With Alba now represented in Westminster, that means TWO U.K. party leaders can now be counted as sex pests.
Sex pest implies unwanted attention. Not sure that’s ever been suggested with Boris’s conquests...
It's more where there wasn't a conquest.
The very expression "conquest" is predatory and misogynist.
My word not his. I reckon Boris has a bit of the Bill Clinton about him.
Some men can charm their way into bed with most women. Others, cannot.
He's actually a very good wordsmith, in a literary rather than conceptual way, which tends to attract the opposite sex. Together with the hair-flicking, colourful tramp-to-be-mothered image it might be a heady stew. He's just not very good at concepts.
I thought it was the number of concepts he had problems with!
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
With Alba now represented in Westminster, that means TWO U.K. party leaders can now be counted as sex pests.
Sex pest implies unwanted attention. Not sure that’s ever been suggested with Boris’s conquests...
It's more where there wasn't a conquest.
The very expression "conquest" is predatory and misogynist.
My word not his. I reckon Boris has a bit of the Bill Clinton about him.
Some men can charm their way into bed with most women. Others, cannot.
He's actually a very good wordsmith, in a literary rather than conceptual way, which tends to attract the opposite sex. Together with the hair-flicking and colourful, tramp-to-be-mothered profile it might be a heady stew. He's just not very good at concepts.
With Alba now represented in Westminster, that means TWO U.K. party leaders can now be counted as sex pests.
Sex pest implies unwanted attention. Not sure that’s ever been suggested with Boris’s conquests...
Try telling that to Charlotte Edwardes and Shappi Khorsandi.
Apologies, I’d forgotten about those allegations. Interesting that Number 10 actually went on the record to deny the Edwardes claim. If she went to the police they’d be obliged to investigate it. Obviously would help if a few more women came out to make similar claims. The Shappi Khorsandi one is odd, but I’m not sure it supports Edwarde’s claim.
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
And now we have vaccines, as we do against a number of other diseases. So why do we need all these other measures as well? That is never answered. it's just assumed that we do. And I strongly question that assumption.
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
I strongly suspect that we're going to need some sort of verification to a) get on a plane to Thailand and b) get into Thailand, once we land. And we want to see our grandchildren there, and suspect it's going to be tougher getting them here than us going there.
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
The biggest issue with them is their proposed introduction before all have been offered the vaccine (plus 3 weeks for efficacy to develop), that is completely unacceptable and insulting to the younger half of the country.
If we dont need them ongoing, yet expect to have to have to live with covid ongoing, what are the conditions that allow their removal?
I did idly hope this was going to be some polling about Prince Charles and how his image has changed among the general public.
Ah well..
Another idle musing - is Dowden positioning himself for a leadership bid one day? He'll have to live down being so close to David Cameron but I imagine he's hoping people will excuse the liberal indiscretions of his youth and recognise his full-blooded commitment to the populist route to world domination.
I can see him hoping for a senior position in a Sunak Cabinet (or Shadow Cabinet) and if the latter falters, Dowden has plenty of time on his side.
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
And now we have vaccines, as we do against a number of other diseases. So why do we need all these other measures as well? That is never answered. it's just assumed that we do. And I strongly question that assumption.
Yes; one could argue that children should not be allowed to start school without evidence of MMR vaccination. Historically it's been so high that one could just assume, but I believe there are now areas where that isn't the case.
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
And now we have vaccines, as we do against a number of other diseases. So why do we need all these other measures as well? That is never answered. it's just assumed that we do. And I strongly question that assumption.
Exactly, we need to get to a place where COVID is treated just like every other disease. As soon there's limited risk to the NHS we should return to the old normal as quickly as possible. The current dystopian thinking coming from the DoH and Home Office in response to this is quite disturbing.
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
The biggest issue with them is their proposed introduction before all have been offered the vaccine (plus 3 weeks for efficacy to develop), that is completely unacceptable and insulting to the younger half of the country.
If we dont need them ongoing, yet expect to have to have to live with covid ongoing, what are the conditions that allow their removal?
Exactly, I fear that their introduction is a one way measure that will never be reversed.
I would say, due to the vast difference in public perception of their charisma, Labour needs to be consistently 6-7 points clear in mid term polls for Sir Keir to beat Boris in a GE
he's hoping people will excuse the liberal indiscretions of his youth and recognise his full-blooded commitment to the populist route to world domination.
He needs to stop pissing about and ramp it up to Patriot Level: HOLLOBONE
On topic, raunchy as Shagger's front page revelations are, its hardly a news flash. Tory supporters are perfectly happy to both say "ah he's a lad isn't he" and simultaneously "he's a good father and a family man look at him with Carrie and the baby".
So what with any other politician would have sunk him multiple times over instead boosts Shagger because of the footballification of politics. However, should Keith be revealed to have been shagging the lass who runs his donkey sanctuary there would be Consternation and Uproar about how morally degenerate he is in having an affair.
It's pathetic how partisanly puritan people get.
"Man has sex" is not news. "Woman has sex" is not news.
I couldn't care less if its Boris, Keith, Jezza, Drakeford, Sturgeon, Salmond or anyone else you can throw a stick at.
The days when people were remotely bothered by politicians sex lives are long gone. The Mirror have thrown money away on this - most of this woman's story has been kicking about for a few years, and no one was interested.
Not true. Boris is getting hollowed out, bit by bit.
The best bit in the Arcuri story was where he ponced £3.10 off her to buy a drink. What a grease stain of a human he is.
We've commented in the past, have we not, that Boris Johnson appears to be the sort of chap who'll have a drink with, and be one of the, lads until it comes to his round. Then he finds he's left his wallet at home!
In my pub going days I tended to judge pals on who would slow down as you approached the hostelry so they wouldn't have to buy the first round, BJ strikes me as that sort.
We had a slightly more subtle example of that - something that might or not be ok depending on one's view. Bloke who would have a half (himself) when getting his round but always have a pint otherwise. All fine on the money front but, still, just a bit of a "thing" that perhaps needlessly detracted from group cohesion and corp d'esprit. Still not sure about this one, even though that bloke was me.
Missing out yourself when buying a round is a sensible and fair way of moderating consumption without being rude. Particularly this works well with the culture of pressed drinking so common in British men.
Not a fair solution, everyone else pays £20 for a round, and the "skipper" pays £15.
Yes, but the person losing "value" is the skipper. No one else is shortchanged.
The Sunday Times front page splashes David Cameron and "toxic banker" Greensill. Boris is a convenient distraction.
Exactly. Financial sleaze runs right through this government. It is an open goal, and something Keir should be good at convincing the electoral jury over.
Really? The story is that Dave tried to make direct contact with Rishi a number of times and each time he got rejected. Not sure there's much of a story in it.
There is a story in it - that Dave was trying to pull in favours..
Which party is Dave standing for?
Rishi refused to let even Dave pull in favours is the story.
The interesting aspect is why this story - which hurts an ex-PM who left office 5 years ago - is appearing now. What are we being diverted from looking at?
The same might be said about the Mirror story too.
Isn’t it just that Greensill is going under (I believe) and it’s an interesting UK angle for the press?
Possibly the government is leaking because it shows they *didn’t* do favours for their mates?
Greensill going under also takes out a whole lot of our steel industry as it now desperately need money,
How Cameron ties into the need to bail British Steel out yet again is something I can't work out.
Tbh, it might be time to just call it on British Steel. The UK no longer has a cost structure that makes it possible to have rolled steel production. Energy costs, carbon floor pricing and all of the other emissions and safety costs are just too high. This is coming to whole of Western Europe.
We either need to nationalise it and operate it as a business of strategic importance under state control or live without major steel production in the UK. I'm not sure either is a particular vote winner.
I suspect strategically we need the production so we are going to have to nationalise it.
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
The biggest issue with them is their proposed introduction before all have been offered the vaccine (plus 3 weeks for efficacy to develop), that is completely unacceptable and insulting to the younger half of the country.
If we dont need them ongoing, yet expect to have to have to live with covid ongoing, what are the conditions that allow their removal?
Exactly, I fear that their introduction is a one way measure that will never be reversed.
As Sir Richard Sykes said today the UK approach has gone from cavalier to crippling caution in a few months.
Unfortunately those who benefit from lockdown life, combined with those scared of re-opening are in a clear majority in the country, and especially of voters. The data the govt is most keen to follow is opinion polling so am pretty pessimistic about where this goes.
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
I strongly suspect that we're going to need some sort of verification to a) get on a plane to Thailand and b) get into Thailand, once we land. And we want to see our grandchildren there, and suspect it's going to be tougher getting them here than us going there.
As a temporary measure I’m not opposed but they must fade out as the threat recedes. I genuinely think there is some “nudge” thinking going on here to get younger and sceptical cohorts to get vaccinated.
In some ways we are both a beneficiary and a victim of modern science. Clearly if this pandemic had happened 20 years ago we would have been in an utterly hopeless state because mRNA vaccines would not have been possible. However if it had happened 100-150 years ago we would not have any idea about “variants” - or even that this was caused by a virus - it would have been thought of as a form of flu and formed part of one of the panoply of other diseases that lurked in the background that would ultimately fade into the background.
I’m really into the theory that the 1889 “flu” pandemic was caused by a novel coronavirus and what concerns me is that after that there was no “roaring 90s” but rather the fin de siecle malaise of the end of the C19 - maybe a symptom of a type of long Covid of the time. Below is an extract from the diary of a Dublin doctor in 1890.
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
And now we have vaccines, as we do against a number of other diseases. So why do we need all these other measures as well? That is never answered. it's just assumed that we do. And I strongly question that assumption.
Exactly, we need to get to a place where COVID is treated just like every other disease. As soon there's limited risk to the NHS we should return to the old normal as quickly as possible. The current dystopian thinking coming from the DoH and Home Office in response to this is quite disturbing.
We have already gone to 1 metre social distancing in our outpatients as part of our recovery plan.
It seems unreasonable to require 2 metres in other indoor venues.
The Sunday Times front page splashes David Cameron and "toxic banker" Greensill. Boris is a convenient distraction.
Exactly. Financial sleaze runs right through this government. It is an open goal, and something Keir should be good at convincing the electoral jury over.
Really? The story is that Dave tried to make direct contact with Rishi a number of times and each time he got rejected. Not sure there's much of a story in it.
There is a story in it - that Dave was trying to pull in favours..
Which party is Dave standing for?
Rishi refused to let even Dave pull in favours is the story.
The interesting aspect is why this story - which hurts an ex-PM who left office 5 years ago - is appearing now. What are we being diverted from looking at?
The same might be said about the Mirror story too.
Isn’t it just that Greensill is going under (I believe) and it’s an interesting UK angle for the press?
Possibly the government is leaking because it shows they *didn’t* do favours for their mates?
Greensill going under also takes out a whole lot of our steel industry as it now desperately need money,
How Cameron ties into the need to bail British Steel out yet again is something I can't work out.
Gupta (the owner of British Steel) is dependent on Greensill for financing.
He is pleading for money
It’s a pity that his wife has just started the refurbishment of her beautiful house on Belgrave Square. Poor optics.
Cameron is slipping down in my estimation as time passes. Not just this, more generally.
I had him as "mediocre" but he's flirting with "poor" now.
Let's see if he can turn it around.
Predictably Rachel Reeves is now asking for an inquiry into this latest scandal. Whereas the better response would be to ask for full transparency on the contracts entered into by this government. Not be diverted into obsessing about what the last PM but one did a decade ago.
Rachel Reeves has been doing exactly what you ask, so that's not a fair criticism. It's just that this government takes no notice.
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
I strongly suspect that we're going to need some sort of verification to a) get on a plane to Thailand and b) get into Thailand, once we land. And we want to see our grandchildren there, and suspect it's going to be tougher getting them here than us going there.
As a temporary measure I’m not opposed but they must fade out as the threat recedes. I genuinely think there is some “nudge” thinking going on here to get younger and sceptical cohorts to get vaccinated.
In some ways we are both a beneficiary and a victim of modern science. Clearly if this pandemic had happened 20 years ago we would have been in an utterly hopeless state because mRNA vaccines would not have been possible. However if it had happened 100-150 years ago we would not have any idea about “variants” - or even that this was caused by a virus - it would have been thought of as a form of flu and formed part of one of the panoply of other diseases that lurked in the background that would ultimately fade into the background.
I’m really into the theory that the 1889 “flu” pandemic was caused by a novel coronavirus and what concerns me is that after that there was no “roaring 90s” but rather the fin de siecle malaise of the end of the C19 - maybe a symptom of a type of long Covid of the time. Below is an extract from the diary of a Dublin doctor in 1890.
he's hoping people will excuse the liberal indiscretions of his youth and recognise his full-blooded commitment to the populist route to world domination.
He needs to stop pissing about and ramp it up to Patriot Level: HOLLOBONE
The Sunday Times front page splashes David Cameron and "toxic banker" Greensill. Boris is a convenient distraction.
Exactly. Financial sleaze runs right through this government. It is an open goal, and something Keir should be good at convincing the electoral jury over.
Really? The story is that Dave tried to make direct contact with Rishi a number of times and each time he got rejected. Not sure there's much of a story in it.
There is a story in it - that Dave was trying to pull in favours..
Which party is Dave standing for?
Rishi refused to let even Dave pull in favours is the story.
The interesting aspect is why this story - which hurts an ex-PM who left office 5 years ago - is appearing now. What are we being diverted from looking at?
The same might be said about the Mirror story too.
Isn’t it just that Greensill is going under (I believe) and it’s an interesting UK angle for the press?
Possibly the government is leaking because it shows they *didn’t* do favours for their mates?
Greensill going under also takes out a whole lot of our steel industry as it now desperately need money,
How Cameron ties into the need to bail British Steel out yet again is something I can't work out.
Tbh, it might be time to just call it on British Steel. The UK no longer has a cost structure that makes it possible to have rolled steel production. Energy costs, carbon floor pricing and all of the other emissions and safety costs are just too high. This is coming to whole of Western Europe.
We either need to nationalise it and operate it as a business of strategic importance under state control or live without major steel production in the UK. I'm not sure either is a particular vote winner.
I suspect strategically we need the production so we are going to have to nationalise it.
We absolutely need the production. It is a strategic national asset. Which is why the Tories will allow it to go to the wall.
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
And now we have vaccines, as we do against a number of other diseases. So why do we need all these other measures as well? That is never answered. it's just assumed that we do. And I strongly question that assumption.
Exactly, we need to get to a place where COVID is treated just like every other disease. As soon there's limited risk to the NHS we should return to the old normal as quickly as possible. The current dystopian thinking coming from the DoH and Home Office in response to this is quite disturbing.
We have already gone to 1 metre social distancing in our outpatients as part of our recovery plan.
It seems unreasonable to require 2 metres in other indoor venues.
The country has been traumatised by this winter. I think that a gentle relaxation of measures is a good idea from a mental health let alone a Covid perspective. I was walking down the riverside in Canterbury yesterday and someone a good 15-20 feet away reflexively put on their mask as we passed. That sort of fear is going to take a long time to overcome. I seriously think there is an element of PTSD out there after the last year - particularly the last winter,
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
The biggest issue with them is their proposed introduction before all have been offered the vaccine (plus 3 weeks for efficacy to develop), that is completely unacceptable and insulting to the younger half of the country.
If we dont need them ongoing, yet expect to have to have to live with covid ongoing, what are the conditions that allow their removal?
Exactly, I fear that their introduction is a one way measure that will never be reversed.
As Sir Richard Sykes said today the UK approach has gone from cavalier to crippling caution in a few months.
Unfortunately those who benefit from lockdown life, combined with those scared of re-opening are in a clear majority in the country, and especially of voters. The data the govt is most keen to follow is opinion polling so am pretty pessimistic about where this goes.
Ultimately the treasury will want the tax income from hospitality and to eliminate furlough as early as possible so that's what will drive the decision making process in the end.
The worry I have is how long it will take for that rational thinking to assert itself, how much unnecessary loneliness and isolation it will result in for millions of younger people who are wasting away distanced from their friends and colleagues.
The original report from Pfizer indicated 52% efficacy of a first vaccination after three weeks and this rose to 85% seven days after the second vaccination. It was on that basis I, and others, argued we should follow the recommendation of two vaccinations 21 days apart.
I don't recall similar figures from AstraZeneca so it may well have been there was clear data the efficacy of the first AZ vaccination after 21 days, 60 days and 90 days was such as to make the 12 week gap between vaccinations acceptable in terms of maintaining protection.
The report on New Year's Day from the JCVI provided new data for the Pfizer vaccine which contradicted the earlier Pfizer data. I argued at the time I still thought following the vaccine manufacturer's recommendation was the sensible path but, and I'm happy to admit this, I was wrong.
I do think there was widespread ignorance of the period required for immunity to build up after the first vaccination - I honestly think some people believed as soon as they were vaccinated they were immune which, as we know, isn't the case.
The roadmap was, I suspect, carefully designed to allow the appropriate 3-week time lag so those vaccinated now will have considerable immunity by April 12th. As second vaccinations increase, the May 17th easing will take place with a growing number of the elderly having received both vaccinations and of course by June 21st even more will be in the position of not having had both vaccinations but to have built up the greatest level of immunity.
Clearly, there are concerns over the levels of immunity later in the year - for those who are having or have had their second vaccinations now, what will immunity levels be like in September or October? I suspect we don't know and the irony will be in the autumn if we have a largely protected younger cohort and the elderly, whose immunity levels are falling.
That becomes a problem as we see vaccination take-up numbers. As has been reported, among the over 70s, the take up is less than 75% in Newham and in other areas. I also suspect there are people under the radar who will never be contacted and therefore will remain vulnerable.
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
I strongly suspect that we're going to need some sort of verification to a) get on a plane to Thailand and b) get into Thailand, once we land. And we want to see our grandchildren there, and suspect it's going to be tougher getting them here than us going there.
As a temporary measure I’m not opposed but they must fade out as the threat recedes. I genuinely think there is some “nudge” thinking going on here to get younger and sceptical cohorts to get vaccinated.
In some ways we are both a beneficiary and a victim of modern science. Clearly if this pandemic had happened 20 years ago we would have been in an utterly hopeless state because mRNA vaccines would not have been possible. However if it had happened 100-150 years ago we would not have any idea about “variants” - or even that this was caused by a virus - it would have been thought of as a form of flu and formed part of one of the panoply of other diseases that lurked in the background that would ultimately fade into the background.
I’m really into the theory that the 1889 “flu” pandemic was caused by a novel coronavirus and what concerns me is that after that there was no “roaring 90s” but rather the fin de siecle malaise of the end of the C19 - maybe a symptom of a type of long Covid of the time. Below is an extract from the diary of a Dublin doctor in 1890.
Though loss of sense of smell and taste is common to many upper respiratory viruses, including influenza. The unusual feature of Covid-19 is how prolonged it is, while the Russian Flu appears short but severe, in common with other pandemic flu.
The electoral calculus of constituency vs list votes aside I cannot see how this ego clash can possibly be good for the Indy movement - amongst the waivers at least.
The Sunday Times front page splashes David Cameron and "toxic banker" Greensill. Boris is a convenient distraction.
Exactly. Financial sleaze runs right through this government. It is an open goal, and something Keir should be good at convincing the electoral jury over.
Really? The story is that Dave tried to make direct contact with Rishi a number of times and each time he got rejected. Not sure there's much of a story in it.
There is a story in it - that Dave was trying to pull in favours..
Which party is Dave standing for?
Rishi refused to let even Dave pull in favours is the story.
The interesting aspect is why this story - which hurts an ex-PM who left office 5 years ago - is appearing now. What are we being diverted from looking at?
The same might be said about the Mirror story too.
Isn’t it just that Greensill is going under (I believe) and it’s an interesting UK angle for the press?
Possibly the government is leaking because it shows they *didn’t* do favours for their mates?
Greensill going under also takes out a whole lot of our steel industry as it now desperately need money,
How Cameron ties into the need to bail British Steel out yet again is something I can't work out.
Tbh, it might be time to just call it on British Steel. The UK no longer has a cost structure that makes it possible to have rolled steel production. Energy costs, carbon floor pricing and all of the other emissions and safety costs are just too high. This is coming to whole of Western Europe.
We either need to nationalise it and operate it as a business of strategic importance under state control or live without major steel production in the UK. I'm not sure either is a particular vote winner.
I suspect strategically we need the production so we are going to have to nationalise it.
HS2, the other railways being reopened, the renewal of all the motorway viaducts as they reach the end of their life and windfarms all require vast amounts of steel.
It would be wiser to keep production for that reason alone rather than risk being held to ransom by China.
Whether the current lot will see it that way is another question.
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
I strongly suspect that we're going to need some sort of verification to a) get on a plane to Thailand and b) get into Thailand, once we land. And we want to see our grandchildren there, and suspect it's going to be tougher getting them here than us going there.
As a temporary measure I’m not opposed but they must fade out as the threat recedes. I genuinely think there is some “nudge” thinking going on here to get younger and sceptical cohorts to get vaccinated.
In some ways we are both a beneficiary and a victim of modern science. Clearly if this pandemic had happened 20 years ago we would have been in an utterly hopeless state because mRNA vaccines would not have been possible. However if it had happened 100-150 years ago we would not have any idea about “variants” - or even that this was caused by a virus - it would have been thought of as a form of flu and formed part of one of the panoply of other diseases that lurked in the background that would ultimately fade into the background.
I’m really into the theory that the 1889 “flu” pandemic was caused by a novel coronavirus and what concerns me is that after that there was no “roaring 90s” but rather the fin de siecle malaise of the end of the C19 - maybe a symptom of a type of long Covid of the time. Below is an extract from the diary of a Dublin doctor in 1890.
he's hoping people will excuse the liberal indiscretions of his youth and recognise his full-blooded commitment to the populist route to world domination.
He needs to stop pissing about and ramp it up to Patriot Level: HOLLOBONE
I'm afraid I knew Hollobone when he was a Bromley Councillor. He probably doesn't regret the right-wing excesses of his youth.
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
And now we have vaccines, as we do against a number of other diseases. So why do we need all these other measures as well? That is never answered. it's just assumed that we do. And I strongly question that assumption.
Exactly, we need to get to a place where COVID is treated just like every other disease. As soon there's limited risk to the NHS we should return to the old normal as quickly as possible. The current dystopian thinking coming from the DoH and Home Office in response to this is quite disturbing.
We have already gone to 1 metre social distancing in our outpatients as part of our recovery plan.
It seems unreasonable to require 2 metres in other indoor venues.
Yes, I'd suggest that we won't need it at all by the June unlockdown date. We need to be able to get back to normal sooner rather than later.
The Sunday Times front page splashes David Cameron and "toxic banker" Greensill. Boris is a convenient distraction.
Exactly. Financial sleaze runs right through this government. It is an open goal, and something Keir should be good at convincing the electoral jury over.
Really? The story is that Dave tried to make direct contact with Rishi a number of times and each time he got rejected. Not sure there's much of a story in it.
There is a story in it - that Dave was trying to pull in favours..
Which party is Dave standing for?
Rishi refused to let even Dave pull in favours is the story.
The interesting aspect is why this story - which hurts an ex-PM who left office 5 years ago - is appearing now. What are we being diverted from looking at?
The same might be said about the Mirror story too.
Isn’t it just that Greensill is going under (I believe) and it’s an interesting UK angle for the press?
Possibly the government is leaking because it shows they *didn’t* do favours for their mates?
Greensill going under also takes out a whole lot of our steel industry as it now desperately need money,
How Cameron ties into the need to bail British Steel out yet again is something I can't work out.
Gupta (the owner of British Steel) is dependent on Greensill for financing.
He is pleading for money
It’s a pity that his wife has just started the refurbishment of her beautiful house on Belgrave Square. Poor optics.
Cameron is slipping down in my estimation as time passes. Not just this, more generally.
I had him as "mediocre" but he's flirting with "poor" now.
The GC and FCA have completely failed in their duties.
It makes no sense at all, how something that was so clearly a Ponzi scheme got past the regulators, who are supposed to understand the products they authorise.
Boris annoys so many and yet he is still enjoying a poll lead and improving ratings
The same arguments continue to be resurrected but it is simply baked into just who he is
It must be very frustrating to his critics to see it all just bounce of him
More popular now than the first poll after the GE
The problem for people who dislike Boris is they are blinded by hatred, which makes it impossible for them to give an unbiased view. So they only mention the bad polls for him, are obsessed by his infidelities when they are baked in to the public perception of him, and so on...
On topic, raunchy as Shagger's front page revelations are, its hardly a news flash. Tory supporters are perfectly happy to both say "ah he's a lad isn't he" and simultaneously "he's a good father and a family man look at him with Carrie and the baby".
So what with any other politician would have sunk him multiple times over instead boosts Shagger because of the footballification of politics. However, should Keith be revealed to have been shagging the lass who runs his donkey sanctuary there would be Consternation and Uproar about how morally degenerate he is in having an affair.
It's pathetic how partisanly puritan people get.
"Man has sex" is not news. "Woman has sex" is not news.
I couldn't care less if its Boris, Keith, Jezza, Drakeford, Sturgeon, Salmond or anyone else you can throw a stick at.
The days when people were remotely bothered by politicians sex lives are long gone. The Mirror have thrown money away on this - most of this woman's story has been kicking about for a few years, and no one was interested.
Not true. Boris is getting hollowed out, bit by bit.
The best bit in the Arcuri story was where he ponced £3.10 off her to buy a drink. What a grease stain of a human he is.
We've commented in the past, have we not, that Boris Johnson appears to be the sort of chap who'll have a drink with, and be one of the, lads until it comes to his round. Then he finds he's left his wallet at home!
In my pub going days I tended to judge pals on who would slow down as you approached the hostelry so they wouldn't have to buy the first round, BJ strikes me as that sort.
We had a slightly more subtle example of that - something that might or not be ok depending on one's view. Bloke who would have a half (himself) when getting his round but always have a pint otherwise. All fine on the money front but, still, just a bit of a "thing" that perhaps needlessly detracted from group cohesion and corp d'esprit. Still not sure about this one, even though that bloke was me.
I have reached the age where volume of liquid is a bigger issue than volume of alcohol. So I stick to bottles while the younger guys are on pints.
The GC and FCA have completely failed in their duties.
It makes no sense at all, how something that was so clearly a Ponzi scheme got past the regulators, who are supposed to understand the products they authorise.
The GC should not regulated a product that they did not understand and was not a betting site (98% of users won money). The FCA should have understood it, as a Ponzi scheme and falsely advertising as a stock market, and shut it down before it became mass market.
I doubt anyone in the above will resign and doubt anyone will go to prison.
The Sunday Times front page splashes David Cameron and "toxic banker" Greensill. Boris is a convenient distraction.
Exactly. Financial sleaze runs right through this government. It is an open goal, and something Keir should be good at convincing the electoral jury over.
Really? The story is that Dave tried to make direct contact with Rishi a number of times and each time he got rejected. Not sure there's much of a story in it.
There is a story in it - that Dave was trying to pull in favours..
Which party is Dave standing for?
Rishi refused to let even Dave pull in favours is the story.
The interesting aspect is why this story - which hurts an ex-PM who left office 5 years ago - is appearing now. What are we being diverted from looking at?
The same might be said about the Mirror story too.
Isn’t it just that Greensill is going under (I believe) and it’s an interesting UK angle for the press?
Possibly the government is leaking because it shows they *didn’t* do favours for their mates?
Greensill going under also takes out a whole lot of our steel industry as it now desperately need money,
How Cameron ties into the need to bail British Steel out yet again is something I can't work out.
Gupta (the owner of British Steel) is dependent on Greensill for financing.
He is pleading for money
It’s a pity that his wife has just started the refurbishment of her beautiful house on Belgrave Square. Poor optics.
Cameron is slipping down in my estimation as time passes. Not just this, more generally.
I had him as "mediocre" but he's flirting with "poor" now.
Let's see if he can turn it around.
Predictably Rachel Reeves is now asking for an inquiry into this latest scandal. Whereas the better response would be to ask for full transparency on the contracts entered into by this government. Not be diverted into obsessing about what the last PM but one did a decade ago.
Yes, Labour aren't very good at politics.
Different incentives
At the moment Dodds is being sacked Reeves needs to be in the media. Doesn’t matter if this approach is suboptimal for Labour if it demonstrates she can cut through
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
And now we have vaccines, as we do against a number of other diseases. So why do we need all these other measures as well? That is never answered. it's just assumed that we do. And I strongly question that assumption.
Exactly, we need to get to a place where COVID is treated just like every other disease. As soon there's limited risk to the NHS we should return to the old normal as quickly as possible. The current dystopian thinking coming from the DoH and Home Office in response to this is quite disturbing.
My working assumption is that there are plans in the Home Office to have ID cards and every few years they're resurrected as possible opportunities arise. But are eventually beaten back. This time Covid has given these authoritarians a wonderful excuse because they don't even need to use the name ID cards but can create them just the same, call them something else and link them to something nice like going out for a drink with your mates and not being killed by the Big Bad Virus. Thus hoping to fool people.
Those of us who are opposed will have to fight like rats to stop them because that is what vax passports are - a form of ID card which will be used long after Covid is forgotten and for purposes which have nothing to do with health.
I don't trust the assurances of Ministers or health officials on this one little bit. The state is always looking for ways to make itself our master instead of our servants, to control us, to limit how we live, what we think and say - all for our own good, they tell us. Yeah, right .....
Boris annoys so many and yet he is still enjoying a poll lead and improving ratings
The same arguments continue to be resurrected but it is simply baked into just who he is
It must be very frustrating to his critics to see it all just bounce of him
More popular now than the first poll after the GE
The problem for people who dislike Boris is they are blinded by hatred, which makes it impossible for them to give an unbiased view. So they only mention the bad polls for him, are obsessed by his infidelities when they are baked in to the public perception of him, and so on...
It happens on both sides though, some people here only post good Tory polls.
I think the gap is probably somewhere around 5 points, Johnson is slightly more popular than Starmer but Starmer is a lot more unknown than Johnson. That can either be a good, or very bad thing.
Ultimately the treasury will want the tax income from hospitality and to eliminate furlough as early as possible so that's what will drive the decision making process in the end.
The worry I have is how long it will take for that rational thinking to assert itself, how much unnecessary loneliness and isolation it will result in for millions of younger people who are wasting away distanced from their friends and colleagues.
This is going to be cultural, not political and economic.
There will be those who will want to forget Covid ever happened - wipe it from the mind and go back to the pre-Covid life in its entirety (which will mean initially to excess before balance is restored).
There will be those for whom it has been a nightmare and the scale of the mental health damage is yet to be truly understood - I do know there have been huge increases in calls from those facing physical abuse and from vulnerable adults and children.
I get all of that - I really do.
BUT, there are those for whom Covid has either been, in whole or in part, a positive life-changing experience. Whatever the continued background stigmatisation of home working, for many it has been a revelation. Not having the commute (whether road, rail or bus or whatever), having more time to spend with family or even at home (and for a lot of people, home is a place they like to be (and recognising for a few it is purgatory)) are all for some people positives.
It has enabled people to stop and think, to evaluate or re-evaluate life priorities, to work out what is really important and what matters. Let's not downplay this either - Covid has changed the lives of millions, some, regrettable for the worse, others, arguably for the better.
The world has changed - much as some might like to, we can't put the genie back in Pandora's Box (mixed metaphor alert !!). The new "normal" won't be the old normal and as there were winners and losers then, there will be winners and losers now.
Boris annoys so many and yet he is still enjoying a poll lead and improving ratings
The same arguments continue to be resurrected but it is simply baked into just who he is
It must be very frustrating to his critics to see it all just bounce of him
More popular now than the first poll after the GE
The problem for people who dislike Boris is they are blinded by hatred, which makes it impossible for them to give an unbiased view. So they only mention the bad polls for him, are obsessed by his infidelities when they are baked in to the public perception of him, and so on...
It happens on both sides though, some people here only post good Tory polls.
I think the gap is probably somewhere around 5 points, Johnson is slightly more popular than Starmer but Starmer is a lot more unknown than Johnson. That can either be a good, or very bad thing.
The original report from Pfizer indicated 52% efficacy of a first vaccination after three weeks and this rose to 85% seven days after the second vaccination. It was on that basis I, and others, argued we should follow the recommendation of two vaccinations 21 days apart.
I don't recall similar figures from AstraZeneca so it may well have been there was clear data the efficacy of the first AZ vaccination after 21 days, 60 days and 90 days was such as to make the 12 week gap between vaccinations acceptable in terms of maintaining protection.
The report on New Year's Day from the JCVI provided new data for the Pfizer vaccine which contradicted the earlier Pfizer data. I argued at the time I still thought following the vaccine manufacturer's recommendation was the sensible path but, and I'm happy to admit this, I was wrong.
I do think there was widespread ignorance of the period required for immunity to build up after the first vaccination - I honestly think some people believed as soon as they were vaccinated they were immune which, as we know, isn't the case.
The roadmap was, I suspect, carefully designed to allow the appropriate 3-week time lag so those vaccinated now will have considerable immunity by April 12th. As second vaccinations increase, the May 17th easing will take place with a growing number of the elderly having received both vaccinations and of course by June 21st even more will be in the position of not having had both vaccinations but to have built up the greatest level of immunity.
Clearly, there are concerns over the levels of immunity later in the year - for those who are having or have had their second vaccinations now, what will immunity levels be like in September or October? I suspect we don't know and the irony will be in the autumn if we have a largely protected younger cohort and the elderly, whose immunity levels are falling.
That becomes a problem as we see vaccination take-up numbers. As has been reported, among the over 70s, the take up is less than 75% in Newham and in other areas. I also suspect there are people under the radar who will never be contacted and therefore will remain vulnerable.
On long term immunity - SARS survivors have been immune to COVID and that's not an identical disease. People who have been vaccinated or have had COVID are very likely to have a good level of immunity in the very long term due to t-cells.
The immune system isn't just antibodies and the new studies that look into t-cell responses are going to be really important to know what kind of long term immunty vaccinated people will have, so far the results are very promising.
On topic, raunchy as Shagger's front page revelations are, its hardly a news flash. Tory supporters are perfectly happy to both say "ah he's a lad isn't he" and simultaneously "he's a good father and a family man look at him with Carrie and the baby".
So what with any other politician would have sunk him multiple times over instead boosts Shagger because of the footballification of politics. However, should Keith be revealed to have been shagging the lass who runs his donkey sanctuary there would be Consternation and Uproar about how morally degenerate he is in having an affair.
It's pathetic how partisanly puritan people get.
"Man has sex" is not news. "Woman has sex" is not news.
I couldn't care less if its Boris, Keith, Jezza, Drakeford, Sturgeon, Salmond or anyone else you can throw a stick at.
The days when people were remotely bothered by politicians sex lives are long gone. The Mirror have thrown money away on this - most of this woman's story has been kicking about for a few years, and no one was interested.
Not true. Boris is getting hollowed out, bit by bit.
The best bit in the Arcuri story was where he ponced £3.10 off her to buy a drink. What a grease stain of a human he is.
We've commented in the past, have we not, that Boris Johnson appears to be the sort of chap who'll have a drink with, and be one of the, lads until it comes to his round. Then he finds he's left his wallet at home!
In my pub going days I tended to judge pals on who would slow down as you approached the hostelry so they wouldn't have to buy the first round, BJ strikes me as that sort.
We had a slightly more subtle example of that - something that might or not be ok depending on one's view. Bloke who would have a half (himself) when getting his round but always have a pint otherwise. All fine on the money front but, still, just a bit of a "thing" that perhaps needlessly detracted from group cohesion and corp d'esprit. Still not sure about this one, even though that bloke was me.
Missing out yourself when buying a round is a sensible and fair way of moderating consumption without being rude. Particularly this works well with the culture of pressed drinking so common in British men.
Not a fair solution, everyone else pays £20 for a round, and the "skipper" pays £15.
Incorrect.
Everyone pays the same amount for other people so it is fair.
Using tap water instead of a half because it makes the maths easier
Boris annoys so many and yet he is still enjoying a poll lead and improving ratings
The same arguments continue to be resurrected but it is simply baked into just who he is
It must be very frustrating to his critics to see it all just bounce of him
More popular now than the first poll after the GE
The problem for people who dislike Boris is they are blinded by hatred, which makes it impossible for them to give an unbiased view. So they only mention the bad polls for him, are obsessed by his infidelities when they are baked in to the public perception of him, and so on...
On topic, raunchy as Shagger's front page revelations are, its hardly a news flash. Tory supporters are perfectly happy to both say "ah he's a lad isn't he" and simultaneously "he's a good father and a family man look at him with Carrie and the baby".
So what with any other politician would have sunk him multiple times over instead boosts Shagger because of the footballification of politics. However, should Keith be revealed to have been shagging the lass who runs his donkey sanctuary there would be Consternation and Uproar about how morally degenerate he is in having an affair.
It's pathetic how partisanly puritan people get.
"Man has sex" is not news. "Woman has sex" is not news.
I couldn't care less if its Boris, Keith, Jezza, Drakeford, Sturgeon, Salmond or anyone else you can throw a stick at.
The days when people were remotely bothered by politicians sex lives are long gone. The Mirror have thrown money away on this - most of this woman's story has been kicking about for a few years, and no one was interested.
Not true. Boris is getting hollowed out, bit by bit.
The best bit in the Arcuri story was where he ponced £3.10 off her to buy a drink. What a grease stain of a human he is.
We've commented in the past, have we not, that Boris Johnson appears to be the sort of chap who'll have a drink with, and be one of the, lads until it comes to his round. Then he finds he's left his wallet at home!
In my pub going days I tended to judge pals on who would slow down as you approached the hostelry so they wouldn't have to buy the first round, BJ strikes me as that sort.
We had a slightly more subtle example of that - something that might or not be ok depending on one's view. Bloke who would have a half (himself) when getting his round but always have a pint otherwise. All fine on the money front but, still, just a bit of a "thing" that perhaps needlessly detracted from group cohesion and corp d'esprit. Still not sure about this one, even though that bloke was me.
Missing out yourself when buying a round is a sensible and fair way of moderating consumption without being rude. Particularly this works well with the culture of pressed drinking so common in British men.
Not a fair solution, everyone else pays £20 for a round, and the "skipper" pays £15.
Incorrect.
Everyone pays the same amount for other people so it is fair.
Using tap water instead of a half because it makes the maths easier
A: buys 3 pints for others 1 pint for himself
B: buys 3 pints for others 1 pint for himself
C: buys 3 pints for others water for himself
Why is he being ungenerous?
Yeah sitting out your own round is fine as long as you're buying for everyone else in it.
The Sunday Times front page splashes David Cameron and "toxic banker" Greensill. Boris is a convenient distraction.
Exactly. Financial sleaze runs right through this government. It is an open goal, and something Keir should be good at convincing the electoral jury over.
Really? The story is that Dave tried to make direct contact with Rishi a number of times and each time he got rejected. Not sure there's much of a story in it.
There is a story in it - that Dave was trying to pull in favours..
Which party is Dave standing for?
Rishi refused to let even Dave pull in favours is the story.
The interesting aspect is why this story - which hurts an ex-PM who left office 5 years ago - is appearing now. What are we being diverted from looking at?
The same might be said about the Mirror story too.
Isn’t it just that Greensill is going under (I believe) and it’s an interesting UK angle for the press?
Possibly the government is leaking because it shows they *didn’t* do favours for their mates?
Greensill going under also takes out a whole lot of our steel industry as it now desperately need money,
How Cameron ties into the need to bail British Steel out yet again is something I can't work out.
Gupta (the owner of British Steel) is dependent on Greensill for financing.
He is pleading for money
It’s a pity that his wife has just started the refurbishment of her beautiful house on Belgrave Square. Poor optics.
Cameron is slipping down in my estimation as time passes. Not just this, more generally.
I had him as "mediocre" but he's flirting with "poor" now.
Let's see if he can turn it around.
Predictably Rachel Reeves is now asking for an inquiry into this latest scandal. Whereas the better response would be to ask for full transparency on the contracts entered into by this government. Not be diverted into obsessing about what the last PM but one did a decade ago.
Rachel Reeves has been doing exactly what you ask, so that's not a fair criticism. It's just that this government takes no notice.
Labour aren't cutting through though. Not sure why. Starmer needs to develop a bit of star quality, something which makes people interested in what he has to say. I don't know whether it is style or that he does not have much to say or a bit of both. Or whether now is not the time, whoever was speaking for them. But there seems to be too much of a hole where one is badly needed.
On topic, raunchy as Shagger's front page revelations are, its hardly a news flash. Tory supporters are perfectly happy to both say "ah he's a lad isn't he" and simultaneously "he's a good father and a family man look at him with Carrie and the baby".
So what with any other politician would have sunk him multiple times over instead boosts Shagger because of the footballification of politics. However, should Keith be revealed to have been shagging the lass who runs his donkey sanctuary there would be Consternation and Uproar about how morally degenerate he is in having an affair.
It's pathetic how partisanly puritan people get.
"Man has sex" is not news. "Woman has sex" is not news.
I couldn't care less if its Boris, Keith, Jezza, Drakeford, Sturgeon, Salmond or anyone else you can throw a stick at.
The days when people were remotely bothered by politicians sex lives are long gone. The Mirror have thrown money away on this - most of this woman's story has been kicking about for a few years, and no one was interested.
Not true. Boris is getting hollowed out, bit by bit.
The best bit in the Arcuri story was where he ponced £3.10 off her to buy a drink. What a grease stain of a human he is.
We've commented in the past, have we not, that Boris Johnson appears to be the sort of chap who'll have a drink with, and be one of the, lads until it comes to his round. Then he finds he's left his wallet at home!
In my pub going days I tended to judge pals on who would slow down as you approached the hostelry so they wouldn't have to buy the first round, BJ strikes me as that sort.
We had a slightly more subtle example of that - something that might or not be ok depending on one's view. Bloke who would have a half (himself) when getting his round but always have a pint otherwise. All fine on the money front but, still, just a bit of a "thing" that perhaps needlessly detracted from group cohesion and corp d'esprit. Still not sure about this one, even though that bloke was me.
Missing out yourself when buying a round is a sensible and fair way of moderating consumption without being rude. Particularly this works well with the culture of pressed drinking so common in British men.
Not a fair solution, everyone else pays £20 for a round, and the "skipper" pays £15.
Incorrect.
Everyone pays the same amount for other people so it is fair.
Using tap water instead of a half because it makes the maths easier
A: buys 3 pints for others 1 pint for himself
B: buys 3 pints for others 1 pint for himself
C: buys 3 pints for others water for himself
Why is he being ungenerous?
Depends how you look at it, and what the purpose of the "round" is, if you split the bill at the end it would be £75/4, everyone paying £18.75 instead of the skipper paying £15 to the others £20.
If the round is to reflect exact usage then why not just pay for your own? If the round is to effectively split the bill but not leave bar owners worried about people doing a runner, then the skipper is gaining an advantage.
Ultimately the treasury will want the tax income from hospitality and to eliminate furlough as early as possible so that's what will drive the decision making process in the end.
The worry I have is how long it will take for that rational thinking to assert itself, how much unnecessary loneliness and isolation it will result in for millions of younger people who are wasting away distanced from their friends and colleagues.
This is going to be cultural, not political and economic.
There will be those who will want to forget Covid ever happened - wipe it from the mind and go back to the pre-Covid life in its entirety (which will mean initially to excess before balance is restored).
There will be those for whom it has been a nightmare and the scale of the mental health damage is yet to be truly understood - I do know there have been huge increases in calls from those facing physical abuse and from vulnerable adults and children.
I get all of that - I really do.
BUT, there are those for whom Covid has either been, in whole or in part, a positive life-changing experience. Whatever the continued background stigmatisation of home working, for many it has been a revelation. Not having the commute (whether road, rail or bus or whatever), having more time to spend with family or even at home (and for a lot of people, home is a place they like to be (and recognising for a few it is purgatory)) are all for some people positives.
It has enabled people to stop and think, to evaluate or re-evaluate life priorities, to work out what is really important and what matters. Let's not downplay this either - Covid has changed the lives of millions, some, regrettable for the worse, others, arguably for the better.
The world has changed - much as some might like to, we can't put the genie back in Pandora's Box (mixed metaphor alert !!). The new "normal" won't be the old normal and as there were winners and losers then, there will be winners and losers now.
I don't have a problem with some people thinking this is the new normal, seriously I don't. The issue I have is that there's a very large older group of people trying to assert this new normal on the rest of the country as a necessity to "save the NHS" or something along those lines.
What you call a positive life changing experience has been a living nightmare for people and there just seems to be an agenda to push the "lockdown can be positive" idea at the moment.
I hate it and everything about it, and, this isn't a reflection on you personally, I find those who like it to be a bit sad.
On topic, raunchy as Shagger's front page revelations are, its hardly a news flash. Tory supporters are perfectly happy to both say "ah he's a lad isn't he" and simultaneously "he's a good father and a family man look at him with Carrie and the baby".
So what with any other politician would have sunk him multiple times over instead boosts Shagger because of the footballification of politics. However, should Keith be revealed to have been shagging the lass who runs his donkey sanctuary there would be Consternation and Uproar about how morally degenerate he is in having an affair.
It's pathetic how partisanly puritan people get.
"Man has sex" is not news. "Woman has sex" is not news.
I couldn't care less if its Boris, Keith, Jezza, Drakeford, Sturgeon, Salmond or anyone else you can throw a stick at.
The days when people were remotely bothered by politicians sex lives are long gone. The Mirror have thrown money away on this - most of this woman's story has been kicking about for a few years, and no one was interested.
Not true. Boris is getting hollowed out, bit by bit.
The best bit in the Arcuri story was where he ponced £3.10 off her to buy a drink. What a grease stain of a human he is.
We've commented in the past, have we not, that Boris Johnson appears to be the sort of chap who'll have a drink with, and be one of the, lads until it comes to his round. Then he finds he's left his wallet at home!
In my pub going days I tended to judge pals on who would slow down as you approached the hostelry so they wouldn't have to buy the first round, BJ strikes me as that sort.
We had a slightly more subtle example of that - something that might or not be ok depending on one's view. Bloke who would have a half (himself) when getting his round but always have a pint otherwise. All fine on the money front but, still, just a bit of a "thing" that perhaps needlessly detracted from group cohesion and corp d'esprit. Still not sure about this one, even though that bloke was me.
Missing out yourself when buying a round is a sensible and fair way of moderating consumption without being rude. Particularly this works well with the culture of pressed drinking so common in British men.
Not a fair solution, everyone else pays £20 for a round, and the "skipper" pays £15.
Incorrect.
Everyone pays the same amount for other people so it is fair.
Using tap water instead of a half because it makes the maths easier
A: buys 3 pints for others 1 pint for himself
B: buys 3 pints for others 1 pint for himself
C: buys 3 pints for others water for himself
Why is he being ungenerous?
Depends how you look at it, and what the purpose of the "round" is, if you split the bill at the end it would be £75/4, everyone paying £18.75 instead of the skipper paying £15 to the others £20.
If the round is to reflect exact usage then why not just pay for your own? If the round is to effectively split the bill but not leave bar owners worried about people doing a runner, then the skipper is gaining an advantage.
Plans to get sports fans back in stadiums and music fans back at festivals this summer will fail because the government is insisting they go to NHS testing centres for a Covid-19 test first, rather than use a home test like schoolchildren.
Lawrence Dallaglio, the former England rugby captain, raised the alarm last night after holding talks with Whitehall officials over plans to allow fans into Wembley and the World Snooker Championship.
He said the government was “in a mess of its own making” for putting in place a “crazy” system of testing that would “put off” fans and overload the NHS. Dallaglio has offered to help ministers set up a system in which fans can get a test at home, validated by a credited laboratory, with the results recorded on a phone app that would be used to access the event.
He said: “I want to get fans and supporters safely back into events by the summer, but I fail to see what’s being proposed can achieve that. A system that involves using already overstretched NHS resources to test a few hundred fans here and there just won’t do. It has got failure written all over it.
“The government won’t allow fans to rapid flow test themselves at home on game day and digitally verify their negative test before going to the event in safety.”
They just need to do away with the testing requirement once everyone has been vaccinated, especially in July when we're highly likely to have double dosed 90-95% of all adults. It just seems completely pointless at that stage to continue COVID safe measures indefinitely.
It's pointless for the country, certainly, but not for the government, as it gets to keep its emergency powers.
When does parliament break for the summer?
I posted the other day that you probably need the powers for a few weeks after June 21st to react quickly if there is a problem. So July 31st would be reasonable.
But if that is in the recess then you would need to recall parliament for emergency legislation which would be a pain, spread panic and delay the response (partly for logistical reasons and partly because the government would hesitate to recall because of the political cost)
Perhaps Sept 30 is really just a sensible measure rather than some great point of principle
I'm all for MPs taking their well-deserved three month break, but I don't think it's sufficient to end democracy in this country to do so.
But the government has completely lost the habit of submitting itself to scrutiny in this crisis.
I note they said schools should work extra weeks, but despite having much longer holidays than schools nobody has suggested sorting out Parliament so it sits for longer.
Enough already from politicians about changing the school holidays. Won’t happen, and shouldn’t happen. We have already booked a holiday this August as have many millions of other parents. The six week summer break is fine. Leave it alone.
The GC and FCA have completely failed in their duties.
It makes no sense at all, how something that was so clearly a Ponzi scheme got past the regulators, who are supposed to understand the products they authorise.
There was a good article on the Athletic this week about it, basically the regulator didn't understand it at all, nor did many of the staff.
Boris annoys so many and yet he is still enjoying a poll lead and improving ratings
The same arguments continue to be resurrected but it is simply baked into just who he is
It must be very frustrating to his critics to see it all just bounce of him
More popular now than the first poll after the GE
The problem for people who dislike Boris is they are blinded by hatred, which makes it impossible for them to give an unbiased view. So they only mention the bad polls for him, are obsessed by his infidelities when they are baked in to the public perception of him, and so on...
Yes, indeed. Your quip from yesterday that PB headers have predicted five of the last zero Boris electoral defeats was spot on
Boris annoys so many and yet he is still enjoying a poll lead and improving ratings
The same arguments continue to be resurrected but it is simply baked into just who he is
It must be very frustrating to his critics to see it all just bounce of him
More popular now than the first poll after the GE
The problem for people who dislike Boris is they are blinded by hatred, which makes it impossible for them to give an unbiased view. So they only mention the bad polls for him, are obsessed by his infidelities when they are baked in to the public perception of him, and so on...
Yes, it’s striking that a large chunk of this site (particularly those who feel their party has been “taken” from them) have a complete blind spot for why many people find Boris impossible to dislike.
Ultimately the treasury will want the tax income from hospitality and to eliminate furlough as early as possible so that's what will drive the decision making process in the end.
The worry I have is how long it will take for that rational thinking to assert itself, how much unnecessary loneliness and isolation it will result in for millions of younger people who are wasting away distanced from their friends and colleagues.
This is going to be cultural, not political and economic.
There will be those who will want to forget Covid ever happened - wipe it from the mind and go back to the pre-Covid life in its entirety (which will mean initially to excess before balance is restored).
There will be those for whom it has been a nightmare and the scale of the mental health damage is yet to be truly understood - I do know there have been huge increases in calls from those facing physical abuse and from vulnerable adults and children.
I get all of that - I really do.
BUT, there are those for whom Covid has either been, in whole or in part, a positive life-changing experience. Whatever the continued background stigmatisation of home working, for many it has been a revelation. Not having the commute (whether road, rail or bus or whatever), having more time to spend with family or even at home (and for a lot of people, home is a place they like to be (and recognising for a few it is purgatory)) are all for some people positives.
It has enabled people to stop and think, to evaluate or re-evaluate life priorities, to work out what is really important and what matters. Let's not downplay this either - Covid has changed the lives of millions, some, regrettable for the worse, others, arguably for the better.
The world has changed - much as some might like to, we can't put the genie back in Pandora's Box (mixed metaphor alert !!). The new "normal" won't be the old normal and as there were winners and losers then, there will be winners and losers now.
I don't have a problem with some people thinking this is the new normal, seriously I don't. The issue I have is that there's a very large older group of people trying to assert this new normal on the rest of the country as a necessity to "save the NHS" or something along those lines.
What you call a positive life changing experience has been a living nightmare for people and there just seems to be an agenda to push the "lockdown can be positive" idea at the moment.
I hate it and everything about it, and, this isn't a reflection on you personally, I find those who like it to be a bit sad.
On paper, I’m a “winner” from lockdown. I have earned more this Tax Year than ever before, while greatly reducing my costs. I have paid off huge amounts of debt, and accrued big savings.
Yet I have loathed lockdown with every inch of my being. It’s is inhumane. It is likely living life in black and white and in two dimensions. Technology has become a tool of oppression.
We need to rediscover the wonders of human contact and the human touch.
Boris annoys so many and yet he is still enjoying a poll lead and improving ratings
The same arguments continue to be resurrected but it is simply baked into just who he is
It must be very frustrating to his critics to see it all just bounce of him
More popular now than the first poll after the GE
The problem for people who dislike Boris is they are blinded by hatred, which makes it impossible for them to give an unbiased view. So they only mention the bad polls for him, are obsessed by his infidelities when they are baked in to the public perception of him, and so on...
Yes, indeed. Your quip from yesterday that PB headers have predicted five of the last zero Boris electoral defeats was spot on
FWIW: At the moment I think Johnson will run again in 2023/4 and win a majority. I think he will go to the electorate a year early in 2023.
The GC and FCA have completely failed in their duties.
It makes no sense at all, how something that was so clearly a Ponzi scheme got past the regulators, who are supposed to understand the products they authorise.
There was a good article on the Athletic this week about it, basically the regulator didn't understand it at all, nor did many of the staff.
I think there’s also an issue where financial markets meet gambling, and each regulator thinks it’s one for the other (if you can call the gambling commission a “regulator”). You see it also ok the boundary between that FCA and the CMA.
Ultimately the treasury will want the tax income from hospitality and to eliminate furlough as early as possible so that's what will drive the decision making process in the end.
The worry I have is how long it will take for that rational thinking to assert itself, how much unnecessary loneliness and isolation it will result in for millions of younger people who are wasting away distanced from their friends and colleagues.
This is going to be cultural, not political and economic.
There will be those who will want to forget Covid ever happened - wipe it from the mind and go back to the pre-Covid life in its entirety (which will mean initially to excess before balance is restored).
There will be those for whom it has been a nightmare and the scale of the mental health damage is yet to be truly understood - I do know there have been huge increases in calls from those facing physical abuse and from vulnerable adults and children.
I get all of that - I really do.
BUT, there are those for whom Covid has either been, in whole or in part, a positive life-changing experience. Whatever the continued background stigmatisation of home working, for many it has been a revelation. Not having the commute (whether road, rail or bus or whatever), having more time to spend with family or even at home (and for a lot of people, home is a place they like to be (and recognising for a few it is purgatory)) are all for some people positives.
It has enabled people to stop and think, to evaluate or re-evaluate life priorities, to work out what is really important and what matters. Let's not downplay this either - Covid has changed the lives of millions, some, regrettable for the worse, others, arguably for the better.
The world has changed - much as some might like to, we can't put the genie back in Pandora's Box (mixed metaphor alert !!). The new "normal" won't be the old normal and as there were winners and losers then, there will be winners and losers now.
The negatives far outweigh the positives. I can't think of anyone who enjoys not being able to meet friends, or go on holiday, or visit cultural attractions, or go to pubs and restaurants, or do sports in groups.
My 'children' when young had someone like that in their friendship group. Pretty well any girl he wanted he seemed to be able to have, although he tended to keep such activities out of the group; just turn up on Friday night with a new conquest. That sort of thing.
My daughter said, in her 30's that she'd found him very unattractive, but reckoned he had a sort of smell about him.
The GC and FCA have completely failed in their duties.
It makes no sense at all, how something that was so clearly a Ponzi scheme got past the regulators, who are supposed to understand the products they authorise.
There was a good article on the Athletic this week about it, basically the regulator didn't understand it at all, nor did many of the staff.
I think there’s also an issue where financial markets meet gambling, and each regulator thinks it’s one for the other (if you can call the gambling commission a “regulator”). You see it also ok the boundary between that FCA and the CMA.
The Sunday Times front page splashes David Cameron and "toxic banker" Greensill. Boris is a convenient distraction.
Exactly. Financial sleaze runs right through this government. It is an open goal, and something Keir should be good at convincing the electoral jury over.
Really? The story is that Dave tried to make direct contact with Rishi a number of times and each time he got rejected. Not sure there's much of a story in it.
There is a story in it - that Dave was trying to pull in favours..
Which party is Dave standing for?
Rishi refused to let even Dave pull in favours is the story.
The interesting aspect is why this story - which hurts an ex-PM who left office 5 years ago - is appearing now. What are we being diverted from looking at?
The same might be said about the Mirror story too.
Isn’t it just that Greensill is going under (I believe) and it’s an interesting UK angle for the press?
Possibly the government is leaking because it shows they *didn’t* do favours for their mates?
Greensill going under also takes out a whole lot of our steel industry as it now desperately need money,
How Cameron ties into the need to bail British Steel out yet again is something I can't work out.
Gupta (the owner of British Steel) is dependent on Greensill for financing.
He is pleading for money
It’s a pity that his wife has just started the refurbishment of her beautiful house on Belgrave Square. Poor optics.
Cameron is slipping down in my estimation as time passes. Not just this, more generally.
I had him as "mediocre" but he's flirting with "poor" now.
Let's see if he can turn it around.
Predictably Rachel Reeves is now asking for an inquiry into this latest scandal. Whereas the better response would be to ask for full transparency on the contracts entered into by this government. Not be diverted into obsessing about what the last PM but one did a decade ago.
Rachel Reeves has been doing exactly what you ask, so that's not a fair criticism. It's just that this government takes no notice.
Labour aren't cutting through though. Not sure why. Starmer needs to develop a bit of star quality, something which makes people interested in what he has to say. I don't know whether it is style or that he does not have much to say or a bit of both. Or whether now is not the time, whoever was speaking for them. But there seems to be too much of a hole where one is badly needed.
Here is why Labour aren't cutting through: Despite the open corruption of the Tories, their disastrous Brexit negotiation, the vast excess death toll of their pandemic management failure - millions of voters simply do not care.
They had enough of being patronised by politicians of all parties, were offered the opportunity to Take Back Control and did so by voting Brexit then Boris. That their lives have not improved, that they have less control, that economically we're increasingly in the shit doesn't matter - they are giving Boris a massive honeymoon free pass.
Labour can't cut through by pointing at the government's outrageous cash for pub landlords actions because people have chosen not to care. In any other time with any other politician the events of the last year would have ended them and their party. Instead the Tories get a bounce.
It is post-truth anti-politics. Labour could cut through if they had another charismatic leader like Blair who can make people feel optimistic about another direction. Instead they have Keith who can't charm his way out of a cardboard box and is endlessly relentlessly negative. People are sick of negative, they want to feel good about stuff.
Plans to get sports fans back in stadiums and music fans back at festivals this summer will fail because the government is insisting they go to NHS testing centres for a Covid-19 test first, rather than use a home test like schoolchildren.
Lawrence Dallaglio, the former England rugby captain, raised the alarm last night after holding talks with Whitehall officials over plans to allow fans into Wembley and the World Snooker Championship.
He said the government was “in a mess of its own making” for putting in place a “crazy” system of testing that would “put off” fans and overload the NHS. Dallaglio has offered to help ministers set up a system in which fans can get a test at home, validated by a credited laboratory, with the results recorded on a phone app that would be used to access the event.
He said: “I want to get fans and supporters safely back into events by the summer, but I fail to see what’s being proposed can achieve that. A system that involves using already overstretched NHS resources to test a few hundred fans here and there just won’t do. It has got failure written all over it.
“The government won’t allow fans to rapid flow test themselves at home on game day and digitally verify their negative test before going to the event in safety.”
They just need to do away with the testing requirement once everyone has been vaccinated, especially in July when we're highly likely to have double dosed 90-95% of all adults. It just seems completely pointless at that stage to continue COVID safe measures indefinitely.
It's pointless for the country, certainly, but not for the government, as it gets to keep its emergency powers.
When does parliament break for the summer?
I posted the other day that you probably need the powers for a few weeks after June 21st to react quickly if there is a problem. So July 31st would be reasonable.
But if that is in the recess then you would need to recall parliament for emergency legislation which would be a pain, spread panic and delay the response (partly for logistical reasons and partly because the government would hesitate to recall because of the political cost)
Perhaps Sept 30 is really just a sensible measure rather than some great point of principle
I'm all for MPs taking their well-deserved three month break, but I don't think it's sufficient to end democracy in this country to do so.
But the government has completely lost the habit of submitting itself to scrutiny in this crisis.
I note they said schools should work extra weeks, but despite having much longer holidays than schools nobody has suggested sorting out Parliament so it sits for longer.
Enough already from politicians about changing the school holidays. Won’t happen, and shouldn’t happen. We have already booked a holiday this August as have many millions of other parents. The six week summer break is fine. Leave it alone.
I'm sure there is a special unit in the Dept Education that exists soley to propose the curtailment of the six week summer school break every time there is some good excuse to look at it yet again.
It's been proposed every so often throughout my entire adult life as far as I can recall.
"Only there for bringing in the harvest" etc etc...
The GC and FCA have completely failed in their duties.
It makes no sense at all, how something that was so clearly a Ponzi scheme got past the regulators, who are supposed to understand the products they authorise.
There was a good article on the Athletic this week about it, basically the regulator didn't understand it at all, nor did many of the staff.
I think there’s also an issue where financial markets meet gambling, and each regulator thinks it’s one for the other (if you can call the gambling commission a “regulator”). You see it also ok the boundary between that FCA and the CMA.
Definitely an issue, but if the FCA regulates sports spread betting, and it still does, then it has no excuse not to regulate a fictional sports stock market.
Boris annoys so many and yet he is still enjoying a poll lead and improving ratings
The same arguments continue to be resurrected but it is simply baked into just who he is
It must be very frustrating to his critics to see it all just bounce of him
It's more likely that he gets in serious trouble about his venal need for other people's money to fund the ambit of his chaotic lifestyle than his shagging antics.
Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden has insisted vaccine passports will not be introduced on a "permanent basis".
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
And now we have vaccines, as we do against a number of other diseases. So why do we need all these other measures as well? That is never answered. it's just assumed that we do. And I strongly question that assumption.
Exactly, we need to get to a place where COVID is treated just like every other disease. As soon there's limited risk to the NHS we should return to the old normal as quickly as possible. The current dystopian thinking coming from the DoH and Home Office in response to this is quite disturbing.
We have already gone to 1 metre social distancing in our outpatients as part of our recovery plan.
It seems unreasonable to require 2 metres in other indoor venues.
Yes, I'd suggest that we won't need it at all by the June unlockdown date. We need to be able to get back to normal sooner rather than later.
On the subject of trying to get back to normal:
The UK has "gone from being cavalier to crippling caution" in its approach to Covid, a former head of drug maker GlaxoSmithKline has said.
Sir Richard Sykes, who is now chairman of the Royal Institution, said the possibility of a third wave of infections in the UK was concerning but "very, very unlikely".
"We have gone from being cavalier to crippling caution and I think that's dangerous," he told BBC Radio 4's Broadcasting House.
"There could be, but it's very, very unlikely that there will be a third wave."
In a wide-ranging interview, Sykes defended Oxford jab maker AstraZeneca's supply strategy - but he criticised the firm for its communciations amid a row over supplies with the EU.
And reflecting on the achievements of all the vaccine manufacturers, Sykes said: “What we’ve done in nine months is create a vaccine that is ninety-something percent effective, and absolutely safe, and got it into millions of people. I think has to stand as one of the great achievements of mankind.”
The Sunday Times front page splashes David Cameron and "toxic banker" Greensill. Boris is a convenient distraction.
Exactly. Financial sleaze runs right through this government. It is an open goal, and something Keir should be good at convincing the electoral jury over.
Really? The story is that Dave tried to make direct contact with Rishi a number of times and each time he got rejected. Not sure there's much of a story in it.
There is a story in it - that Dave was trying to pull in favours..
Which party is Dave standing for?
Rishi refused to let even Dave pull in favours is the story.
The interesting aspect is why this story - which hurts an ex-PM who left office 5 years ago - is appearing now. What are we being diverted from looking at?
The same might be said about the Mirror story too.
Isn’t it just that Greensill is going under (I believe) and it’s an interesting UK angle for the press?
Possibly the government is leaking because it shows they *didn’t* do favours for their mates?
Greensill going under also takes out a whole lot of our steel industry as it now desperately need money,
How Cameron ties into the need to bail British Steel out yet again is something I can't work out.
Gupta (the owner of British Steel) is dependent on Greensill for financing.
He is pleading for money
It’s a pity that his wife has just started the refurbishment of her beautiful house on Belgrave Square. Poor optics.
Cameron is slipping down in my estimation as time passes. Not just this, more generally.
I had him as "mediocre" but he's flirting with "poor" now.
Let's see if he can turn it around.
Predictably Rachel Reeves is now asking for an inquiry into this latest scandal. Whereas the better response would be to ask for full transparency on the contracts entered into by this government. Not be diverted into obsessing about what the last PM but one did a decade ago.
Rachel Reeves has been doing exactly what you ask, so that's not a fair criticism. It's just that this government takes no notice.
Labour aren't cutting through though. Not sure why. Starmer needs to develop a bit of star quality, something which makes people interested in what he has to say. I don't know whether it is style or that he does not have much to say or a bit of both. Or whether now is not the time, whoever was speaking for them. But there seems to be too much of a hole where one is badly needed.
It's complex. Certainly speeches like the one I cited are getting minimal press coverage; it's really hard for Labour during the pandemic to get a fair hearing, especially in the press.
But I agree that Starmer isn't cutting through enough. In my view, he needs a) more passion, and b) a better sense of humour; for example, instead of always getting cross at BJ's refusal to answer any questions, he needs to start taking the piss out of him from time to time. Policy stuff can wait until after the current health crisis is over.
Plans to get sports fans back in stadiums and music fans back at festivals this summer will fail because the government is insisting they go to NHS testing centres for a Covid-19 test first, rather than use a home test like schoolchildren.
Lawrence Dallaglio, the former England rugby captain, raised the alarm last night after holding talks with Whitehall officials over plans to allow fans into Wembley and the World Snooker Championship.
He said the government was “in a mess of its own making” for putting in place a “crazy” system of testing that would “put off” fans and overload the NHS. Dallaglio has offered to help ministers set up a system in which fans can get a test at home, validated by a credited laboratory, with the results recorded on a phone app that would be used to access the event.
He said: “I want to get fans and supporters safely back into events by the summer, but I fail to see what’s being proposed can achieve that. A system that involves using already overstretched NHS resources to test a few hundred fans here and there just won’t do. It has got failure written all over it.
“The government won’t allow fans to rapid flow test themselves at home on game day and digitally verify their negative test before going to the event in safety.”
They just need to do away with the testing requirement once everyone has been vaccinated, especially in July when we're highly likely to have double dosed 90-95% of all adults. It just seems completely pointless at that stage to continue COVID safe measures indefinitely.
It's pointless for the country, certainly, but not for the government, as it gets to keep its emergency powers.
When does parliament break for the summer?
I posted the other day that you probably need the powers for a few weeks after June 21st to react quickly if there is a problem. So July 31st would be reasonable.
But if that is in the recess then you would need to recall parliament for emergency legislation which would be a pain, spread panic and delay the response (partly for logistical reasons and partly because the government would hesitate to recall because of the political cost)
Perhaps Sept 30 is really just a sensible measure rather than some great point of principle
I'm all for MPs taking their well-deserved three month break, but I don't think it's sufficient to end democracy in this country to do so.
But the government has completely lost the habit of submitting itself to scrutiny in this crisis.
I note they said schools should work extra weeks, but despite having much longer holidays than schools nobody has suggested sorting out Parliament so it sits for longer.
Enough already from politicians about changing the school holidays. Won’t happen, and shouldn’t happen. We have already booked a holiday this August as have many millions of other parents. The six week summer break is fine. Leave it alone.
I'm sure there is a special unit in the Dept Education that exists soley to propose the curtailment of the six week summer school break every time there is some good excuse to look at it yet again.
It's been proposed every so often throughout my entire adult life as far as I can recall.
"Only there for bringing in the harvest" etc etc...
It's the natural response to the great St Trinian's scandals of an earlier era.
The GC and FCA have completely failed in their duties.
It makes no sense at all, how something that was so clearly a Ponzi scheme got past the regulators, who are supposed to understand the products they authorise.
There was a good article on the Athletic this week about it, basically the regulator didn't understand it at all, nor did many of the staff.
I think there’s also an issue where financial markets meet gambling, and each regulator thinks it’s one for the other (if you can call the gambling commission a “regulator”). You see it also ok the boundary between that FCA and the CMA.
The FCA is utterly and completely useless.
Better than many of its peers. Trying to stay on top of what it regulates is just one hell of a task. Better that it try though, than move towards the French approach of wanting to just ban any innovative market developments they don’t understand.
Boris annoys so many and yet he is still enjoying a poll lead and improving ratings
The same arguments continue to be resurrected but it is simply baked into just who he is
It must be very frustrating to his critics to see it all just bounce of him
More popular now than the first poll after the GE
The problem for people who dislike Boris is they are blinded by hatred, which makes it impossible for them to give an unbiased view. So they only mention the bad polls for him, are obsessed by his infidelities when they are baked in to the public perception of him, and so on...
Yes, indeed. Your quip from yesterday that PB headers have predicted five of the last zero Boris electoral defeats was spot on
That's nothing, wait till you hear about the PBers who have predicted 49 of the last 0 ends to the SNP honeymoon..
The GC and FCA have completely failed in their duties.
It makes no sense at all, how something that was so clearly a Ponzi scheme got past the regulators, who are supposed to understand the products they authorise.
There was a good article on the Athletic this week about it, basically the regulator didn't understand it at all, nor did many of the staff.
I think there’s also an issue where financial markets meet gambling, and each regulator thinks it’s one for the other (if you can call the gambling commission a “regulator”). You see it also ok the boundary between that FCA and the CMA.
The Sunday Times front page splashes David Cameron and "toxic banker" Greensill. Boris is a convenient distraction.
Exactly. Financial sleaze runs right through this government. It is an open goal, and something Keir should be good at convincing the electoral jury over.
Really? The story is that Dave tried to make direct contact with Rishi a number of times and each time he got rejected. Not sure there's much of a story in it.
There is a story in it - that Dave was trying to pull in favours..
Which party is Dave standing for?
Rishi refused to let even Dave pull in favours is the story.
The interesting aspect is why this story - which hurts an ex-PM who left office 5 years ago - is appearing now. What are we being diverted from looking at?
The same might be said about the Mirror story too.
Isn’t it just that Greensill is going under (I believe) and it’s an interesting UK angle for the press?
Possibly the government is leaking because it shows they *didn’t* do favours for their mates?
Greensill going under also takes out a whole lot of our steel industry as it now desperately need money,
How Cameron ties into the need to bail British Steel out yet again is something I can't work out.
Gupta (the owner of British Steel) is dependent on Greensill for financing.
He is pleading for money
It’s a pity that his wife has just started the refurbishment of her beautiful house on Belgrave Square. Poor optics.
Cameron is slipping down in my estimation as time passes. Not just this, more generally.
I had him as "mediocre" but he's flirting with "poor" now.
Let's see if he can turn it around.
Predictably Rachel Reeves is now asking for an inquiry into this latest scandal. Whereas the better response would be to ask for full transparency on the contracts entered into by this government. Not be diverted into obsessing about what the last PM but one did a decade ago.
Rachel Reeves has been doing exactly what you ask, so that's not a fair criticism. It's just that this government takes no notice.
Labour aren't cutting through though. Not sure why. Starmer needs to develop a bit of star quality, something which makes people interested in what he has to say. I don't know whether it is style or that he does not have much to say or a bit of both. Or whether now is not the time, whoever was speaking for them. But there seems to be too much of a hole where one is badly needed.
It's complex. Certainly speeches like the one I cited are getting minimal press coverage; it's really hard for Labour during the pandemic to get a fair hearing, especially in the press.
But I agree that Starmer isn't cutting through enough. In my view, he needs a) more passion, and b) a better sense of humour; for example, instead of always getting cross at BJ's refusal to answer any questions, he needs to start taking the piss out of him from time to time. Policy stuff can wait until after the current health crisis is over.
You may be looking for qualities he doesn't have. All the talk of bringing back Cooper et al seriously shows up the dearth of talent and ideas in the party. They haven't recovered yet from the Corbyn lurch to the left - itself a sadly recurring them in Labour history. In short the members live in a country largely unsuited to their beliefs. Not a problem for the Tories in the same way as they've always been more flexible on the ideological issues - despite what you sometimes read on here from the Chingford tendency. They will come back at some point - but it will probably need a Blair type leader to do it.
Comments
"Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short-term," he told the Andrew Marr Show on the BBC.
He stressed no decisions had yet been made on Covid certification, but "it's important to examine it".
Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said vaccine passports were something that needed to be considered.
"It's certainly something we have to consider seriously, as part of a wider package of measures that are designed to make our activities safe," he told Andrew Marr.
"Over the last year, when we have tried to make ourselves safe, we have tended to do this by stopping activities," he said, referring to the lockdown measures
"Part of the point of living with this virus, is we have to switch emphasis," said Prof Woolhouse.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-56554227
And we want to see our grandchildren there, and suspect it's going to be tougher getting them here than us going there.
If we dont need them ongoing, yet expect to have to have to live with covid ongoing, what are the conditions that allow their removal?
I did idly hope this was going to be some polling about Prince Charles and how his image has changed among the general public.
Ah well..
Another idle musing - is Dowden positioning himself for a leadership bid one day? He'll have to live down being so close to David Cameron but I imagine he's hoping people will excuse the liberal indiscretions of his youth and recognise his full-blooded commitment to the populist route to world domination.
I can see him hoping for a senior position in a Sunak Cabinet (or Shadow Cabinet) and if the latter falters, Dowden has plenty of time on his side.
Unfortunately those who benefit from lockdown life, combined with those scared of re-opening are in a clear majority in the country, and especially of voters. The data the govt is most keen to follow is opinion polling so am pretty pessimistic about where this goes.
In some ways we are both a beneficiary and a victim of modern science. Clearly if this pandemic had happened 20 years ago we would have been in an utterly hopeless state because mRNA vaccines would not have been possible. However if it had happened 100-150 years ago we would not have any idea about “variants” - or even that this was caused by a virus - it would have been thought of as a form of flu and formed part of one of the panoply of other diseases that lurked in the background that would ultimately fade into the background.
I’m really into the theory that the 1889 “flu” pandemic was caused by a novel coronavirus and what concerns me is that after that there was no “roaring 90s” but rather the fin de siecle malaise of the end of the C19 - maybe a symptom of a type of long Covid of the time. Below is an extract from the diary of a Dublin doctor in 1890.
It seems unreasonable to require 2 metres in other indoor venues.
Here's the evidence:
https://labour.org.uk/press/rachel-reeves-calls-on-government-to-clean-up-crony-contracts/
The right move, now also to shift the other lightweights in the SC. Get Cooper back in.
https://circulatingnow.nlm.nih.gov/2014/08/15/a-physicians-perspective-on-the-russian-flu/
Burn the witch!
The worry I have is how long it will take for that rational thinking to assert itself, how much unnecessary loneliness and isolation it will result in for millions of younger people who are wasting away distanced from their friends and colleagues.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/mar/28/football-index-how-stock-market-ended-up-costing-customers-millions
The GC and FCA have completely failed in their duties.
The original report from Pfizer indicated 52% efficacy of a first vaccination after three weeks and this rose to 85% seven days after the second vaccination. It was on that basis I, and others, argued we should follow the recommendation of two vaccinations 21 days apart.
I don't recall similar figures from AstraZeneca so it may well have been there was clear data the efficacy of the first AZ vaccination after 21 days, 60 days and 90 days was such as to make the 12 week gap between vaccinations acceptable in terms of maintaining protection.
The report on New Year's Day from the JCVI provided new data for the Pfizer vaccine which contradicted the earlier Pfizer data. I argued at the time I still thought following the vaccine manufacturer's recommendation was the sensible path but, and I'm happy to admit this, I was wrong.
I do think there was widespread ignorance of the period required for immunity to build up after the first vaccination - I honestly think some people believed as soon as they were vaccinated they were immune which, as we know, isn't the case.
The roadmap was, I suspect, carefully designed to allow the appropriate 3-week time lag so those vaccinated now will have considerable immunity by April 12th. As second vaccinations increase, the May 17th easing will take place with a growing number of the elderly having received both vaccinations and of course by June 21st even more will be in the position of not having had both vaccinations but to have built up the greatest level of immunity.
Clearly, there are concerns over the levels of immunity later in the year - for those who are having or have had their second vaccinations now, what will immunity levels be like in September or October? I suspect we don't know and the irony will be in the autumn if we have a largely protected younger cohort and the elderly, whose immunity levels are falling.
That becomes a problem as we see vaccination take-up numbers. As has been reported, among the over 70s, the take up is less than 75% in Newham and in other areas. I also suspect there are people under the radar who will never be contacted and therefore will remain vulnerable.
It would be wiser to keep production for that reason alone rather than risk being held to ransom by China.
Whether the current lot will see it that way is another question.
The same arguments continue to be resurrected but it is simply baked into just who he is
It must be very frustrating to his critics to see it all just bounce of him
The problem for people who dislike Boris is they are blinded by hatred, which makes it impossible for them to give an unbiased view. So they only mention the bad polls for him, are obsessed by his infidelities when they are baked in to the public perception of him, and so on...
So I stick to bottles while the younger guys are on pints.
https://twitter.com/Independent/status/1376129717095518210?s=20
https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(20)32134-6.pdf
The FCA should have understood it, as a Ponzi scheme and falsely advertising as a stock market, and shut it down before it became mass market.
I doubt anyone in the above will resign and doubt anyone will go to prison.
At the moment Dodds is being sacked Reeves needs to be in the media. Doesn’t matter if this approach is suboptimal for Labour if it demonstrates she can cut through
Those of us who are opposed will have to fight like rats to stop them because that is what vax passports are - a form of ID card which will be used long after Covid is forgotten and for purposes which have nothing to do with health.
I don't trust the assurances of Ministers or health officials on this one little bit. The state is always looking for ways to make itself our master instead of our servants, to control us, to limit how we live, what we think and say - all for our own good, they tell us. Yeah, right .....
I think the gap is probably somewhere around 5 points, Johnson is slightly more popular than Starmer but Starmer is a lot more unknown than Johnson. That can either be a good, or very bad thing.
That's about as objective as I can be.
There will be those who will want to forget Covid ever happened - wipe it from the mind and go back to the pre-Covid life in its entirety (which will mean initially to excess before balance is restored).
There will be those for whom it has been a nightmare and the scale of the mental health damage is yet to be truly understood - I do know there have been huge increases in calls from those facing physical abuse and from vulnerable adults and children.
I get all of that - I really do.
BUT, there are those for whom Covid has either been, in whole or in part, a positive life-changing experience. Whatever the continued background stigmatisation of home working, for many it has been a revelation. Not having the commute (whether road, rail or bus or whatever), having more time to spend with family or even at home (and for a lot of people, home is a place they like to be (and recognising for a few it is purgatory)) are all for some people positives.
It has enabled people to stop and think, to evaluate or re-evaluate life priorities, to work out what is really important and what matters. Let's not downplay this either - Covid has changed the lives of millions, some, regrettable for the worse, others, arguably for the better.
The world has changed - much as some might like to, we can't put the genie back in Pandora's Box (mixed metaphor alert !!). The new "normal" won't be the old normal and as there were winners and losers then, there will be winners and losers now.
The immune system isn't just antibodies and the new studies that look into t-cell responses are going to be really important to know what kind of long term immunty vaccinated people will have, so far the results are very promising.
Everyone pays the same amount for other people so it is fair.
Using tap water instead of a half because it makes the maths easier
A: buys 3 pints for others 1 pint for himself
B: buys 3 pints for others 1 pint for himself
C: buys 3 pints for others water for himself
Why is he being ungenerous?
Dodds has good ideas - no ability to sell them however. Reeves could, I think.
And again...why is Cooper not in there Keir?
She was massively underwhelming as a cabinet minister and dismal when she ran for leader (I think she went on holiday during the campaign?
The only thing I can remember she did was HIPs and I am sure she’d rather those were forgotten
Labour aren't cutting through though. Not sure why. Starmer needs to develop a bit of star quality, something which makes people interested in what he has to say. I don't know whether it is style or that he does not have much to say or a bit of both. Or whether now is not the time, whoever was speaking for them. But there seems to be too much of a hole where one is badly needed.
If the round is to reflect exact usage then why not just pay for your own?
If the round is to effectively split the bill but not leave bar owners worried about people doing a runner, then the skipper is gaining an advantage.
What you call a positive life changing experience has been a living nightmare for people and there just seems to be an agenda to push the "lockdown can be positive" idea at the moment.
I hate it and everything about it, and, this isn't a reflection on you personally, I find those who like it to be a bit sad.
Yet I have loathed lockdown with every inch of my being. It’s is inhumane. It is likely living life in black and white and in two dimensions. Technology has become a tool of oppression.
We need to rediscover the wonders of human contact and the human touch.
They had enough of being patronised by politicians of all parties, were offered the opportunity to Take Back Control and did so by voting Brexit then Boris. That their lives have not improved, that they have less control, that economically we're increasingly in the shit doesn't matter - they are giving Boris a massive honeymoon free pass.
Labour can't cut through by pointing at the government's outrageous cash for pub landlords actions because people have chosen not to care. In any other time with any other politician the events of the last year would have ended them and their party. Instead the Tories get a bounce.
It is post-truth anti-politics. Labour could cut through if they had another charismatic leader like Blair who can make people feel optimistic about another direction. Instead they have Keith who can't charm his way out of a cardboard box and is endlessly relentlessly negative. People are sick of negative, they want to feel good about stuff.
It's been proposed every so often throughout my entire adult life as far as I can recall.
"Only there for bringing in the harvest" etc etc...
The money stuff definitely is not priced in.
The UK has "gone from being cavalier to crippling caution" in its approach to Covid, a former head of drug maker GlaxoSmithKline has said.
Sir Richard Sykes, who is now chairman of the Royal Institution, said the possibility of a third wave of infections in the UK was concerning but "very, very unlikely".
"We have gone from being cavalier to crippling caution and I think that's dangerous," he told BBC Radio 4's Broadcasting House.
"There could be, but it's very, very unlikely that there will be a third wave."
In a wide-ranging interview, Sykes defended Oxford jab maker AstraZeneca's supply strategy - but he criticised the firm for its communciations amid a row over supplies with the EU.
And reflecting on the achievements of all the vaccine manufacturers, Sykes said: “What we’ve done in nine months is create a vaccine that is ninety-something percent effective, and absolutely safe, and got it into millions of people. I think has to stand as one of the great achievements of mankind.”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-56554227
But I agree that Starmer isn't cutting through enough. In my view, he needs a) more passion, and b) a better sense of humour; for example, instead of always getting cross at BJ's refusal to answer any questions, he needs to start taking the piss out of him from time to time. Policy stuff can wait until after the current health crisis is over.
Felt fine all day, felt miserable all night. Wild uncontrollable chills and high fever.
The only other time I have had similar symptoms was almost exactly a year ago.
The positive is at least you know the vaccine has gone in ok and the immune response is happening.