Britain manages 220,000 coronavirus vaccines in Sunday slowdown with fewer than half as many as record-breaking Saturday as NHS misses internal target of reaching all care home residents by January 24
(Gets in haggis flavoured popcorn, especially for Burns’ Night!)
If one of them has to be lying and the other telling the truth my money would be on Sturgeon doing the truth telling. She gives off to me a solid and trustworthy aroma that Salmond, for all his undoubted gifts as a politician, does not.
Except...what is in it for Salmond if he is lying? He is certainly coming across as seriously aggrieved by something.
Boris Johnson has hinted that the Government will be "looking at the potential of relaxing some measures", before mid- February.
The Prime Minister said that the Government was "looking at the data as it comes in", and then added that "before then we'll be looking at the potential of relaxing some measures".
However No 10 pushed back against Mr Johnson's words and said that the 15th of February "remains the earliest point at which we could change any of the rules".
I think JOhnson is wrong to consider relaxation on February but he did say "looking at" relaxing before that date rather than saying he actually would.
We're doing well with vaccinations. Our pharma industry is stepping up. That's something to be proud of. Is that not enough?
No, we need to go much further. We will soon increase our production of vaccine beyond what is required to give everyone in these islands their double dose. What do we do then? I think we keep ramping up production and come to the rescue of others by giving them our surplus. The aid budget should buy as much vaccine as possible for the third world and deliver it. The EU should be given access to our surplus too. Personally, I would give it to them. No conditions, no quid pro quo (other than giving Brits the ability to go on their holidays again). Its what friends do. But maybe I am too nice.
Rubbish, Europe is a rich continent, it has the means to invest in significant production capacity, they have chosen not to. Any surplus we have should go to the COVAX scheme after a strategic reserve is built up.
We have a strong self interest in the EU also getting over this pandemic this year. I'm not that nice.
Boris Johnson has hinted that the Government will be "looking at the potential of relaxing some measures", before mid- February.
The Prime Minister said that the Government was "looking at the data as it comes in", and then added that "before then we'll be looking at the potential of relaxing some measures".
However No 10 pushed back against Mr Johnson's words and said that the 15th of February "remains the earliest point at which we could change any of the rules".
I think JOhnson is wrong to consider relaxation on February but he did say "looking at" relaxing before that date rather than saying he actually would.
It's the media that hypes these kind of stories all out of proportion. We are told the restrictions are constantly under review, so it isn't surprising that they would be reviewed at some point.
DM Headline : How Britain could REGRET bringing in Australian-style Covid quarantines: Oz system has left the country cut off, sparked shambles at tennis Open, and seen security guards spread disease
Meanwhile in the article... It means that many of the Australians who would usually return home to see family over Christmas haven't bothered because much of the trip would be in quarantine with guests forced to foot their own hotel bill - £1,700 on average.
Best part of enforced hotel quarantine I think - you stop people popping out the country for a quick family wedding in Egypt (*Cough Salah*) or wherever.
Who gives a crap? Midterm polls are meaningless at best of times, in the middle a pandemic they are beyond meaningless. Why anyone pays the slightest attention is beyond me.
A few weeks ago we were assured that the Tories would get a Brexit bounce inn the polls. After that failed to materialise a vaccine bounce was predicted. So this poll is interesting in that it seems to show no sign of any bouncing.
There is a bounce but I suspect it's more like this
with polls continuing as they are until reality suddenly hits.
It's not often PB includes a pic of one of my heroes.
Wile E Coyote reminds me of a few current Government Ministers (Hancock and Williamson in particular) who keep on going even though every single one of their plans is thwarted.
Hancock has vastly improved. After a shaky start, admittedly.
Who gives a crap? Midterm polls are meaningless at best of times, in the middle a pandemic they are beyond meaningless. Why anyone pays the slightest attention is beyond me.
A few weeks ago we were assured that the Tories would get a Brexit bounce inn the polls. After that failed to materialise a vaccine bounce was predicted. So this poll is interesting in that it seems to show no sign of any bouncing.
There is a bounce but I suspect it's more like this
with polls continuing as they are until reality suddenly hits.
It's not often PB includes a pic of one of my heroes.
Wile E Coyote reminds me of a few current Government Ministers (Hancock and Williamson in particular) who keep on going even though every single one of their plans is thwarted.
Hancock has vastly improved. After a shaky start, admittedly.
Williamson, oh dear.
Hancock is a worthy minister. Once this is over, he deserves some combination of promotion and time away from the trenches- Foreign Secretary is customary in that situation, is it not?
Williamson wasn't worthy last time round. And he's not improved.
I am on Hancock (now 36s bf) for next Cons leader.
Rishi's fate will be in the hands of the extent of the furlough.
I'm not sure there are too many other candidates. Raab perhaps. Gove I can't see it.
Hunt would likely run again, if Sunak was not now a contender he might even win next time with Brexit no longer an issue and Corbyn defeated and no more
That is a good point. Hunt might tempt me back to the Party.
You're a diehard something or other. They don't want you back.
If they want Hunt they want me.
Indeed. I don't have money on his getting the leadership.
We're doing well with vaccinations. Our pharma industry is stepping up. That's something to be proud of. Is that not enough?
No, we need to go much further. We will soon increase our production of vaccine beyond what is required to give everyone in these islands their double dose. What do we do then? I think we keep ramping up production and come to the rescue of others by giving them our surplus. The aid budget should buy as much vaccine as possible for the third world and deliver it. The EU should be given access to our surplus too. Personally, I would give it to them. No conditions, no quid pro quo (other than giving Brits the ability to go on their holidays again). Its what friends do. But maybe I am too nice.
Rubbish, Europe is a rich continent, it has the means to invest in significant production capacity, they have chosen not to. Any surplus we have should go to the COVAX scheme after a strategic reserve is built up.
We have a strong self interest in the EU also getting over this pandemic this year. I'm not that nice.
Then it's up to the EU to invest in manufacturing for vaccines, our spare capacity should help those parts of the world who don't have the money to do that. The EU scheme has been a complete disaster from the beginning, let them bail themselves out.
I don't understand what they expect to happen? The UK has a domestic manufacturing requirement as part of the contract and in case they don't remember, AZ fucked up our initial delivery as well from 20m to 4m so it's not exactly an isolated incident.
Trying to pass the buck and deflect attention from their ineptitude
We're doing well with vaccinations. Our pharma industry is stepping up. That's something to be proud of. Is that not enough?
No, we need to go much further. We will soon increase our production of vaccine beyond what is required to give everyone in these islands their double dose. What do we do then? I think we keep ramping up production and come to the rescue of others by giving them our surplus. The aid budget should buy as much vaccine as possible for the third world and deliver it. The EU should be given access to our surplus too. Personally, I would give it to them. No conditions, no quid pro quo (other than giving Brits the ability to go on their holidays again). Its what friends do. But maybe I am too nice.
Rubbish, Europe is a rich continent, it has the means to invest in significant production capacity, they have chosen not to. Any surplus we have should go to the COVAX scheme after a strategic reserve is built up.
We have a strong self interest in the EU also getting over this pandemic this year. I'm not that nice.
Then it's up to the EU to invest in manufacturing for vaccines, our spare capacity should help those parts of the world who don't have the money to do that. The EU scheme has been a complete disaster from the beginning, let them bail themselves out.
(Gets in haggis flavoured popcorn, especially for Burns’ Night!)
If one of them has to be lying and the other telling the truth my money would be on Sturgeon doing the truth telling. She gives off to me a solid and trustworthy aroma that Salmond, for all his undoubted gifts as a politician, does not.
Except...what is in it for Salmond if he is lying? He is certainly coming across as seriously aggrieved by something.
If hes angry enough to just want to lash out he may not be wholly rational about it.
We're doing well with vaccinations. Our pharma industry is stepping up. That's something to be proud of. Is that not enough?
No, we need to go much further. We will soon increase our production of vaccine beyond what is required to give everyone in these islands their double dose. What do we do then? I think we keep ramping up production and come to the rescue of others by giving them our surplus. The aid budget should buy as much vaccine as possible for the third world and deliver it. The EU should be given access to our surplus too. Personally, I would give it to them. No conditions, no quid pro quo (other than giving Brits the ability to go on their holidays again). Its what friends do. But maybe I am too nice.
Indeed, no reason not to vaccinate the third world once we are happy, and to use the aid budget to pay for it.
Also, I’d write “🇬🇧UK Aid, 🇬🇧 Vaccinating the Developing World🇬🇧” on the boxes.
Yep, just like the US used to do when donating its agricultural surplus.
Not a lawyer but I did once work in local government and was an activist at local level (I kept internal meeting minutes for my party's group on the district council). My understanding of what is and isn't ultra vires for a local authority revolves around what purposes can an authority legally spend public money on. It used to be that local authorities could only spend public money strictly on purposes specifically or implicitly[1] authorized by Parliament. Older PBers may recall the Thatcher government and its cheerleaders in the Tory press striking against "propaganda on the rates" by inter alia making the GLC change its slogan from "Working for London" to "Working in London".
However, in England under the Localism Act local authorities can now seek a "general power of competence" which allows them to spend public money or more or less any purpose they feel beneficial to their area that's not specifically denied to them by Parliament. AIUI it's up to the devolved assemblies to grant similar powers to their local authorities. So far the Northern Ireland Assembly has done so and Scotland and Wales are considering it.
So I, from my admittedly layman's perspective, think there's two issues here
1) Does the Scottish Parliament, and the devolved assemblies as a whole, have a "general power of competence" to expend public money except where specifically prohibited, or can they only expend on matters specifically authorized by the UK Parliament?
AIUI the devolution settlements have given the assemblies (certainly Scotland at any rate) the power to legislate on any non-reserved matter, which by extension means they can authorize expenditure on any non-reserved matter. I'd also argue it would be strange for the assemblies to have the power to grant a general power of competence to their local authorities but not possess it themselves.
2) Would a purely advisory referendum on independence be a ultra vires expenditure of public funds? I would say no, as governments at all levels in the UK frequently spend public money to find out their constituents views for the purpose of lobbying higher levels of government for various things, including an extension of powers. I agree that the Scottish Parliament cannot actually legislate for independence without the consent of Westminster, but I don't see how it can be prevented from formally asking its people what their view on the matter is.
[1] I.e. there's no statute that says local authorities can purchase computers, but doing so is implicit in being able to execute their specific powers and duties
Hidden in a long twitter thread about the new Dominion Giulliani lawsuit is this gem, which probably highlights the real point of this case - as Discovery will allow them to see if they can tie Trump into this is anyway shape or form,
Are any of our vaccines made in the EU ? It's one area of relative robustness iirc.
Yes, Pfizer though I imagine Pfizer will refuse to comply with any export ban as it would basically destroy their credibility worldwide as their Belgian site even supplies the US. It would, IMO, destroy any credibility that the EU has on being an honest broker with global trade.
We're doing well with vaccinations. Our pharma industry is stepping up. That's something to be proud of. Is that not enough?
No, we need to go much further. We will soon increase our production of vaccine beyond what is required to give everyone in these islands their double dose. What do we do then? I think we keep ramping up production and come to the rescue of others by giving them our surplus. The aid budget should buy as much vaccine as possible for the third world and deliver it. The EU should be given access to our surplus too. Personally, I would give it to them. No conditions, no quid pro quo (other than giving Brits the ability to go on their holidays again). Its what friends do. But maybe I am too nice.
Indeed, no reason not to vaccinate the third world once we are happy, and to use the aid budget to pay for it.
Also, I’d write “🇬🇧UK Aid, 🇬🇧 Vaccinating the Developing World🇬🇧” on the boxes.
Yep, just like the US used to do when donating its agricultural surplus.
A blood mess, if we have a Unionist boycott then I think it will play havoc with the secondary markets like turnout and share of the votes.
Yes to win 90% of the vote on 35% turnout would be my guess.
Yeah, sounds plausible, although I suspect turnout would be lower.
The last thing the SNP want is for the election to be about education etc. hence ramping up Indy. Placates the hard-core (and there is definitely a party management issue in play) and distracts from what appears to be a less than impressive performance on the vaccination roll-out. Also they may be slightly (very slightly) concerned about SLAB coming back to life under Sarwar. Making everything about Indy is the best way of stifling a Labour revival.
Are any of our vaccines made in the EU ? It's one area of relative robustness iirc.
Yes, Pfizer though I imagine Pfizer will refuse to comply with any export ban as it would basically destroy their credibility worldwide as their Belgian site even supplies the US. It would, IMO, destroy any credibility that the EU has on being an honest broker with global trade.
I actually don't know what the EU are trying to achieve here. The UK doesn't source the AZN vaccine from the EU.
A blood mess, if we have a Unionist boycott then I think it will play havoc with the secondary markets like turnout and share of the votes.
Yes to win 90% of the vote on 35% turnout would be my guess.
Yeah, sounds plausible, although I suspect turnout would be lower.
The last thing the SNP want is for the election to be about education etc. hence ramping up Indy. Placates the hard-core (and there is definitely a party management issue in play) and distracts from what appears to be a less than impressive performance on the vaccination roll-out. Also they may be slightly (very slightly) concerned about SLAB coming back to life under Sarwar. Making everything about Indy is the best way of stifling a Labour revival.
LOL, another Scotch expert talks utter mince.
Well you're no Scotland expert either.
I remember when Alastair Meeks tipped the SNP to lose their majority (10/1 and 8/1 on the election day 2016) you said people were losing their money.
The same thing you said when people were backing No in 2014.
Ditto when some people backed the Tories to win 10 plus seats in 2017.
I really welcome the opportunity to have a discussion about the legalities of a Scottish Independence referendum. I feel it is a topic too often ignored on these boards.
(Gets in haggis flavoured popcorn, especially for Burns’ Night!)
If one of them has to be lying and the other telling the truth my money would be on Sturgeon doing the truth telling. She gives off to me a solid and trustworthy aroma that Salmond, for all his undoubted gifts as a politician, does not.
Except...what is in it for Salmond if he is lying? He is certainly coming across as seriously aggrieved by something.
What's in it for him? A return to what he considers his rightful place perhaps.
Boris Johnson has hinted that the Government will be "looking at the potential of relaxing some measures", before mid- February.
The Prime Minister said that the Government was "looking at the data as it comes in", and then added that "before then we'll be looking at the potential of relaxing some measures".
However No 10 pushed back against Mr Johnson's words and said that the 15th of February "remains the earliest point at which we could change any of the rules".
I think JOhnson is wrong to consider relaxation on February but he did say "looking at" relaxing before that date rather than saying he actually would.
It's the media that hypes these kind of stories all out of proportion. We are told the restrictions are constantly under review, so it isn't surprising that they would be reviewed at some point.
Boris just needs to say:
"We will not be looking at any relaxations until February 15th, when we will have had three weeks more data on infections, hospitalisations, R factor, vaccination efficacy - everything. There'll be a press conference then, when you can ask away to your hearts content...."
Are any of our vaccines made in the EU ? It's one area of relative robustness iirc.
Yes, Pfizer though I imagine Pfizer will refuse to comply with any export ban as it would basically destroy their credibility worldwide as their Belgian site even supplies the US. It would, IMO, destroy any credibility that the EU has on being an honest broker with global trade.
I actually don't know what the EU are trying to achieve here. The UK doesn't source the AZN vaccine from the EU.
Remember when your ex dumps you and starts dating someone awesome....
A referendum which isn't legally authorised and internationally recognised is absolutely no use at all for the Nats, except to further stoke the already well-stoked grievance machine. They must know this, so there's a huge amount of bluster here.
From the point of view of the Conservative government, I really can't see any upside to agreeing the referendum. Better to say No, ignore the fuss, and leave it to the next Labour PM to impale himself or herself on the spike.
Surely you just have a unionist boycott and then dare the SNP to go for UDI based on a referendum process that would embarrass banana republics.
This is due to pressure from the Salmondite wing - who recently won a number of internal party positions - demanding a "Plan B" when Boris turns down the Section 30 request. The SNP, despite being electorally unassailable (at the moment) is festering inside.
This idea is against her better instincts but she simply doesn't have an answer to the conundrum.
All the more reason, of course, for Boris to say NO.
A referendum which isn't legally authorised and internationally recognised is absolutely no use at all for the Nats, except to further stoke the already well-stoked grievance machine. They must know this, so there's a huge amount of bluster here.
From the point of view of the Conservative government, I really can't see any upside to agreeing the referendum. Better to say No, ignore the fuss, and leave it to the next Labour PM to impale himself or herself on the spike.
Surely you just have a unionist boycott and then dare the SNP to go for UDI based on a referendum process that would embarrass banana republics.
Yep. As an actual strategy this is DOA - the UK Government would be mad to try and stop it happening in the courts, just let it go ahead as the utter farce it is. No better together, no campaign, just gently point out that it has no legal status and is an utter waste of public money.
The reason it has come about is purely internal. Sturgeon needs to steady the ship and keep the nutters off her back.
(Gets in haggis flavoured popcorn, especially for Burns’ Night!)
If one of them has to be lying and the other telling the truth my money would be on Sturgeon doing the truth telling. She gives off to me a solid and trustworthy aroma that Salmond, for all his undoubted gifts as a politician, does not.
There speaks ignorance. Unless Aberdein lied under oath she told porkies to parliament. Also top aid asked him to change his evidence so her career was not impacted. Last gambit is they are saying the evidence cannot be used by inquiry, witholding documentation and had their lackey Lord Advocate stated that Salmond would be prosecuted if he told the truth under oath at the inquiry.
I think those export registration/ban comments are going to be walked back very quickly and the likes of Pfizer will have a whole bunch of public statements saying that they won't be effected by it.
It's definitely one of those things that I'm sure was regretted the instant after it was mentioned. There's going to be a lot of damage control on this in the next few days, serious trade partners don't fuck with this stuff. If you buggered up your own purchasing, you have to deal with that situation, not fuck up everyone else's plans (and the Belgian manufacturing delivers to the UK, US, Canada and Japan so the EU aren't just fucking us over, it's all of it's supposed security partners).
I actually think it would put EU/US relations into a deep freeze, and they're already on shaky ground after the EU gave China a hand job during Biden's inauguration.
A referendum which isn't legally authorised and internationally recognised is absolutely no use at all for the Nats, except to further stoke the already well-stoked grievance machine. They must know this, so there's a huge amount of bluster here.
From the point of view of the Conservative government, I really can't see any upside to agreeing the referendum. Better to say No, ignore the fuss, and leave it to the next Labour PM to impale himself or herself on the spike.
Surely you just have a unionist boycott and then dare the SNP to go for UDI based on a referendum process that would embarrass banana republics.
(Gets in haggis flavoured popcorn, especially for Burns’ Night!)
If one of them has to be lying and the other telling the truth my money would be on Sturgeon doing the truth telling. She gives off to me a solid and trustworthy aroma that Salmond, for all his undoubted gifts as a politician, does not.
Except...what is in it for Salmond if he is lying? He is certainly coming across as seriously aggrieved by something.
If someone tried to get you 12 years in jail when you are completely innocent , would you not be just a little bit miffed.
Boris Johnson has hinted that the Government will be "looking at the potential of relaxing some measures", before mid- February.
The Prime Minister said that the Government was "looking at the data as it comes in", and then added that "before then we'll be looking at the potential of relaxing some measures".
However No 10 pushed back against Mr Johnson's words and said that the 15th of February "remains the earliest point at which we could change any of the rules".
I think JOhnson is wrong to consider relaxation on February but he did say "looking at" relaxing before that date rather than saying he actually would.
The infection rates seem to be coming down quite fast at the moment. If this continues then the government ought to consider relaxing some of the measures. I would not be surprised if this crisis goes on for five years before pre-virus normality returns. We cannot have a total lockdown for the next five years.
A blood mess, if we have a Unionist boycott then I think it will play havoc with the secondary markets like turnout and share of the votes.
Yes to win 90% of the vote on 35% turnout would be my guess.
Yeah, sounds plausible, although I suspect turnout would be lower.
The last thing the SNP want is for the election to be about education etc. hence ramping up Indy. Placates the hard-core (and there is definitely a party management issue in play) and distracts from what appears to be a less than impressive performance on the vaccination roll-out. Also they may be slightly (very slightly) concerned about SLAB coming back to life under Sarwar. Making everything about Indy is the best way of stifling a Labour revival.
LOL, another Scotch expert talks utter mince.
Well you're no Scotland expert either.
I remember when Alastair Meeks tipped the SNP to lose their majority (10/1 and 8/1 on the election day 2016) you said people were losing their money.
The same thing you said when people were backing No in 2014.
Ditto when some people backed the Tories to win 10 plus seats in 2017.
So you talk plenty of mince.
When he gets it right, it's a turnip for the book.
Boris Johnson has hinted that the Government will be "looking at the potential of relaxing some measures", before mid- February.
The Prime Minister said that the Government was "looking at the data as it comes in", and then added that "before then we'll be looking at the potential of relaxing some measures".
However No 10 pushed back against Mr Johnson's words and said that the 15th of February "remains the earliest point at which we could change any of the rules".
I think JOhnson is wrong to consider relaxation on February but he did say "looking at" relaxing before that date rather than saying he actually would.
Oh, for God's sake. We have had enough government by hint and kite-flying. Until you've decided what needs to be done, STFU. When you've decided, JFDI. Sorry to be vulgar, but really...
(Gets in haggis flavoured popcorn, especially for Burns’ Night!)
If one of them has to be lying and the other telling the truth my money would be on Sturgeon doing the truth telling. She gives off to me a solid and trustworthy aroma that Salmond, for all his undoubted gifts as a politician, does not.
Except...what is in it for Salmond if he is lying? He is certainly coming across as seriously aggrieved by something.
If someone tried to get you 12 years in jail when you are completely innocent , would you not be just a little bit miffed.
Well, probably yes.
But I'm not quite sure that applies in this case...
Boris Johnson has hinted that the Government will be "looking at the potential of relaxing some measures", before mid- February.
The Prime Minister said that the Government was "looking at the data as it comes in", and then added that "before then we'll be looking at the potential of relaxing some measures".
However No 10 pushed back against Mr Johnson's words and said that the 15th of February "remains the earliest point at which we could change any of the rules".
I think JOhnson is wrong to consider relaxation on February but he did say "looking at" relaxing before that date rather than saying he actually would.
Oh, for God's sake. We have had enough government by hint and kite-flying. Until you've decided what needs to be done, STFU. When you've decided, JFDI. Sorry to be vulgar, but really...
A bloody mess, if we have a Unionist boycott then I think it will play havoc with the secondary markets like turnout and share of the votes.
Yes to win 90% of the vote on a 35% turnout would be my guess.
For comparison in 2017 the Nationalists won the unconstitutional Catalan independence referendum by 92% to 7.9% as to whether Catalonia should be an independent republic.
Turnout was only 43% though due to the boycott of Spanish Unionists
A referendum which isn't legally authorised and internationally recognised is absolutely no use at all for the Nats, except to further stoke the already well-stoked grievance machine. They must know this, so there's a huge amount of bluster here.
From the point of view of the Conservative government, I really can't see any upside to agreeing the referendum. Better to say No, ignore the fuss, and leave it to the next Labour PM to impale himself or herself on the spike.
If its authorised by the Scottish Parliament - and if the Scottish Parliament has the legal authority to authorise it - then how is that not legally authorised?
The UK has a proud history of respecting democracy. Is the union more important than that?
I really welcome the opportunity to have a discussion about the legalities of a Scottish Independence referendum. I feel it is a topic too often ignored on these boards.
EU mafia trying their "give us the vaccine - or the puppy gets it" routine I see.
Weren't we supposed to be the ones going begging to them for vital supplies by now?
The "punishment beating" strategy? That one?
It must REALLY be pissing off the EU that those pesky Brits are jabbing and saving their Brexit-votig oldies, whilst true-blooded EU veterans are dying from the virus....they didn't order.
I really welcome the opportunity to have a discussion about the legalities of a Scottish Independence referendum. I feel it is a topic too often ignored on these boards.
Deadpan overload!
Razedabode is right though. We haven't had a discussion about serious issues like what should happen to those who put pineapple on pizza in weeks.
A bloody mess, if we have a Unionist boycott then I think it will play havoc with the secondary markets like turnout and share of the votes.
Yes to win 90% of the vote on a 35% turnout would be my guess.
For comparison in 2017 the Nationalists won the unconstitutional Catalan independence referendum by 92% to 7.9% as to whether Catalonia should be an independent republic.
Turnout was only 43% though due to the boycott of Spanish Unionists
I really welcome the opportunity to have a discussion about the legalities of a Scottish Independence referendum. I feel it is a topic too often ignored on these boards.
I agree. The other thing we could discuss if anyone has any interest is Brexit maybe?
Boris Johnson has hinted that the Government will be "looking at the potential of relaxing some measures", before mid- February.
The Prime Minister said that the Government was "looking at the data as it comes in", and then added that "before then we'll be looking at the potential of relaxing some measures".
However No 10 pushed back against Mr Johnson's words and said that the 15th of February "remains the earliest point at which we could change any of the rules".
I think JOhnson is wrong to consider relaxation on February but he did say "looking at" relaxing before that date rather than saying he actually would.
Oh, for God's sake. We have had enough government by hint and kite-flying. Until you've decided what needs to be done, STFU. When you've decided, JFDI. Sorry to be vulgar, but really...
Boris needs to say NOW:
- we are not relaxing anything before 1 April - we will publish a plan in March but implementation will be dependent on how the situation (hopefully) improves - the approach will be cautious
I really welcome the opportunity to have a discussion about the legalities of a Scottish Independence referendum. I feel it is a topic too often ignored on these boards.
I agree. The other thing we could discuss if anyone has any interest is Brexit maybe?
That cat has my 'this could have been done via email' face during video calls.
Email seems to have a very bad rep thesedays. People act as though its never the best approach.
I prefer email, there's an easily accessible record of what was said and what needs doing.
I think with some video calls people either forget or have different recollections, with email there's no doubt.
To be honest after the first few weeks of WFH my team only uses video calls/face time to have a catch up on how are lives are going.
It's the fannying about in the first 15 minutes of a big video conference call that really grates as people struggle to set it up/have poor speeds.
If you put it in the body of the email people find it much harder to plausibly claim they missed something important whilst insisting they looked at it - the 'oh, it was in the attachment?' defence.
I think those export registration/ban comments are going to be walked back very quickly and the likes of Pfizer will have a whole bunch of public statements saying that they won't be effected by it.
It's definitely one of those things that I'm sure was regretted the instant after it was mentioned. There's going to be a lot of damage control on this in the next few days, serious trade partners don't fuck with this stuff. If you buggered up your own purchasing, you have to deal with that situation, not fuck up everyone else's plans (and the Belgian manufacturing delivers to the UK, US, Canada and Japan so the EU aren't just fucking us over, it's all of it's supposed security partners).
I actually think it would put EU/US relations into a deep freeze, and they're already on shaky ground after the EU gave China a hand job during Biden's inauguration.
I have a feeling the some sections of the UK press and twitterati won't get as exercised by this as the clauses in the Internal Market Bill that could have broken international law, which were reported to akin to trying to start WWIII. I imagine we will hear, their club they can do what they like type excuses.
I really welcome the opportunity to have a discussion about the legalities of a Scottish Independence referendum. I feel it is a topic too often ignored on these boards.
I'm hoping to do a piece on electoral reform this weekend.
I think those export registration/ban comments are going to be walked back very quickly and the likes of Pfizer will have a whole bunch of public statements saying that they won't be effected by it.
It's definitely one of those things that I'm sure was regretted the instant after it was mentioned. There's going to be a lot of damage control on this in the next few days, serious trade partners don't fuck with this stuff. If you buggered up your own purchasing, you have to deal with that situation, not fuck up everyone else's plans (and the Belgian manufacturing delivers to the UK, US, Canada and Japan so the EU aren't just fucking us over, it's all of it's supposed security partners).
I actually think it would put EU/US relations into a deep freeze, and they're already on shaky ground after the EU gave China a hand job during Biden's inauguration.
I'm not so sure - you have politicians in trouble. They are going to grab at anything.
I really welcome the opportunity to have a discussion about the legalities of a Scottish Independence referendum. I feel it is a topic too often ignored on these boards.
I'm hoping to do a piece on electoral reform this weekend.
Are there any other, some might say alternative, voting systems available for us to consider?
I really welcome the opportunity to have a discussion about the legalities of a Scottish Independence referendum. I feel it is a topic too often ignored on these boards.
I'm hoping to do a piece on electoral reform this weekend.
A blood mess, if we have a Unionist boycott then I think it will play havoc with the secondary markets like turnout and share of the votes.
Yes to win 90% of the vote on 35% turnout would be my guess.
Yeah, sounds plausible, although I suspect turnout would be lower.
The last thing the SNP want is for the election to be about education etc. hence ramping up Indy. Placates the hard-core (and there is definitely a party management issue in play) and distracts from what appears to be a less than impressive performance on the vaccination roll-out. Also they may be slightly (very slightly) concerned about SLAB coming back to life under Sarwar. Making everything about Indy is the best way of stifling a Labour revival.
LOL, another Scotch expert talks utter mince.
Well you're no Scotland expert either.
I remember when Alastair Meeks tipped the SNP to lose their majority (10/1 and 8/1 on the election day 2016) you said people were losing their money.
The same thing you said when people were backing No in 2014.
Ditto when some people backed the Tories to win 10 plus seats in 2017.
I really welcome the opportunity to have a discussion about the legalities of a Scottish Independence referendum. I feel it is a topic too often ignored on these boards.
I'm hoping to do a piece on electoral reform this weekend.
Are there any other, some might say alternative, voting systems available for us to consider?
The case data looks really positive today, even taking into account it's a weekend figure. Was expecting ~28k according to the algorithm so coming in at 22k is definitely a big positive. The rate of contraction is actually increasing at the moment, the R value is going down again, which is impressive after this long being under 1.
Add in the effects of vaccination over the coming two weeks and we should actually start to see some really big strides in the hospitalisation rate falling and pressure on the NHS drop considerably.
A referendum which isn't legally authorised and internationally recognised is absolutely no use at all for the Nats, except to further stoke the already well-stoked grievance machine. They must know this, so there's a huge amount of bluster here.
From the point of view of the Conservative government, I really can't see any upside to agreeing the referendum. Better to say No, ignore the fuss, and leave it to the next Labour PM to impale himself or herself on the spike.
If its authorised by the Scottish Parliament - and if the Scottish Parliament has the legal authority to authorise it - then how is that not legally authorised?
The UK has a proud history of respecting democracy. Is the union more important than that?
I'm looking at it from the point of view of the politics, not the rights and wrongs.
However, the UK government has a very strong argument that we've just had a Scottish independence referendum. I seem to recall that you thought a second Brexit referendum would be an outrage; same principle applies, surely?
I really welcome the opportunity to have a discussion about the legalities of a Scottish Independence referendum. I feel it is a topic too often ignored on these boards.
I'm hoping to do a piece on electoral reform this weekend.
I really welcome the opportunity to have a discussion about the legalities of a Scottish Independence referendum. I feel it is a topic too often ignored on these boards.
I'm hoping to do a piece on electoral reform this weekend.
Are there any other, some might say alternative, voting systems available for us to consider?
D'Hondt start him.
Why not? It would represent a proportional approach.
A blood mess, if we have a Unionist boycott then I think it will play havoc with the secondary markets like turnout and share of the votes.
Yes to win 90% of the vote on 35% turnout would be my guess.
Yeah, sounds plausible, although I suspect turnout would be lower.
The last thing the SNP want is for the election to be about education etc. hence ramping up Indy. Placates the hard-core (and there is definitely a party management issue in play) and distracts from what appears to be a less than impressive performance on the vaccination roll-out. Also they may be slightly (very slightly) concerned about SLAB coming back to life under Sarwar. Making everything about Indy is the best way of stifling a Labour revival.
LOL, another Scotch expert talks utter mince.
Well you're no Scotland expert either.
I remember when Alastair Meeks tipped the SNP to lose their majority (10/1 and 8/1 on the election day 2016) you said people were losing their money.
The same thing you said when people were backing No in 2014.
Ditto when some people backed the Tories to win 10 plus seats in 2017.
(Gets in haggis flavoured popcorn, especially for Burns’ Night!)
If one of them has to be lying and the other telling the truth my money would be on Sturgeon doing the truth telling. She gives off to me a solid and trustworthy aroma that Salmond, for all his undoubted gifts as a politician, does not.
Except...what is in it for Salmond if he is lying? He is certainly coming across as seriously aggrieved by something.
If someone tried to get you 12 years in jail when you are completely innocent , would you not be just a little bit miffed.
Well, probably yes.
But I'm not quite sure that applies in this case...
A bloody mess, if we have a Unionist boycott then I think it will play havoc with the secondary markets like turnout and share of the votes.
Yes to win 90% of the vote on a 35% turnout would be my guess.
For comparison in 2017 the Nationalists won the unconstitutional Catalan independence referendum by 92% to 7.9% as to whether Catalonia should be an independent republic.
Turnout was only 43% though due to the boycott of Spanish Unionists
A comparison which every Unionist on this board wishes would stop continually being made.
I am afraid like it or not if the SNP win a Holyrood majority in May, Boris and Westminster refuse to grant them a legal indyref2 but Sturgeon orders an unofficial indyref2 to be held anyway we will be in a Madrid Catalonia style standoff between London and Edinburgh whether we like it or not.
The Unionist boycott of the referendum too will also mirror the situation in Catalonia then, even if Boris does not go as far as Rajoy and order the arrest of Sturgeon and SNP leaders and the deployment of police to try and stop the poll taking place.
I really welcome the opportunity to have a discussion about the legalities of a Scottish Independence referendum. I feel it is a topic too often ignored on these boards.
I'm hoping to do a piece on electoral reform this weekend.
Are there any other, some might say alternative, voting systems available for us to consider?
D'Hondt start him.
Why not? It would represent a proportional approach.
Fecking D'Hondt is about as proportional as nuking a country to protest at a junior civil servant making an ill-advised remark on Twitter.
Boris Johnson has hinted that the Government will be "looking at the potential of relaxing some measures", before mid- February.
The Prime Minister said that the Government was "looking at the data as it comes in", and then added that "before then we'll be looking at the potential of relaxing some measures".
However No 10 pushed back against Mr Johnson's words and said that the 15th of February "remains the earliest point at which we could change any of the rules".
I think JOhnson is wrong to consider relaxation on February but he did say "looking at" relaxing before that date rather than saying he actually would.
Oh, for God's sake. We have had enough government by hint and kite-flying. Until you've decided what needs to be done, STFU. When you've decided, JFDI. Sorry to be vulgar, but really...
Boris needs to say NOW:
- we are not relaxing anything before 1 April - we will publish a plan in March but implementation will be dependent on how the situation (hopefully) improves - the approach will be cautious
Remember when you had a meltdown about Sadiq Khan wanting to increase the lockdown level in London?
Incoming 20 questions on why is the vaccine programme failing as only did 220k yesterday.
I really wish they would make everything clear.
The vaccination figures are Saturday and any done before then that weren't reported previously
They need a "by date administered" plot. Similar to cases and deaths.
I think it would be useful, but we can also just work with the rolling 7 day average, they should add that to the graph as they do with cases and the other measures.
A senior EU official told Reuters on Friday that deliveries of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine to the EU would be cut by 60 percent to 31 million doses in the first quarter. According to that report, AstraZeneca said that the cut was caused by "production problems" at a vaccine factory in Belgium run by its partner Novasep.
Another EU official told POLITICO that AstraZeneca is facing two issues: First, there was an issue with one of their batches that had to be thrown out. Second, the company is still sourcing raw material to ramp up manufacturing. Now, “it seems unlikely they will meet their first quarter target,” the official said.
The case data looks really positive today, even taking into account it's a weekend figure. Was expecting ~28k according to the algorithm so coming in at 22k is definitely a big positive. The rate of contraction is actually increasing at the moment, the R value is going down again, which is impressive after this long being under 1.
Add in the effects of vaccination over the coming two weeks and we should actually start to see some really big strides in the hospitalisation rate falling and pressure on the NHS drop considerably.
Living in the county that was ground zero for the new variant I am particularly encouraged by the progress here.
Did it get mentioned here that Estonia has a new PM?
I think she, Kaja Kallas, is the first Prime Minister of anywhere that I've found genuinely pleasant to look at.
Have you seen Sanna Marin from Finland?
I hadn't, she's very nice looking too. But crazy young for a Prime Minister at 35!?
Kurtz in Austria has been PM since he was 30 I believe, with a brief gap.
Almost in their dotage. Baby Doc Duvalier was 19 when he took over from his father. San Marino has had 4 heads of government under 30 - the last one was last year.
Well sure, but any young idiot can take over when they have the right genes in a pseudo monarchy.
Though 19 year olds can work out - Look at Gaius Octavius.
I think they'll find out that most of them have been manufactured outside of the EU. Then what are they going to do?
What it is going to do is send the likes of Pfizer scurrying to magic up manufacturing capacity outside of the EU, the UK and Switzerland seem like logical choices given our expertise in pharma. Companies who have international contracts to fulfil don't work in countries that block them from doing so.
Comments
Meanwhile in the article...
It means that many of the Australians who would usually return home to see family over Christmas haven't bothered because much of the trip would be in quarantine with guests forced to foot their own hotel bill - £1,700 on average.
Best part of enforced hotel quarantine I think - you stop people popping out the country for a quick family wedding in Egypt (*Cough Salah*) or wherever.
USA, UK, UAE, Israel, Singapore and others to start blocking all EU exports in 3,2,1...
I don't have money on his getting the leadership.
It's one area of relative robustness iirc.
The UK has it's own (nearly flooded) place for the AZN vaccine.
But I cannot even begin to know who to believe.
However, in England under the Localism Act local authorities can now seek a "general power of competence" which allows them to spend public money or more or less any purpose they feel beneficial to their area that's not specifically denied to them by Parliament. AIUI it's up to the devolved assemblies to grant similar powers to their local authorities. So far the Northern Ireland Assembly has done so and Scotland and Wales are considering it.
So I, from my admittedly layman's perspective, think there's two issues here
1) Does the Scottish Parliament, and the devolved assemblies as a whole, have a "general power of competence" to expend public money except where specifically prohibited, or can they only expend on matters specifically authorized by the UK Parliament?
AIUI the devolution settlements have given the assemblies (certainly Scotland at any rate) the power to legislate on any non-reserved matter, which by extension means they can authorize expenditure on any non-reserved matter. I'd also argue it would be strange for the assemblies to have the power to grant a general power of competence to their local authorities but not possess it themselves.
2) Would a purely advisory referendum on independence be a ultra vires expenditure of public funds? I would say no, as governments at all levels in the UK frequently spend public money to find out their constituents views for the purpose of lobbying higher levels of government for various things, including an extension of powers. I agree that the Scottish Parliament cannot actually legislate for independence without the consent of Westminster, but I don't see how it can be prevented from formally asking its people what their view on the matter is.
[1] I.e. there's no statute that says local authorities can purchase computers, but doing so is implicit in being able to execute their specific powers and duties
I think with some video calls people either forget or have different recollections, with email there's no doubt.
To be honest after the first few weeks of WFH my team only uses video calls/face time to have a catch up on how are lives are going.
It's the fannying about in the first 15 minutes of a big video conference call that really grates as people struggle to set it up/have poor speeds.
Especially if some of them end up in the EU...
Indeed already the Scottish Conservatives and their leader Douglas Ross are telling Unionists to boycott any such unofficial referendum
https://twitter.com/ScotTories/status/1353700309500112896?s=20
I remember when Alastair Meeks tipped the SNP to lose their majority (10/1 and 8/1 on the election day 2016) you said people were losing their money.
The same thing you said when people were backing No in 2014.
Ditto when some people backed the Tories to win 10 plus seats in 2017.
So you talk plenty of mince.
"We will not be looking at any relaxations until February 15th, when we will have had three weeks more data on infections, hospitalisations, R factor, vaccination efficacy - everything. There'll be a press conference then, when you can ask away to your hearts content...."
aka STFU until then.
It's really not fucking difficult.
This idea is against her better instincts but she simply doesn't have an answer to the conundrum.
All the more reason, of course, for Boris to say NO.
She is becoming the Grand Old Duchess of York...
The reason it has come about is purely internal. Sturgeon needs to steady the ship and keep the nutters off her back.
Would be interesting to be able to compare with cases in March to May, but of course our testing at the time didn't allow that.
Last gambit is they are saying the evidence cannot be used by inquiry, witholding documentation and had their lackey Lord Advocate stated that Salmond would be prosecuted if he told the truth under oath at the inquiry.
It's definitely one of those things that I'm sure was regretted the instant after it was mentioned. There's going to be a lot of damage control on this in the next few days, serious trade partners don't fuck with this stuff. If you buggered up your own purchasing, you have to deal with that situation, not fuck up everyone else's plans (and the Belgian manufacturing delivers to the UK, US, Canada and Japan so the EU aren't just fucking us over, it's all of it's supposed security partners).
I actually think it would put EU/US relations into a deep freeze, and they're already on shaky ground after the EU gave China a hand job during Biden's inauguration.
But I'm not quite sure that applies in this case...
Turnout was only 43% though due to the boycott of Spanish Unionists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Catalan_independence_referendum
From case data
From hospitalisation data
The UK has a proud history of respecting democracy. Is the union more important than that?
https://twitter.com/Paul1Singh/status/1334045508504064000?s=20
- we are not relaxing anything before 1 April
- we will publish a plan in March but implementation will be dependent on how the situation (hopefully) improves
- the approach will be cautious
Incoming 20 questions on why is the vaccine programme failing as only did 220k yesterday.
Add in the effects of vaccination over the coming two weeks and we should actually start to see some really big strides in the hospitalisation rate falling and pressure on the NHS drop considerably.
However, the UK government has a very strong argument that we've just had a Scottish independence referendum. I seem to recall that you thought a second Brexit referendum would be an outrage; same principle applies, surely?
The vaccination figures are Saturday and any done before then that weren't reported previously
Reporting Monday => Saturday vaccinations
Tuesday => Sunday vaccinations
Wednesday => Monday
....
Sunday reporting => Friday vaccinations
The Unionist boycott of the referendum too will also mirror the situation in Catalonia then, even if Boris does not go as far as Rajoy and order the arrest of Sturgeon and SNP leaders and the deployment of police to try and stop the poll taking place.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_National_Assembly_for_Wales_election
https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1353747806352244736?s=20
A senior EU official told Reuters on Friday that deliveries of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine to the EU would be cut by 60 percent to 31 million doses in the first quarter. According to that report, AstraZeneca said that the cut was caused by "production problems" at a vaccine factory in Belgium run by its partner Novasep.
Another EU official told POLITICO that AstraZeneca is facing two issues: First, there was an issue with one of their batches that had to be thrown out. Second, the company is still sourcing raw material to ramp up manufacturing. Now, “it seems unlikely they will meet their first quarter target,” the official said.
Though 19 year olds can work out - Look at Gaius Octavius.