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.
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.
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.
My old dad's best mate at work, who regularly called to see him when he was Ill, was Scottish. He and everyone called him Jock. Even Jock called him self Jock. That well known rotund dart player was known by all, including himself, as Jocky Wilson. I remember in the Gulf War a Scottish private laughing off a BBC suggestion about the dangers of the Iraq Republican Guard. "They have not come up against the Royal Jocks yet!" he said.
Personally I don't mind being called a Brit.
As you suggest there are still Scots who call themselves Jock and the expression ‘we’re all Jock Tamson’s bairns’ is pretty common. However the PB brains trust (Scotch section) has made a ruling.
Surprise Surprise , those people are call John ( Jock) and don't say it with a sneer.
'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.'
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.
Deflect, blame, ignore.
You don't want the Scottish government to improve its rate of vaccination?
In good time we should be generous with out vaccines (especially with Ireland poorer nations) but only when we've vaccinated enough of our own people to significantly drive down the infection rate and ease the pressure on the NHS.
By about May we should be in a position to start sharing our vaccines hopefully.
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.
Extraordinary stuff! Does this mean that Sky have lost the rights?? I'm stunned by this deal –but well done Channel 4. Finally a terrestrial channel taking cricket seriously. I suspect it will be very popular if marketed well.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
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.
Indeed. For myself and many others, Cameron's attempt at renegotiation with the EU proved that the organisation itself was unreformable, an inward-looking protectionist zone, rather than an enabler of global free trade.
CP-TPP is a free trade model for the future, an alliance of relatively wealthy nations committed to removing barriers to trade between them - without the political baggage that comes with EU membership. If we can get the USA involved, then even better.
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.
Deflect, blame, ignore.
You don't want the Scottish government to improve its rate of vaccination?
I want them to improve of course, but yet again you highlight your bias with your selective numbers. I am happy that Scotland has lower death rate , lower positivity rate and lower vaccination rate. I look at the big picture , you on the other hand ignore the devastating other numbers and focus on the one good part. When we are all vaccinated , Scotland a week or so behind England but England still having 40% higher death rate and probably world champions, will you still be crowing.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
The mistake was not being able to join it sooner. Fantastic news joining this and it's a shame you're so short sighted and xenophobic you don't understand why we would want to do so.
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
Why are people even talking about their kids schooling on social media?
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
Considering some of the drug use statistics available, you could definitely argue that they have been successful in getting Loaded...
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.
Deflect, blame, ignore.
You don't want the Scottish government to improve its rate of vaccination?
I want them to improve of course, but yet again you highlight your bias with your selective numbers. I am happy that Scotland has lower death rate , lower positivity rate and lower vaccination rate. I look at the big picture , you on the other hand ignore the devastating other numbers and focus on the one good part. When we are all vaccinated , Scotland a week or so behind England but England still having 40% higher death rate and probably world champions, will you still be crowing.
Sounds like you are the one crowing about deaths in England. Unless you've got a time machine you can't change the past - all we can change is the present and the future - but you and the SNP seem very defensive over Scotland's slower vaccination rate, now the "care homes first" rationale has run out of road.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
The mistake was not being able to join it sooner. Fantastic news joining this and it's a shame you're so short sighted and xenophobic you don't understand why we would want to do so.
Christ, get with the programme Philip
UK does something = automatically bad, short sighted, narrow minded etc Somebody else does it (bar the US) = great move, shows how shortsighted the UK is etc
It's not what you do that counts, it's who doing it.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
No. What's the mistake in joining a free trade grouping that accounts for 13% of world GDP?
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.
Malc, with the greatest respect, you're not averse to a bit of a ruck yourself!
Vaccinating the entire British/European/American/rich country population before releasing vaccines to other countries would lead to hundreds of thousands if not millions of additional deaths.
The UK represents less than 1% of the world's population and is moving at lightning speed relative to almost all other countries. Stopping halfway through our programme to chuck largesse at everybody else is not going to make a huge amount of difference to them in the grand scheme of things, but it will hurt us.
@Cyclefree is correct. And underlying all the good points she makes, especially with regard to young people, there is the fundamental issue of inter-generational equity. The younger people of the UK have been crushed under the weight of lockdown and its many implications in large part to save the lives of the old. Once the old have been protected from the virus, expecting the young to then keep playing a game of Russian roulette with it, whilst people abroad are inoculated at their expense, is indefensible.
The first duty of Government is the defence of the realm - both its territory and its citizenry. Britain can help the rest of the world too, but the rest of the world will have to wait until we are good and ready.
Yes - this header very strongly reflects what I've been hearing from my 3 children and their friends. They feel forgotten: all the focus is on the older people, which they understand, but the effects on them and their lives is just being ignored.
And while they are altruistic in general they react dismissively to the idea that they should continue to be ignored once the oldies have had their vaccinations so that those same oldies can feel good about helping people far away while ignoring the very real adverse consequences for them of the sacrifices they have made.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
The mistake was not being able to join it sooner. Fantastic news joining this and it's a shame you're so short sighted and xenophobic you don't understand why we would want to do so.
Christ, get with the programme Philip
UK does something = automatically bad, short sighted, narrow minded etc Somebody else does it (bar the US) = great move, shows how shortsighted the UK is etc
It's not what you do that counts, it's who doing it.
No it isn't. That's hysterical.
I support the joining of CPTPP however I'm yet to be convinced that it's better for us than being members of the EU. I don't think that's a particularly controversial view to have.
But in the absence of the EU, sure, CPTPP is probably better than nothing.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
The mistake was not being able to join it sooner. Fantastic news joining this and it's a shame you're so short sighted and xenophobic you don't understand why we would want to do so.
Not sure its xenophobic to observe that the Dover - Calais trade route is slightly larger, easier, and simpler than the UK - Perth one.
CPTPP does not, to provide one example, provide alternative trade possibilities for our fishing and agriculture sector.
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.
Indeed. For myself and many others, Cameron's attempt at renegotiation with the EU proved that the organisation itself was unreformable, an inward-looking protectionist zone, rather than an enabler of global free trade.
CP-TPP is a free trade model for the future, an alliance of relatively wealthy nations committed to removing barriers to trade between them - without the political baggage that comes with EU membership. If we can get the USA involved, then even better.
Being locked into it also makes Rejoining the EU way, way harder.....
As some of those squealing about our joining CP-TPP realise.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
6 Commonwealth Members 3 Anglophone majority, 5 widely spoken 4 Common Law
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?
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.
Not on the ballot and not in any way going to happen. Most people in the UK have wanted a reformed EU for years but all they got was more EU. At some point you have to accept it is not going to happen and move on. Which we did.
Vaccinating the entire British/European/American/rich country population before releasing vaccines to other countries would lead to hundreds of thousands if not millions of additional deaths.
The UK represents less than 1% of the world's population and is moving at lightning speed relative to almost all other countries. Stopping halfway through our programme to chuck largesse at everybody else is not going to make a huge amount of difference to them in the grand scheme of things, but it will hurt us.
@Cyclefree is correct. And underlying all the good points she makes, especially with regard to young people, there is the fundamental issue of inter-generational equity. The younger people of the UK have been crushed under the weight of lockdown and its many implications in large part to save the lives of the old. Once the old have been protected from the virus, expecting the young to then keep playing a game of Russian roulette with it, whilst people abroad are inoculated at their expense, is indefensible.
The first duty of Government is the defence of the realm - both its territory and its citizenry. Britain can help the rest of the world too, but the rest of the world will have to wait until we are good and ready.
Yes - this header very strongly reflects what I've been hearing from my 3 children and their friends. They feel forgotten: all the focus is on the older people, which they understand, but the effects on them and their lives is just being ignored.
And while they are altruistic in general they react dismissively to the idea that they should continue to be ignored once the oldies have had their vaccinations so that those same oldies can feel good about helping people far away while ignoring the very real adverse consequences for them of the sacrifices they have made.
Actually this is a very good point and one which I'd not previously considered.
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."
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
The mistake was not being able to join it sooner. Fantastic news joining this and it's a shame you're so short sighted and xenophobic you don't understand why we would want to do so.
Christ, get with the programme Philip
UK does something = automatically bad, short sighted, narrow minded etc Somebody else does it (bar the US) = great move, shows how shortsighted the UK is etc
It's not what you do that counts, it's who doing it.
No it isn't. That's hysterical.
I support the joining of CPTPP however I'm yet to be convinced that it's better for us than being members of the EU. I don't think that's a particularly controversial view to have.
But in the absence of the EU, sure, CPTPP is probably better than nothing.
We have a trade deal with the EU, based on zero tariffs and zero quotas.
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.
I don't think this is right at all. Sure the elite Brexit supporters want free trade but the Brexit core in the red wall wants protectionism. They want their jobs protected and manufacturing brought back to the UK.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
The mistake was not being able to join it sooner. Fantastic news joining this and it's a shame you're so short sighted and xenophobic you don't understand why we would want to do so.
Not sure its xenophobic to observe that the Dover - Calais trade route is slightly larger, easier, and simpler than the UK - Perth one.
CPTPP does not, to provide one example, provide alternative trade possibilities for our fishing and agriculture sector.
You do know that our sales of seafood to China in 2019 were over £100m, right?
I'm thinking they didn't go overland via Dover-Calais....
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
Completely agree. It`s an issue that can only endure in the very short term. There is a feeling - just a feeling - that the key worker children are currently "enjoying" an advantage.
Are the schools actually teaching the key worker children, or are they simply providing a babysitting service? Most reports seem to suggest the latter.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
The mistake was not being able to join it sooner. Fantastic news joining this and it's a shame you're so short sighted and xenophobic you don't understand why we would want to do so.
Christ, get with the programme Philip
UK does something = automatically bad, short sighted, narrow minded etc Somebody else does it (bar the US) = great move, shows how shortsighted the UK is etc
It's not what you do that counts, it's who doing it.
No it isn't. That's hysterical.
I support the joining of CPTPP however I'm yet to be convinced that it's better for us than being members of the EU. I don't think that's a particularly controversial view to have.
But in the absence of the EU, sure, CPTPP is probably better than nothing.
We have a trade deal with the EU, based on zero tariffs and zero quotas.
I'm not sure what relevance that has considering I was comparing CPTPP membership with membership of 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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
The mistake was not being able to join it sooner. Fantastic news joining this and it's a shame you're so short sighted and xenophobic you don't understand why we would want to do so.
Christ, get with the programme Philip
UK does something = automatically bad, short sighted, narrow minded etc Somebody else does it (bar the US) = great move, shows how shortsighted the UK is etc
It's not what you do that counts, it's who doing it.
No it isn't. That's hysterical.
I support the joining of CPTPP however I'm yet to be convinced that it's better for us than being members of the EU. I don't think that's a particularly controversial view to have.
But in the absence of the EU, sure, CPTPP is probably better than nothing.
Unfortunately, that is the attitude of many. The underlying reaction seems to be "we're not in the EU, therefore we can't do anything else"
We are where we are. We should seek the best deals wherever they may be. Joining the CPTPP makes perfect sense. We have much in common with several of the parties.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
6 Commonwealth Members 3 Anglophone majority, 5 widely spoken 4 Common Law
How does that stack up vs the EU?
Its not all about geography.
Have you changed your allegiance to Yes? Your avatar surprises me!
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
The mistake was not being able to join it sooner. Fantastic news joining this and it's a shame you're so short sighted and xenophobic you don't understand why we would want to do so.
Christ, get with the programme Philip
UK does something = automatically bad, short sighted, narrow minded etc Somebody else does it (bar the US) = great move, shows how shortsighted the UK is etc
It's not what you do that counts, it's who doing it.
No it isn't. That's hysterical.
I support the joining of CPTPP however I'm yet to be convinced that it's better for us than being members of the EU. I don't think that's a particularly controversial view to have.
But in the absence of the EU, sure, CPTPP is probably better than nothing.
We have a trade deal with the EU, based on zero tariffs and zero quotas.
Precisely. It's not EU or CPTPP. We should have a good deal with both.
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.
Indeed. For myself and many others, Cameron's attempt at renegotiation with the EU proved that the organisation itself was unreformable, an inward-looking protectionist zone, rather than an enabler of global free trade.
CP-TPP is a free trade model for the future, an alliance of relatively wealthy nations committed to removing barriers to trade between them - without the political baggage that comes with EU membership. If we can get the USA involved, then even better.
Being locked into it also makes Rejoining the EU way, way harder.....
As some of those squealing about our joining CP-TPP realise.
Yes, I think this is starting to be realised now. The FBPE squad thought that a Labour victory in 2024 would be a route back to EU membership, and that they just needed to hold on to see their victory. It's now clear that the UK is going to sign a whole load of international agreements in the next couple of years that would be incompatible with EU membership, so rejoning would mean tearing up all these new trade agreements.
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.
Not sure why you try to associate me with the right wingers
Even Euro news is attacking their stance and condemnation is evenly spread across the political divide on the way Germany and France are behaving
Cyclefree also seems to have misunderstood the purpose of covax which by design is aiming to make access to vaccines more equitable and speed up delivery to developing countries. In other words doing the opposite of what she proposes.
Realistically I think every Government is going to take the same line - I've not the slightest doubt that Starmer would. But I don't like it myself - the idea that teenager X in one country is prioritised over elderly person Y who happens to live over the border just feels wrong. I'm having a vaccination today, and feel personally relieved but also a little ashamed - it's obvious that there are others across the borders who need it more. As a country I think that combination of feelings is right, and we should start helping others at the point where we genuinely feel that we've got the pandmeic firmly under control, rather than wait till we've reached the last 18-year-old.
You might feel differently if you saw and heard what this disease does to your own son. I had to watch over WhatsApp my son cry with pain because 10 days in he still had a constant pounding headache, fevers, no sleep, aching all over, vomiting and breathlessness. And there was nothing I could do. Or anyone else. And he got the disease because he is a key worker and people coming to his place of work, older and richer than him, would ignore the social distancing rules or the limits on numbers and get antsy with him if he told them to obey. And God knows what this has done to his long-term health.
So I make no apologies for saying that we owe it to our young to help them just as much as we are helping the old. They are not immune to this disease or its economic consequences. Far from it. There are too many people on this forum who are comfortably off and insulated from the economic and social consequences and being a bit too Mrs Jellyby-like.
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 where we are. We should seek the best deals wherever they may be. Joining the CPTPP makes perfect sense. We have much in common with several of the parties.
Joining the EU single market would be even better!
We have much in common with several of the parties.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
The mistake was not being able to join it sooner. Fantastic news joining this and it's a shame you're so short sighted and xenophobic you don't understand why we would want to do so.
Christ, get with the programme Philip
UK does something = automatically bad, short sighted, narrow minded etc Somebody else does it (bar the US) = great move, shows how shortsighted the UK is etc
It's not what you do that counts, it's who doing it.
No it isn't. That's hysterical.
I support the joining of CPTPP however I'm yet to be convinced that it's better for us than being members of the EU. I don't think that's a particularly controversial view to have.
But in the absence of the EU, sure, CPTPP is probably better than nothing.
We have a trade deal with the EU, based on zero tariffs and zero quotas.
Precisely. It's not EU or CPTPP. We should have a good deal with both.
It's a completely separate point.
I was comparing EU membership with CPTPP membership whilst acknowledging that sans EU membership then I support joining CPTPP. That doesn't mean the status quo is better than the previous arrangements though. Obviously we disagree on that.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
The mistake was not being able to join it sooner. Fantastic news joining this and it's a shame you're so short sighted and xenophobic you don't understand why we would want to do so.
Not sure its xenophobic to observe that the Dover - Calais trade route is slightly larger, easier, and simpler than the UK - Perth one.
CPTPP does not, to provide one example, provide alternative trade possibilities for our fishing and agriculture sector.
You do know that our sales of seafood to China in 2019 were over £100m, right?
I'm thinking they didn't go overland via Dover-Calais....
Don't look at seafood exports to the UAE - literally a plane full of fish every night from London to Dubai.
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.
Indeed. For myself and many others, Cameron's attempt at renegotiation with the EU proved that the organisation itself was unreformable, an inward-looking protectionist zone, rather than an enabler of global free trade.
CP-TPP is a free trade model for the future, an alliance of relatively wealthy nations committed to removing barriers to trade between them - without the political baggage that comes with EU membership. If we can get the USA involved, then even better.
Being locked into it also makes Rejoining the EU way, way harder.....
As some of those squealing about our joining CP-TPP realise.
Yes, I think this is starting to be realised now. The FBPE squad thought that a Labour victory in 2024 would be a route back to EU membership, and that they just needed to hold on to see their victory. It's now clear that the UK is going to sign a whole load of international agreements in the next couple of years that would be incompatible with EU membership, so rejoning would mean tearing up all these new trade agreements.
Not really. Tearing them up is not really a problem. I don't think that's going to happen though.
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.
Deflect, blame, ignore.
You don't want the Scottish government to improve its rate of vaccination?
I want them to improve of course, but yet again you highlight your bias with your selective numbers. I am happy that Scotland has lower death rate , lower positivity rate and lower vaccination rate. I look at the big picture , you on the other hand ignore the devastating other numbers and focus on the one good part. When we are all vaccinated , Scotland a week or so behind England but England still having 40% higher death rate and probably world champions, will you still be crowing.
Actually, to be fair, I think Malc has a point. (Although speeding up would have the benefit of reducing the risk of mutations cropping up, so the slowness in delivery is an issue),
I still think Nicola is well-placed for May and the decision to sack Cherry, for Murrell to show two-fingers to the inquiry, shows the leadership has decided to crack down, batten down the hatches and weather whatever Eck throws at them next week. His problem is that he is a largely discredited has-been in the eyes of most Scots (Malc honourably excluded from that description) and unless he really is in possession of a smoking gun won't bring Nicola down. Far from it.
The issue is what happens after May. The recent shenanigans show that are cracks in the armour and that will provide succour to Unionists. But perhaps more significant is the EU vaccine disaster. The Indy proposal after all is, effectively: which union do you prefer, EU or UK?
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.
I don't think this is right at all. Sure the elite Brexit supporters want free trade but the Brexit core in the red wall wants protectionism. They want their jobs protected and manufacturing brought back to the UK.
We aren't going to have protectionism.
It's overly simplistic for you and HYUFD to say the red wall wants protectionism or they want a halt to migration.
People want to be listened to, respected and have their lives improve. How that happens isn't as significant as that it does. Most people aren't political extremist obsessives one way or another.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
The mistake was not being able to join it sooner. Fantastic news joining this and it's a shame you're so short sighted and xenophobic you don't understand why we would want to do so.
Not sure its xenophobic to observe that the Dover - Calais trade route is slightly larger, easier, and simpler than the UK - Perth one.
CPTPP does not, to provide one example, provide alternative trade possibilities for our fishing and agriculture sector.
Isn't that two sectors? But you are, of course, right.
Johnson on the right side, for a change. Border controls is mostly (identified and threatening geographically specific mutant viruses excepted) people trying to fight last year's war.
Why? Nobody should be travelling anyway. This is the perfect time to shut the borders and then slowly open them up again as the world vaccinates.
That's not actually true. The list of legitimate reasons applies.
Mandatory hotel quarantine would make people think twice about whether their trip was actually essential. There are very few reasons people *need* to travel internationally in the middle of a pandemic.
Precisely this. Mandatory hotel quarantine has a huge effect on demand, people and companies will only do trips where it REALLY is needed. And that's what you want in a pandemic.
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
Completely agree. It`s an issue that can only endure in the very short term. There is a feeling - just a feeling - that the key worker children are currently "enjoying" an advantage.
Are the schools actually teaching the key worker children, or are they simply providing a babysitting service? Most reports seem to suggest the latter.
If my school is any guide, the latter.
My Eldest Grandson, a primary school teacher seems to be doing more education than ever.
We are where we are. We should seek the best deals wherever they may be. Joining the CPTPP makes perfect sense. We have much in common with several of the parties.
Joining the EU single market would be even better!
We have much in common with several of the parties.
Maybe from an economic standpoint but then that relationship comes with significant restrictions on what we can do independently.
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
Why are people even talking about their kids schooling on social media?
Not sure I can answer that other than social media is mainstream these days
Even the last President of the US used it as his main communication tool
However, it does not alter the fact of the growing resentment between those in school and those not in school, and in my grandchildren's case their parents are thinking of taking them out of school and home schooling them, even though they are keyworkers
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.
I don't think this is right at all. Sure the elite Brexit supporters want free trade but the Brexit core in the red wall wants protectionism. They want their jobs protected and manufacturing brought back to the UK.
We aren't going to have protectionism.
It's overly simplistic for you and HYUFD to say the red wall wants protectionism or they want a halt to migration.
People want to be listened to, respected and have their lives improve. How that happens isn't as significant as that it does. Most people aren't political extremist obsessives one way or another.
In the same way it's overly simplistic to say that Brexit supporters largely support free trade.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
6 Commonwealth Members 3 Anglophone majority, 5 widely spoken 4 Common Law
How does that stack up vs the EU?
Its not all about geography.
Have you changed your allegiance to Yes? Your avatar surprises me!
No - I thought it nicely summed up the intellectual incoherence of the YES campaign.....
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.
Deflect, blame, ignore.
You don't want the Scottish government to improve its rate of vaccination?
I want them to improve of course, but yet again you highlight your bias with your selective numbers. I am happy that Scotland has lower death rate , lower positivity rate and lower vaccination rate. I look at the big picture , you on the other hand ignore the devastating other numbers and focus on the one good part. When we are all vaccinated , Scotland a week or so behind England but England still having 40% higher death rate and probably world champions, will you still be crowing.
Sounds like you are the one crowing about deaths in England. Unless you've got a time machine you can't change the past - all we can change is the present and the future - but you and the SNP seem very defensive over Scotland's slower vaccination rate, now the "care homes first" rationale has run out of road.
A plaintive bleat of you can’t change the past = not defensive
Literally 100s of tweets about deaths in Scottish care homes and vaccination rates = not crowing
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.
Not on the ballot and not in any way going to happen. Most people in the UK have wanted a reformed EU for years but all they got was more EU. At some point you have to accept it is not going to happen and move on. Which we did.
Absolutely agree. In the long run the EU have made a terrible error in not reforming when the UK gave them the chance, although it is arguable that reform became impossible as soon as the Euro was established - a self binding action making sensible progress impossible and proving beyond doubt that state sovereignty is the objective.
But in the UK there are signs that the argument is moving on from the myth that Brexit is supported solely by two headed Neanderthals, ex Nazis and the golf clubs of Surrey.
Weather report: 5 inches of snow here in Airedale. A couple of conifers in our garden have collapsed under the weight of snow.
Nowt but a bit slushy here on Tyneside
A generous covering on the Tyne Valley. No conifers down though as yet.
About two inches of very heavy wet snow in the Flatlands. That isn't going to help with vaccinations.
Some conifers are quite dangerous after heavy snowfall. Most pines you see in the UK are prone to losing branches, including Scots pine and the much planted Corsican pine. Continental and high altitude US species are much better adapted, as you'd expect.
After heavy snowfall in the Scottish pine forests you will often find large branches littering the floor.
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.
Malc, with the greatest respect, you're not averse to a bit of a ruck yourself!
Hello TWFS3, I can hold my own for sure. Hope all well with you and family.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
The mistake was not being able to join it sooner. Fantastic news joining this and it's a shame you're so short sighted and xenophobic you don't understand why we would want to do so.
Christ, get with the programme Philip
UK does something = automatically bad, short sighted, narrow minded etc Somebody else does it (bar the US) = great move, shows how shortsighted the UK is etc
It's not what you do that counts, it's who doing it.
No it isn't. That's hysterical.
I support the joining of CPTPP however I'm yet to be convinced that it's better for us than being members of the EU. I don't think that's a particularly controversial view to have.
But in the absence of the EU, sure, CPTPP is probably better than nothing.
Unfortunately, that is the attitude of many. The underlying reaction seems to be "we're not in the EU, therefore we can't do anything else"
We are where we are. We should seek the best deals wherever they may be. Joining the CPTPP makes perfect sense. We have much in common with several of the parties.
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.
I don't think this is right at all. Sure the elite Brexit supporters want free trade but the Brexit core in the red wall wants protectionism. They want their jobs protected and manufacturing brought back to the UK.
We aren't going to have protectionism.
It's overly simplistic for you and HYUFD to say the red wall wants protectionism or they want a halt to migration.
People want to be listened to, respected and have their lives improve. How that happens isn't as significant as that it does. Most people aren't political extremist obsessives one way or another.
Spot on.
The debate has been wrecked by the myth that there are 17 million extremists in the UK, all voting Brexit. Nearly all Remain and Leave voters are moderates.
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
Why are people even talking about their kids schooling on social media?
Not sure I can answer that other than social media is mainstream these days
Even the last President of the US used it as his main communication tool
However, it does not alter the fact of the growing resentment between those in school and those not in school, and in my grandchildren's case their parents are thinking of taking them out of school and home schooling them, even though they are keyworkers
The younger parents I know seem very keen to keep any mention of their kids off social media altogether - no pictures or discussion. You wouldn't even know they had children. I must say that is way I plan to proceed should I have children in the future.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
6 Commonwealth Members 3 Anglophone majority, 5 widely spoken 4 Common Law
How does that stack up vs the EU?
Its not all about geography.
Have you changed your allegiance to Yes? Your avatar surprises me!
No - I thought it nicely summed up the intellectual incoherence of the YES campaign.....
It just looks like a lady in Scottish sunglasses to me.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
The mistake was not being able to join it sooner. Fantastic news joining this and it's a shame you're so short sighted and xenophobic you don't understand why we would want to do so.
Christ, get with the programme Philip
UK does something = automatically bad, short sighted, narrow minded etc Somebody else does it (bar the US) = great move, shows how shortsighted the UK is etc
It's not what you do that counts, it's who doing it.
No it isn't. That's hysterical.
I support the joining of CPTPP however I'm yet to be convinced that it's better for us than being members of the EU. I don't think that's a particularly controversial view to have.
But in the absence of the EU, sure, CPTPP is probably better than nothing.
We have a trade deal with the EU, based on zero tariffs and zero quotas.
Precisely. It's not EU or CPTPP. We should have a good deal with both.
It's a completely separate point.
I was comparing EU membership with CPTPP membership whilst acknowledging that sans EU membership then I support joining CPTPP. That doesn't mean the status quo is better than the previous arrangements though. Obviously we disagree on that.
Indeed we do disagree but part and parcel of the new arrangements is literally seeking to be more nimble and to be able to have our cake and eat it.
If we can keep zero tariff, zero quota trade with Europe with just SPS and a bit of customs paperwork as the only real costs and we can get a deal with the CPTPP and we can get a deal with India etc etc etc ... This is turning the concept of "sovereignty" into very real outcomes.
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 difference between them, no siree. Care to point me to the CPTPP parliament and commission.
And currency....
Chris Kendall supposedly advises the EU on foreign policy matters (at least according to his bio), and yet he can't see the difference between the two blocs?
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.
Indeed. For myself and many others, Cameron's attempt at renegotiation with the EU proved that the organisation itself was unreformable, an inward-looking protectionist zone, rather than an enabler of global free trade.
CP-TPP is a free trade model for the future, an alliance of relatively wealthy nations committed to removing barriers to trade between them - without the political baggage that comes with EU membership. If we can get the USA involved, then even better.
Being locked into it also makes Rejoining the EU way, way harder.....
As some of those squealing about our joining CP-TPP realise.
Yes, I think this is starting to be realised now. The FBPE squad thought that a Labour victory in 2024 would be a route back to EU membership, and that they just needed to hold on to see their victory. It's now clear that the UK is going to sign a whole load of international agreements in the next couple of years that would be incompatible with EU membership, so rejoning would mean tearing up all these new trade agreements.
And they're going to take a lot more getting used to than the EU ever did. And, I very much doubt they're going to provide as much benefit for ordinary people as the EU did. Can't see many practical options for retirement homes in these countries, for example.
Not, before any of the usual suspects jump on me, have I any intention of retiring to any of the Costas. Or Portugal. Or France.
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.
Deflect, blame, ignore.
You don't want the Scottish government to improve its rate of vaccination?
I want them to improve of course, but yet again you highlight your bias with your selective numbers. I am happy that Scotland has lower death rate , lower positivity rate and lower vaccination rate. I look at the big picture , you on the other hand ignore the devastating other numbers and focus on the one good part. When we are all vaccinated , Scotland a week or so behind England but England still having 40% higher death rate and probably world champions, will you still be crowing.
Sounds like you are the one crowing about deaths in England. Unless you've got a time machine you can't change the past - all we can change is the present and the future - but you and the SNP seem very defensive over Scotland's slower vaccination rate, now the "care homes first" rationale has run out of road.
A plaintive bleat of you can’t change the past = not defensive
Literally 100s of tweets about deaths in Scottish care homes and vaccination rates = not crowing
Glad that’s been cleared up.
I note she does not provide the numbers as expected, shameful the way she denigrates Scotland and especially using partial doctored data. Not a very nice person and tries to pretend she is Scottish into the bargain.
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 pandemic isn't going to be "under control" until the virus is eliminated and all social distancing measures have been entirely removed in full.
If it is possible for a pub or restaurant not just to be open (currently they're all closed afterall), but to be open normally with no social distancing measures. If we are eg able to safely go to a packed, crowded bar and have over a hundred people stood standing room only shoulder to shoulder watching Liverpool vs Manchester United then the pandemic is under control - if we can not, it is not.
Yes defeating the virus globally is necessary but that isn't done by sending what is internationally a tiny number of doses overseas, but to us a dramatic number of doses. Again 7 million doses would allow jabs for over 10% of our population but not even 0.1% of global population - you are an innumerate fool if you think vaccinating the world is possible at the expense of not vaccinating ourselves.
It isn't either/or we need to do both and the best way to do both is to finish the job here and then be able to work properly and afford to pay for the rest of the world. We don't need to send a few million doses that would let us finish the job here overseas, we need to finish the job here and send hundreds of millions of doses overseas.
The unfortunate "innumerate fool" comment arises from a misunderstanding. I'm not talking about now. I'm talking about where we have achieved a level of virus immunity and prevalence sufficiently high and low respectively to substantially reopen our society at a time when the global vaccine supply is limited and we through our sterling efforts have nailed down a disproportionate share of it. So then one can argue (as you are) that this is not job done and we should continue to prioritize ourselves and only ourselves. We should carry on vaccinating all the way down to 18, every adult, shoot for zero Covid and total domestic normality (but with closed borders), and not worry about the global situation until we've got there. Or one can argue it makes both ethical and practical sense to release stock and pipeline for use in places where the virus is rampant and likely to mutate in a malign direction. Both arguments are respectable. Neither is stupid or immoral. I prefer the 2nd for reasons I've explained many times.
Well at the rate they are going, it certainly will be....and the Dutch seem to be running it wearing a giant Rhino outfit.
This whole idea of it being a marathon is bullshit. It's a sprint all the way. People who say it are covering up for rubbish schemes or terrible purchasing and capacity.
Hmm I'd say it is a marathon, Israel in the lead pushing for 2 hrs 20, the UK trying for sub 3 hours and the EU haven't done sufficient training and are finding it tough after a mile or so, wondering if they'll finish in front of the road close time of 8 hours.
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.
Indeed. For myself and many others, Cameron's attempt at renegotiation with the EU proved that the organisation itself was unreformable, an inward-looking protectionist zone, rather than an enabler of global free trade.
CP-TPP is a free trade model for the future, an alliance of relatively wealthy nations committed to removing barriers to trade between them - without the political baggage that comes with EU membership. If we can get the USA involved, then even better.
Being locked into it also makes Rejoining the EU way, way harder.....
As some of those squealing about our joining CP-TPP realise.
Yes, I think this is starting to be realised now. The FBPE squad thought that a Labour victory in 2024 would be a route back to EU membership, and that they just needed to hold on to see their victory. It's now clear that the UK is going to sign a whole load of international agreements in the next couple of years that would be incompatible with EU membership, so rejoning would mean tearing up all these new trade agreements.
And they're going to take a lot more getting used to than the EU ever did. And, I very much doubt they're going to provide as much benefit for ordinary people as the EU did. Can't see many practical options for retirement homes in these countries, for example.
Erm, don't thousands retire to Australia (for example) each year already?
But in the UK there are signs that the argument is moving on from the myth that Brexit is supported solely by two headed Neanderthals, ex Nazis and the golf clubs of Surrey.
Yes, not even two headed Neanderthals, ex Nazis and the golf clubs of Surrey support it any more now that the consequences are apparent.
Cyclefree also seems to have misunderstood the purpose of covax which by design is aiming to make access to vaccines more equitable and speed up delivery to developing countries. In other words doing the opposite of what she proposes.
Realistically I think every Government is going to take the same line - I've not the slightest doubt that Starmer would. But I don't like it myself - the idea that teenager X in one country is prioritised over elderly person Y who happens to live over the border just feels wrong. I'm having a vaccination today, and feel personally relieved but also a little ashamed - it's obvious that there are others across the borders who need it more. As a country I think that combination of feelings is right, and we should start helping others at the point where we genuinely feel that we've got the pandmeic firmly under control, rather than wait till we've reached the last 18-year-old.
You might feel differently if you saw and heard what this disease does to your own son. I had to watch over WhatsApp my son cry with pain because 10 days in he still had a constant pounding headache, fevers, no sleep, aching all over, vomiting and breathlessness. And there was nothing I could do. Or anyone else. And he got the disease because he is a key worker and people coming to his place of work, older and richer than him, would ignore the social distancing rules or the limits on numbers and get antsy with him if he told them to obey. And God knows what this has done to his long-term health.
So I make no apologies for saying that we owe it to our young to help them just as much as we are helping the old. They are not immune to this disease or its economic consequences. Far from it. There are too many people on this forum who are comfortably off and insulated from the economic and social consequences and being a bit too Mrs Jellyby-like.
Yes. I predict that there will be a very large crossover between those who advocate shipping out vaccines before we immunise our younger people and those comfortable with prolonged lockdowns.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
The mistake was not being able to join it sooner. Fantastic news joining this and it's a shame you're so short sighted and xenophobic you don't understand why we would want to do so.
Not sure its xenophobic to observe that the Dover - Calais trade route is slightly larger, easier, and simpler than the UK - Perth one.
CPTPP does not, to provide one example, provide alternative trade possibilities for our fishing and agriculture sector.
You do know that our sales of seafood to China in 2019 were over £100m, right?
I'm thinking they didn't go overland via Dover-Calais....
Oh sure! Its just that the *fresh* seafood business that the CTA has killed waon't suddenly switch to frozen exports of something else to China. You can only ship what you can catch to people who want to eat it. "Seafood" is rather a broad category.
Maybe from an economic standpoint but then that relationship comes with significant restrictions on what we can do independently.
The story from UK business is that Brexit has severely restricted their freedom to trade.
Absolutely mired in Brexit red tape.
Because business has never in the history of mankind ever had to deal with red tape before.
Keep whinging, the world is moving on without you.
Your assertion that businesses have to deal with red tape, whilst true, is completely seperate to whether businesses having to deal with red tape is a good thing.
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
Your last sentence is disgusting
Using mental health to make an argument is so low but then why am I surprised
And when the US joins TPP this group of countries will see a huge increase in tariff free trade
My view on vaccines is that they're like the oxygen masks that pop down in front of you on an aeroplane in an emergency: you should put on yours and check it's working properly, before helping others.
It's only with our domestic population protected, and therefore our economy recovering, that we'll have the strength and resources to help the rest of the world get on top of it.
Otherwise we're gambling on everything or nothing, and we might still be 2-3 years away from total global suppression, with all the political, civil and social challenges and upheavals that might pose in the meantime.
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.
Deflect, blame, ignore.
You don't want the Scottish government to improve its rate of vaccination?
I want them to improve of course, but yet again you highlight your bias with your selective numbers. I am happy that Scotland has lower death rate , lower positivity rate and lower vaccination rate. I look at the big picture , you on the other hand ignore the devastating other numbers and focus on the one good part. When we are all vaccinated , Scotland a week or so behind England but England still having 40% higher death rate and probably world champions, will you still be crowing.
Sounds like you are the one crowing about deaths in England. Unless you've got a time machine you can't change the past - all we can change is the present and the future - but you and the SNP seem very defensive over Scotland's slower vaccination rate, now the "care homes first" rationale has run out of road.
Trying to avoid the point yet again. Post the numbers or prove that you are a ne'er do well. I know for a fact you will not post the real data, cowards like you just hide in the shadows and post misinformation. Not very pleasant.
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.
Indeed. For myself and many others, Cameron's attempt at renegotiation with the EU proved that the organisation itself was unreformable, an inward-looking protectionist zone, rather than an enabler of global free trade.
CP-TPP is a free trade model for the future, an alliance of relatively wealthy nations committed to removing barriers to trade between them - without the political baggage that comes with EU membership. If we can get the USA involved, then even better.
Being locked into it also makes Rejoining the EU way, way harder.....
As some of those squealing about our joining CP-TPP realise.
Yes, I think this is starting to be realised now. The FBPE squad thought that a Labour victory in 2024 would be a route back to EU membership, and that they just needed to hold on to see their victory. It's now clear that the UK is going to sign a whole load of international agreements in the next couple of years that would be incompatible with EU membership, so rejoning would mean tearing up all these new trade agreements.
Puts SKS in a bit of a bind. "Would you withdraw the UK from the CP-TPP Agreement?"
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
Your last sentence is disgusting
Using mental health to make an argument is so low but then why am I surprised
And when the US joins TPP this group of countries will see a huge increase in tariff free trade
G , your appetite for chlorinated chicken and hormone full beef surprises me?
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
Can you spot the deliberate mistake with the grouping Liz is trying to join
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
Your last sentence is disgusting
Using mental health to make an argument is so low but then why am I surprised
And when the US joins TPP this group of countries will see a huge increase in tariff free trade
MENSA is a measure of intelligence, not mental health. What are you on about?
Comments
You don't want the Scottish government to improve its rate of vaccination?
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1356281354326044677?s=20
In good time we should be generous with out vaccines (especially with Ireland poorer nations) but only when we've vaccinated enough of our own people to significantly drive down the infection rate and ease the pressure on the NHS.
By about May we should be in a position to start sharing our vaccines hopefully.
'It is a trade agreement between 11 Pacific Rim nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam'.
Liz Truss should get together with Gavin Williamson. They can form a new MENSA group in the Tory Party
CP-TPP is a free trade model for the future, an alliance of relatively wealthy nations committed to removing barriers to trade between them - without the political baggage that comes with EU membership. If we can get the USA involved, then even better.
When we are all vaccinated , Scotland a week or so behind England but England still having 40% higher death rate and probably world champions, will you still be crowing.
For people who are too hip for bookcases.
UK does something = automatically bad, short sighted, narrow minded etc
Somebody else does it (bar the US) = great move, shows how shortsighted the UK is etc
It's not what you do that counts, it's who doing it.
And while they are altruistic in general they react dismissively to the idea that they should continue to be ignored once the oldies have had their vaccinations so that those same oldies can feel good about helping people far away while ignoring the very real adverse consequences for them of the sacrifices they have made.
Absolutely extraordinary deal.
I support the joining of CPTPP however I'm yet to be convinced that it's better for us than being members of the EU. I don't think that's a particularly controversial view to have.
But in the absence of the EU, sure, CPTPP is probably better than nothing.
CPTPP does not, to provide one example, provide alternative trade possibilities for our fishing and agriculture sector.
As some of those squealing about our joining CP-TPP realise.
3 Anglophone majority, 5 widely spoken
4 Common Law
How does that stack up vs the EU?
Its not all about geography.
Your children are right, I think. Hmm.
I'm thinking they didn't go overland via Dover-Calais....
We are where we are. We should seek the best deals wherever they may be. Joining the CPTPP makes perfect sense. We have much in common with several of the parties.
Even Euro news is attacking their stance and condemnation is evenly spread across the political divide on the way Germany and France are behaving
So I make no apologies for saying that we owe it to our young to help them just as much as we are helping the old. They are not immune to this disease or its economic consequences. Far from it. There are too many people on this forum who are comfortably off and insulated from the economic and social consequences and being a bit too Mrs Jellyby-like.
We have much in common with several of the parties.
I was comparing EU membership with CPTPP membership whilst acknowledging that sans EU membership then I support joining CPTPP. That doesn't mean the status quo is better than the previous arrangements though. Obviously we disagree on that.
https://twitter.com/soniasodha/status/1356539151148056576?s=20
I still think Nicola is well-placed for May and the decision to sack Cherry, for Murrell to show two-fingers to the inquiry, shows the leadership has decided to crack down, batten down the hatches and weather whatever Eck throws at them next week. His problem is that he is a largely discredited has-been in the eyes of most Scots (Malc honourably excluded from that description) and unless he really is in possession of a smoking gun won't bring Nicola down. Far from it.
The issue is what happens after May. The recent shenanigans show that are cracks in the armour and that will provide succour to Unionists. But perhaps more significant is the EU vaccine disaster. The Indy proposal after all is, effectively: which union do you prefer, EU or UK?
It's overly simplistic for you and HYUFD to say the red wall wants protectionism or they want a halt to migration.
People want to be listened to, respected and have their lives improve. How that happens isn't as significant as that it does. Most people aren't political extremist obsessives one way or another.
This doesn't to the same extent.
Even the last President of the US used it as his main communication tool
However, it does not alter the fact of the growing resentment between those in school and those not in school, and in my grandchildren's case their parents are thinking of taking them out of school and home schooling them, even though they are keyworkers
A quick google search shows it to be a known scam.
Literally 100s of tweets about deaths in Scottish care homes and vaccination rates = not crowing
Glad that’s been cleared up.
But in the UK there are signs that the argument is moving on from the myth that Brexit is supported solely by two headed Neanderthals, ex Nazis and the golf clubs of Surrey.
Some conifers are quite dangerous after heavy snowfall. Most pines you see in the UK are prone to losing branches, including Scots pine and the much planted Corsican pine. Continental and high altitude US species are much better adapted, as you'd expect.
After heavy snowfall in the Scottish pine forests you will often find large branches littering the floor.
I support the membership of the CPTPP too.
Sorry to ruin your daft hypothesis.
The debate has been wrecked by the myth that there are 17 million extremists in the UK, all voting Brexit. Nearly all Remain and Leave voters are moderates.
It just looks like a lady in Scottish sunglasses to me.
Absolutely mired in Brexit red tape.
If we can keep zero tariff, zero quota trade with Europe with just SPS and a bit of customs paperwork as the only real costs and we can get a deal with the CPTPP and we can get a deal with India etc etc etc ... This is turning the concept of "sovereignty" into very real outcomes.
https://twitter.com/HYUFD1/status/1356557454058913793
Not, before any of the usual suspects jump on me, have I any intention of retiring to any of the Costas. Or Portugal. Or France.
Keep whinging, the world is moving on without you.
Using mental health to make an argument is so low but then why am I surprised
And when the US joins TPP this group of countries will see a huge increase in tariff free trade
https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1356563269100711937?s=20
Not very pleasant.
https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2021/02/01/ursula-von-der-leyen-la-strategie-de-vaccination-europeenne-est-la-bonne_6068416_3210.html
see also -
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/02/ursula-von-der-leyen-accuses-uk-of-compromising-on-vaccine-safety