I have just read on Vote UK site that the SNP MP for Airdrie & Shotts is to give up his seat to contest the same seat at Holyrood. If true , it should be an interesting by election, with Labour coming within 200 votes in 2017.
In 2019 Neil Gray had a majority of 5,201 over Labour
The only way Labour will have any chance is if the present SNP internal warfare affects voters plus a large conservative tactical vote
Both BBC and Sky leading on the EU threat to ban vaccines coming to the UK later this week
The optics of this for the EU are toxic and just affirms rejoining is going to become very difficult to sell
BBC website is leading on 'No foreign holidays' Mentions the vaccine wall, but attributes any comments to the Defence Sec.
Polite question but are you trying to downplay how serious this could be for the EU relationships not only with the UK, but the rest of the world.
If, and I stress if, the reports are true, yes, there would be serious effects. However the reports I've seen, from sources I do not regard as hopelessly biased, and the interview I watched this morning, suggest that situation is being seriously overplayed by those who hate the EU.
In that context I am reminded of the remark attributed to Rupert Murdoch when asked why his papers supported Leave. 'When I go to Downing Street they pay attention to me. When I go to Brussels they just listen politely." (Or something close to that.)
And now I'm off to a cheese and wine lunch, with a mixture of British and European cheeses. Not sure yet of the provenance of the wine; quite possibly Italian, as it's very, very difficult to make a decent red wine in this climate. Although there's a vineyard in Suffolk which makes quite a passable one.
The UK had a de facto AV system for Westminster throughout the 1950s when most seats only had two candidates - Tory and Labour. For circa 50% of the country that continued to be the case until 1974.
'Binary choice' and 'AV' are not the same thing.
Which is why I said 'De Facto'. Liberal , Green and supporters of other small parties were faced in most constituencies with voting for 'the lesser of two evils', spoiling their ballot papers or staying at home.
Are there any voters that agree with every single policy of the party they are voting for? It's always a lesser of two evils kind of choice. Jut because there are only two options on the ballot paper doesn't make it AV.
But the choice was restricted to two lesser evils rather than three,four or five. Many voters were effectively being denied their preferred 'lesser evil'.
I'm just demonstrating that by your logic FPTP with any number of candidates is AV.
It is for voters denied their preferred candidate.
Both BBC and Sky leading on the EU threat to ban vaccines coming to the UK later this week
The optics of this for the EU are toxic and just affirms rejoining is going to become very difficult to sell
BBC website is leading on 'No foreign holidays' Mentions the vaccine wall, but attributes any comments to the Defence Sec.
Polite question but are you trying to downplay how serious this could be for the EU relationships not only with the UK, but the rest of the world.
If, and I stress if, the reports are true, yes, there would be serious effects. However the reports I've seen, from sources I do not regard as hopelessly biased, and the interview I watched this morning, suggest that situation is being seriously overplayed by those who hate the EU.
In that context I am reminded of the remark attributed to Rupert Murdoch when asked why his papers supported Leave. 'When I go to Downing Street they pay attention to me. When I go to Brussels they just listen politely." (Or something close to that.)
And now I'm off to a cheese and wine lunch, with a mixture of British and European cheeses. Not sure yet of the provenance of the wine; quite possibly Italian, as it's very, very difficult to make a decent red wine in this climate. Although there's a vineyard in Suffolk which makes quite a passable one.
Did you read the UvdL interview? It was pretty clear what she was saying, and that it isn't being overblown by "those that hate the EU".
The UK had a de facto AV system for Westminster throughout the 1950s when most seats only had two candidates - Tory and Labour. For circa 50% of the country that continued to be the case until 1974.
How does that make it de facto AV? There are only two candidates to pick from, no one gets multiple choices etc.
It's more accurate to say that AV and FPTP are the same when there are only two candidates.
In a similar way STV becomes AV for by-elections when there is only one seat to be filled.
Similar to the way in which Relativity is approximately the same as Newtonian Mechanics when speeds and gravitational field strengths are low.
I have just read on Vote UK site that the SNP MP for Airdrie & Shotts is to give up his seat to contest the same seat at Holyrood. If true , it should be an interesting by election, with Labour coming within 200 votes in 2017.
In 2019 Neil Gray had a majority of 5,201 over Labour
The only way Labour will have any chance is if the present SNP internal warfare affects voters plus a large conservative tactical vote
But Labour came very close in 2017 so the seat will be a key target for the party. So maybe we now have two key by elections on 6th May.
Both BBC and Sky leading on the EU threat to ban vaccines coming to the UK later this week
The optics of this for the EU are toxic and just affirms rejoining is going to become very difficult to sell
BBC website is leading on 'No foreign holidays' Mentions the vaccine wall, but attributes any comments to the Defence Sec.
Polite question but are you trying to downplay how serious this could be for the EU relationships not only with the UK, but the rest of the world.
If, and I stress if, the reports are true, yes, there would be serious effects. However the reports I've seen, from sources I do not regard as hopelessly biased, and the interview I watched this morning, suggest that situation is being seriously overplayed by those who hate the EU.
In that context I am reminded of the remark attributed to Rupert Murdoch when asked why his papers supported Leave. 'When I go to Downing Street they pay attention to me. When I go to Brussels they just listen politely." (Or something close to that.)
And now I'm off to a cheese and wine lunch, with a mixture of British and European cheeses. Not sure yet of the provenance of the wine; quite possibly Italian, as it's very, very difficult to make a decent red wine in this climate. Although there's a vineyard in Suffolk which makes quite a passable one.
I am not sure either the BBC or Sky hate Europe and it is the main agenda for the EU leaders meeting on Thursday
Another point about the EU arguments is that they seem to be based on UK citizens in non-vulnerable age groups being vaccinated before vulnerable groups in the EU (and we'll gloss over that many EU countries explicitly ruled out use of AZ for the (elderly) vulnerable groups for a long period). But of course the major direction of UK supplies in coming weeks will be for second doses of vulnerable groups.
The EU seems to be arguing that the UK could halt its rollout with no major health consequences. But this is not the case with 70+ aged individuals returning for second doses to provide their ongoing protection. So this is a bit more than just disappointing 30 year olds.
The UK had a de facto AV system for Westminster throughout the 1950s when most seats only had two candidates - Tory and Labour. For circa 50% of the country that continued to be the case until 1974.
How does that make it de facto AV? There are only two candidates to pick from, no one gets multiple choices etc.
It's more accurate to say that AV and FPTP are the same when there are only two candidates.
In a similar way STV becomes AV for by-elections when there is only one seat to be filled.
Similar to the way in which Relativity is approximately the same as Newtonian Mechanics when speeds and gravitational field strengths are low.
Certainly, AV becomes FPTP when there are two candidates because there is no transfer.
"We've got more now from Dr Mary Ramsay, the head of immunisation at Public Health England, who has told Andrew Marr some restrictions, such as social distancing and wearing a mask, could last for years.
“People have got used to those lower level restrictions now, and people can live with them, and the economy can still go on with those less severe restrictions in place."
“We are talking about quite a long period of time," says Dr Ramsay."
I would like to know her economic qualifications upon which she bases that rather dramatic claim. Has she not observed that through all the iterations of the lockdown, there have some people who have been on permanent furlough, and many businesses in receipt of permanent government support to a lesser or greater degree.
The fact that many individuals may have go used to the lower level restrictions, is hardly an indication that they are sustainable for a longer period. Might just about be able to give her masks, in theory, but nothing else.
Just a random question - has anyone pointed out that if people took all the rules on social distancing literally, the human race could die out within a couple of generations? As it is the models for future school provision are already completed f*cked up as a result of the last year.
If she's talking about nothing more than just wearing a mask in Tesco and trying to keep your distance from other folk when browsing, maaaaaybe if you squint you could see that being done for a while.
If she is talking about e.g. semi-permanent limited capacity in cinemas, shops, restaurants, trains, gyms, offices etc. due to distancing, limiting the number of people you can see at a time either indoord or outdoors, etc. I think no.
People have endured restrictions because they were told they were necessary and would not be in place for a moment more than absolutely necessary. Once you have vaccinated most of the vulnerable and the hospitals are no longer in danger of being overwhelmed then it is the path back to normal
Too many of these public health people appear to have stopped thinking rationally about the wider picture.
The UK had a de facto AV system for Westminster throughout the 1950s when most seats only had two candidates - Tory and Labour. For circa 50% of the country that continued to be the case until 1974.
'Binary choice' and 'AV' are not the same thing.
Which is why I said 'De Facto'. Liberal , Green and supporters of other small parties were faced in most constituencies with voting for 'the lesser of two evils', spoiling their ballot papers or staying at home.
Are there any voters that agree with every single policy of the party they are voting for? It's always a lesser of two evils kind of choice. Jut because there are only two options on the ballot paper doesn't make it AV.
But the choice was restricted to two lesser evils rather than three,four or five. Many voters were effectively being denied their preferred 'lesser evil'.
I'm just demonstrating that by your logic FPTP with any number of candidates is AV.
It is for voters denied their preferred candidate.
No, that's just FPTP with fewer candidates.
The Labour and Tory votes ended up being artificially high - and explains why both parties nationally polled 45% - nearly 50% in the 1950s.
The “post-Christian era” in the UK will be cemented by data emerging from Sunday’s census which is expected to show further generational disengagement from organised religion, according to a leading academic.
The once-a-decade snapshot of the country has included a voluntary question about religion since 2001. In 2011, returns across England and Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland showed 59.3% ticking Christianity, a fall from 71.6% a decade earlier.
Abby Day, professor of race, faith and culture at Goldsmiths, University of London, expects this year’s census to show a further erosion in Christian identity, mainly because postwar generations regard the church as irrelevant and immoral.
Day predicted the proportion of people ticking Christianity “could drop below 50%”. Peter Brierley, an expert on religion statistics, said he predicted 48% or 49% identifying as Christian, but David Voas, head of the social sciences department at University College London, said he would be surprised if the figure fell below 50%
I would expect Christian to still be ahead of No religion though.
The question did not ask 'are you religious?' when I did the census yesterday, it asked 'what is your religion?' ie No religion, Christian (no denomination breakdown so Catholics and evangelicals will boost the figure compared to what the C of E would have got), Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, any other religion?
I know people who aren't Christians, but write down Christian on the form because they can't stand organisations like the National Secular Society.
I put CofE because I go a couple of times a year (harvest, Easter and Christmas) and I wouldn't want to give succour to anti-disestabishmentarians, ultra-liberal progressives and republicans, which it otherwise most certainly would and potentially influence public policy accordingly.
You've just convinced me not to put CofE.
I doubt that but when it comes to religion people certainly play with it.
The idea of simply responding on the basis of what religion or none that you believe clearly being too straightforward for you?
I am a cultural Christian. I go a handful of times a year and do christenings, weddings and funerals in church. I am not a regular Sunday worshipper, but few people are, and CofE is a far better way of describing my identity than putting I'm an atheist.
I think there are millions like me.
Perhaps a secondary "intensity" question would throw more light on this. For each religion are you a follower, believer or fundamentalist?
Perhaps a how often do you practice? Fundamentalist is a loaded term. Which means different things between, as well as, within each religion.
The UK had a de facto AV system for Westminster throughout the 1950s when most seats only had two candidates - Tory and Labour. For circa 50% of the country that continued to be the case until 1974.
How does that make it de facto AV? There are only two candidates to pick from, no one gets multiple choices etc.
It's more accurate to say that AV and FPTP are the same when there are only two candidates.
In a similar way STV becomes AV for by-elections when there is only one seat to be filled.
Similar to the way in which Relativity is approximately the same as Newtonian Mechanics when speeds and gravitational field strengths are low.
Certainly, AV becomes FPTP when there are two candidates because there is no transfer.
The transfer occurs in the voter's mind before casting the vote .
Little titbit from that article which I am not aware is true. Are there really 19 million vaccines to be imported from the EU countries? Hmm.
In a dramatic move, Ms von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, threatened to join forces with the French and German governments to hold hostage more than 19 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine due to be shipped to the UK over the coming weeks.
I have seen multiple reports that Ms von der Leyen repeated the threats yesterday.
The thing is that our retaliation would be worse than the initial ban - Pfizer would have no choice but to close their EU plant down and shift production to outside the EU.
Still totally confused about this question of an AstraZeneca export ban from the EU. There seem to be totally conflicting reports about whether the UK are receiving AZ from the continent. Or is there some part of the bottling process or something being done over there?
Given that the threats still seem to just about be on the basis of warnings to AZ, rather than warnings to the UK, i don't see how they can be threatening AZ with an export ban on Pfizer?!
As I understand it the EU are threatening AZN supplies to UK and the reason Pfizer is mentioned is that in the event of such a hostile act the UK could prevent essential parts of the Pfizer vaccine being sent to Europe, thereby compromising the production of the Pfizer vaccine in Europe
However, if I have misunderstood this reasoning I am happy to be corrected
If they do it, we should never forget. I, for one, would overnight cease having any interest in protecting their frontier from Russia with British boots on the ground, for example.
That would mean withdrawing from NATO.
Or, splitting NATO. I doubt the Americans will look kindly on the EU seizing vaccines made by an American company.
NATO would split into its Anglophone and European elements. Turkey would finally say goodbye. The end of the Western Alliance
This is inevitable anyway. European and American strategic interests are too divergent now.
Quite possibly true.
In a few years we may realise that the UK-in-the-EU was the keystone holding the entire edifice together. The crucial link in a chain, with opposing forces at either end
The chain perhaps snapped, as we left. Now Europe moves closer to Russia, under German leadership. The Anglosphere builds its own barricades
The whole process accelerated greatly by Covid
The government's Integrated Review has identified Russia as the single greatest direct threat to British security and you are suggesting that Brexit will lead to a massive setback to our security as we watch the EU forge a closer relationship with Russia.
Shouldn't we find a way to avoid this calamitous geopolitical defeat?
The UK had a de facto AV system for Westminster throughout the 1950s when most seats only had two candidates - Tory and Labour. For circa 50% of the country that continued to be the case until 1974.
How does that make it de facto AV? There are only two candidates to pick from, no one gets multiple choices etc.
It's more accurate to say that AV and FPTP are the same when there are only two candidates.
In a similar way STV becomes AV for by-elections when there is only one seat to be filled.
Similar to the way in which Relativity is approximately the same as Newtonian Mechanics when speeds and gravitational field strengths are low.
Certainly, AV becomes FPTP when there are two candidates because there is no transfer.
The transfer occurs in the voter's mind before casting the vote .
As happens in an FPTP election with three candidates, or four, or five.
Both BBC and Sky leading on the EU threat to ban vaccines coming to the UK later this week
The optics of this for the EU are toxic and just affirms rejoining is going to become very difficult to sell
BBC website is leading on 'No foreign holidays' Mentions the vaccine wall, but attributes any comments to the Defence Sec.
Polite question but are you trying to downplay how serious this could be for the EU relationships not only with the UK, but the rest of the world.
If, and I stress if, the reports are true, yes, there would be serious effects. However the reports I've seen, from sources I do not regard as hopelessly biased, and the interview I watched this morning, suggest that situation is being seriously overplayed by those who hate the EU.
In that context I am reminded of the remark attributed to Rupert Murdoch when asked why his papers supported Leave. 'When I go to Downing Street they pay attention to me. When I go to Brussels they just listen politely." (Or something close to that.)
And now I'm off to a cheese and wine lunch, with a mixture of British and European cheeses. Not sure yet of the provenance of the wine; quite possibly Italian, as it's very, very difficult to make a decent red wine in this climate. Although there's a vineyard in Suffolk which makes quite a passable one.
You haven't understood the profundity of what Rupe was saying. It's a clever way of expressing the truth that the UK is a proper democracy, so the government HAS to listen to the media, as one voice of the people (along witn others). Not least because the people can boot them all out at the next election
Brussels bureaucrats and commissioners have no such democratic worries, so they can and will cheerfully ignore the media, as they ignore the voters.
Agree with you on UK red wine, very hard to find decent stuff still. Possibly one in the Isle of Wight?
However, we now make excellent fizz. I had a rose classic cuvee from Nyetimber the other day. Absolutely superb. As good as vintage champagne twice or thrice the price
"We've got more now from Dr Mary Ramsay, the head of immunisation at Public Health England, who has told Andrew Marr some restrictions, such as social distancing and wearing a mask, could last for years.
“People have got used to those lower level restrictions now, and people can live with them, and the economy can still go on with those less severe restrictions in place."
“We are talking about quite a long period of time," says Dr Ramsay."
I would like to know her economic qualifications upon which she bases that rather dramatic claim. Has she not observed that through all the iterations of the lockdown, there have some people who have been on permanent furlough, and many businesses in receipt of permanent government support to a lesser or greater degree.
The fact that many individuals may have go used to the lower level restrictions, is hardly an indication that they are sustainable for a longer period. Might just about be able to give her masks, in theory, but nothing else.
Just a random question - has anyone pointed out that if people took all the rules on social distancing literally, the human race could die out within a couple of generations? As it is the models for future school provision are already completed f*cked up as a result of the last year.
If she's talking about nothing more than just wearing a mask in Tesco and trying to keep your distance from other folk when browsing, maaaaaybe if you squint you could see that being done for a while.
If she is talking about e.g. semi-permanent limited capacity in cinemas, shops, restaurants, trains, gyms, offices etc. due to distancing, limiting the number of people you can see at a time either indoord or outdoors, etc. I think no.
People have endured restrictions because they were told they were necessary and would not be in place for a moment more than absolutely necessary. Once you have vaccinated most of the vulnerable and the hospitals are no longer in danger of being overwhelmed then it is the path back to normal
Too many of these public health people appear to have stopped thinking rationally about the wider picture.
Also the slightly confused issue is that when eg. Whitty is questioned about this in Parliament (eg. trying to explore when the Govt hasn't allegedly followed SAGE recommendations) he always says he is only there to advise on the science of combatting the pandemic, but there are a wide range of other considerations that the politicians have to take in before deciding what to do. And yet we have scientists all over the media generating major headlines effectively saying that the politicians have no choice and will have to follow "the science".
I threw my census form in the bin. I highly doubt the £1,000 fine threatened by the 'compliance team' will ever materialise.
They will still find you. According to that Register article on the MoD telling people to lie leave things out on the census, our CIA and KGB enemies can easily fish out people like you by checking vetting status on Linkedin. Once lockdown ends, you'll be drowning in honeytraps. https://www.theregister.com/2021/03/19/ministry_defence_tells_staff_dont_answer_census/
The “post-Christian era” in the UK will be cemented by data emerging from Sunday’s census which is expected to show further generational disengagement from organised religion, according to a leading academic.
The once-a-decade snapshot of the country has included a voluntary question about religion since 2001. In 2011, returns across England and Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland showed 59.3% ticking Christianity, a fall from 71.6% a decade earlier.
Abby Day, professor of race, faith and culture at Goldsmiths, University of London, expects this year’s census to show a further erosion in Christian identity, mainly because postwar generations regard the church as irrelevant and immoral.
Day predicted the proportion of people ticking Christianity “could drop below 50%”. Peter Brierley, an expert on religion statistics, said he predicted 48% or 49% identifying as Christian, but David Voas, head of the social sciences department at University College London, said he would be surprised if the figure fell below 50%
I would expect Christian to still be ahead of No religion though.
The question did not ask 'are you religious?' when I did the census yesterday, it asked 'what is your religion?' ie No religion, Christian (no denomination breakdown so Catholics and evangelicals will boost the figure compared to what the C of E would have got), Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, any other religion?
I know people who aren't Christians, but write down Christian on the form because they can't stand organisations like the National Secular Society.
I put CofE because I go a couple of times a year (harvest, Easter and Christmas) and I wouldn't want to give succour to anti-disestabishmentarians, ultra-liberal progressives and republicans, which it otherwise most certainly would and potentially influence public policy accordingly.
You've just convinced me not to put CofE.
I doubt that but when it comes to religion people certainly play with it.
The idea of simply responding on the basis of what religion or none that you believe clearly being too straightforward for you?
I am a cultural Christian. I go a handful of times a year and do christenings, weddings and funerals in church. I am not a regular Sunday worshipper, but few people are, and CofE is a far better way of describing my identity than putting I'm an atheist.
I think there are millions like me.
Having an interest in steam engines, test cricket, and real ale is a stronger predictor of being CofE in this country that any belief in God.
Little titbit from that article which I am not aware is true. Are there really 19 million vaccines to be imported from the EU countries? Hmm.
In a dramatic move, Ms von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, threatened to join forces with the French and German governments to hold hostage more than 19 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine due to be shipped to the UK over the coming weeks.
I have seen multiple reports that Ms von der Leyen repeated the threats yesterday.
The thing is that our retaliation would be worse than the initial ban - Pfizer would have no choice but to close their EU plant down and shift production to outside the EU.
Still totally confused about this question of an AstraZeneca export ban from the EU. There seem to be totally conflicting reports about whether the UK are receiving AZ from the continent. Or is there some part of the bottling process or something being done over there?
Given that the threats still seem to just about be on the basis of warnings to AZ, rather than warnings to the UK, i don't see how they can be threatening AZ with an export ban on Pfizer?!
As I understand it the EU are threatening AZN supplies to UK and the reason Pfizer is mentioned is that in the event of such a hostile act the UK could prevent essential parts of the Pfizer vaccine being sent to Europe, thereby compromising the production of the Pfizer vaccine in Europe
However, if I have misunderstood this reasoning I am happy to be corrected
That doesn't answer the question though as to whether AZN actually are exportingfrom the EU to the UK. And if Pfizer isn't prevented from exporting, i don't see why the UK would prevent export of ingredients to Pfizer. As that would disrupt our supply of Pfizer, presumably, as well as everyone else's.
I thought the issue with exporting ingredients to Pfizer only came up if Pfizer were prevented from exporting to us.
The UK position throughout is that the movement of vaccine is an issue for companies and respecting contracts that countries have with those companies (hence "the UK haven't banned AZN vaccine exports") i can't see us interrupting the Pfizer supply chain (from which we benefit) because of a disruption in the supply chain of a different company. What is making the EU mad is that they haven't signed very good contracts.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
The “post-Christian era” in the UK will be cemented by data emerging from Sunday’s census which is expected to show further generational disengagement from organised religion, according to a leading academic.
The once-a-decade snapshot of the country has included a voluntary question about religion since 2001. In 2011, returns across England and Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland showed 59.3% ticking Christianity, a fall from 71.6% a decade earlier.
Abby Day, professor of race, faith and culture at Goldsmiths, University of London, expects this year’s census to show a further erosion in Christian identity, mainly because postwar generations regard the church as irrelevant and immoral.
Day predicted the proportion of people ticking Christianity “could drop below 50%”. Peter Brierley, an expert on religion statistics, said he predicted 48% or 49% identifying as Christian, but David Voas, head of the social sciences department at University College London, said he would be surprised if the figure fell below 50%
I would expect Christian to still be ahead of No religion though.
The question did not ask 'are you religious?' when I did the census yesterday, it asked 'what is your religion?' ie No religion, Christian (no denomination breakdown so Catholics and evangelicals will boost the figure compared to what the C of E would have got), Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, any other religion?
I know people who aren't Christians, but write down Christian on the form because they can't stand organisations like the National Secular Society.
I put CofE because I go a couple of times a year (harvest, Easter and Christmas) and I wouldn't want to give succour to anti-disestabishmentarians, ultra-liberal progressives and republicans, which it otherwise most certainly would and potentially influence public policy accordingly.
You've just convinced me not to put CofE.
I doubt that but when it comes to religion people certainly play with it.
The idea of simply responding on the basis of what religion or none that you believe clearly being too straightforward for you?
I am a cultural Christian. I go a handful of times a year and do christenings, weddings and funerals in church. I am not a regular Sunday worshipper, but few people are, and CofE is a far better way of describing my identity than putting I'm an atheist.
I think there are millions like me.
Perhaps a secondary "intensity" question would throw more light on this. For each religion are you a follower, believer or fundamentalist?
Perhaps a how often do you practice? Fundamentalist is a loaded term. Which means different things between, as well as, within each religion.
It is a loaded term for a reason though. If someone goes to the church, mosque, temple, or synagogue daily or once a year doesnt make any difference to the rest of society.
If someone believes in a religion to the extent that its values trump societies values, and it should be aggressively spread to non believers, they start to become a danger to that society.
I threw my census form in the bin. I highly doubt the £1,000 fine threatened by the 'compliance team' will ever materialise.
Careful. I worked as a census enumerator in Windsor in 2001. Even the Queen got fingered. (She and the Duke falsely claimed they resided in the housekeeper's lodge, not Buck House as agreed.)
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
(you can't even do it online without the initial communication - it contains the access code linked to your property)
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
(you can't even do it online without the initial communication - it contains the access code linked to your property)
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
Little titbit from that article which I am not aware is true. Are there really 19 million vaccines to be imported from the EU countries? Hmm.
In a dramatic move, Ms von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, threatened to join forces with the French and German governments to hold hostage more than 19 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine due to be shipped to the UK over the coming weeks.
I have seen multiple reports that Ms von der Leyen repeated the threats yesterday.
The thing is that our retaliation would be worse than the initial ban - Pfizer would have no choice but to close their EU plant down and shift production to outside the EU.
Still totally confused about this question of an AstraZeneca export ban from the EU. There seem to be totally conflicting reports about whether the UK are receiving AZ from the continent. Or is there some part of the bottling process or something being done over there?
Given that the threats still seem to just about be on the basis of warnings to AZ, rather than warnings to the UK, i don't see how they can be threatening AZ with an export ban on Pfizer?!
As I understand it the EU are threatening AZN supplies to UK and the reason Pfizer is mentioned is that in the event of such a hostile act the UK could prevent essential parts of the Pfizer vaccine being sent to Europe, thereby compromising the production of the Pfizer vaccine in Europe
However, if I have misunderstood this reasoning I am happy to be corrected
That doesn't answer the question though as to whether AZN actually are exporting to the EU. And if Pfizer isn't prevented from exporting, i don't see why the UK would prevent export of ingredients to Pfizer. As that would disrupt our supply of Pfizer, presumably, as well as everyone else's.
I thought the issue with exporting ingredients to Pfizer only came up if Pfizer were prevented from exporting to us.
The UK position throughout is that the movement of vaccine is an issue for companies and respecting contracts that countries have with those companies (hence "the UK haven't banned AZN vaccine exports") i can't see us interrupting the Pfizer supply chain (from which we benefit) because of a disruption in the supply chain of a different company. What is making the EU mad is that they haven't signed very good contracts.
In truth the UK were quicker, invested billions, secured varied supplies, and frankly entered into international contracts with suppliers far earlier resulting in our success.
The EU who have frankly failed their citizens and are now scrapping the barrel to try to deflect from the truth of their failure to protect lives, every governments first responsibility
And nobody will resign over this nor can the citizens vote the commission out
The Exhaustive Ballot IS NOT "Quasi-AV" - it's the, er, Exhaustive Ballot!
Consider - in AV, you get to rank every candidate in "round 1" and the "method" does the rest, whereas in Tory Leadership Elections, you can only vote for ONE candidate in each round, enabling you to change your preference(s) DURING the election.
Useful for those who change their mind between rounds - I wonder what percentage of the electorate that is.
Calling the Exhaustive Ballot "Quasi-AV" is a bit like calling TSE a "Quasi-Man U Fan" "Quasi-Everton Fan"!
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
(you can't even do it online without the initial communication - it contains the access code linked to your property)
You can do it online IMMEDIATELY, you can ask for the access code to be texted to your phone. I just did. Never got the letter
Little titbit from that article which I am not aware is true. Are there really 19 million vaccines to be imported from the EU countries? Hmm.
In a dramatic move, Ms von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, threatened to join forces with the French and German governments to hold hostage more than 19 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine due to be shipped to the UK over the coming weeks.
I have seen multiple reports that Ms von der Leyen repeated the threats yesterday.
The thing is that our retaliation would be worse than the initial ban - Pfizer would have no choice but to close their EU plant down and shift production to outside the EU.
Still totally confused about this question of an AstraZeneca export ban from the EU. There seem to be totally conflicting reports about whether the UK are receiving AZ from the continent. Or is there some part of the bottling process or something being done over there?
Given that the threats still seem to just about be on the basis of warnings to AZ, rather than warnings to the UK, i don't see how they can be threatening AZ with an export ban on Pfizer?!
As I understand it the EU are threatening AZN supplies to UK and the reason Pfizer is mentioned is that in the event of such a hostile act the UK could prevent essential parts of the Pfizer vaccine being sent to Europe, thereby compromising the production of the Pfizer vaccine in Europe
However, if I have misunderstood this reasoning I am happy to be corrected
Just run an aircraft carrier or two thirteen miles away from the EU coast. They'll get the message.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
It takes a few minutes online. You can request an instant access code as a text. It is super efficient. Why not show a bit of gratitude to your country (which is, for once, being nimble) by taking FIVE MINUTES to help the government understand the people. Why be so churlish?
Again, I'm going to point this out. The AZ supply chain in the UK isn't dependent on the EU. Their threat to block AZ exports to the UK is completely empty, UK AZ vaccine substance is supplied by Cobra Biologics and Oxford Biomedica and they are filled and finished by Wockhart in Wales.
We also have importation of finished vaccine from the Serum Institute of India.
Initially around 10m doses of drug substance was shipped from Halix in the Netherlands as the UK supply hadn't fully ramped up. It has now and we don't import from Halix now, it has dropped out of the UK supply chain since around the end of January.
I think both sides know this and the EU can claim "victory" over nasty brexit Britain and really it makes no difference to anything we're doing.
Blocking Pfizer exports now looks to be completely off the table after the call between Boris and the Belgian PM and the EU rhetoric reflects that as they've moved onto blocking non-existant AZ exports to the UK.
What are the "19m doses" the articles talk about. Is that Pfizer?
I am less sanguine than you. The EU has gone postal, and I really CAN see them marching into Belgium (the Germans are good at this) and seizing the Pfizer factories.
Quite simply - the way the EU act is a result of its structural insecurity. It constantly has to justify its existence - hence why when a crisis hits, things quickly go pear shaped and they look to “lash out”
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
(you can't even do it online without the initial communication - it contains the access code linked to your property)
You can do it online IMMEDIATELY, you can ask for the access code to be texted to your phone. I just did. Never got the letter
All in all, it took 5 minutes. Impressive
There is literally no reason not to do it online if you have that choice. Doing it online or sending it by post and having a clerk enter it into the computer results in the data being input into exactly the same computer system.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
(you can't even do it online without the initial communication - it contains the access code linked to your property)
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
That is your decision then
I can understand a refusal to do it.....thats consistent.
I can understand demanding a paper form if you dont have net access thats consistent
I cant understand the view of someone who has access to more than one format to specify they will do it only if it comes in the format they choose.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
(you can't even do it online without the initial communication - it contains the access code linked to your property)
I have just read on Vote UK site that the SNP MP for Airdrie & Shotts is to give up his seat to contest the same seat at Holyrood. If true , it should be an interesting by election, with Labour coming within 200 votes in 2017.
In 2019 Neil Gray had a majority of 5,201 over Labour
The only way Labour will have any chance is if the present SNP internal warfare affects voters plus a large conservative tactical vote
But Labour came very close in 2017 so the seat will be a key target for the party. So maybe we now have two key by elections on 6th May.
Oooh what fun.
There has to be something to give political junkies something to obsess about during mid-term.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
Contrarian, like I said. Your position is ridiculous.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
(you can't even do it online without the initial communication - it contains the access code linked to your property)
You can do it online IMMEDIATELY, you can ask for the access code to be texted to your phone. I just did. Never got the letter
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
How utterly pathetic and childish, when doing it online is easier and quicker and saves on paper.
In the 1820s, did you make stentorian demands that your census form arrive by liveried messenger, written with quill and ink, as that is how it was always done in the past?
Little titbit from that article which I am not aware is true. Are there really 19 million vaccines to be imported from the EU countries? Hmm.
In a dramatic move, Ms von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, threatened to join forces with the French and German governments to hold hostage more than 19 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine due to be shipped to the UK over the coming weeks.
I have seen multiple reports that Ms von der Leyen repeated the threats yesterday.
The thing is that our retaliation would be worse than the initial ban - Pfizer would have no choice but to close their EU plant down and shift production to outside the EU.
Still totally confused about this question of an AstraZeneca export ban from the EU. There seem to be totally conflicting reports about whether the UK are receiving AZ from the continent. Or is there some part of the bottling process or something being done over there?
Given that the threats still seem to just about be on the basis of warnings to AZ, rather than warnings to the UK, i don't see how they can be threatening AZ with an export ban on Pfizer?!
As I understand it the EU are threatening AZN supplies to UK and the reason Pfizer is mentioned is that in the event of such a hostile act the UK could prevent essential parts of the Pfizer vaccine being sent to Europe, thereby compromising the production of the Pfizer vaccine in Europe
However, if I have misunderstood this reasoning I am happy to be corrected
That doesn't answer the question though as to whether AZN actually are exportingfrom the EU to the UK. And if Pfizer isn't prevented from exporting, i don't see why the UK would prevent export of ingredients to Pfizer. As that would disrupt our supply of Pfizer, presumably, as well as everyone else's.
I thought the issue with exporting ingredients to Pfizer only came up if Pfizer were prevented from exporting to us.
The UK position throughout is that the movement of vaccine is an issue for companies and respecting contracts that countries have with those companies (hence "the UK haven't banned AZN vaccine exports") i can't see us interrupting the Pfizer supply chain (from which we benefit) because of a disruption in the supply chain of a different company. What is making the EU mad is that they haven't signed very good contracts.
Once again, there are no AZ exports from the EU to the UK. The EU has an export check mechanism and in the time it has been running neither the Belgian nor Dutch factories have exported AZ drug substance to the UK. Ursula is literally repeating a whole load of falsehoods about "EU exports to the UK" in regards to AZ currently. Just as the Charles Michel lied about the UK blocking exports of vaccines and precursor materials and the commission continues to say.
The whole EU "case" against Britain or AZ is political theatre for a domestic audience who are becoming increasingly impatient looking at the US and UK vaccine successes. They're rightly asking the question as to why the EU has bungled the contracts so badly and how it was possible for brexit Britain to prosper outside of the EU in this manner. The commission has no answers so is lying and obfuscating.
As I've pointed out on many occasions, there exists no mechanism for the EU to block anything, it is up to the individual nations as Belgium isn't going to do it and they can't be forced into doing it either.
If they do it, we should never forget. I, for one, would overnight cease having any interest in protecting their frontier from Russia with British boots on the ground, for example.
That would mean withdrawing from NATO.
Or, splitting NATO. I doubt the Americans will look kindly on the EU seizing vaccines made by an American company.
NATO would split into its Anglophone and European elements. Turkey would finally say goodbye. The end of the Western Alliance
This is inevitable anyway. European and American strategic interests are too divergent now.
Quite possibly true.
In a few years we may realise that the UK-in-the-EU was the keystone holding the entire edifice together. The crucial link in a chain, with opposing forces at either end
The chain perhaps snapped, as we left. Now Europe moves closer to Russia, under German leadership. The Anglosphere builds its own barricades
The whole process accelerated greatly by Covid
The UK will join the new US - China cold war in the Pacific from a distance like one of those cockneys who support Man Utd.
We will join it, but it won't be at an easy distance. It will hurt us, the way it is already hurting Australia
The UK has a big deficit with China while Australia has a surplus, and China trade is a smaller part of our GDP anyway. So I'm not sure that's right. If they could do anything against us they would have over the HK citizens. They threatened it, but have done nothing.
I have just read on Vote UK site that the SNP MP for Airdrie & Shotts is to give up his seat to contest the same seat at Holyrood. If true , it should be an interesting by election, with Labour coming within 200 votes in 2017.
In 2019 Neil Gray had a majority of 5,201 over Labour
The only way Labour will have any chance is if the present SNP internal warfare affects voters plus a large conservative tactical vote
But Labour came very close in 2017 so the seat will be a key target for the party. So maybe we now have two key by elections on 6th May.
Oooh what fun.
There has to be something to give political junkies something to obsess about during mid-term.
The “post-Christian era” in the UK will be cemented by data emerging from Sunday’s census which is expected to show further generational disengagement from organised religion, according to a leading academic.
The once-a-decade snapshot of the country has included a voluntary question about religion since 2001. In 2011, returns across England and Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland showed 59.3% ticking Christianity, a fall from 71.6% a decade earlier.
Abby Day, professor of race, faith and culture at Goldsmiths, University of London, expects this year’s census to show a further erosion in Christian identity, mainly because postwar generations regard the church as irrelevant and immoral.
Day predicted the proportion of people ticking Christianity “could drop below 50%”. Peter Brierley, an expert on religion statistics, said he predicted 48% or 49% identifying as Christian, but David Voas, head of the social sciences department at University College London, said he would be surprised if the figure fell below 50%
I would expect Christian to still be ahead of No religion though.
The question did not ask 'are you religious?' when I did the census yesterday, it asked 'what is your religion?' ie No religion, Christian (no denomination breakdown so Catholics and evangelicals will boost the figure compared to what the C of E would have got), Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, any other religion?
I know people who aren't Christians, but write down Christian on the form because they can't stand organisations like the National Secular Society.
I put CofE because I go a couple of times a year (harvest, Easter and Christmas) and I wouldn't want to give succour to anti-disestabishmentarians, ultra-liberal progressives and republicans, which it otherwise most certainly would and potentially influence public policy accordingly.
You've just convinced me not to put CofE.
I doubt that but when it comes to religion people certainly play with it.
The idea of simply responding on the basis of what religion or none that you believe clearly being too straightforward for you?
I am a cultural Christian. I go a handful of times a year and do christenings, weddings and funerals in church. I am not a regular Sunday worshipper, but few people are, and CofE is a far better way of describing my identity than putting I'm an atheist.
I think there are millions like me.
Perhaps a secondary "intensity" question would throw more light on this. For each religion are you a follower, believer or fundamentalist?
Perhaps a how often do you practice? Fundamentalist is a loaded term. Which means different things between, as well as, within each religion.
It is a loaded term for a reason though. If someone goes to the church, mosque, temple, or synagogue daily or once a year doesnt make any difference to the rest of society.
If someone believes in a religion to the extent that its values trump societies values, and it should be aggressively spread to non believers, they start to become a danger to that society.
You prove my point though. You can be a fundamentalist and share none of those traits. An ultra Orthodox Jew positively eschews conversion of any kind. A fundamental Quaker (arguably all Christians) would be a pacifist. Almost all would argue that their values trump societies values. Catholics sure do. This does not necessarily make them a threat. So, what does "fundamentalist" mean?
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
So you basically haven't asked for the form? Is there any other activity that has now gone fully online (except where as small number of people are asked to pro-actively request alternatives) because the authorities don't think living permanently in the last century is a good use of time or resources, which you "refuse to do" out of damn stubborness?
So you think that rather than pursue the enormous cost savings from making this a primarily online survey (a paper form has a cost of being mailed out, a cost of being returned, and then a further cost of entering the information completed onto a central database - all with the additional complication of people not making their answers clear in line with the given instructions), the government should be carrying on as they have always done it?
If they do it, we should never forget. I, for one, would overnight cease having any interest in protecting their frontier from Russia with British boots on the ground, for example.
That would mean withdrawing from NATO.
Or, splitting NATO. I doubt the Americans will look kindly on the EU seizing vaccines made by an American company.
NATO would split into its Anglophone and European elements. Turkey would finally say goodbye. The end of the Western Alliance
This is inevitable anyway. European and American strategic interests are too divergent now.
Quite possibly true.
In a few years we may realise that the UK-in-the-EU was the keystone holding the entire edifice together. The crucial link in a chain, with opposing forces at either end
The chain perhaps snapped, as we left. Now Europe moves closer to Russia, under German leadership. The Anglosphere builds its own barricades
The whole process accelerated greatly by Covid
The UK will join the new US - China cold war in the Pacific from a distance like one of those cockneys who support Man Utd.
We will join it, but it won't be at an easy distance. It will hurt us, the way it is already hurting Australia
The UK has a big deficit with China while Australia has a surplus, and China trade is a smaller part of our GDP anyway. So I'm not sure that's right.
Yes maybe. But China is now so powerful they could make our lives less comfortable in ways other than trade.
Hopefully, if the West - or at least the English speaking West - unites into a common position, China will realise it is dealing with an enemy easily of equal size (esp if we can get India on board as well) and see the sense of compromise rather than confrontation
This is another area where the CANZUK concept actually makes sense
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
There's a pandemic going on. Having thousands of volunteers going around knocking in doors with paper forms isn't happening this time.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
Contrarian, like I said. Your position is ridiculous.
Ydoethur was going to take the same position I believe, if it had not arrived in time.
Little titbit from that article which I am not aware is true. Are there really 19 million vaccines to be imported from the EU countries? Hmm.
In a dramatic move, Ms von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, threatened to join forces with the French and German governments to hold hostage more than 19 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine due to be shipped to the UK over the coming weeks.
I have seen multiple reports that Ms von der Leyen repeated the threats yesterday.
The thing is that our retaliation would be worse than the initial ban - Pfizer would have no choice but to close their EU plant down and shift production to outside the EU.
Still totally confused about this question of an AstraZeneca export ban from the EU. There seem to be totally conflicting reports about whether the UK are receiving AZ from the continent. Or is there some part of the bottling process or something being done over there?
Given that the threats still seem to just about be on the basis of warnings to AZ, rather than warnings to the UK, i don't see how they can be threatening AZ with an export ban on Pfizer?!
As I understand it the EU are threatening AZN supplies to UK and the reason Pfizer is mentioned is that in the event of such a hostile act the UK could prevent essential parts of the Pfizer vaccine being sent to Europe, thereby compromising the production of the Pfizer vaccine in Europe
However, if I have misunderstood this reasoning I am happy to be corrected
That doesn't answer the question though as to whether AZN actually are exportingfrom the EU to the UK. And if Pfizer isn't prevented from exporting, i don't see why the UK would prevent export of ingredients to Pfizer. As that would disrupt our supply of Pfizer, presumably, as well as everyone else's.
I thought the issue with exporting ingredients to Pfizer only came up if Pfizer were prevented from exporting to us.
The UK position throughout is that the movement of vaccine is an issue for companies and respecting contracts that countries have with those companies (hence "the UK haven't banned AZN vaccine exports") i can't see us interrupting the Pfizer supply chain (from which we benefit) because of a disruption in the supply chain of a different company. What is making the EU mad is that they haven't signed very good contracts.
Once again, there are no AZ exports from the EU to the UK. The EU has an export check mechanism and in the time it has been running neither the Belgian nor Dutch factories have exported AZ drug substance to the UK. Ursula is literally repeating a whole load of falsehoods about "EU exports to the UK" in regards to AZ currently. Just as the Charles Michel lied about the UK blocking exports of vaccines and precursor materials and the commission continues to say.
The whole EU "case" against Britain or AZ is political theatre for a domestic audience who are becoming increasingly impatient looking at the US and UK vaccine successes. They're rightly asking the question as to why the EU has bungled the contracts so badly and how it was possible for brexit Britain to prosper outside of the EU in this manner. The commission has no answers so is lying and obfuscating.
As I've pointed out on many occasions, there exists no mechanism for the EU to block anything, it is up to the individual nations as Belgium isn't going to do it and they can't be forced into doing it either.
Aren't they going to look a bit stupid announcing an EU export ban on AstraZeneca when it results in zero disruption to the AZ vaccine supply?
If they do it, we should never forget. I, for one, would overnight cease having any interest in protecting their frontier from Russia with British boots on the ground, for example.
That would mean withdrawing from NATO.
Or, splitting NATO. I doubt the Americans will look kindly on the EU seizing vaccines made by an American company.
NATO would split into its Anglophone and European elements. Turkey would finally say goodbye. The end of the Western Alliance
This is inevitable anyway. European and American strategic interests are too divergent now.
Quite possibly true.
In a few years we may realise that the UK-in-the-EU was the keystone holding the entire edifice together. The crucial link in a chain, with opposing forces at either end
The chain perhaps snapped, as we left. Now Europe moves closer to Russia, under German leadership. The Anglosphere builds its own barricades
The whole process accelerated greatly by Covid
The UK will join the new US - China cold war in the Pacific from a distance like one of those cockneys who support Man Utd.
We will join it, but it won't be at an easy distance. It will hurt us, the way it is already hurting Australia
The UK has a big deficit with China while Australia has a surplus, and China trade is a smaller part of our GDP anyway. So I'm not sure that's right.
Yes maybe. But China is now so powerful they could make our lives less comfortable in ways other than trade.
Hopefully, if the West - or at least the English speaking West - unites into a common position, China will realise it is dealing with an enemy easily of equal size (esp if we can get India on board as well) and see the sense of compromise rather than confrontation
This is another area where the CANZUK concept actually makes sense
I quite agree, particularly if it includes the US, which would obviously hugely strengthen it in dealing with China, and maybe Japan as well.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
(you can't even do it online without the initial communication - it contains the access code linked to your property)
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
Contrarian, like I said. Your position is ridiculous.
Ydoethur was going to take the same position I believe, if it had not arrived in time.
Implying they had gone to the extraordinary effort of requesting a paper form. No problem with that. The position that someone refuses to even request one because the government should have sent them one in the first place is, as noted previously, childish.
Little titbit from that article which I am not aware is true. Are there really 19 million vaccines to be imported from the EU countries? Hmm.
In a dramatic move, Ms von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, threatened to join forces with the French and German governments to hold hostage more than 19 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine due to be shipped to the UK over the coming weeks.
I have seen multiple reports that Ms von der Leyen repeated the threats yesterday.
The thing is that our retaliation would be worse than the initial ban - Pfizer would have no choice but to close their EU plant down and shift production to outside the EU.
Still totally confused about this question of an AstraZeneca export ban from the EU. There seem to be totally conflicting reports about whether the UK are receiving AZ from the continent. Or is there some part of the bottling process or something being done over there?
Given that the threats still seem to just about be on the basis of warnings to AZ, rather than warnings to the UK, i don't see how they can be threatening AZ with an export ban on Pfizer?!
As I understand it the EU are threatening AZN supplies to UK and the reason Pfizer is mentioned is that in the event of such a hostile act the UK could prevent essential parts of the Pfizer vaccine being sent to Europe, thereby compromising the production of the Pfizer vaccine in Europe
However, if I have misunderstood this reasoning I am happy to be corrected
That doesn't answer the question though as to whether AZN actually are exportingfrom the EU to the UK. And if Pfizer isn't prevented from exporting, i don't see why the UK would prevent export of ingredients to Pfizer. As that would disrupt our supply of Pfizer, presumably, as well as everyone else's.
I thought the issue with exporting ingredients to Pfizer only came up if Pfizer were prevented from exporting to us.
The UK position throughout is that the movement of vaccine is an issue for companies and respecting contracts that countries have with those companies (hence "the UK haven't banned AZN vaccine exports") i can't see us interrupting the Pfizer supply chain (from which we benefit) because of a disruption in the supply chain of a different company. What is making the EU mad is that they haven't signed very good contracts.
Once again, there are no AZ exports from the EU to the UK. The EU has an export check mechanism and in the time it has been running neither the Belgian nor Dutch factories have exported AZ drug substance to the UK. Ursula is literally repeating a whole load of falsehoods about "EU exports to the UK" in regards to AZ currently. Just as the Charles Michel lied about the UK blocking exports of vaccines and precursor materials and the commission continues to say.
The whole EU "case" against Britain or AZ is political theatre for a domestic audience who are becoming increasingly impatient looking at the US and UK vaccine successes. They're rightly asking the question as to why the EU has bungled the contracts so badly and how it was possible for brexit Britain to prosper outside of the EU in this manner. The commission has no answers so is lying and obfuscating.
As I've pointed out on many occasions, there exists no mechanism for the EU to block anything, it is up to the individual nations as Belgium isn't going to do it and they can't be forced into doing it either.
Aren't they going to look a bit stupid announcing an EU export ban on AstraZeneca when it results in zero disruption to the AZ vaccine supply?
Yes but it makes them feel good about themselves and no matter the damage to their reputation
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
So you basically haven't asked for the form? Is there any other activity that has now gone fully online (except where as small number of people are asked to pro-actively request alternatives) because the authorities don't think living permanently in the last century is a good use of time or resources, which you "refuse to do" out of damn stubborness?
So you think that rather than pursue the enormous cost savings from making this a primarily online survey (a paper form has a cost of being mailed out, a cost of being returned, and then a further cost of entering the information completed onto a central database - all with the additional complication of people not making their answers clear in line with the given instructions), the government should be carrying on as they have always done it?
I do indeed. I decide whether and/or when to use my PC. Ditto my telephone. I object to the authorities presuming that people wish to use their own resources in the way they so direct.
I have just read on Vote UK site that the SNP MP for Airdrie & Shotts is to give up his seat to contest the same seat at Holyrood. If true , it should be an interesting by election, with Labour coming within 200 votes in 2017.
In 2019 Neil Gray had a majority of 5,201 over Labour
The only way Labour will have any chance is if the present SNP internal warfare affects voters plus a large conservative tactical vote
But Labour came very close in 2017 so the seat will be a key target for the party. So maybe we now have two key by elections on 6th May.
Oooh what fun.
There has to be something to give political junkies something to obsess about during mid-term.
Still a bit too early for midterm.
Semantics, but my definition of midterm is after the honeymoon but before the pre-election giveaways. I think Boris's honeymoon ended last autumn when people were talking about whether he'd even want to do a full term.
Little titbit from that article which I am not aware is true. Are there really 19 million vaccines to be imported from the EU countries? Hmm.
In a dramatic move, Ms von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, threatened to join forces with the French and German governments to hold hostage more than 19 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine due to be shipped to the UK over the coming weeks.
I have seen multiple reports that Ms von der Leyen repeated the threats yesterday.
The thing is that our retaliation would be worse than the initial ban - Pfizer would have no choice but to close their EU plant down and shift production to outside the EU.
Still totally confused about this question of an AstraZeneca export ban from the EU. There seem to be totally conflicting reports about whether the UK are receiving AZ from the continent. Or is there some part of the bottling process or something being done over there?
Given that the threats still seem to just about be on the basis of warnings to AZ, rather than warnings to the UK, i don't see how they can be threatening AZ with an export ban on Pfizer?!
As I understand it the EU are threatening AZN supplies to UK and the reason Pfizer is mentioned is that in the event of such a hostile act the UK could prevent essential parts of the Pfizer vaccine being sent to Europe, thereby compromising the production of the Pfizer vaccine in Europe
However, if I have misunderstood this reasoning I am happy to be corrected
That doesn't answer the question though as to whether AZN actually are exportingfrom the EU to the UK. And if Pfizer isn't prevented from exporting, i don't see why the UK would prevent export of ingredients to Pfizer. As that would disrupt our supply of Pfizer, presumably, as well as everyone else's.
I thought the issue with exporting ingredients to Pfizer only came up if Pfizer were prevented from exporting to us.
The UK position throughout is that the movement of vaccine is an issue for companies and respecting contracts that countries have with those companies (hence "the UK haven't banned AZN vaccine exports") i can't see us interrupting the Pfizer supply chain (from which we benefit) because of a disruption in the supply chain of a different company. What is making the EU mad is that they haven't signed very good contracts.
Once again, there are no AZ exports from the EU to the UK. The EU has an export check mechanism and in the time it has been running neither the Belgian nor Dutch factories have exported AZ drug substance to the UK. Ursula is literally repeating a whole load of falsehoods about "EU exports to the UK" in regards to AZ currently. Just as the Charles Michel lied about the UK blocking exports of vaccines and precursor materials and the commission continues to say.
The whole EU "case" against Britain or AZ is political theatre for a domestic audience who are becoming increasingly impatient looking at the US and UK vaccine successes. They're rightly asking the question as to why the EU has bungled the contracts so badly and how it was possible for brexit Britain to prosper outside of the EU in this manner. The commission has no answers so is lying and obfuscating.
As I've pointed out on many occasions, there exists no mechanism for the EU to block anything, it is up to the individual nations as Belgium isn't going to do it and they can't be forced into doing it either.
Aren't they going to look a bit stupid announcing an EU export ban on AstraZeneca when it results in zero disruption to the AZ vaccine supply?
You make the assumption they are thinking rather the reacting. They have looked ahead and seen the uk moving back to normal over the next couple of months as eu countries slide into lockdown and are panicking about how their citizens are going to react
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
There's a pandemic going on. Having thousands of volunteers going around knocking in doors with paper forms isn't happening this time.
Ok - then post it to me as apparently happened in Wales!
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
So you basically haven't asked for the form? Is there any other activity that has now gone fully online (except where as small number of people are asked to pro-actively request alternatives) because the authorities don't think living permanently in the last century is a good use of time or resources, which you "refuse to do" out of damn stubborness?
So you think that rather than pursue the enormous cost savings from making this a primarily online survey (a paper form has a cost of being mailed out, a cost of being returned, and then a further cost of entering the information completed onto a central database - all with the additional complication of people not making their answers clear in line with the given instructions), the government should be carrying on as they have always done it?
I do indeed. I decide whether and/or when to use my PC. Ditto my telephone....
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
There's a pandemic going on. Having thousands of volunteers going around knocking in doors with paper forms isn't happening this time.
Ok - then post it to me as apparently happened in Wales!
Little titbit from that article which I am not aware is true. Are there really 19 million vaccines to be imported from the EU countries? Hmm.
In a dramatic move, Ms von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, threatened to join forces with the French and German governments to hold hostage more than 19 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine due to be shipped to the UK over the coming weeks.
I have seen multiple reports that Ms von der Leyen repeated the threats yesterday.
The thing is that our retaliation would be worse than the initial ban - Pfizer would have no choice but to close their EU plant down and shift production to outside the EU.
Still totally confused about this question of an AstraZeneca export ban from the EU. There seem to be totally conflicting reports about whether the UK are receiving AZ from the continent. Or is there some part of the bottling process or something being done over there?
Given that the threats still seem to just about be on the basis of warnings to AZ, rather than warnings to the UK, i don't see how they can be threatening AZ with an export ban on Pfizer?!
As I understand it the EU are threatening AZN supplies to UK and the reason Pfizer is mentioned is that in the event of such a hostile act the UK could prevent essential parts of the Pfizer vaccine being sent to Europe, thereby compromising the production of the Pfizer vaccine in Europe
However, if I have misunderstood this reasoning I am happy to be corrected
Just run an aircraft carrier or two thirteen miles away from the EU coast. They'll get the message.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
So you basically haven't asked for the form? Is there any other activity that has now gone fully online (except where as small number of people are asked to pro-actively request alternatives) because the authorities don't think living permanently in the last century is a good use of time or resources, which you "refuse to do" out of damn stubborness?
So you think that rather than pursue the enormous cost savings from making this a primarily online survey (a paper form has a cost of being mailed out, a cost of being returned, and then a further cost of entering the information completed onto a central database - all with the additional complication of people not making their answers clear in line with the given instructions), the government should be carrying on as they have always done it?
I do indeed. I decide whether and/or when to use my PC. Ditto my telephone. I object to the authorities presuming that people wish to use their own resources in the way they so direct.
"Use their own resources" - you mean, like your fingers and a pen, which you would use to do the paper form, or your fingers and some laptop keys, with which you do the form online? Also your legs, for taking the paper form to the post, or for, er, sitting down at a desk. And your arse. You use your arse there too.
How DARE the government ask you to use your arse for sitting down
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
Contrarian, like I said. Your position is ridiculous.
Ydoethur was going to take the same position I believe, if it had not arrived in time.
Implying they had gone to the extraordinary effort of requesting a paper form. No problem with that. The position that someone refuses to even request one because the government should have sent them one in the first place is, as noted previously, childish.
I can imagine the ONS thought long and hard about how many forms to print. We sent one to every household in March 2011 and the printing began in November 2010.
I wonder if they did a trial of some sort? Problem is, you can’t recreate the conditions of the Census when it’s being talked about a lot.
I have just read on Vote UK site that the SNP MP for Airdrie & Shotts is to give up his seat to contest the same seat at Holyrood. If true , it should be an interesting by election, with Labour coming within 200 votes in 2017.
In 2019 Neil Gray had a majority of 5,201 over Labour
The only way Labour will have any chance is if the present SNP internal warfare affects voters plus a large conservative tactical vote
But Labour came very close in 2017 so the seat will be a key target for the party. So maybe we now have two key by elections on 6th May.
Oooh what fun.
There has to be something to give political junkies something to obsess about during mid-term.
Still a bit too early for midterm.
Semantics, but my definition of midterm is after the honeymoon but before the pre-election giveaways. I think Boris's honeymoon ended last autumn when people were talking about whether he'd even want to do a full term.
To an extent it can be argued that the Pandemic has delayed midterm in that normal party politics has been in abeyance for such an extended period. To my mind , next Autumn - at the earliest - might be said to represent the beginning of midterm. May 6th ,however, is less than 17 months from the last GE.
Calling all Leavers and non-Remoaner Remainers - if you want a book recommendation I can thoroughly recommend Robert Tombs: This Sovereign Isle - Britain in and out of Europe.
It's a bestseller, has rave reviews and is only 162 pages so you can get through it in a couple of evenings.
It's bang up to date too (even has Covid-19 covered in it) and has some fascinating insight and analysis. Very very good, even if you don't agree with all of it.
Little titbit from that article which I am not aware is true. Are there really 19 million vaccines to be imported from the EU countries? Hmm.
In a dramatic move, Ms von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, threatened to join forces with the French and German governments to hold hostage more than 19 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine due to be shipped to the UK over the coming weeks.
I have seen multiple reports that Ms von der Leyen repeated the threats yesterday.
The thing is that our retaliation would be worse than the initial ban - Pfizer would have no choice but to close their EU plant down and shift production to outside the EU.
Still totally confused about this question of an AstraZeneca export ban from the EU. There seem to be totally conflicting reports about whether the UK are receiving AZ from the continent. Or is there some part of the bottling process or something being done over there?
Given that the threats still seem to just about be on the basis of warnings to AZ, rather than warnings to the UK, i don't see how they can be threatening AZ with an export ban on Pfizer?!
As I understand it the EU are threatening AZN supplies to UK and the reason Pfizer is mentioned is that in the event of such a hostile act the UK could prevent essential parts of the Pfizer vaccine being sent to Europe, thereby compromising the production of the Pfizer vaccine in Europe
However, if I have misunderstood this reasoning I am happy to be corrected
That doesn't answer the question though as to whether AZN actually are exportingfrom the EU to the UK. And if Pfizer isn't prevented from exporting, i don't see why the UK would prevent export of ingredients to Pfizer. As that would disrupt our supply of Pfizer, presumably, as well as everyone else's.
I thought the issue with exporting ingredients to Pfizer only came up if Pfizer were prevented from exporting to us.
The UK position throughout is that the movement of vaccine is an issue for companies and respecting contracts that countries have with those companies (hence "the UK haven't banned AZN vaccine exports") i can't see us interrupting the Pfizer supply chain (from which we benefit) because of a disruption in the supply chain of a different company. What is making the EU mad is that they haven't signed very good contracts.
Once again, there are no AZ exports from the EU to the UK. The EU has an export check mechanism and in the time it has been running neither the Belgian nor Dutch factories have exported AZ drug substance to the UK. Ursula is literally repeating a whole load of falsehoods about "EU exports to the UK" in regards to AZ currently. Just as the Charles Michel lied about the UK blocking exports of vaccines and precursor materials and the commission continues to say.
The whole EU "case" against Britain or AZ is political theatre for a domestic audience who are becoming increasingly impatient looking at the US and UK vaccine successes. They're rightly asking the question as to why the EU has bungled the contracts so badly and how it was possible for brexit Britain to prosper outside of the EU in this manner. The commission has no answers so is lying and obfuscating.
As I've pointed out on many occasions, there exists no mechanism for the EU to block anything, it is up to the individual nations as Belgium isn't going to do it and they can't be forced into doing it either.
Aren't they going to look a bit stupid announcing an EU export ban on AstraZeneca when it results in zero disruption to the AZ vaccine supply?
You make the assumption they are thinking rather the reacting. They have looked ahead and seen the uk moving back to normal over the next couple of months as eu countries slide into lockdown and are panicking about how their citizens are going to react
a lot of the citizens arent too bothered presumably as they consider the vaccines unsafe.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
So you basically haven't asked for the form? Is there any other activity that has now gone fully online (except where as small number of people are asked to pro-actively request alternatives) because the authorities don't think living permanently in the last century is a good use of time or resources, which you "refuse to do" out of damn stubborness?
So you think that rather than pursue the enormous cost savings from making this a primarily online survey (a paper form has a cost of being mailed out, a cost of being returned, and then a further cost of entering the information completed onto a central database - all with the additional complication of people not making their answers clear in line with the given instructions), the government should be carrying on as they have always done it?
I do indeed. I decide whether and/or when to use my PC. Ditto my telephone. I object to the authorities presuming that people wish to use their own resources in the way they so direct.
In which case you are and I'm being blunt, a complete idiot.
Allowing people to enter the details on the form themselves saves £1s per an individual even before you look at the quality issues created doing transcribing.
Personally I prefer doing everything on line if it's a paper form I need to manually write on I wish the person at the far end luck reading my handwriting as I rarely write anything these days and my handwriting is now beyond a doctors.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
There's a pandemic going on. Having thousands of volunteers going around knocking in doors with paper forms isn't happening this time.
Ok - then post it to me as apparently happened in Wales!
If they do it, we should never forget. I, for one, would overnight cease having any interest in protecting their frontier from Russia with British boots on the ground, for example.
That would mean withdrawing from NATO.
Or, splitting NATO. I doubt the Americans will look kindly on the EU seizing vaccines made by an American company.
NATO would split into its Anglophone and European elements. Turkey would finally say goodbye. The end of the Western Alliance
This is inevitable anyway. European and American strategic interests are too divergent now.
Quite possibly true.
In a few years we may realise that the UK-in-the-EU was the keystone holding the entire edifice together. The crucial link in a chain, with opposing forces at either end
The chain perhaps snapped, as we left. Now Europe moves closer to Russia, under German leadership. The Anglosphere builds its own barricades
The whole process accelerated greatly by Covid
The UK will join the new US - China cold war in the Pacific from a distance like one of those cockneys who support Man Utd.
We will join it, but it won't be at an easy distance. It will hurt us, the way it is already hurting Australia
The UK has a big deficit with China while Australia has a surplus, and China trade is a smaller part of our GDP anyway. So I'm not sure that's right.
Yes maybe. But China is now so powerful they could make our lives less comfortable in ways other than trade.
Hopefully, if the West - or at least the English speaking West - unites into a common position, China will realise it is dealing with an enemy easily of equal size (esp if we can get India on board as well) and see the sense of compromise rather than confrontation
This is another area where the CANZUK concept actually makes sense
The Wokeness could tear CANZUK apart at birth. The statues of Victoria, the common institutions, the monarchy etc. All "racist" and "imperial oppression".. you know the drill.
It's why Russia and China fund it. And it gets results.
The euro was always going to implode though unless they go for monetary union. The question becomes then whether we are more damaged by it imploding inside or outside the eu. Personally I would argue that being inside the eu would be more damaging purely because being outside we as we see already pursuing other trade avenues.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
There's a pandemic going on. Having thousands of volunteers going around knocking in doors with paper forms isn't happening this time.
Ok - then post it to me as apparently happened in Wales!
I am fully aware of the link thanks. In Wales, forms have been sent without having been requested.
And in England they haven't been, so you have to request it.
I think all you need is your address. Are you really that stubborn that you won't even enter your address to request a form? There's a phone number also, or is that too modern for you also?
The “post-Christian era” in the UK will be cemented by data emerging from Sunday’s census which is expected to show further generational disengagement from organised religion, according to a leading academic.
The once-a-decade snapshot of the country has included a voluntary question about religion since 2001. In 2011, returns across England and Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland showed 59.3% ticking Christianity, a fall from 71.6% a decade earlier.
Abby Day, professor of race, faith and culture at Goldsmiths, University of London, expects this year’s census to show a further erosion in Christian identity, mainly because postwar generations regard the church as irrelevant and immoral.
Day predicted the proportion of people ticking Christianity “could drop below 50%”. Peter Brierley, an expert on religion statistics, said he predicted 48% or 49% identifying as Christian, but David Voas, head of the social sciences department at University College London, said he would be surprised if the figure fell below 50%
I would expect Christian to still be ahead of No religion though.
The question did not ask 'are you religious?' when I did the census yesterday, it asked 'what is your religion?' ie No religion, Christian (no denomination breakdown so Catholics and evangelicals will boost the figure compared to what the C of E would have got), Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, any other religion?
I know people who aren't Christians, but write down Christian on the form because they can't stand organisations like the National Secular Society.
I put CofE because I go a couple of times a year (harvest, Easter and Christmas) and I wouldn't want to give succour to anti-disestabishmentarians, ultra-liberal progressives and republicans, which it otherwise most certainly would and potentially influence public policy accordingly.
You've just convinced me not to put CofE.
I doubt that but when it comes to religion people certainly play with it.
The idea of simply responding on the basis of what religion or none that you believe clearly being too straightforward for you?
I am a cultural Christian. I go a handful of times a year and do christenings, weddings and funerals in church. I am not a regular Sunday worshipper, but few people are, and CofE is a far better way of describing my identity than putting I'm an atheist.
I think there are millions like me.
Perhaps a secondary "intensity" question would throw more light on this. For each religion are you a follower, believer or fundamentalist?
Perhaps a how often do you practice? Fundamentalist is a loaded term. Which means different things between, as well as, within each religion.
It is a loaded term for a reason though. If someone goes to the church, mosque, temple, or synagogue daily or once a year doesnt make any difference to the rest of society.
If someone believes in a religion to the extent that its values trump societies values, and it should be aggressively spread to non believers, they start to become a danger to that society.
You prove my point though. You can be a fundamentalist and share none of those traits. An ultra Orthodox Jew positively eschews conversion of any kind. A fundamental Quaker (arguably all Christians) would be a pacifist. Almost all would argue that their values trump societies values. Catholics sure do. This does not necessarily make them a threat. So, what does "fundamentalist" mean?
Belief in a strict and literal interpretation of religion.
I think that this can be exaggerated. They will be 3-4 months behind us, 6 maximum. That means low hundreds of thousand extra deaths across the EU and probably another quarter in recession, maybe a little more. In the longer term that will not be that significant and I don't see any great pressure on the Euro atm, unlike in 2008.
Little titbit from that article which I am not aware is true. Are there really 19 million vaccines to be imported from the EU countries? Hmm.
In a dramatic move, Ms von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, threatened to join forces with the French and German governments to hold hostage more than 19 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine due to be shipped to the UK over the coming weeks.
I have seen multiple reports that Ms von der Leyen repeated the threats yesterday.
The thing is that our retaliation would be worse than the initial ban - Pfizer would have no choice but to close their EU plant down and shift production to outside the EU.
Still totally confused about this question of an AstraZeneca export ban from the EU. There seem to be totally conflicting reports about whether the UK are receiving AZ from the continent. Or is there some part of the bottling process or something being done over there?
Given that the threats still seem to just about be on the basis of warnings to AZ, rather than warnings to the UK, i don't see how they can be threatening AZ with an export ban on Pfizer?!
As I understand it the EU are threatening AZN supplies to UK and the reason Pfizer is mentioned is that in the event of such a hostile act the UK could prevent essential parts of the Pfizer vaccine being sent to Europe, thereby compromising the production of the Pfizer vaccine in Europe
However, if I have misunderstood this reasoning I am happy to be corrected
That doesn't answer the question though as to whether AZN actually are exportingfrom the EU to the UK. And if Pfizer isn't prevented from exporting, i don't see why the UK would prevent export of ingredients to Pfizer. As that would disrupt our supply of Pfizer, presumably, as well as everyone else's.
I thought the issue with exporting ingredients to Pfizer only came up if Pfizer were prevented from exporting to us.
The UK position throughout is that the movement of vaccine is an issue for companies and respecting contracts that countries have with those companies (hence "the UK haven't banned AZN vaccine exports") i can't see us interrupting the Pfizer supply chain (from which we benefit) because of a disruption in the supply chain of a different company. What is making the EU mad is that they haven't signed very good contracts.
Once again, there are no AZ exports from the EU to the UK. The EU has an export check mechanism and in the time it has been running neither the Belgian nor Dutch factories have exported AZ drug substance to the UK. Ursula is literally repeating a whole load of falsehoods about "EU exports to the UK" in regards to AZ currently. Just as the Charles Michel lied about the UK blocking exports of vaccines and precursor materials and the commission continues to say.
The whole EU "case" against Britain or AZ is political theatre for a domestic audience who are becoming increasingly impatient looking at the US and UK vaccine successes. They're rightly asking the question as to why the EU has bungled the contracts so badly and how it was possible for brexit Britain to prosper outside of the EU in this manner. The commission has no answers so is lying and obfuscating.
As I've pointed out on many occasions, there exists no mechanism for the EU to block anything, it is up to the individual nations as Belgium isn't going to do it and they can't be forced into doing it either.
Aren't they going to look a bit stupid announcing an EU export ban on AstraZeneca when it results in zero disruption to the AZ vaccine supply?
You make the assumption they are thinking rather the reacting. They have looked ahead and seen the uk moving back to normal over the next couple of months as eu countries slide into lockdown and are panicking about how their citizens are going to react
a lot of the citizens arent too bothered presumably as they consider the vaccines unsafe.
They will be bothered however if curfews are imposed, shops and restaurants etc are closed on the continent yet we are almost fully open
If they do it, we should never forget. I, for one, would overnight cease having any interest in protecting their frontier from Russia with British boots on the ground, for example.
That would mean withdrawing from NATO.
Or, splitting NATO. I doubt the Americans will look kindly on the EU seizing vaccines made by an American company.
NATO would split into its Anglophone and European elements. Turkey would finally say goodbye. The end of the Western Alliance
This is inevitable anyway. European and American strategic interests are too divergent now.
Quite possibly true.
In a few years we may realise that the UK-in-the-EU was the keystone holding the entire edifice together. The crucial link in a chain, with opposing forces at either end
The chain perhaps snapped, as we left. Now Europe moves closer to Russia, under German leadership. The Anglosphere builds its own barricades
The whole process accelerated greatly by Covid
The UK will join the new US - China cold war in the Pacific from a distance like one of those cockneys who support Man Utd.
We will join it, but it won't be at an easy distance. It will hurt us, the way it is already hurting Australia
The UK has a big deficit with China while Australia has a surplus, and China trade is a smaller part of our GDP anyway. So I'm not sure that's right.
Yes maybe. But China is now so powerful they could make our lives less comfortable in ways other than trade.
Hopefully, if the West - or at least the English speaking West - unites into a common position, China will realise it is dealing with an enemy easily of equal size (esp if we can get India on board as well) and see the sense of compromise rather than confrontation
This is another area where the CANZUK concept actually makes sense
The Wokeness could tear CANZUK apart at birth. The statues of Victoria, the common institutions, the monarchy etc. All "racist" and "imperial oppression".. you know the drill.
It's why Russia and China fund it. And it gets results.
Yup, there's a meme I remember with the US and USSR playing chess with the US winning on the board and the Soviet Union winning in the US's mind. The communists won the culture war, they infected western people with self doubt over our history when there shouldn't be any.
Both BBC and Sky leading on the EU threat to ban vaccines coming to the UK later this week
The optics of this for the EU are toxic and just affirms rejoining is going to become very difficult to sell
BBC website is leading on 'No foreign holidays' Mentions the vaccine wall, but attributes any comments to the Defence Sec.
Polite question but are you trying to downplay how serious this could be for the EU relationships not only with the UK, but the rest of the world.
If, and I stress if, the reports are true, yes, there would be serious effects. However the reports I've seen, from sources I do not regard as hopelessly biased, and the interview I watched this morning, suggest that situation is being seriously overplayed by those who hate the EU.
In that context I am reminded of the remark attributed to Rupert Murdoch when asked why his papers supported Leave. 'When I go to Downing Street they pay attention to me. When I go to Brussels they just listen politely." (Or something close to that.)
And now I'm off to a cheese and wine lunch, with a mixture of British and European cheeses. Not sure yet of the provenance of the wine; quite possibly Italian, as it's very, very difficult to make a decent red wine in this climate. Although there's a vineyard in Suffolk which makes quite a passable one.
You haven't understood the profundity of what Rupe was saying. It's a clever way of expressing the truth that the UK is a proper democracy, so the government HAS to listen to the media, as one voice of the people (along witn others). Not least because the people can boot them all out at the next election
Brussels bureaucrats and commissioners have no such democratic worries, so they can and will cheerfully ignore the media, as they ignore the voters.
Agree with you on UK red wine, very hard to find decent stuff still. Possibly one in the Isle of Wight?
However, we now make excellent fizz. I had a rose classic cuvee from Nyetimber the other day. Absolutely superb. As good as vintage champagne twice or thrice the price
I was speaking to the guy who owns the island’s principal vineyard a few years back. He gave me their red to taste, and I said I didn’t think it was very good. To my surprise he agreed, and said that if they didn’t make a reasonable one from that year’s harvest (conditions were apparently perfect that year) then he’d think about giving up on the reds altogether. As it was, they were using varietals that, as is often the case in the UK, I’d never heard of because no-one in Europe wants (more correctly, needs) to grow them.
The less said about the island’s other vineyard, the better.
It’ll be some time before global warming allows us to make half decent Pinot Noir.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
There's a pandemic going on. Having thousands of volunteers going around knocking in doors with paper forms isn't happening this time.
Ok - then post it to me as apparently happened in Wales!
I am fully aware of the link thanks. In Wales, forms have been sent without having been requested.
And in England they haven't been, so you have to request it.
I think all you need is your address. Are you really that stubborn that you won't even enter your address to request a form? There's a phone number also, or is that too modern for you also?
I am going to sit tight and wait. It will be interesting to see how long it takes for a form to arrive - if it ever does.
On our walk this morning we passed a house which had a big "two votes for SNP" banner on it. It made me reflect that this message hints at some lack of confidence. A confident SNP expected to scoop up so many constituency seats that it was much smarter and more effective to vote for the Greens on the list to maximise the independence majority in Parliament. That is why we are where we are. This campaign for 2 votes for SNP suggests that they are worried the constituencies will not be quite the same procession as the last time.
Calling all Leavers and non-Remoaner Remainers - if you want a book recommendation I can thoroughly recommend Robert Tombs: This Sovereign Isle - Britain in and out of Europe.
It's a bestseller, has rave reviews and is only 162 pages so you can get through it in a couple of evenings.
It's bang up to date too (even has Covid-19 covered in it) and has some fascinating insight and analysis. Very very good, even if you don't agree with all of it.
Go buy.
He is notorious for being rabidly pro-Brexit, so hardly a neutral source.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
There's a pandemic going on. Having thousands of volunteers going around knocking in doors with paper forms isn't happening this time.
Ok - then post it to me as apparently happened in Wales!
I am fully aware of the link thanks. In Wales, forms have been sent without having been requested.
And in England they haven't been, so you have to request it.
I think all you need is your address. Are you really that stubborn that you won't even enter your address to request a form? There's a phone number also, or is that too modern for you also?
I am going to sit tight and wait. It will be interesting to see how long it takes for a form to arrive - if it ever does.
I think that this can be exaggerated. They will be 3-4 months behind us, 6 maximum. That means low hundreds of thousand extra deaths across the EU and probably another quarter in recession, maybe a little more. In the longer term that will not be that significant and I don't see any great pressure on the Euro atm, unlike in 2008.
I think the ECB is running out of monetary firepower, that's the issue that no one wants to address. The Fed and the BoE still have some chambers loaded and some ammunition left, the ECB has already fired all of its shots, it's already got negative overnight rates, it's already got 60% of EMU GDP on its balance sheet, it's already got direct bank bond buying schemes, it's already used traditional and non-traditional monetary measures and the EMU economy still looks shite.
Greece and the rest of the PIIGS were meant to blow the EU apart but didn't. A delay of 3 months in vaccinating their population will not cause the death of the EU either. The Telegraph is simply not a reliable reporter on EU matters.
No - if the Government wants this data , it can provide the form as has been the case in the past. Apparently in Wales households have been sent them. The onus should not be on the individual to be proactive in carrying out this survey.
What a contrarian. Just request the paper form if it bothers you that much.
You've misunderstood. It's the paper form he's waiting for!
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
Fair point - but i was assuming he wasn't being totally dense.
You misunderstand. I am waiting for the form to land on my doormat - as in the past. Why should I go to the trouble of going online or calling their Freephone line? If they want the data, they can send me the form and I will complete it. Beyond that, I am not really bothered whether it arrives or not.
There's a pandemic going on. Having thousands of volunteers going around knocking in doors with paper forms isn't happening this time.
Ok - then post it to me as apparently happened in Wales!
I am fully aware of the link thanks. In Wales, forms have been sent without having been requested.
And in England they haven't been, so you have to request it.
I think all you need is your address. Are you really that stubborn that you won't even enter your address to request a form? There's a phone number also, or is that too modern for you also?
I am going to sit tight and wait. It will be interesting to see how long it takes for a form to arrive - if it ever does.
Little titbit from that article which I am not aware is true. Are there really 19 million vaccines to be imported from the EU countries? Hmm.
In a dramatic move, Ms von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, threatened to join forces with the French and German governments to hold hostage more than 19 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine due to be shipped to the UK over the coming weeks.
I have seen multiple reports that Ms von der Leyen repeated the threats yesterday.
The thing is that our retaliation would be worse than the initial ban - Pfizer would have no choice but to close their EU plant down and shift production to outside the EU.
Still totally confused about this question of an AstraZeneca export ban from the EU. There seem to be totally conflicting reports about whether the UK are receiving AZ from the continent. Or is there some part of the bottling process or something being done over there?
Given that the threats still seem to just about be on the basis of warnings to AZ, rather than warnings to the UK, i don't see how they can be threatening AZ with an export ban on Pfizer?!
As I understand it the EU are threatening AZN supplies to UK and the reason Pfizer is mentioned is that in the event of such a hostile act the UK could prevent essential parts of the Pfizer vaccine being sent to Europe, thereby compromising the production of the Pfizer vaccine in Europe
However, if I have misunderstood this reasoning I am happy to be corrected
That doesn't answer the question though as to whether AZN actually are exportingfrom the EU to the UK. And if Pfizer isn't prevented from exporting, i don't see why the UK would prevent export of ingredients to Pfizer. As that would disrupt our supply of Pfizer, presumably, as well as everyone else's.
I thought the issue with exporting ingredients to Pfizer only came up if Pfizer were prevented from exporting to us.
The UK position throughout is that the movement of vaccine is an issue for companies and respecting contracts that countries have with those companies (hence "the UK haven't banned AZN vaccine exports") i can't see us interrupting the Pfizer supply chain (from which we benefit) because of a disruption in the supply chain of a different company. What is making the EU mad is that they haven't signed very good contracts.
Once again, there are no AZ exports from the EU to the UK. The EU has an export check mechanism and in the time it has been running neither the Belgian nor Dutch factories have exported AZ drug substance to the UK. Ursula is literally repeating a whole load of falsehoods about "EU exports to the UK" in regards to AZ currently. Just as the Charles Michel lied about the UK blocking exports of vaccines and precursor materials and the commission continues to say.
The whole EU "case" against Britain or AZ is political theatre for a domestic audience who are becoming increasingly impatient looking at the US and UK vaccine successes. They're rightly asking the question as to why the EU has bungled the contracts so badly and how it was possible for brexit Britain to prosper outside of the EU in this manner. The commission has no answers so is lying and obfuscating.
As I've pointed out on many occasions, there exists no mechanism for the EU to block anything, it is up to the individual nations as Belgium isn't going to do it and they can't be forced into doing it either.
Aren't they going to look a bit stupid announcing an EU export ban on AstraZeneca when it results in zero disruption to the AZ vaccine supply?
You make the assumption they are thinking rather the reacting. They have looked ahead and seen the uk moving back to normal over the next couple of months as eu countries slide into lockdown and are panicking about how their citizens are going to react
1. We must do something 2. This is something 3. Therefore, we must do this.
Little titbit from that article which I am not aware is true. Are there really 19 million vaccines to be imported from the EU countries? Hmm.
In a dramatic move, Ms von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, threatened to join forces with the French and German governments to hold hostage more than 19 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine due to be shipped to the UK over the coming weeks.
I have seen multiple reports that Ms von der Leyen repeated the threats yesterday.
The thing is that our retaliation would be worse than the initial ban - Pfizer would have no choice but to close their EU plant down and shift production to outside the EU.
Still totally confused about this question of an AstraZeneca export ban from the EU. There seem to be totally conflicting reports about whether the UK are receiving AZ from the continent. Or is there some part of the bottling process or something being done over there?
Given that the threats still seem to just about be on the basis of warnings to AZ, rather than warnings to the UK, i don't see how they can be threatening AZ with an export ban on Pfizer?!
As I understand it the EU are threatening AZN supplies to UK and the reason Pfizer is mentioned is that in the event of such a hostile act the UK could prevent essential parts of the Pfizer vaccine being sent to Europe, thereby compromising the production of the Pfizer vaccine in Europe
However, if I have misunderstood this reasoning I am happy to be corrected
That doesn't answer the question though as to whether AZN actually are exportingfrom the EU to the UK. And if Pfizer isn't prevented from exporting, i don't see why the UK would prevent export of ingredients to Pfizer. As that would disrupt our supply of Pfizer, presumably, as well as everyone else's.
I thought the issue with exporting ingredients to Pfizer only came up if Pfizer were prevented from exporting to us.
The UK position throughout is that the movement of vaccine is an issue for companies and respecting contracts that countries have with those companies (hence "the UK haven't banned AZN vaccine exports") i can't see us interrupting the Pfizer supply chain (from which we benefit) because of a disruption in the supply chain of a different company. What is making the EU mad is that they haven't signed very good contracts.
Once again, there are no AZ exports from the EU to the UK. The EU has an export check mechanism and in the time it has been running neither the Belgian nor Dutch factories have exported AZ drug substance to the UK. Ursula is literally repeating a whole load of falsehoods about "EU exports to the UK" in regards to AZ currently. Just as the Charles Michel lied about the UK blocking exports of vaccines and precursor materials and the commission continues to say.
The whole EU "case" against Britain or AZ is political theatre for a domestic audience who are becoming increasingly impatient looking at the US and UK vaccine successes. They're rightly asking the question as to why the EU has bungled the contracts so badly and how it was possible for brexit Britain to prosper outside of the EU in this manner. The commission has no answers so is lying and obfuscating.
As I've pointed out on many occasions, there exists no mechanism for the EU to block anything, it is up to the individual nations as Belgium isn't going to do it and they can't be forced into doing it either.
Aren't they going to look a bit stupid announcing an EU export ban on AstraZeneca when it results in zero disruption to the AZ vaccine supply?
I don't think they're thinking that far ahead. They're worrying about tomorrow's headlines, the German federal election, keeping Söder out of the chancellor's office. That's what matters to the EU right now.
The euro was always going to implode though unless they go for monetary union. The question becomes then whether we are more damaged by it imploding inside or outside the eu. Personally I would argue that being inside the eu would be more damaging purely because being outside we as we see already pursuing other trade avenues.
Also we won't be on the hook for whatever 'cohesion' funds - state transfers - the EU will have to institute as part of the fall out.
Comments
The only way Labour will have any chance is if the present SNP internal warfare affects voters plus a large conservative tactical vote
In that context I am reminded of the remark attributed to Rupert Murdoch when asked why his papers supported Leave. 'When I go to Downing Street they pay attention to me. When I go to Brussels they just listen politely."
(Or something close to that.)
And now I'm off to a cheese and wine lunch, with a mixture of British and European cheeses. Not sure yet of the provenance of the wine; quite possibly Italian, as it's very, very difficult to make a decent red wine in this climate. Although there's a vineyard in Suffolk which makes quite a passable one.
In a similar way STV becomes AV for by-elections when there is only one seat to be filled.
Similar to the way in which Relativity is approximately the same as Newtonian Mechanics when speeds and gravitational field strengths are low.
However please enjoy your lunch and wine
The EU seems to be arguing that the UK could halt its rollout with no major health consequences. But this is not the case with 70+ aged individuals returning for second doses to provide their ongoing protection. So this is a bit more than just disappointing 30 year olds.
If she is talking about e.g. semi-permanent limited capacity in cinemas, shops, restaurants, trains, gyms, offices etc. due to distancing, limiting the number of people you can see at a time either indoord or outdoors, etc. I think no.
People have endured restrictions because they were told they were necessary and would not be in place for a moment more than absolutely necessary. Once you have vaccinated most of the vulnerable and the hospitals are no longer in danger of being overwhelmed then it is the path back to normal
Too many of these public health people appear to have stopped thinking rationally about the wider picture.
Fundamentalist is a loaded term. Which means different things between, as well as, within each religion.
However, if I have misunderstood this reasoning I am happy to be corrected
Shouldn't we find a way to avoid this calamitous geopolitical defeat?
Brussels bureaucrats and commissioners have no such democratic worries, so they can and will cheerfully ignore the media, as they ignore the voters.
Agree with you on UK red wine, very hard to find decent stuff still. Possibly one in the Isle of Wight?
However, we now make excellent fizz. I had a rose classic cuvee from Nyetimber the other day. Absolutely superb. As good as vintage champagne twice or thrice the price
lieleave things out on the census, our CIA and KGB enemies can easily fish out people like you by checking vetting status on Linkedin. Once lockdown ends, you'll be drowning in honeytraps.https://www.theregister.com/2021/03/19/ministry_defence_tells_staff_dont_answer_census/
I thought the issue with exporting ingredients to Pfizer only came up if Pfizer were prevented from exporting to us.
The UK position throughout is that the movement of vaccine is an issue for companies and respecting contracts that countries have with those companies (hence "the UK haven't banned AZN vaccine exports") i can't see us interrupting the Pfizer supply chain (from which we benefit) because of a disruption in the supply chain of a different company. What is making the EU mad is that they haven't signed very good contracts.
If someone believes in a religion to the extent that its values trump societies values, and it should be aggressively spread to non believers, they start to become a danger to that society.
hospitalisation R
(you can't even do it online without the initial communication - it contains the access code linked to your property)
Given he is complaining about being proactive are you sure he's requested it?
The EU who have frankly failed their citizens and are now scrapping the barrel to try to deflect from the truth of their failure to protect lives, every governments first responsibility
And nobody will resign over this nor can the citizens vote the commission out
All in all, it took 5 minutes. Impressive
https://census.gov.uk/en/request/access-code/enter-address/
I can understand demanding a paper form if you dont have net access thats consistent
I cant understand the view of someone who has access to more than one format to specify they will do it only if it comes in the format they choose.
There has to be something to give political junkies something to obsess about during mid-term.
With the Sturgeon fiasco and the EU with its individual leaders committing 'hari kari', Boris looks the sane one
In the 1820s, did you make stentorian demands that your census form arrive by liveried messenger, written with quill and ink, as that is how it was always done in the past?
https://twitter.com/PhantomPower14/status/1373619199671734272?s=20
The whole EU "case" against Britain or AZ is political theatre for a domestic audience who are becoming increasingly impatient looking at the US and UK vaccine successes. They're rightly asking the question as to why the EU has bungled the contracts so badly and how it was possible for brexit Britain to prosper outside of the EU in this manner. The commission has no answers so is lying and obfuscating.
As I've pointed out on many occasions, there exists no mechanism for the EU to block anything, it is up to the individual nations as Belgium isn't going to do it and they can't be forced into doing it either.
An ultra Orthodox Jew positively eschews conversion of any kind. A fundamental Quaker (arguably all Christians) would be a pacifist. Almost all would argue that their values trump societies values. Catholics sure do.
This does not necessarily make them a threat.
So, what does "fundamentalist" mean?
So you think that rather than pursue the enormous cost savings from making this a primarily online survey (a paper form has a cost of being mailed out, a cost of being returned, and then a further cost of entering the information completed onto a central database - all with the additional complication of people not making their answers clear in line with the given instructions), the government should be carrying on as they have always done it?
Hopefully, if the West - or at least the English speaking West - unites into a common position, China will realise it is dealing with an enemy easily of equal size (esp if we can get India on board as well) and see the sense of compromise rather than confrontation
This is another area where the CANZUK concept actually makes sense
To see oursels as ithers see us!
It wad frae mony a blunder free us,
An' foolish notion:
https://news.sky.com/video/nicola-sturgeon-is-head-girl-of-old-boys-club-that-surrounds-alex-salmond-says-ruth-davidson-12251113
Here's the link - https://census.gov.uk/en/request/paper-questionnaire/enter-address/
we will blockade all trade?
Invade Europe?
But But But
The German Car Manufacturers
All the Cards
Worldwide Trade Deals
FFS listen to yourself
They dont like it up em!!
How DARE the government ask you to use your arse for sitting down
I wonder if they did a trial of some sort? Problem is, you can’t recreate the conditions of the Census when it’s being talked about a lot.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/03/21/eus-vaccine-mess-sadly/
It's a bestseller, has rave reviews and is only 162 pages so you can get through it in a couple of evenings.
It's bang up to date too (even has Covid-19 covered in it) and has some fascinating insight and analysis. Very very good, even if you don't agree with all of it.
Go buy.
Allowing people to enter the details on the form themselves saves £1s per an individual even before you look at the quality issues created doing transcribing.
Personally I prefer doing everything on line if it's a paper form I need to manually write on I wish the person at the far end luck reading my handwriting as I rarely write anything these days and my handwriting is now beyond a doctors.
It's why Russia and China fund it. And it gets results.
I think all you need is your address. Are you really that stubborn that you won't even enter your address to request a form? There's a phone number also, or is that too modern for you also?
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1373625695474180096?s=20
The less said about the island’s other vineyard, the better.
It’ll be some time before global warming allows us to make half decent Pinot Noir.
2. This is something
3. Therefore, we must do this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician's_syllogism