Howdy, Stranger!

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

Just 7% would vote for The Queen to be our Head of State – politicalbetting.com

2456710

Comments

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,455
    Leon said:

    tlg86 said:

    Just a point....we again heard all these anecdotal stories that loads of people were rejecting their appointment when they found they were to get AZN vaccine....It can't really have been that widespread otherwise never do 850k in a day.

    As I pointed out at the time...
    My worry is it’s a real phenomenon, but focused on specific communities which already have an issue with hesitancy.
    Darwin will sort them out
    Isn't he cancelled these days ;-)
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,661
    edited March 2021

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    Nudge is Schubs in German.
    One German economist has suggested that the best way forward is to create a separate AstraZeneca-only programme which would be voluntary and open to anybody who seeks vaccination. This would allow people to choose which jab they receive, giving the option, for example, to take AstraZeneca tomorrow or wait six weeks for Pfizer. Giving people the choice may go some way towards restoring confidence in AstraZeneca.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Italy still hasn't done over half its over-80s:

    https://twitter.com/leonardocarella/status/1373654887905497089?s=20
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    tlg86 said:

    Just a point....we again heard all these anecdotal stories that loads of people were rejecting their appointment when they found they were to get AZN vaccine....It can't really have been that widespread otherwise never do 850k in a day.

    As I pointed out at the time...
    My worry is it’s a real phenomenon, but focused on specific communities which already have an issue with hesitancy.
    I suspect it’s people who would have refused anyway using this as an excuse
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,357
    I reckon people will just point to the UK and say "See? It REALLY works..."

    Not that that will help the atmosphere in Brussels.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,231
    edited March 2021
    geoffw said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    Nudge is Schubs in German.
    One German economist has suggested that the best way forward is to create a separate AstraZeneca-only programme which would be voluntary and open to anybody who seeks vaccination. This would allow people to choose which jab they receive, giving the option, for example, to take AstraZeneca tomorrow or wait six weeks for Pfizer. Giving people the choice may go some way towards restoring confidence in AstraZeneca.
    The last is not a bad idea at all - I imagine stocks of AZN on the continent would be zero within a few days. Obviously it's not as good as an organised programme, but it's still going to be the quickest at getting vaccines in arms of all the possible options now.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,599
    edited March 2021

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    edited March 2021

    geoffw said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    Nudge is Schubs in German.
    One German economist has suggested that the best way forward is to create a separate AstraZeneca-only programme which would be voluntary and open to anybody who seeks vaccination. This would allow people to choose which jab they receive, giving the option, for example, to take AstraZeneca tomorrow or wait six weeks for Pfizer. Giving people the choice may go some way towards restoring confidence in AstraZeneca.
    The last is not a bad idea at all - I imagine stocks of AZN on the continent would be zero within a few days. Obviously it's not as good as an organised programme, but it's still going to be the quickest at getting vaccines in arms of all the possible options now.

    ..........

    I'm not at all sure that this kind of free-for-all would be countenanced though. Did anyone read about that German cancer patient who got frogmarched out of a vaccination centre because she'd filled in the wrong form? I don't know if that's typically representative of their bureaucracy, but even so...

    (EDIT: Blockquotes all over the place on this system again today)
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,749
    edited March 2021

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
  • Just a point....we again heard all these anecdotal stories that loads of people were rejecting their appointment when they found they were to get AZN vaccine....It can't really have been that widespread otherwise never do 850k in a day.

    The centres were using stocks on people who were assisting family and friends to get to vaccine centres.

    Pro tip, if you're not on the priority list go with someone who is about to have their jab and ask nicely.

    I do expect the numbers to gangbusters even more so, the next month will be people who have already have their first jab, so aren't vaccine scared.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,599

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,578
    geoffw said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    Nudge is Schubs in German.
    One German economist has suggested that the best way forward is to create a separate AstraZeneca-only programme which would be voluntary and open to anybody who seeks vaccination. This would allow people to choose which jab they receive, giving the option, for example, to take AstraZeneca tomorrow or wait six weeks for Pfizer. Giving people the choice may go some way towards restoring confidence in AstraZeneca.
    As in the Schubstaffel?
  • This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Norway is a side issue.

    It is the idiotic way the EU are behaving that is the issue
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,578
    Leon said:

    Man, I really have enjoyed writing both these weekend threads.

    Your headline is nonsense. The people were asked, who would you have as head of state if we replaced the Queen?

    7% love the Queen so much they want to replace her with... The Queen
    Only 7%? Tssk!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,824

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    The EU are the ones talking about export bans. Quite why the individual EU nations waited for the EMA for approval then immediately ignored them is beyond me.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    HYUFD said:

    This has to be one of the most infuriating thread headers I have ever read on PB, though no surprise from a republican, Liberal, non Tory like TSE.

    ...

    Good to see that something can get under your usually impervious skin.
    Kudos @TheScreamingEagles
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,578

    Man, I really have enjoyed writing both these weekend threads.

    Calling the Exhaustive Ballot "Quasi-AV" is a bit like calling TSE a "Quasi-Everton Fan" :lol:

    :lol::lol:
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,661
    edited March 2021
      
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,599
    edited March 2021

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Norway is a side issue.

    It is the idiotic way the EU are behaving that is the issue
    But please, all I am asking is for people to remember which actions the EU have taken and which they havent.

    The blood clots issue started in Norway, not even an EU member, and then other govts worldwide, some in the EU, some not, decided to suspend AZ, other govts worldwide, some in the EU, some not in the EU, decided (rightly) to continue. The EU's body, the EMA said to continue.

    How on earth is that all the EUs fault?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,360
    An enjoyable piece of analysis, a heroic Guardian quality piece of misleading nonsense, and headline to match.

    As many as 7% of people hypothetically electing a head of state would choose a 95 year old? Gosh

    If you could pick anyone lots of different names would crop up. Amazing.

    Hypothetically replacing the royal system as many as a quarter of people would replace royals with royals. A phenomenon.

    The only non royal with any votes is a national treasure aged about 109. Cripes.

    A royal tops the poll of people to replace the royal system. Wowsers.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,824

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Norway is a side issue.

    It is the idiotic way the EU are behaving that is the issue
    But please, all I am asking is for people to remember which actions the EU have taken and which they havent.

    The blood clots issue started in Norway, not even an EU member, and then other govts worldwide, some in the EU, some not decided to suspend AZ, other govts worldwide, some in the EU, not in the EU decided (rightly) to continue. The EU's body, the EMA said to continue.

    How on earth is that all the EUs fault?
    Is anyone explicitly blaming the EU for that? It's not untrue to say EU countries/EU leaders have suspended or tried to discredit the vaccine.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,401
    RobD said:

    Cicero said:

    Floater said:

    Sky News - "The UK really, really going for it"

    Are you watching Ursula?

    No, because why would anyone believe the lying propaganda in the UK media?
    The vaccine numbers are fake?
    Maybe that's the next twist. We'll be accused of taking all the non-existent vaccines and so lying about how many have had the jab.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,657

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Quite right. It's astonishing. Brexit was supposed to mark the beginning of a new era - Independent Britain leaving the old structures behind and forging a new path in a global world. But if anything the Tory Right is more obsessed with the EU than ever. When we were a member, stories about EU matters would surface every few months or so; now its endless and unrelenting. Will nothing every set them free?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    alex_ said:

    Numbers only seem to add up to about 70.

    How can "nobody" be an option for "all those expressing a preference"?

    There is something very suspicious about the poll.
    ... Big shout out to the 4% of voters who would choose themselves to be head of state, we should admire the legendary modesty ...
    Screams out to me that only 25 people were polled, and someone not unadjacent to the header writer was one of them.

    The rest of the numbers were clearly made up at random.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,848

    RobD said:

    Cicero said:

    Floater said:

    Sky News - "The UK really, really going for it"

    Are you watching Ursula?

    No, because why would anyone believe the lying propaganda in the UK media?
    The vaccine numbers are fake?
    Maybe that's the next twist. We'll be accused of taking all the non-existent vaccines and so lying about how many have had the jab.
    I predict the next twist will when we overtake them on people with double doses and it will be "Ah but most of those double doses are of AZN and thats not really as good"
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,599
    RobD said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Norway is a side issue.

    It is the idiotic way the EU are behaving that is the issue
    But please, all I am asking is for people to remember which actions the EU have taken and which they havent.

    The blood clots issue started in Norway, not even an EU member, and then other govts worldwide, some in the EU, some not decided to suspend AZ, other govts worldwide, some in the EU, not in the EU decided (rightly) to continue. The EU's body, the EMA said to continue.

    How on earth is that all the EUs fault?
    Is anyone explicitly blaming the EU for that? It's not untrue to say EU countries/EU leaders have suspended or tried to discredit the vaccine.
    Yes that is the whole thrust of the spectator article, that the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots and different approaches to regulating medicine, but about Brexit politics.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,993
    edited March 2021
    Leon said:

    tlg86 said:

    Just a point....we again heard all these anecdotal stories that loads of people were rejecting their appointment when they found they were to get AZN vaccine....It can't really have been that widespread otherwise never do 850k in a day.

    As I pointed out at the time...
    My worry is it’s a real phenomenon, but focused on specific communities which already have an issue with hesitancy.
    Darwin will sort them out
    Indeed.
    It sounds heartless, but one way or another, when a virus is epidemic and herd immunity is not reached, we will all contribute to herd immunity in the end.

    Either by increasing the numerator through vaccine immunity, or increasing the numerator through virus-survived immunity... or by decreasing the denominator.

    The vast majority of us will experience the virus. Many of us are now privileged to have the choice of experiencing it with vaccine-offered protection, or to decide to experience the virus unprotected. Too many people never had that choice. Those who hesitate too long will find the virus makes the choice for them.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154
    Fishing said:

    Leon said:

    Man, I really have enjoyed writing both these weekend threads.

    Your headline is nonsense. The people were asked, who would you have as head of state if we replaced the Queen?

    7% love the Queen so much they want to replace her with... The Queen
    I agree. Also Her Majesty is 95. So lots of people might not want to inflict a 5-year? 10-year? term on her at that age.

    She has given her virtually the whole of her life to the people of this country and the Commonwealth, as she promised at her Coronation a lifetime ago. We're lucky she's still up for the job at all.

    Had the poll been taken when she was a sprightly 85 year old, more people would have voted for her.
    Although David Attenborough is hardly a spring chicken and he’s second choice.

    I would be interested to know how those names were selected. Were people presented with a slate, or were those the names they came up with?

    If the latter, the fact that 7% chose the Queen to replace herself suggests they weren’t listening to the question.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,455

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Quite right. It's astonishing. Brexit was supposed to mark the beginning of a new era - Independent Britain leaving the old structures behind and forging a new path in a global world. But if anything the Tory Right is more obsessed with the EU than ever. When we were a member, stories about EU matters would surface every few months or so; now its endless and unrelenting. Will nothing every set them free?
    I have no idea why....its like the EC are threatening to block legally obtained life saving vaccines to this country or something....bendy banana bullshit it isn't.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Really impressive timing of the Government to bring forward a bill guaranteed to generate COVID defying protests at a time when they claim that they want to be discouraging the risk of large gatherings whilst getting the population vaccinated. Or maybe they reason that the best chance of gaining public support for the bill is to see people on the streets protesting against it - because... "idiots/agitators not being responsible and potentially prolonging the pandemic..."

    So if people can't protest responsibly they should have that right taken away!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,824
    edited March 2021

    RobD said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Norway is a side issue.

    It is the idiotic way the EU are behaving that is the issue
    But please, all I am asking is for people to remember which actions the EU have taken and which they havent.

    The blood clots issue started in Norway, not even an EU member, and then other govts worldwide, some in the EU, some not decided to suspend AZ, other govts worldwide, some in the EU, not in the EU decided (rightly) to continue. The EU's body, the EMA said to continue.

    How on earth is that all the EUs fault?
    Is anyone explicitly blaming the EU for that? It's not untrue to say EU countries/EU leaders have suspended or tried to discredit the vaccine.
    Yes that is the whole thrust of the spectator article, that the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots and different approaches to regulating medicine, but about Brexit politics.
    What has whether it was done by the EU or the individual nations/leaders got to do with it? The EU didn't ban anything, but that's not the point of the article.
  • kingbongokingbongo Posts: 393
    RobD said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Norway is a side issue.

    It is the idiotic way the EU are behaving that is the issue
    But please, all I am asking is for people to remember which actions the EU have taken and which they havent.

    The blood clots issue started in Norway, not even an EU member, and then other govts worldwide, some in the EU, some not decided to suspend AZ, other govts worldwide, some in the EU, not in the EU decided (rightly) to continue. The EU's body, the EMA said to continue.

    How on earth is that all the EUs fault?
    Is anyone explicitly blaming the EU for that? It's not untrue to say EU countries/EU leaders have suspended or tried to discredit the vaccine.
    the blood clots issues didn't start in Norway - they simply acted to stop using the vaccine first rather than just a batch of the vaccine - It was Denmark banning its use which really kicked things off in the EU - as the French have identified - of course here in Denmark our health authority have gone on record as acknowledging the EMA guidance is correct and there is no evidence of a problem and that covid itself is a bigger risk for blood clots anyway BUT - we are keeping our ban until at least next Thursday because reasons.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,455
    The Liberal Democrats want the government to use profits from green infrastructure projects to create a new fund for climate action and green jobs.

    Leader Sir Ed Davey put forward his "sovereign green wealth fund" proposal at his party's spring conference.

    He said the government raised £9bn last month from auctions to build wind farms on the coasts of England and Wales.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56475256
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,360
    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:
    What did Coventry do to deserve this lady with some very dodgy views.
    Voted labour?
    Labour need a couple of million people who voted Tory in 2019 to vote Labour next time. I am doubtful if this is how to do it.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154

    What a shame that the idiocy of TSE's anti-monarchist dribbling in the comments has now translated into a fatuous and pointless thread header.

    We were far better discussing biscuits.

    Well, be fair, the thread is about the upper crust.
  • ydoethur said:

    Fishing said:

    Leon said:

    Man, I really have enjoyed writing both these weekend threads.

    Your headline is nonsense. The people were asked, who would you have as head of state if we replaced the Queen?

    7% love the Queen so much they want to replace her with... The Queen
    I agree. Also Her Majesty is 95. So lots of people might not want to inflict a 5-year? 10-year? term on her at that age.

    She has given her virtually the whole of her life to the people of this country and the Commonwealth, as she promised at her Coronation a lifetime ago. We're lucky she's still up for the job at all.

    Had the poll been taken when she was a sprightly 85 year old, more people would have voted for her.
    Although David Attenborough is hardly a spring chicken and he’s second choice.

    I would be interested to know how those names were selected. Were people presented with a slate, or were those the names they came up with?

    If the latter, the fact that 7% chose the Queen to replace herself suggests they weren’t listening to the question.
    IIRC it was a list of the great and the good including the Queen and you were also given the option of adding your own choice.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,599
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Norway is a side issue.

    It is the idiotic way the EU are behaving that is the issue
    But please, all I am asking is for people to remember which actions the EU have taken and which they havent.

    The blood clots issue started in Norway, not even an EU member, and then other govts worldwide, some in the EU, some not decided to suspend AZ, other govts worldwide, some in the EU, not in the EU decided (rightly) to continue. The EU's body, the EMA said to continue.

    How on earth is that all the EUs fault?
    Is anyone explicitly blaming the EU for that? It's not untrue to say EU countries/EU leaders have suspended or tried to discredit the vaccine.
    Yes that is the whole thrust of the spectator article, that the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots and different approaches to regulating medicine, but about Brexit politics.
    What has whether it was done by the EU or the individual nations/leaders got to do with it?
    Norway is not involved in Brexit. If a Norwegian regulator suspends AZ, it seems highly unlikely to be purely driven by Brexit?

    Isnt the more obvious reason, that the more bureaucratic approach often associated with European governments and organisations, is not suited to the regulation of vaccines in a pandemic emergency, far more likely than Norway somehow trying to get back at the UK for a Brexit it is not involved in?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,824

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Norway is a side issue.

    It is the idiotic way the EU are behaving that is the issue
    But please, all I am asking is for people to remember which actions the EU have taken and which they havent.

    The blood clots issue started in Norway, not even an EU member, and then other govts worldwide, some in the EU, some not decided to suspend AZ, other govts worldwide, some in the EU, not in the EU decided (rightly) to continue. The EU's body, the EMA said to continue.

    How on earth is that all the EUs fault?
    Is anyone explicitly blaming the EU for that? It's not untrue to say EU countries/EU leaders have suspended or tried to discredit the vaccine.
    Yes that is the whole thrust of the spectator article, that the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots and different approaches to regulating medicine, but about Brexit politics.
    What has whether it was done by the EU or the individual nations/leaders got to do with it?
    Norway is not involved in Brexit. If a Norwegian regulator suspends AZ, it seems highly unlikely to be purely driven by Brexit?

    Isnt the more obvious reason, that the more bureaucratic approach often associated with European governments and organisations, is not suited to the regulation of vaccines in a pandemic emergency, far more likely than Norway somehow trying to get back at the UK for a Brexit it is not involved in?
    The argument is the reaction is driven in part by that. But what has that got to do with blaming the EU? No one is doing that. They quite explicitly talking about EU leaders in the article.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,848
    One worry I have about european vaccine sceptism I have is that as the weather gets warmer cases will drop and it encourages people to think there is less reason to get a vaccine then winter returns and europe goes into yet another wave
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,573

    The Liberal Democrats want the government to use profits from green infrastructure projects to create a new fund for climate action and green jobs.

    Leader Sir Ed Davey put forward his "sovereign green wealth fund" proposal at his party's spring conference.

    He said the government raised £9bn last month from auctions to build wind farms on the coasts of England and Wales.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56475256

    So we'll hypothicate the use of the odd income stream, and quietly ignore the net quarter of a trillion deficit.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154

    ydoethur said:

    Fishing said:

    Leon said:

    Man, I really have enjoyed writing both these weekend threads.

    Your headline is nonsense. The people were asked, who would you have as head of state if we replaced the Queen?

    7% love the Queen so much they want to replace her with... The Queen
    I agree. Also Her Majesty is 95. So lots of people might not want to inflict a 5-year? 10-year? term on her at that age.

    She has given her virtually the whole of her life to the people of this country and the Commonwealth, as she promised at her Coronation a lifetime ago. We're lucky she's still up for the job at all.

    Had the poll been taken when she was a sprightly 85 year old, more people would have voted for her.
    Although David Attenborough is hardly a spring chicken and he’s second choice.

    I would be interested to know how those names were selected. Were people presented with a slate, or were those the names they came up with?

    If the latter, the fact that 7% chose the Queen to replace herself suggests they weren’t listening to the question.
    IIRC it was a list of the great and the good including the Queen and you were also given the option of adding your own choice.
    Then it was a strangely worded question.

    If we were to replace the Queen, would you choose the queen to replace her?

    It’s especially daft given that when she dies, which inevitably will be sooner rather than later, this is precisely sort of question we should be asking.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 22,703
    edited March 2021

    RobD said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Norway is a side issue.

    It is the idiotic way the EU are behaving that is the issue
    But please, all I am asking is for people to remember which actions the EU have taken and which they havent.

    The blood clots issue started in Norway, not even an EU member, and then other govts worldwide, some in the EU, some not decided to suspend AZ, other govts worldwide, some in the EU, not in the EU decided (rightly) to continue. The EU's body, the EMA said to continue.

    How on earth is that all the EUs fault?
    Is anyone explicitly blaming the EU for that? It's not untrue to say EU countries/EU leaders have suspended or tried to discredit the vaccine.
    Yes that is the whole thrust of the spectator article, that the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots and different approaches to regulating medicine, but about Brexit politics.
    The EU medical authorities have been firm. Local country medical authorities have done suspensions.

    Leaders of EU countries are guilty of politics on the AZ suspension question, and several have remarked that they needed to move together. Italy and France, for example.

    Which suggests that at least political leaders are interfering with medical regulators, and EU central politicking is a possibility.

    There are bits of Brexit politicking around.

    UVDL and others are teeing it up to blame "UK Brexit obsession" and "AZ not meeting contracts" and "UK vaccine nationalism" to save themselves,
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,638

    What a shame that the idiocy of TSE's anti-monarchist dribbling in the comments has now translated into a fatuous and pointless thread header.

    We were far better discussing biscuits.

    I'm relaxed about it!

    The Royal Family have been Head of State for 1,000 years and will still be so in 1,000 years time.
  • I think we can 'thank' Andrew Wakefield for that.

    Once bitten twice shy.
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,573

    What a shame that the idiocy of TSE's anti-monarchist dribbling in the comments has now translated into a fatuous and pointless thread header.

    We were far better discussing biscuits.

    I'm relaxed about it!

    The Royal Family have been Head of State for 1,000 years and will still be so in 1,000 years time.
    Just not always the same Royal Family...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154
    I disagree with both groups.

    I think anti-vaxxers are stupid *and* selfish.

    Admittedly, my anecdotal experience is that the major part for the British anti vax movement is soft core rather than hard core a la Corbyn or Wolfe. My neighbour, for example, says he wouldn’t have it at once but he’ll get it when enough people have had it to convince him it’s safe. Fortunately, now we have vaccinated literally millions and seen no major side effects, he seems to be coming round.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,401
    The British Enlightenment.

    Still burning brilliantly to the world.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,360

    HYUFD said:

    SNP now not only heading for no majority but at risk of falling below its 2016 Holyrood vote and seat share in what would be a humiliation for Sturgeon a la May 2017 after the huge poll leads she had just a few months ago.

    Latest Holyrood poll today has SNP on 46% on the constituency vote and 39% on the list compared to the 46.5% it got on the constituency vote and 41% it got on the list in 2016

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1373625695474180096?s=20

    And we still have the reports out in the coming few days, at least one which (and I suspect both) saying she has lied and been exceedingly obstructionist of those getting to the truth.

    Call me old-fashioned, but I ca't see that playing well with the softer end of the SNP vote.

    Expecting a bit of a swing from SNP -> Can't Be Ersed Party
    The hurdles in the way of actual Scottish independence are beginning to look insuperable.

  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,599
    MattW said:

    RobD said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Norway is a side issue.

    It is the idiotic way the EU are behaving that is the issue
    But please, all I am asking is for people to remember which actions the EU have taken and which they havent.

    The blood clots issue started in Norway, not even an EU member, and then other govts worldwide, some in the EU, some not decided to suspend AZ, other govts worldwide, some in the EU, not in the EU decided (rightly) to continue. The EU's body, the EMA said to continue.

    How on earth is that all the EUs fault?
    Is anyone explicitly blaming the EU for that? It's not untrue to say EU countries/EU leaders have suspended or tried to discredit the vaccine.
    Yes that is the whole thrust of the spectator article, that the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots and different approaches to regulating medicine, but about Brexit politics.
    The EU medical authorities have been firm. Local country medical authorities have done suspensions.

    Leaders of EU countries are guilty of politics on the AZ suspension question, and several have remarked that they needed to move together. Italy and France, for example.

    Which suggests that at least political leaders are interfering with medical regulators, and EU central politicking is a possibility.

    There are bits of Brexit politicking around.

    UVDL and others are teeing it up to blame "UK Brexit obsession" and "AZ not meeting contracts" and "UK vaccine nationalism" to save themselves,
    Yes there are bits of Brexit politicking around, I dont disagree. Bits, its far from the overwhelming reason, and to say the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots is as absurd as the decision to stop using the vaccine because of the concerns over blood clots.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154
    maaarsh said:

    What a shame that the idiocy of TSE's anti-monarchist dribbling in the comments has now translated into a fatuous and pointless thread header.

    We were far better discussing biscuits.

    I'm relaxed about it!

    The Royal Family have been Head of State for 1,000 years and will still be so in 1,000 years time.
    Just not always the same Royal Family...
    It is interesting to remember that dynasties are a seventeenth century creation. Prior to that, there was just ‘the blood royal’ which could descend through male or female lines, although male lines were preferred.

    Henry VII, for example, did not think of himself as founding a new ‘Tudor’ dynasty, just as Henry II did not think of an Angevin or Plantagenet dynasty (indeed, the very name Plantagenet wasn’t used until 1460).
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,141
    The author prefers a society in which power is in the hands of wealthy ex-public schoolboys, a group he sees as marginalised and discriminated against. This is very much faux-radicalism.
  • justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    ydoethur said:

    What a shame that the idiocy of TSE's anti-monarchist dribbling in the comments has now translated into a fatuous and pointless thread header.

    We were far better discussing biscuits.

    Well, be fair, the thread is about the upper crust.
    We’ve reopened the Bourbon tin.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,848

    MattW said:

    RobD said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Norway is a side issue.

    It is the idiotic way the EU are behaving that is the issue
    But please, all I am asking is for people to remember which actions the EU have taken and which they havent.

    The blood clots issue started in Norway, not even an EU member, and then other govts worldwide, some in the EU, some not decided to suspend AZ, other govts worldwide, some in the EU, not in the EU decided (rightly) to continue. The EU's body, the EMA said to continue.

    How on earth is that all the EUs fault?
    Is anyone explicitly blaming the EU for that? It's not untrue to say EU countries/EU leaders have suspended or tried to discredit the vaccine.
    Yes that is the whole thrust of the spectator article, that the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots and different approaches to regulating medicine, but about Brexit politics.
    The EU medical authorities have been firm. Local country medical authorities have done suspensions.

    Leaders of EU countries are guilty of politics on the AZ suspension question, and several have remarked that they needed to move together. Italy and France, for example.

    Which suggests that at least political leaders are interfering with medical regulators, and EU central politicking is a possibility.

    There are bits of Brexit politicking around.

    UVDL and others are teeing it up to blame "UK Brexit obsession" and "AZ not meeting contracts" and "UK vaccine nationalism" to save themselves,
    Yes there are bits of Brexit politicking around, I dont disagree. Bits, its far from the overwhelming reason, and to say the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots is as absurd as the decision to stop using the vaccine because of the concerns over blood clots.
    If its about bloodclots how come pfizer wasn't also put on hold as it has had similar incidence?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,231

    geoffw said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    Nudge is Schubs in German.
    One German economist has suggested that the best way forward is to create a separate AstraZeneca-only programme which would be voluntary and open to anybody who seeks vaccination. This would allow people to choose which jab they receive, giving the option, for example, to take AstraZeneca tomorrow or wait six weeks for Pfizer. Giving people the choice may go some way towards restoring confidence in AstraZeneca.
    The last is not a bad idea at all - I imagine stocks of AZN on the continent would be zero within a few days. Obviously it's not as good as an organised programme, but it's still going to be the quickest at getting vaccines in arms of all the possible options now.
    ..........

    I'm not at all sure that this kind of free-for-all would be countenanced though. Did anyone read about that German cancer patient who got frogmarched out of a vaccination centre because she'd filled in the wrong form? I don't know if that's typically representative of their bureaucracy, but even so...

    (EDIT: Blockquotes all over the place on this system again today)

    I agree, not likely to happen, but advisable nonetheless. Sadly, AZN (which is every bit as good as every other vaccine) has been trashed - it's never going to be seen on the continent as anything other than the 'quick and dirty' vaccine, so you may as well just get people in who want the vaccine now.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time
    I await the hard form!
  • justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time
    I await the hard form!
    The one with the £1,000 fine
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,824
    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time
    I await the hard form!
    You've already had the letter saying it wouldn't be coming, and you have been told many times on here.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,360
    maaarsh said:

    What a shame that the idiocy of TSE's anti-monarchist dribbling in the comments has now translated into a fatuous and pointless thread header.

    We were far better discussing biscuits.

    I'm relaxed about it!

    The Royal Family have been Head of State for 1,000 years and will still be so in 1,000 years time.
    Just not always the same Royal Family...
    Not having the gift of eternal life and youth that bit is inevitable, but HM the Queen is identifiably a direct descendent of Alfred the Great (d 899).

    Maybe the thinnest bit in the line is the claim of Henry VII to the throne, which is wafer thin/non existent, requiring Chaucer's sister in law to save the day; but the rules of who is the king/queen change quite often, and even now, because of the exclusions, are not quite based on the legitimate primogeniture principle.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154
    edited March 2021
    OK, which one of you is CHH?

    It isn’t me, by the way...
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    Pagan2 said:

    MattW said:

    RobD said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Norway is a side issue.

    It is the idiotic way the EU are behaving that is the issue
    But please, all I am asking is for people to remember which actions the EU have taken and which they havent.

    The blood clots issue started in Norway, not even an EU member, and then other govts worldwide, some in the EU, some not decided to suspend AZ, other govts worldwide, some in the EU, not in the EU decided (rightly) to continue. The EU's body, the EMA said to continue.

    How on earth is that all the EUs fault?
    Is anyone explicitly blaming the EU for that? It's not untrue to say EU countries/EU leaders have suspended or tried to discredit the vaccine.
    Yes that is the whole thrust of the spectator article, that the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots and different approaches to regulating medicine, but about Brexit politics.
    The EU medical authorities have been firm. Local country medical authorities have done suspensions.

    Leaders of EU countries are guilty of politics on the AZ suspension question, and several have remarked that they needed to move together. Italy and France, for example.

    Which suggests that at least political leaders are interfering with medical regulators, and EU central politicking is a possibility.

    There are bits of Brexit politicking around.

    UVDL and others are teeing it up to blame "UK Brexit obsession" and "AZ not meeting contracts" and "UK vaccine nationalism" to save themselves,
    Yes there are bits of Brexit politicking around, I dont disagree. Bits, its far from the overwhelming reason, and to say the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots is as absurd as the decision to stop using the vaccine because of the concerns over blood clots.
    If its about bloodclots how come pfizer wasn't also put on hold as it has had similar incidence?
    I think what is happening is that the meme of UK=AZN=Treachery=Nasty=Wrong is firmly embedded in some peoples minds.

    So when evidence of anything that might support that belief pops up.......
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    Disappointing lack of outdated dodgy sentiment for me to get my teeth stuck into on this thread. On topic, an elected Head of State would imo need to be a non-divisive national treasure. Attenborough is the obvious choice but he's too old, so I'd probably vote for Olivia Coleman or Monty Don. Who I wouldn't want to see get it is Lord Coe.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154
    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time
    I await the hard form!
    You've already had the letter saying it wouldn't be coming, and you have been told many times on here.
    I’ve had the hard form without even asking for it. So something strange has happened there and I don’t think we can assume they won’t turn up.

    Unless one of you figured out my name and address and was kind enough to contact them on my behalf.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,503
    ydoethur said:

    I disagree with both groups.

    I think anti-vaxxers are stupid *and* selfish.

    Admittedly, my anecdotal experience is that the major part for the British anti vax movement is soft core rather than hard core a la Corbyn or Wolfe. My neighbour, for example, says he wouldn’t have it at once but he’ll get it when enough people have had it to convince him it’s safe. Fortunately, now we have vaccinated literally millions and seen no major side effects, he seems to be coming round.
    That's quite a common view among American and French people interviewed as "doubtful" - it's common for them to say they're wary of something new but they'll have a think if it seems to work well. That's self-centred but not totally stupid, and with luck they'll nearly all come round.

    On topic, the best model of directly-elected Presidents that I've seen is Ireland, favouring noted independents with dignity and gravitas rather than party hacks. Attenborough would be a good example, though he's getting on a bit (94, I think). I'm still fond of the anti-personality cult of the Swiss model, which rotates the Presidency annually around the 7-person Government, so you struggle to remember who's currently doing it, but still have a senior figure for official functions.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154
    edited March 2021
    kinabalu said:

    Disappointing lack of outdated dodgy sentiment for me to get my teeth stuck into on this thread. On topic, an elected Head of State would imo need to be a non-divisive national treasure. Attenborough is the obvious choice but he's too old, so I'd probably vote for Olivia Coleman or Monty Don. Who I wouldn't want to see get it is Lord Coe.

    We should really mess with everyone’s head and give it to Phil Hammond.

    Edit - that’s come across as unintentionally ambiguous but I’m leaving it like that.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,824
    ydoethur said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time
    I await the hard form!
    You've already had the letter saying it wouldn't be coming, and you have been told many times on here.
    I’ve had the hard form without even asking for it. So something strange has happened there and I don’t think we can assume they won’t turn up.

    Unless one of you figured out my name and address and was kind enough to contact them on my behalf.
    You can thank me at the next PB meet. ;)
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,080

    What a shame that the idiocy of TSE's anti-monarchist dribbling in the comments has now translated into a fatuous and pointless thread header.

    We were far better discussing biscuits.

    I'm relaxed about it!

    The Royal Family have been Head of State for 1,000 years and will still be so in 1,000 years time.
    Out of interest, when would you date the start of the Royal Family's rule as Head of State?
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,848
    kinabalu said:

    Disappointing lack of outdated dodgy sentiment for me to get my teeth stuck into on this thread. On topic, an elected Head of State would imo need to be a non-divisive national treasure. Attenborough is the obvious choice but he's too old, so I'd probably vote for Olivia Coleman or Monty Don. Who I wouldn't want to see get it is Lord Coe.

    Attenborough is on the board of the optimum population trust which advocates severe population reduction.....not sure that makes him non divisive
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time
    I await the hard form!
    The one with the £1,000 fine
    I don't think so. How can they prove I even received their brief Census leaflet? More likely someone will come with a form eventually - at which point I will complete it.
  • ajbajb Posts: 145
    Personally,my preferred option would be to keep the crown, but replace the Windsors with a family of lions. The advantages of this approach are considerable:

    - The lions would be unlikely to interfere in politics
    - There is no actual constitutional change, so we'd skip the pitfalls of changing to some kind of Presidential system
    - The tabloids could still write stories about the royals love lives, so not too much opposition from that quarter
    - Lions are more magnificent than Windsors, so the flag-waving tendency would be happy

    As far as I can see the only potential issue is that the lions might occasionally eat a foreign Head of State. Even that would be an improvement in most cases.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,994
    Another way of reading this poll is that people are so unenthusiastic about replacing the Queen with an elected head of state that only a minority expressed a preference, of those who did "nobody" was the first choice, second was another royal, fourth was replace The Queen with the Queen, and fifth in the running was "me".

    Conclusion: no-one's interested.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    I'm trying to think how much difference there is between the vaccine number rampers and those party members you see clapping manically in communist states as the Dear Leader announces the latest tractor stats.

    And there's not much really.

    You have been vaccinated against a disease with a survival rate of 99 per cent plus. Many get away with mild or zero symptoms. Big deal.

    Against that, you still can't go for a drink with friends, go to a political meeting, attend a protest, have a party, exercise at a gym, have a night out at a theatre, restaurant, nightclub or concert hall. Many are not even allowed to work.

    Even if these 'treats' (otherwise known as human rights) return, in the longer term, foreign travel looks like a distant pipedream. Summer abroad is getting cancelled because mutant strains innit.

    Package holidays to Spain will soon be looked on as the halcyon days. If you aren't under house arrest in the summer the government are going to make jolly sure you are under country arrest.

    And the bill for all this is coming soon, its coming right around the corner at you, and it will make you and vast numbers much poorer.

    And yet you think you are well off. Goodness.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154
    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    RobD said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time
    I await the hard form!
    You've already had the letter saying it wouldn't be coming, and you have been told many times on here.
    I’ve had the hard form without even asking for it. So something strange has happened there and I don’t think we can assume they won’t turn up.

    Unless one of you figured out my name and address and was kind enough to contact them on my behalf.
    You can thank me at the next PB meet. ;)
    Why bother? If you know that much about me, just stand yourself a bottle of wine on my credit card.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,824
    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time
    I await the hard form!
    The one with the £1,000 fine
    I don't think so. How can they prove I even received their brief Census leaflet? More likely someone will come with a form eventually - at which point I will complete it.
    So very childish.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    ydoethur said:

    I disagree with both groups.

    I think anti-vaxxers are stupid *and* selfish.

    Admittedly, my anecdotal experience is that the major part for the British anti vax movement is soft core rather than hard core a la Corbyn or Wolfe. My neighbour, for example, says he wouldn’t have it at once but he’ll get it when enough people have had it to convince him it’s safe. Fortunately, now we have vaccinated literally millions and seen no major side effects, he seems to be coming round.
    I've met a couple (parents at kids schools) of the real hard core.

    It comes across as utterly batshit insanity grafted onto otherwise ordinary person - "I like Youngs Bitter, walking the dog, cycling. Also I believe that invisible aliens crawl into my house in the middle of the night to steal the cheese."
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154

    I'm trying to think how much difference there is between the vaccine number rampers and those party members you see clapping manically in communist states as the Dear Leader announces the latest tractor stats.

    And there's not much really.

    The only reason I didn’t bang my head on the desk is because I’ve finally stopped work and am sitting in the sunroom.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,848
    ajb said:

    Personally,my preferred option would be to keep the crown, but replace the Windsors with a family of lions. The advantages of this approach are considerable:

    - The lions would be unlikely to interfere in politics
    - There is no actual constitutional change, so we'd skip the pitfalls of changing to some kind of Presidential system
    - The tabloids could still write stories about the royals love lives, so not too much opposition from that quarter
    - Lions are more magnificent than Windsors, so the flag-waving tendency would be happy

    As far as I can see the only potential issue is that the lions might occasionally eat a foreign Head of State. Even that would be an improvement in most cases.

    Well when the foreign head of state was Trump....though might be classed as cruel to animals
  • Sean_F said:

    The author prefers a society in which power is in the hands of wealthy ex-public schoolboys, a group he sees as marginalised and discriminated against. This is very much faux-radicalism.

    Fake news, I've said I want Brian Blessed as Head of State.

    He's anything but a wealthy ex-public schoolboy.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,125

    Pagan2 said:

    MattW said:

    RobD said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Norway is a side issue.

    It is the idiotic way the EU are behaving that is the issue
    But please, all I am asking is for people to remember which actions the EU have taken and which they havent.

    The blood clots issue started in Norway, not even an EU member, and then other govts worldwide, some in the EU, some not decided to suspend AZ, other govts worldwide, some in the EU, not in the EU decided (rightly) to continue. The EU's body, the EMA said to continue.

    How on earth is that all the EUs fault?
    Is anyone explicitly blaming the EU for that? It's not untrue to say EU countries/EU leaders have suspended or tried to discredit the vaccine.
    Yes that is the whole thrust of the spectator article, that the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots and different approaches to regulating medicine, but about Brexit politics.
    The EU medical authorities have been firm. Local country medical authorities have done suspensions.

    Leaders of EU countries are guilty of politics on the AZ suspension question, and several have remarked that they needed to move together. Italy and France, for example.

    Which suggests that at least political leaders are interfering with medical regulators, and EU central politicking is a possibility.

    There are bits of Brexit politicking around.

    UVDL and others are teeing it up to blame "UK Brexit obsession" and "AZ not meeting contracts" and "UK vaccine nationalism" to save themselves,
    Yes there are bits of Brexit politicking around, I dont disagree. Bits, its far from the overwhelming reason, and to say the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots is as absurd as the decision to stop using the vaccine because of the concerns over blood clots.
    If its about bloodclots how come pfizer wasn't also put on hold as it has had similar incidence?
    I think what is happening is that the meme of UK=AZN=Treachery=Nasty=Wrong is firmly embedded in some peoples minds.

    So when evidence of anything that might support that belief pops up.......
    Or that could be entirely in your own imagination.

    I don't know anyone who thinks anything remotely like that.

    What we need in Germany is *more* political interference, not less. This hopeless laissez-faire attitude from Merkel is a disaster.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154
    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time
    I await the hard form!
    The one with the £1,000 fine
    I don't think so. How can they prove I even received their brief Census leaflet? More likely someone will come with a form eventually - at which point I will complete it.
    Someone will come round, ring your doorbell and ask why you haven’t completed it. They should bring forms with them.
  • justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time
    I await the hard form!
    The one with the £1,000 fine
    I don't think so. How can they prove I even received their brief Census leaflet? More likely someone will come with a form eventually - at which point I will complete it.
    The problem is you have been discussing it today so you cannot say you were unaware, or that you could complete it online as confirmed by several posters and the way to obtain your census number

    You are being deliberately obtuse and risk the fine
  • I'm trying to think how much difference there is between the vaccine number rampers and those party members you see clapping manically in communist states as the Dear Leader announces the latest tractor stats.

    And there's not much really.

    You have been vaccinated against a disease with a survival rate of 99 per cent plus. Many get away with mild or zero symptoms. Big deal.

    Against that, you still can't go for a drink with friends, go to a political meeting, attend a protest, have a party, exercise at a gym, have a night out at a theatre, restaurant, nightclub or concert hall. Many are not even allowed to work.

    Even if these 'treats' (otherwise known as human rights) return, in the longer term, foreign travel looks like a distant pipedream. Summer abroad is getting cancelled because mutant strains innit.

    Package holidays to Spain will soon be looked on as the halcyon days. If you aren't under house arrest in the summer the government are going to make jolly sure you are under country arrest.

    And the bill for all this is coming soon, its coming right around the corner at you, and it will make you and vast numbers much poorer.

    And yet you think you are well off. Goodness.

    You really are a [moderated].

    You moan like a whore about lockdown but get upset about the quickest route to permanently leave lockdown.

    Are you Laurence Fox?
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    Sean_F said:

    The author prefers a society in which power is in the hands of wealthy ex-public schoolboys, a group he sees as marginalised and discriminated against. This is very much faux-radicalism.

    Fake news, I've said I want Brian Blessed as Head of State.

    He's anything but a wealthy ex-public schoolboy.
    Ah, so you want to replace Elizabeth II with Richard IV? Very progressive :smiley:
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,125
    Pagan2 said:

    MattW said:

    RobD said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Norway is a side issue.

    It is the idiotic way the EU are behaving that is the issue
    But please, all I am asking is for people to remember which actions the EU have taken and which they havent.

    The blood clots issue started in Norway, not even an EU member, and then other govts worldwide, some in the EU, some not decided to suspend AZ, other govts worldwide, some in the EU, not in the EU decided (rightly) to continue. The EU's body, the EMA said to continue.

    How on earth is that all the EUs fault?
    Is anyone explicitly blaming the EU for that? It's not untrue to say EU countries/EU leaders have suspended or tried to discredit the vaccine.
    Yes that is the whole thrust of the spectator article, that the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots and different approaches to regulating medicine, but about Brexit politics.
    The EU medical authorities have been firm. Local country medical authorities have done suspensions.

    Leaders of EU countries are guilty of politics on the AZ suspension question, and several have remarked that they needed to move together. Italy and France, for example.

    Which suggests that at least political leaders are interfering with medical regulators, and EU central politicking is a possibility.

    There are bits of Brexit politicking around.

    UVDL and others are teeing it up to blame "UK Brexit obsession" and "AZ not meeting contracts" and "UK vaccine nationalism" to save themselves,
    Yes there are bits of Brexit politicking around, I dont disagree. Bits, its far from the overwhelming reason, and to say the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots is as absurd as the decision to stop using the vaccine because of the concerns over blood clots.
    If its about bloodclots how come pfizer wasn't also put on hold as it has had similar incidence?
    Is that true? The PEI seems to have seen a few cases of something very rare with AZ, but not with Pfizer, as I understood it.
  • AnneJGP said:

    MattW said:

    RobD said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Norway is a side issue.

    It is the idiotic way the EU are behaving that is the issue
    But please, all I am asking is for people to remember which actions the EU have taken and which they havent.

    The blood clots issue started in Norway, not even an EU member, and then other govts worldwide, some in the EU, some not decided to suspend AZ, other govts worldwide, some in the EU, not in the EU decided (rightly) to continue. The EU's body, the EMA said to continue.

    How on earth is that all the EUs fault?
    Is anyone explicitly blaming the EU for that? It's not untrue to say EU countries/EU leaders have suspended or tried to discredit the vaccine.
    Yes that is the whole thrust of the spectator article, that the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots and different approaches to regulating medicine, but about Brexit politics.
    The EU medical authorities have been firm. Local country medical authorities have done suspensions.

    Leaders of EU countries are guilty of politics on the AZ suspension question, and several have remarked that they needed to move together. Italy and France, for example.

    Which suggests that at least political leaders are interfering with medical regulators, and EU central politicking is a possibility.

    There are bits of Brexit politicking around.

    UVDL and others are teeing it up to blame "UK Brexit obsession" and "AZ not meeting contracts" and "UK vaccine nationalism" to save themselves,
    I must admit I have come to admire the self-discipline shown by AstraZenica's top management. Their product has been trashed and they themselves have been accused of ignoring the provisions of contracts. They're just letting all the sound & fury burn itself out, to all appearances. That's quite some self-command.
    And they are selling it at cost price
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    kamski said:

    Pagan2 said:

    MattW said:

    RobD said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Norway is a side issue.

    It is the idiotic way the EU are behaving that is the issue
    But please, all I am asking is for people to remember which actions the EU have taken and which they havent.

    The blood clots issue started in Norway, not even an EU member, and then other govts worldwide, some in the EU, some not decided to suspend AZ, other govts worldwide, some in the EU, not in the EU decided (rightly) to continue. The EU's body, the EMA said to continue.

    How on earth is that all the EUs fault?
    Is anyone explicitly blaming the EU for that? It's not untrue to say EU countries/EU leaders have suspended or tried to discredit the vaccine.
    Yes that is the whole thrust of the spectator article, that the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots and different approaches to regulating medicine, but about Brexit politics.
    The EU medical authorities have been firm. Local country medical authorities have done suspensions.

    Leaders of EU countries are guilty of politics on the AZ suspension question, and several have remarked that they needed to move together. Italy and France, for example.

    Which suggests that at least political leaders are interfering with medical regulators, and EU central politicking is a possibility.

    There are bits of Brexit politicking around.

    UVDL and others are teeing it up to blame "UK Brexit obsession" and "AZ not meeting contracts" and "UK vaccine nationalism" to save themselves,
    Yes there are bits of Brexit politicking around, I dont disagree. Bits, its far from the overwhelming reason, and to say the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots is as absurd as the decision to stop using the vaccine because of the concerns over blood clots.
    If its about bloodclots how come pfizer wasn't also put on hold as it has had similar incidence?
    I think what is happening is that the meme of UK=AZN=Treachery=Nasty=Wrong is firmly embedded in some peoples minds.

    So when evidence of anything that might support that belief pops up.......
    Or that could be entirely in your own imagination.

    I don't know anyone who thinks anything remotely like that.

    What we need in Germany is *more* political interference, not less. This hopeless laissez-faire attitude from Merkel is a disaster.
    Well, someone, or something is causing various politicians to go wibble when the subject of AZN comes up..

    My suggestion is a pre-disposition multiplied by confirmation bias.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,824
    kamski said:

    Pagan2 said:

    MattW said:

    RobD said:

    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca

    The EU has made loads of stupid mistakes, but it feels as if the Brexit media and influencers want to focus on mistakes they have not made to drive further division here.

    The blood clot issue originated in Norway which is not in the EU, and it was national regulators, not the EMA, which suspended vaccination. The EMA has always said it should go ahead, and can do so for all age groups.
    I think it can be safely said the EU are doing this all on their own and do not need any help from the UK
    How on earth can it be the EU on their own if its Norway????? Do facts really not matter anymore?
    Norway is a side issue.

    It is the idiotic way the EU are behaving that is the issue
    But please, all I am asking is for people to remember which actions the EU have taken and which they havent.

    The blood clots issue started in Norway, not even an EU member, and then other govts worldwide, some in the EU, some not decided to suspend AZ, other govts worldwide, some in the EU, not in the EU decided (rightly) to continue. The EU's body, the EMA said to continue.

    How on earth is that all the EUs fault?
    Is anyone explicitly blaming the EU for that? It's not untrue to say EU countries/EU leaders have suspended or tried to discredit the vaccine.
    Yes that is the whole thrust of the spectator article, that the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots and different approaches to regulating medicine, but about Brexit politics.
    The EU medical authorities have been firm. Local country medical authorities have done suspensions.

    Leaders of EU countries are guilty of politics on the AZ suspension question, and several have remarked that they needed to move together. Italy and France, for example.

    Which suggests that at least political leaders are interfering with medical regulators, and EU central politicking is a possibility.

    There are bits of Brexit politicking around.

    UVDL and others are teeing it up to blame "UK Brexit obsession" and "AZ not meeting contracts" and "UK vaccine nationalism" to save themselves,
    Yes there are bits of Brexit politicking around, I dont disagree. Bits, its far from the overwhelming reason, and to say the AZ suspensions were not about blood clots is as absurd as the decision to stop using the vaccine because of the concerns over blood clots.
    If its about bloodclots how come pfizer wasn't also put on hold as it has had similar incidence?
    Is that true? The PEI seems to have seen a few cases of something very rare with AZ, but not with Pfizer, as I understood it.
    The incidence rate in the UK is the same for both.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,147

    What a shame that the idiocy of TSE's anti-monarchist dribbling in the comments has now translated into a fatuous and pointless thread header.

    We were far better discussing biscuits.

    At least with Meeks et al the headers were scholarly.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time
    I await the hard form!
    The one with the £1,000 fine
    I don't think so. How can they prove I even received their brief Census leaflet? More likely someone will come with a form eventually - at which point I will complete it.
    The problem is you have been discussing it today so you cannot say you were unaware, or that you could complete it online as confirmed by several posters and the way to obtain your census number

    You are being deliberately obtuse and risk the fine
    In fairness to Justin - and it’s not as though he and I are bosom friends - he’s not saying he won’t complete it, just that he will only complete it on paper and he doesn’t see why he should have to chase them for it.

    Which isn’t radically different from my own situation on Thursday evening, where I said I was willing to fill it in but not ring them up to ask where the form was given I should not have to waste my time for their error.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,824
    ydoethur said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time
    I await the hard form!
    The one with the £1,000 fine
    I don't think so. How can they prove I even received their brief Census leaflet? More likely someone will come with a form eventually - at which point I will complete it.
    The problem is you have been discussing it today so you cannot say you were unaware, or that you could complete it online as confirmed by several posters and the way to obtain your census number

    You are being deliberately obtuse and risk the fine
    In fairness to Justin - and it’s not as though he and I are bosom friends - he’s not saying he won’t complete it, just that he will only complete it on paper and he doesn’t see why he should have to chase them for it.

    Which isn’t radically different from my own situation on Thursday evening, where I said I was willing to fill it in but not ring them up to ask where the form was given I should not have to waste my time for their error.
    It's not an error though, is it? The forms aren't being mailed out in England by default. If you want one, you have to request one.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Cases plateauing slightly? Still jolly good in the context of still rising testing and collapsing deaths/admissions


  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,638
    Hope everyone has completed their Census!

    Of course those in Scotland will have to wait until 2022. What will Sturgeon be putting down as her occupation then?!

    :lol:
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,154
    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time

    justin124 said:

    This for Survation 10-17 March 2016: ie the same point in the Holyrood campaign.

    SNP - 54%/42%
    Labour - 20%/18%
    Cons - 16%/18%
    Lib Dems - 7%/6%
    Green - -/10%

    Have you done your census yet.

    Still time
    I await the hard form!
    The one with the £1,000 fine
    I don't think so. How can they prove I even received their brief Census leaflet? More likely someone will come with a form eventually - at which point I will complete it.
    The problem is you have been discussing it today so you cannot say you were unaware, or that you could complete it online as confirmed by several posters and the way to obtain your census number

    You are being deliberately obtuse and risk the fine
    In fairness to Justin - and it’s not as though he and I are bosom friends - he’s not saying he won’t complete it, just that he will only complete it on paper and he doesn’t see why he should have to chase them for it.

    Which isn’t radically different from my own situation on Thursday evening, where I said I was willing to fill it in but not ring them up to ask where the form was given I should not have to waste my time for their error.
    It's not an error though, is it? The forms aren't being mailed out in England by default. If you want one, you have to request one.
    So how come I got one?

    The only explanation I can think of, unless you really did ring them up for me, is they somehow realised they hadn’t sent out the original form and it was quicker to prepare and send a full paper copy rather than a net slip.
This discussion has been closed.