Listening to the mad old dear in Epping you'd think "the will of the people" was something you can just ignore in a democracy. Let us see how the actual politicians - even the Tory ones - deal with such basic concepts as representation and legitimacy. I believe they will say all kinds of things to dismiss and denigrate the idea of a referendum without saying that the views of Scotland can be ignored. Because as the people who actually have to be re-elected in Scotland they know they can't say such stupid things.
How many UK journalists have published really dangerous bullshit that endangers countless lives?
Lots, actually. All the Covid deniers and anti-lockdown folk for a start. Allison Pearson in the Telegraph, Hitchens in the Mail, Toby Young (maybe not a journalist?) Julia H-B on Talk Radio. Sure there are plenty more publishing dangerous bullshit.
How many of them have said "multiple government sources tell us that lockdown does fuck all"?
People have died from measles because of the MMR causes autism scandal . Quite a few newspapres continued with the story years after the Wakefiled's initial claims had been soundly refuted.
How many UK journalists have published really dangerous bullshit that endangers countless lives?
I thought that was a recurring squawk on here? Folk demanding enquiries into their role in the pandemic and everything.
They've largely been dickheads. But I've yet to see such pernicious behaviour as Handelsblatt is still at. Their story is still up, 16 hours on. Their journalists' tweets are all still up. People are still reading this dangerous bullshit and spreading it around. It won't help grow any roses.
Did you not see the Sunday People this week? They falsely claimed the UK government was knocking off grannines in care homes left, right and centre with its 12 week vaccination approach to Pfizer, because some people who had been vaccinated had died...not necessarily of covid, they had died, and given the roll out most will have been vaccinated less than 3 weeks ago and not with Pfizer.
Utterly dickish and irresponsible of them, but I doubt it'll lead anyone to refuse a vaccine.
There has been widely reported in some care homes that there is a serious issue with especially staff refusing the vaccine due to all sorts of fake scare stories.
The staff were refusing the vaccine before this week. I don't think they should be allowed to refuse the vaccine and remain employed. I reckon that the correlation of the ethnic background of care home staff and the ethnic background of vaccine refuseniks has more to do with this issue than anything that's been in the British press.
Is that racist? I don't know any more..
I think it is true, it just isn't helpful to have even more fake news on such a delicate and important topic.
Sir Kier might be be Labour's Kinnock? The wait for Labour's Blair continues...
Well still better than Corbyn, Labour's Foot.
Though of course even Kinnock nearly became PM in a hung parliament in 1992 with the LDs.
Labour does not need Blair style landslides a la 1997 or 2001 to win power.
Kinnock was quite a long way short in 1992. Labour won 271 seats, and 291 had a deal been done with Ashdown. That's well short of the 336 required.
I know there's always the "if X people in Y constituencies had voted differently..." Fine - but things don't really work that way. The polls were some way off in 1992, and Labour weren't all that close.
How many UK journalists have published really dangerous bullshit that endangers countless lives?
Lots, actually. All the Covid deniers and anti-lockdown folk for a start. Allison Pearson in the Telegraph, Hitchens in the Mail, Toby Young (maybe not a journalist?) Julia H-B on Talk Radio. Sure there are plenty more publishing dangerous bullshit.
How many of them have said "multiple government sources tell us that lockdown does fuck all"?
Do Lord Hannan and Dezzy Swain count?
Hannan's been pretty poor, but he seems (from his twitter) to be saying "vax teachers, open schools". Not "ignore lockdown, the government has told me it doesn't work"
Just catching up on last night's thread and this morning's. There's clearly a lot of animosity towards the EU, some of it last night rather belligerent.
It seems to me that the time has come to have a referendum on leaving the EU. If we leave, we won't be able to blame Brussels bureaucrats, France or Germany etc. any more, and we can live in harmony with our European friends and neighbours.
Edit - somebody's just told me that we have left the EU. Who'd have thought it?
Amusing, but what does it have to do with criticising a neighbouring entity if appropriate. Still blaming the EU for UK problems is not the same as criticising EU actions or words, if appropriate, and confrontation even between friends can be very justified, surely no one would suggest there never being rows.
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
I don't normally like or respect Peston but this is simple, factual and reads entirely correctly.
You like him when he says things that you like?
No I like him when he reports actual facts rather than what his "sources" say that turns out to be complete and utter codswallop.
Ok. Let's test this.
When was the last time he reported something strongly sourced and truthful that you DIDN'T like?
Test passed: I can't think of anything strongly sourced and truthful that I didn't like, that is my point. What is yours?
When he reports authoritatively that there is going to be no further economic support for people during the pandemic, an hour before the Chancellor hosts a press conference announcing a furlough scheme, that is an example of what I dislike. He makes up nonsense from his "sources" hoping to be "first" with a story rather than reporting actual facts.
My point is that you might be - I suspect are - conflating what you like to hear from Pesto with the quality of what you hear from Pesto. So if he says something you approve of (e.g. this AZ story knocking the EU) you deem it good reporting. If it's something you don't like (e.g. no furlough extension) you deem it dross reporting.
To show this is not the case is quite easy. We simply need to find the last time - or any time - he reported something well sourced and truthful that you did not like. That was hence my question and you answered in the negative. Test FAILED, therefore, not passed, and the initial assertion still stands.
You only like him when he says something you like.
You're wrong, you're getting it backwards. I like to hear actual facts from Peston not his made up nonsense.
If it were not the case you would need to find something well sourced and truthful that I did not like. If that existed then it would be as you say. I don't dislike anything well sourced and truthful, I like the truth whatever it may be. If he was reporting something well sourced and truthful but I still didn't like it then I would be hypocritical.
Even if something is "bad news", even if something goes against my politics, if a journalist is reporting it "well sourced and truthful" then I don't dislike the messenger for it. Its the truth then and we need to accept it and move on.
The problem is most of what Peston does is speculation that turns out to be wrong.
This explanation of yours is precisely what we're testing. To show you are not conflating what you want to hear from Pesto with what you like to hear (from Pesto), we need to find a well-sourced and truthful Pesto scoop that goes against what you believed to be true before you read it. We can illustrate using me instead of you. So, this story today. It goes against one of my core beliefs - that the EU is a benign and competent institution - but at the same time it looks to me to be solid. It's a piece of quality Pesto. This, then, is an example of objective-to-a-fault me liking Pesto even though I don't like what he's saying. Ok? Ok. So we are looking for an equivalent example from you. That's all. Then it's over. Hit me.
How many UK journalists have published really dangerous bullshit that endangers countless lives?
Lots, actually. All the Covid deniers and anti-lockdown folk for a start. Allison Pearson in the Telegraph, Hitchens in the Mail, Toby Young (maybe not a journalist?) Julia H-B on Talk Radio. Sure there are plenty more publishing dangerous bullshit.
How many of them have said "multiple government sources tell us that lockdown does fuck all"?
People have died from measles because of the MMR causes autism scandal . Quite a few newspapres continued with the story years after the Wakefiled's initial claims had been soundly refuted.
Listening to the mad old dear in Epping you'd think "the will of the people" was something you can just ignore in a democracy. Let us see how the actual politicians - even the Tory ones - deal with such basic concepts as representation and legitimacy. I believe they will say all kinds of things to dismiss and denigrate the idea of a referendum without saying that the views of Scotland can be ignored. Because as the people who actually have to be re-elected in Scotland they know they can't say such stupid things.
All 3 represent the views of their mainly Unionist voters.
So only one minority party has actually stated a ref should be boycotted? Very good, carry on.
And one minority party with non-trivial representation (equal to the LDs, remember) says a ref shoulkd happen. The Greens, whom HYUFD always, always, always leaves out because he cannot fit them into his Weltanschauung.
Sir Kier might be be Labour's Kinnock? The wait for Labour's Blair continues...
Biros is definitely ready for him.
Osborne is pretty much on the button. SKS, perhaps sadly, isn't going to be PM. The lack of a truly bruising heavyweight support team is also a real gap. The media have oceans of space to be filled by anyone who has something non-trivial to say. Whenever Blair turns up to fill that space he is miles better than anyone for Labour. Nick Robinson effortlessly turned a prominent Labour MP (I think it was Wes Streeting) into a car crash this morning just by asking him what his own answer would be to the challenge he was putting to the government.
How many UK journalists have published really dangerous bullshit that endangers countless lives?
I thought that was a recurring squawk on here? Folk demanding enquiries into their role in the pandemic and everything.
They've largely been dickheads. But I've yet to see such pernicious behaviour as Handelsblatt is still at. Their story is still up, 16 hours on. Their journalists' tweets are all still up. People are still reading this dangerous bullshit and spreading it around. It won't help grow any roses.
Did you not see the Sunday People this week? They falsely claimed the UK government was knocking off grannines in care homes left, right and centre with its 12 week vaccination approach to Pfizer, because some people who had been vaccinated had died...not necessarily of covid, they had died, and given the roll out most will have been vaccinated less than 3 weeks ago and not with Pfizer.
Utterly dickish and irresponsible of them, but I doubt it'll lead anyone to refuse a vaccine.
There has been widely reported in some care homes that there is a serious issue with especially staff refusing the vaccine due to all sorts of fake scare stories.
The staff were refusing the vaccine before this week. I don't think they should be allowed to refuse the vaccine and remain employed. I reckon that the correlation of the ethnic background of care home staff and the ethnic background of vaccine refuseniks has more to do with this issue than anything that's been in the British press.
Is that racist? I don't know any more..
If you are basing your claim hear-say "evidence" then yes it is racist. If you have good evidence to back up you claim then you should let us know what it is.
Just catching up on last night's thread and this morning's. There's clearly a lot of animosity towards the EU, some of it last night rather belligerent.
It seems to me that the time has come to have a referendum on leaving the EU. If we leave, we won't be able to blame Brussels bureaucrats, France or Germany etc. any more, and we can live in harmony with our European friends and neighbours.
Edit - somebody's just told me that we have left the EU. Who'd have thought it?
I think the UK needs one of Gwynneth Paltrow's fanny candles to help with the conscious uncoupling.
Typical impatient lay person question, but how soon from days release to approval is expected?
Good question. It slightly depends on whether the MHRA have been tracking the trials as they go along, which I expect they have. If so, and if the data is unambiguous, it could be pretty quick - a small number of weeks.
Conclusion: Nowhere large (not even the UK) will be out of the woods by Easter, lockdown relaxations will happen because of nice summer weather, most places won't need to reimpose much in the autumn.
Brutal. "What we have instead is a daily commentary on events. Extend universal credit. Pay nurses more. Listen to Marcus Rashford. Vaccinate the teachers first… and police officers, and social workers, immigration officials, prison staff — and even their prisoners — and any other group that makes some noise, so that everyone is a priority."
The Corbyn era literally gutted the Labour Party. What talent they have left mainly sits outside Parliament (Andy Burnham), or chairing Committees (Hilary Benn, Yvette Cooper), or outside politics completely (Tom Watson, Ed Balls).
They have no programme or even big ideas because they have no idea what they stand for or even their purpose. Unfortunately the break with being run by the union movement done by Blair has largely been reversed. The TUs still stick significant cash and influence into the party both locally and nationally, and the big ones are increasingly bonkers if not actually insane. I don't know where they go next, but Keith Brittas doesn't have enough political nous to lead them anywhere.
And it's an adenovirus vector so it has all of the advantages of the AZ vaccine wrt storage and transportation.
Sounds like they've won the science prize on this one, albeit not the speed prize. Remarkable achievement.
Lots of orders with them so depending on production itll be massive.
Do we know that J&J is more effective as a one-dose vaccine than AZN or Pfizer would be as single dose? By which I mean is there a difference in mechanism that would make this expected? AZN and Pfizer have not (I think) done single dose trials, so with theirs we simply do not know single dose efficacy. We also don't know, of course whether a two-dose J&J (double-double-Boris) would be more effective than a single J&J.
You can imagine that J&J, being slightly later to the party, may have considered it worth the risk to trial a single-dose regime as that would be a selling point against the earlier vaccines if still effective. I don't know what actually happened/reasons for doing it this way - happy to be educated!
Typical impatient lay person question, but how soon from days release to approval is expected?
Good question. It slightly depends on whether the MHRA have been tracking the trials as they go along, which I expect they have. If so, and if the data is unambiguous, it could be pretty quick - a small number of weeks.
Conclusion: Nowhere large (not even the UK) will be out of the woods by Easter, lockdown relaxations will happen because of nice summer weather, most places won't need to reimpose much in the autumn.
Just catching up on last night's thread and this morning's. There's clearly a lot of animosity towards the EU, some of it last night rather belligerent.
It seems to me that the time has come to have a referendum on leaving the EU. If we leave, we won't be able to blame Brussels bureaucrats, France or Germany etc. any more, and we can live in harmony with our European friends and neighbours.
Edit - somebody's just told me that we have left the EU. Who'd have thought it?
Amusing, but what does it have to do with criticising a neighbouring entity if appropriate. Still blaming the EU for UK problems is not the same as criticising EU actions or words, if appropriate, and confrontation even between friends can be very justified, surely no one would suggest there never being rows.
I don't disagree really, of course friends can have rows and disagree.
I just found the level of hostility and several mentions of 'this could lead to war' on here last night pretty distasteful. I prefer diplomacy to aggression, I guess.
Typical impatient lay person question, but how soon from days release to approval is expected?
Good question. It slightly depends on whether the MHRA have been tracking the trials as they go along, which I expect they have. If so, and if the data is unambiguous, it could be pretty quick - a small number of weeks.
Conclusion: Nowhere large (not even the UK) will be out of the woods by Easter, lockdown relaxations will happen because of nice summer weather, most places won't need to reimpose much in the autumn.
And it's an adenovirus vector so it has all of the advantages of the AZ vaccine wrt storage and transportation.
Sounds like they've won the science prize on this one, albeit not the speed prize. Remarkable achievement.
Lots of orders with them so depending on production itll be massive.
Do we know that J&J is more effective as a one-dose vaccine than AZN or Pfizer would be as single dose? By which I mean is there a difference in mechanism that would make this expected? AZN and Pfizer have not (I think) done single dose trials, so with theirs we simply do not know single dose efficacy. We also don't know, of course whether a two-dose J&J (double-double-Boris) would be more effective than a single J&J.
You can imagine that J&J, being slightly later to the party, may have considered it worth the risk to trial a single-dose regime as that would be a selling point against the earlier vaccines if still effective. I don't know what actually happened/reasons for doing it this way - happy to be educated!
There is no public information on J&J effectiveness. J&J are currently running a 2 dose trial, including in the UK.
Sir Kier might be be Labour's Kinnock? The wait for Labour's Blair continues...
Biros is definitely ready for him.
Osborne is pretty much on the button. SKS, perhaps sadly, isn't going to be PM. The lack of a truly bruising heavyweight support team is also a real gap. The media have oceans of space to be filled by anyone who has something non-trivial to say. Whenever Blair turns up to fill that space he is miles better than anyone for Labour. Nick Robinson effortlessly turned a prominent Labour MP (I think it was Wes Streeting) into a car crash this morning just by asking him what his own answer would be to the challenge he was putting to the government.
I did not like the idea of Ed Balls as a potential Chancellor, but it was always plausible. The idea of McDonnell as Chancellor was horrific. The idea of Dodds as Chancellor . . . it is just blank, it is impossible to picture her presenting a Budget.
SKS might be PM one day, though I'm hopeful he won't - nobody who sat in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet deserves to - but Dodds will never be Chancellor.
Does the UK have J&J doses? How many and on what timescale?
30m initial order, priority delivery timescale (starting in April), 22m option for H2 delivery.
*EU eyes look on, enviously....*
Nah, the EU has done well on this, procured a 200m order which is around the same as us on a per capita basis. The delivery schedule is slower though, reflecting the later order date and price bargaining.
And it's an adenovirus vector so it has all of the advantages of the AZ vaccine wrt storage and transportation.
Sounds like they've won the science prize on this one, albeit not the speed prize. Remarkable achievement.
Lots of orders with them so depending on production itll be massive.
Do we know that J&J is more effective as a one-dose vaccine than AZN or Pfizer would be as single dose? By which I mean is there a difference in mechanism that would make this expected? AZN and Pfizer have not (I think) done single dose trials, so with theirs we simply do not know single dose efficacy. We also don't know, of course whether a two-dose J&J (double-double-Boris) would be more effective than a single J&J.
You can imagine that J&J, being slightly later to the party, may have considered it worth the risk to trial a single-dose regime as that would be a selling point against the earlier vaccines if still effective. I don't know what actually happened/reasons for doing it this way - happy to be educated!
Good points, I am presuming decent efficacy with the single shot but we shall soon see.
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
"In the future, all companies producing vaccines against COVID-19 in the EU will have to provide early notification whenever they want to export vaccines to third countries," she added.
An export "ban" that requires "early notification" to be able to export is simply not an export ban. Cocaine smugglers cant get around the ban on exporting cocaine by providing early notification.
Sir Kier might be be Labour's Kinnock? The wait for Labour's Blair continues...
Well still better than Corbyn, Labour's Foot.
Though of course even Kinnock nearly became PM in a hung parliament in 1992 with the LDs.
Labour does not need Blair style landslides a la 1997 or 2001 to win power.
Kinnock was quite a long way short in 1992. Labour won 271 seats, and 291 had a deal been done with Ashdown. That's well short of the 336 required.
I know there's always the "if X people in Y constituencies had voted differently..." Fine - but things don't really work that way. The polls were some way off in 1992, and Labour weren't all that close.
The Tories got 336 seats in 1992 and the Unionists got 10 MPs, Labour and the LDs and the SNP and PC and the SDLP got 302 MPs combined so it would only have taken Labour winning an extra 23 seats off the Tories and Kinnock would probably have been able to form a government in a hung parliament.
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
It's a comment on the way the story is being reported right now across our media.
Yes but you know it is not true, why spread it for point scoring purposes against an institution we have already left?
Just catching up on last night's thread and this morning's. There's clearly a lot of animosity towards the EU, some of it last night rather belligerent.
It seems to me that the time has come to have a referendum on leaving the EU. If we leave, we won't be able to blame Brussels bureaucrats, France or Germany etc. any more, and we can live in harmony with our European friends and neighbours.
Edit - somebody's just told me that we have left the EU. Who'd have thought it?
Amusing, but what does it have to do with criticising a neighbouring entity if appropriate. Still blaming the EU for UK problems is not the same as criticising EU actions or words, if appropriate, and confrontation even between friends can be very justified, surely no one would suggest there never being rows.
I don't disagree really, of course friends can have rows and disagree.
I just found the level of hostility and several mentions of 'this could lead to war' on here last night pretty distasteful. I prefer diplomacy to aggression, I guess.
I certainly wasn't one banging on about "war"....however veiled threats to withhold living saving medicines that have been fairly ordered and paid for, that go beyond mates having a bit of disagreement of the level of who should be the new manager of their footy club.
Without wanting to keep going back to Scotland, the mandate issue is easy to solve. In 2019 the Tories ran on a clear manifesto pledge that a vote for a Tory government is a vote to Get Brexit Done. So the same would be true for an SNP manifesto that a vote for an SNP government is a vote for Sindyref2: The Smell of Salmond Fear.
If - and I'm certain they will - the SNP have the need for a new referendum front and centre of their manifesto, and form the government after the election, the mandate is clear. If Unionists want to pretend there is no mandate and boycott the referendum that is no different to the millions of people who attack governments and politicians but do not vote.
It isn't because without Westminster agreeing the referendum is legal and agreeing to implement its result it is nothing more than a glorified equivalent of Express polls for Nationalist voters if Unionists boycott it, as they would
Of course its more, it would be a legally-held, legally-authorise referendum.
The EU didn't agree to the 2016 UK advisory referendum on EU membership, it was held by the national government. Holyrood is Scotland's national government. Same principle applies exactly.
If Remainers had boycotted the EU referendum then it would still have been won by leavers.
The UK Government had the power to leave the EU by an established legal mechanism that allowed member states to leave. The Scottish Government does not have that power, or they would have done so (referendum or no referendum) a long time ago. There is nothing to stop the SNP holding an independence referendum every year if they feel that it is a good use of public money, but there is also nothing obliging the UK Government to recognise the outcome of such referenda.
As you aren't the mad old dear in Epping I will engage. What you say is *legally* true. But isn't *politically* true. A Scottish government, elected on a manifesto to hold an independence referendum, which then votes to leave. And you're proposing that its politically possible to tell the people of Scotland that its opinions are irrelevant and can be ignored? That the will of the people is irrelevant if you don't like what they want?
Any democracy only functions if based on democratic mandates being respected. "You can vote but we'll ignore you" is how revolutions happen.
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
"In the future, all companies producing vaccines against COVID-19 in the EU will have to provide early notification whenever they want to export vaccines to third countries," she added.
An export "ban" that requires "early notification" to be able to export is simply not an export ban. Cocaine smugglers cant get around the ban on exporting cocaine by providing early notification.
What is the point of having a notification scheme if you are never going to deny permission?
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
"In the future, all companies producing vaccines against COVID-19 in the EU will have to provide early notification whenever they want to export vaccines to third countries," she added.
An export "ban" that requires "early notification" to be able to export is simply not an export ban. Cocaine smugglers cant get around the ban on exporting cocaine by providing early notification.
You seem to be in denial
It was clear on Euro news this morning that an export ban is actively being considered and confirmed by the Irish Minister in the interview
Furthermore, Euro news confirmed the Commission has sent the proposal to all 27 countries
Brutal. "What we have instead is a daily commentary on events. Extend universal credit. Pay nurses more. Listen to Marcus Rashford. Vaccinate the teachers first… and police officers, and social workers, immigration officials, prison staff — and even their prisoners — and any other group that makes some noise, so that everyone is a priority."
The Corbyn era literally gutted the Labour Party. What talent they have left mainly sits outside Parliament (Andy Burnham), or chairing Committees (Hilary Benn, Yvette Cooper), or outside politics completely (Tom Watson, Ed Balls).
They have no programme or even big ideas because they have no idea what they stand for or even their purpose. Unfortunately the break with being run by the union movement done by Blair has largely been reversed. The TUs still stick significant cash and influence into the party both locally and nationally, and the big ones are increasingly bonkers if not actually insane. I don't know where they go next, but Keith Brittas doesn't have enough political nous to lead them anywhere.
Honestly, I've been wondering if Labour wouldn't actually be better off if they were more influenced by the unions these days. At least then there's a chance they'd move away from constantly calling everyone who disagrees with them a bigot.
Certainly the immediate challenge is to win back the northern seats lost because the white working class no longer believed the party was much interested in them anymore, and it seems likely that the unions have their finger on that particular pulse. Or am I wrong, and are the unions now also run by metropolitan liberals obsessed with playing identity politics?
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
It's a comment on the way the story is being reported right now across our media.
Yes but you know it is not true, why spread it for point scoring purposes against an institution we have already left?
It's called listening. Knowing what the non-politically inclined think about an issue means not getting involved in the conversation.
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
"In the future, all companies producing vaccines against COVID-19 in the EU will have to provide early notification whenever they want to export vaccines to third countries," she added.
An export "ban" that requires "early notification" to be able to export is simply not an export ban. Cocaine smugglers cant get around the ban on exporting cocaine by providing early notification.
What is the point of having a notification scheme if you are never going to deny permission?
What purpose does notification provide apart from an ability to cease the production prior to export. See for example Macron blocking the export of PPE from France to the UK last year (as pointed out by someone on here earlier today).
BREXIT UPDATE Due to long term idiot activity concluding at No 10, we can no longer send any plants to Northern Ireland or the EU. As compensation for naked gardens you can have Sovereignty!
Perhaps if the EU had been a bit more fussy about transporting plants across its internal boundaries we wouldn't have had Chalara (ash dieback).
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
"In the future, all companies producing vaccines against COVID-19 in the EU will have to provide early notification whenever they want to export vaccines to third countries," she added.
An export "ban" that requires "early notification" to be able to export is simply not an export ban. Cocaine smugglers cant get around the ban on exporting cocaine by providing early notification.
What is the point of having a notification scheme if you are never going to deny permission?
So they can track what is happening if they don't believe what the companies are telling them.
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
I didn't know you were a good friend of Scott n Paste...
Question. Is it pasting tweets itself that you dislike - the way they format on a phone perhaps - or the content of the tweets?
Dismissing them as a blanket suggests some irritation about the things the tweets are saying that you would prefer weren't made so public...
Its the posting of 100 tweets that say essentially the same thing on the same story. Plus many are from sources such as total nobodies with a 100 followers, which are invariably dubious in accuracy or from the same cliche of people with their predictable rant. It just clogs up the thread. While he offers none of his own insight, just Bozo is crap, heres yet another tweet saying so.
No issue with a tweet or two on a particular story. That why I come here to find out information.
For me it's more the lack of consideration for PB as a forum for discussion. Tweets are reproduced here with zero commentary, as if PB is 'a retweet'. But it isn't - the Tweet should aid or be presented to stimulate discussion, otherwise we are just Twitter. If done occasionally, this isn't an issue - if done all the time, it's spam.
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
"In the future, all companies producing vaccines against COVID-19 in the EU will have to provide early notification whenever they want to export vaccines to third countries," she added.
An export "ban" that requires "early notification" to be able to export is simply not an export ban. Cocaine smugglers cant get around the ban on exporting cocaine by providing early notification.
What is the point of having a notification scheme if you are never going to deny permission?
What purpose does notification provide apart from an ability to cease the production prior to export. See for example Macron blocking the export of PPE from France to the UK last year (as pointed out by someone on here earlier today).
Exactly, why ask for advanced notice of export if you don't intend to do anything about it.
Listening to the mad old dear in Epping you'd think "the will of the people" was something you can just ignore in a democracy. Let us see how the actual politicians - even the Tory ones - deal with such basic concepts as representation and legitimacy. I believe they will say all kinds of things to dismiss and denigrate the idea of a referendum without saying that the views of Scotland can be ignored. Because as the people who actually have to be re-elected in Scotland they know they can't say such stupid things.
All 3 represent the views of their mainly Unionist voters.
So only one minority party has actually stated a ref should be boycotted? Very good, carry on.
And it is saying that about a theoretical pledge from another party. Lets us see what happens. SNP: If re-elected, that will be a clear mandate for an independence vote Tories: If you vote to re-elect the SNP you voted wrong and we will ignore you.
I don't think so. No politician can go the electorate and say "unless you vote to agree with my position we will ignore you".
Typical impatient lay person question, but how soon from days release to approval is expected?
Good question. It slightly depends on whether the MHRA have been tracking the trials as they go along, which I expect they have. If so, and if the data is unambiguous, it could be pretty quick - a small number of weeks.
Conclusion: Nowhere large (not even the UK) will be out of the woods by Easter, lockdown relaxations will happen because of nice summer weather, most places won't need to reimpose much in the autumn.
Must be rerouted from somewhere unless they were sitting on supplies surely.
If this is true
AstraZeneca has offered to bring forward some deliveries of its COVID-19 vaccine to the European Union while the bloc has asked the British drugmaker if it can divert doses from the UK to make up for a shortfall in supplies, European officials told Reuters.
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
Sir Kier might be be Labour's Kinnock? The wait for Labour's Blair continues...
Biros is definitely ready for him.
Osborne is pretty much on the button. SKS, perhaps sadly, isn't going to be PM. The lack of a truly bruising heavyweight support team is also a real gap. The media have oceans of space to be filled by anyone who has something non-trivial to say. Whenever Blair turns up to fill that space he is miles better than anyone for Labour. Nick Robinson effortlessly turned a prominent Labour MP (I think it was Wes Streeting) into a car crash this morning just by asking him what his own answer would be to the challenge he was putting to the government.
He has a terrific chance of being PM. All he needs is 2 things: (i) Stay Labour Leader until the GE. (ii) Labour win more seats than the Cons at that GE. The 1st is heavy odds on. He won the leadership by landslide and there is no feasible challenger. And the 2nd is perfectly likely. It's a 2 horse race and in 2017 they came close. 2 of the big 3 "BBC" factors behind the GE19 drubbing, Brexit and Corbyn, will be absent, and the 3rd - "Boris" - might be too, and even if he isn't he will have lost his shine with many.
Without wanting to keep going back to Scotland, the mandate issue is easy to solve. In 2019 the Tories ran on a clear manifesto pledge that a vote for a Tory government is a vote to Get Brexit Done. So the same would be true for an SNP manifesto that a vote for an SNP government is a vote for Sindyref2: The Smell of Salmond Fear.
If - and I'm certain they will - the SNP have the need for a new referendum front and centre of their manifesto, and form the government after the election, the mandate is clear. If Unionists want to pretend there is no mandate and boycott the referendum that is no different to the millions of people who attack governments and politicians but do not vote.
It isn't because without Westminster agreeing the referendum is legal and agreeing to implement its result it is nothing more than a glorified equivalent of Express polls for Nationalist voters if Unionists boycott it, as they would
Of course its more, it would be a legally-held, legally-authorise referendum.
The EU didn't agree to the 2016 UK advisory referendum on EU membership, it was held by the national government. Holyrood is Scotland's national government. Same principle applies exactly.
If Remainers had boycotted the EU referendum then it would still have been won by leavers.
The UK Government had the power to leave the EU by an established legal mechanism that allowed member states to leave. The Scottish Government does not have that power, or they would have done so (referendum or no referendum) a long time ago. There is nothing to stop the SNP holding an independence referendum every year if they feel that it is a good use of public money, but there is also nothing obliging the UK Government to recognise the outcome of such referenda.
As you aren't the mad old dear in Epping I will engage. What you say is *legally* true. But isn't *politically* true. A Scottish government, elected on a manifesto to hold an independence referendum, which then votes to leave. And you're proposing that its politically possible to tell the people of Scotland that its opinions are irrelevant and can be ignored? That the will of the people is irrelevant if you don't like what they want?
Any democracy only functions if based on democratic mandates being respected. "You can vote but we'll ignore you" is how revolutions happen.
Yes, see Spain and Catalonia in 2017 when the Spanish government refused a legal referendum to the Catalan nationalist government.
Catalonia has also not even had one legal independence referendum allowed by Spain's government as Scots were allowed by the UK government in 2014 when they voted against independence.
More half truths from the SUN, unionists really are desperate nowadays. You would hav ethought the red faces they and BBC got last week would have made them think better on making things up.
glad it seems i am not the only one pissed off with tv news hospital coverage at the moment.
I don't think you are the only one. I have had a number of friends message me getting very angry about this, saying they are using up PPE, getting in the way, just let the doctors and nurses do their job.
However, it is tricky. There has obviously been the nutters who claim its all fakery. And I presume they hope that these reports act as a public service to warn people of the dangers of COVID. However, I do wonder, if you don't realise the dangers of it by now, are you actually watching any news coverage or are you just watching conspiracy videos on the internet?
Its a fine balance. I thought the Sky report yesterday where (with the permission of his wife) they interviewed a guy who then died the next day was on the wrong side of the line.
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
It's a comment on the way the story is being reported right now across our media.
Yes but you know it is not true, why spread it for point scoring purposes against an institution we have already left?
It's called listening. Knowing what the non-politically inclined think about an issue means not getting involved in the conversation.
This way leads to Trumpian beliefs. Plenty of people now think there is an EU export ban, and I am being accused of being in denial for saying there is not. There is not an EU export ban, there is a proposal for early notification of exports, which will continue to be allowed.
You're wrong, you're getting it backwards. I like to hear actual facts from Peston not his made up nonsense.
If it were not the case you would need to find something well sourced and truthful that I did not like. If that existed then it would be as you say. I don't dislike anything well sourced and truthful, I like the truth whatever it may be. If he was reporting something well sourced and truthful but I still didn't like it then I would be hypocritical.
Even if something is "bad news", even if something goes against my politics, if a journalist is reporting it "well sourced and truthful" then I don't dislike the messenger for it. Its the truth then and we need to accept it and move on.
The problem is most of what Peston does is speculation that turns out to be wrong.
Actually Peston is repeating the unattributed assertions of people in an under-siege organisation with an agenda. Exactly what the Handelsblatt journalist did.
Now you might say in either case that this is useful insight into the thinking of Astrazeneca and the German Government respectively. Or you might say, these assertions should be tested first. In neither case did the journalist bother with the second part.
Brutal. "What we have instead is a daily commentary on events. Extend universal credit. Pay nurses more. Listen to Marcus Rashford. Vaccinate the teachers first… and police officers, and social workers, immigration officials, prison staff — and even their prisoners — and any other group that makes some noise, so that everyone is a priority."
The Corbyn era literally gutted the Labour Party. What talent they have left mainly sits outside Parliament (Andy Burnham), or chairing Committees (Hilary Benn, Yvette Cooper), or outside politics completely (Tom Watson, Ed Balls).
They have no programme or even big ideas because they have no idea what they stand for or even their purpose. Unfortunately the break with being run by the union movement done by Blair has largely been reversed. The TUs still stick significant cash and influence into the party both locally and nationally, and the big ones are increasingly bonkers if not actually insane. I don't know where they go next, but Keith Brittas doesn't have enough political nous to lead them anywhere.
Honestly, I've been wondering if Labour wouldn't actually be better off if they were more influenced by the unions these days. At least then there's a chance they'd move away from constantly calling everyone who disagrees with them a bigot.
Certainly the immediate challenge is to win back the northern seats lost because the white working class no longer believed the party was much interested in them anymore, and it seems likely that the unions have their finger on that particular pulse. Or am I wrong, and are the unions now also run by metropolitan liberals obsessed with playing identity politics?
Some truth in that without going as far as Corbyn to the left, Kinnock ran quite a working class focused campaign in 1992 and he won a higher number of Labour MPs in that general election than any other Labour leader has done since 1974 at a general election bar Blair.
glad it seems i am not the only one pissed off with tv news hospital coverage at the moment.
Given there are people still claiming "empty hospitals" or "false positives" or "its not real" then a bit of education as to what is going on, even if it causes despair, may be a good thing.
People need the facts. If the facts are sad, they still need the facts.
glad it seems i am not the only one pissed off with tv news hospital coverage at the moment.
I don't think you are the only one. I have had a number of friends message me getting very angry about this, saying they are using up PPE, getting in the way, just let the doctors and nurses do their job.
However, it is tricky. There has obviously been the nutters who claim its all fakery. And I presume they hope that these reports act as a public service to warn people of the dangers of COVID. However, I do wonder, if you don't realise the dangers of it by now, are you actually watching any news coverage or are you just watching conspiracy videos on the internet?
Its a fine balance.
Indeed. Janet Daley argues that the hard core rule breakers holding parties and so on have switched off long ago and will certainly not be bothering to watch tv news.
This stuff is just scaring people witless who are already scared.
Just catching up on last night's thread and this morning's. There's clearly a lot of animosity towards the EU, some of it last night rather belligerent.
It seems to me that the time has come to have a referendum on leaving the EU. If we leave, we won't be able to blame Brussels bureaucrats, France or Germany etc. any more, and we can live in harmony with our European friends and neighbours.
Edit - somebody's just told me that we have left the EU. Who'd have thought it?
Amusing, but what does it have to do with criticising a neighbouring entity if appropriate. Still blaming the EU for UK problems is not the same as criticising EU actions or words, if appropriate, and confrontation even between friends can be very justified, surely no one would suggest there never being rows.
I don't disagree really, of course friends can have rows and disagree.
I just found the level of hostility and several mentions of 'this could lead to war' on here last night pretty distasteful. I prefer diplomacy to aggression, I guess.
As does everyone but in this case the hostility originated from within the Commission at least one Member state senior minister and within the German government - no doubt out of frustration at their own cock-up - but that is where it began.
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
It's a comment on the way the story is being reported right now across our media.
Yes but you know it is not true, why spread it for point scoring purposes against an institution we have already left?
It's called listening. Knowing what the non-politically inclined think about an issue means not getting involved in the conversation.
This way leads to Trumpian beliefs. Plenty of people now think there is an EU export ban, and I am being accused of being in denial for saying there is not. There is not an EU export ban, there is a proposal for early notification of exports, which will continue to be allowed.
It's still about generating political pressure. If they give notification of something being exported, they can expect a tabloid smear campaign to follow.
You're wrong, you're getting it backwards. I like to hear actual facts from Peston not his made up nonsense.
If it were not the case you would need to find something well sourced and truthful that I did not like. If that existed then it would be as you say. I don't dislike anything well sourced and truthful, I like the truth whatever it may be. If he was reporting something well sourced and truthful but I still didn't like it then I would be hypocritical.
Even if something is "bad news", even if something goes against my politics, if a journalist is reporting it "well sourced and truthful" then I don't dislike the messenger for it. Its the truth then and we need to accept it and move on.
The problem is most of what Peston does is speculation that turns out to be wrong.
Actually Peston is repeating the unattributed assertions of people in an under-siege organisation with an agenda. Exactly what the Handelsblatt journalist did.
Now you might say in either case that this is useful insight into the thinking of Astrazeneca and the German Government respectively. Or you might say, these assertions should be tested first. In neither case did the journalist bother with the second part.
Actually they're not unasserted.
The dates the contracts were signed are not an "assertion" to be tested, they are a matter of public record. The fact the UK contract was signed three months earlier is not an "assertion" to be tested, it is a matter of public record. The fact the UK programme, begun three months earlier, also had problems is not an "assertion" to be tested, it is a matter of public record.
Which "assertion" do you see that needs testing? As opposed to a cogent sequencing of facts that are all a matter of public record?
More half truths from the SUN, unionists really are desperate nowadays. You would hav ethought the red faces they and BBC got last week would have made them think better on making things up.
What are you disputing - and where are your sources, malcy?
Does the UK have J&J doses? How many and on what timescale?
30m initial order, priority delivery timescale (starting in April), 22m option for H2 delivery.
*EU eyes look on, enviously....*
Nah, the EU has done well on this, procured a 200m order which is around the same as us on a per capita basis. The delivery schedule is slower though, reflecting the later order date and price bargaining.
Just as well there's no urgenc..................oh....wait!
glad it seems i am not the only one pissed off with tv news hospital coverage at the moment.
I don't think you are the only one. I have had a number of friends message me getting very angry about this, saying they are using up PPE, getting in the way, just let the doctors and nurses do their job.
However, it is tricky. There has obviously been the nutters who claim its all fakery. And I presume they hope that these reports act as a public service to warn people of the dangers of COVID. However, I do wonder, if you don't realise the dangers of it by now, are you actually watching any news coverage or are you just watching conspiracy videos on the internet?
Its a fine balance. I thought the Sky report yesterday where (with the permission of his wife) they interviewed a guy who then died the next day was on the wrong side of the line.
There are a surprising number of people who are managing no to know about the situation.
I've even had people telling me not to tell them stuff - because it is "too upsetting". So telling people that it is a bad idea to meet-up with your friends for a jolly is wrong because, it hurts their feelings....
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
"In the future, all companies producing vaccines against COVID-19 in the EU will have to provide early notification whenever they want to export vaccines to third countries," she added.
An export "ban" that requires "early notification" to be able to export is simply not an export ban. Cocaine smugglers cant get around the ban on exporting cocaine by providing early notification.
Then what is the purpose of reporting the information?
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
It's a comment on the way the story is being reported right now across our media.
Yes but you know it is not true, why spread it for point scoring purposes against an institution we have already left?
It's called listening. Knowing what the non-politically inclined think about an issue means not getting involved in the conversation.
This way leads to Trumpian beliefs. Plenty of people now think there is an EU export ban, and I am being accused of being in denial for saying there is not. There is not an EU export ban, there is a proposal for early notification of exports, which will continue to be allowed.
Not really, the early notice system is being put in place for something. What legitimate reason can you think of for the EU to ask for this information? I can't think of anything.
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
"In the future, all companies producing vaccines against COVID-19 in the EU will have to provide early notification whenever they want to export vaccines to third countries," she added.
An export "ban" that requires "early notification" to be able to export is simply not an export ban. Cocaine smugglers cant get around the ban on exporting cocaine by providing early notification.
What is the point of having a notification scheme if you are never going to deny permission?
So they can track what is happening if they don't believe what the companies are telling them.
Except their gripe is solely with one company, that is mostly producing outside the EU. Knowing what Pfizer are exporting to us and the US doesn't tell them anything useful, especially if they don't know what the contracts say.
Edit: personally, I think this is classic displacement activity. The EU is just getting its ducks in a row so they can explain in April-June how the fact that the UK and US are both much further along in their vaccination programs is due to enemy action, not their own incompetence.
Brutal. "What we have instead is a daily commentary on events. Extend universal credit. Pay nurses more. Listen to Marcus Rashford. Vaccinate the teachers first… and police officers, and social workers, immigration officials, prison staff — and even their prisoners — and any other group that makes some noise, so that everyone is a priority."
The Corbyn era literally gutted the Labour Party. What talent they have left mainly sits outside Parliament (Andy Burnham), or chairing Committees (Hilary Benn, Yvette Cooper), or outside politics completely (Tom Watson, Ed Balls).
They have no programme or even big ideas because they have no idea what they stand for or even their purpose. Unfortunately the break with being run by the union movement done by Blair has largely been reversed. The TUs still stick significant cash and influence into the party both locally and nationally, and the big ones are increasingly bonkers if not actually insane. I don't know where they go next, but Keith Brittas doesn't have enough political nous to lead them anywhere.
Honestly, I've been wondering if Labour wouldn't actually be better off if they were more influenced by the unions these days. At least then there's a chance they'd move away from constantly calling everyone who disagrees with them a bigot.
Certainly the immediate challenge is to win back the northern seats lost because the white working class no longer believed the party was much interested in them anymore, and it seems likely that the unions have their finger on that particular pulse. Or am I wrong, and are the unions now also run by metropolitan liberals obsessed with playing identity politics?
The problem with being run as the political wing of the TUC is that it will only push the positions and policies relevant to TUCs. With the majority of people not in a union that would turn the Labour Party into a fairly specialist body speaking to an ever-diminishing catchment. Yes, more people would benefit from union membership but having been a GMB member for a bit I quit when I realised they were almost as bonkers as Unite. Remember that in recent political memory the FBU wanted a 40% pay rise for firefighters and were willing to strike for it. Crackers.
Sir Kier might be be Labour's Kinnock? The wait for Labour's Blair continues...
Well still better than Corbyn, Labour's Foot.
Though of course even Kinnock nearly became PM in a hung parliament in 1992 with the LDs.
Labour does not need Blair style landslides a la 1997 or 2001 to win power.
Kinnock was quite a long way short in 1992. Labour won 271 seats, and 291 had a deal been done with Ashdown. That's well short of the 336 required.
I know there's always the "if X people in Y constituencies had voted differently..." Fine - but things don't really work that way. The polls were some way off in 1992, and Labour weren't all that close.
The Tories got 336 seats in 1992 and the Unionists got 10 MPs, Labour and the LDs and the SNP and PC and the SDLP got 302 MPs combined so it would only have taken Labour winning an extra 23 seats off the Tories and Kinnock would probably have been able to form a government in a hung parliament.
That's not particularly close. It wasn't a landslide but Major was a good 7% clear.
It's also doubtful that a rainbow coalition would have been feasible in the scenario you suggest. Ashdown wouldn't have gone in with the Tories as Clegg did (in the very different situation of the financial crisis). But the same logic - that a multiparty coalition with a majority of one or not much more could not survive - would have applied and it's likely there would have been a further election very shortly with Major hobbling on in the interim.
There is a mythology around 1992 being a toss-up election. The truth is the polls said it was but they were very wrong as it turns out.
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
"In the future, all companies producing vaccines against COVID-19 in the EU will have to provide early notification whenever they want to export vaccines to third countries," she added.
An export "ban" that requires "early notification" to be able to export is simply not an export ban. Cocaine smugglers cant get around the ban on exporting cocaine by providing early notification.
What is the point of having a notification scheme if you are never going to deny permission?
So they can track what is happening if they don't believe what the companies are telling them.
Do the contracts with the companies specifically blocking them from demanding these data mean nothing?
Brutal. "What we have instead is a daily commentary on events. Extend universal credit. Pay nurses more. Listen to Marcus Rashford. Vaccinate the teachers first… and police officers, and social workers, immigration officials, prison staff — and even their prisoners — and any other group that makes some noise, so that everyone is a priority."
The Corbyn era literally gutted the Labour Party. What talent they have left mainly sits outside Parliament (Andy Burnham), or chairing Committees (Hilary Benn, Yvette Cooper), or outside politics completely (Tom Watson, Ed Balls).
They have no programme or even big ideas because they have no idea what they stand for or even their purpose. Unfortunately the break with being run by the union movement done by Blair has largely been reversed. The TUs still stick significant cash and influence into the party both locally and nationally, and the big ones are increasingly bonkers if not actually insane. I don't know where they go next, but Keith Brittas doesn't have enough political nous to lead them anywhere.
Honestly, I've been wondering if Labour wouldn't actually be better off if they were more influenced by the unions these days. At least then there's a chance they'd move away from constantly calling everyone who disagrees with them a bigot.
Certainly the immediate challenge is to win back the northern seats lost because the white working class no longer believed the party was much interested in them anymore, and it seems likely that the unions have their finger on that particular pulse. Or am I wrong, and are the unions now also run by metropolitan liberals obsessed with playing identity politics?
"Labour calling everyone who disagrees with them a bigot." This statement does not come from Labour calling everyone who disagrees with them a bigot. It comes from those on the right endlessly repeating what is said by others on the right about Labour calling everyone who disagrees with them a bigot.
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
There is no EU vaccine export ban. If you are rightly aggrieved by the German misreporting of the efficacy, why is it ok to misrepresent the EU position on vaccine exports?
Antagonising EU-UK relations further on fake news is just as unhelpful, the EU are considering a reporting requirement, even that does not exist and may or may not be implemented - it is very different to a ban.
It's a comment on the way the story is being reported right now across our media.
Yes but you know it is not true, why spread it for point scoring purposes against an institution we have already left?
It's called listening. Knowing what the non-politically inclined think about an issue means not getting involved in the conversation.
This way leads to Trumpian beliefs. Plenty of people now think there is an EU export ban, and I am being accused of being in denial for saying there is not. There is not an EU export ban, there is a proposal for early notification of exports, which will continue to be allowed.
Not really, the early notice system is being put in place for something. What legitimate reason can you think of for the EU to ask for this information? I can't think of anything.
They dont believe the vaccine companies are being honest with them about manufacture and distribution? They need to be seen to be doing something? They want to put pressure on the vaccine companies? They may even use the data to consider restricting supply?
What price is anyone willing to lay me on there being covid 19 vaccine exported from the EU to third countries? I will accept evens that they are allowed for any month of your choice up to £100 from 5 people. If I win I will donate the money to NHS Charities Together, if you win you can do what you like with the money.
Given that the UK production of the supply was begun three months earlier, because the UK government signed its contract with the EU three months earlier, then what possible reason is there to acquiesce to this?
Ludicrous. They should have put pen to paper back in June when they were ready to do so rather than frit around for months to ensure there was an EU flag on the project.
It's fairly depressing that the best summary of the rampant obstructionism by the Scottish government to the inquiry can be found on a website like that. Why are our press and media not on this all day every day?
This story is slowly making its way into the public consciousness and lots of my remain voting friends are starting to notice the EU vaccine export ban. One is saying "see we shouldn't have left" the rest think the idea is absolutely horrible and it's turning them against the EU.
I didn't know you were a good friend of Scott n Paste...
Question. Is it pasting tweets itself that you dislike - the way they format on a phone perhaps - or the content of the tweets?
Dismissing them as a blanket suggests some irritation about the things the tweets are saying that you would prefer weren't made so public...
Its the posting of 100 tweets that say essentially the same thing on the same story. Plus many are from sources such as total nobodies with a 100 followers, which are invariably dubious in accuracy or from the same cliche of people with their predictable rant. It just clogs up the thread. While he offers none of his own insight, just Bozo is crap, heres yet another tweet saying so.
No issue with a tweet or two on a particular story. That why I come here to find out information.
For me it's more the lack of consideration for PB as a forum for discussion. Tweets are reproduced here with zero commentary, as if PB is 'a retweet'. But it isn't - the Tweet should aid or be presented to stimulate discussion, otherwise we are just Twitter. If done occasionally, this isn't an issue - if done all the time, it's spam.
I think that's fair. When I post tweets there is commentary on it from me .
Brutal. "What we have instead is a daily commentary on events. Extend universal credit. Pay nurses more. Listen to Marcus Rashford. Vaccinate the teachers first… and police officers, and social workers, immigration officials, prison staff — and even their prisoners — and any other group that makes some noise, so that everyone is a priority."
The Corbyn era literally gutted the Labour Party. What talent they have left mainly sits outside Parliament (Andy Burnham), or chairing Committees (Hilary Benn, Yvette Cooper), or outside politics completely (Tom Watson, Ed Balls).
They have no programme or even big ideas because they have no idea what they stand for or even their purpose. Unfortunately the break with being run by the union movement done by Blair has largely been reversed. The TUs still stick significant cash and influence into the party both locally and nationally, and the big ones are increasingly bonkers if not actually insane. I don't know where they go next, but Keith Brittas doesn't have enough political nous to lead them anywhere.
Honestly, I've been wondering if Labour wouldn't actually be better off if they were more influenced by the unions these days. At least then there's a chance they'd move away from constantly calling everyone who disagrees with them a bigot.
Certainly the immediate challenge is to win back the northern seats lost because the white working class no longer believed the party was much interested in them anymore, and it seems likely that the unions have their finger on that particular pulse. Or am I wrong, and are the unions now also run by metropolitan liberals obsessed with playing identity politics?
"Labour calling everyone who disagrees with them a bigot." This statement does not come from Labour calling everyone who disagrees with them a bigot. It comes from those on the right endlessly repeating what is said by others on the right about Labour calling everyone who disagrees with them a bigot.
Comments
I know there's always the "if X people in Y constituencies had voted differently..." Fine - but things don't really work that way. The polls were some way off in 1992, and Labour weren't all that close.
Expectation management...i am sure Labour will do fine. Government good.on vaccines, but poor on so many other things.
I've no idea what "Dezzy" thinks.
https://www.euronews.com/2021/01/25/covid-19-vaccine-eu-puts-pressure-on-astrazeneca-over-delivery-delays
We can illustrate using me instead of you. So, this story today. It goes against one of my core beliefs - that the EU is a benign and competent institution - but at the same time it looks to me to be solid. It's a piece of quality Pesto.
This, then, is an example of objective-to-a-fault me liking Pesto even though I don't like what he's saying. Ok? Ok.
So we are looking for an equivalent example from you. That's all. Then it's over.
Hit me.
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-vaccine-tracker-global-distribution/
I guess we could shout at that them really loud and threaten to sue them....
Not usually one for Twitter but this is great.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/01/26/eus-coronavirus-jabs-may-have-ended-britain/
Conclusion: Nowhere large (not even the UK) will be out of the woods by Easter, lockdown relaxations will happen because of nice summer weather, most places won't need to reimpose much in the autumn.
Meanwhile, in other news...
https://twitter.com/padraichalpin/status/1354040713802096641?s=19
The Corbyn era literally gutted the Labour Party. What talent they have left mainly sits outside Parliament (Andy Burnham), or chairing Committees (Hilary Benn, Yvette Cooper), or outside politics completely (Tom Watson, Ed Balls).
They have no programme or even big ideas because they have no idea what they stand for or even their purpose. Unfortunately the break with being run by the union movement done by Blair has largely been reversed. The TUs still stick significant cash and influence into the party both locally and nationally, and the big ones are increasingly bonkers if not actually insane. I don't know where they go next, but Keith Brittas doesn't have enough political nous to lead them anywhere.
You can imagine that J&J, being slightly later to the party, may have considered it worth the risk to trial a single-dose regime as that would be a selling point against the earlier vaccines if still effective. I don't know what actually happened/reasons for doing it this way - happy to be educated!
I just found the level of hostility and several mentions of 'this could lead to war' on here last night pretty distasteful. I prefer diplomacy to aggression, I guess.
The idea of McDonnell as Chancellor was horrific.
The idea of Dodds as Chancellor . . . it is just blank, it is impossible to picture her presenting a Budget.
SKS might be PM one day, though I'm hopeful he won't - nobody who sat in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet deserves to - but Dodds will never be Chancellor.
"In the future, all companies producing vaccines against COVID-19 in the EU will have to provide early notification whenever they want to export vaccines to third countries," she added.
An export "ban" that requires "early notification" to be able to export is simply not an export ban. Cocaine smugglers cant get around the ban on exporting cocaine by providing early notification.
Any democracy only functions if based on democratic mandates being respected. "You can vote but we'll ignore you" is how revolutions happen.
It was clear on Euro news this morning that an export ban is actively being considered and confirmed by the Irish Minister in the interview
Furthermore, Euro news confirmed the Commission has sent the proposal to all 27 countries
It is a PR disaster for the EU
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9187573/Tearful-Nadhim-Zahawi-reveals-uncle-killed-coronavirus-receive-vaccine.html
Certainly the immediate challenge is to win back the northern seats lost because the white working class no longer believed the party was much interested in them anymore, and it seems likely that the unions have their finger on that particular pulse. Or am I wrong, and are the unions now also run by metropolitan liberals obsessed with playing identity politics?
Just a coincidence of timing, I'd imagine...
https://order-order.com/2021/01/26/french-vaccine-abandoned-after-disappointing-phase-1-trials-poorlittleeu/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/25/manipulative-broadcasters-intrusive-reports-hospitals-simply/
glad it seems i am not the only one pissed off with tv news hospital coverage at the moment.
SNP: If re-elected, that will be a clear mandate for an independence vote
Tories: If you vote to re-elect the SNP you voted wrong and we will ignore you.
I don't think so. No politician can go the electorate and say "unless you vote to agree with my position we will ignore you".
AstraZeneca has offered to bring forward some deliveries of its COVID-19 vaccine to the European Union while the bloc has asked the British drugmaker if it can divert doses from the UK to make up for a shortfall in supplies, European officials told Reuters.
then it's every country for itself..
Furthermore, the Irish Minister confirmed it as well saying the EU has to look after it's own citizens
All he needs is 2 things: (i) Stay Labour Leader until the GE. (ii) Labour win more seats than the Cons at that GE.
The 1st is heavy odds on. He won the leadership by landslide and there is no feasible challenger. And the 2nd is perfectly likely. It's a 2 horse race and in 2017 they came close. 2 of the big 3 "BBC" factors behind the GE19 drubbing, Brexit and Corbyn, will be absent, and the 3rd - "Boris" - might be too, and even if he isn't he will have lost his shine with many.
Catalonia has also not even had one legal independence referendum allowed by Spain's government as Scots were allowed by the UK government in 2014 when they voted against independence.
However, it is tricky. There has obviously been the nutters who claim its all fakery. And I presume they hope that these reports act as a public service to warn people of the dangers of COVID. However, I do wonder, if you don't realise the dangers of it by now, are you actually watching any news coverage or are you just watching conspiracy videos on the internet?
Its a fine balance. I thought the Sky report yesterday where (with the permission of his wife) they interviewed a guy who then died the next day was on the wrong side of the line.
Now you might say in either case that this is useful insight into the thinking of Astrazeneca and the German Government respectively. Or you might say, these assertions should be tested first. In neither case did the journalist bother with the second part.
People need the facts. If the facts are sad, they still need the facts.
This stuff is just scaring people witless who are already scared.
https://twitter.com/Andrew_Adonis/status/1353979155357065217
The dates the contracts were signed are not an "assertion" to be tested, they are a matter of public record.
The fact the UK contract was signed three months earlier is not an "assertion" to be tested, it is a matter of public record.
The fact the UK programme, begun three months earlier, also had problems is not an "assertion" to be tested, it is a matter of public record.
Which "assertion" do you see that needs testing? As opposed to a cogent sequencing of facts that are all a matter of public record?
Edit: Reading the comments, the answer is Yes. Good!
I've even had people telling me not to tell them stuff - because it is "too upsetting". So telling people that it is a bad idea to meet-up with your friends for a jolly is wrong because, it hurts their feelings....
Edit: personally, I think this is classic displacement activity. The EU is just getting its ducks in a row so they can explain in April-June how the fact that the UK and US are both much further along in their vaccination programs is due to enemy action, not their own incompetence.
A few days ago La Toynbee was fretting Boris might call and win an election in 2022...
https://twitter.com/b_judah/status/1354051145828868096?s=20
It's also doubtful that a rainbow coalition would have been feasible in the scenario you suggest. Ashdown wouldn't have gone in with the Tories as Clegg did (in the very different situation of the financial crisis). But the same logic - that a multiparty coalition with a majority of one or not much more could not survive - would have applied and it's likely there would have been a further election very shortly with Major hobbling on in the interim.
There is a mythology around 1992 being a toss-up election. The truth is the polls said it was but they were very wrong as it turns out.
This statement does not come from Labour calling everyone who disagrees with them a bigot. It comes from those on the right endlessly repeating what is said by others on the right about Labour calling everyone who disagrees with them a bigot.
They need to be seen to be doing something?
They want to put pressure on the vaccine companies?
They may even use the data to consider restricting supply?
What price is anyone willing to lay me on there being covid 19 vaccine exported from the EU to third countries? I will accept evens that they are allowed for any month of your choice up to £100 from 5 people. If I win I will donate the money to NHS Charities Together, if you win you can do what you like with the money.
Any takers? If not, lets stop calling it a ban?
Ludicrous. They should have put pen to paper back in June when they were ready to do so rather than frit around for months to ensure there was an EU flag on the project.
The fact they are suggesting a border poll is because they think it will play well across both countries regardless of the stance of both Governments.
And I suspect the disaster that is Brexit (when you look at it from Irish eyes) may be worth (as a minimum) a few votes to Sinn Fein.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3F_ly9xSqQ
Brown's response when he hears 'Someone's just handed me the tape, let's play it' is monumental, like a great overloaded edifice silently imploding...
Kleenex shares rocket at the Daily Express....