I can forgive a government spending money too indiscriminately in a crisis and therefore wasting some of it. You don't have time to decide what will work so you simply have to try a bunch of stuff and find out.
What I can't forgive is two things.
Firstly, there's evidence that money was spent with a high degree of discrimination, but the deciding qualification was being mates with someone in government. We've heard from domestic manufacturers of PPE who couldn't get phone calls returned from government. That's not mistakes made due to a lack of discrimination, it's the wrong sort of discrimination being applied.
Secondly, this mode of decision-making, once established, has now continued, even though we are well past the peak crisis days in March and April. Even if you can justify the contracts as temporary expedients in a crisis, that time should by now have passed.
When the case for austerity is made in the years ahead I won't forget which politicians allowed the public purse to be plundered under cover of this crisis.
I think this is a reasonable approach. Crisis gives a lot of latitude, but not total.
It's the difference between making a profit and profiteering.
The so-called "jewellery designer" was actually an "importer" and he assisted in using contacts in China to "import" goods.
"Importer paid to import goods" is such a slow news day story.
That’s not quite accurate though is it. There was the company set up by a jewellery designer who agreed to provide the goods to the NHS and then another individual who was used by him to help source the goods in China. It’s the latter who was paid £21 million by the former. Whether it was out out of the £197 million paid by the NHS to the supplier or on top of, is not clear but it ultimately came from the NHS.
No idea whether a 10.65% commission charge is normal. Whether the whole contract was value for money for the NHS who knows. Why the NHS and the government were so unprepared and so lacking in secure and robust contacts with actual suppliers and manufacturers and what lessons should be learned from all this will be one for any inquiry, if we get one.
Businesses seek to make a profit shouldn't be a shocker, that is why people go into business. If the contracted supplier pays subcontractors to honour the contract, then so long as the contract is honoured then that is a supply chain working.
10.65% commission doesn't sound to me to be extortionate under the circumstances, especially if that includes shipping or handling charges. Many businesses operate using thicker margins than that and quite reasonably too - a bottle of beer at the supermarket can cost as little as 50p but that same bottle sold in a pub can be measured in pounds not pennies. Does that make every landlord or landlady in the country a rip off? Or are there costs and factors involved in operating businesses that need to be factored into considerations?
Secure and robust contracts don't exist when we're in a pandemic situation and goods are being demanded in volumes that aren't normally and formerly reliable suppliers are seeing their stockpiles requisitioned by foreign states.
But these generalities cannot and should not be rolled out to defend the indefensible.
Indeed.
But we're not talking about defending the indefensible, we're talking (again) about the government succeeeding completely in securing supplies of PPE for doctors and nurses during a pandemic.
Well done them! Great competence.
That was not the response I was looking for. The risk here - now compounded - is that you come across as someone on the Johnson payroll rather than as a fiercely independent internet blogger who calls out suspected wrongdoing without fear or favour.
The response you were looking for is for me to join in a witch hunt?
The criticism at the time, from good Doctor Foxy here and others as well as the Labour Party - was that the NHS was on the brink of running out of PPE, that the situation in Foxy's words was "desperate" and the government had the responsibility to do what needed to be done to secure PPE.
They did.
Now people whinge. Get over it. They did their job during a pandemic. Had we run out of PPE that would have been a story, so instead of saying "well done" for securing what needed to be secured instead people are trying to whinge about the way it was done.
It is pathetic.
They allowed the crisis to develop and then allowed their cronies to profiteer from it.
What's pathetic is defending that state of affairs.
They created and developed COVID19?
I think you may have been watching too many conspiracy theory videos. Was it all done to allow microchips?
I'm talking about the lack of resilience in the system due to neglect in prior years. The pandemic exposed this. When the tide goes out we see who has not bothered with trunks. As for corrupt cronyism running rife in government, by all means carry on with the "nothing to see here" shtick, I certainly can't stop you, but be aware that there is a price to pay. For the country, obviously, but also for you. Because the day will come when you wish to tear into an administration you do not support for this sort of behaviour. And you won't be able to. You'll be muzzled. Imagine how that will feel.
But there was resilience.
Because the economy had been managed and not running a maxed out credit card deficit like we were in 2006-07 before the last recession hit we had the ability to react and protect the economy and healthcare system and spend what needed to be done. This is why sound sane economics is not to splash every penny during the good times, because when the bad times come it needs to be done then.
As for muzzling, since I am not seeking to deny free speech for people who want to spread ignorant codswallop - and since I condemn the government when its actually appropriate to do so - I don't see why I would be muzzled.
This is, to borrow a phrase, ignorant codswallop. There is no national credit card. If there were, it was not maxed out prior to the GFC. If it had been, it made precisely zero difference to the cause of the GFC, its impact or our recovery from it. The difference between then and now is that Boris and Rishi recognise that austerity was wrong.
There is a national credit card, it is our national deficit. It was maxed out prior to the GFC, running at nearly 3% with the Chancellor boasting he was "below" the 3% limit in the EU Treaties. But the problem was he was running at 3% during the period of growth before the crisis hit.
It didn't cause the GFC but that's irrelevant. The GFC happening wasn't the problem, the UK having a maxed out credit card when the GFC happened was the bigger problem. Recessions happen from time to time, you should be prepared for when they do not attempt to "abolish boom and bust".
Our recovery was impacted as instead of going from eg a small surplus (as we should have had at that stage of the economy) to eg a 5% or 6% deficit we were nakedly exposed with a pre-existing 3% deficit that avalanched into a 10% one. That was catastrophic.
Austerity isn't necessary now because the economy was managed sounder in the past before this hit.
Jeez, so hateful. Maybe like when Corbyn says something was overstated but clarifies he did not mean things were overstated, they in fact mean the opposite of what they say. But I doubt it.
I have not been a Labour voter - but WTF are people like this doing in the Labour Party?
If they want leftish sounding policies plus antisemitism, the BNP is over *there*.
The so-called "jewellery designer" was actually an "importer" and he assisted in using contacts in China to "import" goods.
"Importer paid to import goods" is such a slow news day story.
That’s not quite accurate though is it. There was the company set up by a jewellery designer who agreed to provide the goods to the NHS and then another individual who was used by him to help source the goods in China. It’s the latter who was paid £21 million by the former. Whether it was out out of the £197 million paid by the NHS to the supplier or on top of, is not clear but it ultimately came from the NHS.
No idea whether a 10.65% commission charge is normal. Whether the whole contract was value for money for the NHS who knows. Why the NHS and the government were so unprepared and so lacking in secure and robust contacts with actual suppliers and manufacturers and what lessons should be learned from all this will be one for any inquiry, if we get one.
Businesses seek to make a profit shouldn't be a shocker, that is why people go into business. If the contracted supplier pays subcontractors to honour the contract, then so long as the contract is honoured then that is a supply chain working.
10.65% commission doesn't sound to me to be extortionate under the circumstances, especially if that includes shipping or handling charges. Many businesses operate using thicker margins than that and quite reasonably too - a bottle of beer at the supermarket can cost as little as 50p but that same bottle sold in a pub can be measured in pounds not pennies. Does that make every landlord or landlady in the country a rip off? Or are there costs and factors involved in operating businesses that need to be factored into considerations?
Secure and robust contracts don't exist when we're in a pandemic situation and goods are being demanded in volumes that aren't normally and formerly reliable suppliers are seeing their stockpiles requisitioned by foreign states.
But these generalities cannot and should not be rolled out to defend the indefensible.
Indeed.
But we're not talking about defending the indefensible, we're talking (again) about the government succeeeding completely in securing supplies of PPE for doctors and nurses during a pandemic.
Well done them! Great competence.
That was not the response I was looking for. The risk here - now compounded - is that you come across as someone on the Johnson payroll rather than as a fiercely independent internet blogger who calls out suspected wrongdoing without fear or favour.
The response you were looking for is for me to join in a witch hunt?
The criticism at the time, from good Doctor Foxy here and others as well as the Labour Party - was that the NHS was on the brink of running out of PPE, that the situation in Foxy's words was "desperate" and the government had the responsibility to do what needed to be done to secure PPE.
They did.
Now people whinge. Get over it. They did their job during a pandemic. Had we run out of PPE that would have been a story, so instead of saying "well done" for securing what needed to be secured instead people are trying to whinge about the way it was done.
It is pathetic.
They allowed the crisis to develop and then allowed their cronies to profiteer from it.
What's pathetic is defending that state of affairs.
They created and developed COVID19?
I think you may have been watching too many conspiracy theory videos. Was it all done to allow microchips?
I'm talking about the lack of resilience in the system due to neglect in prior years. The pandemic exposed this. When the tide goes out we see who has not bothered with trunks. As for corrupt cronyism running rife in government, by all means carry on with the "nothing to see here" shtick, I certainly can't stop you, but be aware that there is a price to pay. For the country, obviously, but also for you. Because the day will come when you wish to tear into an administration you do not support for this sort of behaviour. And you won't be able to. You'll be muzzled. Imagine how that will feel.
But there was resilience.
Because the economy had been managed and not running a maxed out credit card deficit like we were in 2006-07 before the last recession hit we had the ability to react and protect the economy and healthcare system and spend what needed to be done. This is why sound sane economics is not to splash every penny during the good times, because when the bad times come it needs to be done then.
As for muzzling, since I am not seeking to deny free speech for people who want to spread ignorant codswallop - and since I condemn the government when its actually appropriate to do so - I don't see why I would be muzzled.
The sort of muzzle I'm talking about does not stop someone talking - it just stops them doing so with credibility. The design is such that it lets the words out but ruins their impact by superimposing a chant of "double standards!". You'll find it unpleasant to wear, trust me.
As for the rest - deflecting and obscuring. The resilience in the area we are discussing was clearly not there. Or not enough of it anyway. Hence the PPE shambles. Some of it can be explained away by the sheer size and speed of onset of the pandemic, but by no means all of it.
1992. Kirsty McColl sang different lyrics on top of the pops
Almost 30 years ago now.
1992 almost 30 years ago you say?! Wow!!
Faggot was always a pejorative borderline swear word anyway, so it’s not a surprise it’s been edited previously, more surprising if it hadn’t
As a kid, faggot meant to me either a spicy sausage type food or firewood. The other meaning came later but was rarely heard.
Still buy faggots from the chippie or the traditional butcher from time to time...
The primary meaning of faggot in the UK is the food. The other meaning is mostly American.
not when I was growing up. People found it amusing there was a food named that precisely as it was not their primary thought.
Same here. Its probably an age-related thing but I don't think the food has been the primary meaning for decades or probably even nearly half a century now.
I was a child when Fairytale of New York came out and already by then I'd suggest the American meaning was more the primary meaning here.
Keir isn't old Labour, he's not Blairite Labour either.
He's sort of soft-left Labour, which even under Ed M was never really in control of the party, in some respects I suppose you could argue he's Wilson Labour which won a landslide
Jeez, so hateful. Maybe like when Corbyn says something was overstated but clarifies he did not mean things were overstated, they in fact mean the opposite of what they say. But I doubt it.
I have not been a Labour voter - but WTF are people like this doing in the Labour Party?
If they want leftish sounding policies plus antisemitism, the BNP is over *there*.
In addition to hateful, violent racism, some Labour Party members it seems, also suffer with erroneous grammar. It looks like they struggle with tenses as well as anti-Semitism.
The so-called "jewellery designer" was actually an "importer" and he assisted in using contacts in China to "import" goods.
"Importer paid to import goods" is such a slow news day story.
That’s not quite accurate though is it. There was the company set up by a jewellery designer who agreed to provide the goods to the NHS and then another individual who was used by him to help source the goods in China. It’s the latter who was paid £21 million by the former. Whether it was out out of the £197 million paid by the NHS to the supplier or on top of, is not clear but it ultimately came from the NHS.
No idea whether a 10.65% commission charge is normal. Whether the whole contract was value for money for the NHS who knows. Why the NHS and the government were so unprepared and so lacking in secure and robust contacts with actual suppliers and manufacturers and what lessons should be learned from all this will be one for any inquiry, if we get one.
Businesses seek to make a profit shouldn't be a shocker, that is why people go into business. If the contracted supplier pays subcontractors to honour the contract, then so long as the contract is honoured then that is a supply chain working.
10.65% commission doesn't sound to me to be extortionate under the circumstances, especially if that includes shipping or handling charges. Many businesses operate using thicker margins than that and quite reasonably too - a bottle of beer at the supermarket can cost as little as 50p but that same bottle sold in a pub can be measured in pounds not pennies. Does that make every landlord or landlady in the country a rip off? Or are there costs and factors involved in operating businesses that need to be factored into considerations?
Secure and robust contracts don't exist when we're in a pandemic situation and goods are being demanded in volumes that aren't normally and formerly reliable suppliers are seeing their stockpiles requisitioned by foreign states.
But these generalities cannot and should not be rolled out to defend the indefensible.
Indeed.
But we're not talking about defending the indefensible, we're talking (again) about the government succeeeding completely in securing supplies of PPE for doctors and nurses during a pandemic.
Well done them! Great competence.
That was not the response I was looking for. The risk here - now compounded - is that you come across as someone on the Johnson payroll rather than as a fiercely independent internet blogger who calls out suspected wrongdoing without fear or favour.
The response you were looking for is for me to join in a witch hunt?
The criticism at the time, from good Doctor Foxy here and others as well as the Labour Party - was that the NHS was on the brink of running out of PPE, that the situation in Foxy's words was "desperate" and the government had the responsibility to do what needed to be done to secure PPE.
They did.
Now people whinge. Get over it. They did their job during a pandemic. Had we run out of PPE that would have been a story, so instead of saying "well done" for securing what needed to be secured instead people are trying to whinge about the way it was done.
It is pathetic.
They allowed the crisis to develop and then allowed their cronies to profiteer from it.
What's pathetic is defending that state of affairs.
They created and developed COVID19?
I think you may have been watching too many conspiracy theory videos. Was it all done to allow microchips?
I'm talking about the lack of resilience in the system due to neglect in prior years. The pandemic exposed this. When the tide goes out we see who has not bothered with trunks. As for corrupt cronyism running rife in government, by all means carry on with the "nothing to see here" shtick, I certainly can't stop you, but be aware that there is a price to pay. For the country, obviously, but also for you. Because the day will come when you wish to tear into an administration you do not support for this sort of behaviour. And you won't be able to. You'll be muzzled. Imagine how that will feel.
But there was resilience.
Because the economy had been managed and not running a maxed out credit card deficit like we were in 2006-07 before the last recession hit we had the ability to react and protect the economy and healthcare system and spend what needed to be done. This is why sound sane economics is not to splash every penny during the good times, because when the bad times come it needs to be done then.
As for muzzling, since I am not seeking to deny free speech for people who want to spread ignorant codswallop - and since I condemn the government when its actually appropriate to do so - I don't see why I would be muzzled.
The sort of muzzle I'm talking about does not stop someone talking - it just stops them doing so with credibility. The design is such that it lets the words out but ruins their impact by superimposing a chant of "double standards!". You'll find it unpleasant to wear, trust me.
As for the rest - deflecting and obscuring. The resilience in the area we are discussing was clearly not there. Or not enough of it anyway. Hence the PPE shambles. Some of it can be explained away by the sheer size and speed of onset of the pandemic, but by no means all of it.
Of course all of it can be explained by the sheer size and speed of onset of the pandemic.
At the peak of the pandemic we were using a year's worth of PPE every single week. Within 10 weeks we were using a decade's PPE - and that was needed on an ongoing basis - and the supply chains were interrupted by other nations requisitioning our orders.
So just what "resilience" were you expecting? Did you want a century's worth of PPE to be hoarded?
1992. Kirsty McColl sang different lyrics on top of the pops
Almost 30 years ago now.
1992 almost 30 years ago you say?! Wow!!
Faggot was always a pejorative borderline swear word anyway, so it’s not a surprise it’s been edited previously, more surprising if it hadn’t
As a kid, faggot meant to me either a spicy sausage type food or firewood. The other meaning came later but was rarely heard.
Still buy faggots from the chippie or the traditional butcher from time to time...
The primary meaning of faggot in the UK is the food. The other meaning is mostly American.
not when I was growing up. People found it amusing there was a food named that precisely as it was not their primary thought.
Same here. Its probably an age-related thing but I don't think the food has been the primary meaning for decades or probably even nearly half a century now.
I was a child when Fairytale of New York came out and already by then I'd suggest the American meaning was more the primary meaning here.
Since it is plainly used as an insult in the song it is unlikely food was intended. Oh for the days we used to argue whether it was 10/1 or 18/1.
Keir isn't old Labour, he's not Blairite Labour either.
He's sort of soft-left Labour, which even under Ed M was never really in control of the party, in some respects I suppose you could argue he's Wilson Labour which won a landslide
That sworn declaration doesn't quite square with Palmer's public statements.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/wayne-county-election/2020/11/18/b515fa14-29c9-11eb-92b7-6ef17b3fe3b4_story.html ...She says she knew that Biden had won Michigan and did not intend to block or overturn his victory. But she had one lever to pull, to force local election authorities to solve the problem: She could vote “nay.” If she and her fellow Republican member did that, then the decision on whether to certify Wayne County’s results would be kicked up to a statewide board, also split two-to-two. That would take another few days. Maybe the state would work harder to solve Wayne County’s problems. And local authorities would take her warnings seriously next time. “I wasn’t taking votes away from anybody,” Palmer said. “I was allowing the state to find the explanations.”
…Palmer says she meant her vote as a narrow protest aimed at local election practices, not a decision that would swing the election...
Keir isn't old Labour, he's not Blairite Labour either.
He's sort of soft-left Labour, which even under Ed M was never really in control of the party, in some respects I suppose you could argue he's Wilson Labour which won a landslide
True the landslide was in 1966 after a narrow win in 1964, after 13 years of opposition. If Starmer can get the tories out even with a minority government, then he might get a majority like Wilson with a second election.
Off topic, the new green deal, the major defence announcement and (very probably) the imminent Brexit deal are all very obviously part of a plan for a sustained Unionist assault on the SNP for 2021.
Someone's been doing some thinking (not Boris).
Yes, things are afoot. I think that Johnson, figuring his days may be numbered, is turning his attention to his legacy (like May did). I know some on here disagree, but Johnson is a great believer in the union and is appalled at the way things are going, and under his watch. (If he had his time again would he have supported Brexit?)
I think he would because it took him to Number 10. But I don't for one minute think he believes in it.
I think he believes in it but not to the extent that it would damage the union. The full concerns about the union were not exposed, or known, in the run up to the referendum - at least not entirely. It especially dawned on me in 2019. I recall posting about it here, saying that I`d concluded that May`s deal was better than Johnson`s because it better protected the union.
Some brexiters care passionately about the union, some don`t. I`ve met both types. Johnson is in the former tribe.
I`ve recounted a conversation I had with Chris HH in May 2019 about this on here before. I said something along the lines of "and, of course, members of the ERG will be concerned about implications for the union". I was shocked when he said "well, some are".
TBH I struggle to impute any political principles to Johnson other than a vague right of centre liberalism. I really do think he's driven close to 100% by personal ambition and an exceptional sense of entitlement. But FWIW, yes, if we ignore what is good for him personally, I would think the Union matters more to him than Brexit does.
1992. Kirsty McColl sang different lyrics on top of the pops
Almost 30 years ago now.
1992 almost 30 years ago you say?! Wow!!
Faggot was always a pejorative borderline swear word anyway, so it’s not a surprise it’s been edited previously, more surprising if it hadn’t
As a kid, faggot meant to me either a spicy sausage type food or firewood. The other meaning came later but was rarely heard.
Still buy faggots from the chippie or the traditional butcher from time to time...
The primary meaning of faggot in the UK is the food. The other meaning is mostly American.
not when I was growing up. People found it amusing there was a food named that precisely as it was not their primary thought.
Same here. Its probably an age-related thing but I don't think the food has been the primary meaning for decades or probably even nearly half a century now.
I was a child when Fairytale of New York came out and already by then I'd suggest the American meaning was more the primary meaning here.
Paragraph 1. It is, and always has been in my world of Guardian, liberal wokery!
The so-called "jewellery designer" was actually an "importer" and he assisted in using contacts in China to "import" goods.
"Importer paid to import goods" is such a slow news day story.
That’s not quite accurate though is it. There was the company set up by a jewellery designer who agreed to provide the goods to the NHS and then another individual who was used by him to help source the goods in China. It’s the latter who was paid £21 million by the former. Whether it was out out of the £197 million paid by the NHS to the supplier or on top of, is not clear but it ultimately came from the NHS.
No idea whether a 10.65% commission charge is normal. Whether the whole contract was value for money for the NHS who knows. Why the NHS and the government were so unprepared and so lacking in secure and robust contacts with actual suppliers and manufacturers and what lessons should be learned from all this will be one for any inquiry, if we get one.
Businesses seek to make a profit shouldn't be a shocker, that is why people go into business. If the contracted supplier pays subcontractors to honour the contract, then so long as the contract is honoured then that is a supply chain working.
10.65% commission doesn't sound to me to be extortionate under the circumstances, especially if that includes shipping or handling charges. Many businesses operate using thicker margins than that and quite reasonably too - a bottle of beer at the supermarket can cost as little as 50p but that same bottle sold in a pub can be measured in pounds not pennies. Does that make every landlord or landlady in the country a rip off? Or are there costs and factors involved in operating businesses that need to be factored into considerations?
Secure and robust contracts don't exist when we're in a pandemic situation and goods are being demanded in volumes that aren't normally and formerly reliable suppliers are seeing their stockpiles requisitioned by foreign states.
But these generalities cannot and should not be rolled out to defend the indefensible.
Indeed.
But we're not talking about defending the indefensible, we're talking (again) about the government succeeeding completely in securing supplies of PPE for doctors and nurses during a pandemic.
Well done them! Great competence.
That was not the response I was looking for. The risk here - now compounded - is that you come across as someone on the Johnson payroll rather than as a fiercely independent internet blogger who calls out suspected wrongdoing without fear or favour.
The response you were looking for is for me to join in a witch hunt?
The criticism at the time, from good Doctor Foxy here and others as well as the Labour Party - was that the NHS was on the brink of running out of PPE, that the situation in Foxy's words was "desperate" and the government had the responsibility to do what needed to be done to secure PPE.
They did.
Now people whinge. Get over it. They did their job during a pandemic. Had we run out of PPE that would have been a story, so instead of saying "well done" for securing what needed to be secured instead people are trying to whinge about the way it was done.
It is pathetic.
They allowed the crisis to develop and then allowed their cronies to profiteer from it.
What's pathetic is defending that state of affairs.
They created and developed COVID19?
I think you may have been watching too many conspiracy theory videos. Was it all done to allow microchips?
I'm talking about the lack of resilience in the system due to neglect in prior years. The pandemic exposed this. When the tide goes out we see who has not bothered with trunks. As for corrupt cronyism running rife in government, by all means carry on with the "nothing to see here" shtick, I certainly can't stop you, but be aware that there is a price to pay. For the country, obviously, but also for you. Because the day will come when you wish to tear into an administration you do not support for this sort of behaviour. And you won't be able to. You'll be muzzled. Imagine how that will feel.
But there was resilience.
Because the economy had been managed and not running a maxed out credit card deficit like we were in 2006-07 before the last recession hit we had the ability to react and protect the economy and healthcare system and spend what needed to be done. This is why sound sane economics is not to splash every penny during the good times, because when the bad times come it needs to be done then.
As for muzzling, since I am not seeking to deny free speech for people who want to spread ignorant codswallop - and since I condemn the government when its actually appropriate to do so - I don't see why I would be muzzled.
The sort of muzzle I'm talking about does not stop someone talking - it just stops them doing so with credibility. The design is such that it lets the words out but ruins their impact by superimposing a chant of "double standards!". You'll find it unpleasant to wear, trust me.
As for the rest - deflecting and obscuring. The resilience in the area we are discussing was clearly not there. Or not enough of it anyway. Hence the PPE shambles. Some of it can be explained away by the sheer size and speed of onset of the pandemic, but by no means all of it.
Of course all of it can be explained by the sheer size and speed of onset of the pandemic.
At the peak of the pandemic we were using a year's worth of PPE every single week. Within 10 weeks we were using a decade's PPE - and that was needed on an ongoing basis - and the supply chains were interrupted by other nations requisitioning our orders.
So just what "resilience" were you expecting? Did you want a century's worth of PPE to be hoarded?
Off topic, the new green deal, the major defence announcement and (very probably) the imminent Brexit deal are all very obviously part of a plan for a sustained Unionist assault on the SNP for 2021.
Someone's been doing some thinking (not Boris).
Are you sure? They all look a bit like a garden bridge to me.
Have they mentioned the North Channel bridge yet, the one from Scotland to NI? (Seriously.)
As a taxpayer in England and Wales, I want no part in investing my tax pounds on a white elephant that when, in the unlikely event it is ever built, will connect two foreign powers (Scotland and Ireland) together by a road bridge!
It is a central UK initiative, from Mr J. Of UK wide importance, certainly as he presented it.
Disclaimer: I don't believe the bridge will be built in my lifetime, on, in, or under the water.
Off topic, the new green deal, the major defence announcement and (very probably) the imminent Brexit deal are all very obviously part of a plan for a sustained Unionist assault on the SNP for 2021.
Someone's been doing some thinking (not Boris).
Yes, things are afoot. I think that Johnson, figuring his days may be numbered, is turning his attention to his legacy (like May did). I know some on here disagree, but Johnson is a great believer in the union and is appalled at the way things are going, and under his watch. (If he had his time again would he have supported Brexit?)
I think he would because it took him to Number 10. But I don't for one minute think he believes in it.
I think he believes in it but not to the extent that it would damage the union. The full concerns about the union were not exposed, or known, in the run up to the referendum - at least not entirely. It especially dawned on me in 2019. I recall posting about it here, saying that I`d concluded that May`s deal was better than Johnson`s because it better protected the union.
Some brexiters care passionately about the union, some don`t. I`ve met both types. Johnson is in the former tribe.
I`ve recounted a conversation I had with Chris HH in May 2019 about this on here before. I said something along the lines of "and, of course, members of the ERG will be concerned about implications for the union". I was shocked when he said "well, some are".
TBH I struggle to impute any political principles to Johnson other than a vague right of centre liberalism. I really do think he's driven close to 100% by personal ambition and an exceptional sense of entitlement. But FWIW, yes, if we ignore what is good for him personally, I would think the Union matters more to him than Brexit does.
As a vaguely unimpressive Historian, I would suggest legacy might be of some importance to Johnson. His legacy is looking like it might be hugely unimpressive at this point in time.
1992. Kirsty McColl sang different lyrics on top of the pops
Almost 30 years ago now.
1992 almost 30 years ago you say?! Wow!!
Faggot was always a pejorative borderline swear word anyway, so it’s not a surprise it’s been edited previously, more surprising if it hadn’t
As a kid, faggot meant to me either a spicy sausage type food or firewood. The other meaning came later but was rarely heard.
Still buy faggots from the chippie or the traditional butcher from time to time...
The primary meaning of faggot in the UK is the food. The other meaning is mostly American.
not when I was growing up. People found it amusing there was a food named that precisely as it was not their primary thought.
Same here. Its probably an age-related thing but I don't think the food has been the primary meaning for decades or probably even nearly half a century now.
I was a child when Fairytale of New York came out and already by then I'd suggest the American meaning was more the primary meaning here.
It might depend where you live as well. In the vicinity of the Black Country it's still a very popular food.
That sworn declaration doesn't quite square with Palmer's public statements.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/wayne-county-election/2020/11/18/b515fa14-29c9-11eb-92b7-6ef17b3fe3b4_story.html ...She says she knew that Biden had won Michigan and did not intend to block or overturn his victory. But she had one lever to pull, to force local election authorities to solve the problem: She could vote “nay.” If she and her fellow Republican member did that, then the decision on whether to certify Wayne County’s results would be kicked up to a statewide board, also split two-to-two. That would take another few days. Maybe the state would work harder to solve Wayne County’s problems. And local authorities would take her warnings seriously next time. “I wasn’t taking votes away from anybody,” Palmer said. “I was allowing the state to find the explanations.”
…Palmer says she meant her vote as a narrow protest aimed at local election practices, not a decision that would swing the election...
Nor is playing games like that an appropriate thing to do anyway
Off topic, the new green deal, the major defence announcement and (very probably) the imminent Brexit deal are all very obviously part of a plan for a sustained Unionist assault on the SNP for 2021.
Someone's been doing some thinking (not Boris).
Are you sure? They all look a bit like a garden bridge to me.
Have they mentioned the North Channel bridge yet, the one from Scotland to NI? (Seriously.)
As a taxpayer in England and Wales, I want no part in investing my tax pounds on a white elephant that when, in the unlikely event it is ever built, will connect two foreign powers (Scotland and Ireland) together by a road bridge!
It is a central UK initiative, from Mr J. Of UK wide importance, certainly as he presented it.
Disclaimer: I don't believe the bridge will be built in my lifetime, on, in, or under the water.
That is Johnson's genius.
Promise wildly ambitious "moonshots", none of which will transpire during the lifetime of even his youngest audience member.
1992. Kirsty McColl sang different lyrics on top of the pops
Almost 30 years ago now.
1992 almost 30 years ago you say?! Wow!!
Faggot was always a pejorative borderline swear word anyway, so it’s not a surprise it’s been edited previously, more surprising if it hadn’t
As a kid, faggot meant to me either a spicy sausage type food or firewood. The other meaning came later but was rarely heard.
Still buy faggots from the chippie or the traditional butcher from time to time...
The primary meaning of faggot in the UK is the food. The other meaning is mostly American.
not when I was growing up. People found it amusing there was a food named that precisely as it was not their primary thought.
Same here. Its probably an age-related thing but I don't think the food has been the primary meaning for decades or probably even nearly half a century now.
I was a child when Fairytale of New York came out and already by then I'd suggest the American meaning was more the primary meaning here.
It might depend where you live as well. In the vicinity of the Black Country it's still a very popular food.
The so-called "jewellery designer" was actually an "importer" and he assisted in using contacts in China to "import" goods.
"Importer paid to import goods" is such a slow news day story.
That’s not quite accurate though is it. There was the company set up by a jewellery designer who agreed to provide the goods to the NHS and then another individual who was used by him to help source the goods in China. It’s the latter who was paid £21 million by the former. Whether it was out out of the £197 million paid by the NHS to the supplier or on top of, is not clear but it ultimately came from the NHS.
No idea whether a 10.65% commission charge is normal. Whether the whole contract was value for money for the NHS who knows. Why the NHS and the government were so unprepared and so lacking in secure and robust contacts with actual suppliers and manufacturers and what lessons should be learned from all this will be one for any inquiry, if we get one.
Businesses seek to make a profit shouldn't be a shocker, that is why people go into business. If the contracted supplier pays subcontractors to honour the contract, then so long as the contract is honoured then that is a supply chain working.
10.65% commission doesn't sound to me to be extortionate under the circumstances, especially if that includes shipping or handling charges. Many businesses operate using thicker margins than that and quite reasonably too - a bottle of beer at the supermarket can cost as little as 50p but that same bottle sold in a pub can be measured in pounds not pennies. Does that make every landlord or landlady in the country a rip off? Or are there costs and factors involved in operating businesses that need to be factored into considerations?
Secure and robust contracts don't exist when we're in a pandemic situation and goods are being demanded in volumes that aren't normally and formerly reliable suppliers are seeing their stockpiles requisitioned by foreign states.
But these generalities cannot and should not be rolled out to defend the indefensible.
Indeed.
But we're not talking about defending the indefensible, we're talking (again) about the government succeeeding completely in securing supplies of PPE for doctors and nurses during a pandemic.
Well done them! Great competence.
That was not the response I was looking for. The risk here - now compounded - is that you come across as someone on the Johnson payroll rather than as a fiercely independent internet blogger who calls out suspected wrongdoing without fear or favour.
The response you were looking for is for me to join in a witch hunt?
The criticism at the time, from good Doctor Foxy here and others as well as the Labour Party - was that the NHS was on the brink of running out of PPE, that the situation in Foxy's words was "desperate" and the government had the responsibility to do what needed to be done to secure PPE.
They did.
Now people whinge. Get over it. They did their job during a pandemic. Had we run out of PPE that would have been a story, so instead of saying "well done" for securing what needed to be secured instead people are trying to whinge about the way it was done.
It is pathetic.
They allowed the crisis to develop and then allowed their cronies to profiteer from it.
What's pathetic is defending that state of affairs.
They created and developed COVID19?
I think you may have been watching too many conspiracy theory videos. Was it all done to allow microchips?
I'm talking about the lack of resilience in the system due to neglect in prior years. The pandemic exposed this. When the tide goes out we see who has not bothered with trunks. As for corrupt cronyism running rife in government, by all means carry on with the "nothing to see here" shtick, I certainly can't stop you, but be aware that there is a price to pay. For the country, obviously, but also for you. Because the day will come when you wish to tear into an administration you do not support for this sort of behaviour. And you won't be able to. You'll be muzzled. Imagine how that will feel.
But there was resilience.
Because the economy had been managed and not running a maxed out credit card deficit like we were in 2006-07 before the last recession hit we had the ability to react and protect the economy and healthcare system and spend what needed to be done. This is why sound sane economics is not to splash every penny during the good times, because when the bad times come it needs to be done then.
As for muzzling, since I am not seeking to deny free speech for people who want to spread ignorant codswallop - and since I condemn the government when its actually appropriate to do so - I don't see why I would be muzzled.
This is, to borrow a phrase, ignorant codswallop. There is no national credit card. If there were, it was not maxed out prior to the GFC. If it had been, it made precisely zero difference to the cause of the GFC, its impact or our recovery from it. The difference between then and now is that Boris and Rishi recognise that austerity was wrong.
There is a national credit card, it is our national deficit. It was maxed out prior to the GFC, running at nearly 3% with the Chancellor boasting he was "below" the 3% limit in the EU Treaties. But the problem was he was running at 3% during the period of growth before the crisis hit.
It didn't cause the GFC but that's irrelevant. The GFC happening wasn't the problem, the UK having a maxed out credit card when the GFC happened was the bigger problem. Recessions happen from time to time, you should be prepared for when they do not attempt to "abolish boom and bust".
Our recovery was impacted as instead of going from eg a small surplus (as we should have had at that stage of the economy) to eg a 5% or 6% deficit we were nakedly exposed with a pre-existing 3% deficit that avalanched into a 10% one. That was catastrophic.
Austerity isn't necessary now because the economy was managed sounder in the past before this hit.
"The GFC happening wasn't the problem" ... Oh no. The Tory Story is cranking up again.
Off topic, the new green deal, the major defence announcement and (very probably) the imminent Brexit deal are all very obviously part of a plan for a sustained Unionist assault on the SNP for 2021.
Someone's been doing some thinking (not Boris).
Are you sure? They all look a bit like a garden bridge to me.
Have they mentioned the North Channel bridge yet, the one from Scotland to NI? (Seriously.)
As a taxpayer in England and Wales, I want no part in investing my tax pounds on a white elephant that when, in the unlikely event it is ever built, will connect two foreign powers (Scotland and Ireland) together by a road bridge!
It is a central UK initiative, from Mr J. Of UK wide importance, certainly as he presented it.
Disclaimer: I don't believe the bridge will be built in my lifetime, on, in, or under the water.
That is Johnson's genius.
Promise wildly ambitious "moonshots", none of which will transpire during the lifetime of even his youngest audience member.
I'm just surprised he hasn't come out with it. Not suggesting he should spend your taxes (or mine) on it. But mayhbe tyhere really is a campaign and this will be re-unveiled. Complete with expensive studies Garden Bridge style.
As Josias Jessop showed when we discussed it some years back it's actually possible, but the topography and geology are horrendous. Is it safe enough (floating bridge uin a shipping lane) and more to the point is itr worth the cost as opposed to a decent ferry service?
Edit: it'll need an island in the middle for the customs, or something. Now.
Trump's net approval down to -20 with Ipsos, could it be a sign that more people are getting fed up with him? though other polling since the election is a bit more mixed
He's just boring. He lost. Everyone knows he lost. He is just a boring bad loser.
Mr. Pete, alongside spineless acquiescence, desire for a legacy (as per May) might be an explanation for his embracing of the global warming agenda.
A good point Mr Dancer. Wonderful ambition, which should it fail in practice due to Johnson forgetting to put in place any infrastructure requirements, no problem. He will be long gone as Prime Minister, enjoying $1,000,000 a night with wife number X?, as an after dinner raconteur in California.
The so-called "jewellery designer" was actually an "importer" and he assisted in using contacts in China to "import" goods.
"Importer paid to import goods" is such a slow news day story.
That’s not quite accurate though is it. There was the company set up by a jewellery designer who agreed to provide the goods to the NHS and then another individual who was used by him to help source the goods in China. It’s the latter who was paid £21 million by the former. Whether it was out out of the £197 million paid by the NHS to the supplier or on top of, is not clear but it ultimately came from the NHS.
No idea whether a 10.65% commission charge is normal. Whether the whole contract was value for money for the NHS who knows. Why the NHS and the government were so unprepared and so lacking in secure and robust contacts with actual suppliers and manufacturers and what lessons should be learned from all this will be one for any inquiry, if we get one.
Businesses seek to make a profit shouldn't be a shocker, that is why people go into business. If the contracted supplier pays subcontractors to honour the contract, then so long as the contract is honoured then that is a supply chain working.
10.65% commission doesn't sound to me to be extortionate under the circumstances, especially if that includes shipping or handling charges. Many businesses operate using thicker margins than that and quite reasonably too - a bottle of beer at the supermarket can cost as little as 50p but that same bottle sold in a pub can be measured in pounds not pennies. Does that make every landlord or landlady in the country a rip off? Or are there costs and factors involved in operating businesses that need to be factored into considerations?
Secure and robust contracts don't exist when we're in a pandemic situation and goods are being demanded in volumes that aren't normally and formerly reliable suppliers are seeing their stockpiles requisitioned by foreign states.
But these generalities cannot and should not be rolled out to defend the indefensible.
Indeed.
But we're not talking about defending the indefensible, we're talking (again) about the government succeeeding completely in securing supplies of PPE for doctors and nurses during a pandemic.
Well done them! Great competence.
That was not the response I was looking for. The risk here - now compounded - is that you come across as someone on the Johnson payroll rather than as a fiercely independent internet blogger who calls out suspected wrongdoing without fear or favour.
The response you were looking for is for me to join in a witch hunt?
The criticism at the time, from good Doctor Foxy here and others as well as the Labour Party - was that the NHS was on the brink of running out of PPE, that the situation in Foxy's words was "desperate" and the government had the responsibility to do what needed to be done to secure PPE.
They did.
Now people whinge. Get over it. They did their job during a pandemic. Had we run out of PPE that would have been a story, so instead of saying "well done" for securing what needed to be secured instead people are trying to whinge about the way it was done.
It is pathetic.
They allowed the crisis to develop and then allowed their cronies to profiteer from it.
What's pathetic is defending that state of affairs.
They created and developed COVID19?
I think you may have been watching too many conspiracy theory videos. Was it all done to allow microchips?
I'm talking about the lack of resilience in the system due to neglect in prior years. The pandemic exposed this. When the tide goes out we see who has not bothered with trunks. As for corrupt cronyism running rife in government, by all means carry on with the "nothing to see here" shtick, I certainly can't stop you, but be aware that there is a price to pay. For the country, obviously, but also for you. Because the day will come when you wish to tear into an administration you do not support for this sort of behaviour. And you won't be able to. You'll be muzzled. Imagine how that will feel.
But there was resilience.
Because the economy had been managed and not running a maxed out credit card deficit like we were in 2006-07 before the last recession hit we had the ability to react and protect the economy and healthcare system and spend what needed to be done. This is why sound sane economics is not to splash every penny during the good times, because when the bad times come it needs to be done then.
As for muzzling, since I am not seeking to deny free speech for people who want to spread ignorant codswallop - and since I condemn the government when its actually appropriate to do so - I don't see why I would be muzzled.
This is, to borrow a phrase, ignorant codswallop. There is no national credit card. If there were, it was not maxed out prior to the GFC. If it had been, it made precisely zero difference to the cause of the GFC, its impact or our recovery from it. The difference between then and now is that Boris and Rishi recognise that austerity was wrong.
There is a national credit card, it is our national deficit. It was maxed out prior to the GFC, running at nearly 3% with the Chancellor boasting he was "below" the 3% limit in the EU Treaties. But the problem was he was running at 3% during the period of growth before the crisis hit.
It didn't cause the GFC but that's irrelevant. The GFC happening wasn't the problem, the UK having a maxed out credit card when the GFC happened was the bigger problem. Recessions happen from time to time, you should be prepared for when they do not attempt to "abolish boom and bust".
Our recovery was impacted as instead of going from eg a small surplus (as we should have had at that stage of the economy) to eg a 5% or 6% deficit we were nakedly exposed with a pre-existing 3% deficit that avalanched into a 10% one. That was catastrophic.
Austerity isn't necessary now because the economy was managed sounder in the past before this hit.
"The GFC happening wasn't the problem" ... Oh no. The Tory Story is cranking up again.
The things you do for love.
The GFC happening wasn't the problem. If it wasn't the GFC then it would have been something else.
Or do you think if it wasn't for the GFC that boom and bust had been abolished.
Gabriel Debenedetti of the "New York Magazine" gives a fascinating insight into the data analytics of the Biden campaign as the election loomed, November 3rd and the days following :
A very good read. Two standouts. The extraordinary amount of information they have on who will vote how and where and a question that isn't addressed but is relevant to the results. Why do uneducated whites vote overwhelmingly for Trump when other uneducated people don't and what is it about Trump that attracts them?
I found it dull. The first three quarters describes comparing actual with expected results, which is what happens on pb every election night (the difference is we want to bet, whereas the campaign wants to update its spin teams for American television). The last quarter, which jumps back in time but was too mundane to lead the piece, has our hero doing the reverse: comparing opinion polls with the swing needed on the night in order to inform strategy. With no technical detail, it is a long statement of the bleeding obvious and it is not even very well written.
I'm sure we don't have that sort of data about backgrounds where people live and who they'll vote for' ....'7 uneducated anti semites in 7 mile Bottom ....Do we put them in the Johnson column or Corbyn's?'
I still cannot get my head round all this anti -semitism thing. I don't even know what being anti-semetic would involve and why people would have such shallow lives that they would be doing it anyway.
For the most part a load of bollocks I'm afraid. Just special pleading for the most part by people for whom Israel can do no wrong.
Another famous song which features the N word is Oliver's Army by Elvis Costello.
I’d know the tune and chorus but no more. Looking it up, it seems to be written about the same subject(s) as his song ‘Shipbuilding’ which I really like - young, poor, unemployed men being carted off to fight/die
Fuck me, Space Command and world beating British lasers have come freshly into existence in BJ's head and we're already being told that they'll be taken away! Can't we just enjoy this exciting bit of science fiction for a wee while?
Off topic, the new green deal, the major defence announcement and (very probably) the imminent Brexit deal are all very obviously part of a plan for a sustained Unionist assault on the SNP for 2021.
Someone's been doing some thinking (not Boris).
Are you sure? They all look a bit like a garden bridge to me.
Have they mentioned the North Channel bridge yet, the one from Scotland to NI? (Seriously.)
As a taxpayer in England and Wales, I want no part in investing my tax pounds on a white elephant that when, in the unlikely event it is ever built, will connect two foreign powers (Scotland and Ireland) together by a road bridge!
It is a central UK initiative, from Mr J. Of UK wide importance, certainly as he presented it.
Disclaimer: I don't believe the bridge will be built in my lifetime, on, in, or under the water.
That is Johnson's genius.
Promise wildly ambitious "moonshots", none of which will transpire during the lifetime of even his youngest audience member.
I'm just surprised he hasn't come out with it. Not suggesting he should spend your taxes (or mine) on it. But mayhbe tyhere really is a campaign and this will be re-unveiled. Complete with expensive studies Garden Bridge style.
As Josias Jessop showed when we discussed it some years back it's actually possible, but the topography and geology are horrendous. Is it safe enough (floating bridge uin a shipping lane) and more to the point is itr worth the cost as opposed to a decent ferry service?
Edit: it'll need an island in the middle for the customs, or something. Now.
... but would such ambition really swing Malcolm's vote?
The so-called "jewellery designer" was actually an "importer" and he assisted in using contacts in China to "import" goods.
"Importer paid to import goods" is such a slow news day story.
That’s not quite accurate though is it. There was the company set up by a jewellery designer who agreed to provide the goods to the NHS and then another individual who was used by him to help source the goods in China. It’s the latter who was paid £21 million by the former. Whether it was out out of the £197 million paid by the NHS to the supplier or on top of, is not clear but it ultimately came from the NHS.
No idea whether a 10.65% commission charge is normal. Whether the whole contract was value for money for the NHS who knows. Why the NHS and the government were so unprepared and so lacking in secure and robust contacts with actual suppliers and manufacturers and what lessons should be learned from all this will be one for any inquiry, if we get one.
Businesses seek to make a profit shouldn't be a shocker, that is why people go into business. If the contracted supplier pays subcontractors to honour the contract, then so long as the contract is honoured then that is a supply chain working.
10.65% commission doesn't sound to me to be extortionate under the circumstances, especially if that includes shipping or handling charges. Many businesses operate using thicker margins than that and quite reasonably too - a bottle of beer at the supermarket can cost as little as 50p but that same bottle sold in a pub can be measured in pounds not pennies. Does that make every landlord or landlady in the country a rip off? Or are there costs and factors involved in operating businesses that need to be factored into considerations?
Secure and robust contracts don't exist when we're in a pandemic situation and goods are being demanded in volumes that aren't normally and formerly reliable suppliers are seeing their stockpiles requisitioned by foreign states.
But these generalities cannot and should not be rolled out to defend the indefensible.
Indeed.
But we're not talking about defending the indefensible, we're talking (again) about the government succeeeding completely in securing supplies of PPE for doctors and nurses during a pandemic.
Well done them! Great competence.
That was not the response I was looking for. The risk here - now compounded - is that you come across as someone on the Johnson payroll rather than as a fiercely independent internet blogger who calls out suspected wrongdoing without fear or favour.
The response you were looking for is for me to join in a witch hunt?
The criticism at the time, from good Doctor Foxy here and others as well as the Labour Party - was that the NHS was on the brink of running out of PPE, that the situation in Foxy's words was "desperate" and the government had the responsibility to do what needed to be done to secure PPE.
They did.
Now people whinge. Get over it. They did their job during a pandemic. Had we run out of PPE that would have been a story, so instead of saying "well done" for securing what needed to be secured instead people are trying to whinge about the way it was done.
It is pathetic.
They allowed the crisis to develop and then allowed their cronies to profiteer from it.
What's pathetic is defending that state of affairs.
They created and developed COVID19?
I think you may have been watching too many conspiracy theory videos. Was it all done to allow microchips?
I'm talking about the lack of resilience in the system due to neglect in prior years. The pandemic exposed this. When the tide goes out we see who has not bothered with trunks. As for corrupt cronyism running rife in government, by all means carry on with the "nothing to see here" shtick, I certainly can't stop you, but be aware that there is a price to pay. For the country, obviously, but also for you. Because the day will come when you wish to tear into an administration you do not support for this sort of behaviour. And you won't be able to. You'll be muzzled. Imagine how that will feel.
But there was resilience.
Because the economy had been managed and not running a maxed out credit card deficit like we were in 2006-07 before the last recession hit we had the ability to react and protect the economy and healthcare system and spend what needed to be done. This is why sound sane economics is not to splash every penny during the good times, because when the bad times come it needs to be done then.
As for muzzling, since I am not seeking to deny free speech for people who want to spread ignorant codswallop - and since I condemn the government when its actually appropriate to do so - I don't see why I would be muzzled.
The sort of muzzle I'm talking about does not stop someone talking - it just stops them doing so with credibility. The design is such that it lets the words out but ruins their impact by superimposing a chant of "double standards!". You'll find it unpleasant to wear, trust me.
As for the rest - deflecting and obscuring. The resilience in the area we are discussing was clearly not there. Or not enough of it anyway. Hence the PPE shambles. Some of it can be explained away by the sheer size and speed of onset of the pandemic, but by no means all of it.
Of course all of it can be explained by the sheer size and speed of onset of the pandemic.
At the peak of the pandemic we were using a year's worth of PPE every single week. Within 10 weeks we were using a decade's PPE - and that was needed on an ongoing basis - and the supply chains were interrupted by other nations requisitioning our orders.
So just what "resilience" were you expecting? Did you want a century's worth of PPE to be hoarded?
Before I pick up on this specific point - which is a good one btw - can I please confirm that your sudden silence on the "double standards" muzzle means that you do now see the grave risk of having to wear one if you continue to defend tory cronyism?
Trump's net approval down to -20 with Ipsos, could it be a sign that more people are getting fed up with him? though other polling since the election is a bit more mixed
He's just boring. He lost. Everyone knows he lost. He is just a boring bad loser.
Go away!
Wish he would before he causes any more damage to democracy. However it looks like he will have to dragged out of the Whitehouse. Hope which ever agency in the USA has that responsibility carries it out successfully.
That sworn declaration doesn't quite square with Palmer's public statements.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/wayne-county-election/2020/11/18/b515fa14-29c9-11eb-92b7-6ef17b3fe3b4_story.html ...She says she knew that Biden had won Michigan and did not intend to block or overturn his victory. But she had one lever to pull, to force local election authorities to solve the problem: She could vote “nay.” If she and her fellow Republican member did that, then the decision on whether to certify Wayne County’s results would be kicked up to a statewide board, also split two-to-two. That would take another few days. Maybe the state would work harder to solve Wayne County’s problems. And local authorities would take her warnings seriously next time. “I wasn’t taking votes away from anybody,” Palmer said. “I was allowing the state to find the explanations.”
…Palmer says she meant her vote as a narrow protest aimed at local election practices, not a decision that would swing the election...
Nor is playing games like that an appropriate thing to do anyway
Somebody evidently promoted one grade beyond their abilities.
Fuck me, Space Command and world beating British lasers have come freshly into existence in BJ's head and we're already being told that they'll be taken away! Can't we just enjoy this exciting bit of science fiction for a wee while?
Fuck me, Space Command and world beating British lasers have come freshly into existence in BJ's head and we're already being told that they'll be taken away! Can't we just enjoy this exciting bit of science fiction for a wee while?
We already have a Scottish space programme. Glasgow's where it is at, in UK terms, certainly for satellites. In other words, another U-turn following the SNP Government policy.
Gabriel Debenedetti of the "New York Magazine" gives a fascinating insight into the data analytics of the Biden campaign as the election loomed, November 3rd and the days following :
A very good read. Two standouts. The extraordinary amount of information they have on who will vote how and where and a question that isn't addressed but is relevant to the results. Why do uneducated whites vote overwhelmingly for Trump when other uneducated people don't and what is it about Trump that attracts them?
I found it dull. The first three quarters describes comparing actual with expected results, which is what happens on pb every election night (the difference is we want to bet, whereas the campaign wants to update its spin teams for American television). The last quarter, which jumps back in time but was too mundane to lead the piece, has our hero doing the reverse: comparing opinion polls with the swing needed on the night in order to inform strategy. With no technical detail, it is a long statement of the bleeding obvious and it is not even very well written.
I'm sure we don't have that sort of data about backgrounds where people live and who they'll vote for' ....'7 uneducated anti semites in 7 mile Bottom ....Do we put them in the Johnson column or Corbyn's?'
I still cannot get my head round all this anti -semitism thing. I don't even know what being anti-semetic would involve and why people would have such shallow lives that they would be doing it anyway.
For the most part a load of bollocks I'm afraid. Just special pleading for the most part by people for whom Israel can do no wrong.
You are making Corbyn's mistake.
Corbyn conflates his desire to see Palestine children no longer gunned down by Israeli soldiers for stone throwing, with Margaret Hodge.
The so-called "jewellery designer" was actually an "importer" and he assisted in using contacts in China to "import" goods.
"Importer paid to import goods" is such a slow news day story.
That’s not quite accurate though is it. There was the company set up by a jewellery designer who agreed to provide the goods to the NHS and then another individual who was used by him to help source the goods in China. It’s the latter who was paid £21 million by the former. Whether it was out out of the £197 million paid by the NHS to the supplier or on top of, is not clear but it ultimately came from the NHS.
No idea whether a 10.65% commission charge is normal. Whether the whole contract was value for money for the NHS who knows. Why the NHS and the government were so unprepared and so lacking in secure and robust contacts with actual suppliers and manufacturers and what lessons should be learned from all this will be one for any inquiry, if we get one.
Businesses seek to make a profit shouldn't be a shocker, that is why people go into business. If the contracted supplier pays subcontractors to honour the contract, then so long as the contract is honoured then that is a supply chain working.
10.65% commission doesn't sound to me to be extortionate under the circumstances, especially if that includes shipping or handling charges. Many businesses operate using thicker margins than that and quite reasonably too - a bottle of beer at the supermarket can cost as little as 50p but that same bottle sold in a pub can be measured in pounds not pennies. Does that make every landlord or landlady in the country a rip off? Or are there costs and factors involved in operating businesses that need to be factored into considerations?
Secure and robust contracts don't exist when we're in a pandemic situation and goods are being demanded in volumes that aren't normally and formerly reliable suppliers are seeing their stockpiles requisitioned by foreign states.
But these generalities cannot and should not be rolled out to defend the indefensible.
Indeed.
But we're not talking about defending the indefensible, we're talking (again) about the government succeeeding completely in securing supplies of PPE for doctors and nurses during a pandemic.
Well done them! Great competence.
That was not the response I was looking for. The risk here - now compounded - is that you come across as someone on the Johnson payroll rather than as a fiercely independent internet blogger who calls out suspected wrongdoing without fear or favour.
The response you were looking for is for me to join in a witch hunt?
The criticism at the time, from good Doctor Foxy here and others as well as the Labour Party - was that the NHS was on the brink of running out of PPE, that the situation in Foxy's words was "desperate" and the government had the responsibility to do what needed to be done to secure PPE.
They did.
Now people whinge. Get over it. They did their job during a pandemic. Had we run out of PPE that would have been a story, so instead of saying "well done" for securing what needed to be secured instead people are trying to whinge about the way it was done.
It is pathetic.
They allowed the crisis to develop and then allowed their cronies to profiteer from it.
What's pathetic is defending that state of affairs.
They created and developed COVID19?
I think you may have been watching too many conspiracy theory videos. Was it all done to allow microchips?
I'm talking about the lack of resilience in the system due to neglect in prior years. The pandemic exposed this. When the tide goes out we see who has not bothered with trunks. As for corrupt cronyism running rife in government, by all means carry on with the "nothing to see here" shtick, I certainly can't stop you, but be aware that there is a price to pay. For the country, obviously, but also for you. Because the day will come when you wish to tear into an administration you do not support for this sort of behaviour. And you won't be able to. You'll be muzzled. Imagine how that will feel.
But there was resilience.
Because the economy had been managed and not running a maxed out credit card deficit like we were in 2006-07 before the last recession hit we had the ability to react and protect the economy and healthcare system and spend what needed to be done. This is why sound sane economics is not to splash every penny during the good times, because when the bad times come it needs to be done then.
As for muzzling, since I am not seeking to deny free speech for people who want to spread ignorant codswallop - and since I condemn the government when its actually appropriate to do so - I don't see why I would be muzzled.
The sort of muzzle I'm talking about does not stop someone talking - it just stops them doing so with credibility. The design is such that it lets the words out but ruins their impact by superimposing a chant of "double standards!". You'll find it unpleasant to wear, trust me.
As for the rest - deflecting and obscuring. The resilience in the area we are discussing was clearly not there. Or not enough of it anyway. Hence the PPE shambles. Some of it can be explained away by the sheer size and speed of onset of the pandemic, but by no means all of it.
Of course all of it can be explained by the sheer size and speed of onset of the pandemic.
At the peak of the pandemic we were using a year's worth of PPE every single week. Within 10 weeks we were using a decade's PPE - and that was needed on an ongoing basis - and the supply chains were interrupted by other nations requisitioning our orders.
So just what "resilience" were you expecting? Did you want a century's worth of PPE to be hoarded?
Can I ask you a question - have you actually read the NAO report on this? The NAO are sympathetic to your view that corners were bound to be cut given the urgency. But nevertheless, in clear civil service language, the report makes it clear that what is not justified is having a fast track for awarding contracts to personal contacts instigated by MPs and others close to government.
And it's not just about PPE - some of it is about contracts awarded for PR type work. Check out what the NAO report says about Public First and Topham Guerin, both with fingers in many government pies.
1992. Kirsty McColl sang different lyrics on top of the pops
Almost 30 years ago now.
1992 almost 30 years ago you say?! Wow!!
Faggot was always a pejorative borderline swear word anyway, so it’s not a surprise it’s been edited previously, more surprising if it hadn’t
As a kid, faggot meant to me either a spicy sausage type food or firewood. The other meaning came later but was rarely heard.
Still buy faggots from the chippie or the traditional butcher from time to time...
The primary meaning of faggot in the UK is the food. The other meaning is mostly American.
not when I was growing up. People found it amusing there was a food named that precisely as it was not their primary thought.
Same here. Its probably an age-related thing but I don't think the food has been the primary meaning for decades or probably even nearly half a century now.
I was a child when Fairytale of New York came out and already by then I'd suggest the American meaning was more the primary meaning here.
Paragraph 1. It is, and always has been in my world of Guardian, liberal wokery!
Time to broaden your horizons?
Guardian-world is very, very small and self-absorbed .
It is unusual around here to see more than one or two copies of the G in a shop in the morning, and often it is left at the end of the day.
I have an affection for the website though; faceplant central.
Off topic, the new green deal, the major defence announcement and (very probably) the imminent Brexit deal are all very obviously part of a plan for a sustained Unionist assault on the SNP for 2021.
Someone's been doing some thinking (not Boris).
Are you sure? They all look a bit like a garden bridge to me.
Have they mentioned the North Channel bridge yet, the one from Scotland to NI? (Seriously.)
As a taxpayer in England and Wales, I want no part in investing my tax pounds on a white elephant that when, in the unlikely event it is ever built, will connect two foreign powers (Scotland and Ireland) together by a road bridge!
It is a central UK initiative, from Mr J. Of UK wide importance, certainly as he presented it.
Disclaimer: I don't believe the bridge will be built in my lifetime, on, in, or under the water.
That is Johnson's genius.
Promise wildly ambitious "moonshots", none of which will transpire during the lifetime of even his youngest audience member.
I'm just surprised he hasn't come out with it. Not suggesting he should spend your taxes (or mine) on it. But mayhbe tyhere really is a campaign and this will be re-unveiled. Complete with expensive studies Garden Bridge style.
As Josias Jessop showed when we discussed it some years back it's actually possible, but the topography and geology are horrendous. Is it safe enough (floating bridge uin a shipping lane) and more to the point is itr worth the cost as opposed to a decent ferry service?
Edit: it'll need an island in the middle for the customs, or something. Now.
... but would such ambition really swing Malcolm's vote?
Having to drive all the way from Ayrshire to Campbeltown before crossing, economical as his diesel wagon is, or risk a floating bridge over Beaufort deep? I rather doubt it, but I'm sure he could be persuaded to give us his opinion.
M ake more sense to sort out the Stranraer road and rail links - or abandon them and redevelop the Upper Clyde ferries to Ireland. Bit hard on the Geordies though.
I hope not because we really need to leave with No Deal or else the madder, swivel-eyed Leavers will plague us for years about how traitors and scum turned us away from the Sunny Uplands.
Brexit needs to be tested to destruction so that it can be disposed of permanently.
Fuck me, Space Command and world beating British lasers have come freshly into existence in BJ's head and we're already being told that they'll be taken away! Can't we just enjoy this exciting bit of science fiction for a wee while?
Fuck me, Space Command and world beating British lasers have come freshly into existence in BJ's head and we're already being told that they'll be taken away! Can't we just enjoy this exciting bit of science fiction for a wee while?
We already have a Scottish space programme. Glasgow's where it is at, in UK terms, certainly for satellites. In other words, another U-turn following the SNP Government policy.
The so-called "jewellery designer" was actually an "importer" and he assisted in using contacts in China to "import" goods.
"Importer paid to import goods" is such a slow news day story.
That’s not quite accurate though is it. There was the company set up by a jewellery designer who agreed to provide the goods to the NHS and then another individual who was used by him to help source the goods in China. It’s the latter who was paid £21 million by the former. Whether it was out out of the £197 million paid by the NHS to the supplier or on top of, is not clear but it ultimately came from the NHS.
No idea whether a 10.65% commission charge is normal. Whether the whole contract was value for money for the NHS who knows. Why the NHS and the government were so unprepared and so lacking in secure and robust contacts with actual suppliers and manufacturers and what lessons should be learned from all this will be one for any inquiry, if we get one.
Businesses seek to make a profit shouldn't be a shocker, that is why people go into business. If the contracted supplier pays subcontractors to honour the contract, then so long as the contract is honoured then that is a supply chain working.
10.65% commission doesn't sound to me to be extortionate under the circumstances, especially if that includes shipping or handling charges. Many businesses operate using thicker margins than that and quite reasonably too - a bottle of beer at the supermarket can cost as little as 50p but that same bottle sold in a pub can be measured in pounds not pennies. Does that make every landlord or landlady in the country a rip off? Or are there costs and factors involved in operating businesses that need to be factored into considerations?
Secure and robust contracts don't exist when we're in a pandemic situation and goods are being demanded in volumes that aren't normally and formerly reliable suppliers are seeing their stockpiles requisitioned by foreign states.
But these generalities cannot and should not be rolled out to defend the indefensible.
Indeed.
But we're not talking about defending the indefensible, we're talking (again) about the government succeeeding completely in securing supplies of PPE for doctors and nurses during a pandemic.
Well done them! Great competence.
That was not the response I was looking for. The risk here - now compounded - is that you come across as someone on the Johnson payroll rather than as a fiercely independent internet blogger who calls out suspected wrongdoing without fear or favour.
The response you were looking for is for me to join in a witch hunt?
The criticism at the time, from good Doctor Foxy here and others as well as the Labour Party - was that the NHS was on the brink of running out of PPE, that the situation in Foxy's words was "desperate" and the government had the responsibility to do what needed to be done to secure PPE.
They did.
Now people whinge. Get over it. They did their job during a pandemic. Had we run out of PPE that would have been a story, so instead of saying "well done" for securing what needed to be secured instead people are trying to whinge about the way it was done.
It is pathetic.
They allowed the crisis to develop and then allowed their cronies to profiteer from it.
What's pathetic is defending that state of affairs.
They created and developed COVID19?
I think you may have been watching too many conspiracy theory videos. Was it all done to allow microchips?
I'm talking about the lack of resilience in the system due to neglect in prior years. The pandemic exposed this. When the tide goes out we see who has not bothered with trunks. As for corrupt cronyism running rife in government, by all means carry on with the "nothing to see here" shtick, I certainly can't stop you, but be aware that there is a price to pay. For the country, obviously, but also for you. Because the day will come when you wish to tear into an administration you do not support for this sort of behaviour. And you won't be able to. You'll be muzzled. Imagine how that will feel.
But there was resilience.
Because the economy had been managed and not running a maxed out credit card deficit like we were in 2006-07 before the last recession hit we had the ability to react and protect the economy and healthcare system and spend what needed to be done. This is why sound sane economics is not to splash every penny during the good times, because when the bad times come it needs to be done then.
As for muzzling, since I am not seeking to deny free speech for people who want to spread ignorant codswallop - and since I condemn the government when its actually appropriate to do so - I don't see why I would be muzzled.
The sort of muzzle I'm talking about does not stop someone talking - it just stops them doing so with credibility. The design is such that it lets the words out but ruins their impact by superimposing a chant of "double standards!". You'll find it unpleasant to wear, trust me.
As for the rest - deflecting and obscuring. The resilience in the area we are discussing was clearly not there. Or not enough of it anyway. Hence the PPE shambles. Some of it can be explained away by the sheer size and speed of onset of the pandemic, but by no means all of it.
Of course all of it can be explained by the sheer size and speed of onset of the pandemic.
At the peak of the pandemic we were using a year's worth of PPE every single week. Within 10 weeks we were using a decade's PPE - and that was needed on an ongoing basis - and the supply chains were interrupted by other nations requisitioning our orders.
So just what "resilience" were you expecting? Did you want a century's worth of PPE to be hoarded?
Can I ask you a question - have you actually read the NAO report on this? The NAO are sympathetic to your view that corners were bound to be cut given the urgency. But nevertheless, in clear civil service language, the report makes it clear that what is not justified is having a fast track for awarding contracts to personal contacts instigated by MPs and others close to government.
And it's not just about PPE - some of it is about contracts awarded for PR type work. Check out what the NAO report says about Public First and Topham Guerin, both with fingers in many government pies.
No I've not read it, I've just read what's been put here.
Off topic, the new green deal, the major defence announcement and (very probably) the imminent Brexit deal are all very obviously part of a plan for a sustained Unionist assault on the SNP for 2021.
Someone's been doing some thinking (not Boris).
Are you sure? They all look a bit like a garden bridge to me.
Have they mentioned the North Channel bridge yet, the one from Scotland to NI? (Seriously.)
As a taxpayer in England and Wales, I want no part in investing my tax pounds on a white elephant that when, in the unlikely event it is ever built, will connect two foreign powers (Scotland and Ireland) together by a road bridge!
It is a central UK initiative, from Mr J. Of UK wide importance, certainly as he presented it.
Disclaimer: I don't believe the bridge will be built in my lifetime, on, in, or under the water.
That is Johnson's genius.
Promise wildly ambitious "moonshots", none of which will transpire during the lifetime of even his youngest audience member.
I'm just surprised he hasn't come out with it. Not suggesting he should spend your taxes (or mine) on it. But mayhbe tyhere really is a campaign and this will be re-unveiled. Complete with expensive studies Garden Bridge style.
As Josias Jessop showed when we discussed it some years back it's actually possible, but the topography and geology are horrendous. Is it safe enough (floating bridge uin a shipping lane) and more to the point is itr worth the cost as opposed to a decent ferry service?
Edit: it'll need an island in the middle for the customs, or something. Now.
... but would such ambition really swing Malcolm's vote?
Having to drive all the way from Ayrshire to Campbeltown before crossing, economical as his diesel wagon is, or risk a floating bridge over Beaufort deep? I rather doubt it, but I'm sure he could be persuaded to give us his opinion.
M ake more sense to sort out the Stranraer road and rail links - or abandon them and redevelop the Upper Clyde ferries to Ireland. Bit hard on the Geordies though.
I once towed a caravan to Campbeltown. Nightmare! I took the Calmac to Arran and then Ardrossan for the return leg. You'd need a hatful of bridges to make Boris' bridge work properly then.
Rudy Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, said in a statement, “This morning we are withdrawing our lawsuit in Michigan as a direct result of achieving the relief we sought: to stop the election in Wayne County from being prematurely certified before residents can be assured that every legal vote has been counted and every illegal vote has not been counted.”
Trump's net approval down to -20 with Ipsos, could it be a sign that more people are getting fed up with him? though other polling since the election is a bit more mixed
He's just boring. He lost. Everyone knows he lost. He is just a boring bad loser.
Go away!
Wish he would before he causes any more damage to democracy. However it looks like he will have to dragged out of the Whitehouse. Hope which ever agency in the USA has that responsibility carries it out successfully.
Reminder of my recurring mental image which I've had for months.
Fuck me, Space Command and world beating British lasers have come freshly into existence in BJ's head and we're already being told that they'll be taken away! Can't we just enjoy this exciting bit of science fiction for a wee while?
We already have a Scottish space programme. Glasgow's where it is at, in UK terms, certainly for satellites. In other words, another U-turn following the SNP Government policy.
I thought Guildford and Portsmouth were the satellite leaders.
Dunno about leaders - but I can well believe all are significant. Though it's beem much more in the news up here of late.
Two further points occur to me ...
UK is of course leaving ESA.
And isn't UK Gmt money going into the Sutherland spaceport for little rockets? That's been known for some time. In which case it's not news at all? Maybe someone who knows more can advise.
1992. Kirsty McColl sang different lyrics on top of the pops
Almost 30 years ago now.
1992 almost 30 years ago you say?! Wow!!
Faggot was always a pejorative borderline swear word anyway, so it’s not a surprise it’s been edited previously, more surprising if it hadn’t
As a kid, faggot meant to me either a spicy sausage type food or firewood. The other meaning came later but was rarely heard.
Still buy faggots from the chippie or the traditional butcher from time to time...
The primary meaning of faggot in the UK is the food. The other meaning is mostly American.
not when I was growing up. People found it amusing there was a food named that precisely as it was not their primary thought.
Same here. Its probably an age-related thing but I don't think the food has been the primary meaning for decades or probably even nearly half a century now.
I was a child when Fairytale of New York came out and already by then I'd suggest the American meaning was more the primary meaning here.
Paragraph 1. It is, and always has been in my world of Guardian, liberal wokery!
Time to broaden your horizons?
Guardian-world is very, very small and self-absorbed .
It is unusual around here to see more than one or two copies of the G in a shop in the morning, and often it is left at the end of the day.
I have an affection for the website though; faceplant central.
Yesterday I paid a rare visit to the Betfair Community Forum and checked out what people were saying about the open Presidential Markets.
As you may imagine, the posts were almost uniformly critical. One of the more considered and restrained comments reflected on how Betfair had really got itself into a tangle by not sticking to its own rules. Having paid out on numerous State markets it is lingering over others and the main events for no discernible reason. If they are not paying out now, it's hard to see when they will or why they should do so at all.
They need an 'event' to get them off the hook. Obviously if Trump conceded he would give them a face-saving formula, even though concession was never part of the rules. The same would apply to certification.
The fact is they are making the rules up as they go along. They are playing a risky game. If I placed a losing bet on Trump now, I think I'd be entitled to ask for my money back later on the grounds they shouldn't have accepted a bet on an event that is over.
It's almost worth £50 just for the pleasure of reporting the matter to the Gambling Commission.
Yep. They have settled 44 states on the call but have not do so for the ones which have put Biden over the top and made him WINNER under the most obvious interpretation of their rules. They should have settled the outright market on the call of PA. Either that or they should have waited for a cert for all the states. Upshot is they are now stuck in a logic free no man's land and need an event to close it out. My best guess is they will now not settle until states worth 270+ have been certified for Biden. Lots of extra commission earned but a poor show imo.
I gather that the Gambling Commission is useless but if needed bettors should be protected by consumer law. This is quite far-reaching in the way it's on the side of the consumer (It needs to be, dealing with some businesses.)
Smarkets behaved in the opposite way, i.e. deemed that Trump had conceded and settled my bet to my disadvantage. What?? BBC R4 News said that he hadn't yet conceded. Other broadcasters say the same.
Fuck me, Space Command and world beating British lasers have come freshly into existence in BJ's head and we're already being told that they'll be taken away! Can't we just enjoy this exciting bit of science fiction for a wee while?
We already have a Scottish space programme. Glasgow's where it is at, in UK terms, certainly for satellites. In other words, another U-turn following the SNP Government policy.
The so-called "jewellery designer" was actually an "importer" and he assisted in using contacts in China to "import" goods.
"Importer paid to import goods" is such a slow news day story.
That’s not quite accurate though is it. There was the company set up by a jewellery designer who agreed to provide the goods to the NHS and then another individual who was used by him to help source the goods in China. It’s the latter who was paid £21 million by the former. Whether it was out out of the £197 million paid by the NHS to the supplier or on top of, is not clear but it ultimately came from the NHS.
No idea whether a 10.65% commission charge is normal. Whether the whole contract was value for money for the NHS who knows. Why the NHS and the government were so unprepared and so lacking in secure and robust contacts with actual suppliers and manufacturers and what lessons should be learned from all this will be one for any inquiry, if we get one.
Businesses seek to make a profit shouldn't be a shocker, that is why people go into business. If the contracted supplier pays subcontractors to honour the contract, then so long as the contract is honoured then that is a supply chain working.
10.65% commission doesn't sound to me to be extortionate under the circumstances, especially if that includes shipping or handling charges. Many businesses operate using thicker margins than that and quite reasonably too - a bottle of beer at the supermarket can cost as little as 50p but that same bottle sold in a pub can be measured in pounds not pennies. Does that make every landlord or landlady in the country a rip off? Or are there costs and factors involved in operating businesses that need to be factored into considerations?
Secure and robust contracts don't exist when we're in a pandemic situation and goods are being demanded in volumes that aren't normally and formerly reliable suppliers are seeing their stockpiles requisitioned by foreign states.
But these generalities cannot and should not be rolled out to defend the indefensible.
Indeed.
But we're not talking about defending the indefensible, we're talking (again) about the government succeeeding completely in securing supplies of PPE for doctors and nurses during a pandemic.
Well done them! Great competence.
That was not the response I was looking for. The risk here - now compounded - is that you come across as someone on the Johnson payroll rather than as a fiercely independent internet blogger who calls out suspected wrongdoing without fear or favour.
The response you were looking for is for me to join in a witch hunt?
The criticism at the time, from good Doctor Foxy here and others as well as the Labour Party - was that the NHS was on the brink of running out of PPE, that the situation in Foxy's words was "desperate" and the government had the responsibility to do what needed to be done to secure PPE.
They did.
Now people whinge. Get over it. They did their job during a pandemic. Had we run out of PPE that would have been a story, so instead of saying "well done" for securing what needed to be secured instead people are trying to whinge about the way it was done.
It is pathetic.
They allowed the crisis to develop and then allowed their cronies to profiteer from it.
What's pathetic is defending that state of affairs.
They created and developed COVID19?
I think you may have been watching too many conspiracy theory videos. Was it all done to allow microchips?
I'm talking about the lack of resilience in the system due to neglect in prior years. The pandemic exposed this. When the tide goes out we see who has not bothered with trunks. As for corrupt cronyism running rife in government, by all means carry on with the "nothing to see here" shtick, I certainly can't stop you, but be aware that there is a price to pay. For the country, obviously, but also for you. Because the day will come when you wish to tear into an administration you do not support for this sort of behaviour. And you won't be able to. You'll be muzzled. Imagine how that will feel.
But there was resilience.
Because the economy had been managed and not running a maxed out credit card deficit like we were in 2006-07 before the last recession hit we had the ability to react and protect the economy and healthcare system and spend what needed to be done. This is why sound sane economics is not to splash every penny during the good times, because when the bad times come it needs to be done then.
As for muzzling, since I am not seeking to deny free speech for people who want to spread ignorant codswallop - and since I condemn the government when its actually appropriate to do so - I don't see why I would be muzzled.
The sort of muzzle I'm talking about does not stop someone talking - it just stops them doing so with credibility. The design is such that it lets the words out but ruins their impact by superimposing a chant of "double standards!". You'll find it unpleasant to wear, trust me.
As for the rest - deflecting and obscuring. The resilience in the area we are discussing was clearly not there. Or not enough of it anyway. Hence the PPE shambles. Some of it can be explained away by the sheer size and speed of onset of the pandemic, but by no means all of it.
Of course all of it can be explained by the sheer size and speed of onset of the pandemic.
At the peak of the pandemic we were using a year's worth of PPE every single week. Within 10 weeks we were using a decade's PPE - and that was needed on an ongoing basis - and the supply chains were interrupted by other nations requisitioning our orders.
So just what "resilience" were you expecting? Did you want a century's worth of PPE to be hoarded?
Can I ask you a question - have you actually read the NAO report on this? The NAO are sympathetic to your view that corners were bound to be cut given the urgency. But nevertheless, in clear civil service language, the report makes it clear that what is not justified is having a fast track for awarding contracts to personal contacts instigated by MPs and others close to government.
And it's not just about PPE - some of it is about contracts awarded for PR type work. Check out what the NAO report says about Public First and Topham Guerin, both with fingers in many government pies.
No I've not read it, I've just read what's been put here.
Thanks. Maybe, with all due respect, it could be a good idea to read the NAO report given that you are commenting a great deal on its contents? It's fairly succinct, but does cast doubt on your arguments in this thread.
Fuck me, Space Command and world beating British lasers have come freshly into existence in BJ's head and we're already being told that they'll be taken away! Can't we just enjoy this exciting bit of science fiction for a wee while?
We already have a Scottish space programme. Glasgow's where it is at, in UK terms, certainly for satellites. In other words, another U-turn following the SNP Government policy.
I thought Guildford and Portsmouth were the satellite leaders.
This surprised me (I'm assuming it's more or less accurate).
'Scotland's space sector is rising faster than anywhere else in the UK, aiming to grow in value to £4 billion by 2030. We have some of the highest space-related activity in Europe – in fact, Glasgow manufactures more satellites than any other city in Europe.'
Presumably the BBC won't report it in case somebody is offended, and it will irrevocably poison the minds of anyone under 30, because they are not able to deal with it.
I do feel sorry for the BBC over the Oliver's Army "white N*****" phrase - they'll be in total confusion not knowing whether to ban it for the N word, or for white cultural appropriation of the N word.
Rudy Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, said in a statement, “This morning we are withdrawing our lawsuit in Michigan as a direct result of achieving the relief we sought: to stop the election in Wayne County from being prematurely certified before residents can be assured that every legal vote has been counted and every illegal vote has not been counted.”
Fuck me, Space Command and world beating British lasers have come freshly into existence in BJ's head and we're already being told that they'll be taken away! Can't we just enjoy this exciting bit of science fiction for a wee while?
We already have a Scottish space programme. Glasgow's where it is at, in UK terms, certainly for satellites. In other words, another U-turn following the SNP Government policy.
Yesterday I paid a rare visit to the Betfair Community Forum and checked out what people were saying about the open Presidential Markets.
As you may imagine, the posts were almost uniformly critical. One of the more considered and restrained comments reflected on how Betfair had really got itself into a tangle by not sticking to its own rules. Having paid out on numerous State markets it is lingering over others and the main events for no discernible reason. If they are not paying out now, it's hard to see when they will or why they should do so at all.
They need an 'event' to get them off the hook. Obviously if Trump conceded he would give them a face-saving formula, even though concession was never part of the rules. The same would apply to certification.
The fact is they are making the rules up as they go along. They are playing a risky game. If I placed a losing bet on Trump now, I think I'd be entitled to ask for my money back later on the grounds they shouldn't have accepted a bet on an event that is over.
It's almost worth £50 just for the pleasure of reporting the matter to the Gambling Commission.
Yep. They have settled 44 states on the call but have not do so for the ones which have put Biden over the top and made him WINNER under the most obvious interpretation of their rules. They should have settled the outright market on the call of PA. Either that or they should have waited for a cert for all the states. Upshot is they are now stuck in a logic free no man's land and need an event to close it out. My best guess is they will now not settle until states worth 270+ have been certified for Biden. Lots of extra commission earned but a poor show imo.
I gather that the Gambling Commission is useless but if needed bettors should be protected by consumer law. This is quite far-reaching in the way it's on the side of the consumer (It needs to be, dealing with some businesses.)
Smarkets behaved in the opposite way, i.e. deemed that Trump had conceded and settled my bet to my disadvantage. What?? BBC R4 News said that he hadn't yet conceded. Other broadcasters say the same.
Depends on the precise wording of the rules. Smarkets will have been different to Betfair. The trouble with Betfair is that they haven't complied with their own rules.
I agree with you about the Gambling Commission. The general consumer law is a much better option for aggrieved punters.
Off topic, the new green deal, the major defence announcement and (very probably) the imminent Brexit deal are all very obviously part of a plan for a sustained Unionist assault on the SNP for 2021.
Someone's been doing some thinking (not Boris).
Are you sure? They all look a bit like a garden bridge to me.
Have they mentioned the North Channel bridge yet, the one from Scotland to NI? (Seriously.)
As a taxpayer in England and Wales, I want no part in investing my tax pounds on a white elephant that when, in the unlikely event it is ever built, will connect two foreign powers (Scotland and Ireland) together by a road bridge!
It is a central UK initiative, from Mr J. Of UK wide importance, certainly as he presented it.
Disclaimer: I don't believe the bridge will be built in my lifetime, on, in, or under the water.
That is Johnson's genius.
Promise wildly ambitious "moonshots", none of which will transpire during the lifetime of even his youngest audience member.
I'm just surprised he hasn't come out with it. Not suggesting he should spend your taxes (or mine) on it. But mayhbe tyhere really is a campaign and this will be re-unveiled. Complete with expensive studies Garden Bridge style.
As Josias Jessop showed when we discussed it some years back it's actually possible, but the topography and geology are horrendous. Is it safe enough (floating bridge uin a shipping lane) and more to the point is itr worth the cost as opposed to a decent ferry service?
Edit: it'll need an island in the middle for the customs, or something. Now.
... but would such ambition really swing Malcolm's vote?
Having to drive all the way from Ayrshire to Campbeltown before crossing, economical as his diesel wagon is, or risk a floating bridge over Beaufort deep? I rather doubt it, but I'm sure he could be persuaded to give us his opinion.
M ake more sense to sort out the Stranraer road and rail links - or abandon them and redevelop the Upper Clyde ferries to Ireland. Bit hard on the Geordies though.
I once towed a caravan to Campbeltown. Nightmare! I took the Calmac to Arran and then Ardrossan for the return leg. You'd need a hatful of bridges to make Boris' bridge work properly then.
You should try it when they are moving the wind turbines...
Still, Machrihanish is worth a visit if you are a golfer.
Off topic, the new green deal, the major defence announcement and (very probably) the imminent Brexit deal are all very obviously part of a plan for a sustained Unionist assault on the SNP for 2021.
Someone's been doing some thinking (not Boris).
Are you sure? They all look a bit like a garden bridge to me.
Have they mentioned the North Channel bridge yet, the one from Scotland to NI? (Seriously.)
As a taxpayer in England and Wales, I want no part in investing my tax pounds on a white elephant that when, in the unlikely event it is ever built, will connect two foreign powers (Scotland and Ireland) together by a road bridge!
It is a central UK initiative, from Mr J. Of UK wide importance, certainly as he presented it.
Disclaimer: I don't believe the bridge will be built in my lifetime, on, in, or under the water.
That is Johnson's genius.
Promise wildly ambitious "moonshots", none of which will transpire during the lifetime of even his youngest audience member.
I'm just surprised he hasn't come out with it. Not suggesting he should spend your taxes (or mine) on it. But mayhbe tyhere really is a campaign and this will be re-unveiled. Complete with expensive studies Garden Bridge style.
As Josias Jessop showed when we discussed it some years back it's actually possible, but the topography and geology are horrendous. Is it safe enough (floating bridge uin a shipping lane) and more to the point is itr worth the cost as opposed to a decent ferry service?
Edit: it'll need an island in the middle for the customs, or something. Now.
... but would such ambition really swing Malcolm's vote?
Having to drive all the way from Ayrshire to Campbeltown before crossing, economical as his diesel wagon is, or risk a floating bridge over Beaufort deep? I rather doubt it, but I'm sure he could be persuaded to give us his opinion.
M ake more sense to sort out the Stranraer road and rail links - or abandon them and redevelop the Upper Clyde ferries to Ireland. Bit hard on the Geordies though.
I once towed a caravan to Campbeltown. Nightmare! I took the Calmac to Arran and then Ardrossan for the return leg. You'd need a hatful of bridges to make Boris' bridge work properly then.
You should try it when they are moving the wind turbines...
Still, Machrihanish is worth a visit if you are a golfer.
It was the campsite at Machrihanish that I stayed on. It was fine when I got there- no midges!
Fuck me, Space Command and world beating British lasers have come freshly into existence in BJ's head and we're already being told that they'll be taken away! Can't we just enjoy this exciting bit of science fiction for a wee while?
We already have a Scottish space programme. Glasgow's where it is at, in UK terms, certainly for satellites. In other words, another U-turn following the SNP Government policy.
I thought Guildford and Portsmouth were the satellite leaders.
Dunno about leaders - but I can well believe all are significant. Though it's beem much more in the news up here of late.
Two further points occur to me ...
UK is of course leaving ESA.
And isn't UK Gmt money going into the Sutherland spaceport for little rockets? That's been known for some time. In which case it's not news at all? Maybe someone who knows more can advise.
Are we leaving ESA? I didn't think we were. It isn't directly part of the EU. Canada is a member I think?
Some ESA programmes are paid for by the EU, though. We may or may not be part of those.
Fuck me, Space Command and world beating British lasers have come freshly into existence in BJ's head and we're already being told that they'll be taken away! Can't we just enjoy this exciting bit of science fiction for a wee while?
We already have a Scottish space programme. Glasgow's where it is at, in UK terms, certainly for satellites. In other words, another U-turn following the SNP Government policy.
I thought Guildford and Portsmouth were the satellite leaders.
This surprised me (I'm assuming it's more or less accurate).
'Scotland's space sector is rising faster than anywhere else in the UK, aiming to grow in value to £4 billion by 2030. We have some of the highest space-related activity in Europe – in fact, Glasgow manufactures more satellites than any other city in Europe.'
That's probably for a very specific definition of "manufactures more satellites than any other city in Europe", like the most cube satellites. Most people would measure economic activity by revenue or employment.
Fuck me, Space Command and world beating British lasers have come freshly into existence in BJ's head and we're already being told that they'll be taken away! Can't we just enjoy this exciting bit of science fiction for a wee while?
We already have a Scottish space programme. Glasgow's where it is at, in UK terms, certainly for satellites. In other words, another U-turn following the SNP Government policy.
I thought Guildford and Portsmouth were the satellite leaders.
Dunno about leaders - but I can well believe all are significant. Though it's beem much more in the news up here of late.
Two further points occur to me ...
UK is of course leaving ESA.
And isn't UK Gmt money going into the Sutherland spaceport for little rockets? That's been known for some time. In which case it's not news at all? Maybe someone who knows more can advise.
I hope not because we really need to leave with No Deal or else the madder, swivel-eyed Leavers will plague us for years about how traitors and scum turned us away from the Sunny Uplands.
Brexit needs to be tested to destruction so that it can be disposed of permanently.
“ Most of these products came via the grey market which has always been a murky place with long chains of multiple people taking a cut.
One I was told about the other days: US pharma sells to Turkish hospital. Hospital sells to mate down the road. Mate sells to Turkish wholesaler. Turkish is wholesaler sells to Romanian parallel importer. Romanian parallel importer sells to Dutch agent. Dutch agent sells to legitimate clinical trial supply company. Clinical trial supply company provides to big pharma company for use in a clinical trial.”
There is quite a big difference between that and Party A reaching an agreement with Party B who then says “BTW before we finalise this you need to pay Intermediary C a large amount of money because he arranged this deal” even though as far as you can tell Intermediary C’s work consists mainly of inserting himself in the middle in order to get paid.
A lot of these companies seem to be wholly unaware of the provisions of the UK’s Bribery Act, which apply not just to operations in the U.K. but overseas as well and to anyone acting on their behalf. If the SFO were not so terminally useless they’d have enough work to keep them going for years. As it is, if there has been any wrongdoing, the wrongdoers are probably safe from justice.
What was more important in the first half of this year?
1. Strict adherence to procurement practices, with extensive due diligence and only purchasing from primary sources of manufacturing?
or
2. By any means necessary, keeping healthcare professionals provided with protective equipment?
At the start of the pandemic, this was the binary choice faced by those in charge of PPE procurement. Of course mistakes will have been made, but that is the nature of a pandemic.
Of course, if there is any evidence of actual fraud this should be investigated, but the vast majority of people involved acted in good faith to an open "Does anyone know anyone anywhere who can get this stuff?" request from the NHS.
I don’t have any problem at all with the government paying over the odds for equipment needed urgently. It does raise the important question of why there appeared to be no plan for getting equipment necessary in a crisis - perhaps that was another part of Project Cygnus that was ditched.
I do have a big problem with doing so in a way which appears to have facilitated some very apparently dodgy behaviour. The Bribery Act does not have a defence of “I needed to do it speedily because I was unprepared.” I also question the claim of “good faith” because of my actual knowledge of some of the people involved.
There has been a persistent response that normal due diligence would take 6 months etc so obviously would need to be ditched. This is simply not true. You can do even basic due diligence very quickly - in hours if need be. It takes minutes to put in contracts clauses allowing clawback of monies paid and yet the ineffably incompetent Helen Whately was claiming that such things did not exist.
When banks were rescued in autumn 2008 this was pretty much done over a weekend. The idea that things cannot be done well and speedily is simply not true. The idea that speed is an excuse for simply abandoning any attempt at some form of control is a nonsense.
What’s more this abandonment of any sort of good practice seems to have continued long after the initial emergency. It seems to have infested all sorts of other contracts and appointments which had nothing to do with getting equipment to doctors on the front line. It seems to be the government’s MO and this should concern us all, however much slack we may be willing to cut the government for what it necessarily had to do back in February/March.
I think that any evidence of fraud should be passed to the relevant authorities, I've been consistent in that. I also think that the lack of preparedness should be investigated thoroughly, so that everyone is ready for the next emergency.
As @Charles mentioned earlier, attempts at due diligence would have difficult back in March - many of these potential suppliers had no prior experience in the field but did know someone further along the grey-market supply chain. Most of them did indeed deliver the PPE that was paid for, even if it wasn't the best possible value for money. The NHS procurement team had little choice if they didn't want to run out of the stuff.
The difference with the bank rescue was that it was just numbers on computers and spreadsheets, rather than having to physically manufacture and distribute stuff that the whole world was looking for at the same time.
The concern was the fast track process for mates and the dodgy broker payments. One suspects cronyism and corruption.
If Sir Kneel Starmer makes the same tax promise that Joe Biden made he'll get in.
Yes - if there were a "PM after next GE" market I would make SKS the favourite.
Starmer probably won't win the next election. Labour is too structurally weak in the Midlands and Scotland and with the over 65 vote. That's not even an anti Starmer point more to do with the solidity of the Tory voter coalition.
The only arguments in Labour's favour are Wales looking better for the party now and Starmer being more actively popular with LD>Lab switchers who weren't actively keen on Miliband or Corbyn even if a lot of them voted tactically Lab in 2017.
I just can't see many Tory voters who have not already switched to Lab (over e.g. Cummings etc), switch between now and 2024.
If the Conservatives find themselves elected in 2024 after the economic armageddon that is already starting upon us, you can forget about anything other than permanent Conservative Government.
That's my feeling too. If Labour lose next time, game over. Realignment of the centre left inevitable.
That was the feeling in 1992. Then the Tories took 23 years to win another majority.
Fuck me, Space Command and world beating British lasers have come freshly into existence in BJ's head and we're already being told that they'll be taken away! Can't we just enjoy this exciting bit of science fiction for a wee while?
We already have a Scottish space programme. Glasgow's where it is at, in UK terms, certainly for satellites. In other words, another U-turn following the SNP Government policy.
I thought Guildford and Portsmouth were the satellite leaders.
Dunno about leaders - but I can well believe all are significant. Though it's beem much more in the news up here of late.
Two further points occur to me ...
UK is of course leaving ESA.
And isn't UK Gmt money going into the Sutherland spaceport for little rockets? That's been known for some time. In which case it's not news at all? Maybe someone who knows more can advise.
Fuck me, Space Command and world beating British lasers have come freshly into existence in BJ's head and we're already being told that they'll be taken away! Can't we just enjoy this exciting bit of science fiction for a wee while?
We already have a Scottish space programme. Glasgow's where it is at, in UK terms, certainly for satellites. In other words, another U-turn following the SNP Government policy.
I hope not because we really need to leave with No Deal or else the madder, swivel-eyed Leavers will plague us for years about how traitors and scum turned us away from the Sunny Uplands.
Brexit needs to be tested to destruction so that it can be disposed of permanently.
Agreed
Too easy. The swivel-eyed tendency will just move to "this pain is temporary, we'd be fools to bail out now, sunlit uplands just round the corner...", followed by "traitor Boris/Rishi/whoever betrayed Brexit just as it was about to be brilliant". What was it JRM said? The payoff might be 50 years hence?
Comments
I like new stuff but I dont know why next gen is treated like an automatic positive. Some stuff that's great is made to look last gen!
It didn't cause the GFC but that's irrelevant. The GFC happening wasn't the problem, the UK having a maxed out credit card when the GFC happened was the bigger problem. Recessions happen from time to time, you should be prepared for when they do not attempt to "abolish boom and bust".
Our recovery was impacted as instead of going from eg a small surplus (as we should have had at that stage of the economy) to eg a 5% or 6% deficit we were nakedly exposed with a pre-existing 3% deficit that avalanched into a 10% one. That was catastrophic.
Austerity isn't necessary now because the economy was managed sounder in the past before this hit.
If they want leftish sounding policies plus antisemitism, the BNP is over *there*.
As for the rest - deflecting and obscuring. The resilience in the area we are discussing was clearly not there. Or not enough of it anyway. Hence the PPE shambles. Some of it can be explained away by the sheer size and speed of onset of the pandemic, but by no means all of it.
I was a child when Fairytale of New York came out and already by then I'd suggest the American meaning was more the primary meaning here.
That's quite a value judgment!
He's sort of soft-left Labour, which even under Ed M was never really in control of the party, in some respects I suppose you could argue he's Wilson Labour which won a landslide
At the peak of the pandemic we were using a year's worth of PPE every single week. Within 10 weeks we were using a decade's PPE - and that was needed on an ongoing basis - and the supply chains were interrupted by other nations requisitioning our orders.
So just what "resilience" were you expecting? Did you want a century's worth of PPE to be hoarded?
https://edition.cnn.com/election/2020/results/president
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/wayne-county-election/2020/11/18/b515fa14-29c9-11eb-92b7-6ef17b3fe3b4_story.html
...She says she knew that Biden had won Michigan and did not intend to block or overturn his victory. But she had one lever to pull, to force local election authorities to solve the problem: She could vote “nay.”
If she and her fellow Republican member did that, then the decision on whether to certify Wayne County’s results would be kicked up to a statewide board, also split two-to-two.
That would take another few days. Maybe the state would work harder to solve Wayne County’s problems. And local authorities would take her warnings seriously next time.
“I wasn’t taking votes away from anybody,” Palmer said. “I was allowing the state to find the explanations.”
…Palmer says she meant her vote as a narrow protest aimed at local election practices, not a decision that would swing the election...
If Starmer can get the tories out even with a minority government, then he might get a majority like Wilson with a second election.
https://www.channel4.com/news/revealed-ppe-stockpile-was-out-of-date-when-coronavirus-hit-uk
Disclaimer: I don't believe the bridge will be built in my lifetime, on, in, or under the water.
Promise wildly ambitious "moonshots", none of which will transpire during the lifetime of even his youngest audience member.
The things you do for love.
Bravo
As Josias Jessop showed when we discussed it some years back it's actually possible, but the topography and geology are horrendous. Is it safe enough (floating bridge uin a shipping lane) and more to the point is itr worth the cost as opposed to a decent ferry service?
Edit: it'll need an island in the middle for the customs, or something. Now.
He's just boring. He lost. Everyone knows he lost. He is just a boring bad loser.
Go away!
Or do you think if it wasn't for the GFC that boom and bust had been abolished.
https://twitter.com/gorbalsgoebbels/status/1329380959045771266?s=20
However it looks like he will have to dragged out of the Whitehouse.
Hope which ever agency in the USA has that responsibility carries it out successfully.
It is a cr*p song anyway....
https://www.sdi.co.uk/key-sectors/space
Same with Trump over 70m he is currently on 73,611,478
BF = W***
'The Pogues tell Laurence Fox to 'f**k off' in foul-mouthed tweet over lyrics'
https://tinyurl.com/y2tktgea
Corbyn conflates his desire to see Palestine children no longer gunned down by Israeli soldiers for stone throwing, with Margaret Hodge.
Or maybe it said undergo?
And it's not just about PPE - some of it is about contracts awarded for PR type work. Check out what the NAO report says about Public First and Topham Guerin, both with fingers in many government pies.
Guardian-world is very, very small and self-absorbed
It is unusual around here to see more than one or two copies of the G in a shop in the morning, and often it is left at the end of the day.
I have an affection for the website though; faceplant central.
Having to drive all the way from Ayrshire to Campbeltown before crossing, economical as his diesel wagon is, or risk a floating bridge over Beaufort deep? I rather doubt it, but I'm sure he could be persuaded to give us his opinion.
M ake more sense to sort out the Stranraer road and rail links - or abandon them and redevelop the Upper Clyde ferries to Ireland. Bit hard on the Geordies though.
Brexit needs to be tested to destruction so that it can be disposed of permanently.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=l4mY2asIjWk
https://twitter.com/daveylittle/status/1329441076835397640?s=20
And of course Lennon's "Woman is the nig ...", his searing attack on the Patriarchy, having been awoken to it by Yoko.
Good game, good game.
Rudy Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, said in a statement, “This morning we are withdrawing our lawsuit in Michigan as a direct result of achieving the relief we sought: to stop the election in Wayne County from being prematurely certified before residents can be assured that every legal vote has been counted and every illegal vote has not been counted.”
It's rather sweet, isn't it?
Leaves under duress in a horizontal position.
Two further points occur to me ...
UK is of course leaving ESA.
And isn't UK Gmt money going into the Sutherland spaceport for little rockets? That's been known for some time. In which case it's not news at all? Maybe someone who knows more can advise.
No one buys newspapers anymore!
Smarkets behaved in the opposite way, i.e. deemed that Trump had conceded and settled my bet to my disadvantage. What?? BBC R4 News said that he hadn't yet conceded. Other broadcasters say the same.
'Scotland's space sector is rising faster than anywhere else in the UK, aiming to grow in value to £4 billion by 2030. We have some of the highest space-related activity in Europe – in fact, Glasgow manufactures more satellites than any other city in Europe.'
https://www.sdi.co.uk/key-sectors/space
In the German anyway.
"Master race".
Presumably the BBC won't report it in case somebody is offended, and it will irrevocably poison the minds of anyone under 30, because they are not able to deal with it.
I do feel sorry for the BBC over the Oliver's Army "white N*****" phrase - they'll be in total confusion not knowing whether to ban it for the N word, or for white cultural appropriation of the N word.
Poor things.
The trouble with Betfair is that they haven't complied with their own rules.
I agree with you about the Gambling Commission. The general consumer law is a much better option for aggrieved punters.
Still, Machrihanish is worth a visit if you are a golfer.
Some ESA programmes are paid for by the EU, though. We may or may not be part of those.
"The UK’s membership of the European Space Agency (ESA) is not affected by leaving the EU as it is not an EU organisation"
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/satellites-and-space-programmes-from-1-january-2021#:~:text=The UK will remain a,the Copernicus programme through ESA .
*Edit* I see it's been answered, I'm too slow.
In other news, the Dutch Brexit Muppet is back:
https://twitter.com/ministerBlok/status/1329299869111119872