Howdy, Stranger!

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

The Future Now – the biggest impact of COVID – politicalbetting.com

12357

Comments

  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,550
    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:



    My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.

    The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.

    That's exactly what they have done.

    They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.

    For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.

    it's what Gove calls a political solution.

    The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.

    The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.

    Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?

    The game's afoot.

    This may well be the view of the UK government, albeit with major implications of bad faith. It is absolutely not the view of the Irish government. Neither the UK nor the rest of the EU is anything like as invested in the Northern Ireland protocol as Ireland, as has been demonstrated recently by both parties. Someone who seemed well connected with the Irish government did a thread on this. The real thing that can't acknowledged by the Irish government is that they will put in a hard land border before they will detach themselves by one iota from the Single Market. The Northern Ireland Protocol exists so they don't have to make that choice. The Irish are very determined on this and they have plenty of diplomatic capital both in the EU and the US.

    I struggle to see a way to square the circle. So you voted for Brexit because you wanted to take control and to get an alien and overbearing institution out of your lives. The EU mandated internal border screams loss of control and imposition by overbearing foreign institutions more than anything else possibly could. On the other hand if you want the United Kingdom to survive in its current form, you are stuck with making the Northern Ireland Protocol sort of work.
    I think we are going to find out. You could well be right. But if so, how will it play out?

  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,429

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:

    I think you surmised it was written in order to justify an expected suspension of Article 16 by HMG.
    My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.

    The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.

    That's exactly what they have done.

    They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.

    For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.

    it's what Gove calls a political solution.

    The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.

    The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.

    Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?

    The game's afoot.

    I think you may be right.

    Moreover, the EU is a fantastic whipping boy to maintain native Brexit enthusiasm for a while yet.

    It would be interesting to see concrete data on the economic hit of Brexit red-tape. So far much of it is still in the realm of anecdote.
    https://order-order.com/2021/02/08/dover-port-trade-bounces-back-to-90-of-normal-despite-covid/
    Firstly- Guido? Really?
    Actually, Guido's an interesting case- gone from equal-opportunities bovver boy to Johnsonian lickspittle.

    Secondly- there's reasonable anecdote of lorries going from UK to Europe empty, because that's how businesses have adapted to the new rules.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/six-out-of-10-lorries-crossing-the-channel-empty-as-brexit-and-covid-bite/ar-BB1dg8V8?c=16080256636713851486&mkt=en-gb

    So similar level of traffic, perhaps, but much less productive.

    And remember- at the moment, EU to UK is still basically running on an honesty box system. For a few more months.

    Still- I'm sure the government know what they're doing.
    Guido was reporting on the Dover Port Authority confirmation traffic was at 90% unlike the report in the observer

    This is factual reporting unless the Dover Port Authority is making dishonest statements
    Both are probably factual. The RHA carried out a survey of its members, who reported a 68% drop in exported loads in January. Dover Port counted lorry movements in and out, presumably including empty ones. We don't know any detail for either of the two figures.

    Will there be a permanent drop in exports to the EU? Almost certainly yes and by a large amount, but not close to 68%, which would be unthinkably catastrophic.
    Thank you for a sensible response

    I am very sensitive today as my eldest son, who lives in Canada and is in a mental health crisis, is having the first of 10 electroconvulsive therapies later today and I just find some posts are unnecessary personal

    Of course in normal times his mother and I would be at his bedside, but due to covid we cannot go and hold his hand and be with him, leaving his wife to take all the strain on her own
    That’s very tough. Sympathies
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    Those who want a lighter alternative to the doom porn on here, this chap is professor of public health at an Ivy League university

    https://twitter.com/ashishkjha/status/1357669053213659136
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,357

    IshmaelZ said:

    kle4 said:

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    What the feck?

    A man has been charged in Lanarkshire in connection with an offensive social media tweet about Sir Captain Tom Moore.

    Sir Tom died in Bedford Hospital last Tuesday, aged 100, after testing positive for Covid-19.

    He had captured the nation's hearts with his fundraising efforts during the first coronavirus lockdown, raising more than £30m for NHS charities.

    The 35-year-old man is due to appear in court later this week.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-55986646

    Given the location of the arrest, it may well be the one that was posted on here a few days ago - Malc said it was unionist black ops.
    The guy was a fecking idiot but I am really unhappy with the idea that what he said was a criminal offence. Is this just under Scottish law or is it the case UK wide?
    Not my areas but section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 has UK wide application -

    127 Improper use of public electronic communications network

    (1) A person is guilty of an offence if he—

    (a) sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character; or

    (b)causes any such message or matter to be so sent.

    (2)A person is guilty of an offence if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, he—

    (a)sends by means of a public electronic communications network, a message that he knows to be false,
    (b)causes such a message to be sent; or

    (c)persistently makes use of a public electronic communications network.

    (3)A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable, on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or to both.
    Presumably there's guidance on what might constitute grossly offensive, indecent, obscene or menacing.
    unfortunately if you big up (perhaps too much) an individual -even a nice and brave one like the Captain and go a bit OTT on his death then you guarantee some idiots and trolls countering it in an unpleasant way.Maybe a lesson to learn on the establishment side as well on this otherwise this sort of thing will always lead then to this sort of unseemly criminal case . FWIW my own view on the Captain was that he was being called a hero for the wrong thing (yes his walk around his garden was public spirited and impressive ) but his real legacy is one of a handful of WW2 pilots still around (or was until he died the other week). If that was what the nation went OTT about on his death rather than covid-19/NHS fundraising then there might have been less trolls
    He wasn't a pilot. He was a driving instructor.
    If he got Dura Ace to his test, VC and Bar
    George Cross surely? since I don't think DA counts as "in the face of the enemy"?
  • Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20
  • Best of luck to you and yours, Big G from yours truly and every other PBer. As you are with you & your wife are with your son & his wife in soul & spirit, so are we with you.

    As to your citing Guido, well, you did give the source, allowing others to judge for themselves. Which they have every right to do. In spite of some hot talk, seems there's general agreement in seeking out actual facts, even if we don't really know what the heck they really mean.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,588
    "Covid vaccine centre in Hackney has to close early because of 'really low uptake' - as nursing chief says UK has been too slow to respond to anti-vaxx myths among BAME communities

    John Scott vaccine hub in Hackney closed early three on three days last week
    Fears jab hesitancy among BAME groups behind poor uptake in diverse borough
    The centre is open to patients from 40 GP surgeries in the inner London area"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9236465/Covid-vaccine-centre-Hackney-forced-close-early-really-low-uptake.html
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,126

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    Yes, I can't quite see how a more targeted approach makes a difference in the numbers of people refusing?

    However achieved, it's remarkable.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:



    My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.

    The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.

    That's exactly what they have done.

    They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.

    For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.

    it's what Gove calls a political solution.

    The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.

    The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.

    Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?

    The game's afoot.

    This may well be the view of the UK government, albeit with major implications of bad faith. It is absolutely not the view of the Irish government. Neither the UK nor the rest of the EU is anything like as invested in the Northern Ireland protocol as Ireland, as has been demonstrated recently by both parties. Someone who seemed well connected with the Irish government did a thread on this. The real thing that can't acknowledged by the Irish government is that they will put in a hard land border before they will detach themselves by one iota from the Single Market. The Northern Ireland Protocol exists so they don't have to make that choice. The Irish are very determined on this and they have plenty of diplomatic capital both in the EU and the US.

    I struggle to see a way to square the circle. So you voted for Brexit because you wanted to take control and to get an alien and overbearing institution out of your lives. The EU mandated internal border screams loss of control and imposition by overbearing foreign institutions more than anything else possibly could. On the other hand if you want the United Kingdom to survive in its current form, you are stuck with making the Northern Ireland Protocol sort of work.
    I think that's a lot of bollocks.

    Charles put it brilliantly: the GFA was designed in a climate where both the UK and Irish Republic were full EU members.

    Now one is not it needs to be redesigned. It can't be totally lopsided to EU single market dogma or it will risk the Troubles restarting.

    Ireland is going to have to show a bit of leg too, with the tacit permission of the EU, and it already does with the CTA and Anglo-Irish agreement.
    I agree there will need to be nodding and winking from both sides if the Protocol is going to work. But there is no real alternative to it or major redesign IMO. The UK has a treaty obligation to implement it, that Johnson himself negotiated, and will be held to it
  • What the feck?

    A man has been charged in Lanarkshire in connection with an offensive social media tweet about Sir Captain Tom Moore.

    Sir Tom died in Bedford Hospital last Tuesday, aged 100, after testing positive for Covid-19.

    He had captured the nation's hearts with his fundraising efforts during the first coronavirus lockdown, raising more than £30m for NHS charities.

    The 35-year-old man is due to appear in court later this week.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-55986646

    Madness. The reaction to him has been hysterical.
    Indeed.

    I know it will come as a great shock to everyone on here but I have an outrageous and occasionally offensive sense of humour.

    But I'm not stupid enough to post stuff like that on social media.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    FPT
    I am very much with Alistair here. If the parties are level pegging at 39% , Labour is likely to reverse its 2019 losses in Wales - and could go beyond that to win Preseli Pembrokeshire and Arfon. Anglesey is possibly the most challenging for Labour due to its long history of re-electing incumbents.
  • Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    Is this because Scots geezers are trying to bump up the jab rate north o' the border, in order to catch up and hopefully surpass the English?

    Could be the up side of vaccination nationalism!
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362
    gealbhan said:

    My take outs from this evenings briefing, please correct me where I’m wrong

    They wouldn’t commit to extermination strategy
    They wouldn’t commit to border controls and say don’t book abroad holidays

    Today They really talked up phenomenal success of test trace. The figures are fantastic, so Kudos to the Tory government for that. But haven’t they changed it so instead of tracing, they ask the tested person to do their own tracing and count it in these figures that it’s happened? And are making the tracers redundant? That seems more like a phenomenal assumption the trace stats are so high
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 1,993
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Selebian said:

    Leon said:

    Gaussian said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    Leon said:

    Fpt for Carlotta


    Shit. The truly alarming thing there is what I feared most: past infection with ‘normal’ Covid provides no immunity against SA Covid. This bug is Satanic

    If the Safferbug runs riot in the UK this spring we will be back to square one. They won’t be able to tweak any of the vaccines in time. People will catch it again who’ve already had it. People vaxxed with AZ will also get it. Hopefully they will only get mild/moderate cases, but we don’t know that yet, for sure.

    I don’t want to come over all Black Rook but this is ominous. To me it suggests lockdown until Autumn. And yet I just don’t think the economy can hack that, or the nation’s mental health. So what gives?

    It’s a setback, but you are probably going too far.
    • The sample size in the new study was small. Of 1749 participants, 42 got sick, of whom 19 had the vaccine and 23 had a placebo, producing an efficacy figure of just 22 per cent.
    • However, no one became severely ill or died.
    • That is partly because participants were young – average age 31 – but also because while the vaccine doesn’t appear to prompt a significant immune response in the form of antibodies specific to 501Y.V2, it does still boost a broader immune response in the form of T cells. That also appears to be true of reinfection.
    • So AstraZeneca believes its vaccine still offers protection against serious illness and death from the variant. The same, with respect to T-Cells, will likely be true of reinfection.
    • In any case, South Africa has shipments of the Pfizer, Novavax and Johnson & Johnson vaccines on order, and all appear to provide protection against the variant, including among over 65s.o.
    Finally, if you want some good news from South Africa, look at their case numbers and mortality over the last six weeks. Dropping like a rock.
    Yes, the drop in cases and deaths in SA is encouraging. No one seems entirely sure why. Herd immunity in townships has been posited. Tho I also note the SA health minister is warning of a third wave

    https://businesstech.co.za/news/trending/465684/south-africa-must-prepare-for-a-possible-third-covid-19-wave-mkhize/
    There is no mystery about the falling case numbers in South Africa. They started a lockdown at the end of December, and surprise surprise, cases peaked around two weeks later.
    You’re wrong, I believe. There is some mystery because the lockdown basically didn’t happen in the townships, because it is impossible to social distance/isolate or practice great hygiene in these densely populated, impoverished places. Yet still cases have crashed. Hence the herd immunity theory, tho it is just a theory, I admit

    Similar things have happened in India. Which is even poorer, and more crowded. Cases have just fallen away (long before any vaccines arrived)

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/india/

    Hey, look, this is GOOD news. Perhaps the bug, at some point, just fizzles out.

    Let us pray.
    I think you overplay the inability to lockdown/isolate etc in poorer countries.

    Lockdowns worked in the US in 1918 [1] for Spanish Flu

    India in 2020 is close in GDP per capita and much better in life expectancy compared to the US in 1918 [2]


    [1] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/2020/03/how-cities-flattened-curve-1918-spanish-flu-pandemic-coronavirus/
    [2] https://www.gapminder.org/tools/#$state$time$value=1918;;&chart-type=bubbles (US is the biggish green circle in 1918; in 2020 India is one of the big pink one at a similar horizontal position
    An interesting point well made, but.... India? Have you been to cities like Mumbai, Delhi, Calcutta?

    I don’t see how you could possibly lockdown strictly in those enormous slums, and as for hygiene...

    For comparison, America’s largest city in 1918 was nyc, with a population of 5m. Mumbai has a population of 18m

    America’s 2nd largest city in 1918 was Chicago - 2.6m. New Delhi has a population of 16m
    Yes, yes, but can they bat?
    They can, but they use different bats.

    More on topic, what's the governance structure of the Crown Office, is there any UK institution that can manage the problems without nuclear options such as the suspension of Holyrood?
    Crown Office is under the control of the Lord Advocate. Before Holyrood this was basically a UK appointment and the Crown Office had a huge degree of independence arguably too much in that it was not accountable to anyone. Post devolution the Lord Advocate became a member of the Scottish government akin to the Attorney General in rUK. This has, to put it politely, proved suboptimal. In England, AIUI, prosecutions are a matter for the DPP who is not a government minister. This is clearly a good thing. The separation of powers is very important.

    For years after devolution Crown Office clung to its independence but we are now seeing that crumble and what looks painfully like politically motivated prosecutions. I am not saying that Salmond was such but the way that the "evidence" was, err, collected caused considerable concern before the trial and during it. The current prosecutions for alleged breaches of the Contempt of Court Act directed at journalists seem ill advised too.

    For decades most of the Advocates Depute who prosecuted crime in Scotland were senior silks looking to tick a public service box before going onto the bench. The downside was that these silks often had limited knowledge of criminal law but they were smart and absolutely independent, by no means dependent on their salaries which in most cases were a pittance to what they had earned before. The Crown Office is now more "professional" in that it has ADs who serve there for long periods of time and who don't have that independence. I am not completely convinced that the trade off has proven advantageous.
    Nicely phrased.

    BTW, just in case it has escaped noticed, Salmond not turning up to inquiry tomorrow.

    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/alex-salmond-evidence-session-holyrood-23460844

    What kind of inquiry can it be when the principal witness can simply opt out?
    Well, they could force him to come but since this is essentially his complaint if he chooses not to come voluntarily it may prove a handy excuse for shutting things down. These things happen in banana republics apparently. Scotland is of course not such because the sun hardly ever shines.
    He is under threat of prosecution if he discusses all the details of his submission to the inquiry. He simply wants confirmation of what he is allowed to mention.
  • What the feck?

    A man has been charged in Lanarkshire in connection with an offensive social media tweet about Sir Captain Tom Moore.

    Sir Tom died in Bedford Hospital last Tuesday, aged 100, after testing positive for Covid-19.

    He had captured the nation's hearts with his fundraising efforts during the first coronavirus lockdown, raising more than £30m for NHS charities.

    The 35-year-old man is due to appear in court later this week.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-55986646

    Madness. The reaction to him has been hysterical.
    Indeed.

    I know it will come as a great shock to everyone on here but I have an outrageous and occasionally offensive sense of humour.

    But I'm not stupid enough to post stuff like that on social media.
    It's one reason why I need my phone taken away from me if I've been drinking.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    They vaccination team just gets them blind drunk first.
  • FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:



    My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.

    The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.

    That's exactly what they have done.

    They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.

    For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.

    it's what Gove calls a political solution.

    The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.

    The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.

    Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?

    The game's afoot.

    This may well be the view of the UK government, albeit with major implications of bad faith. It is absolutely not the view of the Irish government. Neither the UK nor the rest of the EU is anything like as invested in the Northern Ireland protocol as Ireland, as has been demonstrated recently by both parties. Someone who seemed well connected with the Irish government did a thread on this. The real thing that can't acknowledged by the Irish government is that they will put in a hard land border before they will detach themselves by one iota from the Single Market. The Northern Ireland Protocol exists so they don't have to make that choice. The Irish are very determined on this and they have plenty of diplomatic capital both in the EU and the US.

    I struggle to see a way to square the circle. So you voted for Brexit because you wanted to take control and to get an alien and overbearing institution out of your lives. The EU mandated internal border screams loss of control and imposition by overbearing foreign institutions more than anything else possibly could. On the other hand if you want the United Kingdom to survive in its current form, you are stuck with making the Northern Ireland Protocol sort of work.
    I think that's a lot of bollocks.

    Charles put it brilliantly: the GFA was designed in a climate where both the UK and Irish Republic were full EU members.

    Now one is not it needs to be redesigned. It can't be totally lopsided to EU single market dogma or it will risk the Troubles restarting.

    Ireland is going to have to show a bit of leg too, with the tacit permission of the EU, and it already does with the CTA and Anglo-Irish agreement.
    I agree there will need to be nodding and winking from both sides if the Protocol is going to work. But there is no real alternative to it or major redesign IMO. The UK has a treaty obligation to implement it, that Johnson himself negotiated, and will be held to it
    The Irish Republic, UK and EU will all need to compromise and fudge.

    That way peace lies.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,477
    DavidL said:

    Is it possible in this mess that there will be time for some self-reflection? The party which has dominated Scottish politics for the last 13 years has, throughout that time, been run by a feckin idiot. It really doesn't say much for the other Scottish parties that to date this had had no impact on the SNP's dominance.
    I think that's unfair. What the SNP have done in Scotland is unprecedented in the UK - gain control of a branch of Government, and ruthlessly and systematically use every lever to turn the part against the rest. Remainers complain a lot about Brexit being inevitable due to 'years of Eurosceptic moaning from politicians' - but actually the opposite is true.

    European legislation was meekly passed through Parliament as domestic law, with no complaint from Governments of any colour, and it was enthusiastically implemented by the civil service. If a Government *had* actively campaigned against the EU, fomented ill feeling about it, encouraged grievances, blamed it for shortcomings, and revived ancient quarrels, Brexit could have been achieved in a decade.
  • FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:

    I think you surmised it was written in order to justify an expected suspension of Article 16 by HMG.
    My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.

    The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.

    That's exactly what they have done.

    They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.

    For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.

    it's what Gove calls a political solution.

    The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.

    The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.

    Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?

    The game's afoot.

    I think you may be right.

    Moreover, the EU is a fantastic whipping boy to maintain native Brexit enthusiasm for a while yet.

    It would be interesting to see concrete data on the economic hit of Brexit red-tape. So far much of it is still in the realm of anecdote.
    https://order-order.com/2021/02/08/dover-port-trade-bounces-back-to-90-of-normal-despite-covid/
    Firstly- Guido? Really?
    Actually, Guido's an interesting case- gone from equal-opportunities bovver boy to Johnsonian lickspittle.

    Secondly- there's reasonable anecdote of lorries going from UK to Europe empty, because that's how businesses have adapted to the new rules.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/six-out-of-10-lorries-crossing-the-channel-empty-as-brexit-and-covid-bite/ar-BB1dg8V8?c=16080256636713851486&mkt=en-gb

    So similar level of traffic, perhaps, but much less productive.

    And remember- at the moment, EU to UK is still basically running on an honesty box system. For a few more months.

    Still- I'm sure the government know what they're doing.
    Guido was reporting on the Dover Port Authority confirmation traffic was at 90% unlike the report in the observer

    This is factual reporting unless the Dover Port Authority is making dishonest statements
    Both are probably factual. The RHA carried out a survey of its members, who reported a 68% drop in exported loads in January. Dover Port counted lorry movements in and out, presumably including empty ones. We don't know any detail for either of the two figures.

    Will there be a permanent drop in exports to the EU? Almost certainly yes and by a large amount, but not close to 68%, which would be unthinkably catastrophic.
    Thank you for a sensible response

    I am very sensitive today as my eldest son, who lives in Canada and is in a mental health crisis, is having the first of 10 electroconvulsive therapies later today and I just find some posts are unnecessary personal
    Big G, I was sorry to hear your news the other day - sorrier than you might think.
    I am wishing and hoping for his recovery, and some peace in your life.

    But please don't be citing Guido.
    I don't bother even looking at anything he posts - same as I wouldn't look at anything on the Canary.
    I can't believe I'm saying this but just like the Mirror or the Express or Trump just because it's Guido saying it doesn't necessarily mean its wrong.

    But I agree that given his reputation it's better to quote the primary source.
  • kinabalu said:

    Sandpit said:

    Fantastic Speccie article on how the vaccine issue played out in government...

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/secrets-of-the-vaccine-taskforces-success
    "The foreign press coverage has turned from mockery to awe, with Britain having vaccinated more people than France, Germany, Italy and Spain put together. Many of those behind this success are virtually unknown to the public. Their story matters, because the Vaccine Taskforce is already being looked to by ministers as a model for how government should work once the pandemic is over.

    "Sir Patrick – backed by Dominic Cummings – went to the Prime Minister and said that a vaccine tsar should be appointed so as to avoid repeating old mistakes. The Chancellor agreed – as a former investor with portfolio he believed a hawkish approach on contracts was necessary, even if it carried risk levels that led Treasury officials to describe it as 'an extremely unusual programme'. ‘They needed someone with immense private expertise — a dealmaker,’ says an aide.

    "In many ways, Kate Bingham was an obvious choice. An established venture capitalist, she has spent her career investing in pharma companies."

    To me this has a distinct Magnificent Seven vibe to it -

    Yul Brynner IS PM Boris "Boris" Johnson: He picked Kate and she was great.
    Steve McQueen IS Sir Richard Vallance: The Boffin who kept things real.
    Olivia Coleman IS Kate Bingham: She was it. She took no shit!
    As Himself: Chancellor Rishi Sunak: He ate the risk for breakfast.
    Robert Carlyle IS Dominic Cummings: He was there until he wasn't.
    Ross Kemp IS Nick Elliot: Bomb disposal expert who would not take no for an answer.
    And finally ... Matt Hancock. He watched a film.
    Valance is the bald one. He took no liberties.
    But you and missed out Eli Wallach...remember, the two timing lying evil scumbag. Frankly there are a few to choose from there. The one wanted protection money.
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362
    DougSeal said:

    Those who want a lighter alternative to the doom porn on here, this chap is professor of public health at an Ivy League university

    https://twitter.com/ashishkjha/status/1357669053213659136

    Doom porn. Or some valid reasons to be sceptical?

    Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?

    1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out.
    2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening?
    3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,590

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    I think the word you're looking for is unbelievable
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,770
    Alistair said:

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    They vaccination team just gets them blind drunk first.
    The one refuser I know originally wouldn't have any vaccine ever. Then it became a 'British' vaccine only (Bill Gates was mentioned). Today I learn (and I'm quietly delighted) that it turns out that after all the best vaccine is Pfizer and that's what's in her arm. People are bad enough, but when they're relatives too.
  • FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:

    I think you surmised it was written in order to justify an expected suspension of Article 16 by HMG.
    My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.

    The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.

    That's exactly what they have done.

    They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.

    For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.

    it's what Gove calls a political solution.

    The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.

    The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.

    Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?

    The game's afoot.

    I think you may be right.

    Moreover, the EU is a fantastic whipping boy to maintain native Brexit enthusiasm for a while yet.

    It would be interesting to see concrete data on the economic hit of Brexit red-tape. So far much of it is still in the realm of anecdote.
    https://order-order.com/2021/02/08/dover-port-trade-bounces-back-to-90-of-normal-despite-covid/
    Firstly- Guido? Really?
    Actually, Guido's an interesting case- gone from equal-opportunities bovver boy to Johnsonian lickspittle.

    Secondly- there's reasonable anecdote of lorries going from UK to Europe empty, because that's how businesses have adapted to the new rules.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/six-out-of-10-lorries-crossing-the-channel-empty-as-brexit-and-covid-bite/ar-BB1dg8V8?c=16080256636713851486&mkt=en-gb

    So similar level of traffic, perhaps, but much less productive.

    And remember- at the moment, EU to UK is still basically running on an honesty box system. For a few more months.

    Still- I'm sure the government know what they're doing.
    Guido was reporting on the Dover Port Authority confirmation traffic was at 90% unlike the report in the observer

    This is factual reporting unless the Dover Port Authority is making dishonest statements
    Both are probably factual. The RHA carried out a survey of its members, who reported a 68% drop in exported loads in January. Dover Port counted lorry movements in and out, presumably including empty ones. We don't know any detail for either of the two figures.

    Will there be a permanent drop in exports to the EU? Almost certainly yes and by a large amount, but not close to 68%, which would be unthinkably catastrophic.
    Thank you for a sensible response

    I am very sensitive today as my eldest son, who lives in Canada and is in a mental health crisis, is having the first of 10 electroconvulsive therapies later today and I just find some posts are unnecessary personal

    Of course in normal times his mother and I would be at his bedside, but due to covid we cannot go and hold his hand and be with him, leaving his wife to take all the strain on her own
    Sorry to hear this.

    Best wishes to you, him and your family.
  • kle4 said:

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    Yes, I can't quite see how a more targeted approach makes a difference in the numbers of people refusing?

    However achieved, it's remarkable.
    If achieved.

    The total number of people ineligible due to medical concerns, refusing, and/or unreachable due to being potentially Covid positive at the moment being just 0.4%? I find it very hard to believe.

    0.4% excluding [reasons for not being vaccinated] is far more plausible but if that's the case the question is how many have been excluded which makes the 0.4% meaningless.
  • Best of luck to you and yours, Big G from yours truly and every other PBer. As you are with you & your wife are with your son & his wife in soul & spirit, so are we with you.

    As to your citing Guido, well, you did give the source, allowing others to judge for themselves. Which they have every right to do. In spite of some hot talk, seems there's general agreement in seeking out actual facts, even if we don't really know what the heck they really mean.

    Thank you for your ever so kind words

    They mean a lot as we despair at being so far away at his hour of need, and of course his wife's

    And on Guido, I know he upsets many but whether it is Guido or someone else, if they are quoting a responsible source and they are really only the messenger then I have no issue with quoting it
  • Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:

    I think you surmised it was written in order to justify an expected suspension of Article 16 by HMG.
    My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.

    The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.

    That's exactly what they have done.

    They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.

    For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.

    it's what Gove calls a political solution.

    The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.

    The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.

    Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?

    The game's afoot.

    I think you may be right.

    Moreover, the EU is a fantastic whipping boy to maintain native Brexit enthusiasm for a while yet.

    It would be interesting to see concrete data on the economic hit of Brexit red-tape. So far much of it is still in the realm of anecdote.
    https://order-order.com/2021/02/08/dover-port-trade-bounces-back-to-90-of-normal-despite-covid/
    Firstly- Guido? Really?
    Actually, Guido's an interesting case- gone from equal-opportunities bovver boy to Johnsonian lickspittle.

    Secondly- there's reasonable anecdote of lorries going from UK to Europe empty, because that's how businesses have adapted to the new rules.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/six-out-of-10-lorries-crossing-the-channel-empty-as-brexit-and-covid-bite/ar-BB1dg8V8?c=16080256636713851486&mkt=en-gb

    So similar level of traffic, perhaps, but much less productive.

    And remember- at the moment, EU to UK is still basically running on an honesty box system. For a few more months.

    Still- I'm sure the government know what they're doing.
    Guido was reporting on the Dover Port Authority confirmation traffic was at 90% unlike the report in the observer

    This is factual reporting unless the Dover Port Authority is making dishonest statements
    Both are probably factual. The RHA carried out a survey of its members, who reported a 68% drop in exported loads in January. Dover Port counted lorry movements in and out, presumably including empty ones. We don't know any detail for either of the two figures.

    Will there be a permanent drop in exports to the EU? Almost certainly yes and by a large amount, but not close to 68%, which would be unthinkably catastrophic.
    Thank you for a sensible response

    I am very sensitive today as my eldest son, who lives in Canada and is in a mental health crisis, is having the first of 10 electroconvulsive therapies later today and I just find some posts are unnecessary personal

    Of course in normal times his mother and I would be at his bedside, but due to covid we cannot go and hold his hand and be with him, leaving his wife to take all the strain on her own
    That’s very tough. Sympathies
    Thank you so much

    Today is very difficult for us to be honest
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,550
    edited February 2021
    Andy_JS said:

    "Covid vaccine centre in Hackney has to close early because of 'really low uptake' - as nursing chief says UK has been too slow to respond to anti-vaxx myths among BAME communities

    John Scott vaccine hub in Hackney closed early three on three days last week
    Fears jab hesitancy among BAME groups behind poor uptake in diverse borough
    The centre is open to patients from 40 GP surgeries in the inner London area"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9236465/Covid-vaccine-centre-Hackney-forced-close-early-really-low-uptake.html

    I would have thought members of BAME communities under exactly the same duty to get informed, educate themselves and make a decision as everyone else and that differing results and outcomes are of no special significance.

    Would it not be wiser to act as if something like that were true?

  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,770

    kinabalu said:

    Sandpit said:

    Fantastic Speccie article on how the vaccine issue played out in government...

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/secrets-of-the-vaccine-taskforces-success
    "The foreign press coverage has turned from mockery to awe, with Britain having vaccinated more people than France, Germany, Italy and Spain put together. Many of those behind this success are virtually unknown to the public. Their story matters, because the Vaccine Taskforce is already being looked to by ministers as a model for how government should work once the pandemic is over.

    "Sir Patrick – backed by Dominic Cummings – went to the Prime Minister and said that a vaccine tsar should be appointed so as to avoid repeating old mistakes. The Chancellor agreed – as a former investor with portfolio he believed a hawkish approach on contracts was necessary, even if it carried risk levels that led Treasury officials to describe it as 'an extremely unusual programme'. ‘They needed someone with immense private expertise — a dealmaker,’ says an aide.

    "In many ways, Kate Bingham was an obvious choice. An established venture capitalist, she has spent her career investing in pharma companies."

    To me this has a distinct Magnificent Seven vibe to it -

    Yul Brynner IS PM Boris "Boris" Johnson: He picked Kate and she was great.
    Steve McQueen IS Sir Richard Vallance: The Boffin who kept things real.
    Olivia Coleman IS Kate Bingham: She was it. She took no shit!
    As Himself: Chancellor Rishi Sunak: He ate the risk for breakfast.
    Robert Carlyle IS Dominic Cummings: He was there until he wasn't.
    Ross Kemp IS Nick Elliot: Bomb disposal expert who would not take no for an answer.
    And finally ... Matt Hancock. He watched a film.
    Valance is the bald one. He took no liberties.
    But you and missed out Eli Wallach...remember, the two timing lying evil scumbag. Frankly there are a few to choose from there. The one wanted protection money.
    Klaus Kinsky is the clear Boris choice.

    Yul Brinner has to put in the performance of his life in being Andrew Adonis. The antithesis of all time.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,477

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:

    I think you surmised it was written in order to justify an expected suspension of Article 16 by HMG.
    My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.

    The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.

    That's exactly what they have done.

    They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.

    For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.

    it's what Gove calls a political solution.

    The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.

    The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.

    Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?

    The game's afoot.

    I think you may be right.

    Moreover, the EU is a fantastic whipping boy to maintain native Brexit enthusiasm for a while yet.

    It would be interesting to see concrete data on the economic hit of Brexit red-tape. So far much of it is still in the realm of anecdote.
    https://order-order.com/2021/02/08/dover-port-trade-bounces-back-to-90-of-normal-despite-covid/
    Firstly- Guido? Really?
    Actually, Guido's an interesting case- gone from equal-opportunities bovver boy to Johnsonian lickspittle.

    Secondly- there's reasonable anecdote of lorries going from UK to Europe empty, because that's how businesses have adapted to the new rules.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/six-out-of-10-lorries-crossing-the-channel-empty-as-brexit-and-covid-bite/ar-BB1dg8V8?c=16080256636713851486&mkt=en-gb

    So similar level of traffic, perhaps, but much less productive.

    And remember- at the moment, EU to UK is still basically running on an honesty box system. For a few more months.

    Still- I'm sure the government know what they're doing.
    Guido was reporting on the Dover Port Authority confirmation traffic was at 90% unlike the report in the observer

    This is factual reporting unless the Dover Port Authority is making dishonest statements
    Both are probably factual. The RHA carried out a survey of its members, who reported a 68% drop in exported loads in January. Dover Port counted lorry movements in and out, presumably including empty ones. We don't know any detail for either of the two figures.

    Will there be a permanent drop in exports to the EU? Almost certainly yes and by a large amount, but not close to 68%, which would be unthinkably catastrophic.
    Thank you for a sensible response

    I am very sensitive today as my eldest son, who lives in Canada and is in a mental health crisis, is having the first of 10 electroconvulsive therapies later today and I just find some posts are unnecessary personal

    Of course in normal times his mother and I would be at his bedside, but due to covid we cannot go and hold his hand and be with him, leaving his wife to take all the strain on her own
    Sorry to hear this.

    Best wishes to you, him and your family.
    Same. I am glad that your son is bravely getting the treatment he needs. I hope you hear really good news of progress soon.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    gealbhan said:

    DougSeal said:

    Those who want a lighter alternative to the doom porn on here, this chap is professor of public health at an Ivy League university

    https://twitter.com/ashishkjha/status/1357669053213659136

    Doom porn. Or some valid reasons to be sceptical?

    Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?

    1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out.
    2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening?
    3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
    If the UK has a gnomonic speciality, how could we possibly have anything other than a sunny disposition?
  • FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:

    I think you surmised it was written in order to justify an expected suspension of Article 16 by HMG.
    My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.

    The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.

    That's exactly what they have done.

    They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.

    For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.

    it's what Gove calls a political solution.

    The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.

    The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.

    Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?

    The game's afoot.

    I think you may be right.

    Moreover, the EU is a fantastic whipping boy to maintain native Brexit enthusiasm for a while yet.

    It would be interesting to see concrete data on the economic hit of Brexit red-tape. So far much of it is still in the realm of anecdote.
    https://order-order.com/2021/02/08/dover-port-trade-bounces-back-to-90-of-normal-despite-covid/
    Firstly- Guido? Really?
    Actually, Guido's an interesting case- gone from equal-opportunities bovver boy to Johnsonian lickspittle.

    Secondly- there's reasonable anecdote of lorries going from UK to Europe empty, because that's how businesses have adapted to the new rules.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/six-out-of-10-lorries-crossing-the-channel-empty-as-brexit-and-covid-bite/ar-BB1dg8V8?c=16080256636713851486&mkt=en-gb

    So similar level of traffic, perhaps, but much less productive.

    And remember- at the moment, EU to UK is still basically running on an honesty box system. For a few more months.

    Still- I'm sure the government know what they're doing.
    Guido was reporting on the Dover Port Authority confirmation traffic was at 90% unlike the report in the observer

    This is factual reporting unless the Dover Port Authority is making dishonest statements
    Both are probably factual. The RHA carried out a survey of its members, who reported a 68% drop in exported loads in January. Dover Port counted lorry movements in and out, presumably including empty ones. We don't know any detail for either of the two figures.

    Will there be a permanent drop in exports to the EU? Almost certainly yes and by a large amount, but not close to 68%, which would be unthinkably catastrophic.
    Thank you for a sensible response

    I am very sensitive today as my eldest son, who lives in Canada and is in a mental health crisis, is having the first of 10 electroconvulsive therapies later today and I just find some posts are unnecessary personal

    Of course in normal times his mother and I would be at his bedside, but due to covid we cannot go and hold his hand and be with him, leaving his wife to take all the strain on her own
    Sorry to hear this.

    Best wishes to you, him and your family.
    Thanks CR
  • Omnium said:

    Alistair said:

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    They vaccination team just gets them blind drunk first.
    The one refuser I know originally wouldn't have any vaccine ever. Then it became a 'British' vaccine only (Bill Gates was mentioned). Today I learn (and I'm quietly delighted) that it turns out that after all the best vaccine is Pfizer and that's what's in her arm. People are bad enough, but when they're relatives too.
    Good news, and very interesting.

    Goes to show that many, indeed most people are conflicted re: COVID vaccination, in some way and to some degree. And that very few of us are totally inflexible about it.

    Right now, having had jab #1, am feeling like a very privileged person, in a very privileged part of the world (WA State USA) where 9% of the population has gotten first dose (and 2% the second).
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362

    gealbhan said:

    DougSeal said:

    Those who want a lighter alternative to the doom porn on here, this chap is professor of public health at an Ivy League university

    https://twitter.com/ashishkjha/status/1357669053213659136

    Doom porn. Or some valid reasons to be sceptical?

    Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?

    1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out.
    2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening?
    3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
    If the UK has a gnomonic speciality, how could we possibly have anything other than a sunny disposition?
    You are always so quick.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    All the best to @Big_G_NorthWales and his family, especially his son.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    edited February 2021
    justin124 said:

    FPT
    I am very much with Alistair here. If the parties are level pegging at 39% , Labour is likely to reverse its 2019 losses in Wales - and could go beyond that to win Preseli Pembrokeshire and Arfon. Anglesey is possibly the most challenging for Labour due to its long history of re-electing incumbents.

    Ynys Mon is protected. What happens there probably depends on the choice of candidate.

    Any redrawing of Arfon to make it bigger will make it safer for Plaid Cymru (there is only one Labour Councillor left on Gwynedd Council).

    Abercowny, Arfon & Dwyfor Meirionnydd have enough electors to make only two seats. My guess is that it makes one very safe Plaid Cymru and one more marginal Plaid Cymru seat.

    Preseli Pembrokeshire will presumably vanish. Pembrokeshire is still a bit too populous for one constituency which must have max 77k electors.

    The likelihood is they will remove the more Welsh-speaking northern portion & join it with Ceredigion.

    My guess is this will leave a Tory-leaning seat in Pembrokeshire South & Central that Labour would expect to take in a good year. And probably make a Ceredigion & Pembroke North Seat that is slightly safer for Plaid Cymru.

    [Edit: Labour would be better off if Ynys Mon wasn't protected, and the constituency could be joined with Labour strength in Bangor.]
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,086
    edited February 2021

    If I hear another pissing question about foreign holidays at these press conferences I may lose it a la Michael Douglas in Falling Down.

    They didn't....I was joking earlier about potential for some journo asking for a friend about foreign summer hols because Cotswold cottages are too expensive.

    One day its why haven't you closed the border and turned the UK into a concentration camp, the next it is what about my Greek getaway..
  • eekeek Posts: 28,398

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:



    My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.

    The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.

    That's exactly what they have done.

    They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.

    For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.

    it's what Gove calls a political solution.

    The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.

    The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.

    Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?

    The game's afoot.

    This may well be the view of the UK government, albeit with major implications of bad faith. It is absolutely not the view of the Irish government. Neither the UK nor the rest of the EU is anything like as invested in the Northern Ireland protocol as Ireland, as has been demonstrated recently by both parties. Someone who seemed well connected with the Irish government did a thread on this. The real thing that can't acknowledged by the Irish government is that they will put in a hard land border before they will detach themselves by one iota from the Single Market. The Northern Ireland Protocol exists so they don't have to make that choice. The Irish are very determined on this and they have plenty of diplomatic capital both in the EU and the US.

    I struggle to see a way to square the circle. So you voted for Brexit because you wanted to take control and to get an alien and overbearing institution out of your lives. The EU mandated internal border screams loss of control and imposition by overbearing foreign institutions more than anything else possibly could. On the other hand if you want the United Kingdom to survive in its current form, you are stuck with making the Northern Ireland Protocol sort of work.
    I think that's a lot of bollocks.

    Charles put it brilliantly: the GFA was designed in a climate where both the UK and Irish Republic were full EU members.

    Now one is not it needs to be redesigned. It can't be totally lopsided to EU single market dogma or it will risk the Troubles restarting.

    Ireland is going to have to show a bit of leg too, with the tacit permission of the EU, and it already does with the CTA and Anglo-Irish agreement.
    How can you redesign something that only worked because it was based on the foundation of everyone being in a single political and common market with broad decisions at a level above both countries.

    Brexit removed the foundations (and most of the cliff) on which the GFA agreement was built - so I really can't see how you can quickly fix something that took 10 years to build on foundations that have also disappeared.



  • Best of luck to you and yours, Big G from yours truly and every other PBer. As you are with you & your wife are with your son & his wife in soul & spirit, so are we with you.

    As to your citing Guido, well, you did give the source, allowing others to judge for themselves. Which they have every right to do. In spite of some hot talk, seems there's general agreement in seeking out actual facts, even if we don't really know what the heck they really mean.

    Thank you for your ever so kind words

    They mean a lot as we despair at being so far away at his hour of need, and of course his wife's

    And on Guido, I know he upsets many but whether it is Guido or someone else, if they are quoting a responsible source and they are really only the messenger then I have no issue with quoting it
    Firstly, and importantly, every good wish to you and yours. It's horribly difficult, but at least we know that doctors are damn good at what that do.

    As to the Guido point, I'm sure you don't need me to tell you that a fact can be perfectly true and also utterly misleading. And whilst no news source is perfect, some specialise in misleading truths, because winding up your readers wins you an audience. The same goes for some politicians, of course.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,770

    justin124 said:

    FPT
    I am very much with Alistair here. If the parties are level pegging at 39% , Labour is likely to reverse its 2019 losses in Wales - and could go beyond that to win Preseli Pembrokeshire and Arfon. Anglesey is possibly the most challenging for Labour due to its long history of re-electing incumbents.

    Ynys Mon is protected. What happens there probably depends on the choice of candidate.

    Any redrawing of Arfon to make it bigger will make it safer for Plaid Cymru (there is only one Labour Councillor left on Gwynedd Council).

    Abercowny, Arfon & Dwyfor Meirionnydd have enough electors to make only two seats. My guess is that it makes one safe Plaid Cymru and one marginal Plaid Cymru seat.

    Preseli Pembrokeshire will presumably vanish. Pembrokeshire is still a bit too populous for one constituency which must have max 77k electors.

    The likelihood is they will remove the more Welsh-speaking northern portion & join it with Ceredigion.

    My guess is this will leave a Tory-leaning seat in Pembrokeshire South & Central that Labour would expect to take in a good year. And probably make a Ceredigion & Pembroke North Seat that is slightly safer for Plaid Cymru.
    Ynys Mon is solid Tory anyway now...

    I love that constituency in that I'd long targeted it as potential great betting opportunity and it worked out. Obviously didn't win much money - a hard market to access, but still.

  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,477
    eek said:

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:



    My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.

    The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.

    That's exactly what they have done.

    They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.

    For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.

    it's what Gove calls a political solution.

    The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.

    The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.

    Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?

    The game's afoot.

    This may well be the view of the UK government, albeit with major implications of bad faith. It is absolutely not the view of the Irish government. Neither the UK nor the rest of the EU is anything like as invested in the Northern Ireland protocol as Ireland, as has been demonstrated recently by both parties. Someone who seemed well connected with the Irish government did a thread on this. The real thing that can't acknowledged by the Irish government is that they will put in a hard land border before they will detach themselves by one iota from the Single Market. The Northern Ireland Protocol exists so they don't have to make that choice. The Irish are very determined on this and they have plenty of diplomatic capital both in the EU and the US.

    I struggle to see a way to square the circle. So you voted for Brexit because you wanted to take control and to get an alien and overbearing institution out of your lives. The EU mandated internal border screams loss of control and imposition by overbearing foreign institutions more than anything else possibly could. On the other hand if you want the United Kingdom to survive in its current form, you are stuck with making the Northern Ireland Protocol sort of work.
    I think that's a lot of bollocks.

    Charles put it brilliantly: the GFA was designed in a climate where both the UK and Irish Republic were full EU members.

    Now one is not it needs to be redesigned. It can't be totally lopsided to EU single market dogma or it will risk the Troubles restarting.

    Ireland is going to have to show a bit of leg too, with the tacit permission of the EU, and it already does with the CTA and Anglo-Irish agreement.
    How can you redesign something that only worked because it was based on the foundation of everyone being in a single political and common market with broad decisions at a level above both countries.

    Brexit removed the foundations (and most of the cliff) on which the GFA agreement was built - so I really can't see how you can quickly fix something that took 10 years to build on foundations that have also disappeared.
    Good job they're not asking you to do it then!
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,858
    sarissa said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Selebian said:

    Leon said:

    Gaussian said:

    Leon said:

    DougSeal said:

    Leon said:

    Fpt for Carlotta


    Shit. The truly alarming thing there is what I feared most: past infection with ‘normal’ Covid provides no immunity against SA Covid. This bug is Satanic

    If the Safferbug runs riot in the UK this spring we will be back to square one. They won’t be able to tweak any of the vaccines in time. People will catch it again who’ve already had it. People vaxxed with AZ will also get it. Hopefully they will only get mild/moderate cases, but we don’t know that yet, for sure.

    I don’t want to come over all Black Rook but this is ominous. To me it suggests lockdown until Autumn. And yet I just don’t think the economy can hack that, or the nation’s mental health. So what gives?

    It’s a setback, but you are probably going too far.
    • The sample size in the new study was small. Of 1749 participants, 42 got sick, of whom 19 had the vaccine and 23 had a placebo, producing an efficacy figure of just 22 per cent.
    • However, no one became severely ill or died.
    • That is partly because participants were young – average age 31 – but also because while the vaccine doesn’t appear to prompt a significant immune response in the form of antibodies specific to 501Y.V2, it does still boost a broader immune response in the form of T cells. That also appears to be true of reinfection.
    • So AstraZeneca believes its vaccine still offers protection against serious illness and death from the variant. The same, with respect to T-Cells, will likely be true of reinfection.
    • In any case, South Africa has shipments of the Pfizer, Novavax and Johnson & Johnson vaccines on order, and all appear to provide protection against the variant, including among over 65s.o.
    Finally, if you want some good news from South Africa, look at their case numbers and mortality over the last six weeks. Dropping like a rock.
    Yes, the drop in cases and deaths in SA is encouraging. No one seems entirely sure why. Herd immunity in townships has been posited. Tho I also note the SA health minister is warning of a third wave

    https://businesstech.co.za/news/trending/465684/south-africa-must-prepare-for-a-possible-third-covid-19-wave-mkhize/
    There is no mystery about the falling case numbers in South Africa. They started a lockdown at the end of December, and surprise surprise, cases peaked around two weeks later.
    You’re wrong, I believe. There is some mystery because the lockdown basically didn’t happen in the townships, because it is impossible to social distance/isolate or practice great hygiene in these densely populated, impoverished places. Yet still cases have crashed. Hence the herd immunity theory, tho it is just a theory, I admit

    Similar things have happened in India. Which is even poorer, and more crowded. Cases have just fallen away (long before any vaccines arrived)

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/india/

    Hey, look, this is GOOD news. Perhaps the bug, at some point, just fizzles out.

    Let us pray.
    I think you overplay the inability to lockdown/isolate etc in poorer countries.

    Lockdowns worked in the US in 1918 [1] for Spanish Flu

    India in 2020 is close in GDP per capita and much better in life expectancy compared to the US in 1918 [2]


    [1] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/2020/03/how-cities-flattened-curve-1918-spanish-flu-pandemic-coronavirus/
    [2] https://www.gapminder.org/tools/#$state$time$value=1918;;&chart-type=bubbles (US is the biggish green circle in 1918; in 2020 India is one of the big pink one at a similar horizontal position
    An interesting point well made, but.... India? Have you been to cities like Mumbai, Delhi, Calcutta?

    I don’t see how you could possibly lockdown strictly in those enormous slums, and as for hygiene...

    For comparison, America’s largest city in 1918 was nyc, with a population of 5m. Mumbai has a population of 18m

    America’s 2nd largest city in 1918 was Chicago - 2.6m. New Delhi has a population of 16m
    Yes, yes, but can they bat?
    They can, but they use different bats.

    More on topic, what's the governance structure of the Crown Office, is there any UK institution that can manage the problems without nuclear options such as the suspension of Holyrood?
    Crown Office is under the control of the Lord Advocate. Before Holyrood this was basically a UK appointment and the Crown Office had a huge degree of independence arguably too much in that it was not accountable to anyone. Post devolution the Lord Advocate became a member of the Scottish government akin to the Attorney General in rUK. This has, to put it politely, proved suboptimal. In England, AIUI, prosecutions are a matter for the DPP who is not a government minister. This is clearly a good thing. The separation of powers is very important.

    For years after devolution Crown Office clung to its independence but we are now seeing that crumble and what looks painfully like politically motivated prosecutions. I am not saying that Salmond was such but the way that the "evidence" was, err, collected caused considerable concern before the trial and during it. The current prosecutions for alleged breaches of the Contempt of Court Act directed at journalists seem ill advised too.

    For decades most of the Advocates Depute who prosecuted crime in Scotland were senior silks looking to tick a public service box before going onto the bench. The downside was that these silks often had limited knowledge of criminal law but they were smart and absolutely independent, by no means dependent on their salaries which in most cases were a pittance to what they had earned before. The Crown Office is now more "professional" in that it has ADs who serve there for long periods of time and who don't have that independence. I am not completely convinced that the trade off has proven advantageous.
    Nicely phrased.

    BTW, just in case it has escaped noticed, Salmond not turning up to inquiry tomorrow.

    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/alex-salmond-evidence-session-holyrood-23460844

    What kind of inquiry can it be when the principal witness can simply opt out?
    Well, they could force him to come but since this is essentially his complaint if he chooses not to come voluntarily it may prove a handy excuse for shutting things down. These things happen in banana republics apparently. Scotland is of course not such because the sun hardly ever shines.
    He is under threat of prosecution if he discusses all the details of his submission to the inquiry. He simply wants confirmation of what he is allowed to mention.
    Hmm...I have read his submission as, I am sure, have you. Its principally about the judicial review fiasco. I did not detect anything to do with his trial, let alone his contempt of court order. If he was asked about his trial (which he almost certainly wouldn't be) then he could decline to answer for this reason.

    It's just a little convenient, that's all I am saying.
  • eek said:

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:



    My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.

    The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.

    That's exactly what they have done.

    They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.

    For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.

    it's what Gove calls a political solution.

    The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.

    The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.

    Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?

    The game's afoot.

    This may well be the view of the UK government, albeit with major implications of bad faith. It is absolutely not the view of the Irish government. Neither the UK nor the rest of the EU is anything like as invested in the Northern Ireland protocol as Ireland, as has been demonstrated recently by both parties. Someone who seemed well connected with the Irish government did a thread on this. The real thing that can't acknowledged by the Irish government is that they will put in a hard land border before they will detach themselves by one iota from the Single Market. The Northern Ireland Protocol exists so they don't have to make that choice. The Irish are very determined on this and they have plenty of diplomatic capital both in the EU and the US.

    I struggle to see a way to square the circle. So you voted for Brexit because you wanted to take control and to get an alien and overbearing institution out of your lives. The EU mandated internal border screams loss of control and imposition by overbearing foreign institutions more than anything else possibly could. On the other hand if you want the United Kingdom to survive in its current form, you are stuck with making the Northern Ireland Protocol sort of work.
    I think that's a lot of bollocks.

    Charles put it brilliantly: the GFA was designed in a climate where both the UK and Irish Republic were full EU members.

    Now one is not it needs to be redesigned. It can't be totally lopsided to EU single market dogma or it will risk the Troubles restarting.

    Ireland is going to have to show a bit of leg too, with the tacit permission of the EU, and it already does with the CTA and Anglo-Irish agreement.
    How can you redesign something that only worked because it was based on the foundation of everyone being in a single political and common market with broad decisions at a level above both countries.

    Brexit removed the foundations (and most of the cliff) on which the GFA agreement was built - so I really can't see how you can quickly fix something that took 10 years to build on foundations that have also disappeared.



    Perhaps the Single Market framework (i don't like the word dogma) was what kept the troubles at bay. I think it is the people who wanted to change things unilaterally who need to be careful of restarting the troubles.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,086
    edited February 2021
    I absolutely dispair at the footballers...just watching Ben Foster on YouTube..

    Yeah well.we are having to go to the away game on two coaches because of social distancing rules...before i head off, I am just off down the shops to gets some snacks for the lads.
  • eek said:

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:



    My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.

    The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.

    That's exactly what they have done.

    They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.

    For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.

    it's what Gove calls a political solution.

    The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.

    The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.

    Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?

    The game's afoot.

    This may well be the view of the UK government, albeit with major implications of bad faith. It is absolutely not the view of the Irish government. Neither the UK nor the rest of the EU is anything like as invested in the Northern Ireland protocol as Ireland, as has been demonstrated recently by both parties. Someone who seemed well connected with the Irish government did a thread on this. The real thing that can't acknowledged by the Irish government is that they will put in a hard land border before they will detach themselves by one iota from the Single Market. The Northern Ireland Protocol exists so they don't have to make that choice. The Irish are very determined on this and they have plenty of diplomatic capital both in the EU and the US.

    I struggle to see a way to square the circle. So you voted for Brexit because you wanted to take control and to get an alien and overbearing institution out of your lives. The EU mandated internal border screams loss of control and imposition by overbearing foreign institutions more than anything else possibly could. On the other hand if you want the United Kingdom to survive in its current form, you are stuck with making the Northern Ireland Protocol sort of work.
    I think that's a lot of bollocks.

    Charles put it brilliantly: the GFA was designed in a climate where both the UK and Irish Republic were full EU members.

    Now one is not it needs to be redesigned. It can't be totally lopsided to EU single market dogma or it will risk the Troubles restarting.

    Ireland is going to have to show a bit of leg too, with the tacit permission of the EU, and it already does with the CTA and Anglo-Irish agreement.
    How can you redesign something that only worked because it was based on the foundation of everyone being in a single political and common market with broad decisions at a level above both countries.

    Brexit removed the foundations (and most of the cliff) on which the GFA agreement was built - so I really can't see how you can quickly fix something that took 10 years to build on foundations that have also disappeared.



    Trouble is that, for some, undermining the GFA was the whole point of Brexit, and for others it was just a delightful bonus.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,086
    edited February 2021
    How much spin do we think there was in JVT claims that because cockney covid is more transmissible, the chances are that Cockney covid will remain the dominant strain compared to SA covid for many months to come.

    Does the data back that up?
  • eekeek Posts: 28,398

    eek said:

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:



    My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.

    The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.

    That's exactly what they have done.

    They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.

    For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.

    it's what Gove calls a political solution.

    The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.

    The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.

    Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?

    The game's afoot.

    This may well be the view of the UK government, albeit with major implications of bad faith. It is absolutely not the view of the Irish government. Neither the UK nor the rest of the EU is anything like as invested in the Northern Ireland protocol as Ireland, as has been demonstrated recently by both parties. Someone who seemed well connected with the Irish government did a thread on this. The real thing that can't acknowledged by the Irish government is that they will put in a hard land border before they will detach themselves by one iota from the Single Market. The Northern Ireland Protocol exists so they don't have to make that choice. The Irish are very determined on this and they have plenty of diplomatic capital both in the EU and the US.

    I struggle to see a way to square the circle. So you voted for Brexit because you wanted to take control and to get an alien and overbearing institution out of your lives. The EU mandated internal border screams loss of control and imposition by overbearing foreign institutions more than anything else possibly could. On the other hand if you want the United Kingdom to survive in its current form, you are stuck with making the Northern Ireland Protocol sort of work.
    I think that's a lot of bollocks.

    Charles put it brilliantly: the GFA was designed in a climate where both the UK and Irish Republic were full EU members.

    Now one is not it needs to be redesigned. It can't be totally lopsided to EU single market dogma or it will risk the Troubles restarting.

    Ireland is going to have to show a bit of leg too, with the tacit permission of the EU, and it already does with the CTA and Anglo-Irish agreement.
    How can you redesign something that only worked because it was based on the foundation of everyone being in a single political and common market with broad decisions at a level above both countries.

    Brexit removed the foundations (and most of the cliff) on which the GFA agreement was built - so I really can't see how you can quickly fix something that took 10 years to build on foundations that have also disappeared.



    Perhaps the Single Market framework (i don't like the word dogma) was what kept the troubles at bay. I think it is the people who wanted to change things unilaterally who need to be careful of restarting the troubles.
    I always thought it would be the GFA that had the greatest impact on Brexit but then we got Boris who brushed everything aside until suddenly the issues became obvious.

    Sadly however that wasn't 2 years before we left, it's 5 weeks after we irrevocably had left.

    No wonder Gove was cockahoop when the EU triggered Article 16 without realizing on the 29th.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,865

    How much spin do we think there was in JVT claims that because cockney covid is more transmissible, the chances are that Cockney covid will remain the dominant strain compared to SA covid for many months to come.

    Does the data back that up?

    Difficult to say because both variants can conceivably compete for the same host. At least if people who have had SA COVID can get Kent COVID. We know the reverse is true.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    edited February 2021
    Omnium said:

    justin124 said:

    FPT
    I am very much with Alistair here. If the parties are level pegging at 39% , Labour is likely to reverse its 2019 losses in Wales - and could go beyond that to win Preseli Pembrokeshire and Arfon. Anglesey is possibly the most challenging for Labour due to its long history of re-electing incumbents.

    Ynys Mon is protected. What happens there probably depends on the choice of candidate.

    Any redrawing of Arfon to make it bigger will make it safer for Plaid Cymru (there is only one Labour Councillor left on Gwynedd Council).

    Abercowny, Arfon & Dwyfor Meirionnydd have enough electors to make only two seats. My guess is that it makes one safe Plaid Cymru and one marginal Plaid Cymru seat.

    Preseli Pembrokeshire will presumably vanish. Pembrokeshire is still a bit too populous for one constituency which must have max 77k electors.

    The likelihood is they will remove the more Welsh-speaking northern portion & join it with Ceredigion.

    My guess is this will leave a Tory-leaning seat in Pembrokeshire South & Central that Labour would expect to take in a good year. And probably make a Ceredigion & Pembroke North Seat that is slightly safer for Plaid Cymru.
    Ynys Mon is solid Tory anyway now...

    I love that constituency in that I'd long targeted it as potential great betting opportunity and it worked out. Obviously didn't win much money - a hard market to access, but still.

    ".. solid Tory ..." Err, Virginia Crosbie has 35 % of the vote and a majority of 1,968.

    She has had to spend most of the pandemic explaining to voters in Ynys Mon why the wanker Tory MP from Rossendale & Darwen brought the pox to Ynys Mon.

    Because, curiously, Jake Berry MP does not own a house in the constituency he represents -- Rossendale & Darwen -- but owns a property empire on Ynys Mon as well as a London town house. The pandemic has thrown a rather brilliant glare on his many properties on the island.

    Jake must have single-handled done much to ensure her defeat next time.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,858

    DavidL said:

    Is it possible in this mess that there will be time for some self-reflection? The party which has dominated Scottish politics for the last 13 years has, throughout that time, been run by a feckin idiot. It really doesn't say much for the other Scottish parties that to date this had had no impact on the SNP's dominance.
    I think that's unfair. What the SNP have done in Scotland is unprecedented in the UK - gain control of a branch of Government, and ruthlessly and systematically use every lever to turn the part against the rest. Remainers complain a lot about Brexit being inevitable due to 'years of Eurosceptic moaning from politicians' - but actually the opposite is true.

    European legislation was meekly passed through Parliament as domestic law, with no complaint from Governments of any colour, and it was enthusiastically implemented by the civil service. If a Government *had* actively campaigned against the EU, fomented ill feeling about it, encouraged grievances, blamed it for shortcomings, and revived ancient quarrels, Brexit could have been achieved in a decade.
    It's true that most of our political parties were only anti-EU in opposition and found the joys of the Council of Ministers meetings irresistible in office but Morrel, jeez. And yet the opposition parties struggle to lay a glove on him to this day.

    Extraordinary.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,398

    eek said:

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:



    My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.

    The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.

    That's exactly what they have done.

    They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.

    For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.

    it's what Gove calls a political solution.

    The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.

    The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.

    Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?

    The game's afoot.

    This may well be the view of the UK government, albeit with major implications of bad faith. It is absolutely not the view of the Irish government. Neither the UK nor the rest of the EU is anything like as invested in the Northern Ireland protocol as Ireland, as has been demonstrated recently by both parties. Someone who seemed well connected with the Irish government did a thread on this. The real thing that can't acknowledged by the Irish government is that they will put in a hard land border before they will detach themselves by one iota from the Single Market. The Northern Ireland Protocol exists so they don't have to make that choice. The Irish are very determined on this and they have plenty of diplomatic capital both in the EU and the US.

    I struggle to see a way to square the circle. So you voted for Brexit because you wanted to take control and to get an alien and overbearing institution out of your lives. The EU mandated internal border screams loss of control and imposition by overbearing foreign institutions more than anything else possibly could. On the other hand if you want the United Kingdom to survive in its current form, you are stuck with making the Northern Ireland Protocol sort of work.
    I think that's a lot of bollocks.

    Charles put it brilliantly: the GFA was designed in a climate where both the UK and Irish Republic were full EU members.

    Now one is not it needs to be redesigned. It can't be totally lopsided to EU single market dogma or it will risk the Troubles restarting.

    Ireland is going to have to show a bit of leg too, with the tacit permission of the EU, and it already does with the CTA and Anglo-Irish agreement.
    How can you redesign something that only worked because it was based on the foundation of everyone being in a single political and common market with broad decisions at a level above both countries.

    Brexit removed the foundations (and most of the cliff) on which the GFA agreement was built - so I really can't see how you can quickly fix something that took 10 years to build on foundations that have also disappeared.
    Good job they're not asking you to do it then!
    I don't see you doing any research into the issue - and until you understand the root cause of the problem and how the previous fixes worked for so long, you aren't going to find a way to permanently fix it.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,858
    We've just lost 10% of our GDP thanks to Covid. Why is anyone surprised by this?
  • https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1358828742995492866?s=19

    He works in the media and doesn't seem to know that you don't need a tv licence to listen to BBC radio.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    maaarsh said:

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    I think the word you're looking for is unbelievable
    So are you saying the Scot Gov is lying about the number of people vaccinated?
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Is it possible in this mess that there will be time for some self-reflection? The party which has dominated Scottish politics for the last 13 years has, throughout that time, been run by a feckin idiot. It really doesn't say much for the other Scottish parties that to date this had had no impact on the SNP's dominance.
    I think that's unfair. What the SNP have done in Scotland is unprecedented in the UK - gain control of a branch of Government, and ruthlessly and systematically use every lever to turn the part against the rest. Remainers complain a lot about Brexit being inevitable due to 'years of Eurosceptic moaning from politicians' - but actually the opposite is true.

    European legislation was meekly passed through Parliament as domestic law, with no complaint from Governments of any colour, and it was enthusiastically implemented by the civil service. If a Government *had* actively campaigned against the EU, fomented ill feeling about it, encouraged grievances, blamed it for shortcomings, and revived ancient quarrels, Brexit could have been achieved in a decade.
    It's true that most of our political parties were only anti-EU in opposition and found the joys of the Council of Ministers meetings irresistible in office but Morrel, jeez. And yet the opposition parties struggle to lay a glove on him to this day.

    Extraordinary.
    Opposition parties crap, Sturgeon must answer.
  • https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1358828742995492866?s=19

    He works in the media and doesn't seem to know that you don't need a tv licence to listen to BBC radio.

    What was I saying about perfectly true and utterly misleading?

    (And whilst Times Radio is free, it's business model is mainly to push subscriptions for the paper and website. Their minimal smartphone app? £180 a year.)
  • Liverpool and Manchester seem be continually problematic.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,924
    edited February 2021
    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Not seeing it myself...

    'Overtly sexual' cow blocked as Facebook ad
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-55981602

    I thought that a big pink udder might have triggered the nanny, but that is a bullock not a cow!
    Cow love was the comic sub-plot in an episode of House.
    www.youtube.com/watch?v=auYEqm3bfGs
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 1,993

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    Is this because Scots geezers are trying to bump up the jab rate north o' the border, in order to catch up and hopefully surpass the English?

    Could be the up side of vaccination nationalism!
    One life saved for every 20 inoculations of elderly residents of care homes, versus one saved for every 40,000 50-somethings.
    Everyone else in between.
    It’s not nationalism, it’s about the risk of death.

  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,770

    Omnium said:

    justin124 said:

    FPT
    I am very much with Alistair here. If the parties are level pegging at 39% , Labour is likely to reverse its 2019 losses in Wales - and could go beyond that to win Preseli Pembrokeshire and Arfon. Anglesey is possibly the most challenging for Labour due to its long history of re-electing incumbents.

    Ynys Mon is protected. What happens there probably depends on the choice of candidate.

    Any redrawing of Arfon to make it bigger will make it safer for Plaid Cymru (there is only one Labour Councillor left on Gwynedd Council).

    Abercowny, Arfon & Dwyfor Meirionnydd have enough electors to make only two seats. My guess is that it makes one safe Plaid Cymru and one marginal Plaid Cymru seat.

    Preseli Pembrokeshire will presumably vanish. Pembrokeshire is still a bit too populous for one constituency which must have max 77k electors.

    The likelihood is they will remove the more Welsh-speaking northern portion & join it with Ceredigion.

    My guess is this will leave a Tory-leaning seat in Pembrokeshire South & Central that Labour would expect to take in a good year. And probably make a Ceredigion & Pembroke North Seat that is slightly safer for Plaid Cymru.
    Ynys Mon is solid Tory anyway now...

    I love that constituency in that I'd long targeted it as potential great betting opportunity and it worked out. Obviously didn't win much money - a hard market to access, but still.

    ".. solid Tory ..." Err, Virginia Crosbie has 35 % of the vote and a majority of 1,968.

    She has had to spend most of the pandemic explaining to voters in Ynys Mon why the wanker Tory MP from Rossendale & Darwen brought the pox to Ynys Mon.

    Because, curiously, Jake Berry MP does not own a house in the constituency he represents -- Rossendale & Darwen -- but owns a property empire on Ynys Mon as well as a London town house. The pandemic has thrown a rather brilliant glare on his many properties on the island.

    Jake must have single-handled done much to ensure her defeat next time.
    I did try to imply tongue-in-cheek with the "..."

    I've no local knowledge at all, but it is the sort of place that an aspiring Tory MP might imagine could become anomalous.

    Whatever the outcome the fact that there's something to fight for politically in these sorts of seats is a good thing.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,879
    sarissa said:

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    Is this because Scots geezers are trying to bump up the jab rate north o' the border, in order to catch up and hopefully surpass the English?

    Could be the up side of vaccination nationalism!
    One life saved for every 20 inoculations of elderly residents of care homes, versus one saved for every 40,000 50-somethings.
    Everyone else in between.
    It’s not nationalism, it’s about the risk of death.

    And filling up hospital ICUs, too.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,665
    edited February 2021
    From Paul Brand's twitter.

    NEW: I understand the government will announce tomorrow that ALL passengers arriving in UK will have to be tested for Covid on days 2 and 8 after they arrive.

    So that’s not just those arriving from red zone countries heading into hotel quarantine, but those isolating at home.

    Announcement comes as part of the government’s broader package of measures to quarantine arrivals.

    Many will ask why mandatory testing wasn’t introduced over a year ago, when the virus first arrived in the UK. And if govt is so concerned about variants, why not ban all arrivals?

    On the flip side the airline industry worries this will be the final nail in the coffin.

    One source suggests that short-haul flights will all but end.

    “Demand will be nil. Wouldn’t be surprised if EasyJet grounded its fleet”.

    Dept of Health says:

    “Enhancing our testing regime to cover all arrivals while they isolate will provide a further level of protection and enable us to better track any new cases which might be brought into the country, and give us eDept of Health says:

    “Enhancing our testing regime to cover all arrivals while they isolate will provide a further level of protection and enable us to better track any new cases which might be brought into the country, and give us even more opportunities to detect new variants”
  • eekeek Posts: 28,398
    Carnyx said:

    sarissa said:

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    Is this because Scots geezers are trying to bump up the jab rate north o' the border, in order to catch up and hopefully surpass the English?

    Could be the up side of vaccination nationalism!
    One life saved for every 20 inoculations of elderly residents of care homes, versus one saved for every 40,000 50-somethings.
    Everyone else in between.
    It’s not nationalism, it’s about the risk of death.

    And filling up hospital ICUs, too.
    I'm sorry but the Scottish figure doesn't make much sense. Is it 99.6% of care home residents being vaccinated (even if they shouldn't be because of illnesses and pre-existing conditions) or 99.6% of those who can be vaccinated have been vaccinated.

    If it's the former WTF and if it's the latter I suspect England is virtually identical but used a different calculation.
  • eek said:

    eek said:

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:



    My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.

    The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.

    That's exactly what they have done.

    They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.

    For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.

    it's what Gove calls a political solution.

    The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.

    The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.

    Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?

    The game's afoot.

    This may well be the view of the UK government, albeit with major implications of bad faith. It is absolutely not the view of the Irish government. Neither the UK nor the rest of the EU is anything like as invested in the Northern Ireland protocol as Ireland, as has been demonstrated recently by both parties. Someone who seemed well connected with the Irish government did a thread on this. The real thing that can't acknowledged by the Irish government is that they will put in a hard land border before they will detach themselves by one iota from the Single Market. The Northern Ireland Protocol exists so they don't have to make that choice. The Irish are very determined on this and they have plenty of diplomatic capital both in the EU and the US.

    I struggle to see a way to square the circle. So you voted for Brexit because you wanted to take control and to get an alien and overbearing institution out of your lives. The EU mandated internal border screams loss of control and imposition by overbearing foreign institutions more than anything else possibly could. On the other hand if you want the United Kingdom to survive in its current form, you are stuck with making the Northern Ireland Protocol sort of work.
    I think that's a lot of bollocks.

    Charles put it brilliantly: the GFA was designed in a climate where both the UK and Irish Republic were full EU members.

    Now one is not it needs to be redesigned. It can't be totally lopsided to EU single market dogma or it will risk the Troubles restarting.

    Ireland is going to have to show a bit of leg too, with the tacit permission of the EU, and it already does with the CTA and Anglo-Irish agreement.
    How can you redesign something that only worked because it was based on the foundation of everyone being in a single political and common market with broad decisions at a level above both countries.

    Brexit removed the foundations (and most of the cliff) on which the GFA agreement was built - so I really can't see how you can quickly fix something that took 10 years to build on foundations that have also disappeared.
    Good job they're not asking you to do it then!
    I don't see you doing any research into the issue - and until you understand the root cause of the problem and how the previous fixes worked for so long, you aren't going to find a way to permanently fix it.
    Based on what some people have been saying here, it's pretty clear what their desired solution is. It's the equivalent of the used car salesman who puts their arm round your shoulder and says

    "Nah, you don't need a test drive. Or have some boring old engineer look at it. Or a warranty. Look at the sign- I'm Honest Ron! I'd never want to diddle you..."

    Alternatively, the world is split into those who think that rules strangle trade, and those who think they enable trade. And a lot turns on that split.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Omnium said:

    justin124 said:

    FPT
    I am very much with Alistair here. If the parties are level pegging at 39% , Labour is likely to reverse its 2019 losses in Wales - and could go beyond that to win Preseli Pembrokeshire and Arfon. Anglesey is possibly the most challenging for Labour due to its long history of re-electing incumbents.

    Ynys Mon is protected. What happens there probably depends on the choice of candidate.

    Any redrawing of Arfon to make it bigger will make it safer for Plaid Cymru (there is only one Labour Councillor left on Gwynedd Council).

    Abercowny, Arfon & Dwyfor Meirionnydd have enough electors to make only two seats. My guess is that it makes one safe Plaid Cymru and one marginal Plaid Cymru seat.

    Preseli Pembrokeshire will presumably vanish. Pembrokeshire is still a bit too populous for one constituency which must have max 77k electors.

    The likelihood is they will remove the more Welsh-speaking northern portion & join it with Ceredigion.

    My guess is this will leave a Tory-leaning seat in Pembrokeshire South & Central that Labour would expect to take in a good year. And probably make a Ceredigion & Pembroke North Seat that is slightly safer for Plaid Cymru.
    Ynys Mon is solid Tory anyway now...

    I love that constituency in that I'd long targeted it as potential great betting opportunity and it worked out. Obviously didn't win much money - a hard market to access, but still.

    Hardly - when it was only narrowly won by the Tories in 2019 in a close three-way contest!
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,865

    https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1358828742995492866?s=19

    He works in the media and doesn't seem to know that you don't need a tv licence to listen to BBC radio.

    What was I saying about perfectly true and utterly misleading?

    (And whilst Times Radio is free, it's business model is mainly to push subscriptions for the paper and website. Their minimal smartphone app? £180 a year.)
    As if anyone actually pays that much. Everyone I know has got a huge discount from the call centre. I think last time I paid up £99 for the year for the full digital subscription which is rated at £26/m or something like that.
  • I can't get my head around the governments approach to incoming travel. Why do they keep adding more barriers, but not just shut the border properly and compensate the airlines. Instead we are in this weird no.mans land of not tough enough, but still significantly disruptive to kneecap airlines.
  • DavidL said:

    We've just lost 10% of our GDP thanks to Covid. Why is anyone surprised by this?
    Wasn’t/isn’t the plan to move to greater LA reliance on business rates? I can see that’s a tad problematic right now, and might be forever if we’ve seen permanent shifts from Covid (I think we have). There’s a big fight coming on LAs off the back of this, adding in revaluations and whatever the Social Care policy comes out as.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,865

    I can't get my head around the governments approach to incoming travel. Why do they keep adding more barriers, but not just shut the border properly and compensate the airlines. Instead we are in this weird no.mans land of not tough enough, but still significantly disruptive to kneecap airlines.

    Look at the "support" given to hospitality. It's the same idiotic thinking of saving a few pennies here and there.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,858
    sarissa said:

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    Is this because Scots geezers are trying to bump up the jab rate north o' the border, in order to catch up and hopefully surpass the English?

    Could be the up side of vaccination nationalism!
    One life saved for every 20 inoculations of elderly residents of care homes, versus one saved for every 40,000 50-somethings.
    Everyone else in between.
    It’s not nationalism, it’s about the risk of death.

    It's really nowhere near as simple as that though. Those at risk in care homes are essentially subject to something approaching civil imprisonment; they have absolutely minimal interaction with anyone with no visitors and very limited access for third parties. In contrast your 50 something might well be a delivery driver dealing with dozens of people a day and potentially infecting them all.

    We need as many people vaccinated as quickly as possible to reduce the risk to those not vaccinated. If you look at it from that end of the telescope prioritising care homes is a mistake.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,879

    eek said:

    eek said:

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:



    My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.

    The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.

    That's exactly what they have done.

    They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.

    For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.

    it's what Gove calls a political solution.

    The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.

    The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.

    Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?

    The game's afoot.

    This may well be the view of the UK government, albeit with major implications of bad faith. It is absolutely not the view of the Irish government. Neither the UK nor the rest of the EU is anything like as invested in the Northern Ireland protocol as Ireland, as has been demonstrated recently by both parties. Someone who seemed well connected with the Irish government did a thread on this. The real thing that can't acknowledged by the Irish government is that they will put in a hard land border before they will detach themselves by one iota from the Single Market. The Northern Ireland Protocol exists so they don't have to make that choice. The Irish are very determined on this and they have plenty of diplomatic capital both in the EU and the US.

    I struggle to see a way to square the circle. So you voted for Brexit because you wanted to take control and to get an alien and overbearing institution out of your lives. The EU mandated internal border screams loss of control and imposition by overbearing foreign institutions more than anything else possibly could. On the other hand if you want the United Kingdom to survive in its current form, you are stuck with making the Northern Ireland Protocol sort of work.
    I think that's a lot of bollocks.

    Charles put it brilliantly: the GFA was designed in a climate where both the UK and Irish Republic were full EU members.

    Now one is not it needs to be redesigned. It can't be totally lopsided to EU single market dogma or it will risk the Troubles restarting.

    Ireland is going to have to show a bit of leg too, with the tacit permission of the EU, and it already does with the CTA and Anglo-Irish agreement.
    How can you redesign something that only worked because it was based on the foundation of everyone being in a single political and common market with broad decisions at a level above both countries.

    Brexit removed the foundations (and most of the cliff) on which the GFA agreement was built - so I really can't see how you can quickly fix something that took 10 years to build on foundations that have also disappeared.
    Good job they're not asking you to do it then!
    I don't see you doing any research into the issue - and until you understand the root cause of the problem and how the previous fixes worked for so long, you aren't going to find a way to permanently fix it.
    Based on what some people have been saying here, it's pretty clear what their desired solution is. It's the equivalent of the used car salesman who puts their arm round your shoulder and says

    "Nah, you don't need a test drive. Or have some boring old engineer look at it. Or a warranty. Look at the sign- I'm Honest Ron! I'd never want to diddle you..."

    Alternatively, the world is split into those who think that rules strangle trade, and those who think they enable trade. And a lot turns on that split.
    Dunno. But not many will be pregnant, that's for sure. .
  • MaxPB said:

    https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1358828742995492866?s=19

    He works in the media and doesn't seem to know that you don't need a tv licence to listen to BBC radio.

    What was I saying about perfectly true and utterly misleading?

    (And whilst Times Radio is free, it's business model is mainly to push subscriptions for the paper and website. Their minimal smartphone app? £180 a year.)
    As if anyone actually pays that much. Everyone I know has got a huge discount from the call centre. I think last time I paid up £99 for the year for the full digital subscription which is rated at £26/m or something like that.
    I don't pay that either. But you and I are shrewdies who know the game. By analogy with things like insurance, I bet quite a lot of people just pay the sticker price.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,770
    justin124 said:

    Omnium said:

    justin124 said:

    FPT
    I am very much with Alistair here. If the parties are level pegging at 39% , Labour is likely to reverse its 2019 losses in Wales - and could go beyond that to win Preseli Pembrokeshire and Arfon. Anglesey is possibly the most challenging for Labour due to its long history of re-electing incumbents.

    Ynys Mon is protected. What happens there probably depends on the choice of candidate.

    Any redrawing of Arfon to make it bigger will make it safer for Plaid Cymru (there is only one Labour Councillor left on Gwynedd Council).

    Abercowny, Arfon & Dwyfor Meirionnydd have enough electors to make only two seats. My guess is that it makes one safe Plaid Cymru and one marginal Plaid Cymru seat.

    Preseli Pembrokeshire will presumably vanish. Pembrokeshire is still a bit too populous for one constituency which must have max 77k electors.

    The likelihood is they will remove the more Welsh-speaking northern portion & join it with Ceredigion.

    My guess is this will leave a Tory-leaning seat in Pembrokeshire South & Central that Labour would expect to take in a good year. And probably make a Ceredigion & Pembroke North Seat that is slightly safer for Plaid Cymru.
    Ynys Mon is solid Tory anyway now...

    I love that constituency in that I'd long targeted it as potential great betting opportunity and it worked out. Obviously didn't win much money - a hard market to access, but still.

    Hardly - when it was only narrowly won by the Tories in 2019 in a close three-way contest!
    Well yes, I know, hence the "...". YBarddCwsc made some interesting points, and my reply is below/above - earlier timewise anyway.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,879
    DavidL said:

    sarissa said:

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    Is this because Scots geezers are trying to bump up the jab rate north o' the border, in order to catch up and hopefully surpass the English?

    Could be the up side of vaccination nationalism!
    One life saved for every 20 inoculations of elderly residents of care homes, versus one saved for every 40,000 50-somethings.
    Everyone else in between.
    It’s not nationalism, it’s about the risk of death.

    It's really nowhere near as simple as that though. Those at risk in care homes are essentially subject to something approaching civil imprisonment; they have absolutely minimal interaction with anyone with no visitors and very limited access for third parties. In contrast your 50 something might well be a delivery driver dealing with dozens of people a day and potentially infecting them all.

    We need as many people vaccinated as quickly as possible to reduce the risk to those not vaccinated. If you look at it from that end of the telescope prioritising care homes is a mistake.
    Well, someone should have told the Scottish Tories. They've been going on and on about care homes and deaths.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,858
    eek said:

    Carnyx said:

    sarissa said:

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    Is this because Scots geezers are trying to bump up the jab rate north o' the border, in order to catch up and hopefully surpass the English?

    Could be the up side of vaccination nationalism!
    One life saved for every 20 inoculations of elderly residents of care homes, versus one saved for every 40,000 50-somethings.
    Everyone else in between.
    It’s not nationalism, it’s about the risk of death.

    And filling up hospital ICUs, too.
    I'm sorry but the Scottish figure doesn't make much sense. Is it 99.6% of care home residents being vaccinated (even if they shouldn't be because of illnesses and pre-existing conditions) or 99.6% of those who can be vaccinated have been vaccinated.

    If it's the former WTF and if it's the latter I suspect England is virtually identical but used a different calculation.
    And are they really vaccinating people in the end stages of life who may be dead before the vaccine is even effective? Surely that is daft.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,588
    "Ignore 'scary headlines' about South Africa variant and get coronavirus vaccine, says Professor Jonathan Van-Tam"

    https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-south-african-variant-not-expected-to-become-uks-dominant-coronavirus-strain-12212708
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,858

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Is it possible in this mess that there will be time for some self-reflection? The party which has dominated Scottish politics for the last 13 years has, throughout that time, been run by a feckin idiot. It really doesn't say much for the other Scottish parties that to date this had had no impact on the SNP's dominance.
    I think that's unfair. What the SNP have done in Scotland is unprecedented in the UK - gain control of a branch of Government, and ruthlessly and systematically use every lever to turn the part against the rest. Remainers complain a lot about Brexit being inevitable due to 'years of Eurosceptic moaning from politicians' - but actually the opposite is true.

    European legislation was meekly passed through Parliament as domestic law, with no complaint from Governments of any colour, and it was enthusiastically implemented by the civil service. If a Government *had* actively campaigned against the EU, fomented ill feeling about it, encouraged grievances, blamed it for shortcomings, and revived ancient quarrels, Brexit could have been achieved in a decade.
    It's true that most of our political parties were only anti-EU in opposition and found the joys of the Council of Ministers meetings irresistible in office but Morrel, jeez. And yet the opposition parties struggle to lay a glove on him to this day.

    Extraordinary.
    Opposition parties crap, Sturgeon must answer.
    It is the SNP members who are at least threatening to hold her to account for the first time, of that there is no doubt. The opposition parties are bystanders.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,879
    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    Carnyx said:

    sarissa said:

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    Is this because Scots geezers are trying to bump up the jab rate north o' the border, in order to catch up and hopefully surpass the English?

    Could be the up side of vaccination nationalism!
    One life saved for every 20 inoculations of elderly residents of care homes, versus one saved for every 40,000 50-somethings.
    Everyone else in between.
    It’s not nationalism, it’s about the risk of death.

    And filling up hospital ICUs, too.
    I'm sorry but the Scottish figure doesn't make much sense. Is it 99.6% of care home residents being vaccinated (even if they shouldn't be because of illnesses and pre-existing conditions) or 99.6% of those who can be vaccinated have been vaccinated.

    If it's the former WTF and if it's the latter I suspect England is virtually identical but used a different calculation.
    And are they really vaccinating people in the end stages of life who may be dead before the vaccine is even effective? Surely that is daft.
    Hospitals and care homes are high risk places. You need to vaccinate as many folk as possible. (And also you wouldn't want to confise the average dureation of life with the longevity once one reaches that age.).
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,858
    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    sarissa said:

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    Is this because Scots geezers are trying to bump up the jab rate north o' the border, in order to catch up and hopefully surpass the English?

    Could be the up side of vaccination nationalism!
    One life saved for every 20 inoculations of elderly residents of care homes, versus one saved for every 40,000 50-somethings.
    Everyone else in between.
    It’s not nationalism, it’s about the risk of death.

    It's really nowhere near as simple as that though. Those at risk in care homes are essentially subject to something approaching civil imprisonment; they have absolutely minimal interaction with anyone with no visitors and very limited access for third parties. In contrast your 50 something might well be a delivery driver dealing with dozens of people a day and potentially infecting them all.

    We need as many people vaccinated as quickly as possible to reduce the risk to those not vaccinated. If you look at it from that end of the telescope prioritising care homes is a mistake.
    Well, someone should have told the Scottish Tories. They've been going on and on about care homes and deaths.
    Well horrendous mistakes were made in moving infected people from wards to care homes. Not just in Scotland in fairness. That does not mean that this is the most efficient use of vaccines now.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    MaxPB said:

    I can't get my head around the governments approach to incoming travel. Why do they keep adding more barriers, but not just shut the border properly and compensate the airlines. Instead we are in this weird no.mans land of not tough enough, but still significantly disruptive to kneecap airlines.

    Look at the "support" given to hospitality. It's the same idiotic thinking of saving a few pennies here and there.
    Re: the airline industry, I'd go even further. We should only be letting as many people into the country as the quarantine system can handle at one time, and they should all have to stay locked in the relevant hotels for three weeks and be tested half-to-death for the whole duration of the stay. And no letting any UK nationals out of the country save for exceptional circumstances (e.g. for medical treatment not available in the UK, for permanent resettlement abroad, or on state business.) And we should keep doing that until the pandemic is over everywhere in the world, which could (at a guess) take anything between three and five years. It rather depends how long it takes to get to the most remote and stubborn disease reservoirs and vaccinate them into submission, and whether or not ongoing genetic surveillance suggests that it's still producing problematic novel variants.

    That'd probably be enough to sink the airlines - but we'll need them to keep running a skeleton service and be ready to ramp up operations when the nightmare is finally over. So, the big question then becomes whether to give them state handouts, loans, take equity stakes, or outright nationalise.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    eek said:

    Carnyx said:

    sarissa said:

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    Is this because Scots geezers are trying to bump up the jab rate north o' the border, in order to catch up and hopefully surpass the English?

    Could be the up side of vaccination nationalism!
    One life saved for every 20 inoculations of elderly residents of care homes, versus one saved for every 40,000 50-somethings.
    Everyone else in between.
    It’s not nationalism, it’s about the risk of death.

    And filling up hospital ICUs, too.
    I'm sorry but the Scottish figure doesn't make much sense. Is it 99.6% of care home residents being vaccinated (even if they shouldn't be because of illnesses and pre-existing conditions) or 99.6% of those who can be vaccinated have been vaccinated.

    If it's the former WTF and if it's the latter I suspect England is virtually identical but used a different calculation.
    29,865 older care home residents have been vaccinates.

    In 2017 there were 31,223 older care home residents (and overall numbers have been in gentle decline over the last few years).

    When you factor in deaths over the last year it is completely plausible that 29865 is indeed 99.6% of residents.

    The last published England figure, as confirmed by Channel 4 news was 81%.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,858

    DavidL said:

    We've just lost 10% of our GDP thanks to Covid. Why is anyone surprised by this?
    Wasn’t/isn’t the plan to move to greater LA reliance on business rates? I can see that’s a tad problematic right now, and might be forever if we’ve seen permanent shifts from Covid (I think we have). There’s a big fight coming on LAs off the back of this, adding in revaluations and whatever the Social Care policy comes out as.
    One of Rishi's policies to save as many businesses as possible was to write off business rates for most businesses this year. A good idea because the priority was to reduce the overheads of businesses with little or no income thanks to lockdowns and Covid but the consequences for LA income surely comes under the category of inevitable.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,298
    Gaslighting, or just stupidity?
    You be the judge.

    https://twitter.com/bestforbritain/status/1358720994702209028?s=21
  • Alistair said:

    maaarsh said:

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    I think the word you're looking for is unbelievable
    So are you saying the Scot Gov is lying about the number of people vaccinated?
    As any ful kno, it would be impossible for Scotland (a country whose services are less resilient than those of England) to surpass England in this matter. Occam’s razor sez lie.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    justin124 said:

    FPT
    I am very much with Alistair here. If the parties are level pegging at 39% , Labour is likely to reverse its 2019 losses in Wales - and could go beyond that to win Preseli Pembrokeshire and Arfon. Anglesey is possibly the most challenging for Labour due to its long history of re-electing incumbents.

    Ynys Mon is protected. What happens there probably depends on the choice of candidate.

    Any redrawing of Arfon to make it bigger will make it safer for Plaid Cymru (there is only one Labour Councillor left on Gwynedd Council).

    Abercowny, Arfon & Dwyfor Meirionnydd have enough electors to make only two seats. My guess is that it makes one safe Plaid Cymru and one marginal Plaid Cymru seat.

    Preseli Pembrokeshire will presumably vanish. Pembrokeshire is still a bit too populous for one constituency which must have max 77k electors.

    The likelihood is they will remove the more Welsh-speaking northern portion & join it with Ceredigion.

    My guess is this will leave a Tory-leaning seat in Pembrokeshire South & Central that Labour would expect to take in a good year. And probably make a Ceredigion & Pembroke North Seat that is slightly safer for Plaid Cymru.
    Ynys Mon is solid Tory anyway now...

    I love that constituency in that I'd long targeted it as potential great betting opportunity and it worked out. Obviously didn't win much money - a hard market to access, but still.

    ".. solid Tory ..." Err, Virginia Crosbie has 35 % of the vote and a majority of 1,968.

    She has had to spend most of the pandemic explaining to voters in Ynys Mon why the wanker Tory MP from Rossendale & Darwen brought the pox to Ynys Mon.

    Because, curiously, Jake Berry MP does not own a house in the constituency he represents -- Rossendale & Darwen -- but owns a property empire on Ynys Mon as well as a London town house. The pandemic has thrown a rather brilliant glare on his many properties on the island.

    Jake must have single-handled done much to ensure her defeat next time.
    I did try to imply tongue-in-cheek with the "..."

    I've no local knowledge at all, but it is the sort of place that an aspiring Tory MP might imagine could become anomalous.

    Whatever the outcome the fact that there's something to fight for politically in these sorts of seats is a good thing.
    The politics of Ynys Mon is internecine. The local parties have a tendency to disrupt because of personality clashes. For a long time, the Tory vote was depressed as a local farmer ran as an independent conservative.

    The council is dysfunctional & was taken into special measures. Much of the island is economically depressed. There are tensions over second homes (& in Jake Berry's case, third homes, fourth homes, fifth homes & sixth homes).

    In fact, Jake has so many homes he should be posting on pb.com ;)

    I think Virginia will do well to hang on (she does not speak Welsh -- in fact Chris Davies XMP was a better fit, but Cyclefree, IanB2 & Co were on the pulpit about his photocopying receipts, so he was forced to withdraw).
  • eekeek Posts: 28,398
    edited February 2021

    Alistair said:

    maaarsh said:

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    I think the word you're looking for is unbelievable
    So are you saying the Scot Gov is lying about the number of people vaccinated?
    As any ful kno, it would be impossible for Scotland (a country whose services are less resilient than those of England) to surpass England in this matter. Occam’s razor sez lie.
    But that figure screams North Korea election result.

    And I just can't see how there isn't at least 1% of people in a care home far too ill to be able to cope with an injection.

    See for example Captain Sir Tom Moore who didn't have a vaccination due to being ill with pneumonia
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,865
    edited February 2021

    MaxPB said:

    I can't get my head around the governments approach to incoming travel. Why do they keep adding more barriers, but not just shut the border properly and compensate the airlines. Instead we are in this weird no.mans land of not tough enough, but still significantly disruptive to kneecap airlines.

    Look at the "support" given to hospitality. It's the same idiotic thinking of saving a few pennies here and there.
    Re: the airline industry, I'd go even further. We should only be letting as many people into the country as the quarantine system can handle at one time, and they should all have to stay locked in the relevant hotels for three weeks and be tested half-to-death for the whole duration of the stay. And no letting any UK nationals out of the country save for exceptional circumstances (e.g. for medical treatment not available in the UK, for permanent resettlement abroad, or on state business.) And we should keep doing that until the pandemic is over everywhere in the world, which could (at a guess) take anything between three and five years. It rather depends how long it takes to get to the most remote and stubborn disease reservoirs and vaccinate them into submission, and whether or not ongoing genetic surveillance suggests that it's still producing problematic novel variants.

    That'd probably be enough to sink the airlines - but we'll need them to keep running a skeleton service and be ready to ramp up operations when the nightmare is finally over. So, the big question then becomes whether to give them state handouts, loans, take equity stakes, or outright nationalise.
    I think the government takes a large equity stake and guarantees any loans. Once the airlines sector has returned to normality the government can sell its stake or the airline can do a series of buybacks of the government shareholding.

    Essentially what the an airline version of the bank recapitalisations without any stupid EU rules overcomplicating things.

    Also, what you'd end up finding is that the market would adjust and countries that depend on tourism would replicate the same tough measures and you'd end up with a bunch of countries that will allow direct flights to each other as COVID will be zero and there will be herd immunity. It's not cutting the UK off indefinitely, it's putting up barriers and letting other countries over the barriers once they meet the requirements.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    maaarsh said:

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    I think the word you're looking for is unbelievable
    So are you saying the Scot Gov is lying about the number of people vaccinated?
    As any ful kno, it would be impossible for Scotland (a country whose services are less resilient than those of England) to surpass England in this matter. Occam’s razor sez lie.
    But that figure screams North Korea election result.
    It has clearly come at the cost of vaccinating others. Until last week Scotland's overall vaccination figures were shit.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,398

    Gaslighting, or just stupidity?
    You be the judge.

    https://twitter.com/bestforbritain/status/1358720994702209028?s=21

    Daniel Hannah? Stupidity without even looking at the articles.

    What's ironic is that the border in Northern Ireland is May's approach which Hannah rejected in 2018/9.
  • eek said:

    Alistair said:

    maaarsh said:

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    I think the word you're looking for is unbelievable
    So are you saying the Scot Gov is lying about the number of people vaccinated?
    As any ful kno, it would be impossible for Scotland (a country whose services are less resilient than those of England) to surpass England in this matter. Occam’s razor sez lie.
    But that figure screams North Korea election result.

    And I just can't see how there isn't at least 1% of people in a care home far too ill to be able to cope with an injection.

    See for example Captain Sir Tom Moore who didn't have a vaccination due to being ill with pneumonia
    He wasn’t in a care home latterly was he?
  • GaussianGaussian Posts: 831
    edited February 2021
    DavidL said:

    sarissa said:

    Astonishingly low refusal rate in Scotland:

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1358826302564892676?s=20

    Is this because Scots geezers are trying to bump up the jab rate north o' the border, in order to catch up and hopefully surpass the English?

    Could be the up side of vaccination nationalism!
    One life saved for every 20 inoculations of elderly residents of care homes, versus one saved for every 40,000 50-somethings.
    Everyone else in between.
    It’s not nationalism, it’s about the risk of death.

    It's really nowhere near as simple as that though. Those at risk in care homes are essentially subject to something approaching civil imprisonment; they have absolutely minimal interaction with anyone with no visitors and very limited access for third parties. In contrast your 50 something might well be a delivery driver dealing with dozens of people a day and potentially infecting them all.

    We need as many people vaccinated as quickly as possible to reduce the risk to those not vaccinated. If you look at it from that end of the telescope prioritising care homes is a mistake.
    Yep, the whole age-based priority list is a question of political expedience, plus a bit of uncertainty as to whether the vaccines reduce transmission. Ideally, all frontline workers (and hence potential superspreaders) should have been near the top of the list, i.e. not just healthcare but also supermarkets, delivery drivers, bus drivers, teachers. Obviously the hope is that the speed of vaccination means that the order doesn't matter all that much.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    We've just lost 10% of our GDP thanks to Covid. Why is anyone surprised by this?
    Wasn’t/isn’t the plan to move to greater LA reliance on business rates? I can see that’s a tad problematic right now, and might be forever if we’ve seen permanent shifts from Covid (I think we have). There’s a big fight coming on LAs off the back of this, adding in revaluations and whatever the Social Care policy comes out as.
    One of Rishi's policies to save as many businesses as possible was to write off business rates for most businesses this year. A good idea because the priority was to reduce the overheads of businesses with little or no income thanks to lockdowns and Covid but the consequences for LA income surely comes under the category of inevitable.
    But this always comes back to the same problem, doesn't it? The local authorities require a vastly increased bloc grant (which central Government will never give them, because it doesn't want to lose control of the money) or a proper source of stable income like a local income tax (which central Government will never give them, because councils would hike bills massively to relieve the stress on their finances, but all the voter anger for that happening would be directed back at central Government.)

    So, the councils are left to collapse, the central Government blames the councils for being useless and forces them to reorganise according to whatever the flavour of the month is (currently unitarization and/or directly elected mayors,) the new councils sell assets, close services and maybe get a small handout from central Government if they're lucky, and finally they stagger on for however many years until they in turn go bankrupt.

    I'm only surprised that, given the accumulated effect of this sort of slow strangulation, an ageing population and now a year of Plague-wrought economic devastation, there are only twelve councils allegedly coming close to falling over. You wonder how any of them manage.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    In other news, India recorded 58 new Covid deaths today. Looking at its graph it has seemingly displayed a single, normal distribution, Farr’s Law wave over a period of 12 months. It looks like they may record no deaths on the first anniversary of their first.

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/india/
  • A 20-year-old has been shot dead allegedly taking part in a "prank" robbery being filmed for YouTube.

    Witnesses told police Timothy Wilks and a friend had approached a group of people outside a family trampoline park in Nashville, holding large knives.

    Mr Wilks was then shot by a 23-year-old, who told police he had had no idea it had been a "prank" and had been acting in self-defence.

    Mr Wilks's friend told officers the "prank" had been for a YouTube video.

    No-one has been arrested over the death.

    Several families had been inside the Urban Air trampoline and adventure park, which describes itself as "kid friendly" and "family fun", at the time of the shooting, 21:20, local news outlet WKRN reported.

    Robbery "prank videos" are relatively common on YouTube, sometimes involving fake firearms, balaclavas or getaway vehicles.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-55982131
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    South Africa, with its variant, and having relaxed lockdown last week, is reaching the bottom of a sharp, up-down, arrowhead second wave...

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/south-africa/
  • I can't get my head around the governments approach to incoming travel. Why do they keep adding more barriers, but not just shut the border properly and compensate the airlines. Instead we are in this weird no.mans land of not tough enough, but still significantly disruptive to kneecap airlines.

    If they compensate airlines there's two major problems I see

    1) This support to the airlines may last for most, if not all, of 2020 and then some.

    2) Other industries will demand the same support.
This discussion has been closed.