Confirmation yesterday that yet again the Crown Office provided the "wrong" text and whatsapp messages to the Holyrood Cttee and withheld the proof of collusion. This morning gov. lawyers are trying to convince the cttee to withdraw their order to Alex' lawyers for the material.
Fwiw on trade - our trade deficit with the EU narrowed in January. They lost more export value than we did, and that's with the UK not fully implementing customs checks.
I'm not sure that a goods exporting bloc of countries imposing tougher trade terms on a goods importing nation will work out to the benefit of the first party. Then again, I only do this professionally for a living, those Twitter people have their blue ticks.
Brilliant! I'm sure all those shellfish producers whose businesses are being totally wrecked will be delighted to hear that.
Although, if you really want to compete with the Twitter trade experts, you might need to up your game a bit, and think about services...
However you cut it EU exports to the UK are down by £6.6bn and UK exports to the UK exports to the EU are down by £5.5bn, it's what many of us suggested would happen.
So you can bang on about minor issues here and there but one day soon you'll have to admit the sky hasn't fallen in, the world has kept turning and ultimately the EU isn't as all powerful as you'd like everyone to believe.
However you cut it, the impact on our exports has been catastrophic, and the impact on EU exports has been tiny, proportionately. Sure, they sell more in value to us than we do to them, but proportionately they are far more important to us than we are to them.
Of course, there are plenty of caveats: it's only one month, stockpiling affected some sectors, the overall picture is hugely distorted by Covid in both directions, and some of the fall is no doubt genuinely 'teething troubles', in the sense that the spectacularly stupid decision by the UK not to negotiate any implementation period has massively and unnecessarily made things worse in the short term. When things settle down, we obviously won't be looking at the 38% hit (goods exports to the EU Jan 2021 vs Jan 2020) , but it's going to be bad. Bear in mind also that neither we nor the EU are yet implementing the full panoply of massive red tape that is coming.
Plus of course there's the hit on services. Anyone's guess what that will settle down at, but, again, it's going to be bad.
One thing I would say (and have said before) is that the EU worried about the wrong thing. They shouldn't be worried about the UK becoming a super-competitor on their doorstep: the bigger risk for them is that, as one of their important customers, our economy slumps and demand for their products falls. We're just going to be a lot poorer as a result of this clusterfuck, and that of course will have a (small) effect on them.
So wife can go for an evening stroll but husband has to stay at home. Seriously?
At least the Green Peer this morning on Sky had the sense to say that she wasn't actually serious about her suggestion and it was in response to comments in the Lords yesterday that women could best protect themselves by staying at home. She said she made the remark to highlight how one sided the whole argument was and to stimulate proper debate.
Actually suggesting it might be done is shear lunacy and I suspect would be opposed by just as many women as men.
I thought even from the curtailed clip you could tell she was being ironical to make a point.
But the outrage bus was already leaving the bus garage before she sat down.
Confirmation yesterday that yet again the Crown Office provided the "wrong" text and whatsapp messages to the Holyrood Cttee and withheld the proof of collusion. This morning gov. lawyers are trying to convince the cttee to withdraw their order to Alex' lawyers for the material.
Given that the Crown Office and lawyers are civil servants, can't they be reported to the Ombudsman for abuse of office?
So wife can go for an evening stroll but husband has to stay at home. Seriously?
I always assumed the "male curfew" was a rhetorical device/counterpoint to the feeling of de facto curfew women feel often by Jones they're under wrt heading out at night. A cutting point in a debate, not something ever ever ever to be remotely taken seriously by any politician anywhere. Drakeford even remotely suggesting this is a new level of bonkers. The Covid restrictions must have gone to his head.
Mr. Pulpstar, there are some crazy fools out there. Some people who think you can't be racist against white people. That men can be perpetrators but not victims of crime. Or that slavery reparations should be paid by people who have never owned slaves to people who have never been slaves.
Telling satire from serious comment can be very tricky.
Confirmation yesterday that yet again the Crown Office provided the "wrong" text and whatsapp messages to the Holyrood Cttee and withheld the proof of collusion. This morning gov. lawyers are trying to convince the cttee to withdraw their order to Alex' lawyers for the material.
Given that the Crown Office and lawyers are civil servants, can't they be reported to the Ombudsman for abuse of office?
Hard to believe how they are getting away with it other than the LA is in the cabinet. It is a complete shambles , banana republic does not come close.
Fwiw on trade - our trade deficit with the EU narrowed in January. They lost more export value than we did, and that's with the UK not fully implementing customs checks.
I'm not sure that a goods exporting bloc of countries imposing tougher trade terms on a goods importing nation will work out to the benefit of the first party. Then again, I only do this professionally for a living, those Twitter people have their blue ticks.
Brilliant! I'm sure all those shellfish producers whose businesses are being totally wrecked will be delighted to hear that.
Although, if you really want to compete with the Twitter trade experts, you might need to up your game a bit, and think about services...
However you cut it EU exports to the UK are down by £6.6bn and UK exports to the UK exports to the EU are down by £5.5bn, it's what many of us suggested would happen.
So you can bang on about minor issues here and there but one day soon you'll have to admit the sky hasn't fallen in, the world has kept turning and ultimately the EU isn't as all powerful as you'd like everyone to believe.
However you cut it, the impact on our exports has been catastrophic, and the impact on EU exports has been tiny, proportionately. Sure, they sell more in value to us than we do to them, but proprtionately they are far more important to us than we are to them.
Of course, there are plenty of caveats: it's only one month, stockpiling affected some sectors, the overall picture is hugely distorted by Covid in both directions, and some of the fall is no doubt genuinely 'teething troubles', in the sense that the spectacularly stupid decision by the UK not to negotiate any implementation period has massively and unnecessarily made things worse in the short term. When things settle down, we obviously won't be looking at the 38% hit (goods exports to the EU Jan 2021 vs Jan 2020) , but it's going to be bad. Bear in mind also that neither we nor the EU are yet implementing the full panoply of massive red tape that is coming.
Plus of course there's the hit on services. Anyone's guess what that we settle down at, but, again, it's going to be bad.
Honestly, this is just a whole load of rambling nonsense. You've basically used a whole load of words to say "we don't know how this ends". The point is fair, though I think you've failed to address the wider point of EU trade losing value for the UK resulting in the UK diluting the existing trade deal even further.
You've got to move on from brexit, you're a broken record and you can keep banging on about it until you're blue in the face, it's not going to change anything and ultimately brexit has already happened. Make peace with it.
Mr. Pulpstar, there are some crazy fools out there. Some people who think you can't be racist against white people. That men can be perpetrators but not victims of crime. Or that slavery reparations should be paid by people who have never owned slaves to people who have never been slaves.
Telling satire from serious comment can be very tricky.
If there's a general curfew because of a serial killer on the loose or mega mutant covid that's one thing but this is madness
Upshot: no NI bridge or tunnel (not even mentioned) but a UK-wide intermodal transport network is, and an enhanced air bridge between Belfast and other regional UK airports is, plus an upgrade to Holyhead port.
Forgive my ignorance but how much attention does the government have to give this review? Would they welcome it as an excuse to dump some of their wilder imaginings (eg a bridge/tunnel) or plow on regardless?
Probably the former. Peter Hendy is well-respected, and this gives Boris what he wants (a sensible UK-wider intermodal transport strategy, and better integration) but in a real-world not barking way.
He's dropped the House of Lords move to York, and also the Thames Estuary airport, for similar reasons; he just likes very big grand projects but if they're obviously bonkers he'll look for a facesaving way to back down.
One of the things I didn't touch upon is it may be quite difficult to get down to 0.5% given what Boris Johnson has said about giving away excess vaccines. The value of those could be in the billions and they will count to ODA.
Another factor is COP26 in November. I think it's likely the govt will want to make some big pledges on climate change given they are hosting in Glasgow. Also a good opportunity to make Boris Johnson look generous vs. Nicola Sturgeon.
It's worth pointing out that the increase to 0.7% from 0.5% took place over four years. Cutting to get back to 0.5% in a single year might not be politically possible given all the ODA the govt wants to spend.
So wife can go for an evening stroll but husband has to stay at home. Seriously?
I always assumed the "male curfew" was a rhetorical device/counterpoint to the feeling of de facto curfew women feel often by Jones they're under wrt heading out at night. A cutting point in a debate, not something ever ever ever to be remotely taken seriously by any politician anywhere. Drakeford even remotely suggesting this is a new level of bonkers. The Covid restrictions must have gone to his head.
We've seen similar. Have you forgotten Jezza's segregated underground carriages?
There is definitely an advantage to being the first Skybot to come clean. I wonder who their Floyd Landis is going to be...
I remember watching the 1988 Olympics when Des Lynam broke the news of Ben Johnson testing positive for drugs and assumed the shame of it all would mean noone would ever try anything like that again.
AstraZeneca has again cut down its forecast for coronavirus vaccine deliveries to the European Union in the first quarter of 2021, telling the EU officials it expects to only provide about 30 million doses by the end of March, according to a document dated March 10 and seen by Reuters.
Mind you, since some of them aren't using AZ any way, and those who are are facing resistance from a sceptical population, it might not have that great an impact.
Fwiw on trade - our trade deficit with the EU narrowed in January. They lost more export value than we did, and that's with the UK not fully implementing customs checks.
I'm not sure that a goods exporting bloc of countries imposing tougher trade terms on a goods importing nation will work out to the benefit of the first party. Then again, I only do this professionally for a living, those Twitter people have their blue ticks.
Brilliant! I'm sure all those shellfish producers whose businesses are being totally wrecked will be delighted to hear that.
Although, if you really want to compete with the Twitter trade experts, you might need to up your game a bit, and think about services...
However you cut it EU exports to the UK are down by £6.6bn and UK exports to the UK exports to the EU are down by £5.5bn, it's what many of us suggested would happen.
So you can bang on about minor issues here and there but one day soon you'll have to admit the sky hasn't fallen in, the world has kept turning and ultimately the EU isn't as all powerful as you'd like everyone to believe.
However you cut it, the impact on our exports has been catastrophic, and the impact on EU exports has been tiny, proportionately. Sure, they sell more in value to us than we do to them, but proprtionately they are far more important to us than we are to them.
Of course, there are plenty of caveats: it's only one month, stockpiling affected some sectors, the overall picture is hugely distorted by Covid in both directions, and some of the fall is no doubt genuinely 'teething troubles', in the sense that the spectacularly stupid decision by the UK not to negotiate any implementation period has massively and unnecessarily made things worse in the short term. When things settle down, we obviously won't be looking at the 38% hit (goods exports to the EU Jan 2021 vs Jan 2020) , but it's going to be bad. Bear in mind also that neither we nor the EU are yet implementing the full panoply of massive red tape that is coming.
Plus of course there's the hit on services. Anyone's guess what that we settle down at, but, again, it's going to be bad.
Honestly, this is just a whole load of rambling nonsense. You've basically used a whole load of words to say "we don't know how this ends". The point is fair, though I think you've failed to address the wider point of EU trade losing value for the UK resulting in the UK diluting the existing trade deal even further.
You've got to move on from brexit, you're a broken record and you can keep banging on about it until you're blue in the face, it's not going to change anything and ultimately brexit has already happened. Make peace with it.
I literally agree with Richard Nabavi on almost *everything* - we are so, so close politically, it's unreal - except when he starts talking about Brexit. It's like he turns into a totally different person.
I'd have thought he'd have accepted it by now (even whilst stating it still wasn't his preferred choice), like David Herdson, Felix, HYFUD, BluestBlue etc., but he's sticking to the full ScottP.
One of the things I didn't touch upon is it may be quite difficult to get down to 0.5% given what Boris Johnson has said about giving away excess vaccines. The value of those could be in the billions and they will count to ODA.
Another factor is COP26 in November. I think it's likely the govt will want to make some big pledges on climate change given they are hosting in Glasgow. Also a good opportunity to make Boris Johnson look generous vs. Nicola Sturgeon.
It's worth pointing out that the increase to 0.7% from 0.5% took place over four years. Cutting to get back to 0.5% in a single year might not be politically possible given all the ODA the govt wants to spend.
We could make our vaccine giveaway a project and amortise over the lifetime of the official pandemic.
Mr. Pulpstar, there are some crazy fools out there. Some people who think you can't be racist against white people. That men can be perpetrators but not victims of crime. Or that slavery reparations should be paid by people who have never owned slaves to people who have never been slaves.
Telling satire from serious comment can be very tricky.
If there's a general curfew because of a serial killer on the loose or mega mutant covid that's one thing but this is madness
I think the point is that the status quo is not acceptable, but it's something that's tolerated.
A male curfew would at least work (if enforced) in making the streets safer for women.
If it's an intolerable cost to pay to achieve that then maybe we ought to find a different way of achieving the same ends - like convicting men who perpetrate violence against women instead of finding excuses for them.
There was that guy excused of murdering his wife due to Covid lockdown. We have a pitifully low conviction rate for rape, because there's always some excuse.
Maybe if the problem was taken seriously people wouldn't suggest ridiculous things like a male curfew.
One of the things I didn't touch upon is it may be quite difficult to get down to 0.5% given what Boris Johnson has said about giving away excess vaccines. The value of those could be in the billions and they will count to ODA.
Another factor is COP26 in November. I think it's likely the govt will want to make some big pledges on climate change given they are hosting in Glasgow. Also a good opportunity to make Boris Johnson look generous vs. Nicola Sturgeon.
It's worth pointing out that the increase to 0.7% from 0.5% took place over four years. Cutting to get back to 0.5% in a single year might not be politically possible given all the ODA the govt wants to spend.
We could make our vaccine giveaway a project and amortise over the lifetime of the official pandemic.
I think the ODA definition the OECD uses is actually quite strict - you would have to actually delay offering vaccines to delay them being counted as ODA in a particular year.
So wife can go for an evening stroll but husband has to stay at home. Seriously?
At least the Green Peer this morning on Sky had the sense to say that she wasn't actually serious about her suggestion and it was in response to comments in the Lords yesterday that women could best protect themselves by staying at home. She said she made the remark to highlight how one sided the whole argument was and to stimulate proper debate.
Actually suggesting it might be done is shear lunacy and I suspect would be opposed by just as many women as men.
Outlandish statements and suggestions get lots of publicity and attention, shock. This is why people do them.
The trouble is they then start to get legs, as subtleties are taken literally by both sides, and that's where it starts to polarise/radicalise people.
Honestly, this is just a whole load of rambling nonsense. You've basically used a whole load of words to say "we don't know how this ends". The point is fair, though I think you've failed to address the wider point of EU trade losing value for the UK resulting in the UK diluting the existing trade deal even further.
You've got to move on from brexit, you're a broken record and you can keep banging on about it until you're blue in the face, it's not going to change anything and ultimately brexit has already happened. Make peace with it.
Err, Brexit hasn't fully happened. You obviously haven't been following the news properly. The UK is trying to renegotiate the two agreements, including the one it signed just a few weeks ago. Well, I say 'renegotiate', but Lord Frost's approach can scarcely be called negotiation, it's more a combination of insults and reneging, which certainly isn't going to end well as an approach.
As for making peace on it, I've already written a pair of pieces for PB where I proposed a constructive way forward which would fully respect the referendum result (indeed, more fully than what we're getting). Of course, it's true that before that can happen, we'd need a sane government, and I'm afraid there's no chance of that in the foreseeable future. So, yes, we are stuck with the damage. It will take many years, perhaps a couple of decades, to recover the lost ground.
I remember watching the 1988 Olympics when Des Lynam broke the news of Ben Johnson testing positive for drugs and always assumed the shame of it all would mean noone would ever try anything like that again.
Cycling is dirtier than it's ever been at all levels because the techniques are so well known and the 'produits' are so readily available. I know people who do blood bags/testosterone gels for Regional C races - the 2nd lowest level of amateur competition in the UK.
Perversely, losing the vote might not be a bad thing.
If he loses it, that will mostly be due to Opposition votes. Yes, there will have been a rebellion and that's a bad look, but it means the issue stays live. Then it can be put in a manifesto and MPs told "back it or lose the whip".
Suspect this will play well in the Red Wall areas. And with older people.
I'm undecided on this. I see the logic but it also makes it look like Boris can't deliver on what he says?
I am very interested as to whether we will see MPs lose the whip. My guess is that we won't because there is a long time until the next election, Boris needs their votes. I suspect some Tory MPs would feel strongly enough about this to quit the party if forced.
There may be a happy landing ground for Tory strategy between Boris promising to cut the aid budget, failing to do so because of giving away COVID vaccines and still being able to campaign on future cuts next time around.
So wife can go for an evening stroll but husband has to stay at home. Seriously?
I always assumed the "male curfew" was a rhetorical device/counterpoint to the feeling of de facto curfew women feel often by Jones they're under wrt heading out at night. A cutting point in a debate, not something ever ever ever to be remotely taken seriously by any politician anywhere. Drakeford even remotely suggesting this is a new level of bonkers. The Covid restrictions must have gone to his head.
We've seen similar. Have you forgotten Jezza's segregated underground carriages?
Even that has more sense. Women do travel alone. But most of the places they go to involve interaction with men. A curfew for men would keep a lot of women at home too.
Another sort of lockdown really. But who would deliver all the takeaways? Most of them seem to be men.
Probably not healthy to speculate about what level of anger Wings feels he's being disqualified from expressing, but perhaps knowing he can call a minister a total c*** on Twitter might assuage the rage.
Honestly, this is just a whole load of rambling nonsense. You've basically used a whole load of words to say "we don't know how this ends". The point is fair, though I think you've failed to address the wider point of EU trade losing value for the UK resulting in the UK diluting the existing trade deal even further.
You've got to move on from brexit, you're a broken record and you can keep banging on about it until you're blue in the face, it's not going to change anything and ultimately brexit has already happened. Make peace with it.
Err, Brexit hasn't fully happened. You obviously haven't been following the news properly. The UK is trying to renegotiate the two agreements, including the one it signed just a few weeks ago. Well, I say 'renegotiate', but Lord Frost's approach can scarcely be called negotiation, it's more a combination of insults and reneging, which certainly isn't going to end well as an approach.
As for making peace on it, I've already written a pair of pieces for PB where I proposed a constructive way forward which would fully respect the referendum result (indeed, more fully than what we're getting). Of course, it's true that before that can happen, we'd need a sane government, and I'm afraid there's no chance of that in the foreseeable future. So, yes, we are stuck with the damage. It will take many years, perhaps a couple of decades, to recover the lost ground.
You have an extreme bias towards the 2016 status quo and see any deviation from it in any direction as insane by definition.
Mr. Pulpstar, there are some crazy fools out there. Some people who think you can't be racist against white people. That men can be perpetrators but not victims of crime. Or that slavery reparations should be paid by people who have never owned slaves to people who have never been slaves.
Telling satire from serious comment can be very tricky.
If there's a general curfew because of a serial killer on the loose or mega mutant covid that's one thing but this is madness
I think the point is that the status quo is not acceptable, but it's something that's tolerated.
A male curfew would at least work (if enforced) in making the streets safer for women.
If it's an intolerable cost to pay to achieve that then maybe we ought to find a different way of achieving the same ends - like convicting men who perpetrate violence against women instead of finding excuses for them.
There was that guy excused of murdering his wife due to Covid lockdown. We have a pitifully low conviction rate for rape, because there's always some excuse.
Maybe if the problem was taken seriously people wouldn't suggest ridiculous things like a male curfew.
Seriously, how do you increase rape conviction rates? I'm currently reading the Secret Barrister and he's scathing of Magistrates courts for being too ready to convict.
Trial by jury is fundamental to our criminal justice system. For sure plenty of rapists walk free, but what can you do about it other than to make sure the CPS and police don't screw up to let them off on a technicality?
Perhaps we could say, well we think 20% of rape cases that go to trial should result in a conviction, so we'll hear a whole load of cases together and convict the top 20% where it looks most likely that the accused is guilty.
But given what went on with the exam grades last summer, I doubt this form of justice would be particularly popular.
So wife can go for an evening stroll but husband has to stay at home. Seriously?
At least the Green Peer this morning on Sky had the sense to say that she wasn't actually serious about her suggestion and it was in response to comments in the Lords yesterday that women could best protect themselves by staying at home. She said she made the remark to highlight how one sided the whole argument was and to stimulate proper debate.
Actually suggesting it might be done is shear lunacy and I suspect would be opposed by just as many women as men.
Outlandish statements and suggestions get lots of publicity and attention, shock. This is why people do them.
The trouble is they then start to get legs, as subtleties are taken literally by both sides, and that's where it starts to polarise/radicalise people.
Words matter.
Something the Met Police could perhaps of considered when they were advising women not to go out alone in London.
Bit sad that aid for the world's poorest has been identified as a wedge issue in the war on woke but I think the author is right - it has. 0.7% was a manifesto commitment and it's utter bullshit that we now can't afford it because of the pandemic. The reason for the cut is pure politics and of the most poisonous type. They think Red Wall voters - as in generic term for working class Leavers who used to vote Labour - will see this and go, "Yeah, too right. Charity begins at home innit. Good on yer, Boris." I hope they're wrong. I hope this reductive patronizing pandering view of their voter base comes back and bites them in their fat cynical arses. So there.
If it can be afforded then perhaps you can say which other countries are providing it? Is Macron? Von der Leyen? Biden? Anybody at all?
Indeed who else is even matching us at 0.5%? Do you know? Do you even care?
Here's the list. UK was up to now pretty good, but is opting to fall back below Germany.
Not that it makes a material difference to the rankings or the points at hand but the US figure is substantially wrong. In 2019/20 the US figure was just a shade under $40 billion rather than the $34 billion listed. It does make me wonder about the other countries figures as well.
Honestly, this is just a whole load of rambling nonsense. You've basically used a whole load of words to say "we don't know how this ends". The point is fair, though I think you've failed to address the wider point of EU trade losing value for the UK resulting in the UK diluting the existing trade deal even further.
You've got to move on from brexit, you're a broken record and you can keep banging on about it until you're blue in the face, it's not going to change anything and ultimately brexit has already happened. Make peace with it.
Err, Brexit hasn't fully happened. You obviously haven't been following the news properly. The UK is trying to renegotiate the two agreements, including the one it signed just a few weeks ago. Well, I say 'renegotiate', but Lord Frost's approach can scarcely be called negotiation, it's more a combination of insults and reneging, which certainly isn't going to end well as an approach.
As for making peace on it, I've already written a pair of pieces for PB where I proposed a constructive way forward which would fully respect the referendum result (indeed, more fully than what we're getting). Of course, it's true that before that can happen, we'd need a sane government, and I'm afraid there's no chance of that in the foreseeable future. So, yes, we are stuck with the damage. It will take many years, perhaps a couple of decades, to recover the lost ground.
Again, you might say you've made peace with it, everything you've written since then on the subject suggests otherwise and both of your articles, while interesting, were basically just a list of ways to unwind leaving the EU to an extent where rejoining became inevitable on a "well we've signed up to the rules, let's rejoin so we can have a say in making them". It was extremely transparent.
Bit sad that aid for the world's poorest has been identified as a wedge issue in the war on woke but I think the author is right - it has. 0.7% was a manifesto commitment and it's utter bullshit that we now can't afford it because of the pandemic. The reason for the cut is pure politics and of the most poisonous type. They think Red Wall voters - as in generic term for working class Leavers who used to vote Labour - will see this and go, "Yeah, too right. Charity begins at home innit. Good on yer, Boris." I hope they're wrong. I hope this reductive patronizing pandering view of their voter base comes back and bites them in their fat cynical arses. So there.
If it can be afforded then perhaps you can say which other countries are providing it? Is Macron? Von der Leyen? Biden? Anybody at all?
Indeed who else is even matching us at 0.5%? Do you know? Do you even care?
Here's the list. UK was up to now pretty good, but is opting to fall back below Germany.
Not that it makes a material difference to the rankings or the points at hand but the US figure is substantially wrong. In 2019/20 the US figure was just a shade under $40 billion rather than the $34 billion listed. It does make me wonder about the other countries figures as well.
"The FY 2019 President’s Budget for the State Department and USAID is $39.3 billion, which includes $16.8 billion in assistance that USAID fully or partially manages through the Economic Support and Development Fund, Global Health Programs, Transition Initiatives, International Disaster Assistance, and USAID operational accounts. The USAID programs funded through these accounts will help developing countries make progress on their path to self-reliance and prosperity."
Confirmation yesterday that yet again the Crown Office provided the "wrong" text and whatsapp messages to the Holyrood Cttee and withheld the proof of collusion. This morning gov. lawyers are trying to convince the cttee to withdraw their order to Alex' lawyers for the material.
Meanwhile the Scottish Tories are campaigning hard against lying and corruption. Still not sure if the message is "we are screaming hypocrites by criticising only their lying and corruption whilst ignoring our own" or perhaps "if you want corrupt liars the Tories are the best there is so why not vote for us to have it done properly".
Off topic, I'm working with lots of northerners currently on the Transpennine upgrade programme at the moment, and it's *way* more fun than down in London.
They are more relaxed, informal, conversational and have a far better sense of humour. They don't police language. They don't grandstand. They don't have massive egos. And they're not up their own arseholes either, they will give you the benefit of the doubt in both your style and your work. I always feel I'm perpetually treading on eggshells Up in Town.
So wife can go for an evening stroll but husband has to stay at home. Seriously?
At least the Green Peer this morning on Sky had the sense to say that she wasn't actually serious about her suggestion and it was in response to comments in the Lords yesterday that women could best protect themselves by staying at home. She said she made the remark to highlight how one sided the whole argument was and to stimulate proper debate.
Actually suggesting it might be done is shear lunacy and I suspect would be opposed by just as many women as men.
Outlandish statements and suggestions get lots of publicity and attention, shock. This is why people do them.
The trouble is they then start to get legs, as subtleties are taken literally by both sides, and that's where it starts to polarise/radicalise people.
Words matter.
Something the Met Police could perhaps of considered when they were advising women not to go out alone in London.
For those who want to give more to Yemen, there are several charities that provide aid to that tragic country. I give to one of them myself. But I don't see why people who don't want to give should have money legally extorted from them to do so.
It won't be a shock to anybody with more than a passing acquaintance with pro cycling.
No. Although wasn't this a medical tribunal? Nothing to do with the sport as such. There was evidence of non-theraputic use of drugs, which is what the medics care about, but there's no actual evidence of who they were for. There's still an - admittedly faint - possibility they really were for Shane Sutton, although he's denied it.
Bit sad that aid for the world's poorest has been identified as a wedge issue in the war on woke but I think the author is right - it has. 0.7% was a manifesto commitment and it's utter bullshit that we now can't afford it because of the pandemic. The reason for the cut is pure politics and of the most poisonous type. They think Red Wall voters - as in generic term for working class Leavers who used to vote Labour - will see this and go, "Yeah, too right. Charity begins at home innit. Good on yer, Boris." I hope they're wrong. I hope this reductive patronizing pandering view of their voter base comes back and bites them in their fat cynical arses. So there.
If it can be afforded then perhaps you can say which other countries are providing it? Is Macron? Von der Leyen? Biden? Anybody at all?
Indeed who else is even matching us at 0.5%? Do you know? Do you even care?
Here's the list. UK was up to now pretty good, but is opting to fall back below Germany.
Not that it makes a material difference to the rankings or the points at hand but the US figure is substantially wrong. In 2019/20 the US figure was just a shade under $40 billion rather than the $34 billion listed. It does make me wonder about the other countries figures as well.
"The FY 2019 President’s Budget for the State Department and USAID is $39.3 billion, which includes $16.8 billion in assistance that USAID fully or partially manages through the Economic Support and Development Fund, Global Health Programs, Transition Initiatives, International Disaster Assistance, and USAID operational accounts. The USAID programs funded through these accounts will help developing countries make progress on their path to self-reliance and prosperity."
Right - but some of that won't count as ODA because State Department spends money on lots of other things, e.g. consular services, embassy construction & maintenance, military aid which is not eligible etc.
Honestly, this is just a whole load of rambling nonsense. You've basically used a whole load of words to say "we don't know how this ends". The point is fair, though I think you've failed to address the wider point of EU trade losing value for the UK resulting in the UK diluting the existing trade deal even further.
You've got to move on from brexit, you're a broken record and you can keep banging on about it until you're blue in the face, it's not going to change anything and ultimately brexit has already happened. Make peace with it.
Err, Brexit hasn't fully happened. You obviously haven't been following the news properly. The UK is trying to renegotiate the two agreements, including the one it signed just a few weeks ago. Well, I say 'renegotiate', but Lord Frost's approach can scarcely be called negotiation, it's more a combination of insults and reneging, which certainly isn't going to end well as an approach.
As for making peace on it, I've already written a pair of pieces for PB where I proposed a constructive way forward which would fully respect the referendum result (indeed, more fully than what we're getting). Of course, it's true that before that can happen, we'd need a sane government, and I'm afraid there's no chance of that in the foreseeable future. So, yes, we are stuck with the damage. It will take many years, perhaps a couple of decades, to recover the lost ground.
You have an extreme bias towards the 2016 status quo and see any deviation from it in any direction as insane by definition.
Well, it's true that the 2016 status quo was the best we'd be able to get: it gave us all the advantages of being in the EU with only some of the disadvantages, and those mostly minor.
But if we were going to leave, we didn't have to do it as spectacularly incompetently as Boris has managed. I mean, at the very least we could have written some computer systems to be ready on time, couldn't we? Or published the detailed regulations six months in advance, not broad-brush and useless generalisations of the regulations a few days before they applied. Or thought about NI. Or trained up the customs agents.
Off topic, I'm working with lots of northerners currently on the Transpennine upgrade programme at the moment, and it's *way* more fun than down in London.
They are more relaxed, informal, conversational and have a far better sense of humour. They don't police language. They don't grandstand. They don't have massive egos. And they're not up their own arseholes either, they will give you the benefit of the doubt in both your style and your work. I always feel I'm perpetually treading on eggshells Up in Town.
So refreshing. And fun.
Some of my best work friends are either Northerners or Southern Europeans (Italian, mostly) as they've got no PC filter.
Confirmation yesterday that yet again the Crown Office provided the "wrong" text and whatsapp messages to the Holyrood Cttee and withheld the proof of collusion. This morning gov. lawyers are trying to convince the cttee to withdraw their order to Alex' lawyers for the material.
Meanwhile the Scottish Tories are campaigning hard against lying and corruption. Still not sure if the message is "we are screaming hypocrites by criticising only their lying and corruption whilst ignoring our own" or perhaps "if you want corrupt liars the Tories are the best there is so why not vote for us to have it done properly".
So this “Male Curfew” idea. Who is going to be policing it? Just female officers? Officers who identify as female? Are male police officers considered safe to police it and considered no threat to women?
I’m sure there aren’t enough female officers to do the job (there don’t seem to be enough police officers full stop to patrol at present) and if there aren’t enough officers to police it then the sort of men who are a danger aren’t going to be deterred from going out to commit crimes against women I would imagine.
Honestly, this is just a whole load of rambling nonsense. You've basically used a whole load of words to say "we don't know how this ends". The point is fair, though I think you've failed to address the wider point of EU trade losing value for the UK resulting in the UK diluting the existing trade deal even further.
You've got to move on from brexit, you're a broken record and you can keep banging on about it until you're blue in the face, it's not going to change anything and ultimately brexit has already happened. Make peace with it.
Err, Brexit hasn't fully happened. You obviously haven't been following the news properly. The UK is trying to renegotiate the two agreements, including the one it signed just a few weeks ago. Well, I say 'renegotiate', but Lord Frost's approach can scarcely be called negotiation, it's more a combination of insults and reneging, which certainly isn't going to end well as an approach.
As for making peace on it, I've already written a pair of pieces for PB where I proposed a constructive way forward which would fully respect the referendum result (indeed, more fully than what we're getting). Of course, it's true that before that can happen, we'd need a sane government, and I'm afraid there's no chance of that in the foreseeable future. So, yes, we are stuck with the damage. It will take many years, perhaps a couple of decades, to recover the lost ground.
You have an extreme bias towards the 2016 status quo and see any deviation from it in any direction as insane by definition.
"Brexit" was Britain leaving the EU. We did that over a year ago. The problem is that we never had a plan of what to do afterwards.
Personally I am hugely appreciative that the man who negotiated our treaty is now the man going to yerp and saying "who wrote this shit, it doesn't work".
There is no squaring of the Norniron circle possible. Either we have a hard border in the Irish Sea or one on the Island. Neither is possible, the attempted fudge has already fallen apart. So we're back to bluster and threats and breaking international law. Which as we apparently want to go and negotiate new trade deals is a great starting point.
"We demanded something. We signed a deal to give us that something. Now we have realised what that something actually is and we don't want it. We're going to rip up this deal we negotiated and signed literally weeks ago. You definitely can trust us to negotiate in good faith from a clear factual position of what we want."
Bit sad that aid for the world's poorest has been identified as a wedge issue in the war on woke but I think the author is right - it has. 0.7% was a manifesto commitment and it's utter bullshit that we now can't afford it because of the pandemic. The reason for the cut is pure politics and of the most poisonous type. They think Red Wall voters - as in generic term for working class Leavers who used to vote Labour - will see this and go, "Yeah, too right. Charity begins at home innit. Good on yer, Boris." I hope they're wrong. I hope this reductive patronizing pandering view of their voter base comes back and bites them in their fat cynical arses. So there.
If it can be afforded then perhaps you can say which other countries are providing it? Is Macron? Von der Leyen? Biden? Anybody at all?
Indeed who else is even matching us at 0.5%? Do you know? Do you even care?
Here's the list. UK was up to now pretty good, but is opting to fall back below Germany.
Not that it makes a material difference to the rankings or the points at hand but the US figure is substantially wrong. In 2019/20 the US figure was just a shade under $40 billion rather than the $34 billion listed. It does make me wonder about the other countries figures as well.
"The FY 2019 President’s Budget for the State Department and USAID is $39.3 billion, which includes $16.8 billion in assistance that USAID fully or partially manages through the Economic Support and Development Fund, Global Health Programs, Transition Initiatives, International Disaster Assistance, and USAID operational accounts. The USAID programs funded through these accounts will help developing countries make progress on their path to self-reliance and prosperity."
Right - but some of that won't count as ODA because State Department spends money on lots of other things, e.g. consular services, embassy construction & maintenance, military aid which is not eligible etc.
Ah okay. Didn't realise that. Is that the norm for most countries or just a US peculiarity?
Honestly, this is just a whole load of rambling nonsense. You've basically used a whole load of words to say "we don't know how this ends". The point is fair, though I think you've failed to address the wider point of EU trade losing value for the UK resulting in the UK diluting the existing trade deal even further.
You've got to move on from brexit, you're a broken record and you can keep banging on about it until you're blue in the face, it's not going to change anything and ultimately brexit has already happened. Make peace with it.
Err, Brexit hasn't fully happened. You obviously haven't been following the news properly. The UK is trying to renegotiate the two agreements, including the one it signed just a few weeks ago. Well, I say 'renegotiate', but Lord Frost's approach can scarcely be called negotiation, it's more a combination of insults and reneging, which certainly isn't going to end well as an approach.
As for making peace on it, I've already written a pair of pieces for PB where I proposed a constructive way forward which would fully respect the referendum result (indeed, more fully than what we're getting). Of course, it's true that before that can happen, we'd need a sane government, and I'm afraid there's no chance of that in the foreseeable future. So, yes, we are stuck with the damage. It will take many years, perhaps a couple of decades, to recover the lost ground.
Again, you might say you've made peace with it, everything you've written since then on the subject suggests otherwise and both of your articles, while interesting, were basically just a list of ways to unwind leaving the EU to an extent where rejoining became inevitable on a "well we've signed up to the rules, let's rejoin so we can have a say in making them". It was extremely transparent.
Garbage. As I made crystal clear, I don't think we should try to rejoin. For that matter I don't think the offer would be open.
Honestly, this is just a whole load of rambling nonsense. You've basically used a whole load of words to say "we don't know how this ends". The point is fair, though I think you've failed to address the wider point of EU trade losing value for the UK resulting in the UK diluting the existing trade deal even further.
You've got to move on from brexit, you're a broken record and you can keep banging on about it until you're blue in the face, it's not going to change anything and ultimately brexit has already happened. Make peace with it.
Err, Brexit hasn't fully happened. You obviously haven't been following the news properly. The UK is trying to renegotiate the two agreements, including the one it signed just a few weeks ago. Well, I say 'renegotiate', but Lord Frost's approach can scarcely be called negotiation, it's more a combination of insults and reneging, which certainly isn't going to end well as an approach.
As for making peace on it, I've already written a pair of pieces for PB where I proposed a constructive way forward which would fully respect the referendum result (indeed, more fully than what we're getting). Of course, it's true that before that can happen, we'd need a sane government, and I'm afraid there's no chance of that in the foreseeable future. So, yes, we are stuck with the damage. It will take many years, perhaps a couple of decades, to recover the lost ground.
Again, you might say you've made peace with it, everything you've written since then on the subject suggests otherwise and both of your articles, while interesting, were basically just a list of ways to unwind leaving the EU to an extent where rejoining became inevitable on a "well we've signed up to the rules, let's rejoin so we can have a say in making them". It was extremely transparent.
Garbage. As I made crystal clear, I don't think we should try to rejoin. For that matter I don't think the offer would be open.
Yes, and the EU has made it crystal clear that it isn't engaged in a vaccine trade war. 🤷♂️
I am sure we will hear outrage about this being cancelled, or is it only when it's right-wing stuff that people get mad
Indifferent to whether it is cancelled or not, as I think Nish Kumar is from the metrotwit demographic and currently far too Brexit-obsessed; though to do so for perceived bias would be a mistake.
Will be interesting, as the Daily Mash is an external setup started back in 2007/8/9 so the IP may be owned by outsiders.
Mr. Pulpstar, there are some crazy fools out there. Some people who think you can't be racist against white people. That men can be perpetrators but not victims of crime. Or that slavery reparations should be paid by people who have never owned slaves to people who have never been slaves.
Telling satire from serious comment can be very tricky.
If there's a general curfew because of a serial killer on the loose or mega mutant covid that's one thing but this is madness
I think the point is that the status quo is not acceptable, but it's something that's tolerated.
A male curfew would at least work (if enforced) in making the streets safer for women.
If it's an intolerable cost to pay to achieve that then maybe we ought to find a different way of achieving the same ends - like convicting men who perpetrate violence against women instead of finding excuses for them.
There was that guy excused of murdering his wife due to Covid lockdown. We have a pitifully low conviction rate for rape, because there's always some excuse.
Maybe if the problem was taken seriously people wouldn't suggest ridiculous things like a male curfew.
Seriously, how do you increase rape conviction rates? I'm currently reading the Secret Barrister and he's scathing of Magistrates courts for being too ready to convict.
Trial by jury is fundamental to our criminal justice system. For sure plenty of rapists walk free, but what can you do about it other than to make sure the CPS and police don't screw up to let them off on a technicality?
Perhaps we could say, well we think 20% of rape cases that go to trial should result in a conviction, so we'll hear a whole load of cases together and convict the top 20% where it looks most likely that the accused is guilty.
But given what went on with the exam grades last summer, I doubt this form of justice would be particularly popular.
What I would not do is give up and accept the status quo. I am sure that there are suggestions and recommendations being made by people with more knowledge and expertise than me.
Off topic, I'm working with lots of northerners currently on the Transpennine upgrade programme at the moment, and it's *way* more fun than down in London.
They are more relaxed, informal, conversational and have a far better sense of humour. They don't police language. They don't grandstand. They don't have massive egos. And they're not up their own arseholes either, they will give you the benefit of the doubt in both your style and your work. I always feel I'm perpetually treading on eggshells Up in Town.
So refreshing. And fun.
Some of my best work friends are either Northerners or Southern Europeans (Italian, mostly) as they've got no PC filter.
Here's the thing: there hasn't been any unPC chat. It's just they don't judge you and mark your card if you don't use the right phrase at the right time for everything. Because they recognise that's not important.
Also, they laugh and smile a lot, enjoy their work and make it fun. I've had conversations about Oasis, Ian Brown, and cracked jokes about Vikings and working in Sainsbury's if we get this wrong, this morning.
They know that humour is what makes life bearable, and they're absolutely fine with it.
@rkrkrk, you make an interesting point, if I understand your header correctly. Johnson has made a decision to cut aid for populist reasons without thinking things through, and this is now coming back to bite him. This is regardless of whether the cut makes sense in its own terms.
The Johnson government has no strategy, acts very ad-hoc, at times despotic. This shows up as consequences, which we are also seeing today in the truly awful January trade figures.
A big issue, as I understand, with the aid cut is that the UK is committed to multilateral programmes for a large part of its aid budget. The only way it can get to 0.5% of GDP (one third cut) is to decimate its own programmes. If you decided 0.5% is the appropriate amount, you would sensibly reduce the actual amount gradually, to allow you to unwind your multilateral commitments and reduce your own programmes in a managed way.
For those who want to give more to Yemen, there are several charities that provide aid to that tragic country. I give to one of them myself. But I don't see why people who don't want to give should have money legally extorted from them to do so.
Because apart from the moral dimension - which of course you are addressing - it also makes their own lives better and safer in the long run. Having failed states, massive refugee crises and mass starvation breeds exactly the sorts of anti western feelings and extremism that we are spending billions trying, and failing, to combat. And that is before you take into account that successful stable states are good for trade. Even if you want to completely ignore the moral dimension then it is still good economic and political policy to try and eliminate this sort of extreme poverty and state failure.
One of the things I didn't touch upon is it may be quite difficult to get down to 0.5% given what Boris Johnson has said about giving away excess vaccines. The value of those could be in the billions and they will count to ODA.
Another factor is COP26 in November. I think it's likely the govt will want to make some big pledges on climate change given they are hosting in Glasgow. Also a good opportunity to make Boris Johnson look generous vs. Nicola Sturgeon.
It's worth pointing out that the increase to 0.7% from 0.5% took place over four years. Cutting to get back to 0.5% in a single year might not be politically possible given all the ODA the govt wants to spend.
My understanding was that the reason why some of the cuts are so high is because the commitments to the EU/UN are fixed on a multi year basis.
So that would be a natural way to move in that you wind them down over time.
On the legislation point wouldn’t this be covered by the budget? I thought that was legislation.
Mr. Pulpstar, there are some crazy fools out there. Some people who think you can't be racist against white people. That men can be perpetrators but not victims of crime. Or that slavery reparations should be paid by people who have never owned slaves to people who have never been slaves.
Telling satire from serious comment can be very tricky.
If there's a general curfew because of a serial killer on the loose or mega mutant covid that's one thing but this is madness
I think the point is that the status quo is not acceptable, but it's something that's tolerated.
A male curfew would at least work (if enforced) in making the streets safer for women.
If it's an intolerable cost to pay to achieve that then maybe we ought to find a different way of achieving the same ends - like convicting men who perpetrate violence against women instead of finding excuses for them.
There was that guy excused of murdering his wife due to Covid lockdown. We have a pitifully low conviction rate for rape, because there's always some excuse.
Maybe if the problem was taken seriously people wouldn't suggest ridiculous things like a male curfew.
Seriously, how do you increase rape conviction rates? I'm currently reading the Secret Barrister and he's scathing of Magistrates courts for being too ready to convict.
Trial by jury is fundamental to our criminal justice system. For sure plenty of rapists walk free, but what can you do about it other than to make sure the CPS and police don't screw up to let them off on a technicality?
Perhaps we could say, well we think 20% of rape cases that go to trial should result in a conviction, so we'll hear a whole load of cases together and convict the top 20% where it looks most likely that the accused is guilty.
But given what went on with the exam grades last summer, I doubt this form of justice would be particularly popular.
It's very simple. You decriminalise date rape, by introducing a separate (civil) charge of sexual misconduct, which gets tried on the balance of probabilities, and results in fines and whatever other powers civil courts have at their disposal.
The problem is that activists won't hear of this, because they insist that "rape is rape" and therefore, by necessity, all charges need to be brought in criminal courts and proved beyond reasonable doubt. This is typically impossible, since so many cases just devolve into "he said/she said" type disputes with no way for the jury to decide between them, and therefore are forced to acquit.
So this “Male Curfew” idea. Who is going to be policing it? Just female officers? Officers who identify as female? Are male police officers considered safe to police it and considered no threat to women?
I’m sure there aren’t enough female officers to do the job (there don’t seem to be enough police officers full stop to patrol at present) and if there aren’t enough officers to police it then the sort of men who are a danger aren’t going to be deterred from going out to commit crimes against women I would imagine.
The Met need to fix the problems in their own ranks before they tell anyone, men or women, to observe a curfew.
One of the things I didn't touch upon is it may be quite difficult to get down to 0.5% given what Boris Johnson has said about giving away excess vaccines. The value of those could be in the billions and they will count to ODA.
Another factor is COP26 in November. I think it's likely the govt will want to make some big pledges on climate change given they are hosting in Glasgow. Also a good opportunity to make Boris Johnson look generous vs. Nicola Sturgeon.
It's worth pointing out that the increase to 0.7% from 0.5% took place over four years. Cutting to get back to 0.5% in a single year might not be politically possible given all the ODA the govt wants to spend.
My understanding was that the reason why some of the cuts are so high is because the commitments to the EU/UN are fixed on a multi year basis.
So that would be a natural way to move in that you wind them down over time.
On the legislation point wouldn’t this be covered by the budget? I thought that was legislation.
It's definitely finance so could be part of a finance bill.
I think the issue is that it's breaking a manifesto committment to keep aid at 0.7% but we could stay over that given the amount of Covid vaccines we may be providing.
I've just watched the H&M interview in full. I think where I have sympathy with them is how the Palace responded (or, rather, didn't respond) to coverage of Meghan in the press. It wouldn't have taken much to put out a statement at an appropriate moment to say that they were appalled by what appeared to be racist coverage of Meghan.
One thing that my sister pointed out to me is that there appears to be an inconsistency on the skin colour comment. Meghan was talking about it as though it was made when she was pregnant with Archie. But Harry seemed to suggest that it happened early on in their relationship. Not sure if there is any significance in that - people's memories can be unreliable - but thought it was interesting.
The idea that rapists, kidnappers, and murderers are content to commit those crimes, but would be frightened of violating a curfew, is not necessarily a notion brimming with credibility.
Curfews for men is one of the stupidest ideas I've ever heard. Christ.
Why?
Because it doesn't solve anything and it's the opposite of liberty. I haven't ever committed violence towards women so why should I be punished by being forced to stay inside my house?
One thing that my sister pointed out to me is that there appears to be an inconsistency on the skin colour comment. Meghan was talking about it as though it was made when she was pregnant with Archie. But Harry seemed to suggest that it happened early on in their relationship. Not sure if there is any significance in that - people's memories can be unreliable - but thought it was interesting.
Meghan: "several times, while she was pregnant" Harry: "Once, before they got engaged".
I suspect Harry is correct, and may regret mentioning it to Meghan as it's thoughtless and hurtful and has clearly hurt. But they've dug the hole, and standard advice applies.....
Curfews for men is one of the stupidest ideas I've ever heard. Christ.
Why?
Because it is unenforceable Because it would be challenged legally and thrown out Because it would be opposed by the vast majority of people in the country - both men and women Because if it were attempted it would lead to mass protests and rioting Because it would be massively damaging to the economy Because it would be punishing the vast majority of innocent people for the crimes of a tiny few. Because it would be a final admission by the state that it is unable to provide basic safety for the population and would destroy what little faith people have left in the police. Because it would punish women almost as much as men. Because it would actually lead to more violence against women not less with that tiny minority who are predisposed to violence against women venting their frustrations on wives and partners.
No one in their right minds thinks it is a reasonable solution. Which is why Drakeford's comments are so dumb.
Sometimes, if you click enough, there is the perfect image. This was genuine (there's nother image of it emerging). Not mine sadly.
There are some stunning wildlife photographers out there. Check out Markus Varesvuo. Many of his images are of wildlife they have in common with Scotland.
See this image of a Snowy Owl. Should be a once in a lifetime shot. He gets hundreds like this.
For those who want to give more to Yemen, there are several charities that provide aid to that tragic country. I give to one of them myself. But I don't see why people who don't want to give should have money legally extorted from them to do so.
Because apart from the moral dimension - which of course you are addressing - it also makes their own lives better and safer in the long run. Having failed states, massive refugee crises and mass starvation breeds exactly the sorts of anti western feelings and extremism that we are spending billions trying, and failing, to combat. And that is before you take into account that successful stable states are good for trade. Even if you want to completely ignore the moral dimension then it is still good economic and political policy to try and eliminate this sort of extreme poverty and state failure.
We will never eliminate it. States will fail and there will be extreme poverty whether or not we give aid. We may reduce it by a trivial amount - even that is questionable. But there are plenty of other ills closer to home where government or private spending will have a more certain beneficial effect.
Off topic, I'm working with lots of northerners currently on the Transpennine upgrade programme at the moment, and it's *way* more fun than down in London.
They are more relaxed, informal, conversational and have a far better sense of humour. They don't police language. They don't grandstand. They don't have massive egos. And they're not up their own arseholes either, they will give you the benefit of the doubt in both your style and your work. I always feel I'm perpetually treading on eggshells Up in Town.
So refreshing. And fun.
Some of my best work friends are either Northerners or Southern Europeans (Italian, mostly) as they've got no PC filter.
Here's the thing: there hasn't been any unPC chat. It's just they don't judge you and mark your card if you don't use the right phrase at the right time for everything. Because they recognise that's not important.
Also, they laugh and smile a lot, enjoy their work and make it fun. I've had conversations about Oasis, Ian Brown, and cracked jokes about Vikings and working in Sainsbury's if we get this wrong, this morning.
They know that humour is what makes life bearable, and they're absolutely fine with it.
Makes me want to move house.
The whole north/south friendliness is true in my experience (southerner who moved north). People in Yorkshire just chat to you. I remember walking the walls in York with my wife and (southerner) parents and a lady giving way to us as we came down some narrow steps. We ended up chatting with her for 5-10 minutes (well, my wife and I, my parents kept quiet). Afterwards my parents asked who she was. Reply: "no idea, just met her". They really couldn't comprehend that we'd just had this conversation with someone we did not know and would likely never see again.
I also think northerners are more likely to cut through the bullshit, in general and in a work setting.
Honestly, this is just a whole load of rambling nonsense. You've basically used a whole load of words to say "we don't know how this ends". The point is fair, though I think you've failed to address the wider point of EU trade losing value for the UK resulting in the UK diluting the existing trade deal even further.
You've got to move on from brexit, you're a broken record and you can keep banging on about it until you're blue in the face, it's not going to change anything and ultimately brexit has already happened. Make peace with it.
Err, Brexit hasn't fully happened. You obviously haven't been following the news properly. The UK is trying to renegotiate the two agreements, including the one it signed just a few weeks ago. Well, I say 'renegotiate', but Lord Frost's approach can scarcely be called negotiation, it's more a combination of insults and reneging, which certainly isn't going to end well as an approach.
As for making peace on it, I've already written a pair of pieces for PB where I proposed a constructive way forward which would fully respect the referendum result (indeed, more fully than what we're getting). Of course, it's true that before that can happen, we'd need a sane government, and I'm afraid there's no chance of that in the foreseeable future. So, yes, we are stuck with the damage. It will take many years, perhaps a couple of decades, to recover the lost ground.
You have an extreme bias towards the 2016 status quo and see any deviation from it in any direction as insane by definition.
Curfews for men is one of the stupidest ideas I've ever heard. Christ.
Why?
Because it is unenforceable Because it would be challenged legally and thrown out Because it would be opposed by the vast majority of people in the country - both men and women Because if it were attempted it would lead to mass protests and rioting Because it would be massively damaging to the economy Because it would be punishing the vast majority of innocent people for the crimes of a tiny few. Because it would be a final admission by the state that it is unable to provide basic safety for the population and would destroy what little faith people have left in the police. Because it would punish women almost as much as men. Because it would actually lead to more violence against women not less with that tiny minority who are predisposed to violence against women venting their frustrations on wives and partners.
No one in their right minds thinks it is a reasonable solution. Which is why Drakeford's comments are so dumb.
I am only surprised that anyone should question why Drakeford is dumb
I've just watched the H&M interview in full. I think where I have sympathy with them is how the Palace responded (or, rather, didn't respond) to coverage of Meghan in the press. It wouldn't have taken much to put out a statement at an appropriate moment to say that they were appalled by what appeared to be racist coverage of Meghan.
One thing that my sister pointed out to me is that there appears to be an inconsistency on the skin colour comment. Meghan was talking about it as though it was made when she was pregnant with Archie. But Harry seemed to suggest that it happened early on in their relationship. Not sure if there is any significance in that - people's memories can be unreliable - but thought it was interesting.
I instinctively support Harry and Meghan because the Royal Family is gruesome in a way that H&M really are not. Yes, there are big holes in their story, but these pale against the sheer ghastliness of the Royal Family, which isn't a family in any normal sense of the word (itself a problem)
Not sure the Royal Family are actually racist, but definitely chauvinist towards Meghan. And they have history of attitude issues with the women in their midst (Meghan, Fergie, Diana, and if you go back a bit, Margaret)
Comments
This morning gov. lawyers are trying to convince the cttee to withdraw their order to Alex' lawyers for the material.
Of course, there are plenty of caveats: it's only one month, stockpiling affected some sectors, the overall picture is hugely distorted by Covid in both directions, and some of the fall is no doubt genuinely 'teething troubles', in the sense that the spectacularly stupid decision by the UK not to negotiate any implementation period has massively and unnecessarily made things worse in the short term. When things settle down, we obviously won't be looking at the 38% hit (goods exports to the EU Jan 2021 vs Jan 2020) , but it's going to be bad. Bear in mind also that neither we nor the EU are yet implementing the full panoply of massive red tape that is coming.
Plus of course there's the hit on services. Anyone's guess what that will settle down at, but, again, it's going to be bad.
One thing I would say (and have said before) is that the EU worried about the wrong thing. They shouldn't be worried about the UK becoming a super-competitor on their doorstep: the bigger risk for them is that, as one of their important customers, our economy slumps and demand for their products falls. We're just going to be a lot poorer as a result of this clusterfuck, and that of course will have a (small) effect on them.
But the outrage bus was already leaving the bus garage before she sat down.
Drakeford even remotely suggesting this is a new level of bonkers. The Covid restrictions must have gone to his head.
Telling satire from serious comment can be very tricky.
You've got to move on from brexit, you're a broken record and you can keep banging on about it until you're blue in the face, it's not going to change anything and ultimately brexit has already happened. Make peace with it.
He's dropped the House of Lords move to York, and also the Thames Estuary airport, for similar reasons; he just likes very big grand projects but if they're obviously bonkers he'll look for a facesaving way to back down.
One of the things I didn't touch upon is it may be quite difficult to get down to 0.5% given what Boris Johnson has said about giving away excess vaccines. The value of those could be in the billions and they will count to ODA.
Another factor is COP26 in November. I think it's likely the govt will want to make some big pledges on climate change given they are hosting in Glasgow. Also a good opportunity to make Boris Johnson look generous vs. Nicola Sturgeon.
It's worth pointing out that the increase to 0.7% from 0.5% took place over four years. Cutting to get back to 0.5% in a single year might not be politically possible given all the ODA the govt wants to spend.
"Whoops, I've lost all the relevant minutes on various crucial meetings. Oh well."
AstraZeneca has again cut down its forecast for coronavirus vaccine deliveries to the European Union in the first quarter of 2021, telling the EU officials it expects to only provide about 30 million doses by the end of March, according to a document dated March 10 and seen by Reuters.
https://www.politico.eu/article/astrazeneca-cuts-once-again-its-eu-vaccine-delivery-targets-report/
Mind you, since some of them aren't using AZ any way, and those who are are facing resistance from a sceptical population, it might not have that great an impact.
I'd have thought he'd have accepted it by now (even whilst stating it still wasn't his preferred choice), like David Herdson, Felix, HYFUD, BluestBlue etc., but he's sticking to the full ScottP.
It's weird.
A male curfew would at least work (if enforced) in making the streets safer for women.
If it's an intolerable cost to pay to achieve that then maybe we ought to find a different way of achieving the same ends - like convicting men who perpetrate violence against women instead of finding excuses for them.
There was that guy excused of murdering his wife due to Covid lockdown. We have a pitifully low conviction rate for rape, because there's always some excuse.
Maybe if the problem was taken seriously people wouldn't suggest ridiculous things like a male curfew.
The trouble is they then start to get legs, as subtleties are taken literally by both sides, and that's where it starts to polarise/radicalise people.
Words matter.
As for making peace on it, I've already written a pair of pieces for PB where I proposed a constructive way forward which would fully respect the referendum result (indeed, more fully than what we're getting). Of course, it's true that before that can happen, we'd need a sane government, and I'm afraid there's no chance of that in the foreseeable future. So, yes, we are stuck with the damage. It will take many years, perhaps a couple of decades, to recover the lost ground.
I am very interested as to whether we will see MPs lose the whip. My guess is that we won't because there is a long time until the next election, Boris needs their votes. I suspect some Tory MPs would feel strongly enough about this to quit the party if forced.
There may be a happy landing ground for Tory strategy between Boris promising to cut the aid budget, failing to do so because of giving away COVID vaccines and still being able to campaign on future cuts next time around.
Another sort of lockdown really. But who would deliver all the takeaways? Most of them seem to be men.
https://twitter.com/MrMcEnaney/status/1370290736487337989?s=20
Probably not healthy to speculate about what level of anger Wings feels he's being disqualified from expressing, but perhaps knowing he can call a minister a total c*** on Twitter might assuage the rage.
https://twitter.com/HumzaYousaf/status/1370294351994224645?s=20
Trial by jury is fundamental to our criminal justice system. For sure plenty of rapists walk free, but what can you do about it other than to make sure the CPS and police don't screw up to let them off on a technicality?
Perhaps we could say, well we think 20% of rape cases that go to trial should result in a conviction, so we'll hear a whole load of cases together and convict the top 20% where it looks most likely that the accused is guilty.
But given what went on with the exam grades last summer, I doubt this form of justice would be particularly popular.
https://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-standards/official-development-assistance.htm
"The FY 2019 President’s Budget for the State Department and USAID is $39.3 billion, which includes $16.8 billion in assistance that USAID fully or partially manages through the Economic Support and Development Fund, Global Health Programs, Transition Initiatives, International Disaster Assistance, and USAID operational accounts. The USAID programs funded through these accounts will help developing countries make progress on their path to self-reliance and prosperity."
I am sure we will hear outrage about this being cancelled, or is it only when it's right-wing stuff that people get mad
They are more relaxed, informal, conversational and have a far better sense of humour. They don't police language. They don't grandstand. They don't have massive egos. And they're not up their own arseholes either, they will give you the benefit of the doubt in both your style and your work. I always feel I'm perpetually treading on eggshells Up in Town.
So refreshing. And fun.
But if we were going to leave, we didn't have to do it as spectacularly incompetently as Boris has managed. I mean, at the very least we could have written some computer systems to be ready on time, couldn't we? Or published the detailed regulations six months in advance, not broad-brush and useless generalisations of the regulations a few days before they applied. Or thought about NI. Or trained up the customs agents.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1370331992026406912?s=20
I wonder if people have guessed "who said what"?
I’m sure there aren’t enough female officers to do the job (there don’t seem to be enough police officers full stop to patrol at present) and if there aren’t enough officers to police it then the sort of men who are a danger aren’t going to be deterred from going out to commit crimes against women I would imagine.
Personally I am hugely appreciative that the man who negotiated our treaty is now the man going to yerp and saying "who wrote this shit, it doesn't work".
There is no squaring of the Norniron circle possible. Either we have a hard border in the Irish Sea or one on the Island. Neither is possible, the attempted fudge has already fallen apart. So we're back to bluster and threats and breaking international law. Which as we apparently want to go and negotiate new trade deals is a great starting point.
"We demanded something. We signed a deal to give us that something. Now we have realised what that something actually is and we don't want it. We're going to rip up this deal we negotiated and signed literally weeks ago. You definitely can trust us to negotiate in good faith from a clear factual position of what we want."
Yeah, lots of great negotiations coming up.
Will be interesting, as the Daily Mash is an external setup started back in 2007/8/9 so the IP may be owned by outsiders.
It may move somewhere else.
Be careful what you wish for - as chances are you will hate the way its going to be implemented.
Also, they laugh and smile a lot, enjoy their work and make it fun. I've had conversations about Oasis, Ian Brown, and cracked jokes about Vikings and working in Sainsbury's if we get this wrong, this morning.
They know that humour is what makes life bearable, and they're absolutely fine with it.
Makes me want to move house.
The Johnson government has no strategy, acts very ad-hoc, at times despotic. This shows up as consequences, which we are also seeing today in the truly awful January trade figures.
A big issue, as I understand, with the aid cut is that the UK is committed to multilateral programmes for a large part of its aid budget. The only way it can get to 0.5% of GDP (one third cut) is to decimate its own programmes. If you decided 0.5% is the appropriate amount, you would sensibly reduce the actual amount gradually, to allow you to unwind your multilateral commitments and reduce your own programmes in a managed way.
But this was entirely about creating a headline.
So that would be a natural way to move in that you wind them down over time.
On the legislation point wouldn’t this be covered by the budget? I thought that was legislation.
The problem is that activists won't hear of this, because they insist that "rape is rape" and therefore, by necessity, all charges need to be brought in criminal courts and proved beyond reasonable doubt. This is typically impossible, since so many cases just devolve into "he said/she said" type disputes with no way for the jury to decide between them, and therefore are forced to acquit.
https://twitter.com/outdoorski/status/1369619572345610240?s=20
I think the issue is that it's breaking a manifesto committment to keep aid at 0.7% but we could stay over that given the amount of Covid vaccines we may be providing.
One thing that my sister pointed out to me is that there appears to be an inconsistency on the skin colour comment. Meghan was talking about it as though it was made when she was pregnant with Archie. But Harry seemed to suggest that it happened early on in their relationship. Not sure if there is any significance in that - people's memories can be unreliable - but thought it was interesting.
Made sure to thank each and every one of the staff I interacted with.
https://twitter.com/LukeSmithF1/status/1370326233779732484
Harry: "Once, before they got engaged".
I suspect Harry is correct, and may regret mentioning it to Meghan as it's thoughtless and hurtful and has clearly hurt. But they've dug the hole, and standard advice applies.....
It's a way of avoiding engaging in the other side of the argument, which means they're not confident of the merits of their own.
Because it would be challenged legally and thrown out
Because it would be opposed by the vast majority of people in the country - both men and women
Because if it were attempted it would lead to mass protests and rioting
Because it would be massively damaging to the economy
Because it would be punishing the vast majority of innocent people for the crimes of a tiny few.
Because it would be a final admission by the state that it is unable to provide basic safety for the population and would destroy what little faith people have left in the police.
Because it would punish women almost as much as men.
Because it would actually lead to more violence against women not less with that tiny minority who are predisposed to violence against women venting their frustrations on wives and partners.
No one in their right minds thinks it is a reasonable solution. Which is why Drakeford's comments are so dumb.
There are some stunning wildlife photographers out there. Check out Markus Varesvuo. Many of his images are of wildlife they have in common with Scotland.
See this image of a Snowy Owl. Should be a once in a lifetime shot. He gets hundreds like this.
https://www.canon.co.uk/pro/ambassadors/markus-varesvuo/
I also think northerners are more likely to cut through the bullshit, in general and in a work setting.
Not sure the Royal Family are actually racist, but definitely chauvinist towards Meghan. And they have history of attitude issues with the women in their midst (Meghan, Fergie, Diana, and if you go back a bit, Margaret)