Two of our younger grandchildren attend their Junior School, as both of their parents are keyworkers.
I was talking to their mother yesterday who said they are considering home schooling them, due to the social media abuse the parents of the children are receiving from parents of the children who are not entitled to go to their school
Apparently it is very upsetting and creating a divide between the two groups of parents, with considerable resentment
This is another reason for the schools to return as soon as possible, and it would be interesting to hear comments from the teachers on this forum
It should be possible to identify the group 'parents of young-ish children' and give them some priority over others in the same cohort, one would think.
This is age group 5 - 10 and I cannot see a way of cooling it other than all the children returning
To be fair the door-to-door testing in response to the SA variant is very good and proactive. Matt Hancock does seem to be coming into his own as the pandemic has progressed.
I'm still annoyed about lack of airport quarantine though.
This is probably a false perception on my part but it does seem to me that, in areas where Hancock has control of what is being done, he is making the right decisions and doing well. But once it is areas where Johnson or the wider cabinet have an input, the decision making gets poorer very quickly. Sadly I think there are still too many people in cabinet who don't understand that the best way to get the economy back on track - which appears to be their main driving factor - is to absolutely kill this virus by any means possible.
"...so that politicians can get kudos from some WHO bureaucrats."
This is the sort of absurd strawman argument that immediately provokes me into taking the contrary position.
The argument for sending vaccines overseas, to protect the vulnerable and healthcare workers, is perfectly logical and moral and has nothing to do with bureaucrats.
We can see that the argument of saving more lives vaccinating the vulnerable abroad than our young is not one that will win the day, however, because we always value the lives of people in Britain more highly than those overseas.
Look at the money we spend on rail safety in the UK, which would save more lives if spent on Indian railways. Look at the money I hope we will spend on the post-Grenfell cladding issue, which would save more lives if spent on housing in Africa. Look at the money spent on free school meals, which would save more lives if spent on food aid for the hungry in Yemen.
So we will vaccinate the people of Britain first, and this will be because we value the lives of British people more highly than those elsewhere in the world. This should make us feel a bit uncomfortable, and we should seek in general to include the rest of the world within the group of people that we care about, and are willing to inconvenience ourselves to help.
But the way we will do that now is by ensuring that the vaccine shortage ends as soon as possible, so the issue of prioritization no longer arises.
It absolutely should not make us feel at all uncomfortable.
The first thing the UK should do is to look after ourselves. The first thing India and Yemen and Africa and anywhere else should do is look after themselves. Yemen won't be sending aid to the UK if we don't look after ourselves.
If Yemen aren't capable of looking after themselves and we are capable of helping them as well as ourselves, then there is a moral case to make that we should do both. But its not either/or, it is both.
If ever we choose to cease to look after ourselves, then before very long we won't be able to look after Yemen or anyone else either - and who does that help?
The key word there is "ourselves".
What logically makes ourselves = British, as opposed to considering everyone on the planet part of ourselves?
Now, I don't disagree with receiving my vaccination before a South African grandma. I've long argued in favour of expensive safety measures on British railways, etc.
But I am opposed to nationalism. My ideal is to value all lives equally, and I see it as morally wrong to do otherwise. Perhaps if we had spent the past several decades valuing the lives of the people of Yemen as highly as our own they would now be able to manufacture their own vaccines, instead of starving while dodging British munitions dropping from Saudi-piloted planes?
Democracy.
Nationalism is a good thing, not a bad one. The ultimate opposite of nationalism isn't internationalism, it is imperialism.
Does the South African Grandma pay taxes to our exchequer? Does she receive a pension from our exchequer? Does she vote in our elections, have a local MP, get served by the NHS?
How do we stop the Saudis from dropping munitions? They're their own country. Unless you want to subjugate them as part of a reinvented British Empire it isn't our choice.
The argument is between the world as-is and as-could-be.
I accept that the world is as it is, now, and therefore there is a hierarchy in our mutual aid and empathy.
My argument is that there is a different world as it might be, an ideal that we might strive to reach. You seem to think that the status quo is as good as it is going to get.
I think Britain's actions on vaccines take us closer to the world as I would want it, since we are taking on a substantial share of responsibility for vaccinating the world. Even if we're not at the equitable ideal, which would not be possible without reciprocity.
It strikes me that there are two different, and not easily reconcilable, ideologies at the heart of this government (and on PB): Global Britain, and Britain First. These ideologies are being played out in the vaccination debate, on post-Brexit Britain, on Scottish nationalism (England First, rather than Britain First), and elsewhere in government.
So Global Britain is the outward-looking, vaccine sharing, Liz Truss trade vision, Hong Kong migrants welcoming type of vision that I suspect the PM favours.
Britain First is the vaccine hoarding, EU-hating, migrant Channel-crossing anxious, sod off Scotland, nationalistic vision of much of the Tory Party membership and beloved by most of the tabloids.
While both visions are represented by PB Tories, being the civilised bunch they are most favour Global Britain.
I suspect the government will struggle to hold this coalition together as time goes on, and it gives opposition parties an opportunity to (to coin a phrase) develop a third way that mediates between, and away from, these stark choices.
Just to confirm I am very much in the Global Britain cohort and credit Liz Truss for her successes and her formal application yesterday to join TPP
As the European regulator made the same decision it does seem hard to criticise the UK regulator unless the suggestion is evidenced that the approval was slapdash and was just lucky the other regulator made the same call.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
The last place I saw the word "Jocks" used was in "The Complete McAuslan". Given this was written some little time ago....
That surprised me - I was going to say you obviously have a sheltered life, but on reflection it's simply that you don't see quite as much on Scottish current affairs as TUD and I do,including some of the reaction - quite understandably.
This, for instance, is a prime UK commentator only a few months ago.
"A prime UK commentator" who is pimping out car insurance in the middle of his video, with a "ticker" on his video pimping out car insurance?
And who agrees with what you want politically?
And agrees with what you want politically also, unless all your democracy stuff is bullshit.
Yes he does.
I still wouldn't call him "a prime UK commentator" though. I wouldn't call myself a prime UK commentator and I believe in everything I believe in.
He's an old has-been pimping out car insurance.
Well, the Sun are, or recently were*, willing to pay him a lot more than you for assorted commentary and pensees.
*not sure when he stopped
According to Wikipedia it was 1994 he ceased to be Editor of the Sun and he hasn't been paid as a commentator since 2017.
Frankly if we never saw him again it would be too soon. Hateful vile man - what he published over Hillsborough I would never forgive him or the Sun for - using the word Jocks in a stupid online video is frankly nothing compared to that.
The man should have zero credibility and never be taken seriously by anyone.
I certainly didn't picvk him for any apparent agreement with my views or otherwise! Just the first recent example of Jockanese when I had a look on the news bit of Google.
I think "Jock" is rare now in everyday speech, but not in Tabloid-ese.
It is one of the words beloved of crass journalists, but not much heard anymore.
Another is "boffin" for scientist. I do not think I have ever heard the word "boffin" used in speech in everyday life.
But, sure enough, Prof Neil Ferguson is the "Bonking Boffin".
The vaccines were developed by "top boffins", Etc.
As the European regulator made the same decision it does seem hard to criticise the UK regulator unless the suggestion is evidenced that the approval was slapdash and was just lucky the other regulator made the same call.
Or they are just pushing dangerous fake news for idealogical reasons.
"This does not include British and Irish Nationals, longer-term visa holders and permanent residents, who will be able to enter but are required to self-isolate for 10 days on arrival along with their household."
Surely they should be tested and quarantined formally not self isolating?
It’s a can of worms, but I’d rather not get in to holding a British citizen against their will on no charge when we could just ask them to stay put at home (and check they are, with stern penalties if they don’t).
Even when we know compliance is low and it could cause another year of restrictions and isolation?!
We need to get compliance up, like they do in Canada or Poland. Have an app that checks people are at home using selfies, or call the regularly on a landline, or both.
But imprisoning people without charge or trial, the overwhelming majority of whom won't have any virus, at their own expense once the vulnerable here are all vaccinated is immoral, expensive and pointless. A friend of mine will need to come back from Tanzania from an Oxfam project in May. She doesn't have any money to pay for a hotel. Why should she need to self-isolate pointlessly when there's no evidence at all that she's infected.
Yes, there are new strains that could get around the vaccines, but that'll always be the case. At some point we have to get over our fears and open up again. This virus will always be with us, sadly, in one form or another.
For the EU, the UK is now a third country and competitor. As a result, the EU has adopted the same zero-sum approach to both vaccines and the recently completed trade negotiations. One of the major problems with the implementation of the Northern Ireland protocol has been the issue of checks on animal and plant products (what are known as sanitary and phytosanitary checks, or “SPS checks” in the jargon).
That Brussels was willing to give the UK a far less generous deal over SPS checks than it gave New Zealand was indicative of the EU’s new attitude towards the UK, which it sees as a geographically proximate economic competitor. Yet this insistence on relatively stringent checks between the UK and EU also extends to Britain and Northern Ireland, because the latter remains in the EU’s single market for goods.
This is incorrect. The UK negotiating position unveiled after Brexit included the imposition of SPS checks. We literally stated in the first line that "The UK will maintain a robust SPS regime reflecting our existing high standards" and that we wanted to be "preserving each party’s autonomy over their own SPS regimes". (https://tinyurl.com/y4nqoj9r)
Yes, we then went on to set out that we wanted a compromise agreement like New Zealand has. Its typical cakeist bollox from our team and its no wonder that we didn't get it. What Simon Jenkins doesn't note is that the EU-NZ arrangement is the result of 9 amendments to the original agreement.
So all we have to do is go back to the EU and renegotiate the deal where it doesn't work. And we won't. Because Boris Defeated the EU and Won a Brilliant Deal.
The government should certainly focus on vaccinating over 50s and those with pre existing health conditions first, only after that can they look at sending vaccines abroad
In a former Wickes store, very efficient process. 12 lanes running, and capacity of 30 lanes. Apparently they are doing over 1000 a day and working towards 2000.
AZ jab. One interesting point was that they did all the checks, then moved me on to the jab table, then made me wait while they went away to draw up the vaccine - so no baskets of pre-prepared ready to go jabs.
I was handled as an exception as I had one of the letters with the wrong link. But handled very efficiently.
While "swimming in vaccines" (coined by @MaxPB in the first instance IIRC) is I believe an apt and accurate description of our (the developed world's) likely position later in the year can we please cease using the phrase "swimming in vaccines".
With thanks.
Eh? If it were only one kind of vaccine, then the singular would be correct.
But there are two or more kinds, so the plural is correct.
One can talk about 'swimming in whisky'. But a punctilious grammarian would say 'whiskies' if, say, Talisker and Bruachladdich were involved.
"...so that politicians can get kudos from some WHO bureaucrats."
This is the sort of absurd strawman argument that immediately provokes me into taking the contrary position.
The argument for sending vaccines overseas, to protect the vulnerable and healthcare workers, is perfectly logical and moral and has nothing to do with bureaucrats.
We can see that the argument of saving more lives vaccinating the vulnerable abroad than our young is not one that will win the day, however, because we always value the lives of people in Britain more highly than those overseas.
Look at the money we spend on rail safety in the UK, which would save more lives if spent on Indian railways. Look at the money I hope we will spend on the post-Grenfell cladding issue, which would save more lives if spent on housing in Africa. Look at the money spent on free school meals, which would save more lives if spent on food aid for the hungry in Yemen.
So we will vaccinate the people of Britain first, and this will be because we value the lives of British people more highly than those elsewhere in the world. This should make us feel a bit uncomfortable, and we should seek in general to include the rest of the world within the group of people that we care about, and are willing to inconvenience ourselves to help.
But the way we will do that now is by ensuring that the vaccine shortage ends as soon as possible, so the issue of prioritization no longer arises.
More selfish arguments for sending vaccines overseas might include:- - increasing British influence or soft power - stopping the developing world becoming reliant on Russia or China - slowing the evolution of new, more dangerous variants in unvaccinated populations - allowing British holidaymakers, influencers and business people to travel - reopening export markets - reopening British borders (if we ever get round to closing them).
Hence COVAX - which is funding vaccine production around the world.
For those worried about vaccine nationalism, the COVAX effort is genuinely a good answer.
Instead of just helicoptering in aid, made in "The West", it involve building/enhancing the capability to make vaccines on every continent.
Building capability elsewhere might be a good idea but I was looking at selfish or self-interested justifications, so let us reverse your suggestion and add to my list that it supports and develops the British pharmaceutical industry.
COVAX actually does both - for example AZN is one of the major elements in COVAX. AZN itself will be doing lots of work, paid for out of COVAX. So there will be benefit in cold, hard, economic terms for the UK.
But most of the AZN vaccine for COVAX will probably be made abroad.
In order to get buy in from the world, COVAX has avoided a childish attempt to grab all the benefit for any one nation. Or group of nations. So facilities are being created around the world, supply chains setup etc etc. Yes, some nations well benefit more than others. But it quite distributed.
I'm sure he will continue to be dismissive in public for a few months more, expressing EU solidarity - until the vaccines are actually offered and available, at which point he'll bite the UK's hand off for them.
This. Otherwise he will be the next up in the Euro Coconut Shy. VDL would really, really, like someone to do something she can condemn at this moment.
Over-18 population of RoI is only about 4m people. Once UK is at the point of massive vaccine centres in exhibition halls and car parks, helping the country with which we share a land border get their population also vaccinated is in our collective best interest. Not only will we send them some vaccines, we'll probably send them a load of (vaccinated) tourists over the summer too.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
The last place I saw the word "Jocks" used was in "The Complete McAuslan". Given this was written some little time ago....
That surprised me - I was going to say you obviously have a sheltered life, but on reflection it's simply that you don't see quite as much on Scottish current affairs as TUD and I do,including some of the reaction - quite understandably.
This, for instance, is a prime UK commentator only a few months ago.
"A prime UK commentator" who is pimping out car insurance in the middle of his video, with a "ticker" on his video pimping out car insurance?
And who agrees with what you want politically?
And agrees with what you want politically also, unless all your democracy stuff is bullshit.
Yes he does.
I still wouldn't call him "a prime UK commentator" though. I wouldn't call myself a prime UK commentator and I believe in everything I believe in.
He's an old has-been pimping out car insurance.
Well, the Sun are, or recently were*, willing to pay him a lot more than you for assorted commentary and pensees.
*not sure when he stopped
According to Wikipedia it was 1994 he ceased to be Editor of the Sun and he hasn't been paid as a commentator since 2017.
Frankly if we never saw him again it would be too soon. Hateful vile man - what he published over Hillsborough I would never forgive him or the Sun for - using the word Jocks in a stupid online video is frankly nothing compared to that.
The man should have zero credibility and never be taken seriously by anyone.
I certainly didn't picvk him for any apparent agreement with my views or otherwise! Just the first recent example of Jockanese when I had a look on the news bit of Google.
I think "Jock" is rare now in everyday speech, but not in Tabloid-ese.
It is one of the words beloved of crass journalists, but not much heard anymore.
Another is "boffin" for scientist. I do not think I have ever heard the word "boffin" used in speech in everyday life.
But, sure enough, Prof Neil Ferguson is the "Bonking Boffin".
The vaccines were developed by "top boffins", Etc.
They're doing whatever they think they can do to slow our programme down. It's a clear attempt to try and sow seeds of doubt among UK citizens, unfortunately for them it's not going to work. I think by now every single person in the country has had at least 1 parent or grandparent that's had their first dose and knows there's no danger.
Listening to French and German politicians attacking both the UK and AZN is very sad, and will hurt their own population but also endorse the UK attitude that brexit was the right thing to do
As the European regulator made the same decision it does seem hard to criticise the UK regulator unless the suggestion is evidenced that the approval was slapdash and was just lucky the other regulator made the same call.
It is possible and they could have been under pressure to do so as soon as possible and we might be lucky we don't have a disaster on our hands.
BUT we haven't and bearing in mind the anti vaxxers who are out there this is a discussion that should really be had much further down the line.
Edit: Sorry not a criticism of your post but of those criticizing the UK approval.
"...so that politicians can get kudos from some WHO bureaucrats."
This is the sort of absurd strawman argument that immediately provokes me into taking the contrary position.
The argument for sending vaccines overseas, to protect the vulnerable and healthcare workers, is perfectly logical and moral and has nothing to do with bureaucrats.
We can see that the argument of saving more lives vaccinating the vulnerable abroad than our young is not one that will win the day, however, because we always value the lives of people in Britain more highly than those overseas.
Look at the money we spend on rail safety in the UK, which would save more lives if spent on Indian railways. Look at the money I hope we will spend on the post-Grenfell cladding issue, which would save more lives if spent on housing in Africa. Look at the money spent on free school meals, which would save more lives if spent on food aid for the hungry in Yemen.
So we will vaccinate the people of Britain first, and this will be because we value the lives of British people more highly than those elsewhere in the world. This should make us feel a bit uncomfortable, and we should seek in general to include the rest of the world within the group of people that we care about, and are willing to inconvenience ourselves to help.
But the way we will do that now is by ensuring that the vaccine shortage ends as soon as possible, so the issue of prioritization no longer arises.
It absolutely should not make us feel at all uncomfortable.
The first thing the UK should do is to look after ourselves. The first thing India and Yemen and Africa and anywhere else should do is look after themselves. Yemen won't be sending aid to the UK if we don't look after ourselves.
If Yemen aren't capable of looking after themselves and we are capable of helping them as well as ourselves, then there is a moral case to make that we should do both. But its not either/or, it is both.
If ever we choose to cease to look after ourselves, then before very long we won't be able to look after Yemen or anyone else either - and who does that help?
The key word there is "ourselves".
What logically makes ourselves = British, as opposed to considering everyone on the planet part of ourselves?
Now, I don't disagree with receiving my vaccination before a South African grandma. I've long argued in favour of expensive safety measures on British railways, etc.
But I am opposed to nationalism. My ideal is to value all lives equally, and I see it as morally wrong to do otherwise. Perhaps if we had spent the past several decades valuing the lives of the people of Yemen as highly as our own they would now be able to manufacture their own vaccines, instead of starving while dodging British munitions dropping from Saudi-piloted planes?
Doubt it. They would just be dodging French or Chinese munitions instead.
"...so that politicians can get kudos from some WHO bureaucrats."
This is the sort of absurd strawman argument that immediately provokes me into taking the contrary position.
The argument for sending vaccines overseas, to protect the vulnerable and healthcare workers, is perfectly logical and moral and has nothing to do with bureaucrats.
We can see that the argument of saving more lives vaccinating the vulnerable abroad than our young is not one that will win the day, however, because we always value the lives of people in Britain more highly than those overseas.
Look at the money we spend on rail safety in the UK, which would save more lives if spent on Indian railways. Look at the money I hope we will spend on the post-Grenfell cladding issue, which would save more lives if spent on housing in Africa. Look at the money spent on free school meals, which would save more lives if spent on food aid for the hungry in Yemen.
So we will vaccinate the people of Britain first, and this will be because we value the lives of British people more highly than those elsewhere in the world. This should make us feel a bit uncomfortable, and we should seek in general to include the rest of the world within the group of people that we care about, and are willing to inconvenience ourselves to help.
But the way we will do that now is by ensuring that the vaccine shortage ends as soon as possible, so the issue of prioritization no longer arises.
It absolutely should not make us feel at all uncomfortable.
The first thing the UK should do is to look after ourselves. The first thing India and Yemen and Africa and anywhere else should do is look after themselves. Yemen won't be sending aid to the UK if we don't look after ourselves.
If Yemen aren't capable of looking after themselves and we are capable of helping them as well as ourselves, then there is a moral case to make that we should do both. But its not either/or, it is both.
If ever we choose to cease to look after ourselves, then before very long we won't be able to look after Yemen or anyone else either - and who does that help?
The key word there is "ourselves".
What logically makes ourselves = British, as opposed to considering everyone on the planet part of ourselves?
Now, I don't disagree with receiving my vaccination before a South African grandma. I've long argued in favour of expensive safety measures on British railways, etc.
But I am opposed to nationalism. My ideal is to value all lives equally, and I see it as morally wrong to do otherwise. Perhaps if we had spent the past several decades valuing the lives of the people of Yemen as highly as our own they would now be able to manufacture their own vaccines, instead of starving while dodging British munitions dropping from Saudi-piloted planes?
Doubt it. They would just be dodging French or Chinese munitions instead.
A shitty world doesnt mean we have to participate of course.
They're doing whatever they think they can do to slow our programme down. It's a clear attempt to try and sow seeds of doubt among UK citizens, unfortunately for them it's not going to work. I think by now every single person in the country has had at least 1 parent or grandparent that's had their first dose and knows there's no danger.
Listening to French and German politicians attacking both the UK and AZN is very sad, and will hurt their own population but also endorse the UK attitude that brexit was the right thing to do
I think it is more about telling their populations they are really, really lucky that said politicians are in charge.
"That stuff we don't have - you are better off without it"
While "swimming in vaccines" (coined by @MaxPB in the first instance IIRC) is I believe an apt and accurate description of our (the developed world's) likely position later in the year can we please cease using the phrase "swimming in vaccines".
With thanks.
Eh? If it were only one kind of vaccine, then the singular would be correct.
But there are two or more kinds, so the plural is correct.
One can talk about 'swimming in whisky'. But a punctilious grammarian would say 'whiskies' if, say, Talisker and Bruachladdich were involved.
It is the phrase that I don't like. It is grammatically correct.
While "swimming in vaccines" (coined by @MaxPB in the first instance IIRC) is I believe an apt and accurate description of our (the developed world's) likely position later in the year can we please cease using the phrase "swimming in vaccines".
With thanks.
Eh? If it were only one kind of vaccine, then the singular would be correct.
But there are two or more kinds, so the plural is correct.
One can talk about 'swimming in whisky'. But a punctilious grammarian would say 'whiskies' if, say, Talisker and Bruachladdich were involved.
It is the phrase that I don't like. It is grammatically correct.
It strikes me that there are two different, and not easily reconcilable, ideologies at the heart of this government (and on PB): Global Britain, and Britain First. These ideologies are being played out in the vaccination debate, on post-Brexit Britain, on Scottish nationalism (England First, rather than Britain First), and elsewhere in government.
So Global Britain is the outward-looking, vaccine sharing, Liz Truss trade vision, Hong Kong migrants welcoming type of vision that I suspect the PM favours.
Britain First is the vaccine hoarding, EU-hating, migrant Channel-crossing anxious, sod off Scotland, nationalistic vision of much of the Tory Party membership and beloved by most of the tabloids.
While both visions are represented by PB Tories, being the civilised bunch they are most favour Global Britain.
I suspect the government will struggle to hold this coalition together as time goes on, and it gives opposition parties an opportunity to (to coin a phrase) develop a third way that mediates between, and away from, these stark choices.
Just to confirm I am very much in the Global Britain cohort and credit Liz Truss for her successes and her formal application yesterday to join TPP
Does anyone have an estimate for how long this may take?
It strikes me that there are two different, and not easily reconcilable, ideologies at the heart of this government (and on PB): Global Britain, and Britain First. These ideologies are being played out in the vaccination debate, on post-Brexit Britain, on Scottish nationalism (England First, rather than Britain First), and elsewhere in government.
So Global Britain is the outward-looking, vaccine sharing, Liz Truss trade vision, Hong Kong migrants welcoming type of vision that I suspect the PM favours.
Britain First is the vaccine hoarding, EU-hating, migrant Channel-crossing anxious, sod off Scotland, nationalistic vision of much of the Tory Party membership and beloved by most of the tabloids.
While both visions are represented by PB Tories, being the civilised bunch they are most favour Global Britain.
I suspect the government will struggle to hold this coalition together as time goes on, and it gives opposition parties an opportunity to (to coin a phrase) develop a third way that mediates between, and away from, these stark choices.
Just to confirm I am very much in the Global Britain cohort and credit Liz Truss for her successes and her formal application yesterday to join TPP
Does anyone have an estimate for how long this may take?
No one has joined it before except for the founding members so not a clue.
Definitely the sort of people who will refuse a vaccine because it was made by a team who contained somebody who is distantly related to a slave owner.
The government should certainly focus on vaccinating over 50s and those with pre existing health conditions first, only after that can they look at sending vaccines abroad
But where do you draw the line with over 50s. Especially for those who are rapidly approaching 50..
It strikes me that there are two different, and not easily reconcilable, ideologies at the heart of this government (and on PB): Global Britain, and Britain First. These ideologies are being played out in the vaccination debate, on post-Brexit Britain, on Scottish nationalism (England First, rather than Britain First), and elsewhere in government.
So Global Britain is the outward-looking, vaccine sharing, Liz Truss trade vision, Hong Kong migrants welcoming type of vision that I suspect the PM favours.
Britain First is the vaccine hoarding, EU-hating, migrant Channel-crossing anxious, sod off Scotland, nationalistic vision of much of the Tory Party membership and beloved by most of the tabloids.
While both visions are represented by PB Tories, being the civilised bunch they are most favour Global Britain.
I suspect the government will struggle to hold this coalition together as time goes on, and it gives opposition parties an opportunity to (to coin a phrase) develop a third way that mediates between, and away from, these stark choices.
Just to confirm I am very much in the Global Britain cohort and credit Liz Truss for her successes and her formal application yesterday to join TPP
Does anyone have an estimate for how long this may take?
They're doing whatever they think they can do to slow our programme down. It's a clear attempt to try and sow seeds of doubt among UK citizens, unfortunately for them it's not going to work. I think by now every single person in the country has had at least 1 parent or grandparent that's had their first dose and knows there's no danger.
Their rhetoric and petulance is doing more to undermine confidence in the EU than Britain's actions.
A confident EU would welcome the fact it could learn from other countries to always challenge itself to raise its game.
It strikes me that there are two different, and not easily reconcilable, ideologies at the heart of this government (and on PB): Global Britain, and Britain First. These ideologies are being played out in the vaccination debate, on post-Brexit Britain, on Scottish nationalism (England First, rather than Britain First), and elsewhere in government.
So Global Britain is the outward-looking, vaccine sharing, Liz Truss trade vision, Hong Kong migrants welcoming type of vision that I suspect the PM favours.
Britain First is the vaccine hoarding, EU-hating, migrant Channel-crossing anxious, sod off Scotland, nationalistic vision of much of the Tory Party membership and beloved by most of the tabloids.
While both visions are represented by PB Tories, being the civilised bunch they are most favour Global Britain.
I suspect the government will struggle to hold this coalition together as time goes on, and it gives opposition parties an opportunity to (to coin a phrase) develop a third way that mediates between, and away from, these stark choices.
Just to confirm I am very much in the Global Britain cohort and credit Liz Truss for her successes and her formal application yesterday to join TPP
Does anyone have an estimate for how long this may take?
Is performative xenophobia better or worse than just xenophobia?
That's also a rather silly tweet. Being in the EU, vaccines aside, is probably in our better interest but its certainly not merely a trade bloc. That's part of its pitch, about how much more integrated it is than a trade bloc.
Quarantine after travel was a simple policy. During the periods where non-essential travel abroad was restricted, insist that all incoming people quarantine in airport hotels. Collect them off the plane, onto a bus, into the hotel. We certainly had the ability to do so - surplus hotel space existed. So why didn't we? And why - even now with people having to go door to door to try and mop up this SA strain - aren't we doing it now?
Three possibilities, none of which are mutually exclusive: 1. "Global Britain, Open for Business". Politically it was so important post Brexit to have Britain open that it trumped all other considerations including public health 2. Pressure from Tory donors. We have watched agog at the brazen way the Tories have handed out vast amounts of public money to their friends. And we had that amazing announcement that travel restrictions would no longer apply to captains of industry like their friends. So rich Tory friends/benefactors/donors telling the cabinet not to do it would have been influential 3. Boris is crap. He has proven utterly incapable of taking tough decisions or doing anything unpopular until its absolutely unavoidable
A stupid, corrupt fool really isn't who we needed to be "leading" us through this crisis. Which is why so many of us have died or been badly infected unnecessarily.
Laughable. But idiocy like that gives comfort to me. It means Labour are not going to win anything. Especially with Raynor as deputy.
Of course Johnson nearly died of this virus. He realised why and decided to lose weight. It's it rocket science. I'll give you and others some free advice... cut out the booze and fat.
And of course Johnson is not cruel or inept... You are being typically hysterical. It was Johnson who got the vaccine programme going.
But do carry on swimmingly. You are wondering off into the mists of irrelevance.
While "swimming in vaccines" (coined by @MaxPB in the first instance IIRC) is I believe an apt and accurate description of our (the developed world's) likely position later in the year can we please cease using the phrase "swimming in vaccines".
With thanks.
Eh? If it were only one kind of vaccine, then the singular would be correct.
But there are two or more kinds, so the plural is correct.
One can talk about 'swimming in whisky'. But a punctilious grammarian would say 'whiskies' if, say, Talisker and Bruachladdich were involved.
It is the phrase that I don't like. It is grammatically correct.
You do realise we'll all now be using "swimming in vaccines" at every opportunity, just to annoy you?
While "swimming in vaccines" (coined by @MaxPB in the first instance IIRC) is I believe an apt and accurate description of our (the developed world's) likely position later in the year can we please cease using the phrase "swimming in vaccines".
With thanks.
Eh? If it were only one kind of vaccine, then the singular would be correct.
But there are two or more kinds, so the plural is correct.
One can talk about 'swimming in whisky'. But a punctilious grammarian would say 'whiskies' if, say, Talisker and Bruachladdich were involved.
It is the phrase that I don't like. It is grammatically correct.
It's Robert's phrase, not mine!
Duly noted.
Let's all not use it any more (myself included, as I have done so recently).
You have explained why it's important for us to be vaccinated not why we shouldn't share our vaccines with others who might have even greater needs than our own?
They're doing whatever they think they can do to slow our programme down. It's a clear attempt to try and sow seeds of doubt among UK citizens, unfortunately for them it's not going to work. I think by now every single person in the country has had at least 1 parent or grandparent that's had their first dose and knows there's no danger.
Listening to French and German politicians attacking both the UK and AZN is very sad, and will hurt their own population but also endorse the UK attitude that brexit was the right thing to do
Unless there's new polling out, the UK (public) attitude is still that Brexit was the wrong thing to do
While "swimming in vaccines" (coined by @MaxPB in the first instance IIRC) is I believe an apt and accurate description of our (the developed world's) likely position later in the year can we please cease using the phrase "swimming in vaccines".
With thanks.
Eh? If it were only one kind of vaccine, then the singular would be correct.
But there are two or more kinds, so the plural is correct.
One can talk about 'swimming in whisky'. But a punctilious grammarian would say 'whiskies' if, say, Talisker and Bruachladdich were involved.
No self-respecting PB Scotch expert would swim in anything other than a Grouse.
It strikes me that there are two different, and not easily reconcilable, ideologies at the heart of this government (and on PB): Global Britain, and Britain First. These ideologies are being played out in the vaccination debate, on post-Brexit Britain, on Scottish nationalism (England First, rather than Britain First), and elsewhere in government.
So Global Britain is the outward-looking, vaccine sharing, Liz Truss trade vision, Hong Kong migrants welcoming type of vision that I suspect the PM favours.
Britain First is the vaccine hoarding, EU-hating, migrant Channel-crossing anxious, sod off Scotland, nationalistic vision of much of the Tory Party membership and beloved by most of the tabloids.
While both visions are represented by PB Tories, being the civilised bunch they are most favour Global Britain.
I suspect the government will struggle to hold this coalition together as time goes on, and it gives opposition parties an opportunity to (to coin a phrase) develop a third way that mediates between, and away from, these stark choices.
Just to confirm I am very much in the Global Britain cohort and credit Liz Truss for her successes and her formal application yesterday to join TPP
Does anyone have an estimate for how long this may take?
They're doing whatever they think they can do to slow our programme down. It's a clear attempt to try and sow seeds of doubt among UK citizens, unfortunately for them it's not going to work. I think by now every single person in the country has had at least 1 parent or grandparent that's had their first dose and knows there's no danger.
Their rhetoric and petulance is doing more to undermine confidence in the EU than Britain's actions.
A confident EU would welcome the fact it could learn from other countries to always challenge itself to raise its game.
Brexit is going to help the whole world get vaccinated faster. If we were still in (and thus clearly part of the EU scheme given zero members availabled themselves of the freedom to go it alone), the EU would have no idea it wasn't doing brilliantly and would plod along at the same pace, ignoring the microstates as irrelevant comparisons.
It strikes me that there are two different, and not easily reconcilable, ideologies at the heart of this government (and on PB): Global Britain, and Britain First. These ideologies are being played out in the vaccination debate, on post-Brexit Britain, on Scottish nationalism (England First, rather than Britain First), and elsewhere in government.
So Global Britain is the outward-looking, vaccine sharing, Liz Truss trade vision, Hong Kong migrants welcoming type of vision that I suspect the PM favours.
Britain First is the vaccine hoarding, EU-hating, migrant Channel-crossing anxious, sod off Scotland, nationalistic vision of much of the Tory Party membership and beloved by most of the tabloids.
While both visions are represented by PB Tories, being the civilised bunch they are most favour Global Britain.
I suspect the government will struggle to hold this coalition together as time goes on, and it gives opposition parties an opportunity to (to coin a phrase) develop a third way that mediates between, and away from, these stark choices.
Just to confirm I am very much in the Global Britain cohort and credit Liz Truss for her successes and her formal application yesterday to join TPP
Does anyone have an estimate for how long this may take?
I'm sure he will continue to be dismissive in public for a few months more, expressing EU solidarity - until the vaccines are actually offered and available, at which point he'll bite the UK's hand off for them.
This. Otherwise he will be the next up in the Euro Coconut Shy. VDL would really, really, like someone to do something she can condemn at this moment.
Over-18 population of RoI is only about 4m people. Once UK is at the point of massive vaccine centres in exhibition halls and car parks, helping the country with which we share a land border get their population also vaccinated is in our collective best interest. Not only will we send them some vaccines, we'll probably send them a load of (vaccinated) tourists over the summer too.
Yes. We should help Ireland.
Ireland should be offered to be done anyway, as part of our domestic pandemic response. There is an utterly porous border with a vector for the Bastard Bug to walk through into the UK. No wider EU issues. Just looking out for our own interests. Their good fortune....
I'm sure he will continue to be dismissive in public for a few months more, expressing EU solidarity - until the vaccines are actually offered and available, at which point he'll bite the UK's hand off for them.
This. Otherwise he will be the next up in the Euro Coconut Shy. VDL would really, really, like someone to do something she can condemn at this moment.
Over-18 population of RoI is only about 4m people. Once UK is at the point of massive vaccine centres in exhibition halls and car parks, helping the country with which we share a land border get their population also vaccinated is in our collective best interest. Not only will we send them some vaccines, we'll probably send them a load of (vaccinated) tourists over the summer too.
Yes. We should help Ireland.
Ireland should be offered to be done anyway, as part of our domestic pandemic response. There is an utterly porous border with a vector for the Bastard Bug to walk through into the UK. No wider EU issues. Just looking out for our own interests. Their good fortune....
It strikes me that there are two different, and not easily reconcilable, ideologies at the heart of this government (and on PB): Global Britain, and Britain First. These ideologies are being played out in the vaccination debate, on post-Brexit Britain, on Scottish nationalism (England First, rather than Britain First), and elsewhere in government.
So Global Britain is the outward-looking, vaccine sharing, Liz Truss trade vision, Hong Kong migrants welcoming type of vision that I suspect the PM favours.
Britain First is the vaccine hoarding, EU-hating, migrant Channel-crossing anxious, sod off Scotland, nationalistic vision of much of the Tory Party membership and beloved by most of the tabloids.
While both visions are represented by PB Tories, being the civilised bunch they are most favour Global Britain.
I suspect the government will struggle to hold this coalition together as time goes on, and it gives opposition parties an opportunity to (to coin a phrase) develop a third way that mediates between, and away from, these stark choices.
Just to confirm I am very much in the Global Britain cohort and credit Liz Truss for her successes and her formal application yesterday to join TPP
Does anyone have an estimate for how long this may take?
'I don’t know many poor, or working class, or female, or struggling-to-be-taken-seriously folk who would show up at the inauguration of our 46th president dressed like Bernie. Unless those same folk had privilege. Which they don’t.'
It strikes me that there are two different, and not easily reconcilable, ideologies at the heart of this government (and on PB): Global Britain, and Britain First. These ideologies are being played out in the vaccination debate, on post-Brexit Britain, on Scottish nationalism (England First, rather than Britain First), and elsewhere in government.
So Global Britain is the outward-looking, vaccine sharing, Liz Truss trade vision, Hong Kong migrants welcoming type of vision that I suspect the PM favours.
Britain First is the vaccine hoarding, EU-hating, migrant Channel-crossing anxious, sod off Scotland, nationalistic vision of much of the Tory Party membership and beloved by most of the tabloids.
While both visions are represented by PB Tories, being the civilised bunch they are most favour Global Britain.
I suspect the government will struggle to hold this coalition together as time goes on, and it gives opposition parties an opportunity to (to coin a phrase) develop a third way that mediates between, and away from, these stark choices.
Just to confirm I am very much in the Global Britain cohort and credit Liz Truss for her successes and her formal application yesterday to join TPP
Does anyone have an estimate for how long this may take?
My honest answer is I do not know
If this article is correct it's not a process of 'joining one bloc' rather, it requires negotiating with each individual country. However, Japan seems to be quite keen for us to join and they are one of the most influential members:
Is anybody buying they accidentally triggered A16? They must be the same sort who would believe the stories people tell A&E doctors about why they have a 16 inch flint knapped dildo lodged up their arse.
'I don’t know many poor, or working class, or female, or struggling-to-be-taken-seriously folk who would show up at the inauguration of our 46th president dressed like Bernie. Unless those same folk had privilege. Which they don’t.'
Thank goodness he didn't show up at the Cenotaph in a donkey jacket. (It wasnt one, I know).
It strikes me that there are two different, and not easily reconcilable, ideologies at the heart of this government (and on PB): Global Britain, and Britain First. These ideologies are being played out in the vaccination debate, on post-Brexit Britain, on Scottish nationalism (England First, rather than Britain First), and elsewhere in government.
So Global Britain is the outward-looking, vaccine sharing, Liz Truss trade vision, Hong Kong migrants welcoming type of vision that I suspect the PM favours.
Britain First is the vaccine hoarding, EU-hating, migrant Channel-crossing anxious, sod off Scotland, nationalistic vision of much of the Tory Party membership and beloved by most of the tabloids.
While both visions are represented by PB Tories, being the civilised bunch they are most favour Global Britain.
I suspect the government will struggle to hold this coalition together as time goes on, and it gives opposition parties an opportunity to (to coin a phrase) develop a third way that mediates between, and away from, these stark choices.
Just to confirm I am very much in the Global Britain cohort and credit Liz Truss for her successes and her formal application yesterday to join TPP
Does anyone have an estimate for how long this may take?
I'm sure he will continue to be dismissive in public for a few months more, expressing EU solidarity - until the vaccines are actually offered and available, at which point he'll bite the UK's hand off for them.
This. Otherwise he will be the next up in the Euro Coconut Shy. VDL would really, really, like someone to do something she can condemn at this moment.
Over-18 population of RoI is only about 4m people. Once UK is at the point of massive vaccine centres in exhibition halls and car parks, helping the country with which we share a land border get their population also vaccinated is in our collective best interest. Not only will we send them some vaccines, we'll probably send them a load of (vaccinated) tourists over the summer too.
Yes. We should help Ireland.
Ireland should be offered to be done anyway, as part of our domestic pandemic response. There is an utterly porous border with a vector for the Bastard Bug to walk through into the UK. No wider EU issues. Just looking out for our own interests. Their good fortune....
Is anybody buying they accidentally triggered A16? They must be the same sort who would believe the stories people tell A&E doctors about why they have a 16 inch flint knapped dildo lodged up their arse.
It's up to you whether you buy my explantion. I'm sticking with it,
They're doing whatever they think they can do to slow our programme down. It's a clear attempt to try and sow seeds of doubt among UK citizens, unfortunately for them it's not going to work. I think by now every single person in the country has had at least 1 parent or grandparent that's had their first dose and knows there's no danger.
Listening to French and German politicians attacking both the UK and AZN is very sad, and will hurt their own population but also endorse the UK attitude that brexit was the right thing to do
And of course British, and especially Tory politicians never criticised Europeans ones? Never, never. Or did I miss something?
The whole time since about 2010 onward has been marked by vicious attacks on all things European by UKIP and by a significant section of the Tory party; a section which is now in control.
Speeding up the vaccine rollout is, as one commentator put it, “the world’s easiest cost-benefit test”, with costs in the billions and an upside in the trillions. And yet while the UK, USA, and especially Israel are passing this test, the EU – which prioritised trying to get superficially better prices and terms from pharmaceutical companies – has manifestly failed.
While the UK will soon have vaccinated 15 per cent of its population, across the EU the same figure is just three per cent. And this gap will likely grow, since the UK rollout is still accelerating: over one per cent of UK adults were vaccinated on Saturday alone, a figure most countries in the EU would struggle to achieve in a week.
If the Government had opted in to the EU vaccine scheme, we would now be stuck in the slow lane. This would undoubtedly have meant many more lives lost in the coming months....it is possible that our decision to go it alone will be one of the most economically beneficial decisions any government has ever made – with the £12 billion the UK is reportedly spending on vaccines delivering a potential return by the end of 2021 in the hundreds of billions of pounds.
Quarantine after travel was a simple policy. During the periods where non-essential travel abroad was restricted, insist that all incoming people quarantine in airport hotels. Collect them off the plane, onto a bus, into the hotel. We certainly had the ability to do so - surplus hotel space existed. So why didn't we? And why - even now with people having to go door to door to try and mop up this SA strain - aren't we doing it now?
Three possibilities, none of which are mutually exclusive: 1. "Global Britain, Open for Business". Politically it was so important post Brexit to have Britain open that it trumped all other considerations including public health 2. Pressure from Tory donors. We have watched agog at the brazen way the Tories have handed out vast amounts of public money to their friends. And we had that amazing announcement that travel restrictions would no longer apply to captains of industry like their friends. So rich Tory friends/benefactors/donors telling the cabinet not to do it would have been influential 3. Boris is crap. He has proven utterly incapable of taking tough decisions or doing anything unpopular until its absolutely unavoidable
A stupid, corrupt fool really isn't who we needed to be "leading" us through this crisis. Which is why so many of us have died or been badly infected unnecessarily.
Laughable. But idiocy like that gives comfort to me. It means Labour are not going to win anything. Especially with Raynor as deputy.
Of course Johnson nearly died of this virus. He realised why and decided to lose weight. It's it rocket science. I'll give you and others some free advice... cut out the booze and fat.
And of course Johnson is not cruel or inept... You are being typically hysterical. It was Johnson who got the vaccine programme going.
But do carry on swimmingly. You are wondering off into the mists of irrelevance.
I am not advocating a Labour victory. As for "Johnson is not inept", its a true honour to have Gavin Williamson posting his support for the boss on our forum!
Interesting that you don't even try to deny the open corruption.
It strikes me that there are two different, and not easily reconcilable, ideologies at the heart of this government (and on PB): Global Britain, and Britain First. These ideologies are being played out in the vaccination debate, on post-Brexit Britain, on Scottish nationalism (England First, rather than Britain First), and elsewhere in government.
So Global Britain is the outward-looking, vaccine sharing, Liz Truss trade vision, Hong Kong migrants welcoming type of vision that I suspect the PM favours.
Britain First is the vaccine hoarding, EU-hating, migrant Channel-crossing anxious, sod off Scotland, nationalistic vision of much of the Tory Party membership and beloved by most of the tabloids.
While both visions are represented by PB Tories, being the civilised bunch they are most favour Global Britain.
I suspect the government will struggle to hold this coalition together as time goes on, and it gives opposition parties an opportunity to (to coin a phrase) develop a third way that mediates between, and away from, these stark choices.
Just to confirm I am very much in the Global Britain cohort and credit Liz Truss for her successes and her formal application yesterday to join TPP
Does anyone have an estimate for how long this may take?
We are not there yet but if (i) vaccines are in limited supply and (ii) the UK has vaccinated sufficiently to control the virus and substantially reopen, it not IMMORAL (in fact it is quite the contrary) to argue that the priority should then be in countries where the virus is raging.
Furthermore this is the most rational approach for a global pandemic. It must be defeated globally otherwise it will be back to bite us with vicious imported mutations and we will be stuck in this twilight world for years.
The header is great but is playing to the gallery.
The issue with point ii is that your definition of sufficient won't be the same as others.
Yes. And in fact this is hopefully an argument more in the realms of theory than practice. Plan A - which looks possible - is we are able to vaccinate every adult who wants it quite quickly and by that point the limiting factor on the global effort will be logistics rather than supply.
Tower Hamlets has had some fractious politics in the past to put it mildly, I've had colleagues in the past who worked there. Probably a surprise it's been comparatively calm.
They're doing whatever they think they can do to slow our programme down. It's a clear attempt to try and sow seeds of doubt among UK citizens, unfortunately for them it's not going to work. I think by now every single person in the country has had at least 1 parent or grandparent that's had their first dose and knows there's no danger.
Listening to French and German politicians attacking both the UK and AZN is very sad, and will hurt their own population but also endorse the UK attitude that brexit was the right thing to do
And of course British, and especially Tory politicians never criticised Europeans ones? Never, never. Or did I miss something?
The whole time since about 2010 onward has been marked by vicious attacks on all things European by UKIP and by a significant section of the Tory party; a section which is now in control.
I am rather surprise that you do not join the condemnation of the behaviour of the German and French politicians when they are actively attempting to undermine an important vaccine in a global pandemic because they cannot bear the thought the UK may be doing very well compared to them
They're doing whatever they think they can do to slow our programme down. It's a clear attempt to try and sow seeds of doubt among UK citizens, unfortunately for them it's not going to work. I think by now every single person in the country has had at least 1 parent or grandparent that's had their first dose and knows there's no danger.
Listening to French and German politicians attacking both the UK and AZN is very sad, and will hurt their own population but also endorse the UK attitude that brexit was the right thing to do
And of course British, and especially Tory politicians never criticised Europeans ones? Never, never. Or did I miss something?
The whole time since about 2010 onward has been marked by vicious attacks on all things European by UKIP and by a significant section of the Tory party; a section which is now in control.
There's lives at risk from these EU vicious attacks. Anti-vaxxers having a field day with it.
Channel 4 have won the rights to show England’s upcoming series in India in a groundbreaking deal that sees Test cricket return to terrestrial television in the UK for the first time since the 2005 Ashes.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
The last place I saw the word "Jocks" used was in "The Complete McAuslan". Given this was written some little time ago....
That surprised me - I was going to say you obviously have a sheltered life, but on reflection it's simply that you don't see quite as much on Scottish current affairs as TUD and I do,including some of the reaction - quite understandably.
This, for instance, is a prime UK commentator only a few months ago.
"A prime UK commentator" who is pimping out car insurance in the middle of his video, with a "ticker" on his video pimping out car insurance?
And who agrees with what you want politically?
And agrees with what you want politically also, unless all your democracy stuff is bullshit.
Yes he does.
I still wouldn't call him "a prime UK commentator" though. I wouldn't call myself a prime UK commentator and I believe in everything I believe in.
He's an old has-been pimping out car insurance.
Well, the Sun are, or recently were*, willing to pay him a lot more than you for assorted commentary and pensees.
*not sure when he stopped
According to Wikipedia it was 1994 he ceased to be Editor of the Sun and he hasn't been paid as a commentator since 2017.
Frankly if we never saw him again it would be too soon. Hateful vile man - what he published over Hillsborough I would never forgive him or the Sun for - using the word Jocks in a stupid online video is frankly nothing compared to that.
The man should have zero credibility and never be taken seriously by anyone.
I certainly didn't picvk him for any apparent agreement with my views or otherwise! Just the first recent example of Jockanese when I had a look on the news bit of Google.
I think "Jock" is rare now in everyday speech, but not in Tabloid-ese.
It is one of the words beloved of crass journalists, but not much heard anymore.
Another is "boffin" for scientist. I do not think I have ever heard the word "boffin" used in speech in everyday life.
But, sure enough, Prof Neil Ferguson is the "Bonking Boffin".
The vaccines were developed by "top boffins", Etc.
The ability to see oneself as not rich, powerful etc is always of interest to me.
Bernie Sanders might as well live on Mount Olympus - short of doing something really, really stupid, he will never want for anything*, ever.
*For a certain definition of "anything" of course. But he has multiple properties, travels by private plane etc.
It's quite hilarious, that to a certain audience his support of Biden makes him as evil as Trump.
That is certainly bizarre.
But there is actually insight in the comments about how he dressed.
It takes a level of "being In The Thing" before you can feel that you can get away with dressing how you like. "A Duke dressed like a dustman is still a duke" and all that.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
Can you point out the last post in which I did that? I believe digging up old posts is one of your talents.
In any case I have been assured that the term is an affectionate one, a bit of banter between our family of nations. Have I been misinformed?
Yes. Just type the word into the search box on PB VF you get the below. You and another prominent Scottish Nationalist use it every other day. No one else does.
I don't know if its an affectionate term or not - that's for you to decide because you (and Carnyx as you will see below) are the only person I come accross who ever uses the term regularly. I do know is that in England it's obsolete. When I was a kid (I'm 47) I didn't read the Dandy (being more of a Whoopee! and Whizzer & Chips man myself) but was obviously aware of it from friends copies - I had literally no clue until I was in my teens that the Jocks were supposed to be from Scotland and the Geordies from Newcastle. Since then, save in the context of passionate outbursts from older relatives during sporting fixtures, I've never heard it used.
I knew I could rely on you, happy to provide your stalker fix now Malc has been banned.
I couldn’t give a fuck who uses the term Jock, it just entertains me the number of people who get wound up about me using it, and Scotch of course. If I had a pound for every time someone or other lumbers on to tell me it refers to whisky, I’d have enough to buy a bottle of decent malt.
"stalker fix"? Sorry to break it to you mate, but really - nobody gives a shiny shit about you.
Thanks for making the effort to tell me that. Looking forward to you getting back to some strong English Sparkling Wine content.
Hi TUD , I am back, I see the usual suspects are behaving to form, pleasant and friendly as ever.
Come on Arlene! Simply tell us how to square the circle between being an integral part of the UK and maintaining an open border on Ireland! It must be very simple to fix as you and the Tories you supported kept saying how NI wouldn't be a blockage.
Yes I know that you and they were talking bollox and that you've been semi-detached from the union by your supposed allies, but you have to take some kind of ownership here.
I like this line: "Would love to see a real plan for the future. A radical plan. Way to the left of the SNP. But remember, the E.U. is a neo-liberal construct. It won't be easy. Ask the Greeks."
Maybe ask the Irish too.
Political archaeologists will be interested to learn that Bobby's Dad, also Bob, was the memorably inept Labour candidate who lost Govan to Jim Sillars in the 1988 by-election. I remember it well. Glasgow Labour was something else. Those were the days.
On Sturgeon's polling, she has lost 5% favourability in January with Opinium - from +15 to +10.
(Starmer has lost 6%. Ed Davey has lost 4%. Boris has lost 2%)
She has more of it to lose of course.
Oh indeed. But from the glee of posters north of the border, you wouldn't have known that polling wise, only Starmer had a worse January than Sturgeon.
Let's see how February plays out....
Are you thinking of the Covid rates and whether you stay top of the world league.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
The last place I saw the word "Jocks" used was in "The Complete McAuslan". Given this was written some little time ago....
That surprised me - I was going to say you obviously have a sheltered life, but on reflection it's simply that you don't see quite as much on Scottish current affairs as TUD and I do,including some of the reaction - quite understandably.
This, for instance, is a prime UK commentator only a few months ago.
"A prime UK commentator" who is pimping out car insurance in the middle of his video, with a "ticker" on his video pimping out car insurance?
And who agrees with what you want politically?
And agrees with what you want politically also, unless all your democracy stuff is bullshit.
Yes he does.
I still wouldn't call him "a prime UK commentator" though. I wouldn't call myself a prime UK commentator and I believe in everything I believe in.
He's an old has-been pimping out car insurance.
Well, the Sun are, or recently were*, willing to pay him a lot more than you for assorted commentary and pensees.
*not sure when he stopped
According to Wikipedia it was 1994 he ceased to be Editor of the Sun and he hasn't been paid as a commentator since 2017.
Frankly if we never saw him again it would be too soon. Hateful vile man - what he published over Hillsborough I would never forgive him or the Sun for - using the word Jocks in a stupid online video is frankly nothing compared to that.
The man should have zero credibility and never be taken seriously by anyone.
I certainly didn't picvk him for any apparent agreement with my views or otherwise! Just the first recent example of Jockanese when I had a look on the news bit of Google.
I think "Jock" is rare now in everyday speech, but not in Tabloid-ese.
It is one of the words beloved of crass journalists, but not much heard anymore.
Another is "boffin" for scientist. I do not think I have ever heard the word "boffin" used in speech in everyday life.
But, sure enough, Prof Neil Ferguson is the "Bonking Boffin".
The vaccines were developed by "top boffins", Etc.
It strikes me that there are two different, and not easily reconcilable, ideologies at the heart of this government (and on PB): Global Britain, and Britain First. These ideologies are being played out in the vaccination debate, on post-Brexit Britain, on Scottish nationalism (England First, rather than Britain First), and elsewhere in government.
So Global Britain is the outward-looking, vaccine sharing, Liz Truss trade vision, Hong Kong migrants welcoming type of vision that I suspect the PM favours.
Britain First is the vaccine hoarding, EU-hating, migrant Channel-crossing anxious, sod off Scotland, nationalistic vision of much of the Tory Party membership and beloved by most of the tabloids.
While both visions are represented by PB Tories, being the civilised bunch they are most favour Global Britain.
I suspect the government will struggle to hold this coalition together as time goes on, and it gives opposition parties an opportunity to (to coin a phrase) develop a third way that mediates between, and away from, these stark choices.
Just to confirm I am very much in the Global Britain cohort and credit Liz Truss for her successes and her formal application yesterday to join TPP
Does anyone have an estimate for how long this may take?
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
Can you point out the last post in which I did that? I believe digging up old posts is one of your talents.
In any case I have been assured that the term is an affectionate one, a bit of banter between our family of nations. Have I been misinformed?
Yes. Just type the word into the search box on PB VF you get the below. You and another prominent Scottish Nationalist use it every other day. No one else does.
I don't know if its an affectionate term or not - that's for you to decide because you (and Carnyx as you will see below) are the only person I come accross who ever uses the term regularly. I do know is that in England it's obsolete. When I was a kid (I'm 47) I didn't read the Dandy (being more of a Whoopee! and Whizzer & Chips man myself) but was obviously aware of it from friends copies - I had literally no clue until I was in my teens that the Jocks were supposed to be from Scotland and the Geordies from Newcastle. Since then, save in the context of passionate outbursts from older relatives during sporting fixtures, I've never heard it used.
I knew I could rely on you, happy to provide your stalker fix now Malc has been banned.
I couldn’t give a fuck who uses the term Jock, it just entertains me the number of people who get wound up about me using it, and Scotch of course. If I had a pound for every time someone or other lumbers on to tell me it refers to whisky, I’d have enough to buy a bottle of decent malt.
"Stalker". You give yourself too much credit. Why the hell would I want to stalk you? And quite obviously you don't give a fuck who uses the word. You're about the only one who does use it.
You seem to latch onto more of my posts than I do yours. You could remedy that quite easily of course.
TUD, he has promised several times to ignore me but always comes back, like a bad penny.
I like this line: "Would love to see a real plan for the future. A radical plan. Way to the left of the SNP. But remember, the E.U. is a neo-liberal construct. It won't be easy. Ask the Greeks."
Maybe ask the Irish too.
Political archaeologists will be interested to learn that Bobby's Dad, also Bob, was the memorably inept Labour candidate who lost Govan to Jim Sillars in the 1988 by-election. I remember it well. Glasgow Labour was something else. Those were the days.
Well, we wanna be free, we wanna be free to do what we wanna do
'I don’t know many poor, or working class, or female, or struggling-to-be-taken-seriously folk who would show up at the inauguration of our 46th president dressed like Bernie. Unless those same folk had privilege. Which they don’t.'
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
Can you point out the last post in which I did that? I believe digging up old posts is one of your talents.
In any case I have been assured that the term is an affectionate one, a bit of banter between our family of nations. Have I been misinformed?
Yes. Just type the word into the search box on PB VF you get the below. You and another prominent Scottish Nationalist use it every other day. No one else does.
I don't know if its an affectionate term or not - that's for you to decide because you (and Carnyx as you will see below) are the only person I come accross who ever uses the term regularly. I do know is that in England it's obsolete. When I was a kid (I'm 47) I didn't read the Dandy (being more of a Whoopee! and Whizzer & Chips man myself) but was obviously aware of it from friends copies - I had literally no clue until I was in my teens that the Jocks were supposed to be from Scotland and the Geordies from Newcastle. Since then, save in the context of passionate outbursts from older relatives during sporting fixtures, I've never heard it used.
I knew I could rely on you, happy to provide your stalker fix now Malc has been banned.
I couldn’t give a fuck who uses the term Jock, it just entertains me the number of people who get wound up about me using it, and Scotch of course. If I had a pound for every time someone or other lumbers on to tell me it refers to whisky, I’d have enough to buy a bottle of decent malt.
"stalker fix"? Sorry to break it to you mate, but really - nobody gives a shiny shit about you.
Thanks for making the effort to tell me that. Looking forward to you getting back to some strong English Sparkling Wine content.
Hi TUD , I am back, I see the usual suspects are behaving to form, pleasant and friendly as ever.
They're doing whatever they think they can do to slow our programme down. It's a clear attempt to try and sow seeds of doubt among UK citizens, unfortunately for them it's not going to work. I think by now every single person in the country has had at least 1 parent or grandparent that's had their first dose and knows there's no danger.
Listening to French and German politicians attacking both the UK and AZN is very sad, and will hurt their own population but also endorse the UK attitude that brexit was the right thing to do
And of course British, and especially Tory politicians never criticised Europeans ones? Never, never. Or did I miss something?
The whole time since about 2010 onward has been marked by vicious attacks on all things European by UKIP and by a significant section of the Tory party; a section which is now in control.
I am rather surprise that you do not join the condemnation of the behaviour of the German and French politicians when they are actively attempting to undermine an important vaccine in a global pandemic because they cannot bear the thought the UK may be doing very well compared to them
I deplore that sort of behaviour from where ever it comes. I notice that you now seem happy with the sort of remarks made by right-wingers about the EU.
It strikes me that there are two different, and not easily reconcilable, ideologies at the heart of this government (and on PB): Global Britain, and Britain First. These ideologies are being played out in the vaccination debate, on post-Brexit Britain, on Scottish nationalism (England First, rather than Britain First), and elsewhere in government.
So Global Britain is the outward-looking, vaccine sharing, Liz Truss trade vision, Hong Kong migrants welcoming type of vision that I suspect the PM favours.
Britain First is the vaccine hoarding, EU-hating, migrant Channel-crossing anxious, sod off Scotland, nationalistic vision of much of the Tory Party membership and beloved by most of the tabloids.
While both visions are represented by PB Tories, being the civilised bunch they are most favour Global Britain.
I suspect the government will struggle to hold this coalition together as time goes on, and it gives opposition parties an opportunity to (to coin a phrase) develop a third way that mediates between, and away from, these stark choices.
Just to confirm I am very much in the Global Britain cohort and credit Liz Truss for her successes and her formal application yesterday to join TPP
Does anyone have an estimate for how long this may take?
Is performative xenophobia better or worse than just xenophobia?
That's also a rather silly tweet. Being in the EU, vaccines aside, is probably in our better interest but its certainly not merely a trade bloc. That's part of its pitch, about how much more integrated it is than a trade bloc.
Brexit supporters largely support free trade, were reluctant to get rid of the free trade aspects of the EU as a trade association, and many oppose protectionism like the EU protectionism against some of the world's poorest people. The vote gave everyone an impossible forced choice between two highly imperfect situations when a large majority wanted a reformed EU - not on the ballot.
More ‘why don’t those ungrateful Jocks realise how great the UK is and how awful Sturgeon is’ news. Though it appears a goodly number of non Jocks hold the same view. A Britain united at last!
Why do you persist in referring to your fellow countrymen as “Jocks? Well, actually, I know, it’s what you stereotypically imagine the English do and it fuels your oppression fantasy.
Can you point out the last post in which I did that? I believe digging up old posts is one of your talents.
In any case I have been assured that the term is an affectionate one, a bit of banter between our family of nations. Have I been misinformed?
Yes. Just type the word into the search box on PB VF you get the below. You and another prominent Scottish Nationalist use it every other day. No one else does.
I don't know if its an affectionate term or not - that's for you to decide because you (and Carnyx as you will see below) are the only person I come accross who ever uses the term regularly. I do know is that in England it's obsolete. When I was a kid (I'm 47) I didn't read the Dandy (being more of a Whoopee! and Whizzer & Chips man myself) but was obviously aware of it from friends copies - I had literally no clue until I was in my teens that the Jocks were supposed to be from Scotland and the Geordies from Newcastle. Since then, save in the context of passionate outbursts from older relatives during sporting fixtures, I've never heard it used.
I knew I could rely on you, happy to provide your stalker fix now Malc has been banned.
I couldn’t give a fuck who uses the term Jock, it just entertains me the number of people who get wound up about me using it, and Scotch of course. If I had a pound for every time someone or other lumbers on to tell me it refers to whisky, I’d have enough to buy a bottle of decent malt.
"Stalker". You give yourself too much credit. Why the hell would I want to stalk you? And quite obviously you don't give a fuck who uses the word. You're about the only one who does use it.
You seem to latch onto more of my posts than I do yours. You could remedy that quite easily of course.
TUD, he has promised several times to ignore me but always comes back, like a bad penny.
As you are so good at numbers , could you oblige with the death rates and positivity rates for same countries , we can then do a real comparison of who is doing well rather than your Tory cult ideas of success.
Comments
I accept that the world is as it is, now, and therefore there is a hierarchy in our mutual aid and empathy.
My argument is that there is a different world as it might be, an ideal that we might strive to reach. You seem to think that the status quo is as good as it is going to get.
I think Britain's actions on vaccines take us closer to the world as I would want it, since we are taking on a substantial share of responsibility for vaccinating the world. Even if we're not at the equitable ideal, which would not be possible without reciprocity.
Fastest human running race of all time: (Starts at 3m19s)
https://youtu.be/uwLDpcye-VM?t=199
It is one of the words beloved of crass journalists, but not much heard anymore.
Another is "boffin" for scientist. I do not think I have ever heard the word "boffin" used in speech in everyday life.
But, sure enough, Prof Neil Ferguson is the "Bonking Boffin".
The vaccines were developed by "top boffins", Etc.
But imprisoning people without charge or trial, the overwhelming majority of whom won't have any virus, at their own expense once the vulnerable here are all vaccinated is immoral, expensive and pointless. A friend of mine will need to come back from Tanzania from an Oxfam project in May. She doesn't have any money to pay for a hotel. Why should she need to self-isolate pointlessly when there's no evidence at all that she's infected.
Yes, there are new strains that could get around the vaccines, but that'll always be the case. At some point we have to get over our fears and open up again. This virus will always be with us, sadly, in one form or another.
Yes, we then went on to set out that we wanted a compromise agreement like New Zealand has. Its typical cakeist bollox from our team and its no wonder that we didn't get it. What Simon Jenkins doesn't note is that the EU-NZ arrangement is the result of 9 amendments to the original agreement.
So all we have to do is go back to the EU and renegotiate the deal where it doesn't work. And we won't. Because Boris Defeated the EU and Won a Brilliant Deal.
In a former Wickes store, very efficient process. 12 lanes running, and capacity of 30 lanes. Apparently they are doing over 1000 a day and working towards 2000.
AZ jab. One interesting point was that they did all the checks, then moved me on to the jab table, then made me wait while they went away to draw up the vaccine - so no baskets of pre-prepared ready to go jabs.
I was handled as an exception as I had one of the letters with the wrong link. But handled very efficiently.
(ie if you are worried, don't be).
Very impressive.
But there are two or more kinds, so the plural is correct.
One can talk about 'swimming in whisky'. But a punctilious grammarian would say 'whiskies' if, say, Talisker and Bruachladdich were involved.
But most of the AZN vaccine for COVAX will probably be made abroad.
In order to get buy in from the world, COVAX has avoided a childish attempt to grab all the benefit for any one nation. Or group of nations. So facilities are being created around the world, supply chains setup etc etc. Yes, some nations well benefit more than others. But it quite distributed.
Only 11% would prefer the SNP to do better at the expense of Scottish Labour.
https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2021/02/our-survey-conservative-activists-back-the-labour-party.html?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Tuesday 2nd February 2021&utm_content=Tuesday 2nd February 2021+CID_16787b71c97ff8e229aa28a64aeb2f4c&utm_source=Daily Email&utm_term=Our survey Conservative activists back the Labour Party
And I wonder if Scott_P will retweet it?
Probably not for some whike though as youd need a reserve to cover second doses in case deliveries got hit.
Testing the mixing and matching of vaccines is ongoing? Eg a Pfizer then an AZ? Thatd make things easier if the way the work allows that.
BUT we haven't and bearing in mind the anti vaxxers who are out there this is a discussion that should really be had much further down the line.
Edit: Sorry not a criticism of your post but of those criticizing the UK approval.
https://twitter.com/sfc_opinions/status/1356213758826311681?s=19
"That stuff we don't have - you are better off without it"
https://www.cricviz.com/joe-root-how-to-play-spin-in-test-cricket
Bernie Sanders might as well live on Mount Olympus - short of doing something really, really stupid, he will never want for anything*, ever.
*For a certain definition of "anything" of course. But he has multiple properties, travels by private plane etc.
That's also a rather silly tweet. Being in the EU, vaccines aside, is probably in our better interest but its certainly not merely a trade bloc. That's part of its pitch, about how much more integrated it is than a trade bloc.
But idiocy like that gives comfort to me. It means Labour are not going to win anything. Especially with Raynor as deputy.
Of course Johnson nearly died of this virus. He realised why and decided to lose weight. It's it rocket science. I'll give you and others some free advice... cut out the booze and fat.
And of course Johnson is not cruel or inept... You are being typically hysterical. It was Johnson who got the vaccine programme going.
But do carry on swimmingly. You are wondering off into the mists of irrelevance.
Let's all not use it any more (myself included, as I have done so recently).
All in all a very depressing header
An Anglo-Schwäbisch eurocrat (personal capacity) - maker of EU foreign policy & spätzle - guerrilla knitter - UK & EU federalist - Far Remain - host
https://www.global-counsel.com/insights/blog/unlikely-trans-pacific-alliance-uks-case-cptpp-membership
But it does mean 'timeframes' are misleading ideas in this contxt.
An Anglo-Schwäbisch eurocrat (personal capacity) - maker of EU foreign policy & spätzle - guerrilla knitter - UK & EU federalist - Far Remain - host
Or did I miss something?
The whole time since about 2010 onward has been marked by vicious attacks on all things European by UKIP and by a significant section of the Tory party; a section which is now in control.
While the UK will soon have vaccinated 15 per cent of its population, across the EU the same figure is just three per cent. And this gap will likely grow, since the UK rollout is still accelerating: over one per cent of UK adults were vaccinated on Saturday alone, a figure most countries in the EU would struggle to achieve in a week.
If the Government had opted in to the EU vaccine scheme, we would now be stuck in the slow lane. This would undoubtedly have meant many more lives lost in the coming months....it is possible that our decision to go it alone will be one of the most economically beneficial decisions any government has ever made – with the £12 billion the UK is reportedly spending on vaccines delivering a potential return by the end of 2021 in the hundreds of billions of pounds.
https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2021/02/jethro-elsden-by-how-much-will-we-gain-by-choosing-our-own-vaccination-programme-not-the-eus-lets-start-at-100-billion.html
Interesting that you don't even try to deny the open corruption.
Channel 4 have won the rights to show England’s upcoming series in India in a groundbreaking deal that sees Test cricket return to terrestrial television in the UK for the first time since the 2005 Ashes.
But there is actually insight in the comments about how he dressed.
It takes a level of "being In The Thing" before you can feel that you can get away with dressing how you like. "A Duke dressed like a dustman is still a duke" and all that.
Yes I know that you and they were talking bollox and that you've been semi-detached from the union by your supposed allies, but you have to take some kind of ownership here.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/primal-scream-star-bobby-gillespie-23420856
I like this line: "Would love to see a real plan for the future. A radical plan. Way to the left of the SNP. But remember, the E.U. is a neo-liberal construct. It won't be easy. Ask the Greeks."
Maybe ask the Irish too.
Political archaeologists will be interested to learn that Bobby's Dad, also Bob, was the memorably inept Labour candidate who lost Govan to Jim Sillars in the 1988 by-election. I remember it well. Glasgow Labour was something else. Those were the days.
On Woman’s Hour just now:
We’ve reduced the number of women in prison by 25%, it’s a great success story.
But you’re asking for £150m for another 500 prison places for women?
The public would never forgive us if we were not prepared for an increase in female crime which our modelling shows is likely.
Can you explain or link to this modelling?
It’s very complicated..