people he's spent hours in a room with that he faces a fine. My kids spend all day squashed together in a classroom but if they meet up in the park after school they're dangerous and illegal.
He said he had to sit 2 metres apart and with a mask so not exactly squashed together without restrictions?
My kids are squashed together. Their schools are designed to have students sat in clusters. That is contrary to the covid guidelines so tables and seats are now in rows which don't comfortably fit. Teachers have to squeeze round some desks. If those same kids gather in the park later? Dangerous and illegal.
And the NE? Can't meet anyone in your home. But can in the pub. Give over defending this Philip, even ministers have given it up as a bad job.
Actually in the NE you can't meet anyone in the pub either.
I don't defend everything but at least get the facts straight.
Incidentally for what its worth with schools they are operating a "bubble" principle. I've been offline more lately because with my kids back at school I've been able to get back to work more, but yesterday as I was heading out the door to take them to school I got a text saying that there has been a positive test in my youngest daughter's class so as a result the whole class have been told to stay at home. So my youngest daughter is back home with me today and I'm back at home, home schooling her again. Her sister is able to continue going to school unless any of us develop symptoms.
1. Yes you can. In the beer garden. What were you saying about facts? 2. With kids in 2 schools and a wife working in a 3rd I am well aware of the bubble principle. Answer the point I am making. It is illegal for students in said bubble to meet outside school despite spending all day squashed together - how does that make any sense at all?
1. The beer garden is not in the pub, it is outside. 2. Because the idea is to have necessary interactions and not unnecessary ones. It is about managing and reducing risk not eliminating it.
Philip, I did ask you to stop dancing on pinheads. A pub beer garden is a pub. Its licensed premises.
A pub beer garden is not in the pub.
Where the virus spreads indoors much more than outdoors then the distinction absolutely matters and is not a pinhead. Outside is not inside.
Jesus Christ. A pub is not a pub. OK. You say outside is not inside - so why can't people meet their family outside? It is about managing and reducing risk so I hear. If the risk is managed and reduced outside in a fenced off pub garden then why is it not also managed and reduced outside in the fenced off house garden on the other side of the fence?
Incidentally. The pub beer garden that isn't a pub despite being a pub ? My local pub has the beer garden at the back so that you have to enter and exit the non-pub via the pub. I can sit in a managed and reduced manner in the non-pub at the back but have to illegally pass through the not managed and reduced pub to get to it.
A whole haystack full of pins you've got there mate. You're almost as ridiculous as HYUFD these days.
You're being ridiculous. I never said a pub is not a pub, I said outside is not inside. It isn't!
Unless you live in the Northeast you are entitled to have upto six people mingling in your home garden. If you are in the North East you're not supposed to mingle with other households whether in the beer garden or your home garden.
Passing through the pub without mingling with others is not illegal. You're mistaken if you think it is and are getting upset because your facts are just wrong.
So today I have my first "face-to-face" lectures. I will be required to wear a mask the entire time and sit 2m away from my fellow students.
However if I chat to my fellow students outside the building afterwards I risk being thrown out of university, as we are required to follow not just the laws, but also the guidelines, that state no outdoor socialising with those outside my household.
Cool.
So don't chat afterwards then. What's the issue?
Because the new laws are fucking stupid. Its so dangerous for Gallowgate to stand and chat outdoors with the people he's spent hours in a room with that he faces a fine. My kids spend all day squashed together in a classroom but if they meet up in the park after school they're dangerous and illegal.
He said he had to sit 2 metres apart and with a mask so not exactly squashed together without restrictions?
My kids are squashed together. Their schools are designed to have students sat in clusters. That is contrary to the covid guidelines so tables and seats are now in rows which don't comfortably fit. Teachers have to squeeze round some desks. If those same kids gather in the park later? Dangerous and illegal.
And the NE? Can't meet anyone in your home. But can in the pub. Give over defending this Philip, even ministers have given it up as a bad job.
Actually in the NE you can't meet anyone in the pub either.
I don't defend everything but at least get the facts straight.
Incidentally for what its worth with schools they are operating a "bubble" principle. I've been offline more lately because with my kids back at school I've been able to get back to work more, but yesterday as I was heading out the door to take them to school I got a text saying that there has been a positive test in my youngest daughter's class so as a result the whole class have been told to stay at home. So my youngest daughter is back home with me today and I'm back at home, home schooling her again. Her sister is able to continue going to school unless any of us develop symptoms.
1. Yes you can. In the beer garden. What were you saying about facts? 2. With kids in 2 schools and a wife working in a 3rd I am well aware of the bubble principle. Answer the point I am making. It is illegal for students in said bubble to meet outside school despite spending all day squashed together - how does that make any sense at all?
1. The beer garden is not in the pub, it is outside. 2. Because the idea is to have necessary interactions and not unnecessary ones. It is about managing and reducing risk not eliminating it.
Philip, I did ask you to stop dancing on pinheads. A pub beer garden is a pub. Its licensed premises.
A pub beer garden is not in the pub.
Where the virus spreads indoors much more than outdoors then the distinction absolutely matters and is not a pinhead. Outside is not inside.
If someone asks you on a sunny day "do you want to go to the pub?" Would you really answer "No, but I'll go to the beer garden" ???
Totally off topic, I'm just venting here cos it's preying on my mind.
Went to see my 91 year old grandmother last night. After falling and breaking her arm in June (the stubborn old dear refused to use her walking frame and suffered the consequences, bless her) she went into hospital. After a couple of weeks went into a home for respite care. Then had another fall trying to get herself out of bed - again being stubborn. Back into hospital. Then back into respite care. Because of constant quarantining she only saw one person, my mum, once in all that time.
She needs 24 hour care and should be in a home, and has been told that, but insisted on coming home. Which I can totally understand. So she's back at home now with my Grandad who's 92 and equally knackered - on oxygen 24/7 cos his lungs are buggered, he's had an ambulance out to him twice in the past week cos of feeling dizzy.
Both have fought tooth and nail against going into a home because they want to die in their own home. Which I can totally understand.
Both have visits from carers four times a day, but they're struggling to cope. The burden is falling on my 67 year old mum, who lives on the same street. She's starting to buckle. I'm doing what I can but in practical terms that isn't very much, other than the odd errand and being a sounding board for my mum.
Really difficult situation with no easy answers at all.
I just hope if I get to such an advanced state of decrepitude I have the option of taking a pill and gently slipping off into the great beyond. Yes I know euthanasia is a massively emotive subject, with legitimate arguments on both sides, but at the end of the day after seeing what I saw yesterday, you wouldn't put a dog through that. If I get to that age I might feel very different, but I would like to be able to have the choice to go with some dignity, on my own terms, rather than regressing to someone who needs the same intensity of care as a newborn baby, but still having all my mental faculties.
Sorry about that, just needed to get it off my chest.
For what it is worth here is my opinion of last night:
I went to bed after 1 hour. I could not take it anymore. It was awful, but I couldn't decide who had won. Relieved to see the reviews this morning.
Chris Wallace: Appalling, but what could he do? At one point I thought he was about to get out of his seat and shout at Trump. I saw one review that compared it to being hit in the face by a frying pan for 90 min.
Biden: Whenever he actually got a word in edgeways it was bumbling. The one thing I did like was him looking in to the camera to make pleas to the audience at home. That worked well.
Trump: Just lied constantly and acted like a bully. No debating. And constantly dominating both the time and Biden/Wallace. I was concerned this might make him look strong and Biden weak, but that doesn't seem to be the view this morning, thankfully.
You probably saw the worst of it. Biden got better towards the end especially when talking about mail-in voting and the possibility of vote-rigging. Trump also made the mistake of going for Biden's sons which was a bad look. By that time, it was becoming increasingly obvious the constant interruption was a deliberate ploy and any positives he got from doing that were being lost by the sheer annoyance of it all.
I was puzzled at first by the drift in Trump's price after the event but I think I can understand it now. It was one of his last chances to land a killer blow. He didn't, so I guess to that extent Biden won.
So today I have my first "face-to-face" lectures. I will be required to wear a mask the entire time and sit 2m away from my fellow students.
However if I chat to my fellow students outside the building afterwards I risk being thrown out of university, as we are required to follow not just the laws, but also the guidelines, that state no outdoor socialising with those outside my household.
Cool.
So don't chat afterwards then. What's the issue?
Because the new laws are fucking stupid. Its so dangerous for Gallowgate to stand and chat outdoors with the people he's spent hours in a room with that he faces a fine. My kids spend all day squashed together in a classroom but if they meet up in the park after school they're dangerous and illegal.
He said he had to sit 2 metres apart and with a mask so not exactly squashed together without restrictions?
My kids are squashed together. Their schools are designed to have students sat in clusters. That is contrary to the covid guidelines so tables and seats are now in rows which don't comfortably fit. Teachers have to squeeze round some desks. If those same kids gather in the park later? Dangerous and illegal.
And the NE? Can't meet anyone in your home. But can in the pub. Give over defending this Philip, even ministers have given it up as a bad job.
Actually in the NE you can't meet anyone in the pub either.
I don't defend everything but at least get the facts straight.
Incidentally for what its worth with schools they are operating a "bubble" principle. I've been offline more lately because with my kids back at school I've been able to get back to work more, but yesterday as I was heading out the door to take them to school I got a text saying that there has been a positive test in my youngest daughter's class so as a result the whole class have been told to stay at home. So my youngest daughter is back home with me today and I'm back at home, home schooling her again. Her sister is able to continue going to school unless any of us develop symptoms.
1. Yes you can. In the beer garden. What were you saying about facts? 2. With kids in 2 schools and a wife working in a 3rd I am well aware of the bubble principle. Answer the point I am making. It is illegal for students in said bubble to meet outside school despite spending all day squashed together - how does that make any sense at all?
1. The beer garden is not in the pub, it is outside. 2. Because the idea is to have necessary interactions and not unnecessary ones. It is about managing and reducing risk not eliminating it.
Philip, I did ask you to stop dancing on pinheads. A pub beer garden is a pub. Its licensed premises.
A pub beer garden is not in the pub.
Where the virus spreads indoors much more than outdoors then the distinction absolutely matters and is not a pinhead. Outside is not inside.
If someone asks you on a sunny day "do you want to go to the pub?" Would you really answer "No, but I'll go to the beer garden" ???
"To the pub" and "in the pub" are different.
"To" and "in" are different words. Sorry but they are.
So today I have my first "face-to-face" lectures. I will be required to wear a mask the entire time and sit 2m away from my fellow students.
However if I chat to my fellow students outside the building afterwards I risk being thrown out of university, as we are required to follow not just the laws, but also the guidelines, that state no outdoor socialising with those outside my household.
Cool.
So don't chat afterwards then. What's the issue?
Because the new laws are fucking stupid. Its so dangerous for Gallowgate to stand and chat outdoors with the people he's spent hours in a room with that he faces a fine. My kids spend all day squashed together in a classroom but if they meet up in the park after school they're dangerous and illegal.
He said he had to sit 2 metres apart and with a mask so not exactly squashed together without restrictions?
My kids are squashed together. Their schools are designed to have students sat in clusters. That is contrary to the covid guidelines so tables and seats are now in rows which don't comfortably fit. Teachers have to squeeze round some desks. If those same kids gather in the park later? Dangerous and illegal.
And the NE? Can't meet anyone in your home. But can in the pub. Give over defending this Philip, even ministers have given it up as a bad job.
Actually in the NE you can't meet anyone in the pub either.
I don't defend everything but at least get the facts straight.
Incidentally for what its worth with schools they are operating a "bubble" principle. I've been offline more lately because with my kids back at school I've been able to get back to work more, but yesterday as I was heading out the door to take them to school I got a text saying that there has been a positive test in my youngest daughter's class so as a result the whole class have been told to stay at home. So my youngest daughter is back home with me today and I'm back at home, home schooling her again. Her sister is able to continue going to school unless any of us develop symptoms.
1. Yes you can. In the beer garden. What were you saying about facts? 2. With kids in 2 schools and a wife working in a 3rd I am well aware of the bubble principle. Answer the point I am making. It is illegal for students in said bubble to meet outside school despite spending all day squashed together - how does that make any sense at all?
1. The beer garden is not in the pub, it is outside. 2. Because the idea is to have necessary interactions and not unnecessary ones. It is about managing and reducing risk not eliminating it.
Philip, I did ask you to stop dancing on pinheads. A pub beer garden is a pub. Its licensed premises.
A pub beer garden is not in the pub.
Where the virus spreads indoors much more than outdoors then the distinction absolutely matters and is not a pinhead. Outside is not inside.
Jesus Christ. A pub is not a pub. OK. You say outside is not inside - so why can't people meet their family outside? It is about managing and reducing risk so I hear. If the risk is managed and reduced outside in a fenced off pub garden then why is it not also managed and reduced outside in the fenced off house garden on the other side of the fence?
Incidentally. The pub beer garden that isn't a pub despite being a pub ? My local pub has the beer garden at the back so that you have to enter and exit the non-pub via the pub. I can sit in a managed and reduced manner in the non-pub at the back but have to illegally pass through the not managed and reduced pub to get to it.
A whole haystack full of pins you've got there mate. You're almost as ridiculous as HYUFD these days.
There's a pretty easy way to settle this argument: do the licensing laws apply in a pub garden?
Theresa May is not Boris Johnson. I repeat, there is no deal the government can do that you will consider to be bad. You have already demonstrated this by lauding the brilliance of Boris Johnson in negotiating an agreement you now believe should be reneged upon.
What I hadn't appreciated until today is that, as well as switching to a much worse position on the Northern Irish aspect, Boris also threw away another important concession that Theresa May had won:
"The commission has made clear that it will not agree third-country cumulation in any circumstances, which we regret, but obviously cannot insist upon," says Lord Frost's letter, written on 7 September.
Senior figures in the car industry expressed the view that the government could have chosen to insist on a deal that did contain such measures. But discussions on such subjects have been stalled by the impasse over fishing rights and subsidy powers.
The original Brexit deal negotiated by former PM Theresa May contained a route to minimise checks on what are known as "rules of origin".
That option was removed as part of the revision to the withdrawal agreement a year ago.
So today I have my first "face-to-face" lectures. I will be required to wear a mask the entire time and sit 2m away from my fellow students.
However if I chat to my fellow students outside the building afterwards I risk being thrown out of university, as we are required to follow not just the laws, but also the guidelines, that state no outdoor socialising with those outside my household.
Cool.
So don't chat afterwards then. What's the issue?
Because the new laws are fucking stupid. Its so dangerous for Gallowgate to stand and chat outdoors with the people he's spent hours in a room with that he faces a fine. My kids spend all day squashed together in a classroom but if they meet up in the park after school they're dangerous and illegal.
He said he had to sit 2 metres apart and with a mask so not exactly squashed together without restrictions?
My kids are squashed together. Their schools are designed to have students sat in clusters. That is contrary to the covid guidelines so tables and seats are now in rows which don't comfortably fit. Teachers have to squeeze round some desks. If those same kids gather in the park later? Dangerous and illegal.
And the NE? Can't meet anyone in your home. But can in the pub. Give over defending this Philip, even ministers have given it up as a bad job.
Actually in the NE you can't meet anyone in the pub either.
I don't defend everything but at least get the facts straight.
Incidentally for what its worth with schools they are operating a "bubble" principle. I've been offline more lately because with my kids back at school I've been able to get back to work more, but yesterday as I was heading out the door to take them to school I got a text saying that there has been a positive test in my youngest daughter's class so as a result the whole class have been told to stay at home. So my youngest daughter is back home with me today and I'm back at home, home schooling her again. Her sister is able to continue going to school unless any of us develop symptoms.
1. Yes you can. In the beer garden. What were you saying about facts? 2. With kids in 2 schools and a wife working in a 3rd I am well aware of the bubble principle. Answer the point I am making. It is illegal for students in said bubble to meet outside school despite spending all day squashed together - how does that make any sense at all?
1. The beer garden is not in the pub, it is outside. 2. Because the idea is to have necessary interactions and not unnecessary ones. It is about managing and reducing risk not eliminating it.
Philip, I did ask you to stop dancing on pinheads. A pub beer garden is a pub. Its licensed premises.
A pub beer garden is not in the pub.
Where the virus spreads indoors much more than outdoors then the distinction absolutely matters and is not a pinhead. Outside is not inside.
Jesus Christ. A pub is not a pub. OK. You say outside is not inside - so why can't people meet their family outside? It is about managing and reducing risk so I hear. If the risk is managed and reduced outside in a fenced off pub garden then why is it not also managed and reduced outside in the fenced off house garden on the other side of the fence?
Incidentally. The pub beer garden that isn't a pub despite being a pub ? My local pub has the beer garden at the back so that you have to enter and exit the non-pub via the pub. I can sit in a managed and reduced manner in the non-pub at the back but have to illegally pass through the not managed and reduced pub to get to it.
A whole haystack full of pins you've got there mate. You're almost as ridiculous as HYUFD these days.
There's a pretty easy way to settle this argument: do the licensing laws apply in a pub garden?
It depends upon the conditions of the licence. Typically no a pub selling on its property outside of the designated area will require a variation of its licence via a Temporary Events Notice or something else.
So today I have my first "face-to-face" lectures. I will be required to wear a mask the entire time and sit 2m away from my fellow students.
However if I chat to my fellow students outside the building afterwards I risk being thrown out of university, as we are required to follow not just the laws, but also the guidelines, that state no outdoor socialising with those outside my household.
Cool.
So don't chat afterwards then. What's the issue?
Because the new laws are fucking stupid. Its so dangerous for Gallowgate to stand and chat outdoors with the people he's spent hours in a room with that he faces a fine. My kids spend all day squashed together in a classroom but if they meet up in the park after school they're dangerous and illegal.
He said he had to sit 2 metres apart and with a mask so not exactly squashed together without restrictions?
My kids are squashed together. Their schools are designed to have students sat in clusters. That is contrary to the covid guidelines so tables and seats are now in rows which don't comfortably fit. Teachers have to squeeze round some desks. If those same kids gather in the park later? Dangerous and illegal.
And the NE? Can't meet anyone in your home. But can in the pub. Give over defending this Philip, even ministers have given it up as a bad job.
Actually in the NE you can't meet anyone in the pub either.
I don't defend everything but at least get the facts straight.
Incidentally for what its worth with schools they are operating a "bubble" principle. I've been offline more lately because with my kids back at school I've been able to get back to work more, but yesterday as I was heading out the door to take them to school I got a text saying that there has been a positive test in my youngest daughter's class so as a result the whole class have been told to stay at home. So my youngest daughter is back home with me today and I'm back at home, home schooling her again. Her sister is able to continue going to school unless any of us develop symptoms.
1. Yes you can. In the beer garden. What were you saying about facts? 2. With kids in 2 schools and a wife working in a 3rd I am well aware of the bubble principle. Answer the point I am making. It is illegal for students in said bubble to meet outside school despite spending all day squashed together - how does that make any sense at all?
1. The beer garden is not in the pub, it is outside. 2. Because the idea is to have necessary interactions and not unnecessary ones. It is about managing and reducing risk not eliminating it.
Philip, I did ask you to stop dancing on pinheads. A pub beer garden is a pub. Its licensed premises.
A pub beer garden is not in the pub.
Where the virus spreads indoors much more than outdoors then the distinction absolutely matters and is not a pinhead. Outside is not inside.
Jesus Christ. A pub is not a pub. OK. You say outside is not inside - so why can't people meet their family outside? It is about managing and reducing risk so I hear. If the risk is managed and reduced outside in a fenced off pub garden then why is it not also managed and reduced outside in the fenced off house garden on the other side of the fence?
Incidentally. The pub beer garden that isn't a pub despite being a pub ? My local pub has the beer garden at the back so that you have to enter and exit the non-pub via the pub. I can sit in a managed and reduced manner in the non-pub at the back but have to illegally pass through the not managed and reduced pub to get to it.
A whole haystack full of pins you've got there mate. You're almost as ridiculous as HYUFD these days.
You're being ridiculous. I never said a pub is not a pub, I said outside is not inside. It isn't!
Unless you live in the Northeast you are entitled to have upto six people mingling in your home garden. If you are in the North East you're not supposed to mingle with other households whether in the beer garden or your home garden.
Passing through the pub without mingling with others is not illegal. You're mistaken if you think it is and are getting upset because your facts are just wrong.
It’s actually against the law to mingle in your own garden, but merely against the “guidance” to mingle in a pub garden.
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
I think the EU generously agrees to let him keep the nicer half of Kent, he comes back with his victory and drops (or repeals as part of the ratification bill) those sections, and says their job is done because he forced the EU to negotiate. That works, doesn't it? A few of his MPs might bitch but most of them will be relieved to have got the thing out of the way, and he's already set the precedent that rebels get kicked out of the party.
It seems clear that is the plan although not sure it will work. The obvious question will be why didnt you get it done when it was oven ready? And Labour will be pledging to get it done faster and closer to the median voters desired outcome.
The rerun Brexit 2024 strategy might need a new front man as PM who throws Boris under the bus as incompetent.
For what it is worth here is my opinion of last night:
I went to bed after 1 hour. I could not take it anymore. It was awful, but I couldn't decide who had won. Relieved to see the reviews this morning.
Chris Wallace: Appalling, but what could he do? At one point I thought he was about to get out of his seat and shout at Trump. I saw one review that compared it to being hit in the face by a frying pan for 90 min.
Biden: Whenever he actually got a word in edgeways it was bumbling. The one thing I did like was him looking in to the camera to make pleas to the audience at home. That worked well.
Trump: Just lied constantly and acted like a bully. No debating. And constantly dominating both the time and Biden/Wallace. I was concerned this might make him look strong and Biden weak, but that doesn't seem to be the view this morning, thankfully.
You probably saw the worst of it. Biden got better towards the end especially when talking about mail-in voting and the possibility of vote-rigging. Trump also made the mistake of going for Biden's sons which was a bad look. By that time, it was becoming increasingly obvious the constant interruption was a deliberate ploy and any positives he got from doing that were being lost by the sheer annoyance of it all.
I was puzzled at first by the drift in Trump's price after the event but I think I can understand it now. It was one of his last chances to land a killer blow. He didn't, so I guess to that extent Biden won.
Biden should pull out of the other two.
Nothing to gain now.
No, it would look bad and he has little to fear now. Votes are being cast in great numbers and the risk diminishes by the day.
So today I have my first "face-to-face" lectures. I will be required to wear a mask the entire time and sit 2m away from my fellow students.
However if I chat to my fellow students outside the building afterwards I risk being thrown out of university, as we are required to follow not just the laws, but also the guidelines, that state no outdoor socialising with those outside my household.
Cool.
So don't chat afterwards then. What's the issue?
The issue is that it is fecking ridiculous and unnecessary. Outdoor socialising is massively less risky than indoors and if you are going to allow indoor mixing between households in offices, schools and universities then not allowing outdoor mixing makes absolutely no sense at all.
I have supported the Government for much of this pandemic and I take the whole thing very seriously. But the Government is turning the whole thing into a joke through utter ineptitude. If laws clearly don't make sense then they become counterproductive.
I support the broad strategy - which is suppression until vaccine next summer - but the government are making such a hash of it. There's a bizarre and counterproductive mix of complacency and panic developing and it's coming from the top. Let's (i) keep schools open as a priority, (ii) WFH if possible or otherwise in a workplace that is made as safe as practicable, and (iii) have a clear and simple set of logical guidelines for the public (backed to some extent by the law but not aggressively policed) for the whole country that will stay in place for the next six months. I know this is a challenge for Johnson & Co, I know it's not easy, but neither should it be beyond them.
Theresa May is not Boris Johnson. I repeat, there is no deal the government can do that you will consider to be bad. You have already demonstrated this by lauding the brilliance of Boris Johnson in negotiating an agreement you now believe should be reneged upon.
What I hadn't appreciated until today is that, as well as switching to a much worse position on the Northern Irish aspect, Boris also threw away another important concession that Theresa May had won:
"The commission has made clear that it will not agree third-country cumulation in any circumstances, which we regret, but obviously cannot insist upon," says Lord Frost's letter, written on 7 September.
Senior figures in the car industry expressed the view that the government could have chosen to insist on a deal that did contain such measures. But discussions on such subjects have been stalled by the impasse over fishing rights and subsidy powers.
The original Brexit deal negotiated by former PM Theresa May contained a route to minimise checks on what are known as "rules of origin".
That option was removed as part of the revision to the withdrawal agreement a year ago.
As has been pointed out - this significantly narrows the gap between "A deal" and "No Deal". Which may be what some of the "smarter" people involved in its removal may have wanted.
For what it is worth here is my opinion of last night:
I went to bed after 1 hour. I could not take it anymore. It was awful, but I couldn't decide who had won. Relieved to see the reviews this morning.
Chris Wallace: Appalling, but what could he do? At one point I thought he was about to get out of his seat and shout at Trump. I saw one review that compared it to being hit in the face by a frying pan for 90 min.
Biden: Whenever he actually got a word in edgeways it was bumbling. The one thing I did like was him looking in to the camera to make pleas to the audience at home. That worked well.
Trump: Just lied constantly and acted like a bully. No debating. And constantly dominating both the time and Biden/Wallace. I was concerned this might make him look strong and Biden weak, but that doesn't seem to be the view this morning, thankfully.
You probably saw the worst of it. Biden got better towards the end especially when talking about mail-in voting and the possibility of vote-rigging. Trump also made the mistake of going for Biden's sons which was a bad look. By that time, it was becoming increasingly obvious the constant interruption was a deliberate ploy and any positives he got from doing that were being lost by the sheer annoyance of it all.
I was puzzled at first by the drift in Trump's price after the event but I think I can understand it now. It was one of his last chances to land a killer blow. He didn't, so I guess to that extent Biden won.
Biden should pull out of the other two.
Nothing to gain now.
The debates are a risk with an upside if they go well. Pulling out is also a risk (never happened before, we don't know how the voters would see it, it would feed conspiracy theories about senility etc) but with no upside. I think he sticks with them and adapts. Also the moderators will be thinking harder about how to prevent Trump's DoS.
There can be no deal for as long as the Internal Market Bill contains sections 42-45 in their present form. For a deal to happen, those provisions will have to be removed or substantially amended. It is politically impossible for Johnson to do that. Everything else is just fluff.
I think the EU generously agrees to let him keep the nicer half of Kent, he comes back with his victory and drops (or repeals as part of the ratification bill) those sections, and says their job is done because he forced the EU to negotiate. That works, doesn't it? A few of his MPs might bitch but most of them will be relieved to have got the thing out of the way, and he's already set the precedent that rebels get kicked out of the party.
History tells us time and again that this is not how the ERG works. They will cheer Johnson tot he rooftops, then a few months later they will realise that they have been sold down the river and it will all start up again.
This is from the London Playbook today. The government really has gone insane:
KARAOKE NEWS: It wasn’t until around midnight that the government put the latest regulations for the North-West and North-East online. Doughty Street barrister Adam Wagner has a rundown, including that in the south six people are free to sing, but in the north only one person is allowed to sing indoors, although six can sing outside. Can’t wait for the questions to the PM at this evening’s presser.
Comments
I don't defend everything but at least get the facts straight.
Incidentally for what its worth with schools they are operating a "bubble" principle. I've been offline more lately because with my kids back at school I've been able to get back to work more, but yesterday as I was heading out the door to take them to school I got a text saying that there has been a positive test in my youngest daughter's class so as a result the whole class have been told to stay at home. So my youngest daughter is back home with me today and I'm back at home, home schooling her again. Her sister is able to continue going to school unless any of us develop symptoms.
A three year transition is code for kick the can down the road.
I presume you opposed the backstop on the same grounds or is that Johnson is in charge so now transitions are a great idea?
https://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/27/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-debate-poll/
The other 2 polls have Biden winning but by a smaller margin
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1311159349105111040?s=20
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1311143791760478208?s=20
I have never opposed transitions with a defined end point.
I am happy for concessions on either side to get a deal
And if a three year fishing transition is agreed and passes the European Parliament time to move on
Let Labour deal with it, eh Philip?
For someone who know literally nothing about this area you can't seem to stop yourself pronouncing about it. As I have suggested previously why not get in your car, stick your blue rosette on and go knocking on doors to make statements like the above. I'll pre-book the ambulance for you.
Abstract nonsense like "customs union" is neither here nor there.
They don't expect their lives to get worse. I don't think it's in the Tory's advantage to make their lives worse.
You may not like it but its not confusing. Its like saying in normal times you can go to use the toilets but don't go into a cubicle if someone is already there. Inside stick to yourselves and away from others. Outside the rules are looser.
I don’t think it would help him much - though the chances of his being able to contain himself like that for 90mins are slim to none.
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1311151519421681664
And from a Keir fanboy
Seems... unlikely.
https://twitter.com/revrrlewis/status/1310915882483359751
2. With kids in 2 schools and a wife working in a 3rd I am well aware of the bubble principle. Answer the point I am making. It is illegal for students in said bubble to meet outside school despite spending all day squashed together - how does that make any sense at all?
'China Virus' £30 @ 1.73 Lost £30
'Climate Change' £30@1.33 Lost £30 [that one's a surprise!]
'Law and Order' £30@1.44 Won £13
'Putin' £25@2.0 Won £25
SPIN:
Sell 'China Virus' £5 @ 5: Won £25
Betfair Sports:
'Tax' £200@1.04 Won £8
Trump not to wear a mask £100@1.1 Won £10 [I think, not settled yet]
Trum/Biden not to elbow-bump: £80@1.25 Won £20
Net Kerching!: £41
Contribution to Shadsy's Xmas bonus: £22
The boy who cried wolf comes to mind.
At least I know what I am.
Let us wait and see. Not too long to go now.
2. Because the idea is to have necessary interactions and not unnecessary ones. It is about managing and reducing risk not eliminating it.
A common rulebook protects the UK much better as you are protected as long as you follow the rules. The sanctions approach puts you at the whim of the counterparty. It's what you get when you decide to be a "sovereign equal" against a more powerful party. No Deal protects you even less.
Probably a draw, perhaps shading it to Biden on the angle that if fewer voters bother to take part after that shambles, it will be quicker and easier to count the votes accurately and speedily!
I called it immediately that this would make a deal more likely when most here were losing their heads and considering it an act of bridge burning that made a deal impossible.
This is not a Catch 22 as Southam seems to believe. A deal will require the removal of the parts of the IMB that the EU dislike, a deal will make those parts superfluous, a deal will allow Johnson to remove them. Therefore the solution for everyone is to get a good deal. If there's not a good deal then we let the IMB stand and move on.
I wonder whether it is worth Biden cancelling the rest of the debates on the basis of what is the point; they aren't debates.
"Listen, our aim is to reduce the incidence of Covid while maintaining certain activities that we all value, such as the ability to socialise, and the maintenance of our children's and young people's education. However, this means that we must rein in other parts of the economy. Much of this won't make sense but please do try to adhere as much as possible to our laws and guidelines as you understand them because overall, it will make a huge difference".
If Starmer wants to rejoin the EEA in 2024 that is up to him if he wins on a manifesto for that, until then the Tory manifesto will be delivered
Would you be so happy if I used your actual name and party position....
You can't even spell "Blyth Valley".
What was brilliant was it showed how comfortable we were with no deal, which makes a good deal more likely.
It was always the case that the better prepared you were for no deal then the better a deal you could get.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
https://torrentfreak.com/bbc-itv-reveal-settlement-to-shut-down-uktveverywhere-iptv-service-200930/
(Apart from the engines and stuff that we have to import from the Ascension Islands, etc.)
Also the opposite - if there is No Deal IMB is guaranteed to stay - makes the No Deal environment even more difficult and toxic.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12803551/man-gets-legal-pint-after-ten-uk/
So are we to expect a December 2023 "Brexit is still in peril" election, or a Spring 2024 "Brexit is a recent triumph" election?
I don't like the games Dom and Boris play, but sometimes they play them very well...
https://twitter.com/nick_gutteridge/status/1311210239669219328?s=20
There is no deal the UK government will do that you will regard as bad. Anything it comes back with you will regard as a triumph. But you are not a member of the ERG, who has just cheered the IMB through the lobbies. They may see things differently.
And anyway, I think he has to show up, if only to run down the clock.
I vehemently opposed Theresa May's deal. I was one of the very few Tories here to oppose it at all 3 Meaningful Votes.
I was puzzled at first by the drift in Trump's price after the event but I think I can understand it now. It was one of his last chances to land a killer blow. He didn't, so I guess to that extent Biden won.
Where the virus spreads indoors much more than outdoors then the distinction absolutely matters and is not a pinhead. Outside is not inside.
There has been decades of institutional decline. They have a huge mass of people who are beyond making decisions based on facts and evidence. I appreciate the robustness of the federal system, states' rights, and checks and balances, but they have been undermined for too long by legalised bribery, gerrymandering, and totalitarianism masquerading as religion.
President Biden is not going to turn that round. And Trump is not an outlier in the GOP. The next will be like him, but less moronic.
PS The UK is undergoing exactly the same process (albeit with Brexit and imperial nostalgia instead of Christianity).
Have fun everyone.
Next thing you will be telling me that the Hitachi factory which screws imported bits* into an imported bodyshell is going to be affected. Which is NONSENSE - its a 100% ENGLISH train because we make the seats.
Firstly, yes, Trump lost the first debate to Clinton in 2016 AND this was reflected in post-debate polls - she ticked up a couple of percentage points in the averages. Simply because she lost the election doesn't mean she lost every aspect of the campaign.
Secondly, if you look into the detail of the CNN poll in 2016, because more Democrats were watching than Republicans, only 26% of respondents identified as GOP compared with 41% Democrat and 33% independent. The CBS poll this time is much more (but not perfectly) balanced with 33%/39%/28%. Can't find the figures on Data for Progress.
My take on this is that both Trump and Biden are incredibly well known quantities on whom people have very settled views, and the post-debate polls reflect (surprise, surprise) the established divide. I don't think it'll shift the wider polls one bit. A slight proviso is that, because Trump set an incredibly low expectations bar for Biden for unfathomable reasons, and because Biden easily cleared that non-obstacle simply by remaining awake and upright, he might have won the expectations game.
Incidentally. The pub beer garden that isn't a pub despite being a pub ? My local pub has the beer garden at the back so that you have to enter and exit the non-pub via the pub. I can sit in a managed and reduced manner in the non-pub at the back but have to illegally pass through the not managed and reduced pub to get to it.
A whole haystack full of pins you've got there mate. You're almost as ridiculous as HYUFD these days.
Boris's deal has bits in it that cause us real problems as he hadn't read it before fighting an election on it.
https://twitter.com/RichardNabavi/status/1204363808837382144
Unless you live in the Northeast you are entitled to have upto six people mingling in your home garden. If you are in the North East you're not supposed to mingle with other households whether in the beer garden or your home garden.
Passing through the pub without mingling with others is not illegal. You're mistaken if you think it is and are getting upset because your facts are just wrong.
Would you really answer "No, but I'll go to the beer garden" ???
Went to see my 91 year old grandmother last night. After falling and breaking her arm in June (the stubborn old dear refused to use her walking frame and suffered the consequences, bless her) she went into hospital. After a couple of weeks went into a home for respite care. Then had another fall trying to get herself out of bed - again being stubborn. Back into hospital. Then back into respite care. Because of constant quarantining she only saw one person, my mum, once in all that time.
She needs 24 hour care and should be in a home, and has been told that, but insisted on coming home. Which I can totally understand. So she's back at home now with my Grandad who's 92 and equally knackered - on oxygen 24/7 cos his lungs are buggered, he's had an ambulance out to him twice in the past week cos of feeling dizzy.
Both have fought tooth and nail against going into a home because they want to die in their own home. Which I can totally understand.
Both have visits from carers four times a day, but they're struggling to cope. The burden is falling on my 67 year old mum, who lives on the same street. She's starting to buckle. I'm doing what I can but in practical terms that isn't very much, other than the odd errand and being a sounding board for my mum.
Really difficult situation with no easy answers at all.
I just hope if I get to such an advanced state of decrepitude I have the option of taking a pill and gently slipping off into the great beyond. Yes I know euthanasia is a massively emotive subject, with legitimate arguments on both sides, but at the end of the day after seeing what I saw yesterday, you wouldn't put a dog through that. If I get to that age I might feel very different, but I would like to be able to have the choice to go with some dignity, on my own terms, rather than regressing to someone who needs the same intensity of care as a newborn baby, but still having all my mental faculties.
Sorry about that, just needed to get it off my chest.
Nothing to gain now.
"To" and "in" are different words. Sorry but they are.
"The commission has made clear that it will not agree third-country cumulation in any circumstances, which we regret, but obviously cannot insist upon," says Lord Frost's letter, written on 7 September.
Senior figures in the car industry expressed the view that the government could have chosen to insist on a deal that did contain such measures. But discussions on such subjects have been stalled by the impasse over fishing rights and subsidy powers.
The original Brexit deal negotiated by former PM Theresa May contained a route to minimise checks on what are known as "rules of origin".
That option was removed as part of the revision to the withdrawal agreement a year ago.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54345882
The rerun Brexit 2024 strategy might need a new front man as PM who throws Boris under the bus as incompetent.
KARAOKE NEWS: It wasn’t until around midnight that the government put the latest regulations for the North-West and North-East online. Doughty Street barrister Adam Wagner has a rundown, including that in the south six people are free to sing, but in the north only one person is allowed to sing indoors, although six can sing outside. Can’t wait for the questions to the PM at this evening’s presser.
Geeks will find all this insanity here:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/1057/pdfs/uksi_20201057_en.pdf