EPL going for greed...£14.95 per match that isn't already on Sky or BT schedule. So everybody will all go round Bob's house and share the cost and spread the COVID, genius.
That’s a really silly thing to do, at a time when social gatherings in homes are banned. They should televise every match played behind closed doors, selling loads of adverts around it if they need the money.
Advertising revenue has dropped like never before.
These are the matches that aren't normally televised, nobody wants to pay lots of money to advertise around West Brom and Fulham.
The problem is that they’re on PPV, which is going to encourage people to engage in risky and prohibited behaviour - namely having house parties to watch the match.
Blame the government who think it is fine to let people into the cinemas and the Royal Albert Hall but not football stadia.
Presumably because those venues have spent a lot of time and money on convincing the authorities they could operate a reduced capacity safely.
What are the actual issues with premier league grounds? I’m assuming it’s more related to co-ordinating arrivals and departures, behaviour inside the ground, city centre locations, fans without tickets etc., than the risks of catching a virus when 2m from anyone else and wearing a mask.
Also most people in the RAH and flicks don't jump around and yell themselves hoarse (the Last Night of the Proms excepted). It's not a nice thought to be downwind of a stadium full, however spaced out they might be, if they are all yelling at once.
Latest Texas poll has Trumps lead increasing! Also Trump leading in Arizona and Florida, probably the effect of all the publicity he is getting, the old adage, "The only bad publicity is no publicity". Trump to stay in power and then four years of autocracy, maybe dystopian. A certain book written by that Canadian authoress could come true. Truly frightening.
Trump is playing it like a tv show...tonight on the apprentice president will young donald pass his medical... failure to do so and Sir Aluuuunnn will surely say You're Fired.
EPL going for greed...£14.95 per match that isn't already on Sky or BT schedule. So everybody will all go round Bob's house and share the cost and spread the COVID, genius.
That’s a really silly thing to do, at a time when social gatherings in homes are banned. They should televise every match played behind closed doors, selling loads of adverts around it if they need the money.
Advertising revenue has dropped like never before.
These are the matches that aren't normally televised, nobody wants to pay lots of money to advertise around West Brom and Fulham.
The problem is that they’re on PPV, which is going to encourage people to engage in risky and prohibited behaviour - namely having house parties to watch the match.
Blame the government who think it is fine to let people into the cinemas and the Royal Albert Hall but not football stadia.
Presumably because those venues have spent a lot of time and money on convincing the authorities they could operate a reduced capacity safely.
What are the actual issues with premier league grounds? I’m assuming it’s more related to co-ordinating arrivals and departures, behaviour inside the ground, city centre locations, fans without tickets etc., than the risks of catching a virus when 2m from anyone else and wearing a mask.
Also most people in the RAH and flicks don't jump around and yell themselves hoarse (the Last Night of the Proms excepted). It's not a nice thought to be downwind of a stadium full, however spaced out they might be, if they are all yelling at once.
Up here the public transport would be a nightmare at NUFC. Not to mention the Strawberry.
Latest Texas poll has Trumps lead increasing! Also Trump leading in Arizona and Florida, probably the effect of all the publicity he is getting, the old adage, "The only bad publicity is no publicity". Trump to stay in power and then four years of autocracy, maybe dystopian. A certain book written by that Canadian authoress could come true. Truly frightening.
Biden can win the Presidency by flipping Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan, all the rest could stay as is ... and each of those states went to Trump by a fraction of 1%. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1E9Qc5hqzo
Latest Texas poll has Trumps lead increasing! Also Trump leading in Arizona and Florida, probably the effect of all the publicity he is getting, the old adage, "The only bad publicity is no publicity". Trump to stay in power and then four years of autocracy, maybe dystopian. A certain book written by that Canadian authoress could come true. Truly frightening.
Trump leading in Texas is hardly news as the vast majority of polling has had him in the lead . And two polls for Arizona and Florida can’t be seen as some new trend unless you get more polling . As for publicity the more Trump is seen the worse it gets for him . Biden leads by 10 nationally with just over 3 weeks to go so that book might not be needed !
Allegra Stratton should have refused to become the new Downing Street press secretary. I have three big reasons for saying this, and none of them has anything to do with party politics, or my views about the Conservatives or Boris Johnson, or even my liking for Stratton herself.
QUB, 6/10 - 166 cases in the first fortnight of term, 388 self-isolating. That's still below most northern English universities, but above most southern ones. Nevertheless, the potential is there for that to significantly influence the overall NI figures.
Allegra Stratton should have refused to become the new Downing Street press secretary. I have three big reasons for saying this, and none of them has anything to do with party politics, or my views about the Conservatives or Boris Johnson, or even my liking for Stratton herself.
Lord Sumption in his Sun piece that I linked to in the last thread seems very keen on the GB declaration and its 'distinguished' sponsors. Hopefully his standards were a little more rigorous in his judgin' days.
Latest Texas poll has Trumps lead increasing! Also Trump leading in Arizona and Florida, probably the effect of all the publicity he is getting, the old adage, "The only bad publicity is no publicity". Trump to stay in power and then four years of autocracy, maybe dystopian. A certain book written by that Canadian authoress could come true. Truly frightening.
Trump leading in Texas is hardly news as the vast majority of polling has had him in the lead . And two polls for Arizona and Florida can’t be seen as some new trend unless you get more polling . As for publicity the more Trump is seen the worse it gets for him . Biden leads by 10 nationally with just over 3 weeks to go so that book might not be needed !
Indeed. Biden's principal virtue in the eyes of the voters is the same as mine would be if I were running. I'm not Trump.
Allegra Stratton should have refused to become the new Downing Street press secretary. I have three big reasons for saying this, and none of them has anything to do with party politics, or my views about the Conservatives or Boris Johnson, or even my liking for Stratton herself.
Likelihood is that she will remain tainted by taking this position long after Bozo becomes just a bad memory.
I don't see how this role is that much different to what spin doctors / press secretary used to get up to, over than this job is to do it on the record. And of course one which is pretty much always filled by a somebody with a journalist background, from Bernard to Bad Al to Coulson.
Allegra Stratton should have refused to become the new Downing Street press secretary. I have three big reasons for saying this, and none of them has anything to do with party politics, or my views about the Conservatives or Boris Johnson, or even my liking for Stratton herself.
Likelihood is that she will remain tainted by taking this position long after Bozo becomes just a bad memory.
Perhaps.
Original quote 'should have refused' - I suspect she wasn't in any way forced. 'Shouldn't have chosen to be' is probably the way it was.
Guardian is very sloppy about these things.
I assume they’re saving the massive “Cambridge Analytica Cleared Of Any Wrongdoing” headline for the Observer on Sunday, so as to give it the same prominence as their original stories on the company?
You've already done this. It's an ill-formed question because there's half a dozen equally pettifogging and pointless things it could mean, some more possible than others and some of which have already happened.
Allegra Stratton should have refused to become the new Downing Street press secretary. I have three big reasons for saying this, and none of them has anything to do with party politics, or my views about the Conservatives or Boris Johnson, or even my liking for Stratton herself.
Likelihood is that she will remain tainted by taking this position long after Bozo becomes just a bad memory.
Perhaps.
Original quote 'should have refused' - I suspect she wasn't in any way forced. 'Shouldn't have chosen to be' is probably the way it was.
Guardian is very sloppy about these things.
I assume they’re saving the massive “Cambridge Analytica Cleared Of Any Wrongdoing” headline for the Observer on Sunday, so as to give it the same prominence as their original stories on the company?
I am sure Carole have a new conspiracy to reveal by then.
Allegra Stratton should have refused to become the new Downing Street press secretary. I have three big reasons for saying this, and none of them has anything to do with party politics, or my views about the Conservatives or Boris Johnson, or even my liking for Stratton herself.
Likelihood is that she will remain tainted by taking this position long after Bozo becomes just a bad memory.
Perhaps.
Original quote 'should have refused' - I suspect she wasn't in any way forced. 'Shouldn't have chosen to be' is probably the way it was.
Guardian is very sloppy about these things.
I assume they’re saving the massive “Cambridge Analytica Cleared Of Any Wrongdoing” headline for the Observer on Sunday, so as to give it the same prominence as their original stories on the company?
Have to say, the state polling today is worrying me that Trumpton is coming back.
But I’m skittish. Very skittish.
Pelosi drawing attention to the fact that Biden is getting senile, and wishing for no news about a vaccine today, isn’t exactly helping to get her party’s vote out either.
So I think I've been very critical of the government, fairly, but also of Starmer for not proposing any solutions and just carping from the sidelines. To avoid accusations of doing the same I'm going to offer up, for free, three workable policies:
1. Change self isolation to separation. People who test positive should be given paid for accommodation and £500 per week for up to three weeks and be completely separated from wider society. People who need to be separated as a family should be given family rooms and couples should be given double rooms. This should be provided to all UK citizens and long term residents free of charge. The cost of the policy works out to £1.2k per person per week in isolation up to a maximum of £3.6k, even at today's high levels of community infection this comes to £2.5bn per week. The advantages of this policy is that it's £2.5bn per week which subsidises the beleaguered hotel and catering industry as well as hermetically sealing off people who test positive from the wider community resulting in a huge reduction in the R. Disadvantages are that its an initially costly policy, though as it is one which will being the R down very rapidly the cost goes down very quickly. It may also discourage people from being tested, but the generous nature of the scheme should avoid this.
2. All arrivals in the UK should be quarantined at their own expense for 5 days in hotels near the airport and then tested with an accurate PCR test, people who test negative go home, those who don't continue in separation at their own expense until two negative tests in a row are recorded. This will destroy the international tourism sector, however this is a necessary cost to avoid another lockdown which will wipe another 7-9% off GDP. Advantages - after 5 days almost all cases are caught, another big win for UK hotels and catering. Disadvantages - it discourages tourism which may or may not be good.
3. Clear communication on what the virus measures actually are. This is a no cost option. Currently very few people have an idea of what their local rules are or even what the national rules are. Additionally keeping the rules consistent would significantly cut down confusion among people who need to follow them. Next moving from personal fines to business compliance fines. Handing out fines to individuals is basically the impossible task, it needs police state level intrusion to people's daily lives. Moving to fines for non-compliant businesses and random inspections of pubs, bars and restaurants for covid safe compliance would allow these businesses to stay open without restrictions on their operating hours due to high levels of distancing compliance. Finally, and this is the unpopular one - mask wearing to be made mandatory in all public indoor spaces, if you have a medical condition which means you can't wear a mask you can't enter these places, frankly you should be there in the first place as the risk to your health is already extremely high. Government inspectors empowered to hand out punitive fines to companies who don't enforce mask wearing.
These three policies are all workable, the first is a high cost, though much lower than the cost of a second lockdown. The second would put IAG and EasyJet out of business and support would need to be provided to keep them going, again cheaper than a second lockdown. The final policy is free and would make people more confident in knowing what is and isn't allowed whe heading out of the front door.
Latest Texas poll has Trumps lead increasing! Also Trump leading in Arizona and Florida, probably the effect of all the publicity he is getting, the old adage, "The only bad publicity is no publicity". Trump to stay in power and then four years of autocracy, maybe dystopian. A certain book written by that Canadian authoress could come true. Truly frightening.
Trump leading in Texas is hardly news as the vast majority of polling has had him in the lead . And two polls for Arizona and Florida can’t be seen as some new trend unless you get more polling . As for publicity the more Trump is seen the worse it gets for him . Biden leads by 10 nationally with just over 3 weeks to go so that book might not be needed !
Indeed. Biden's principal virtue in the eyes of the voters is the same as mine would be if I were running. I'm not Trump.
Biden has a good Pennsylvania backstory though. If you were going to construct a Dem candidate for this election you'd probably end up with a younger Joe Biden (Less the Kinnock plagiarism obviously)
Allegra Stratton should have refused to become the new Downing Street press secretary. I have three big reasons for saying this, and none of them has anything to do with party politics, or my views about the Conservatives or Boris Johnson, or even my liking for Stratton herself.
Allegra Stratton should have refused to become the new Downing Street press secretary. I have three big reasons for saying this, and none of them has anything to do with party politics, or my views about the Conservatives or Boris Johnson, or even my liking for Stratton herself.
Likelihood is that she will remain tainted by taking this position long after Bozo becomes just a bad memory.
I don't see how this role is that much different to what spin doctors / press secretary used to get up to, over than this job is to do it on the record. And of course one which is pretty much always filled by a somebody with a journalist background, from Bernard to Bad Al to Coulson.
Yes, Martin Kettle's Guardian article (an opinion piece) neglects to mention Alastair Campbell, which is an oversight. But even Campbell kept a relatively low profile, as did, for example, Bernard Ingham (who is very critical of the daily briefing idea).
So the key point about the article is the intention that Stratton should lead daily press briefings on behalf of the government, and that this in itself is yet another step to undermine the role of parliament and create a more presidential system of government. The expectation is that the trend to announcing government policies or thinking via the media rather than via parliament will increase. In this respect, Kettle has a point - a further move away from parliamentary democracy.
Whilst Europe is plainly seeing a large increase in C19 cases, the USA figures appear to be ticking up too - and it's not the usual suspects. The larger population centres that had it worst are not too bad but the pandemic seems to be fanning out pretty much everywhere.
So the key point about the article is the intention that Stratton should lead daily press briefings on behalf of the government, and that this in itself is yet another step to undermine the role of parliament and create a more presidential system of government. The expectation is that the trend to announcing government policies or thinking via the media rather than via parliament will increase. In this respect, Kettle has a point - a further move away from parliamentary democracy.
So the key point about the article is the intention that Stratton should lead daily press briefings on behalf of the government, and that this in itself is yet another step to undermine the role of parliament and create a more presidential system of government. The expectation is that the trend to announcing government policies or thinking via the media rather than via parliament will increase. In this respect, Kettle has a point - a further move away from parliamentary democracy.
Surprising given how responsible they've been historically.
Comfortably the daftest people in the UK, and that's a pretty high bar.
Equivalent to 33,000 for England and Wales.
That's just the cases. In terms of infections Northern Ireland is probably only a week away from hitting the peak rate of infections that the UK had in the spring.
Allegra Stratton should have refused to become the new Downing Street press secretary. I have three big reasons for saying this, and none of them has anything to do with party politics, or my views about the Conservatives or Boris Johnson, or even my liking for Stratton herself.
Likelihood is that she will remain tainted by taking this position long after Bozo becomes just a bad memory.
I don't see how this role is that much different to what spin doctors / press secretary used to get up to, over than this job is to do it on the record. And of course one which is pretty much always filled by a somebody with a journalist background, from Bernard to Bad Al to Coulson.
Yes, Martin Kettle's Guardian article (an opinion piece) neglects to mention Alastair Campbell, which is an oversight. But even Campbell kept a relatively low profile, as did, for example, Bernard Ingham (who is very critical of the daily briefing idea).
So the key point about the article is the intention that Stratton should lead daily press briefings on behalf of the government, and that this in itself is yet another step to undermine the role of parliament and create a more presidential system of government. The expectation is that the trend to announcing government policies or thinking via the media rather than via parliament will increase. In this respect, Kettle has a point - a further move away from parliamentary democracy.
Is it is all well and good saying that, but we know all these previous individuals regularly briefed the media well ahead of announcements in parliament e.g For years we had the whole of budgets pre-announced through the media and we know what Boris is going to announce on Monday.
And every day we get the PM spoke person said x, the lobby were briefed y.
Whilst Europe is plainly seeing a large increase in C19 cases, the USA figures appear to be ticking up too - and it's not the usual suspects. The larger population centres that had it worst are not too bad but the pandemic seems to be fanning out pretty much everywhere.
Allegra Stratton should have refused to become the new Downing Street press secretary. I have three big reasons for saying this, and none of them has anything to do with party politics, or my views about the Conservatives or Boris Johnson, or even my liking for Stratton herself.
Likelihood is that she will remain tainted by taking this position long after Bozo becomes just a bad memory.
I don't see how this role is that much different to what spin doctors / press secretary used to get up to, over than this job is to do it on the record. And of course one which is pretty much always filled by a somebody with a journalist background, from Bernard to Bad Al to Coulson.
Yes, Martin Kettle's Guardian article (an opinion piece) neglects to mention Alastair Campbell, which is an oversight. But even Campbell kept a relatively low profile, as did, for example, Bernard Ingham (who is very critical of the daily briefing idea).
So the key point about the article is the intention that Stratton should lead daily press briefings on behalf of the government, and that this in itself is yet another step to undermine the role of parliament and create a more presidential system of government. The expectation is that the trend to announcing government policies or thinking via the media rather than via parliament will increase. In this respect, Kettle has a point - a further move away from parliamentary democracy.
Is it is all well and good saying that, but we know all these previous individuals regularly briefed the media well ahead of announcements in parliament e.g For years we had the whole of budgets pre-announced through the media and we know what Boris is going to announce on Monday.
And every day we get the PM spoke person said x, the lobby were briefed y.
I honestly don't see that much of a difference.
Precisely.
In fact it will be harder to anonymously brief something if it's then going to be quoted and asked about on live TV later on.
QUB, 6/10 - 166 cases in the first fortnight of term, 388 self-isolating. That's still below most northern English universities, but above most southern ones. Nevertheless, the potential is there for that to significantly influence the overall NI figures.
The growth in NI cases is being led by Derry and Strabane, which is as far from Belfast as you can get in NI. No idea whether they have a university in Derry, but it's already spread across to Donegal in a big way, and Letterkenny Institute of Technology is not the largest of universities.
Allegra Stratton should have refused to become the new Downing Street press secretary. I have three big reasons for saying this, and none of them has anything to do with party politics, or my views about the Conservatives or Boris Johnson, or even my liking for Stratton herself.
Likelihood is that she will remain tainted by taking this position long after Bozo becomes just a bad memory.
I don't see how this role is that much different to what spin doctors / press secretary used to get up to, over than this job is to do it on the record. And of course one which is pretty much always filled by a somebody with a journalist background, from Bernard to Bad Al to Coulson.
Yes, Martin Kettle's Guardian article (an opinion piece) neglects to mention Alastair Campbell, which is an oversight. But even Campbell kept a relatively low profile, as did, for example, Bernard Ingham (who is very critical of the daily briefing idea).
So the key point about the article is the intention that Stratton should lead daily press briefings on behalf of the government, and that this in itself is yet another step to undermine the role of parliament and create a more presidential system of government. The expectation is that the trend to announcing government policies or thinking via the media rather than via parliament will increase. In this respect, Kettle has a point - a further move away from parliamentary democracy.
Is it is all well and good saying that, but we know all these previous individuals regularly briefed the media well ahead of announcements in parliament e.g For years we had the whole of budgets pre-announced through the media and we know what Boris is going to announce on Monday.
And every day we get the PM spoke person said x, the lobby were briefed y.
I honestly don't see that much of a difference.
Indeed. The change is to do things openly which were previously done privately.
Oh, and kill off the privilege of the select few Lobby hacks, which is why they’re raving mad about it.
So I think I've been very critical of the government, fairly, but also of Starmer for not proposing any solutions and just carping from the sidelines. To avoid accusations of doing the same I'm going to offer up, for free, three workable policies:
2. All arrivals in the UK should be quarantined at their own expense for 5 days in hotels near the airport and then tested with an accurate PCR test, people who test negative go home, those who don't continue in separation at their own expense until two negative tests in a row are recorded. This will destroy the international tourism sector, however this is a necessary cost to avoid another lockdown which will wipe another 7-9% off GDP. Advantages - after 5 days almost all cases are caught, another big win for UK hotels and catering. Disadvantages - it discourages tourism which may or may not be good.
New Zealand insists on 14-day quarantine at a cost of NZ$3,100 per person and a further NZ$900 per additional person so basically NZ$4,000 per couple. That's whether you are an NZ citizen or not.
There are no exemptions to the quarantine period but the payment is waived if you are visiting a terminally ill family member.
As you say, it has wrecked the not-insignificant tourism sector and that has serious economic consequences for the country.
Has the queen been let out of her isolation chamber?
Hopefully, the country's biggest benefit recipient should work for her benefits.
If Covid looks like it will linger on I wonder whether she will decide that she can no longer safely do her job and abdicate, notwithstanding her abhorrence of that path. She is, completely understandably of course, becoming rather notable for her absence from public life.
Has the queen been let out of her isolation chamber?
Hopefully, the country's biggest benefit recipient should work for her benefits.
If Covid looks like it will linger on I wonder whether she will decide that she can no longer safely do her job and abdicate, notwithstanding her abhorrence of that path. She is, completely understandably of course, becoming rather notable for her absence from public life.
But she was anointed by God, it would be an insult to God to abdicate.
So the key point about the article is the intention that Stratton should lead daily press briefings on behalf of the government, and that this in itself is yet another step to undermine the role of parliament and create a more presidential system of government. The expectation is that the trend to announcing government policies or thinking via the media rather than via parliament will increase. In this respect, Kettle has a point - a further move away from parliamentary democracy.
It's an idea that will die with BoZo
Johnson is (politically) immortal. He and his party's stock ascends as the nation descends into chaos.
So the key point about the article is the intention that Stratton should lead daily press briefings on behalf of the government, and that this in itself is yet another step to undermine the role of parliament and create a more presidential system of government. The expectation is that the trend to announcing government policies or thinking via the media rather than via parliament will increase. In this respect, Kettle has a point - a further move away from parliamentary democracy.
It's an idea that will die with BoZo
Johnson is (politically) immortal. He and his party's stock ascends as the nation descends into chaos.
Allegra Stratton should have refused to become the new Downing Street press secretary. I have three big reasons for saying this, and none of them has anything to do with party politics, or my views about the Conservatives or Boris Johnson, or even my liking for Stratton herself.
Likelihood is that she will remain tainted by taking this position long after Bozo becomes just a bad memory.
I don't see how this role is that much different to what spin doctors / press secretary used to get up to, over than this job is to do it on the record. And of course one which is pretty much always filled by a somebody with a journalist background, from Bernard to Bad Al to Coulson.
Yes, Martin Kettle's Guardian article (an opinion piece) neglects to mention Alastair Campbell, which is an oversight. But even Campbell kept a relatively low profile, as did, for example, Bernard Ingham (who is very critical of the daily briefing idea).
So the key point about the article is the intention that Stratton should lead daily press briefings on behalf of the government, and that this in itself is yet another step to undermine the role of parliament and create a more presidential system of government. The expectation is that the trend to announcing government policies or thinking via the media rather than via parliament will increase. In this respect, Kettle has a point - a further move away from parliamentary democracy.
Is it is all well and good saying that, but we know all these previous individuals regularly briefed the media well ahead of announcements in parliament e.g For years we had the whole of budgets pre-announced through the media and we know what Boris is going to announce on Monday.
And every day we get the PM spoke person said x, the lobby were briefed y.
I honestly don't see that much of a difference.
That's fair enough, and of course off-the-record briefings are nothing new. But do you not even have the slightest concern about this government's cavalier disregard for the role of parliament in our democracy? It's certainly bothering the Speaker and, it would appear, quite a lot of backbench MPs from across the political spectrum.
Has the queen been let out of her isolation chamber?
Hopefully, the country's biggest benefit recipient should work for her benefits.
If Covid looks like it will linger on I wonder whether she will decide that she can no longer safely do her job and abdicate, notwithstanding her abhorrence of that path. She is, completely understandably of course, becoming rather notable for her absence from public life.
Funny you should say that. Isn't she resuming official engagements next week?
So I think I've been very critical of the government, fairly, but also of Starmer for not proposing any solutions and just carping from the sidelines. To avoid accusations of doing the same I'm going to offer up, for free, three workable policies:
1. Change self isolation to separation. People who test positive should be given paid for accommodation and £500 per week for up to three weeks and be completely separated from wider society. People who need to be separated as a family should be given family rooms and couples should be given double rooms. This should be provided to all UK citizens and long term residents free of charge. The cost of the policy works out to £1.2k per person per week in isolation up to a maximum of £3.6k, even at today's high levels of community infection this comes to £2.5bn per week. The advantages of this policy is that it's £2.5bn per week which subsidises the beleaguered hotel and catering industry as well as hermetically sealing off people who test positive from the wider community resulting in a huge reduction in the R. Disadvantages are that its an initially costly policy, though as it is one which will being the R down very rapidly the cost goes down very quickly. It may also discourage people from being tested, but the generous nature of the scheme should avoid this.
2. All arrivals in the UK should be quarantined at their own expense for 5 days in hotels near the airport and then tested with an accurate PCR test, people who test negative go home, those who don't continue in separation at their own expense until two negative tests in a row are recorded. This will destroy the international tourism sector, however this is a necessary cost to avoid another lockdown which will wipe another 7-9% off GDP. Advantages - after 5 days almost all cases are caught, another big win for UK hotels and catering. Disadvantages - it discourages tourism which may or may not be good.
Completely agree with 1) - indeed I’ve been arguing much the same.
2) I’d just give them rapid antigen tests, the most accurate available, and if positive do 1).
I'm looking forward to the polling arguments in 2024 when, hopefully, @HYUFD will be telling everyone that Redfield and Wilton were the most accurate pollster in 2020 and so all other polls should be ignored.
Whilst Europe is plainly seeing a large increase in C19 cases, the USA figures appear to be ticking up too - and it's not the usual suspects. The larger population centres that had it worst are not too bad but the pandemic seems to be fanning out pretty much everywhere.
You wouldn't, for example, expect places like Utah and Oklahoma to be recording over a thousand new cases a day but it appears that's where we are.
Wisconsin's second wave looks bad.
I'm not sure the US ever got out of the wave. From the end of March it is hard to find any significant period when new cases were consistently under 25,000 per day. It is very easy to imagine now that deaths will exceed 300,000 by the end of the year.
So I think I've been very critical of the government, fairly, but also of Starmer for not proposing any solutions and just carping from the sidelines. To avoid accusations of doing the same I'm going to offer up, for free, three workable policies:
1. Change self isolation to separation. People who test positive should be given paid for accommodation and £500 per week for up to three weeks and be completely separated from wider society. People who need to be separated as a family should be given family rooms and couples should be given double rooms. This should be provided to all UK citizens and long term residents free of charge. The cost of the policy works out to £1.2k per person per week in isolation up to a maximum of £3.6k, even at today's high levels of community infection this comes to £2.5bn per week. The advantages of this policy is that it's £2.5bn per week which subsidises the beleaguered hotel and catering industry as well as hermetically sealing off people who test positive from the wider community resulting in a huge reduction in the R. Disadvantages are that its an initially costly policy, though as it is one which will being the R down very rapidly the cost goes down very quickly. It may also discourage people from being tested, but the generous nature of the scheme should avoid this.
2. All arrivals in the UK should be quarantined at their own expense for 5 days in hotels near the airport and then tested with an accurate PCR test, people who test negative go home, those who don't continue in separation at their own expense until two negative tests in a row are recorded. This will destroy the international tourism sector, however this is a necessary cost to avoid another lockdown which will wipe another 7-9% off GDP. Advantages - after 5 days almost all cases are caught, another big win for UK hotels and catering. Disadvantages - it discourages tourism which may or may not be good.
Completely agree with 1) - indeed I’ve been arguing much the same.
2) I’d just give them rapid antigen tests, the most accurate available, and if positive do 1).
Not sufficient since people may be incubating and be positive later. Should be a full quarantine.
So I think I've been very critical of the government, fairly, but also of Starmer for not proposing any solutions and just carping from the sidelines. To avoid accusations of doing the same I'm going to offer up, for free, three workable policies:
2. All arrivals in the UK should be quarantined at their own expense for 5 days in hotels near the airport and then tested with an accurate PCR test, people who test negative go home, those who don't continue in separation at their own expense until two negative tests in a row are recorded. This will destroy the international tourism sector, however this is a necessary cost to avoid another lockdown which will wipe another 7-9% off GDP. Advantages - after 5 days almost all cases are caught, another big win for UK hotels and catering. Disadvantages - it discourages tourism which may or may not be good.
New Zealand insists on 14-day quarantine at a cost of NZ$3,100 per person and a further NZ$900 per additional person so basically NZ$4,000 per couple. That's whether you are an NZ citizen or not.
There are no exemptions to the quarantine period but the payment is waived if you are visiting a terminally ill family member.
As you say, it has wrecked the not-insignificant tourism sector and that has serious economic consequences for the country.
That's why I think the 5 day and test is a good compromise. It catches almost all cases and adds around £400-500 per couple going on holiday, especially given that WFHotel is an option for a significant number of people.
The UK, unlike NZ, has a huge tourism deficit. People who live here spend far, far more money overseas than tourists do in the UK. Closing down tourism and keeping UK tourist money in bank accounts as a higher savings rate or spent on UK hospitality is probably economically better for us than turning off tourism for NZ. We're a larger market economy as well so much closer to self sustaining growth than somewhere like NZ.
I see that neither Great Jumping Jolyon, nor the original article, provide a shred of evidence that the process was corrupt.
Quel surprise - another game of Attention-seeking Imaginary Whackafox.
Indeed. It seems a huge surprise to these people, that the usual rediculous amount of government procurement bureaucracy got thrown in the bin when we were hit by a pandemic.
Of course, if we’d kept that bureaucracy in place, the same people would instead be complaining that the government hadn’t delivered whatever it was they were trying to buy.
So I think I've been very critical of the government, fairly, but also of Starmer for not proposing any solutions and just carping from the sidelines. To avoid accusations of doing the same I'm going to offer up, for free, three workable policies:
1. Change self isolation to separation. People who test positive should be given paid for accommodation and £500 per week for up to three weeks and be completely separated from wider society. People who need to be separated as a family should be given family rooms and couples should be given double rooms. This should be provided to all UK citizens and long term residents free of charge. The cost of the policy works out to £1.2k per person per week in isolation up to a maximum of £3.6k, even at today's high levels of community infection this comes to £2.5bn per week. The advantages of this policy is that it's £2.5bn per week which subsidises the beleaguered hotel and catering industry as well as hermetically sealing off people who test positive from the wider community resulting in a huge reduction in the R. Disadvantages are that its an initially costly policy, though as it is one which will being the R down very rapidly the cost goes down very quickly. It may also discourage people from being tested, but the generous nature of the scheme should avoid this.
2. All arrivals in the UK should be quarantined at their own expense for 5 days in hotels near the airport and then tested with an accurate PCR test, people who test negative go home, those who don't continue in separation at their own expense until two negative tests in a row are recorded. This will destroy the international tourism sector, however this is a necessary cost to avoid another lockdown which will wipe another 7-9% off GDP. Advantages - after 5 days almost all cases are caught, another big win for UK hotels and catering. Disadvantages - it discourages tourism which may or may not be good.
Completely agree with 1) - indeed I’ve been arguing much the same.
2) I’d just give them rapid antigen tests, the most accurate available, and if positive do 1).
We need a series of islands. Asymptomatic, symptomatic, post-symptomatic. Have people move through the islands as their infection progresses until they have been non-shedding sufficient tests in a row, when they can return to normal life on the mainland. Set up attractions and entertainments for those not too ill so that their stint on the islands is as fun as quarantine can be.
PS This is the internet, so I should make clear that this is not a serious proposal
So I think I've been very critical of the government, fairly, but also of Starmer for not proposing any solutions and just carping from the sidelines. To avoid accusations of doing the same I'm going to offer up, for free, three workable policies:
1. Change self isolation to separation. People who test positive should be given paid for accommodation and £500 per week for up to three weeks and be completely separated from wider society. People who need to be separated as a family should be given family rooms and couples should be given double rooms. This should be provided to all UK citizens and long term residents free of charge. The cost of the policy works out to £1.2k per person per week in isolation up to a maximum of £3.6k, even at today's high levels of community infection this comes to £2.5bn per week. The advantages of this policy is that it's £2.5bn per week which subsidises the beleaguered hotel and catering industry as well as hermetically sealing off people who test positive from the wider community resulting in a huge reduction in the R. Disadvantages are that its an initially costly policy, though as it is one which will being the R down very rapidly the cost goes down very quickly. It may also discourage people from being tested, but the generous nature of the scheme should avoid this.
2. All arrivals in the UK should be quarantined at their own expense for 5 days in hotels near the airport and then tested with an accurate PCR test, people who test negative go home, those who don't continue in separation at their own expense until two negative tests in a row are recorded. This will destroy the international tourism sector, however this is a necessary cost to avoid another lockdown which will wipe another 7-9% off GDP. Advantages - after 5 days almost all cases are caught, another big win for UK hotels and catering. Disadvantages - it discourages tourism which may or may not be good.
Completely agree with 1) - indeed I’ve been arguing much the same.
2) I’d just give them rapid antigen tests, the most accurate available, and if positive do 1).
On the second point I wanted to work within the bounds of what the UK government seems acceptable, clearly they don't believe in any kind of rapid testing so it's not an option. Ideally, yes, I'd actually say two rapid tests with two consecutive negative results.
3. Clear communication on what the virus measures actually are. This is a no cost option. Currently very few people have an idea of what their local rules are or even what the national rules are. Additionally keeping the rules consistent would significantly cut down confusion among people who need to follow them. Next moving from personal fines to business compliance fines. Handing out fines to individuals is basically the impossible task, it needs police state level intrusion to people's daily lives. Moving to fines for non-compliant businesses and random inspections of pubs, bars and restaurants for covid safe compliance would allow these businesses to stay open without restrictions on their operating hours due to high levels of distancing compliance. Finally, and this is the unpopular one - mask wearing to be made mandatory in all public indoor spaces, if you have a medical condition which means you can't wear a mask you can't enter these places, frankly you should be there in the first place as the risk to your health is already extremely high. Government inspectors empowered to hand out punitive fines to companies who don't enforce mask wearing.
These three policies are all workable, the first is a high cost, though much lower than the cost of a second lockdown. The second would put IAG and EasyJet out of business and support would need to be provided to keep them going, again cheaper than a second lockdown. The final policy is free and would make people more confident in knowing what is and isn't allowed whe heading out of the front door.
Fair play I think all three of these are probably sensible. Although I think they would have been more sensible back in August when we could have made use of them but I'm pretty sure I saw more than a few commentators on PB saying that then as well. I don't think the masking is actually that unpopular either. It seems to be one of the most commonly obeyed and willingly accepted of all the restrictions, bar the usual loons.
EPL going for greed...£14.95 per match that isn't already on Sky or BT schedule. So everybody will all go round Bob's house and share the cost and spread the COVID, genius.
That’s a really silly thing to do, at a time when social gatherings in homes are banned. They should televise every match played behind closed doors, selling loads of adverts around it if they need the money.
Advertising revenue has dropped like never before.
These are the matches that aren't normally televised, nobody wants to pay lots of money to advertise around West Brom and Fulham.
The problem is that they’re on PPV, which is going to encourage people to engage in risky and prohibited behaviour - namely having house parties to watch the match.
Blame the government who think it is fine to let people into the cinemas and the Royal Albert Hall but not football stadia.
Presumably because those venues have spent a lot of time and money on convincing the authorities they could operate a reduced capacity safely.
What are the actual issues with premier league grounds? I’m assuming it’s more related to co-ordinating arrivals and departures, behaviour inside the ground, city centre locations, fans without tickets etc., than the risks of catching a virus when 2m from anyone else and wearing a mask.
Also most people in the RAH and flicks don't jump around and yell themselves hoarse (the Last Night of the Proms excepted). It's not a nice thought to be downwind of a stadium full, however spaced out they might be, if they are all yelling at once.
Up here the public transport would be a nightmare at NUFC. Not to mention the Strawberry.
*Googles* - ah, the local equivalent of the Louden Tavern, not far from Chinatown.
So I think I've been very critical of the government, fairly, but also of Starmer for not proposing any solutions and just carping from the sidelines. To avoid accusations of doing the same I'm going to offer up, for free, three workable policies:
1. Change self isolation to separation. People who test positive should be given paid for accommodation and £500 per week for up to three weeks and be completely separated from wider society. People who need to be separated as a family should be given family rooms and couples should be given double rooms. This should be provided to all UK citizens and long term residents free of charge. The cost of the policy works out to £1.2k per person per week in isolation up to a maximum of £3.6k, even at today's high levels of community infection this comes to £2.5bn per week. The advantages of this policy is that it's £2.5bn per week which subsidises the beleaguered hotel and catering industry as well as hermetically sealing off people who test positive from the wider community resulting in a huge reduction in the R. Disadvantages are that its an initially costly policy, though as it is one which will being the R down very rapidly the cost goes down very quickly. It may also discourage people from being tested, but the generous nature of the scheme should avoid this.
2. All arrivals in the UK should be quarantined at their own expense for 5 days in hotels near the airport and then tested with an accurate PCR test, people who test negative go home, those who don't continue in separation at their own expense until two negative tests in a row are recorded. This will destroy the international tourism sector, however this is a necessary cost to avoid another lockdown which will wipe another 7-9% off GDP. Advantages - after 5 days almost all cases are caught, another big win for UK hotels and catering. Disadvantages - it discourages tourism which may or may not be good.
Completely agree with 1) - indeed I’ve been arguing much the same.
2) I’d just give them rapid antigen tests, the most accurate available, and if positive do 1).
Not sufficient since people may be incubating and be positive later. Should be a full quarantine.
Perhaps - but right now we’re basically doing nothing.
"The latest figures for London, published on Friday, show that Richmond upon Thames had the highest infection rate in the capital in the week ending 5 October, with 112.1 new cases per 100,000 people. The number of cases in the borough rose to 222 from 89 in the previous week.
The second highest infection rate in London was 108.8 in Redbridge. The number of cases there increased from 240 to 332.
The Evening Standard reported that some of the figures in London may be skewed by students from the capital becoming ill at universities outside of their home boroughs.
It reported that an analysis of positive cases in Richmond since 20 September found that out of about half the cases for which the council had postcodes, almost a quarter of them were for places including Manchester, Durham, Leeds and Exeter, suggesting students results were being sent to their GPs at home in London."
So it could well be that some of the leading "hotspots" aren't hotspots at all! There was something very suspicious about Richmond's numbers quadrupling in a week despite having no obvious major sources of new infection to justify it.
Has the queen been let out of her isolation chamber?
Hopefully, the country's biggest benefit recipient should work for her benefits.
If Covid looks like it will linger on I wonder whether she will decide that she can no longer safely do her job and abdicate, notwithstanding her abhorrence of that path. She is, completely understandably of course, becoming rather notable for her absence from public life.
But she was anointed by God, it would be an insult to God to abdicate.
Well yes, there is that of course. Having watched the Crown I know she thinks that uncle David was a bad egg for abdicating.
Has the queen been let out of her isolation chamber?
Hopefully, the country's biggest benefit recipient should work for her benefits.
If Covid looks like it will linger on I wonder whether she will decide that she can no longer safely do her job and abdicate, notwithstanding her abhorrence of that path. She is, completely understandably of course, becoming rather notable for her absence from public life.
Funny you should say that. Isn't she resuming official engagements next week?
So I think I've been very critical of the government, fairly, but also of Starmer for not proposing any solutions and just carping from the sidelines. To avoid accusations of doing the same I'm going to offer up, for free, three workable policies:
1. Change self isolation to separation. People who test positive should be given paid for accommodation and £500 per week for up to three weeks and be completely separated from wider society. People who need to be separated as a family should be given family rooms and couples should be given double rooms. This should be provided to all UK citizens and long term residents free of charge. The cost of the policy works out to £1.2k per person per week in isolation up to a maximum of £3.6k, even at today's high levels of community infection this comes to £2.5bn per week. The advantages of this policy is that it's £2.5bn per week which subsidises the beleaguered hotel and catering industry as well as hermetically sealing off people who test positive from the wider community resulting in a huge reduction in the R. Disadvantages are that its an initially costly policy, though as it is one which will being the R down very rapidly the cost goes down very quickly. It may also discourage people from being tested, but the generous nature of the scheme should avoid this.
2. All arrivals in the UK should be quarantined at their own expense for 5 days in hotels near the airport and then tested with an accurate PCR test, people who test negative go home, those who don't continue in separation at their own expense until two negative tests in a row are recorded. This will destroy the international tourism sector, however this is a necessary cost to avoid another lockdown which will wipe another 7-9% off GDP. Advantages - after 5 days almost all cases are caught, another big win for UK hotels and catering. Disadvantages - it discourages tourism which may or may not be good.
Completely agree with 1) - indeed I’ve been arguing much the same.
2) I’d just give them rapid antigen tests, the most accurate available, and if positive do 1).
On the second point I wanted to work within the bounds of what the UK government seems acceptable, clearly they don't believe in any kind of rapid testing so it's not an option. Ideally, yes, I'd actually say two rapid tests with two consecutive negative results.
As for your 3) also provide free masks to shops, pubs etc. Some supermarkets have started handing them out at the entrance to the maskless, and it takes away most of the arguments about not having them.
HYUFD will either never be called polling font again after this election and will come down to my levels of credibility or he will be a God
Well, he's always claiming that the English Tory Party is a combination of Henry VIII - Head of the Church - and the Divine Right of Kings ((c) James VI, Charles Stuart the Malignant, etc.)
HYUFD will either never be called polling font again after this election and will come down to my levels of credibility or he will be a God
Well, he's always claiming that the English Tory Party is a combination of Henry VIII - Head of the Church - and the Divine Right of Kings ((c) James VI, Charles Stuart the Malignant, etc.)
Sometimes I feel like he is a parody to make Jacob Rees Mogg look modern and in touch.
Have to say, the state polling today is worrying me that Trumpton is coming back.
But I’m skittish. Very skittish.
Pelosi drawing attention to the fact that Biden is getting senile, and wishing for no news about a vaccine today, isn’t exactly helping to get her party’s vote out either.
He isn't "getting senile". Stop it with Trump propaganda.
Comments
Comfortably the daftest people in the UK, and that's a pretty high bar.
Not to mention the Strawberry.
... and each of those states went to Trump by a fraction of 1%.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1E9Qc5hqzo
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/09/allegra-stratton-downing-street-press-secretary-mistake
+1
Likelihood is that she will remain tainted by taking this position long after Bozo becomes just a bad memory.
Original quote 'should have refused' - I suspect she wasn't in any way forced. 'Shouldn't have chosen to be' is probably the way it was.
Guardian is very sloppy about these things.
Are CA in the clear?
https://twitter.com/LBCNews/status/1314533937843253254
1. Change self isolation to separation. People who test positive should be given paid for accommodation and £500 per week for up to three weeks and be completely separated from wider society. People who need to be separated as a family should be given family rooms and couples should be given double rooms. This should be provided to all UK citizens and long term residents free of charge. The cost of the policy works out to £1.2k per person per week in isolation up to a maximum of £3.6k, even at today's high levels of community infection this comes to £2.5bn per week. The advantages of this policy is that it's £2.5bn per week which subsidises the beleaguered hotel and catering industry as well as hermetically sealing off people who test positive from the wider community resulting in a huge reduction in the R. Disadvantages are that its an initially costly policy, though as it is one which will being the R down very rapidly the cost goes down very quickly. It may also discourage people from being tested, but the generous nature of the scheme should avoid this.
2. All arrivals in the UK should be quarantined at their own expense for 5 days in hotels near the airport and then tested with an accurate PCR test, people who test negative go home, those who don't continue in separation at their own expense until two negative tests in a row are recorded. This will destroy the international tourism sector, however this is a necessary cost to avoid another lockdown which will wipe another 7-9% off GDP. Advantages - after 5 days almost all cases are caught, another big win for UK hotels and catering. Disadvantages - it discourages tourism which may or may not be good.
These three policies are all workable, the first is a high cost, though much lower than the cost of a second lockdown. The second would put IAG and EasyJet out of business and support would need to be provided to keep them going, again cheaper than a second lockdown. The final policy is free and would make people more confident in knowing what is and isn't allowed whe heading out of the front door.
Stay classy and presidential.
Or are we going full Moldavian wedding here?
https://twitter.com/SimonFRCox/status/1314645009992474626
But this isn't a hill I'm prepared to die on.
"Faith leaders back Biden in sign that evangelical support for Trump is waning"
Looks encouraging.
So the key point about the article is the intention that Stratton should lead daily press briefings on behalf of the government, and that this in itself is yet another step to undermine the role of parliament and create a more presidential system of government. The expectation is that the trend to announcing government policies or thinking via the media rather than via parliament will increase. In this respect, Kettle has a point - a further move away from parliamentary democracy.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
You wouldn't, for example, expect places like Utah and Oklahoma to be recording over a thousand new cases a day but it appears that's where we are.
There is a stench of death and decay about Trump's campaign and he is lashing out because he knows it.
https://twitter.com/MattHancock/status/1314647163289436160?s=20
https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1314647752505257986
These kids should have been given MacBooks.
For years we had the whole of budgets pre-announced through the media and we know what Boris is going to announce on Monday.
And every day we get the PM spoke person said x, the lobby were briefed y.
I honestly don't see that much of a difference.
In fact it will be harder to anonymously brief something if it's then going to be quoted and asked about on live TV later on.
When I first moved to Canada I hadn't a clue what a Chesterfield was. Let alone being asked to sit in the "loveseat".
Oh, and kill off the privilege of the select few Lobby hacks, which is why they’re raving mad about it.
There are no exemptions to the quarantine period but the payment is waived if you are visiting a terminally ill family member.
As you say, it has wrecked the not-insignificant tourism sector and that has serious economic consequences for the country.
2) I’d just give them rapid antigen tests, the most accurate available, and if positive do 1).
BBC News - MPs could get £3,000 pay rise under new proposals
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54481234
Quel surprise - another game of Attention-seeking Imaginary Whackafox.
No blue screen of death with them.
The UK, unlike NZ, has a huge tourism deficit. People who live here spend far, far more money overseas than tourists do in the UK. Closing down tourism and keeping UK tourist money in bank accounts as a higher savings rate or spent on UK hospitality is probably economically better for us than turning off tourism for NZ. We're a larger market economy as well so much closer to self sustaining growth than somewhere like NZ.
Of course, if we’d kept that bureaucracy in place, the same people would instead be complaining that the government hadn’t delivered whatever it was they were trying to buy.
PS This is the internet, so I should make clear that this is not a serious proposal
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/
https://twitter.com/CharlotteChar22/status/1314645979367452672?s=19
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/09/sadiq-khan-further-covid-restrictions-london-inevitable
"The latest figures for London, published on Friday, show that Richmond upon Thames had the highest infection rate in the capital in the week ending 5 October, with 112.1 new cases per 100,000 people. The number of cases in the borough rose to 222 from 89 in the previous week.
The second highest infection rate in London was 108.8 in Redbridge. The number of cases there increased from 240 to 332.
The Evening Standard reported that some of the figures in London may be skewed by students from the capital becoming ill at universities outside of their home boroughs.
It reported that an analysis of positive cases in Richmond since 20 September found that out of about half the cases for which the council had postcodes, almost a quarter of them were for places including Manchester, Durham, Leeds and Exeter, suggesting students results were being sent to their GPs at home in London."
So it could well be that some of the leading "hotspots" aren't hotspots at all! There was something very suspicious about Richmond's numbers quadrupling in a week despite having no obvious major sources of new infection to justify it.
Some supermarkets have started handing them out at the entrance to the maskless, and it takes away most of the arguments about not having them.
Might also ensure decent quality of masks worn.
Incredible.