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.
1992 was the closest general election at the time however since 1974.
Today's Yougov gives Tories 308, Labour 255, SNP 58 and LDs 6 with electoral calculus so even closer than 1992 and Starmer would probably become PM in a hung parliament with SNP and LD support
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.
Fair enough. My view of Frances O'Grady is reasonably positive, with the caveats that I agree with her on exactly nothing and don't exactly follow her statements closely. Even with union membership declining, it seems crackers to me that they can't figure out a platform that would resonate with about half the country, including a decent chunk of swing voters, but I'm certainly not complaining.
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?
That the reason for AZ failing to deliver on the contract was due to the EU being slow in signing that contract. In fact, the source contradicts themselves in the very thread by saying we don't blame the EU. Peston doesn't check this assertion with the EU.
glad it seems i am not the only one pissed off with tv news hospital coverage at the moment.
It's necessary. The daily death toll has just become a set of numbers which wash over people. Putting some faces on what Covid actually means knocks a bit of reality back into those parts of the public who don't want to see it. Well, tough: a thousand people a day dying who don't need to should not be background noise.
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.
And also, does that chain of supply not need specific regulatory approval in the EU?
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?
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.
The problem, especially with mega unions like Unite, is that the link between the top of the union and the people they're supposed to represent is utterly broken.
Len McCluskey isn't a union man representing his colleagues - he is a politician who is at the top of a rather unique party.
Unite is simply an institution now, not a union. McCluskey has no more understanding of a regular union workers lifestyle and issues than Johnson does of a voter sat on a bus.
The whole thing now is politics - and institutional behemoth politics.
I've said it before, small and nimble is better than behemothic and sclerotic. That applies to unions as much as any other institution.
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.
We've always had a surfeit of tory armchair special forces who never dreamed of taking the shilling themselves.
glad it seems i am not the only one pissed off with tv news hospital coverage at the moment.
It's necessary. The daily death toll has just become a set of numbers which wash over people. Putting some faces on what Covid actually means knocks a bit of reality back into those parts of the public who don't want to see it. Well, tough: a thousand people a day dying who don't need to should not be background noise.
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.
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.
Couldn't agree more. Maybe if there'd been more of this stuff in March (I don't recall any) then perhaps the "it's just flu/doesn't exist/only affects the ancient, sick and obese" stuff might not have got such traction.
Sinn Fein explicitly calling for a border poll is a change in stance.
Even the Irish government opposes a border poll within the next 5 years
Hesitate to dip toe in murky waters, but I'd heard opinions that the south wouldn't want to pay for the cost of Northern Ireland.
Oh they don't, which is why Sinn Fein talking about a Border poll is interesting (not because their Northern voters don't want to hear such things, but because Southern voters absolutely hated the idea so Sinn Fein always avoided the topic).
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.
No, it doesn't. It comes from those on the right observing what's actually happening in the world.
Have you never seen, for example, Dawn Butler being interviewed? Her performance on the 2019 local elections results show was just one unfounded accusation after another.
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.
Yes, but I saw the word "Labour" and mentally substituted it for "Momentum" at which point it works. Starmer HAS to purge the party within a party or its hopeless.
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.
And if it makes people think again before organising an illegal get-together it is well worth it.
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.
1992 was the closest general election at the time however since 1974.
It doesn't have much in the way of competition in terms of elections since 1974, to be fair!
1983 and 1987 were massive landslides and, in 1979, Thatcher won a larger majority but with a slightly smaller vote lead than Major enjoyed.
I'd also read almost nothing into seat calculators three years out from an election.
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 .
Sometimes I will post without comment, but the tweet is usually one I know people on here would be interested and I can't think of any comment that is worth adding..
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?
Keep tabs.
Does nobody care that "keeping tabs" is specifically ruled out in the signed contracts?
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.
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...
Brown wasn't calling *everyone* a bigot. Just "that woman" who was a proper Rochdale bigot. They aren't racist, they just say what they think unfiltered (that's Lancashire lasses for thee). And what a lot of people her age do is automatically label non-whites and box them off as not proper like them. My dad does it...
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?
Maybe the press & media that compared Salmond to the Moors murderers & Dennis Nilsen and had him convicted & imprisoned before the trial started have had an attack of queasiness over running with 'Justice for Salmond'.
In fairness, Adonis has posted a reply to his own post making clear he means The Times wouldn't have carried it pre-Brexit.
I'm not at all sure he's correct on that. But he's not claiming that Sinn Fein are supporting a united Ireland due to Brexit, which would be daft.
I do think people should be careful not to willfully misinterpret tweets to attribute to people views that they've been clear they don't hold.
Yes, I noticed that too afterwards so my apologies for any confusion.
I don't believe it's correct either as the media didn't shun SF during the Troubles and found ways to (quite rightly) get around the broadcasting restrictions that were put in place. I also doubt that it's the first time that SF have called for a border poll, Martin McGuinness called for one after indyref 1. There's been a lot of half hearted demands for one that have appeared serious requests over the last 10-15 years.
No, it doesn't. It comes from those on the right observing what's actually happening in the world.
Have you never seen, for example, Dawn Butler being interviewed? Her performance on the 2019 local elections results show was just one unfounded accusation after another.
Dawn Butler and her ilk are everything that has broken in the Labour Party.
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.
The big SKS and Labour fail at the moment is not taking advantage of one of the few benefits of opposition, at a time when it is critical: In opposition you can state regularly, clearly and consistently the correct solution to problems which are in fact insoluble, so that you can be seen as innovative, correct and a government in waiting, better than the present lot. In opposition every government fail proves you are right, and every government success proves that they have partially taken your advice.
In Blair they have a text book of how it is done.
By now we should have an unequivocal idea in our heads of how Labour will solve: Covid 19 Brexit Scotland Debt Deficit Trade deals NHS Tax avoidance by everyone richer than oneself Housing The wealth gap between young and old
and all the other insoluble problems of our day.
The fact that none of them will be true is of course irrelevant.
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?
Keep tabs.
Does nobody care that "keeping tabs" is specifically ruled out in the signed contracts?
Precisely. It is the companies job to keep tabs according to the contracts it signed - in some case 3+ months before other contacts.
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....*
The generous, outward looking "Spirit of Leave".
Proving once more that Brexit was not driven by xenophobic, Little Englander antipathy towards the continent, but by a rational and mature realization that the UK was not a good fit in an ever more integrated European Union.
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.
Yes, but I saw the word "Labour" and mentally substituted it for "Momentum" at which point it works. Starmer HAS to purge the party within a party or its hopeless.
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....
There is, however, a difference between not wanting to follow the daily details because it is simply too grim, and blithely ignoring inconvenient facts. If you are struggling with your mental health, turning off the news is one practical and effective step. I know plenty who are doing so, including members of my own family. Incidentally, I feel this might be a partial reason the polls are static. Large numbers simply aren't following the ins and outs.
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...
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.
1992 was the closest general election at the time however since 1974.
It doesn't have much in the way of competition in terms of elections since 1974, to be fair!
1983 and 1987 were massive landslides and, in 1979, Thatcher won a larger majority but with a slightly smaller vote lead than Major enjoyed.
I'd also read almost nothing into seat calculators three years out from an election.
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.
Here's one off the top of my head. The EU produces 10 of something it needs and finds out that nine of them will be exported.
It then informs its Member States so they can be prepared or ramp up production or take other mitigating action.
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....*
The generous, outward looking "Spirit of Leave".
Proving once more that Brexit was not driven by xenophobic, Little Englander antipathy towards the continent, but by a rational and mature realization that the UK was not a good fit in an ever more integrated European Union.
Absolutely. 100%.
The one thing the EU got directly involved in was vaccines and as a result they have shown itself to be a bureaucratic, shambling and dare I say sclerotic mess.
The UK has shown itself to be innovative, quick and dare I say nimble in achieving better results - with contracts signed three months earlier and a rollout that is working.
Germany and other nations had contracts ready to sign in June. Because of the EU interference they weren't signed for another couple of months causing needless delay resulting in what we see today.
A perfect realisation that demonstrates exactly what some of us have said here.
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....*
The generous, outward looking "Spirit of Leave".
Proving once more that Brexit was not driven by xenophobic, Little Englander antipathy towards the continent, but by a rational and mature realization that the UK was not a good fit in an ever more integrated European Union.
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.
Any takers? If not, lets stop calling it a ban?
Let's reverse the roles here. Boris is putting in an export monitoring system that will blow up commerical confidentiality of contracts signed by AZ and subcontractors based in the UK, what legitimate reasons would they have to do that?
Also, there's no such thing as "fair" distribution. There is contracted distribution.
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.
Here's one off the top of my head. The EU produces 10 of something it needs and finds out that nine of them will be exported.
It then informs its Member States so they can be prepared or ramp up production or take other mitigating action.
What's the EU producing? 🤔
I thought companies were producing something. I didn't realise the EU was producing anything? It isn't news that companies are exporting as per the contracts they have signed.
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.
Yep, bad wording from me. What I meant was that if J&J is pretty good as a single dose (when the results are public), that doesn't necessarily mean that they've done something unique in creating a single dose vaccine*, just in doing successful trials on a single dose vaccine. Pfizer and AZN might also be quite effective as a single dose vaccine, that's just untested (there's some data available after the first dose becomes effective and before the second dose which seems to show single dose is quite protective in the short term, but we don't know how long that will last without the second dose, as not tested, unlike for the J&J trial).
*or have they? Is there something fundamentally different in mechanism of action that makes it likely to be more suited to a single dose than the others?
Edit: Oh and interesting on the J&J two dose trial, thanks. Will be interesting whether that does make much difference or not.
I wonder if Hodges and Cohen and many on here, will be as hot on these 'spreaders of disinformation' as they are on Toby Young and JHB.
Everyone makes mistakes. The difference is if when you are presented with proof you're wrong, you double down and ignore it, or take responsibility and update your views accordingly.
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....*
The generous, outward looking "Spirit of Leave".
Proving once more that Brexit was not driven by xenophobic, Little Englander antipathy towards the continent, but by a rational and mature realization that the UK was not a good fit in an ever more integrated European Union.
I agree - vaccine triumphalism is too early and in poor taste.
I also think we need to check where Johnson and Johnson are manufacturing their vaccines as a matter of priority....
glad it seems i am not the only one pissed off with tv news hospital coverage at the moment.
It's necessary. The daily death toll has just become a set of numbers which wash over people. Putting some faces on what Covid actually means knocks a bit of reality back into those parts of the public who don't want to see it. Well, tough: a thousand people a day dying who don't need to should not be background noise.
It is also a useful corrective to the Covid deniers, lockdown sceptics, anti vaxxers and other assorted numbskulls who think the whole thing is a giant hoax or conspiracy.
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....
There is, however, a difference between not wanting to follow the daily details because it is simply too grim, and blithely ignoring inconvenient facts. If you are struggling with your mental health, turning off the news is one practical and effective step. I know plenty who are doing so, including members of my own family. Incidentally, I feel this might be a partial reason the polls are static. Large numbers simply aren't following the ins and outs.
The problem is that this becomes - "I must have a foreign holiday in Feb. For my sanity. What do you mean that I won't be able to travel? That is rude...."
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.
Here's one off the top of my head. The EU produces 10 of something it needs and finds out that nine of them will be exported.
It then informs its Member States so they can be prepared or ramp up production or take other mitigating action.
Expect a lot more of those situations over the next few years.
Is this to be the persona of Global Britain then? Nimble and taking shortcuts?
The Del Boy Trotter of international trade. Lovely Jubbly!
@Philip_Thompson will be tickled pink at the 'nimble' from that EU diplomat - and rightly so on this occasion!
Not my idea of what our post-Brexit MO should be, but I guess it is true that Trotters Inc was not "sclerotic".
This time next year we'll have a trade deal with the whole world!
In April we could have said "this time next year we'll be vaccine millionaires", and you and every other anti brexit poster would have scoffed as loudly as you could.
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.
The headline is. Did you read the linked statement from Kyriakides?
Better still I have been listening to Euro news this morning who confirmed the commission has sent the export ban proposal to all 27 nations
Furthermore, the Irish Minister confirmed it as well saying the EU has to look after it's own citizens
Is it an export ban proposal or is it an export transparency mechanism?
The companies concerned have confidentiality arrangements in the contracts.
The EU themselves signed confidentiality clauses in their contracts.
Now you talk about "transparency"? Pull the other one, this is shit stirring to get away from the fact that the EU screwed up, signed contracts months later than other nations, so aren't at the front of the queue.
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 .
I find that they are often posted in support of a comment or line of discussion. For example:
@Philip_Thompson: There will be no disruption as a result of Brexit for Northern Ireland.
Me (and everyone sentient): There will be disruption as a result of the NI protocol
I don't know why the EU are getting so het up on number of vaccine deliveries, outside of Germany and Italy, most countries were doing bugger all anyway, combination of anti-vaxxering, red-tape requiring GP appointments before you can even get a jab and shear laziness where always next week will do to start vaccinating properly as if they are about to start some new diet.
I wonder if Hodges and Cohen and many on here, will be as hot on these 'spreaders of disinformation' as they are on Toby Young and JHB.
I know I should have known better, and indeed posted on my scepticism last night about the 8 % nonsense, but I still found it a depressing and slightly worrying few hours. We are in such a disasterous situation that the consequences if it had been true we too awful to think about. I really think whoever is at fault for this needs public shaming and should be made to apologise. As others have said, there is genuine vaccine hesitancy and reluctance. A totally incorrect story like this, however 'well intentioned' (assuming it was), genuinely could claim lives.
I can deal with the innumeracy of the daily ups and downs of cases and deaths (deaths increased today from yesterday and on and on and on...), but this was of a different order. Making a huge claim, without actually getting the facts right? That can have such consequences? Career ending.
I wonder if Hodges and Cohen and many on here, will be as hot on these 'spreaders of disinformation' as they are on Toby Young and JHB.
I know I should have known better, and indeed posted on my scepticism last night about the 8 % nonsense, but I still found it a depressing and slightly worrying few hours. We are in such a disasterous situation that the consequences if it had been true we too awful to think about. I really think whoever is at fault for this needs public shaming and should be made to apologise. As others have said, there is genuine vaccine hesitancy and reluctance. A totally incorrect story like this, however 'well intentioned' (assuming it was), genuinely could claim lives.
I can deal with the innumeracy of the daily ups and downs of cases and deaths (deaths increased today from yesterday and on and on and on...), but this was of a different order. Making a huge claim, without actually getting the facts right? That can have such consequences? Career ending.
The important thing in such time is to remember this
British travellers arriving back from high-risk coronavirus hotspots will be made to change their own bed sheets and eat meals in their rooms in an 'entirely contactless and sterile experience' as they are forced to quarantine in airport hotels.
Boris Johnson will today sign off on plans to toughen border controls by putting new arrivals into isolation, at their own expense - with a ten-day stay costing up to £1,500.
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?
I am disputing that there are 500K vaccines lying about and can you show evidence that the SUN numbers are correct, they were wrong last time , only a few days ago. UK saying supplied last time meant in a warehouse in UK or in transit. I prefer to believe the Scottish Government rather than a toilet paper rag.
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.
Here's one off the top of my head. The EU produces 10 of something it needs and finds out that nine of them will be exported.
It then informs its Member States so they can be prepared or ramp up production or take other mitigating action.
What's the EU producing? 🤔
I thought companies were producing something. I didn't realise the EU was producing anything? It isn't news that companies are exporting as per the contracts they have signed.
Yes good point I realised that as I pressed the post button. But it doesn't take a huge stretch of the imagination (checks who interlocutor is: ah yes) to amend it to prepare the approvals process, disseminate coordinated information to Member States, etc.
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.
Here's one off the top of my head. The EU produces 10 of something it needs and finds out that nine of them will be exported.
It then informs its Member States so they can be prepared or ramp up production or take other mitigating action.
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.
The headline is. Did you read the linked statement from Kyriakides?
Better still I have been listening to Euro news this morning who confirmed the commission has sent the export ban proposal to all 27 nations
Furthermore, the Irish Minister confirmed it as well saying the EU has to look after it's own citizens
Is it an export ban proposal or is it an export transparency mechanism?
The companies concerned have confidentiality arrangements in the contracts.
The EU themselves signed confidentiality clauses in their contracts.
Now you talk about "transparency"? Pull the other one, this is shit stirring to get away from the fact that the EU screwed up, signed contracts months later than other nations, so aren't at the front of the queue.
Maybe but do you know what an export transparency mechanism is?
Why are you so aggrieved at the EU behaving to protect its interests?
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....
There is, however, a difference between not wanting to follow the daily details because it is simply too grim, and blithely ignoring inconvenient facts. If you are struggling with your mental health, turning off the news is one practical and effective step. I know plenty who are doing so, including members of my own family. Incidentally, I feel this might be a partial reason the polls are static. Large numbers simply aren't following the ins and outs.
The problem is that this becomes - "I must have a foreign holiday in Feb. For my sanity. What do you mean that I won't be able to travel? That is rude...."
I agree. It can do. But that stems from the premise that "here is a situation I don't want, therefore it doesn't exist." Rather than "here is a grim old do. I will try to make it through to the end of the day with body and mind together."
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.
The big SKS and Labour fail at the moment is not taking advantage of one of the few benefits of opposition, at a time when it is critical: In opposition you can state regularly, clearly and consistently the correct solution to problems which are in fact insoluble, so that you can be seen as innovative, correct and a government in waiting, better than the present lot. In opposition every government fail proves you are right, and every government success proves that they have partially taken your advice.
In Blair they have a text book of how it is done.
By now we should have an unequivocal idea in our heads of how Labour will solve: Covid 19 Brexit Scotland Debt Deficit Trade deals NHS Tax avoidance by everyone richer than oneself Housing The wealth gap between young and old
and all the other insoluble problems of our day.
The fact that none of them will be true is of course irrelevant.
I'm not sure that Labour are capable of this any more - the brand itself needs a complete remaking as Blair did. The big picture thing that an opposition party needs to be making is the need to remake this country so that its fit for the future.
Constitutionally we are a joke as the last few days of Scotland threads have set out Institutionally we are stuck with an NHS and elderly care system we can't afford Financially we removed capitalism and replaced it with bankism We've become obsessed with looking inwards - me vs them, us needing to beat Europe. We used to look outwards and lead the world
So a few things LOTO could be pushing if he/they were capable 1. A UK for the 21st Century. Fair votes. Self-determination for nations. No Peers. Decentralised power 2. A reimagined care system. Take the duplication and profiteering out of healthcare. Make elderly care something not reliant on minimum wage foreign carers. Preventative care & mental health care to avoid costly treatments later when its too late 3. Modern capitalism reborn. Companies pay wages sufficient for their workers to buy the products/services they produce. The state provides modern infrastructure to allow them to flourish - fibre-optics, transport. Companies pay proper taxes in exchange for R&D credits.
The problem is these are top level long term objectives, and politics has become micro-management of immediate headlines. and with the Tory Party and right-wing press very happy to pit me against my neighbour whilst they make off with the loot, its probably unrealistic to achieve.
I wonder if Hodges and Cohen and many on here, will be as hot on these 'spreaders of disinformation' as they are on Toby Young and JHB.
I know I should have known better, and indeed posted on my scepticism last night about the 8 % nonsense, but I still found it a depressing and slightly worrying few hours. We are in such a disasterous situation that the consequences if it had been true we too awful to think about. I really think whoever is at fault for this needs public shaming and should be made to apologise. As others have said, there is genuine vaccine hesitancy and reluctance. A totally incorrect story like this, however 'well intentioned' (assuming it was), genuinely could claim lives.
I can deal with the innumeracy of the daily ups and downs of cases and deaths (deaths increased today from yesterday and on and on and on...), but this was of a different order. Making a huge claim, without actually getting the facts right? That can have such consequences? Career ending.
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.
Here's one off the top of my head. The EU produces 10 of something it needs and finds out that nine of them will be exported.
It then informs its Member States so they can be prepared or ramp up production or take other mitigating action.
How very Soviet tractor production....
Yes I realise that as @Big_Phil has pointed out the premise was mistaken in that post but the principle doesn't need too much tweaking to understand the reasoning.
British travellers arriving back from high-risk coronavirus hotspots will be made to change their own bed sheets and eat meals in their rooms in an 'entirely contactless and sterile experience' as they are forced to quarantine in airport hotels.
Boris Johnson will today sign off on plans to toughen border controls by putting new arrivals into isolation, at their own expense - with a ten-day stay costing up to £1,500.
I don't like this caveat of "high risk hotspots"....it smacks of the failed airbridge idea again. It should be all travel, with some minimal exemptions.
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....*
The generous, outward looking "Spirit of Leave".
Proving once more that Brexit was not driven by xenophobic, Little Englander antipathy towards the continent, but by a rational and mature realization that the UK was not a good fit in an ever more integrated European Union.
Absolutely. 100%.
The one thing the EU got directly involved in was vaccines and as a result they have shown itself to be a bureaucratic, shambling and dare I say sclerotic mess.
The UK has shown itself to be innovative, quick and dare I say nimble in achieving better results - with contracts signed three months earlier and a rollout that is working.
Germany and other nations had contracts ready to sign in June. Because of the EU interference they weren't signed for another couple of months causing needless delay resulting in what we see today.
A perfect realisation that demonstrates exactly what some of us have said here.
So we seem to be doing better on something than the EU. Has to happen sometimes. Law of averages. But please get back to my 12.47 post. It's important and lying there unanswered. Until it is - and you really ought to be able to - you stand exposed as somebody who only likes Robert Peston when he says things that you like.
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.
Any takers? If not, lets stop calling it a ban?
Let's reverse the roles here. Boris is putting in an export monitoring system that will blow up commerical confidentiality of contracts signed by AZ and subcontractors based in the UK, what legitimate reasons would they have to do that?
Also, there's no such thing as "fair" distribution. There is contracted distribution.
You are misunderstanding me. I am not giving a view on whether what the EU are doing is justified or not. I am pointing out it is no sense a ban. Those ramping up the issue further by falsely calling it a ban to score political points that increase division should be called out. That is surely one of the key lessons from Trumpism.
If you had criticised the EU for possible introduction of vaccine controls or vaccine diplomacy I would have had no issue. I assume you are not interested in the bet as you know it is not a ban?
First Second Total Total 234851 1326 236177 East Of England 29507 43 29550 London 35126 610 35736 Midlands 42216 128 42344 North East And Yorkshire 34359 33 34392 North West 32861 210 33071 South East 34185 243 34428 South West 24938 58 24996
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.
The headline is. Did you read the linked statement from Kyriakides?
Better still I have been listening to Euro news this morning who confirmed the commission has sent the export ban proposal to all 27 nations
Furthermore, the Irish Minister confirmed it as well saying the EU has to look after it's own citizens
Is it an export ban proposal or is it an export transparency mechanism?
The companies concerned have confidentiality arrangements in the contracts.
The EU themselves signed confidentiality clauses in their contracts.
Now you talk about "transparency"? Pull the other one, this is shit stirring to get away from the fact that the EU screwed up, signed contracts months later than other nations, so aren't at the front of the queue.
Maybe but do you know what an export transparency mechanism is?
Why are you so aggrieved at the EU behaving to protect its interests?
I just Googled "export transparency mechanism", and I have concluded that no-one knows what it is, because the EU literally made it up yesterday.
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....*
The generous, outward looking "Spirit of Leave".
Proving once more that Brexit was not driven by xenophobic, Little Englander antipathy towards the continent, but by a rational and mature realization that the UK was not a good fit in an ever more integrated European Union.
I agree - vaccine triumphalism is too early and in poor taste.
I also think we need to check where Johnson and Johnson are manufacturing their vaccines as a matter of priority....
I think by, say, autumn (I bloody well hope) every developed nation will be way along the vaccination process and hence the issue will be those extra few weeks in February that one country was ahead or behind of another.
I'm not sure that anyone will care. Maybe the will, as might they about today's high death rate in the UK. As that Atlantic article pointed out, there are a lot of moving parts for people to take comfort in or be furious about and plenty for them to (want to) forget or overlook.
British travellers arriving back from high-risk coronavirus hotspots will be made to change their own bed sheets and eat meals in their rooms in an 'entirely contactless and sterile experience' as they are forced to quarantine in airport hotels.
Boris Johnson will today sign off on plans to toughen border controls by putting new arrivals into isolation, at their own expense - with a ten-day stay costing up to £1,500.
Sounds grim. Even the nicest hotel room is still an enclosed (likely) air-conditioned space. And yet it is what countries like Australia have done since the start. The article whining about summer holidays misses the point somewhat.
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.
Here's one off the top of my head. The EU produces 10 of something it needs and finds out that nine of them will be exported.
It then informs its Member States so they can be prepared or ramp up production or take other mitigating action.
Ok, what's the other mitigating action?
Inform the Member States so they can order in more of the thing's ingredients. Or open new thing facilities. Or...
Surely you think this is all a load of nonsense because it's no worse than a bad cold and we should all get back to normal?
Tell you what. I will admit covid is a serious issue.
But then you have to admit that lockdowns have devastating consequences. On children. On young people. On people in poverty. On jobs and the economy. on mental health. On the fabric of society. On human rights. Its eminently clear today.
I at least have tried to have a debate about whether lockdowns are worth it and whether the extent to which the young are being sacrificed is worth it.
All you and others like you have tried to do is shut down debate.
Comments
Today's Yougov gives Tories 308, Labour 255, SNP 58 and LDs 6 with electoral calculus so even closer than 1992 and Starmer would probably become PM in a hung parliament with SNP and LD support
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1354025737746001920?s=20
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=38&LIB=5&Brexit=4&Green=6&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=20.5&SCOTLAB=20.5&SCOTLIB=5.5&SCOTBrexit=0&SCOTGreen=2.5&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=50.5&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019
I'm not at all sure he's correct on that. But he's not claiming that Sinn Fein are supporting a united Ireland due to Brexit, which would be daft.
I do think people should be careful not to willfully misinterpret tweets to attribute to people views that they've been clear they don't hold.
https://twitter.com/SarahChampionMP/status/1353985824484958210
It is our (careful) use of aid that allows us to get the things we provide (services / advice) into places we otherwise wouldn't reach.
To say this is short sighted would be an understatement.
Len McCluskey isn't a union man representing his colleagues - he is a politician who is at the top of a rather unique party.
Unite is simply an institution now, not a union. McCluskey has no more understanding of a regular union workers lifestyle and issues than Johnson does of a voter sat on a bus.
The whole thing now is politics - and institutional behemoth politics.
I've said it before, small and nimble is better than behemothic and sclerotic. That applies to unions as much as any other institution.
Have you never seen, for example, Dawn Butler being interviewed? Her performance on the 2019 local elections results show was just one unfounded accusation after another.
1983 and 1987 were massive landslides and, in 1979, Thatcher won a larger majority but with a slightly smaller vote lead than Major enjoyed.
I'd also read almost nothing into seat calculators three years out from an election.
I don't think I post tweets for the sake of it...
The Daily Express could not have dreamed of a better headline.
File under "Hmmmmmmm......"
I don't believe it's correct either as the media didn't shun SF during the Troubles and found ways to (quite rightly) get around the broadcasting restrictions that were put in place. I also doubt that it's the first time that SF have called for a border poll, Martin McGuinness called for one after indyref 1. There's been a lot of half hearted demands for one that have appeared serious requests over the last 10-15 years.
In Blair they have a text book of how it is done.
By now we should have an unequivocal idea in our heads of how Labour will solve:
Covid 19
Brexit
Scotland
Debt
Deficit
Trade deals
NHS
Tax avoidance by everyone richer than oneself
Housing
The wealth gap between young and old
and all the other insoluble problems of our day.
The fact that none of them will be true is of course irrelevant.
https://www.thetradenews.com/us-hoovers-up-derivatives-trading-post-brexit/
Proving once more that Brexit was not driven by xenophobic, Little Englander antipathy towards the continent, but by a rational and mature realization that the UK was not a good fit in an ever more integrated European Union.
If you are struggling with your mental health, turning off the news is one practical and effective step. I know plenty who are doing so, including members of my own family.
Incidentally, I feel this might be a partial reason the polls are static.
Large numbers simply aren't following the ins and outs.
He told you so. He really did.
https://twitter.com/fact_covid/status/1354058248412942336?s=20
It then informs its Member States so they can be prepared or ramp up production or take other mitigating action.
The one thing the EU got directly involved in was vaccines and as a result they have shown itself to be a bureaucratic, shambling and dare I say sclerotic mess.
The UK has shown itself to be innovative, quick and dare I say nimble in achieving better results - with contracts signed three months earlier and a rollout that is working.
Germany and other nations had contracts ready to sign in June. Because of the EU interference they weren't signed for another couple of months causing needless delay resulting in what we see today.
A perfect realisation that demonstrates exactly what some of us have said here.
Also, there's no such thing as "fair" distribution. There is contracted distribution.
I thought companies were producing something. I didn't realise the EU was producing anything? It isn't news that companies are exporting as per the contracts they have signed.
This time next year we'll have a trade deal with the whole world!
*or have they? Is there something fundamentally different in mechanism of action that makes it likely to be more suited to a single dose than the others?
Edit: Oh and interesting on the J&J two dose trial, thanks. Will be interesting whether that does make much difference or not.
I also think we need to check where Johnson and Johnson are manufacturing their vaccines as a matter of priority....
The EU themselves signed confidentiality clauses in their contracts.
Now you talk about "transparency"? Pull the other one, this is shit stirring to get away from the fact that the EU screwed up, signed contracts months later than other nations, so aren't at the front of the queue.
@Philip_Thompson: There will be no disruption as a result of Brexit for Northern Ireland.
Me (and everyone sentient): There will be disruption as a result of the NI protocol
Scott posts:
https://twitter.com/edwinpootsmla/status/1347623779736973315
https://twitter.com/joepike/status/1354062505425989633?s=20
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-55809355
I can deal with the innumeracy of the daily ups and downs of cases and deaths (deaths increased today from yesterday and on and on and on...), but this was of a different order. Making a huge claim, without actually getting the facts right? That can have such consequences? Career ending.
Clear up your own messes EU.
- Keep Calm
- Blame Canada
https://www.youtube.com/watch/bOR38552MJA
"I have to tell you now that no such undertaking has been received, and that consequently...."
Boris Johnson will today sign off on plans to toughen border controls by putting new arrivals into isolation, at their own expense - with a ten-day stay costing up to £1,500.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9187689/Covid-protocols-faced-travellers-forced-quarantine-airport-hotels-1-500.html
I tell you what....don't f##king travel then.
The likes of Piers Moron will be more upset about this than most of the public who understand there's a global pandemic going on.
Why are you so aggrieved at the EU behaving to protect its interests?
Rather than "here is a grim old do. I will try to make it through to the end of the day with body and mind together."
The EU are not going to block export of Pfizer vaccines.
What is wrong with everyone?
Constitutionally we are a joke as the last few days of Scotland threads have set out
Institutionally we are stuck with an NHS and elderly care system we can't afford
Financially we removed capitalism and replaced it with bankism
We've become obsessed with looking inwards - me vs them, us needing to beat Europe. We used to look outwards and lead the world
So a few things LOTO could be pushing if he/they were capable
1. A UK for the 21st Century. Fair votes. Self-determination for nations. No Peers. Decentralised power
2. A reimagined care system. Take the duplication and profiteering out of healthcare. Make elderly care something not reliant on minimum wage foreign carers. Preventative care & mental health care to avoid costly treatments later when its too late
3. Modern capitalism reborn. Companies pay wages sufficient for their workers to buy the products/services they produce. The state provides modern infrastructure to allow them to flourish - fibre-optics, transport. Companies pay proper taxes in exchange for R&D credits.
The problem is these are top level long term objectives, and politics has become micro-management of immediate headlines. and with the Tory Party and right-wing press very happy to pit me against my neighbour whilst they make off with the loot, its probably unrealistic to achieve.
Believe pb.com and sleep easy.
China to finish building 1,000-room quarantine facility in seven days
Remember the last time they started building large infrastructure projects in really short time periods.
If you had criticised the EU for possible introduction of vaccine controls or vaccine diplomacy I would have had no issue. I assume you are not interested in the bet as you know it is not a ban?
First Second Total
Total 234851 1326 236177
East Of England 29507 43 29550
London 35126 610 35736
Midlands 42216 128 42344
North East And Yorkshire 34359 33 34392
North West 32861 210 33071
South East 34185 243 34428
South West 24938 58 24996
What kind of Daily Hate panic should we have?
I'm not sure that anyone will care. Maybe the will, as might they about today's high death rate in the UK. As that Atlantic article pointed out, there are a lot of moving parts for people to take comfort in or be furious about and plenty for them to (want to) forget or overlook.
But then you have to admit that lockdowns have devastating consequences. On children. On young people. On people in poverty. On jobs and the economy. on mental health. On the fabric of society. On human rights. Its eminently clear today.
I at least have tried to have a debate about whether lockdowns are worth it and whether the extent to which the young are being sacrificed is worth it.
All you and others like you have tried to do is shut down debate.