You can take or leave the assumptions behind this analysis - they are debatable - but the general thrust is plausible. The death rate will be cut rapidly as the most vulnerable are vaccinated; the hospitalisation rate will be cut roughly in half and will only come down further as the general population is vaccinated over a longer timeframe.
As hospitals are beyond capacity right now this suggests to me that significant social distancing measures will still be required months after the vulnerable group are vaccinated. There will be an argument about this.
You can take or leave the assumptions behind this analysis - they are debatable - but the general thrust is plausible. The death rate will be cut rapidly as the most vulnerable are vaccinated; the hospitalisation rate will be cut roughly in half and will only come down further as the general population is vaccinated over a longer timeframe.
As hospitals are beyond capacity right now this suggests to me that significant social distancing measures will still be required months after the vulnerable group are vaccinated. There will be an argument about this.
You can take or leave the assumptions behind this analysis - they are debatable - but the general thrust is plausible. The death rate will be cut rapidly as the most vulnerable are vaccinated; the hospitalisation rate will be cut roughly in half and will only come down further as the general population is vaccinated over a longer timeframe.
As hospitals are beyond capacity right now this suggests to me that significant social distancing measures will still be required months after the vulnerable group are vaccinated. There will be an argument about this.
Yes, I'm pretty much the opposite of a Baker Fan Boy, but he's a useful outrider in keeping government under pressure on exit strategy. We have seen on here that many seek to reduce covid risk to near zero, rather than balance it with other risks.
Baker asking for a timetable is probably a bit previous given we haven't yet got the data we need, but I'd rather have that pressure on than not.
This is exactly the position of the rebels on the right. In the absence of any opposition from Labour to endless lockdowns, the fiscal hawks want to ensure enough pressure is kept on the Govt.
It is from the right that the pressure for 24/7 vaccinations have come. It was from the right that the pressure for parliamentary scrutiny of new regs has come.
The right are driving better decision making. Starmer might learn something from that....if he wasn't dominated by the union position.
Regrettable as I find it, I think you have a point.
24/7 vaccinations are insane - opening enough sites so that all vaccines arriving are used within an 8/12 hour day is a far better plan.
The right isn't driving better decision making they are just throwing mud and seeing what makes the news.
The only caveat is possibly with the Pfizer vaccine, where the cold storage requirements might make running a smaller number of sites more intensively a better option than opening more sites.
Otherwise more sites wins every time over 24 hour vaccinations.
You can take or leave the assumptions behind this analysis - they are debatable - but the general thrust is plausible. The death rate will be cut rapidly as the most vulnerable are vaccinated; the hospitalisation rate will be cut roughly in half and will only come down further as the general population is vaccinated over a longer timeframe.
As hospitals are beyond capacity right now this suggests to me that significant social distancing measures will still be required months after the vulnerable group are vaccinated. There will be an argument about this.
Groups 1-4 will finish vaccinating in the middle of Feb. Does this model just assume vaccination will stop then?
It's only looking at groups 1-4, I'd actually like to see that taken forwards for the whole country.
It can't be just looking at 1-4, as the cases are still at 80% after they've all been vaccinated.
14 million people is near as darn it 20% of the population.
So COVID will be raging along in the other 80% of the population, even if those 14 million are 95% protected.
I do worry about people's understanding of this point. "95% protected" doesn't mean every individual has 95% protection; it means 95% of people will have protection. So if ~10m old people get the jab, wait two weeks and then assumed they are free to resume their normal lives without any precautions, we could see some pretty horrible things start to happen.
Quick back of an envelope calc suggests max ~100k deaths possible as a result if the message doesn't get through that you still need to isolate, and that's assuming 95% effectiveness after a single jab. Actually, I wonder if this was a factor in deciding to delay the second jab to 12 weeks - to make it easier to persuade people that they still aren't protected and need to stay inside?
You can take or leave the assumptions behind this analysis - they are debatable - but the general thrust is plausible. The death rate will be cut rapidly as the most vulnerable are vaccinated; the hospitalisation rate will be cut roughly in half and will only come down further as the general population is vaccinated over a longer timeframe.
As hospitals are beyond capacity right now this suggests to me that significant social distancing measures will still be required months after the vulnerable group are vaccinated. There will be an argument about this.
Groups 1-4 will finish vaccinating in the middle of Feb. Does this model just assume vaccination will stop then?
It's only looking at groups 1-4, I'd actually like to see that taken forwards for the whole country.
It can't be just looking at 1-4, as the cases are still at 80% after they've all been vaccinated.
14 million people is near as darn it 20% of the population.
So COVID will be raging along in the other 80% of the population, even if those 14 million are 95% protected.
I do worry about people's understanding of this point. "95% protected" doesn't mean every individual has 95% protection; it means 95% of people will have protection. So if ~10m old people get the jab, wait two weeks and then assumed they are free to resume their normal lives without any precautions, we could see some pretty horrible things start to happen.
Quick back of an envelope calc suggests max ~100k deaths possible as a result if the message doesn't get through that you still need to isolate, and that's assuming 95% effectiveness after a single jab. Actually, I wonder if this was a factor in deciding to delay the second jab to 12 weeks - to make it easier to persuade people that they still aren't protected and need to stay inside?
Even if you've had the jab you can still be infected and spread it around even if you are not yourself affected by it.
I used to take NSAIDs daily for an autoimmune condition, and it wouldn't even cross my mind that they don't reduce antibody response - dampening the immune system response is literally what they're supposed to do. I'm unclear why this wasn't obvious.
I used to take NSAIDs daily for an autoimmune condition, and it wouldn't even cross my mind that they don't reduce antibody response - dampening the immune system response is literally what they're supposed to do. I'm unclear why this wasn't obvious.
Breaking - Toby's been done by IPSO for saying that getting a cold gives protection against Covid.
He has not had a good pandemic.
Ahhhh. To by Young, foolish again.
I've been defending Toadmeister over the last few months but it's difficult this time.
Tough mission and I don't blame you for bailing out. But tbf if you follow him on Twitter - as I guess you do - he probably doesn't look as big a plank to you as he does to most people. Because you are exposed to all his output not just the bad stuff. You get to see the gems as well as the dross.
"76 per cent of people in Manaus had contracted coronavirus by October" and "at least one person who caught the virus in the first wave has been infected with the new variant. "
Yes, I'm pretty much the opposite of a Baker Fan Boy, but he's a useful outrider in keeping government under pressure on exit strategy. We have seen on here that many seek to reduce covid risk to near zero, rather than balance it with other risks.
Baker asking for a timetable is probably a bit previous given we haven't yet got the data we need, but I'd rather have that pressure on than not.
This is exactly the position of the rebels on the right. In the absence of any opposition from Labour to endless lockdowns, the fiscal hawks want to ensure enough pressure is kept on the Govt.
It is from the right that the pressure for 24/7 vaccinations have come. It was from the right that the pressure for parliamentary scrutiny of new regs has come.
The right are driving better decision making. Starmer might learn something from that....if he wasn't dominated by the union position.
Regrettable as I find it, I think you have a point.
24/7 vaccinations are insane - opening enough sites so that all vaccines arriving are used within an 8/12 hour day is a far better plan.
The right isn't driving better decision making they are just throwing mud and seeing what makes the news.
The only caveat is possibly with the Pfizer vaccine, where the cold storage requirements might make running a smaller number of sites more intensively a better option than opening more sites.
Otherwise more sites wins every time over 24 hour vaccinations.
The question is later in the vaccination program - making getting the vaccine very, vey convenient. Because we need the highest possible take-up.
This is why it is sensible to look at the practicalities of this now.
"76 per cent of people in Manaus had contracted coronavirus by October" and "at least one person who caught the virus in the first wave has been infected with the new variant. "
Yes, I'm pretty much the opposite of a Baker Fan Boy, but he's a useful outrider in keeping government under pressure on exit strategy. We have seen on here that many seek to reduce covid risk to near zero, rather than balance it with other risks.
Baker asking for a timetable is probably a bit previous given we haven't yet got the data we need, but I'd rather have that pressure on than not.
This is exactly the position of the rebels on the right. In the absence of any opposition from Labour to endless lockdowns, the fiscal hawks want to ensure enough pressure is kept on the Govt.
It is from the right that the pressure for 24/7 vaccinations have come. It was from the right that the pressure for parliamentary scrutiny of new regs has come.
The right are driving better decision making. Starmer might learn something from that....if he wasn't dominated by the union position.
Regrettable as I find it, I think you have a point.
Given we now seem to agree on everything (and I saw your very kind words last night too), I assume you're a big pineapple on pizza fan, too?
SB understands the politics around Covid much better than Sky do....
This was a shot across the bows. To remind Boris that you can't run a country by ONLY listening to the science. Or you can, but you'll be ousted by the party in short order.
Yes, I'm pretty much the opposite of a Baker Fan Boy, but he's a useful outrider in keeping government under pressure on exit strategy. We have seen on here that many seek to reduce covid risk to near zero, rather than balance it with other risks.
Baker asking for a timetable is probably a bit previous given we haven't yet got the data we need, but I'd rather have that pressure on than not.
This is exactly the position of the rebels on the right. In the absence of any opposition from Labour to endless lockdowns, the fiscal hawks want to ensure enough pressure is kept on the Govt.
It is from the right that the pressure for 24/7 vaccinations have come. It was from the right that the pressure for parliamentary scrutiny of new regs has come.
The right are driving better decision making. Starmer might learn something from that....if he wasn't dominated by the union position.
Regrettable as I find it, I think you have a point.
24/7 vaccinations are insane - opening enough sites so that all vaccines arriving are used within an 8/12 hour day is a far better plan.
The right isn't driving better decision making they are just throwing mud and seeing what makes the news.
The only caveat is possibly with the Pfizer vaccine, where the cold storage requirements might make running a smaller number of sites more intensively a better option than opening more sites.
Otherwise more sites wins every time over 24 hour vaccinations.
The question is later in the vaccination program - making getting the vaccine very, vey convenient. Because we need the highest possible take-up.
This is why it is sensible to look at the practicalities of this now.
Later in the vaccination program just add more vaccination sites.
There is zero point doing 24/7 far more worthwhile going to a supermarket and doing all the staff there in 1 swoop.
Gordon Brown next leader of SLAB, you read it here first, and probably only here.
Ian Murray, anyone? If having a Westminster MP as Scottish Leader is good enough for the Tories...
They'd be better off selecting Andy Murray..... He's on the look-out for a new career.
Andy's Pro-Indy...
Provocative thought: would Labour do worse with a pro-indy leader? Seems like a good chuck of their base has migrated to the SNP in the last 10-15 years.
Dunno, but the Scons would do better.
By how much? Who's still voting for Labour these days? Probably not those whose main concern is the union. And with people turning away from the Conservatives, would it do more than slightly reduce the flow back from the Conservatives? I don't know, these are just questions. Doesn't seem like an obviously bad idea from a purely electoral calculus.
Still quite a few unionists - IIRC the recednt poll said 38% of SLAB votyers would vote for independence but I can't remember how many were DK. Which means that the SLAB leader can't win except by promising to support a referendum and freedom of conscience, I suppose. Of course, SLAB MSPs will go ape as many are despoerate for the cursus honorum (as they see it) that ends in the HoL.
So 62% of SLab voters oppose independence and indyref2, so obviously the new SLab leader will have to be a Unionist like the majority of their voters.
If they are going to get Tory tactical votes v the SNP they will also need to stick to an anti independence line.
Fortunately both likely successors, Sarwar and Ballie, take a stronger anti indyref2 line than Leonard did and both have ruled out any indyref2 for the rest of this Parliament
SB understands the politics around Covid much better than Sky do....
This was a shot across the bows. To remind Boris that you can't run a country by ONLY listening to the science. Or you can, but you'll be ousted by the party in short order.
That was probably the idea behind the planned relaxation of the rules around Christmas. That doesn't seem to have gone so well, even with the last minute tightening up.
The solution to the problem of fishing folk not being able to send fresh fish to the EU is for the UK to rejoin the EU now. As that clearly won't happen there is in fact no solution to their problem. Fishing folk have two options:
Give up. Which I think a biggish number will do.
Hang on while the systems get up to speed, maybe get some support from government, and hope they don't permanently lose too many EU customers. After that accept a very substantial cost to business and lower incomes.
It's grim and worse than I was expecting it to be.
SB understands the politics around Covid much better than Sky do....
Maybe that is why he withdrew his comments almost as soon as he had made them
Sky don't get a say in when Boris' leadership ends.
The constituency Baker is speaking to very much do.
And I am a member and reject his intervention
I'm neither a member nor a voter, but I think Mr Baker should lie down in a darkened room for some time. This isn't the time to be raising opening up plans.
The solution to the problem of fishing folk not being able to send fresh fish to the EU is for the UK to rejoin the EU now. As that is clearly won't happen there is in fact no solution to the problem. Fishing folk have two options:
Give up. Which I think a biggish number will do.
Hang on while the systems get up to speed, maybe get some support from government, and hope they don't permanently lose too many EU customers. After that accept a very substantial cost to business and lower incomes.
It's grim and worse than I was expecting it to be.
I was listening to the head of a haulage company in Eyemouth who confirmed the issues, but while annoyed he did seem to think that it would be resolved shortly.
Time for Rishi to step in with compensation while it is being sorted
I guess that is pretty obviously true, but why would he want the job?
I wonder why Leonard has resigned now with most polls showing some Labour recovery in Scotland - Comres earlier today had them back in second place.
The Tories were still 2nd on the constituency poll and SLab was still polling below what it got in 2016 in the final poll of Leonard's leadership today
SB understands the politics around Covid much better than Sky do....
Maybe that is why he withdrew his comments almost as soon as he had made them
Sky don't get a say in when Boris' leadership ends.
The constituency Baker is speaking to very much do.
And I am a member and reject his intervention
You also don't get a say in when Boris' leadership ends. I'm not convinced you have much leverage over Steve Baker either.
He sort of does actually. The MPs take into account how they think the members will vote, what they think - and what voters do too - in weighing up how they act themselves in leadership votes.
Gordon Brown next leader of SLAB, you read it here first, and probably only here.
Ian Murray, anyone? If having a Westminster MP as Scottish Leader is good enough for the Tories...
They'd be better off selecting Andy Murray..... He's on the look-out for a new career.
Andy's Pro-Indy...
Provocative thought: would Labour do worse with a pro-indy leader? Seems like a good chuck of their base has migrated to the SNP in the last 10-15 years.
Yes, I'm pretty much the opposite of a Baker Fan Boy, but he's a useful outrider in keeping government under pressure on exit strategy. We have seen on here that many seek to reduce covid risk to near zero, rather than balance it with other risks.
Baker asking for a timetable is probably a bit previous given we haven't yet got the data we need, but I'd rather have that pressure on than not.
This is exactly the position of the rebels on the right. In the absence of any opposition from Labour to endless lockdowns, the fiscal hawks want to ensure enough pressure is kept on the Govt.
It is from the right that the pressure for 24/7 vaccinations have come. It was from the right that the pressure for parliamentary scrutiny of new regs has come.
The right are driving better decision making. Starmer might learn something from that....if he wasn't dominated by the union position.
Regrettable as I find it, I think you have a point.
24/7 vaccinations are insane - opening enough sites so that all vaccines arriving are used within an 8/12 hour day is a far better plan.
The right isn't driving better decision making they are just throwing mud and seeing what makes the news.
The only caveat is possibly with the Pfizer vaccine, where the cold storage requirements might make running a smaller number of sites more intensively a better option than opening more sites.
Otherwise more sites wins every time over 24 hour vaccinations.
The question is later in the vaccination program - making getting the vaccine very, vey convenient. Because we need the highest possible take-up.
This is why it is sensible to look at the practicalities of this now.
Very few people will find a time in the early hours more convenient than a location closer to them.
This is just like polling stations. We have loads of polling stations open 7am-10pm. If you halved the number of polling stations to have them open 24 hours it would make it harder to vote for most people rather than easier.
SB understands the politics around Covid much better than Sky do....
Maybe that is why he withdrew his comments almost as soon as he had made them
Sky don't get a say in when Boris' leadership ends.
The constituency Baker is speaking to very much do.
And I am a member and reject his intervention
You also don't get a say in when Boris' leadership ends. I'm not convinced you have much leverage over Steve Baker either.
He sort of does actually. The MPs take into account how they think the members will vote, what they think - and what voters do too - in weighing up how they act themselves in leadership votes.
Sure, a Labour voter in a swing seat probably has more sway than a Tory member in a safe seat, given that it isn't particularly easy to deselect sitting Tory MPs. In either case, it's a second order effect.
Gordon Brown next leader of SLAB, you read it here first, and probably only here.
Ian Murray, anyone? If having a Westminster MP as Scottish Leader is good enough for the Tories...
They'd be better off selecting Andy Murray..... He's on the look-out for a new career.
Andy's Pro-Indy...
Provocative thought: would Labour do worse with a pro-indy leader? Seems like a good chuck of their base has migrated to the SNP in the last 10-15 years.
SB understands the politics around Covid much better than Sky do....
Maybe that is why he withdrew his comments almost as soon as he had made them
Sky don't get a say in when Boris' leadership ends.
The constituency Baker is speaking to very much do.
And I am a member and reject his intervention
You also don't get a say in when Boris' leadership ends. I'm not convinced you have much leverage over Steve Baker either.
I have a vote but more importantly he has been slapped down by fellow his mps as he made a quick retraction
So do I - on who replaces him. If you remember from a couple of years ago, the vote of no confidence is triggered by letters to Graham Brady, and then voted on by simple majority. In both cases, MPs only. And then the defeated leader can't then stand again in the subsequent election.
I guess that is pretty obviously true, but why would he want the job?
I wonder why Leonard has resigned now with most polls showing some Labour recovery in Scotland - Comres earlier today had them back in second place.
The Tories were still 2nd on the constituency poll and SLab was still polling below what it got in 2016 in the final poll of Leonard's leadership today
I guess that is pretty obviously true, but why would he want the job?
I wonder why Leonard has resigned now with most polls showing some Labour recovery in Scotland - Comres earlier today had them back in second place.
The Tories were still 2nd on the constituency poll and SLab was still polling below what it got in 2016 in the final poll of Leonard's leadership today
But it did show Labour back as the second largest party in the Scottish Parliament .
The solution to the problem of fishing folk not being able to send fresh fish to the EU is for the UK to rejoin the EU now. As that is clearly won't happen there is in fact no solution to the problem. Fishing folk have two options:
Give up. Which I think a biggish number will do.
Hang on while the systems get up to speed, maybe get some support from government, and hope they don't permanently lose too many EU customers. After that accept a very substantial cost to business and lower incomes.
It's grim and worse than I was expecting it to be.
I was listening to the head of a haulage company in Eyemouth who confirmed the issues, but while annoyed he did seem to think that it would be resolved shortly.
Time for Rishi to step in with compensation while it is being sorted
I think there is a dozen or so new bureaucratic steps to get fresh food into the EU. Some of the issues with them relate to immature systems; some are due to a lack of resources (those missing customs agents etc), some a lack of experience in the new bureaucracy. Eventually people who are prepared to put with this stuff will get on top of it, but it doesn't look a few days' project. More like six months or more. Where are those fishing boats and companies going to be at that point?
Including this one, that doesn't get mentioned in the Border Operating Model, probably because those writing didn't know about it.
Breaking - Toby's been done by IPSO for saying that getting a cold gives protection against Covid.
He has not had a good pandemic.
Blimey you have to come out with a real whopper to get the wrong side of IPSO as a journalist.
Well, that’s Toby Young for you. Weirdly I think he asks a lot of the right questions. The trouble lies in the part where he doesn’t seem to be interested whether his answers are true or not.
SB understands the politics around Covid much better than Sky do....
Maybe that is why he withdrew his comments almost as soon as he had made them
Sky don't get a say in when Boris' leadership ends.
The constituency Baker is speaking to very much do.
And I am a member and reject his intervention
You also don't get a say in when Boris' leadership ends. I'm not convinced you have much leverage over Steve Baker either.
I have a vote but more importantly he has been slapped down by fellow his mps as he made a quick retraction
So do I - on who replaces him. If you remember from a couple of years ago, the vote of no confidence is triggered by letters to Graham Brady, and then voted on by simple majority. In both cases, MPs only. And then the defeated leader can't then stand again in the subsequent election.
On the subject Baker has raised I am 100% behind Boris and he will drive more doubters to Boris if he continues his views
Sort of on topic I have heard the handling of Covid-19 has triggered at least five letters to Sir Graham Brady, with a few more keeping their powders dry.
It hasn't been easy defending the indefensible then seeing the government performing u-turn after u-turn.
Plenty of Tory MPs know voting against the free schools meal thing will come back to haunt them at the next election even before Boris Johnson committed his u turns.
The perception around contracts for mates is something that is also being noted.
It is impressive that the explosion in support for independence is so closely aligned with Boris Johnson's premiership. It really takes off in the summer of 2019 and doesn't look back.
I can't quite work this out. But there was a thing in reporting the court case over the need for anonymity for his accusers. Is this the issue here? i.e. submitting the documents may well breach that anonymity.
Sort of on topic I have heard the handling of Covid-19 has triggered at least five letters to Sir Graham Brady, with a few more keeping their powders dry.
It hasn't been easy defending the indefensible then seeing the government performing u-turn after u-turn.
Plenty of Tory MPs know voting against the free schools meal thing will come back to haunt them at the next election even before Boris Johnson committed his u turns.
The perception around contracts for mates is something that is also being noted.
There was a time, we may still be in it, when you could be certain that a policy endorsed by a minister as not changing in the morning would be reversed within days.
That surely is not a good place for a government to be. And not good for an MP to be a member of such a government.
It is impressive that the explosion in support for independence is so closely aligned with Boris Johnson's premiership. It really takes off in the summer of 2019 and doesn't look back.
It is impressive that the explosion in support for independence is so closely aligned with Boris Johnson's premiership. It really takes off in the summer of 2019 and doesn't look back.
With the resignation of Richard Leonard, Scottish Labour must choose within this pool
Jackie Baillie Claire Baker Claudia Beamish Neil Bibby Sarah Boyack James Kelly Daniel Johnson Mark Griffin Rhoda Grant Monica Lennon Pauline McNeill Alex Rowley Anas Sarwar Colin Smyth
Their recent "we thought we reached our lowest point but the new one managed to drop further" tradition may still continue at this rate.
I can't quite work this out. But there was a thing in reporting the court case over the need for anonymity for his accusers. Is this the issue here? i.e. submitting the documents may well breach that anonymity.
I think the implication may be that various aspects of Salmond's behaviour over the years have been known to Sturgeon which would certainly be a sticky wicket for her. However that would mean AS admitting to actions so reprehensible that Sturgeon should have been duty bound to act on the information.
Concidentally, I spotted an earlier tweet -linking to a recent paper re anonymity for complainants re sexual offences being actually unknown to Scots Law. Which is a big surprise to me, if correct (can't see it all).
I can't quite work this out. But there was a thing in reporting the court case over the need for anonymity for his accusers. Is this the issue here? i.e. submitting the documents may well breach that anonymity.
That's one of the issues I thought it might be referencing.
There maybe a confidentially clause in the deal he agreed with the Scottish government.
Sort of on topic I have heard the handling of Covid-19 has triggered at least five letters to Sir Graham Brady, with a few more keeping their powders dry.
It hasn't been easy defending the indefensible then seeing the government performing u-turn after u-turn.
Plenty of Tory MPs know voting against the free schools meal thing will come back to haunt them at the next election even before Boris Johnson committed his u turns.
The perception around contracts for mates is something that is also being noted.
Five?
Were they all by Charles Walker or did Brady send one to himself?
HYUFD: We'll need a more mobile set of goalposts!!
Of course in reality even if the SNP got 100% in May Boris would still not grant them indyref2, even if politically that might be challenging he is not going to even consider granting any indyref unless No is back clearly in front.
He will stick to his line 2014 was a once in a generation vote and as Westminster is sovereign nothing Sturgeon can do about it until the next UK general election in 2024 when she has to hope Starmer needs her support to govern
Comments
So COVID will be raging along in the other 80% of the population, even if those 14 million are 95% protected.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1349774795844554754?s=20
I think the point is more - I wasn't the reason they stormed the Capitol, did you hear what Giuliani said - my comments were far milder.
Otherwise more sites wins every time over 24 hour vaccinations.
Quick back of an envelope calc suggests max ~100k deaths possible as a result if the message doesn't get through that you still need to isolate, and that's assuming 95% effectiveness after a single jab. Actually, I wonder if this was a factor in deciding to delay the second jab to 12 weeks - to make it easier to persuade people that they still aren't protected and need to stay inside?
https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1349776993106219010?s=20
I used to take NSAIDs daily for an autoimmune condition, and it wouldn't even cross my mind that they don't reduce antibody response - dampening the immune system response is literally what they're supposed to do. I'm unclear why this wasn't obvious.
and
"at least one person who caught the virus in the first wave has been infected with the new variant. "
Sense of proportion?
This is why it is sensible to look at the practicalities of this now.
If it doesn't bleed.. get a razor....
Steve Baker's coup lasted two hours
How to misjudge the politics over covid
This was a shot across the bows. To remind Boris that you can't run a country by ONLY listening to the science. Or you can, but you'll be ousted by the party in short order.
There is zero point doing 24/7 far more worthwhile going to a supermarket and doing all the staff there in 1 swoop.
If they are going to get Tory tactical votes v the SNP they will also need to stick to an anti independence line.
Fortunately both likely successors, Sarwar and Ballie, take a stronger anti indyref2 line than Leonard did and both have ruled out any indyref2 for the rest of this Parliament
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18880342.scottish-labour--will-oppose-indyref2-2026/
https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/jackie-baillie-scottish-labour-must-oppose-independence-and-indyref2-2005263
The constituency Baker is speaking to very much do.
- Give up. Which I think a biggish number will do.
- Hang on while the systems get up to speed, maybe get some support from government, and hope they don't permanently lose too many EU customers. After that accept a very substantial cost to business and lower incomes.
It's grim and worse than I was expecting it to be.The bigger question surely is whether he would overshadow Marcus Rashford?
This isn't the time to be raising opening up plans.
Time for Rishi to step in with compensation while it is being sorted
Who defends him on every subject.
Millions of lifelong Conservatives going on strike from the party last year is what ended May's Premiership, not an MP VoNC.
This is just like polling stations. We have loads of polling stations open 7am-10pm. If you halved the number of polling stations to have them open 24 hours it would make it harder to vote for most people rather than easier.
We'll need a more mobile set of goalposts!!
Including this one, that doesn't get mentioned in the Border Operating Model, probably because those writing didn't know about it.
https://twitter.com/ColdChainShane/status/1349701828762599424
https://twitter.com/itssophiemorris/status/1349756440412647428
It hasn't been easy defending the indefensible then seeing the government performing u-turn after u-turn.
Plenty of Tory MPs know voting against the free schools meal thing will come back to haunt them at the next election even before Boris Johnson committed his u turns.
The perception around contracts for mates is something that is also being noted.
https://twitter.com/PeatWorrier/status/1349780911240458241?s=20
That surely is not a good place for a government to be. And not good for an MP to be a member of such a government.
He's Minister for Scottish Independence more like.
I hope that clarifies my position.
Jackie Baillie
Claire Baker
Claudia Beamish
Neil Bibby
Sarah Boyack
James Kelly
Daniel Johnson
Mark Griffin
Rhoda Grant
Monica Lennon
Pauline McNeill
Alex Rowley
Anas Sarwar
Colin Smyth
Their recent "we thought we reached our lowest point but the new one managed to drop further" tradition may still continue at this rate.
https://www.euppublishing.com/doi/abs/10.3366/elr.2020.0658
There maybe a confidentially clause in the deal he agreed with the Scottish government.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/aug/13/alex-salmond-awarded-512000-payout-after-botched-investigation
Were they all by Charles Walker or did Brady send one to himself?
He will stick to his line 2014 was a once in a generation vote and as Westminster is sovereign nothing Sturgeon can do about it until the next UK general election in 2024 when she has to hope Starmer needs her support to govern