Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Best of three. What of a fresh Scottish independence referendum? – politicalbetting.com

13567

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,817

    Newsnight reporting a half-arsed approach to quarantine hotels is expected.

    What a surprise.

    Argh, but the sentiment was moving towards it being applied to all travelers.
  • IanB2 said:

    On topic, Kettle in the Guardian:

    One minister tells me the plan is for Johnson to announce that he considers the UK’s existing constitutional architecture is not working. Whether these issues are to be remitted to a constitutional commission of some kind, perhaps similar to the one proposed by the Labour leader Keir Starmer in December, will soon be made clear. These discussions are described as “very live”. But the target audience is clear: the voters whom ministers describe as the majority of the electorate in all four parts of the UK who do not have a passion for breaking up Britain.

    Until recently, the Johnson government’s policy towards all this was to just say no. But that is changing now. There is panic and realism in the new approach. The SNP is formidable but not unbeatable. Divisions between reformists and ultras – between Sturgeon and Alex Salmond and their respective backers – may change the mood. If Sturgeon or any successor is pushed into calling an illegal referendum, it would trigger a widespread boycott that could open the way for different politics.

    It is an enormous risk, and time is running out fast.

    Ignoring the SNP's referendum wheeze is a bit like lockdown - one can help rid the world of a 'orrible disease just by staying at home.
    I believe you fastidiously stayed at home last time out because you felt it wasn't your beeswax, do you now feel Scottish enough to stay at home for tactical electoral reasons? Welcome! Be sure to get a window poster making it clear what your motivation is.
    As I said, I would vote in a new Indyref (a legally binding one). And I don't think it's really about feeling Scottish. I have nothing but admiration and love for Scotland and its people, but I don't think I feel any more Scottish than I did when I arrived - though I have learned a lot and gained a far greater understanding, great love of Scotch whisky and Scottish food, and lots of wonderful Scottish friends. For me it's more about being invested and committed here. I suppose you'd have to live in England for a while to understand the perspective. You are part of something but not.

    If the joke ref happens, I won't participate. It won't be a big statement, I'll just have other stuff on.
    I suspect that there isn't a single template on how one feels about living in a place that you weren't born/brought up in, in fact I'm bloody sure there isn't. Nevertheless I'm glad you feel invested and committed however it manifests itself.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,706

    HYUFD said:
    I've never had black bun, or Rumbledethumps! Both look like I'd enjoy them - Scottish food is amazing.
    I have never even heard of rumbledthumps. It must be a purely border thing. Looks and sounds quite tasty though.
  • DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:
    I had haggis, tatties and neeps for tea tonight. Very good it was too with just a dram of whisky on the haggis. I miss the Burns night celebrations, its an excellent night usually.
    Many years ago, (early 60's) I used to always have haggis and chips on my way down Leith Walk to my seat in Easter Road

    Happy memories
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,639

    IanB2 said:

    On topic, Kettle in the Guardian:

    One minister tells me the plan is for Johnson to announce that he considers the UK’s existing constitutional architecture is not working. Whether these issues are to be remitted to a constitutional commission of some kind, perhaps similar to the one proposed by the Labour leader Keir Starmer in December, will soon be made clear. These discussions are described as “very live”. But the target audience is clear: the voters whom ministers describe as the majority of the electorate in all four parts of the UK who do not have a passion for breaking up Britain.

    Until recently, the Johnson government’s policy towards all this was to just say no. But that is changing now. There is panic and realism in the new approach. The SNP is formidable but not unbeatable. Divisions between reformists and ultras – between Sturgeon and Alex Salmond and their respective backers – may change the mood. If Sturgeon or any successor is pushed into calling an illegal referendum, it would trigger a widespread boycott that could open the way for different politics.

    It is an enormous risk, and time is running out fast.

    Ignoring the SNP's referendum wheeze is a bit like lockdown - one can help rid the world of a 'orrible disease just by staying at home.
    I believe you fastidiously stayed at home last time out because you felt it wasn't your beeswax, do you now feel Scottish enough to stay at home for tactical electoral reasons? Welcome! Be sure to get a window poster making it clear what your motivation is.
    As I said, I would vote in a new Indyref (a legally binding one). And I don't think it's really about feeling Scottish. I have nothing but admiration and love for Scotland and its people, but I don't think I feel any more Scottish than I did when I arrived - though I have learned a lot and gained a far greater understanding, great love of Scotch whisky and Scottish food, and lots of wonderful Scottish friends. For me it's more about being invested and committed here. I suppose you'd have to live in England for a while to understand the perspective. You are part of something but not.

    If the joke ref happens, I won't participate. It won't be a big statement, I'll just have other stuff on.
    I suspect that there isn't a single template on how one feels about living in a place that you weren't born/brought up in, in fact I'm bloody sure there isn't. Nevertheless I'm glad you feel invested and committed however it manifests itself.
    Except he doesn't feel committed to voting. That is a shame.
  • DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:
    I've never had black bun, or Rumbledethumps! Both look like I'd enjoy them - Scottish food is amazing.
    I have never even heard of rumbledthumps. It must be a purely border thing. Looks and sounds quite tasty though.
    Looks like a cheesy version of colecannon.
  • RH1992RH1992 Posts: 788
    edited January 2021
    The American EU fanboy with the dodgy charts seems to have been allowed onto LBC to spout more of his fantasy opinions.

    https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1353837944507936769
  • RobD said:

    Newsnight reporting a half-arsed approach to quarantine hotels is expected.

    What a surprise.

    Argh, but the sentiment was moving towards it being applied to all travelers.
    It should apply to all travellers apart from limited "essential travel" exemptions.

    Ie lorry drivers I would exempt (in and out of the country rapid, and hard to be more socially isolated than someone spending their day by themselves in a cab near nobody.

    Also Champions League clubs etc I'd call "essential" so long as they have thorough testing.

    Holidays? Get into the hotel.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 21,965
    Before I head off to bed.

    They say that one death is a tragedy, 100,000 deaths is a statistic.

    No. It is 100,000 tragedies.

    100,000. Bloody hell. And tens of thousands more to come.

    Night all.
  • Does anyone who voted for Brexit consider the 2019 prorogation of Parliament a crisis?

    Or is use of "prorogation crisis" a reliable indicator of euphilia?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,817

    RobD said:

    Newsnight reporting a half-arsed approach to quarantine hotels is expected.

    What a surprise.

    Argh, but the sentiment was moving towards it being applied to all travelers.
    It should apply to all travellers apart from limited "essential travel" exemptions.

    Ie lorry drivers I would exempt (in and out of the country rapid, and hard to be more socially isolated than someone spending their day by themselves in a cab near nobody.

    Also Champions League clubs etc I'd call "essential" so long as they have thorough testing.

    Holidays? Get into the hotel.
    Agreed. There are people that legitimately need to travel.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,231

    IanB2 said:

    On topic, Kettle in the Guardian:

    One minister tells me the plan is for Johnson to announce that he considers the UK’s existing constitutional architecture is not working. Whether these issues are to be remitted to a constitutional commission of some kind, perhaps similar to the one proposed by the Labour leader Keir Starmer in December, will soon be made clear. These discussions are described as “very live”. But the target audience is clear: the voters whom ministers describe as the majority of the electorate in all four parts of the UK who do not have a passion for breaking up Britain.

    Until recently, the Johnson government’s policy towards all this was to just say no. But that is changing now. There is panic and realism in the new approach. The SNP is formidable but not unbeatable. Divisions between reformists and ultras – between Sturgeon and Alex Salmond and their respective backers – may change the mood. If Sturgeon or any successor is pushed into calling an illegal referendum, it would trigger a widespread boycott that could open the way for different politics.

    It is an enormous risk, and time is running out fast.

    Ignoring the SNP's referendum wheeze is a bit like lockdown - one can help rid the world of a 'orrible disease just by staying at home.
    I believe you fastidiously stayed at home last time out because you felt it wasn't your beeswax, do you now feel Scottish enough to stay at home for tactical electoral reasons? Welcome! Be sure to get a window poster making it clear what your motivation is.
    As I said, I would vote in a new Indyref (a legally binding one). And I don't think it's really about feeling Scottish. I have nothing but admiration and love for Scotland and its people, but I don't think I feel any more Scottish than I did when I arrived - though I have learned a lot and gained a far greater understanding, great love of Scotch whisky and Scottish food, and lots of wonderful Scottish friends. For me it's more about being invested and committed here. I suppose you'd have to live in England for a while to understand the perspective. You are part of something but not.

    If the joke ref happens, I won't participate. It won't be a big statement, I'll just have other stuff on.
    I suspect that there isn't a single template on how one feels about living in a place that you weren't born/brought up in, in fact I'm bloody sure there isn't. Nevertheless I'm glad you feel invested and committed however it manifests itself.
    In all my childhood and growing up, I always considered myself British - never English. Till I came to Scotland, I'd never really given Englishness any thought. I considered myself coming to a very different part of 'the country', but not leaving it, in a way I didn't when I spend a short time living in France. I think that's part of it.
  • DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:
    I've never had black bun, or Rumbledethumps! Both look like I'd enjoy them - Scottish food is amazing.
    I have never even heard of rumbledthumps. It must be a purely border thing. Looks and sounds quite tasty though.
    Gordon Brown's favourite.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    edited January 2021

    Newsnight reporting a half-arsed approach to quarantine hotels is expected.

    What a surprise.

    It depends which brand of journalistic speculation you believe. Tonight's Torygraph is apparently suggesting that foreign holidays could be off until Easter 2022, as total quarantine on incoming travellers is imposed (though if they do go full-fat on this then I imagine they'd do an Australia and ban UK citizens from leaving for almost all purposes in any event.) In truth, of course, we're all guessing.

    I was speculating on the likely timetable for how the rest of the pandemic will play out the other day - and, assuming there's no major setback in the form of vaccine resistance, I reckon that foreign travel will be off until either the point at which the whole adult population of the UK has been vaccinated at least once (which I think comes in late Summer,) or Easter 2022, depending on how cautious the Government is feeling about protecting our gains, and the possibility of a double-pronged assault on the NHS by Winter Covid and Winter Flu. The longer timescale wouldn't surprise me that much.
  • RH1992 said:

    The American EU fanboy with the dodgy charts seems to have been allowed onto LBC to spout more of his fantasy opinions.

    https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1353837944507936769

    https://twitter.com/SKyriakidesEU/status/1353805553064153091?s=19
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,639

    Does anyone who voted for Brexit consider the 2019 prorogation of Parliament a crisis?

    Or is use of "prorogation crisis" a reliable indicator of euphilia?

    What's the most recentl precedent? You'd have to go back to the 1688-90 invasion surely?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,817
    edited January 2021
    RH1992 said:

    The American EU fanboy with the dodgy charts seems to have been allowed onto LBC to spout more of his fantasy opinions.

    https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1353837944507936769

    Their entire position is quite frankly retarded. They have a problem with AZN, but yet AZN does not produce any vaccines in EU territory for a third country.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,156

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Argh, new threads! FPT:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Anyone tracking AstraZeneca's share price, there could be a killing to be made here.

    FWIW I cannot see a successful company with a market capitalisation of $150 billion playing silly beggars offer the Covid vaccine, it would permanently damage their brand.

    Oddly just last week the head of the German regulator praised the efficacy of AZ so this would have to be a massive about turn from the EMA.

    No, it is perfectly possible to say AZN is moderately effective in younger age groups, but unproven effectiveness in older age groups.
    So wIThy have we used millions of the effective in oldies Pfizer in people under 65 and millions of potentially useless AZN to over 80s?

    We really need to re evaluate quickly unless these reports are BS
    You are still using the highly irresponsible language of 'potentially useless AZN'

    It is just not acceptable
    Beyond that, the German report is obviously false.

    Breathe, then think about this.

    It quotes a specific efficacy estimate of 8% for people over 65.

    No efficacy value exists in the published phase 3 trial report for older cohorts (moreover, even within that there is no "over 65" group. Participants are grouped into three age cohorts, 18-55, 56-69 and 70+)

    There have been no other published trials of the vaccine.

    There has been insufficient time to assess the efficacy of the vaccine in older people during the rollout, because it only began recently, most recipients won't have had time to build immunity based on the first shot let alone had the second, and it will take more time after that to discover how many recipients have subsequently fallen ill, and what degree of efficacy this value implies.

    The 8% figure cannot, therefore, have any basis in evidence, and neither can any broader suggestion that low efficacy in older people has been proven. Either the report has been fabricated, the source was telling porkies, or the source grossly misinterpreted data with which he/she/they were presented. At a guess, the latter explanation seems the most likely.
    That is an excellent analysis.

    My guess is that you are correct in that it is cock up over conspiracy, but still...
    It is a viciously pernicious cock-up, at just the worst time. German media is notoriously complacent, fat, apathetic and PC, and over-protected, but really. IF this is a cock-up, people should be sacked.
    You post it as if PC were a bad thing. PC = Informed politeness; I see nothing wrong with that.
    A lot of people regard PC as fake politeness which makes real politeness rarer.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 54,672
    edited January 2021
    IF - and it is a big IF - this turns out to be nonsense scare-mongering, the German Establishment simply cannot be allowed to get away with this.

    They have systematically tried to undermine confidence in a vital, easily produced, cheap-to-transport vaccine; at a time when we need, as a species, anti-vax sentiment to just go away. It is spectacularly irresponsible.

    They might still be right. But the lack of evidence to back it up....
  • Carnyx said:

    IanB2 said:

    On topic, Kettle in the Guardian:

    One minister tells me the plan is for Johnson to announce that he considers the UK’s existing constitutional architecture is not working. Whether these issues are to be remitted to a constitutional commission of some kind, perhaps similar to the one proposed by the Labour leader Keir Starmer in December, will soon be made clear. These discussions are described as “very live”. But the target audience is clear: the voters whom ministers describe as the majority of the electorate in all four parts of the UK who do not have a passion for breaking up Britain.

    Until recently, the Johnson government’s policy towards all this was to just say no. But that is changing now. There is panic and realism in the new approach. The SNP is formidable but not unbeatable. Divisions between reformists and ultras – between Sturgeon and Alex Salmond and their respective backers – may change the mood. If Sturgeon or any successor is pushed into calling an illegal referendum, it would trigger a widespread boycott that could open the way for different politics.

    It is an enormous risk, and time is running out fast.

    Ignoring the SNP's referendum wheeze is a bit like lockdown - one can help rid the world of a 'orrible disease just by staying at home.
    I believe you fastidiously stayed at home last time out because you felt it wasn't your beeswax, do you now feel Scottish enough to stay at home for tactical electoral reasons? Welcome! Be sure to get a window poster making it clear what your motivation is.
    As I said, I would vote in a new Indyref (a legally binding one). And I don't think it's really about feeling Scottish. I have nothing but admiration and love for Scotland and its people, but I don't think I feel any more Scottish than I did when I arrived - though I have learned a lot and gained a far greater understanding, great love of Scotch whisky and Scottish food, and lots of wonderful Scottish friends. For me it's more about being invested and committed here. I suppose you'd have to live in England for a while to understand the perspective. You are part of something but not.

    If the joke ref happens, I won't participate. It won't be a big statement, I'll just have other stuff on.
    I suspect that there isn't a single template on how one feels about living in a place that you weren't born/brought up in, in fact I'm bloody sure there isn't. Nevertheless I'm glad you feel invested and committed however it manifests itself.
    Except he doesn't feel committed to voting. That is a shame.
    Obviously the only Scottish refs worth voting in are those authorised by a Tory PM elected by English people.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,438
    edited January 2021
    RobD said:

    RH1992 said:

    The American EU fanboy with the dodgy charts seems to have been allowed onto LBC to spout more of his fantasy opinions.

    https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1353837944507936769

    Their entire position is quite frankly retarded. They have a problem with AZN, but yet AZN does not produce any vaccines in EU territory for a third country.
    AZN promised the UK 30 million doses by last September...no dummy spat out the pram by the government when there were production problems.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,817

    RobD said:

    RH1992 said:

    The American EU fanboy with the dodgy charts seems to have been allowed onto LBC to spout more of his fantasy opinions.

    https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1353837944507936769

    Their entire position is quite frankly retarded. They have a problem with AZN, but yet AZN does not produce any vaccines in EU territory for a third country.
    AZN promised the UK 30 million doses by kast September...no dummy spat out the pram by the government.
    How dare you suggest that UK good and EU bad.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,817

    RH1992 said:

    The American EU fanboy with the dodgy charts seems to have been allowed onto LBC to spout more of his fantasy opinions.

    https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1353837944507936769

    https://twitter.com/SKyriakidesEU/status/1353805553064153091?s=19
    No, they only have contractual obligations.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 4,947

    RobD said:

    Newsnight reporting a half-arsed approach to quarantine hotels is expected.

    What a surprise.

    Argh, but the sentiment was moving towards it being applied to all travelers.
    It should apply to all travellers apart from limited "essential travel" exemptions.

    Ie lorry drivers I would exempt (in and out of the country rapid, and hard to be more socially isolated than someone spending their day by themselves in a cab near nobody.

    Also Champions League clubs etc I'd call "essential" so long as they have thorough testing.

    Holidays? Get into the hotel.
    No they should enforce the restrictions they already have. People should have to quarantine in a home with a landline and be called randomly, or else have to take pics with an app like the Polish one. There is no point in quarantining them at hotels, which, as Australia shows, doesn't always work anyway.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,114
    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said:
    I had haggis, tatties and neeps for tea tonight. Very good it was too with just a dram of whisky on the haggis. I miss the Burns night celebrations, its an excellent night usually.
    Frustratingly missed the butcher's opening hours today as was absorbed with work. Had to make some goulash instead. Hope they still have one tomorrow. Highlight of January usually!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,817
    Fishing said:

    RobD said:

    Newsnight reporting a half-arsed approach to quarantine hotels is expected.

    What a surprise.

    Argh, but the sentiment was moving towards it being applied to all travelers.
    It should apply to all travellers apart from limited "essential travel" exemptions.

    Ie lorry drivers I would exempt (in and out of the country rapid, and hard to be more socially isolated than someone spending their day by themselves in a cab near nobody.

    Also Champions League clubs etc I'd call "essential" so long as they have thorough testing.

    Holidays? Get into the hotel.
    No they should enforce the restrictions they already have. People should have to quarantine in a home with a landline and be called randomly, or else have to take pics with an app like the Polish one. There is no point in quarantining them at hotels, which, as Australia shows, doesn't always work anyway.
    It has actually worked pretty well in Australia. If we want to avoid a third wave, there has to be maximum controls on the border.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,817
    Andy_JS said:
    If they refuse them to allow export, that will be completely outrageous. And what is the point in having a scheme like this if you aren't going to refuse.
  • On the subject of vaccine shortages: BCG is the vaccine for TB and about five or six years ago there was a problem with the production which lead to significant shortages world wide. This affected me directly because at the time I was in the middle of a three year course of immunotherapy which used BCG. I learnt at the time that if something goes wrong in making vaccines it can take months to sort out the production line. That was for a well understood vaccine, not one which didn't exist a year ago.
  • RH1992 said:

    The American EU fanboy with the dodgy charts seems to have been allowed onto LBC to spout more of his fantasy opinions.

    https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1353837944507936769

    https://twitter.com/SKyriakidesEU/status/1353805553064153091?s=19
    The EU still standing behind the principle of "unity".

    EU "unity" couldn't bully the UK into signing to being a protectorate of the EU.

    EU "unity" can't make AstraZenica magically provide the EU with vaccines that physically don't exist.

    Perhaps one day they'll realise that "unity" isn't all its cracked up to be.
  • YokesYokes Posts: 1,325
    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    IF - and it is a big IF - this turns out to be nonsense scare-mongering, the German Establishment simply cannot be allowed to get away with this.

    They have systematically tried to undermine confidence in a vital, easily produced, cheap-to-transport vaccine; at a time when we need, as a species, anti-vax sentiment to just go away. It is spectacularly irresponsible.

    They might still be right. But the lack of evidence to back it up....
    The problem is it undermines their own fucking regulator. When the EMA inevitably approves it next week with no reservations anti-vaxxers will be out in force all across Europe quoting this spurious 8% figure everywhere on social media platforms.

    It is the height of irresponsible reporting, I expected it from an idiot in the UK media, maybe Peston. At least it's not one our lot letting everyone down like this.
    Which bears the question where it came from. If the story is as printed, I'd not be 100% sure those sources were talking on behalf of the German government. They may have been in the German government but not speaking for it.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 54,672

    Carnyx said:

    IanB2 said:

    On topic, Kettle in the Guardian:

    One minister tells me the plan is for Johnson to announce that he considers the UK’s existing constitutional architecture is not working. Whether these issues are to be remitted to a constitutional commission of some kind, perhaps similar to the one proposed by the Labour leader Keir Starmer in December, will soon be made clear. These discussions are described as “very live”. But the target audience is clear: the voters whom ministers describe as the majority of the electorate in all four parts of the UK who do not have a passion for breaking up Britain.

    Until recently, the Johnson government’s policy towards all this was to just say no. But that is changing now. There is panic and realism in the new approach. The SNP is formidable but not unbeatable. Divisions between reformists and ultras – between Sturgeon and Alex Salmond and their respective backers – may change the mood. If Sturgeon or any successor is pushed into calling an illegal referendum, it would trigger a widespread boycott that could open the way for different politics.

    It is an enormous risk, and time is running out fast.

    Ignoring the SNP's referendum wheeze is a bit like lockdown - one can help rid the world of a 'orrible disease just by staying at home.
    I believe you fastidiously stayed at home last time out because you felt it wasn't your beeswax, do you now feel Scottish enough to stay at home for tactical electoral reasons? Welcome! Be sure to get a window poster making it clear what your motivation is.
    As I said, I would vote in a new Indyref (a legally binding one). And I don't think it's really about feeling Scottish. I have nothing but admiration and love for Scotland and its people, but I don't think I feel any more Scottish than I did when I arrived - though I have learned a lot and gained a far greater understanding, great love of Scotch whisky and Scottish food, and lots of wonderful Scottish friends. For me it's more about being invested and committed here. I suppose you'd have to live in England for a while to understand the perspective. You are part of something but not.

    If the joke ref happens, I won't participate. It won't be a big statement, I'll just have other stuff on.
    I suspect that there isn't a single template on how one feels about living in a place that you weren't born/brought up in, in fact I'm bloody sure there isn't. Nevertheless I'm glad you feel invested and committed however it manifests itself.
    Except he doesn't feel committed to voting. That is a shame.
    Obviously the only Scottish refs worth voting in are those authorised by a Tory PM elected by English people.
    No, the only referendums worth voting in are the ones sanctioned by the supreme legal, democratic parliament of the UK: Westminster, In which English, Welsh, Norn and Scottish MPs are fully represented, and who take into account the future wellbeing - political and economic and constitutional - of the whole UK.

    A few years ago this same parliament, including Scots MPs, voted to allow a Scottish independence referendum. It turned out to be fairly close. But No won, by a wide ten points. The general sense then was that this was a done deal, thereafter, for a generation.

    If you can persuade the UK's sovereign parliament, representing all the British people, to reconsider, and allow an unexpectedly early 2nd vote, good luck to you

    I suggest that threatening the UK with wildcat votes and UDI is not the way to go
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,817
    MaxPB said:

    Andy_JS said:
    So the veil is lifted and that's what this is about, they hate our success. They want us to fail because they are failing, it's nothing more than that.
    Time for Johnson to summon the Belgian ambassador?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    Manchin just surrendered his power as a Senator, and handed McConnell back the ability to block any legislation for the next couple of years.

    Manchin emphatic he 'will not vote' to kill the filibuster
    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/25/joe-manchin-filibuster-462364
    ... “If I haven’t said it very plain, maybe Sen. McConnell hasn’t understood, I want to basically say it for you. That I will not vote in this Congress, that’s two years, right? I will not vote” to change the filibuster, Manchin (D-W.Va.) said in an interview on Monday afternoon. “And I hope with that guarantee in place he will work in a much more amicable way.”..

    Sinema expressed similar opinions.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    RobD said:

    Andy_JS said:
    If they refuse them to allow export, that will be completely outrageous. And what is the point in having a scheme like this if you aren't going to refuse.
    We should wait and see what, if any, effect this manoeuvre has. Hopefully it's just a combination of panic and the need to be seen to be doing something, and they won't do anything silly to escalate matters.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 54,672
    MaxPB said:

    Andy_JS said:
    So the veil is lifted and that's what this is about, they hate our success. They want us to fail because they are failing, it's nothing more than that.
    MaxPB said:

    Andy_JS said:
    So the veil is lifted and that's what this is about, they hate our success. They want us to fail because they are failing, it's nothing more than that.
    Jesus F Christ. Time to nuke Hamburg
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,476
    Leon said:

    IF - and it is a big IF - this turns out to be nonsense scare-mongering, the German Establishment simply cannot be allowed to get away with this.

    They have systematically tried to undermine confidence in a vital, easily produced, cheap-to-transport vaccine; at a time when we need, as a species, anti-vax sentiment to just go away. It is spectacularly irresponsible.

    They might still be right. But the lack of evidence to back it up....
    Yes, but lack of evidence of efficacy in older people is something conceded by UK sources too, such as the Lancet.

    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32623-4/fulltext
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,156
    This is starting to feel uncomfortably like 1914.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,706
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Argh, new threads! FPT:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Anyone tracking AstraZeneca's share price, there could be a killing to be made here.

    FWIW I cannot see a successful company with a market capitalisation of $150 billion playing silly beggars offer the Covid vaccine, it would permanently damage their brand.

    Oddly just last week the head of the German regulator praised the efficacy of AZ so this would have to be a massive about turn from the EMA.

    No, it is perfectly possible to say AZN is moderately effective in younger age groups, but unproven effectiveness in older age groups.
    So wIThy have we used millions of the effective in oldies Pfizer in people under 65 and millions of potentially useless AZN to over 80s?

    We really need to re evaluate quickly unless these reports are BS
    You are still using the highly irresponsible language of 'potentially useless AZN'

    It is just not acceptable
    Beyond that, the German report is obviously false.

    Breathe, then think about this.

    It quotes a specific efficacy estimate of 8% for people over 65.

    No efficacy value exists in the published phase 3 trial report for older cohorts (moreover, even within that there is no "over 65" group. Participants are grouped into three age cohorts, 18-55, 56-69 and 70+)

    There have been no other published trials of the vaccine.

    There has been insufficient time to assess the efficacy of the vaccine in older people during the rollout, because it only began recently, most recipients won't have had time to build immunity based on the first shot let alone had the second, and it will take more time after that to discover how many recipients have subsequently fallen ill, and what degree of efficacy this value implies.

    The 8% figure cannot, therefore, have any basis in evidence, and neither can any broader suggestion that low efficacy in older people has been proven. Either the report has been fabricated, the source was telling porkies, or the source grossly misinterpreted data with which he/she/they were presented. At a guess, the latter explanation seems the most likely.
    That is an excellent analysis.

    My guess is that you are correct in that it is cock up over conspiracy, but still...
    It is a viciously pernicious cock-up, at just the worst time. German media is notoriously complacent, fat, apathetic and PC, and over-protected, but really. IF this is a cock-up, people should be sacked.
    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Argh, new threads! FPT:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Anyone tracking AstraZeneca's share price, there could be a killing to be made here.

    FWIW I cannot see a successful company with a market capitalisation of $150 billion playing silly beggars offer the Covid vaccine, it would permanently damage their brand.

    Oddly just last week the head of the German regulator praised the efficacy of AZ so this would have to be a massive about turn from the EMA.

    No, it is perfectly possible to say AZN is moderately effective in younger age groups, but unproven effectiveness in older age groups.
    So wIThy have we used millions of the effective in oldies Pfizer in people under 65 and millions of potentially useless AZN to over 80s?

    We really need to re evaluate quickly unless these reports are BS
    You are still using the highly irresponsible language of 'potentially useless AZN'

    It is just not acceptable
    Beyond that, the German report is obviously false.

    Breathe, then think about this.

    It quotes a specific efficacy estimate of 8% for people over 65.

    No efficacy value exists in the published phase 3 trial report for older cohorts (moreover, even within that there is no "over 65" group. Participants are grouped into three age cohorts, 18-55, 56-69 and 70+)

    There have been no other published trials of the vaccine.

    There has been insufficient time to assess the efficacy of the vaccine in older people during the rollout, because it only began recently, most recipients won't have had time to build immunity based on the first shot let alone had the second, and it will take more time after that to discover how many recipients have subsequently fallen ill, and what degree of efficacy this value implies.

    The 8% figure cannot, therefore, have any basis in evidence, and neither can any broader suggestion that low efficacy in older people has been proven. Either the report has been fabricated, the source was telling porkies, or the source grossly misinterpreted data with which he/she/they were presented. At a guess, the latter explanation seems the most likely.
    That is an excellent analysis.

    My guess is that you are correct in that it is cock up over conspiracy, but still...
    It is a viciously pernicious cock-up, at just the worst time. German media is notoriously complacent, fat, apathetic and PC, and over-protected, but really. IF this is a cock-up, people should be sacked.
    You post it as if PC were a bad thing. PC = Informed Politeness; I see nothing wrong with that.
    A fair point, from the British perspective, but we are talking about Germany. I have friends who work for German media, they report that it is relentlessly, absurdly PC - there is no attempt to provide balance. eg if there is a report about immigration, it is ALWAYS positive, unless it literally impossible to do otherwise (eg the Koln NYE riots).

    The BBC looks positively centrist in comparison, or so I am told, by lefty friends who are still shocked by the outrageous leftiness of German media.

    Of course, their history must be taken as context. And it is quite a context.
    A good friend of mine once worked as a lawyer with a German firm based in Hamburg. They had a meeting with the opposing side in a large negotiation where the other side made some demands. My friend replied that was going to be very difficult. He was interrupted by one of his German colleagues who explained that my friend was British and far too polite. The answer was no.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,817
    Andy_JS said:

    This is starting to feel uncomfortably like 1914.

    Any Archdukes out and about?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,231
    edited January 2021

    Carnyx said:

    IanB2 said:

    On topic, Kettle in the Guardian:

    One minister tells me the plan is for Johnson to announce that he considers the UK’s existing constitutional architecture is not working. Whether these issues are to be remitted to a constitutional commission of some kind, perhaps similar to the one proposed by the Labour leader Keir Starmer in December, will soon be made clear. These discussions are described as “very live”. But the target audience is clear: the voters whom ministers describe as the majority of the electorate in all four parts of the UK who do not have a passion for breaking up Britain.

    Until recently, the Johnson government’s policy towards all this was to just say no. But that is changing now. There is panic and realism in the new approach. The SNP is formidable but not unbeatable. Divisions between reformists and ultras – between Sturgeon and Alex Salmond and their respective backers – may change the mood. If Sturgeon or any successor is pushed into calling an illegal referendum, it would trigger a widespread boycott that could open the way for different politics.

    It is an enormous risk, and time is running out fast.

    Ignoring the SNP's referendum wheeze is a bit like lockdown - one can help rid the world of a 'orrible disease just by staying at home.
    I believe you fastidiously stayed at home last time out because you felt it wasn't your beeswax, do you now feel Scottish enough to stay at home for tactical electoral reasons? Welcome! Be sure to get a window poster making it clear what your motivation is.
    As I said, I would vote in a new Indyref (a legally binding one). And I don't think it's really about feeling Scottish. I have nothing but admiration and love for Scotland and its people, but I don't think I feel any more Scottish than I did when I arrived - though I have learned a lot and gained a far greater understanding, great love of Scotch whisky and Scottish food, and lots of wonderful Scottish friends. For me it's more about being invested and committed here. I suppose you'd have to live in England for a while to understand the perspective. You are part of something but not.

    If the joke ref happens, I won't participate. It won't be a big statement, I'll just have other stuff on.
    I suspect that there isn't a single template on how one feels about living in a place that you weren't born/brought up in, in fact I'm bloody sure there isn't. Nevertheless I'm glad you feel invested and committed however it manifests itself.
    Except he doesn't feel committed to voting. That is a shame.
    Obviously the only Scottish refs worth voting in are those authorised by a Tory PM elected by English people.
    It's not about the vote being authorised - if the Scottish Government sees this trial referendum as a priority, they should rock on, and anyone who wants to use it as an opportunity to stand up and be counted, go for it. However, it is not a valid tool to dissolve the UK, which yes, surprisingly enough, does need UK Government buy in. Given that this precise thing happened in 2014, and looks set to happen once again in the not too distant future, I can't see how the UK Government is being especially jack-booted over this. Your argument seems to be not that the Scottish people should have the democratic right to decide their own future, but that they should have that right served up to them on the timetable deemed by the SNP to be most favourable to their desired outcome. Those aren't the same thing.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,349
    What's worse - the Brits do have vaccine. And are sticking it in the arms of Brexit-voters at an astonishing rate...
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,456

    On the subject of vaccine shortages: BCG is the vaccine for TB and about five or six years ago there was a problem with the production which lead to significant shortages world wide. This affected me directly because at the time I was in the middle of a three year course of immunotherapy which used BCG. I learnt at the time that if something goes wrong in making vaccines it can take months to sort out the production line. That was for a well understood vaccine, not one which didn't exist a year ago.

    Same happed with Yellow Fever vaccines for the US. A couple of years ago, I had to sign a waiver as part of an 'experimental study' to get a French (non-US-approved) vaccine so I could get a visa to go to Congo to help with the Ebola outbreak. In the end, the trip did not happen as that particular Ebola outbreak snuffed out before all the bureaucracy was done. Would that that were the case for COVID.

    That said, that is old technology. The same should not be true for Pfizer and Moderna's mRNA vaccine production.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,528
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    IF - and it is a big IF - this turns out to be nonsense scare-mongering, the German Establishment simply cannot be allowed to get away with this.

    They have systematically tried to undermine confidence in a vital, easily produced, cheap-to-transport vaccine; at a time when we need, as a species, anti-vax sentiment to just go away. It is spectacularly irresponsible.

    They might still be right. But the lack of evidence to back it up....
    Yes, but lack of evidence of efficacy in older people is something conceded by UK sources too, such as the Lancet.

    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32623-4/fulltext
    Lack of evidence doesn't mean 8% efficacy though.
  • MaxPB said:

    glw said:

    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Andy_JS said:
    So the veil is lifted and that's what this is about, they hate our success. They want us to fail because they are failing, it's nothing more than that.
    Time for Johnson to summon the Belgian ambassador?
    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.
    And any participation we might have in security and defence of Europe.

    The EU is a completely unreliable ally.
    The EU is not an "ally".

    What war have we fought in with the EU?

    They are trade partners, they are not and never have been our allies.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    edited January 2021
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    IF - and it is a big IF - this turns out to be nonsense scare-mongering, the German Establishment simply cannot be allowed to get away with this.

    They have systematically tried to undermine confidence in a vital, easily produced, cheap-to-transport vaccine; at a time when we need, as a species, anti-vax sentiment to just go away. It is spectacularly irresponsible.

    They might still be right. But the lack of evidence to back it up....
    Yes, but lack of evidence of efficacy in older people is something conceded by UK sources too, such as the Lancet.

    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32623-4/fulltext
    As distinct from evidence that it is almost completely ineffective, which does not exist. The available evidence suggests that it probably should be quite effective, it's just that there are insufficient data points available to be able to put a statistically meaningful number on it.

    That's a million miles away from what the German newspaper story said, which was that unnamed sources had stated that it was 8% effective in the over 65s. The German newspaper story was, therefore, nonsense.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,817
    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    IF - and it is a big IF - this turns out to be nonsense scare-mongering, the German Establishment simply cannot be allowed to get away with this.

    They have systematically tried to undermine confidence in a vital, easily produced, cheap-to-transport vaccine; at a time when we need, as a species, anti-vax sentiment to just go away. It is spectacularly irresponsible.

    They might still be right. But the lack of evidence to back it up....
    Yes, but lack of evidence of efficacy in older people is something conceded by UK sources too, such as the Lancet.

    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32623-4/fulltext
    Lack of evidence doesn't mean 8% efficacy though.
    No, in fact it means you can't give it a number at all.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,817

    MaxPB said:

    glw said:

    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Andy_JS said:
    So the veil is lifted and that's what this is about, they hate our success. They want us to fail because they are failing, it's nothing more than that.
    Time for Johnson to summon the Belgian ambassador?
    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.
    And any participation we might have in security and defence of Europe.

    The EU is a completely unreliable ally.
    Remember when it was claimed the Internal Market Bill was the most outrageous thing ever.....
    Reneging on the Treaty of Troyes, and now this? Tsk!
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207

    MaxPB said:

    glw said:

    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Andy_JS said:
    So the veil is lifted and that's what this is about, they hate our success. They want us to fail because they are failing, it's nothing more than that.
    Time for Johnson to summon the Belgian ambassador?
    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.
    And any participation we might have in security and defence of Europe.

    The EU is a completely unreliable ally.
    The EU is not an "ally".

    What war have we fought in with the EU?

    They are trade partners, they are not and never have been our allies.
    As France goes out of its way to prove ... again and again
  • glw said:

    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.

    That's possibly understating the seriousness. Banning vaccine exports to the UK would be something close to an act of war and HMG should make that very clear to the EU.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    RobD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    This is starting to feel uncomfortably like 1914.

    Any Archdukes out and about?
    'Whatever happens, we have got
    the Vaccine, and they have not'
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,528
    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    IF - and it is a big IF - this turns out to be nonsense scare-mongering, the German Establishment simply cannot be allowed to get away with this.

    They have systematically tried to undermine confidence in a vital, easily produced, cheap-to-transport vaccine; at a time when we need, as a species, anti-vax sentiment to just go away. It is spectacularly irresponsible.

    They might still be right. But the lack of evidence to back it up....
    Yes, but lack of evidence of efficacy in older people is something conceded by UK sources too, such as the Lancet.

    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32623-4/fulltext
    Lack of evidence doesn't mean 8% efficacy though.
    No, in fact it means you can't give it a number at all.
    Indeed, I could fully understand if the EMA gave partial approval on the basis of unknown efficacy in over 55s, I expected the MHRA to do the same.

    The main reason I'm certain the claim is bullshit is because the trial data doesn't have a defined "over 65s" bracket.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,231
    Many things will have gone into that EU decision - I suspect not least of all a desire to be seen to be doing something. However, they have just given Boris's Government a major (ahem) shot in the arm with this. Something I doubt they particularly wanted to do.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,349

    RH1992 said:

    The American EU fanboy with the dodgy charts seems to have been allowed onto LBC to spout more of his fantasy opinions.

    https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1353837944507936769

    https://twitter.com/SKyriakidesEU/status/1353805553064153091?s=19
    The EU still standing behind the principle of "unity".

    EU "unity" couldn't bully the UK into signing to being a protectorate of the EU.

    EU "unity" can't make AstraZenica magically provide the EU with vaccines that physically don't exist.

    Perhaps one day they'll realise that "unity" isn't all its cracked up to be.
    The Germans know that - they bought their own vaccine supplies outside the EU structure: 30 million doses from Biontech.

    https://euobserver.com/coronavirus/150554
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    RobD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    This is starting to feel uncomfortably like 1914.

    Any Archdukes out and about?
    When do France surrender (and to whom)?
  • HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    What else are on the agenda tonight?

    (Since everyone ignored it on the last thread's discussion of data! :) )

    Why are labour not doing better

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1353809414571089920?s=19
    Because
    a) Conservatives who know that Boris Johnson's government is corrupt, inept, vindictive, stupid, and immoral lack the backbone to stand up to him. That is, people like you. And,
    b) Because Labour are not an attractive enough alternative.
    So, what should Labour do to be "more attractive"?

    They tried a mad Marxist jew-baiter, your hero Corbyn, that didn't work, now they've tried a tedious centrist dad lawyer, also not working. What next?
    They need a Jacinda.

    And, of course, the UK Labour party is full of photogenic, under-forty, female MPs, who could easily do an Adern if given the chance -- and rout Boris.

    But, alas, Labour is the most misogynistic of our parties, and so they all voted for Sir Keir PersonalityBypass.
    Jacinda of course became PM in 2017 having come second on both votes and seats behind the governing Nationals.

    She only came to power through deals with the Greens and NZ First, Starmer could well become PM on similar backroom deals if Boris loses his majority in 2024
    The way that Cameron became PM on similar backroom deals when Gordon lost his majority in 2010.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,817
    MaxPB said:

    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    IF - and it is a big IF - this turns out to be nonsense scare-mongering, the German Establishment simply cannot be allowed to get away with this.

    They have systematically tried to undermine confidence in a vital, easily produced, cheap-to-transport vaccine; at a time when we need, as a species, anti-vax sentiment to just go away. It is spectacularly irresponsible.

    They might still be right. But the lack of evidence to back it up....
    Yes, but lack of evidence of efficacy in older people is something conceded by UK sources too, such as the Lancet.

    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32623-4/fulltext
    Lack of evidence doesn't mean 8% efficacy though.
    No, in fact it means you can't give it a number at all.
    Indeed, I could fully understand if the EMA gave partial approval on the basis of unknown efficacy in over 55s, I expected the MHRA to do the same.

    The main reason I'm certain the claim is bullshit is because the trial data doesn't have a defined "over 65s" bracket.
    Personally I would have reserved Pfizer for the oldies, and AZ for the younger plebs. But they weren't authorised at the same time.
  • Leon said:

    Carnyx said:

    IanB2 said:

    On topic, Kettle in the Guardian:

    One minister tells me the plan is for Johnson to announce that he considers the UK’s existing constitutional architecture is not working. Whether these issues are to be remitted to a constitutional commission of some kind, perhaps similar to the one proposed by the Labour leader Keir Starmer in December, will soon be made clear. These discussions are described as “very live”. But the target audience is clear: the voters whom ministers describe as the majority of the electorate in all four parts of the UK who do not have a passion for breaking up Britain.

    Until recently, the Johnson government’s policy towards all this was to just say no. But that is changing now. There is panic and realism in the new approach. The SNP is formidable but not unbeatable. Divisions between reformists and ultras – between Sturgeon and Alex Salmond and their respective backers – may change the mood. If Sturgeon or any successor is pushed into calling an illegal referendum, it would trigger a widespread boycott that could open the way for different politics.

    It is an enormous risk, and time is running out fast.

    Ignoring the SNP's referendum wheeze is a bit like lockdown - one can help rid the world of a 'orrible disease just by staying at home.
    I believe you fastidiously stayed at home last time out because you felt it wasn't your beeswax, do you now feel Scottish enough to stay at home for tactical electoral reasons? Welcome! Be sure to get a window poster making it clear what your motivation is.
    As I said, I would vote in a new Indyref (a legally binding one). And I don't think it's really about feeling Scottish. I have nothing but admiration and love for Scotland and its people, but I don't think I feel any more Scottish than I did when I arrived - though I have learned a lot and gained a far greater understanding, great love of Scotch whisky and Scottish food, and lots of wonderful Scottish friends. For me it's more about being invested and committed here. I suppose you'd have to live in England for a while to understand the perspective. You are part of something but not.

    If the joke ref happens, I won't participate. It won't be a big statement, I'll just have other stuff on.
    I suspect that there isn't a single template on how one feels about living in a place that you weren't born/brought up in, in fact I'm bloody sure there isn't. Nevertheless I'm glad you feel invested and committed however it manifests itself.
    Except he doesn't feel committed to voting. That is a shame.
    Obviously the only Scottish refs worth voting in are those authorised by a Tory PM elected by English people.
    No, the only referendums worth voting in are the ones sanctioned by the supreme legal, democratic parliament of the UK: Westminster, In which English, Welsh, Norn and Scottish MPs are fully represented, and who take into account the future wellbeing - political and economic and constitutional - of the whole UK.

    A few years ago this same parliament, including Scots MPs, voted to allow a Scottish independence referendum. It turned out to be fairly close. But No won, by a wide ten points. The general sense then was that this was a done deal, thereafter, for a generation.

    If you can persuade the UK's sovereign parliament, representing all the British people, to reconsider, and allow an unexpectedly early 2nd vote, good luck to you

    I suggest that threatening the UK with wildcat votes and UDI is not the way to go
    Saying something over and over again doesn't add to its veracity, but thanks for your cock eyed observations about wildcat votes and UDI which are not currently being 'threatened' by anyone serious.

    There was a bloke on here, before your time, who's only Scotch insight was interpreting every single national and international event as being bad for indy and the SNP. After all that repetitive guff he must feel a right diddy. I imagine just like you he's pinning all his hopes on the most unpopular Tory PM in Scotland for 30 years, possible ever, persuading Scots that he knows best.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    glw said:

    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.

    That's possibly understating the seriousness. Banning vaccine exports to the UK would be something close to an act of war and HMG should make that very clear to the EU.
    Let us not get ahead of ourselves. Nothing has actually happened yet.

    We are some distance from the point at which we send the Belgian ambassador home with a flea in his ear, let alone attempt to blockade Antwerp with our feeble navy.

    The EU won't be that silly. Common sense will prevail.

    Probably.
  • YokesYokes Posts: 1,325
    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Andy_JS said:
    So the veil is lifted and that's what this is about, they hate our success. They want us to fail because they are failing, it's nothing more than that.
    Time for Johnson to summon the Belgian ambassador?
    I believe the AZ vaccine for UK use is being produced from frozen product in Wales so that hopefully address that. There seems few doubts based on Israeli data however that Pfizers one is quite a product.

    I'm curious as where the AZ stock for Europe was intended to be produced
  • I asked earlier "If they (EU) purloin our (vaccine) supply, will that be jeered or cheered by Remainiacs?"

    I'm pleased to little cheering, but note the jeering seems to be almost exclusively from leavers, or at least those now comfortable with Brexit.

    Can the EU supporters not see, or possibly admit, what perfidious shits they're being?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,349
    RobD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    This is starting to feel uncomfortably like 1914.

    Any Archdukes out and about?
    If so, take a note of the number plate - it will tell you when hostilities will end....

    https://news.sky.com/story/a-ii-ii-18-franz-ferdinands-prophetic-number-plate-11551176
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207

    glw said:

    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.

    That's possibly understating the seriousness. Banning vaccine exports to the UK would be something close to an act of war and HMG should make that very clear to the EU.
    Let us not get ahead of ourselves. Nothing has actually happened yet.

    We are some distance from the point at which we send the Belgian ambassador home with a flea in his ear, let alone attempt to blockade Antwerp with our feeble navy.

    The EU won't be that silly. Common sense will prevail.

    Probably.
    If it doesn't they can forget any chance of us re-joining

    Fuck that shit
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,817
    edited January 2021

    glw said:

    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.

    That's possibly understating the seriousness. Banning vaccine exports to the UK would be something close to an act of war and HMG should make that very clear to the EU.
    Let us not get ahead of ourselves. Nothing has actually happened yet.

    We are some distance from the point at which we send the Belgian ambassador home with a flea in his ear, let alone attempt to blockade Antwerp with our feeble navy.

    The EU won't be that silly. Common sense will prevail.

    Probably.
    They can block exports at their peril. It isn't just the UK they are exporting to.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,528

    glw said:

    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.

    That's possibly understating the seriousness. Banning vaccine exports to the UK would be something close to an act of war and HMG should make that very clear to the EU.
    Let us not get ahead of ourselves. Nothing has actually happened yet.

    We are some distance from the point at which we send the Belgian ambassador home with a flea in his ear, let alone attempt to blockade Antwerp with our feeble navy.

    The EU won't be that silly. Common sense will prevail.

    Probably.
    I hope so too, but they do seem extremely bitter over our initial success with rolling out both types of vaccines so far.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,156
    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    IF - and it is a big IF - this turns out to be nonsense scare-mongering, the German Establishment simply cannot be allowed to get away with this.

    They have systematically tried to undermine confidence in a vital, easily produced, cheap-to-transport vaccine; at a time when we need, as a species, anti-vax sentiment to just go away. It is spectacularly irresponsible.

    They might still be right. But the lack of evidence to back it up....
    Yes, but lack of evidence of efficacy in older people is something conceded by UK sources too, such as the Lancet.

    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32623-4/fulltext
    Lack of evidence doesn't mean 8% efficacy though.
    No, in fact it means you can't give it a number at all.
    Indeed, I could fully understand if the EMA gave partial approval on the basis of unknown efficacy in over 55s, I expected the MHRA to do the same.

    The main reason I'm certain the claim is bullshit is because the trial data doesn't have a defined "over 65s" bracket.
    Personally I would have reserved Pfizer for the oldies, and AZ for the younger plebs. But they weren't authorised at the same time.
    We still have the option of largely doing that since we've already vaccinated elderly people with the Pfizer vaccine and we could mostly use the AZ vaccine for younger people later on this year.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,152
    Ursula seems to have gone mad? Come back Junker...
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,438
    edited January 2021
    RobD said:

    What were the reasons given for the UK joining the EU vaccine scheme again? I'm not sure having vaccines seized otherwise was among them.

    I notice we now have 4000 people on ventalitors, good job we didn't join the EU scheme for those either....
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,114
    edited January 2021

    glw said:

    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.

    That's possibly understating the seriousness. Banning vaccine exports to the UK would be something close to an act of war and HMG should make that very clear to the EU.
    Not sure I'd go that far, but any excuse to rewatch this...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3BO6GP9NMY
  • The EU won't be that silly. Common sense will prevail.

    Probably.

    We can only hope so. But the EU isn't always rational when on the defensive.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 54,672
    A slight rowing back (tho not total) from Handelsblatt

    https://twitter.com/washingtonski/status/1353841867029438465?s=20
  • Floater said:

    MaxPB said:

    glw said:

    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Andy_JS said:
    So the veil is lifted and that's what this is about, they hate our success. They want us to fail because they are failing, it's nothing more than that.
    Time for Johnson to summon the Belgian ambassador?
    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.
    And any participation we might have in security and defence of Europe.

    The EU is a completely unreliable ally.
    The EU is not an "ally".

    What war have we fought in with the EU?

    They are trade partners, they are not and never have been our allies.
    As France goes out of its way to prove ... again and again
    On topic(ish), Scotland's auldest ally.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    RobD said:

    glw said:

    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.

    That's possibly understating the seriousness. Banning vaccine exports to the UK would be something close to an act of war and HMG should make that very clear to the EU.
    Let us not get ahead of ourselves. Nothing has actually happened yet.

    We are some distance from the point at which we send the Belgian ambassador home with a flea in his ear, let alone attempt to blockade Antwerp with our feeble navy.

    The EU won't be that silly. Common sense will prevail.

    Probably.
    They can block exports at their peril. It isn't just the UK they are exporting to.
    I'm tempted at this juncture to say that they'd probably take great pleasure in confiscating supplies intended for the UK to use themselves, whilst letting the Americans and others have theirs. But in truth that's a preposterous scenario.

    Probably.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,438
    edited January 2021
    GIN1138 said:

    Ursula seems to have gone mad? Come back Junker...

    Remember how she got the gig in the first place....it wasn't reward for success.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,817
    Mortimer said:

    glw said:

    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.

    That's possibly understating the seriousness. Banning vaccine exports to the UK would be something close to an act of war and HMG should make that very clear to the EU.
    Not sure I'd go that far, but any excuse to rewatch this...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3BO6GP9NMY
    The stretched twig of peace is at melting point.

    :D
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,156
    edited January 2021

    RobD said:

    glw said:

    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.

    That's possibly understating the seriousness. Banning vaccine exports to the UK would be something close to an act of war and HMG should make that very clear to the EU.
    Let us not get ahead of ourselves. Nothing has actually happened yet.

    We are some distance from the point at which we send the Belgian ambassador home with a flea in his ear, let alone attempt to blockade Antwerp with our feeble navy.

    The EU won't be that silly. Common sense will prevail.

    Probably.
    They can block exports at their peril. It isn't just the UK they are exporting to.
    I'm tempted at this juncture to say that they'd probably take great pleasure in confiscating supplies intended for the UK to use themselves, whilst letting the Americans and others have theirs. But in truth that's a preposterous scenario.

    Probably.
    Does anyone know how much of the Pfizer vaccine we already have in the UK, ready to use?
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,848
    RobD said:

    What were the reasons given for the UK joining the EU vaccine scheme again? I'm not sure having vaccines seized otherwise was among them.

    wasnt it because the uk was bound to fail whereas the eu was bound to succeed?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,528

    RobD said:

    glw said:

    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.

    That's possibly understating the seriousness. Banning vaccine exports to the UK would be something close to an act of war and HMG should make that very clear to the EU.
    Let us not get ahead of ourselves. Nothing has actually happened yet.

    We are some distance from the point at which we send the Belgian ambassador home with a flea in his ear, let alone attempt to blockade Antwerp with our feeble navy.

    The EU won't be that silly. Common sense will prevail.

    Probably.
    They can block exports at their peril. It isn't just the UK they are exporting to.
    I'm tempted at this juncture to say that they'd probably take great pleasure in confiscating supplies intended for the UK to use themselves, whilst letting the Americans and others have theirs. But in truth that's a preposterous scenario.

    Probably.
    Isn't that an actual declaration of war against the UK?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,438
    edited January 2021
    Leon said:

    A slight rowing back (tho not total) from Handelsblatt

    https://twitter.com/washingtonski/status/1353841867029438465?s=20

    https://twitter.com/washingtonski/status/1353841883840184320?s=19

    Reported like political tittle tattle, when far more important than that.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Yokes said:

    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Andy_JS said:
    So the veil is lifted and that's what this is about, they hate our success. They want us to fail because they are failing, it's nothing more than that.
    Time for Johnson to summon the Belgian ambassador?
    I believe the AZ vaccine for UK use is being produced from frozen product in Wales so that hopefully address that. There seems few doubts based on Israeli data however that Pfizers one is quite a product.

    I'm curious as where the AZ stock for Europe was intended to be produced
    That was covered earlier. There's a plant in Belgium (not the same one as Pfizer's) which is apparently having production difficulties. AZ are attributing their failure to supply the EU the full amount on time to this.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,114
    RobD said:

    Mortimer said:

    glw said:

    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.

    That's possibly understating the seriousness. Banning vaccine exports to the UK would be something close to an act of war and HMG should make that very clear to the EU.
    Not sure I'd go that far, but any excuse to rewatch this...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3BO6GP9NMY
    The stretched twig of peace is at melting point.

    :D
    The whole segment is, for me, the best of the whole Brass Eye output...
  • LeonLeon Posts: 54,672

    Leon said:

    A slight rowing back (tho not total) from Handelsblatt

    https://twitter.com/washingtonski/status/1353841867029438465?s=20

    https://twitter.com/washingtonski/status/1353841883840184320?s=19

    Its not like it is important or anything to get facts right....
    It does smell like politically-inspired horse-shit.

    Which is a daily occurrence. And generally goes unnoticed. Except this time the political whisperer, shovelling the shit, has endangered millions of human lives across the globe.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,438
    edited January 2021
    Andy_JS said:

    RobD said:

    glw said:

    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.

    That's possibly understating the seriousness. Banning vaccine exports to the UK would be something close to an act of war and HMG should make that very clear to the EU.
    Let us not get ahead of ourselves. Nothing has actually happened yet.

    We are some distance from the point at which we send the Belgian ambassador home with a flea in his ear, let alone attempt to blockade Antwerp with our feeble navy.

    The EU won't be that silly. Common sense will prevail.

    Probably.
    They can block exports at their peril. It isn't just the UK they are exporting to.
    I'm tempted at this juncture to say that they'd probably take great pleasure in confiscating supplies intended for the UK to use themselves, whilst letting the Americans and others have theirs. But in truth that's a preposterous scenario.

    Probably.
    Does anyone know how much of the Pfizer vaccine we already have in the UK, ready to use?
    20+ million doses have been produced...they are slowly been QAed and bottled.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,156
    edited January 2021
    It'll be interesting to hear what Dr John Campbell has to say about this saga in his next video.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,817

    Andy_JS said:

    RobD said:

    glw said:

    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.

    That's possibly understating the seriousness. Banning vaccine exports to the UK would be something close to an act of war and HMG should make that very clear to the EU.
    Let us not get ahead of ourselves. Nothing has actually happened yet.

    We are some distance from the point at which we send the Belgian ambassador home with a flea in his ear, let alone attempt to blockade Antwerp with our feeble navy.

    The EU won't be that silly. Common sense will prevail.

    Probably.
    They can block exports at their peril. It isn't just the UK they are exporting to.
    I'm tempted at this juncture to say that they'd probably take great pleasure in confiscating supplies intended for the UK to use themselves, whilst letting the Americans and others have theirs. But in truth that's a preposterous scenario.

    Probably.
    Does anyone know how much of the Pfizer vaccine we already have in the UK, ready to use?
    Don't tell them, Pike.
    The Scottish Health Minister has a new nickname?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 54,672
    RobD said:
    I think this is political arse-covering in Germany, to justify a feeble vaccination programme

    I could easily be wrong. Probably am. But that's what it looks like. At face value
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,817
    MaxPB said:

    RobD said:

    glw said:

    If the EU actually block an export of vaccine to the UK right now then we might as well tear up the deal with the EU as it would have been proven worthless in less than a month.

    That's possibly understating the seriousness. Banning vaccine exports to the UK would be something close to an act of war and HMG should make that very clear to the EU.
    Let us not get ahead of ourselves. Nothing has actually happened yet.

    We are some distance from the point at which we send the Belgian ambassador home with a flea in his ear, let alone attempt to blockade Antwerp with our feeble navy.

    The EU won't be that silly. Common sense will prevail.

    Probably.
    They can block exports at their peril. It isn't just the UK they are exporting to.
    I'm tempted at this juncture to say that they'd probably take great pleasure in confiscating supplies intended for the UK to use themselves, whilst letting the Americans and others have theirs. But in truth that's a preposterous scenario.

    Probably.
    Isn't that an actual declaration of war against the UK?
    It would be the most outrageous diplomatic act between western nations in many decades.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,231
    Is there not a big unfinished vaccine please somewhere in England? Also one being built in Livingston in Scotland I think - need to get all these up and running, not just to ensure supply, but hopefully to export elsewhere to help other countries.
This discussion has been closed.