Also: you can fly TOMORROW on Emirates from Dubai to Melbourne for $1,691.
That's not $10k.
Thing is, you can't cherry pick the strategy. When does Australia expect to open its borders? According to that Spiked article, not any time soon. It might be a case of the hare and the tortoise.
They have taken it slowly but for how much longer will the country be closed? Three months? Six months? A couple of years?
That's no way to run a country.
I'd take Boris' option any day of the week and trust me I can't f**king believe I am saying that.
Oh, I agree.
Australia will suffer if its people can't travel abroad and if people can't visit it.
But I imagine they'll open up first to "double vaccinated" people who have test negative before departure and on arrival.
Mr. Leon, Sturgeon being an idiot is no reason to destroy a nation.
Devolution is a disaster. Especially the botched, stupid, asymmetric devolution given us by Labour. Boris is right
Anecdote: at my last large family gathering I was struck by the family members who were seriously anti-union and anti-Scottish. They used to be apathetic, now they are averse. Let Scotland go. Cut them away. This is a growing feeling in England. It will be England that ends the Union, if it ends
My family is not alone
‘MICHAEL Gove has been warned by a Tory MP that the Union could end through "benign neglect" as voters in England give up on it just as they did with the EU.
The Cabinet Office minister was told by Jackie Doyle-Price that her constituents in Thurrock in Essex now griped about Scotland they way they used to about Brussels.
She said for many people in England the Union was not a “living entity”and urged UK ministers to do more to help people understand and appreciate it.’
The main problem is it is no longer a Union as such but a Federal UK excluding England.
Give England its own Parliament or at least English regional assemblies and the problem would be resolved
no it wouldn't - a UK government would only be allowed to work if the constituent nations accepted the federal government and allowed the federal government to control the overall economic direction of the nation, its defence etc- the English government let alone others would have no incentive to do this - a federal UK could only work if you broke England into pieces so no part was too powerful, and why should England want that?
The UK government already does control the overall economic direction and defence of the whole UK. Just England is the only country in the UK which does not have its own Parliament to run the rest of its domestic policy.
There is no reason an English Parliament would not work other than leftwingers don't want it as it would normally have a Tory majority, otherwise we should at least have regional assemblies which would still be better than the current situation where England has no government of its own at national or regional level outside of the UK (except in the London region with the Mayor and Assembly)
this is nuts - if there were an English government it would be like the SNP on steroids - questioning every single action of the UK govt and attempting to delegitimise it, be allowed to 'approve' its decisions etc - the UK is not suited to be a federation as England dominates - everybody who has thought about this for more than 10 minutes understands this.
I remmeber a particularly interesting and illuminating discussion on PB about 2012-13 which came to an almost unanimous conclusion (quite unusual for that time and general topic of indyref) that true federalism was a non-runner in the UK because of precisely what you say, plus the political unacceptability of breaking up England a la Anglo-Saxon Heptarchy.
This is one reason why Gordon Brown's repeated Interventions with promises of more federalism have not, er, had much effect.
England doesn't need to be broken up within a Federal system, and the more it is broken up within that system, the more it dominates, as the 'more Englands' there are, the more they can out-vote the other home nations. Indeed, if England is broken up in a way that is commensurate with its population size, it totally swamps the other home nations, and defeats the entire object of federalisation. It becomes Westminster MPs mark 2.
I've made this argument to you a few times, and you've never made a counter-argument, so I'm surprised that you persist in the nonsense that England would need to be broken up to make a federal system work.
Hmm, that actually assumes a homogeneous England. If it is, then you are quite right. But if not, not.
You do realise you're undermining the SNP's whole argument on the hopelessness of Scotland's position wrt Westminster by saying that? English MP's aren't 'homogenous' either. Yet it's portrayed as Scotland being overruled by England.
That's because there is a majoritarian phenomenon in England under FPTP at Westminster, ie the Tories usually winning being part of it. PR would put a very different perspective on the entire matter.
But given that each English Parliament would have a ruling party (and presumably most would be Tory at the moment), that effect would surely be magnified?
The whole point of a federal structure is surely that in some circumstances, England counts as 'just a nation' among nations, and is not granted more influence by virtue of its large population - it 'takes one for the team'. I am comfortable with that. The desire to break England into cantons runs wholly counter to that aim. Scotland and Wales would in effect be 'other Yorkshires' - something which many would strongly object to.
That's the issue - either England accepts that the other nations have a veto (in effect) which would upset a lot of its voters ('why should we count for no more than the Nirish?', they might say). Or it doesn't, and therefore either overrides the other nations by population share, or by being broken up into cantons.
Well yes, that is the issue that got the likes of our Phillip so exercised when I proposed a 'Council of the Isles' to ratify major foreign policy and defence decisions. However, I see no real loss - I suspect it would result in less 'Iraqs' and less expensive defence white elephants. In that sense I see it being very popular with actual English people.
The notion of Scotland etc. having a veto is also one I don't normally bother airing as I get piled on when I even neutrally mention the A/S Heptarchy as one solution in a purely theoretical discussion of federalism - and in any case it seems so improbable given the Zeitgeist. I'm glad you raised it for me!
According to Google Flights, you can fly today from LAX to Melbourne for $2,335. Although you will need to pay for hotel quarantine when you get to the other end.
I'm not sure those numbers are correct* - they certainly don't match the numbers from Bloomberg or the NYTimes.
Also, the EU has told AZ they don't want any more shipments post June, so I'd be very surprised if a lawsuit actually happened.
* They may have been correct in the past, but I don't think they're correct now.
They're on the CDC website - take your pick.
As to the EU suing ANZ:
EU seeking €10 per day per missing dose from #AstraZeneca for its failure to meet delivery schedule, as of 1 July. Plus €10 million for each breach of contract.
AstraZeneca is expected to be 200 million doses short by the end of June.
Yes, but they're not actually going to sue. Because there is no case.
This is all political posturing by the EU, to distract from their failings. And now that they've finally gotten their vaccination drive working, it will be quietly dropped.
Ultimately, there is no case. The contracts are clear, and there is no guarantee and there is certainly no "penalty payment".
This is like when a celebrity says they're going to sue someone for libel. It's a way of changing the conversation away from the EU's failings.
In general, I'd reckon the ratio between "I'm going to sue you" and "People actually getting sued" is probably about 10:1.
But the pharma companies (and no doubt companies in other industries too) are making a note of the attitude.
Why build that new factory in the EU, when putting it in the U.K. or Switzerland comes with a much more positive attitude from government?
Also: you can fly TOMORROW on Emirates from Dubai to Melbourne for $1,691.
That's not $10k.
Thing is, you can't cherry pick the strategy. When does Australia expect to open its borders? According to that Spiked article, not any time soon. It might be a case of the hare and the tortoise.
They have taken it slowly but for how much longer will the country be closed? Three months? Six months? A couple of years?
That's no way to run a country.
I'd take Boris' option any day of the week and trust me I can't f**king believe I am saying that.
I've done a quick Google which suggests that international tourism accounts for less than 1% of Australian GDP. If the population really wants to turn the country back into a prison colony again, they can therefore well afford to do so.
This is, of course, suboptimal if you can never visit any other part of the globe ever again, unless you can afford the very considerable time and expense of hotel quarantine when you get back, but if they want to reorganise themselves into a hermit kingdom then that's their choice.
Re:criticism of Hancock. Given this all seems to revolve around the PPE problems of March/April last year, isn’t it likely to be seen as somewhat moot when pushing future cabinet changes given that most people would I think probably say he has been one of the success stories of the vaccine era? And also was one of the lockdown hawks prior to the second wave?
We’ve all wondered why they didn’t close the borders. Now we know. It was The Woke. Closing borders is ‘racist’
This is pretty explosive stuff now
That was always the most obvious thing about the whole saga.
The interesting thing is that hardly anyone accuses New Zealand and Australia of being racist when they closed their borders.
It is the single biggest government failure. Perhaps in modern British history. Keeping the borders open surely killed tens of thousands and took 5% off GDP
We need to know exactly how much ‘fear of racism’ contributed to this and then the whole culture that perpetuates this toxic drivel needs to be extirpated
As I asked on a previous thread, What exactly do you mean by "closing the borders"? We are a major travel hub - do you mean that UK citizens abroad shouldn't have been allowed to return home, people with close family abroad not allowed to visit (either way) even in end of life scenarios, business travel reasons cancelled, journalists and news organisations not allowed to travel, HGV drivers not able to ply their trade?
This is not easy, practically, economically and on principle.
The government has massively cut international travel throughout all of this. And when you look at the traffic light rules now they are pretty draconian aren't they? Even visiting a green list country means a PCR test before leaving the UK plus a test within 72 hours of return to the UK plus a further PCR test two days after return - plus compulsory mask-wearing on route. Amber means all that plus a 4th PCR test 8 days after return plus quarantine. Red means all that plus quarantine in a government prescribed hotel (at traveller's expense).
I mean exactly that. Just close the fucking borders. To everyone, bar absolutely essential trade (and make HGV drivers stay in a bubble).
Australia did it, and it works. East Asia did it, and they are major travel hubs. Yes it is hurtful and painful; dying is worse
I'm sorry Leon but that's ridiculous. Australia has behaved abominably to its own citizens. Seems they have been more authoritarian than even we have.
I have a daughter in Australia, and a daughter in the UK. The former is now much freer than the latter, the former lives in an economy which is virtually unharmed, the latter lives in the UK
That said, I don't agree with the insane over-reactions now going on in Oz. And they have been rubbish at vaccines
Yep. One of my best mates lives in Sydney. Over the past week he has posted pictures of his vacation in Tasmania, including visits to plenty of restaurants and bars, his daughters packed indoor 21st birthday party, and massive crowds at sporting events. Apart from the travel bans, they are living more normally than us, and have been largely throughout.
Of course. My Aussie family sends me the same depressing photos (depressing for a European)
Most Brits would take Australia's Closed Borders Strategy. Add in our vaccine drive, and Korea's test and trace, and there, you have the right response to the pandemic
It means some Brits would end up stuck in India or America or wherever. Sorry. That's tough, but it's better than 200,000 dead
Except we've discussed this already.
Australians can travel to Australia. They just have hotel quarantine upon arrival in Australia.
Hence the fact that there are multiple flights a day to Australia from the US.
“Just have hotel quarantine”.
Robert this is a major impediment to travel and effectively a complete block if you have children.
But that's exactly the same as China, Hong Kong, Singapore, etc (although those countries accept non citizens who go through the quarantine).
Singapore only admits citizens and permanent residents who have received permission to return.
Seems Rishi is being kept free from all the mud and shit being thrown by the Sage of Barnard.
I wonder why????
Because he wants to open up faultlines among the Tories by throwing mud at a few individuals (who some others will be happy to see mud thrown at), not unite them all against him.
Also: you can fly TOMORROW on Emirates from Dubai to Melbourne for $1,691.
That's not $10k.
Because very few citizens are being admitted:
You can travel to Australia if you are an Australian citizen, a permanent resident or a New Zealand citizen usually resident in Australia.
Australia has strict border measures in place to protect the health of the Australian community. Very limited flights are currently available to and from Australia and you may not be able to travel at this time.
The point is that AUSTRALIAN CITIZENS CAN TRAVEL TO AUSTRALIA.
Limited flights != No flights.
If I were Australian, I could go on-line now and book my quarantine, and book my ticket to Australia. I'm not saying it's not harder than normal, I am just saying that it is very far from impossible.
One point on Hancock. Cummings said he suggested breaking up the Health departments roles and thinks it was a mistake not to do so.
This is something I said repeatedly at the time. It made no sense to have one cabinet minister responsible for maybe 4 or 5 of the most important 6 things in government at the time, whilst someone as senior as Gove had few responsibilities.
During the peak emergency period we should have had a Cab Sec for Health Procurement, another for Testing, another for Hospitals, another for Care Homes (or something similar).
I can believe Hancock was as incompetent as Cummings suggests, but I doubt anyone could have done his role properly in that period. The underlying mistake is overloading one manager rather than spreading the work and responsibility out to enough resource.
Except one of the big plans going forward is to bring NHS England back into government as being directly managed by the Health Sec, whereas at moment it is arms length and Stevens has a lot more control.
I dont know enough about it to have a strong view of how it is organised in the future to be honest. But in a crisis, why was one man, regarded as incompetent by many of those senior to him, allowed to have perhaps 75% of the govts important responsibilities on his own? Why not share that work out in a manner which would have a greater chance of things being covered properly?
We’ve all wondered why they didn’t close the borders. Now we know. It was The Woke. Closing borders is ‘racist’
This is pretty explosive stuff now
That was always the most obvious thing about the whole saga.
The interesting thing is that hardly anyone accuses New Zealand and Australia of being racist when they closed their borders.
It is the single biggest government failure. Perhaps in modern British history. Keeping the borders open surely killed tens of thousands and took 5% off GDP
We need to know exactly how much ‘fear of racism’ contributed to this and then the whole culture that perpetuates this toxic drivel needs to be extirpated
As I asked on a previous thread, What exactly do you mean by "closing the borders"? We are a major travel hub - do you mean that UK citizens abroad shouldn't have been allowed to return home, people with close family abroad not allowed to visit (either way) even in end of life scenarios, business travel reasons cancelled, journalists and news organisations not allowed to travel, HGV drivers not able to ply their trade?
This is not easy, practically, economically and on principle.
The government has massively cut international travel throughout all of this. And when you look at the traffic light rules now they are pretty draconian aren't they? Even visiting a green list country means a PCR test before leaving the UK plus a test within 72 hours of return to the UK plus a further PCR test two days after return - plus compulsory mask-wearing on route. Amber means all that plus a 4th PCR test 8 days after return plus quarantine. Red means all that plus quarantine in a government prescribed hotel (at traveller's expense).
I mean exactly that. Just close the fucking borders. To everyone, bar absolutely essential trade (and make HGV drivers stay in a bubble).
Australia did it, and it works. East Asia did it, and they are major travel hubs. Yes it is hurtful and painful; dying is worse
I'm sorry Leon but that's ridiculous. Australia has behaved abominably to its own citizens. Seems they have been more authoritarian than even we have.
I have a daughter in Australia, and a daughter in the UK. The former is now much freer than the latter, the former lives in an economy which is virtually unharmed, the latter lives in the UK
That said, I don't agree with the insane over-reactions now going on in Oz. And they have been rubbish at vaccines
Yep. One of my best mates lives in Sydney. Over the past week he has posted pictures of his vacation in Tasmania, including visits to plenty of restaurants and bars, his daughters packed indoor 21st birthday party, and massive crowds at sporting events. Apart from the travel bans, they are living more normally than us, and have been largely throughout.
Of course. My Aussie family sends me the same depressing photos (depressing for a European)
Most Brits would take Australia's Closed Borders Strategy. Add in our vaccine drive, and Korea's test and trace, and there, you have the right response to the pandemic
It means some Brits would end up stuck in India or America or wherever. Sorry. That's tough, but it's better than 200,000 dead
Except we've discussed this already.
Australians can travel to Australia. They just have hotel quarantine upon arrival in Australia.
Hence the fact that there are multiple flights a day to Australia from the US.
“Just have hotel quarantine”.
Robert this is a major impediment to travel and effectively a complete block if you have children.
But that's exactly the same as China, Hong Kong, Singapore, etc (although those countries accept non citizens who go through the quarantine).
Singapore only admits citizens and permanent residents who have received permission to return.
You're right: I added Singapore after I'd written the whole comment.
Cummings says 99% of civil service jobs should be open to outsiders. Why on earth did he not focus on this rather than all of his other obsessions?
Just change the HR rules to let external people apply by default and sit back and relax in the knowledge you have profoundly transformed Whitehall for all time.
I thought that, to some degree anyway, Thatcher had done that.
It's either that they are not, in fact, advertised, or that (perish the thought) no-one applies.
One of the things I strongly disagreed with about the Thatcher era was the way in which they changed rules in some parts of the public sector
In 1986 just after leaving Uni I had a summer job at the British Geological Survey. There was a lady there who was a renowned expert on a system of clay analysis known as X-Ray Goniometry - a vitally important technique for analysing clay minerals in North Sea cores - it was used as part of the process of checking oil companies were being honest in their declarations of reserves.
Anyway, a period of reform swept through many institutions and in the case of the BGS it basically meant that jobs were reclassified with a minimum education level. In the case of her position you had to have a PhD. Which she didn't have. So she had to reapply for her own job and didn't get it because she didn't have the necessary qualifications. Even though there was probably no-one in the country who knew more about the subject than she did.
LIked, not because the story is a happy one, but because it is so much to the point.
I'm not sure those numbers are correct* - they certainly don't match the numbers from Bloomberg or the NYTimes.
Also, the EU has told AZ they don't want any more shipments post June, so I'd be very surprised if a lawsuit actually happened.
* They may have been correct in the past, but I don't think they're correct now.
They're on the CDC website - take your pick.
As to the EU suing ANZ:
EU seeking €10 per day per missing dose from #AstraZeneca for its failure to meet delivery schedule, as of 1 July. Plus €10 million for each breach of contract.
AstraZeneca is expected to be 200 million doses short by the end of June.
Yes, but they're not actually going to sue. Because there is no case.
This is all political posturing by the EU, to distract from their failings. And now that they've finally gotten their vaccination drive working, it will be quietly dropped.
Ultimately, there is no case. The contracts are clear, and there is no guarantee and there is certainly no "penalty payment".
This is like when a celebrity says they're going to sue someone for libel. It's a way of changing the conversation away from the EU's failings.
In general, I'd reckon the ratio between "I'm going to sue you" and "People actually getting sued" is probably about 10:1.
I had a case in Belgium once many years ago. I cannot recall if they have rules allowing an application for summary dismissal or strikeout but I would be surprised if they didn't.
Also: you can fly TOMORROW on Emirates from Dubai to Melbourne for $1,691.
That's not $10k.
Thing is, you can't cherry pick the strategy. When does Australia expect to open its borders? According to that Spiked article, not any time soon. It might be a case of the hare and the tortoise.
They have taken it slowly but for how much longer will the country be closed? Three months? Six months? A couple of years?
That's no way to run a country.
I'd take Boris' option any day of the week and trust me I can't f**king believe I am saying that.
I've done a quick Google which suggests that international tourism accounts for less than 1% of Australian GDP. If the population really wants to turn the country back into a prison colony again, they can therefore well afford to do so.
This is, of course, suboptimal if you can never visit any other part of the globe ever again, unless you can afford the very considerable time and expense of hotel quarantine when you get back, but if they want to reorganise themselves into a hermit kingdom then that's their choice.
The problem for Australia would be their oil & gas industry: they are making massive investments in developing their gas reserves. And that means that skilled people need to travel to Australia.
I'm not sure those numbers are correct* - they certainly don't match the numbers from Bloomberg or the NYTimes.
Also, the EU has told AZ they don't want any more shipments post June, so I'd be very surprised if a lawsuit actually happened.
* They may have been correct in the past, but I don't think they're correct now.
They're on the CDC website - take your pick.
As to the EU suing ANZ:
EU seeking €10 per day per missing dose from #AstraZeneca for its failure to meet delivery schedule, as of 1 July. Plus €10 million for each breach of contract.
AstraZeneca is expected to be 200 million doses short by the end of June.
I'm not sure those numbers are correct* - they certainly don't match the numbers from Bloomberg or the NYTimes.
Also, the EU has told AZ they don't want any more shipments post June, so I'd be very surprised if a lawsuit actually happened.
* They may have been correct in the past, but I don't think they're correct now.
They're on the CDC website - take your pick.
As to the EU suing ANZ:
EU seeking €10 per day per missing dose from #AstraZeneca for its failure to meet delivery schedule, as of 1 July. Plus €10 million for each breach of contract.
AstraZeneca is expected to be 200 million doses short by the end of June.
Yes, but they're not actually going to sue. Because there is no case.
This is all political posturing by the EU, to distract from their failings. And now that they've finally gotten their vaccination drive working, it will be quietly dropped.
Ultimately, there is no case. The contracts are clear, and there is no guarantee and there is certainly no "penalty payment".
This is like when a celebrity says they're going to sue someone for libel. It's a way of changing the conversation away from the EU's failings.
In general, I'd reckon the ratio between "I'm going to sue you" and "People actually getting sued" is probably about 10:1.
But the pharma companies (and no doubt companies in other industries too) are making a note of the attitude.
Why build that new factory in the EU, when putting it in the U.K. or Switzerland comes with a much more positive attitude from government?
Cummings says his decision to quit No 10 was linked to Carrie Symonds, the PM’s partner, trying to change various Downing Street appointments. In particular, he says she was trying to change the outcome of one official hiring process in a way that was “completely unethical”.
But he says his relationship with the PM had deteriorated. “Fundamentally I regarded him as unfit for the job,” says Cummings.
That’s actually the big one.
Symonds doesn’t have a job in No.10, but has previously worked for the party and knows everyone.
Presumably she doesn’t hold a security clearance, which would be an interesting line of questioning...
Does it make any significance on the last point that she is not formally hitched to Mr J (apart from the law of contract)? I don't know if it does ... jut seems a long time to wait ...
Ooh, lovely! Are you on holiday? I was there two years ago with a group of friends from school and their families. Now this is the sort of thing my own family and I do, but this isn't common to everyone, particularly not when they grow up in London. It was a joy to see the awe and excitement on a bunch of 7-12 year olds' faces that we would be going up there. They swarmed up it - no messing about with the path; straight up the steepest route possible. An absolute joy to see.
According to Google Flights, you can fly today from LAX to Melbourne for $2,335. Although you will need to pay for hotel quarantine when you get to the other end.
Well yes, it is going to be expensive, and people with children are going to be highly disincentivized from returning. (Who wants two weeks in a two two star hotel room with a nine year old and a seven year old?)
But that's not the same as being completely banned from returning home.
Philip Collins @PhilipJCollins1 · 1h Boris Johnson is both a formidable electoral politician and fundamentally ill-equipped for high office. Lots of senior Tories knew what they were giving us.
Mr. Leon, Sturgeon being an idiot is no reason to destroy a nation.
Devolution is a disaster. Especially the botched, stupid, asymmetric devolution given us by Labour. Boris is right
Anecdote: at my last large family gathering I was struck by the family members who were seriously anti-union and anti-Scottish. They used to be apathetic, now they are averse. Let Scotland go. Cut them away. This is a growing feeling in England. It will be England that ends the Union, if it ends
My family is not alone
‘MICHAEL Gove has been warned by a Tory MP that the Union could end through "benign neglect" as voters in England give up on it just as they did with the EU.
The Cabinet Office minister was told by Jackie Doyle-Price that her constituents in Thurrock in Essex now griped about Scotland they way they used to about Brussels.
She said for many people in England the Union was not a “living entity”and urged UK ministers to do more to help people understand and appreciate it.’
The main problem is it is no longer a Union as such but a Federal UK excluding England.
Give England its own Parliament or at least English regional assemblies and the problem would be resolved
no it wouldn't - a UK government would only be allowed to work if the constituent nations accepted the federal government and allowed the federal government to control the overall economic direction of the nation, its defence etc- the English government let alone others would have no incentive to do this - a federal UK could only work if you broke England into pieces so no part was too powerful, and why should England want that?
The UK government already does control the overall economic direction and defence of the whole UK. Just England is the only country in the UK which does not have its own Parliament to run the rest of its domestic policy.
There is no reason an English Parliament would not work other than leftwingers don't want it as it would normally have a Tory majority, otherwise we should at least have regional assemblies which would still be better than the current situation where England has no government of its own at national or regional level outside of the UK (except in the London region with the Mayor and Assembly)
this is nuts - if there were an English government it would be like the SNP on steroids - questioning every single action of the UK govt and attempting to delegitimise it, be allowed to 'approve' its decisions etc - the UK is not suited to be a federation as England dominates - everybody who has thought about this for more than 10 minutes understands this.
I remmeber a particularly interesting and illuminating discussion on PB about 2012-13 which came to an almost unanimous conclusion (quite unusual for that time and general topic of indyref) that true federalism was a non-runner in the UK because of precisely what you say, plus the political unacceptability of breaking up England a la Anglo-Saxon Heptarchy.
This is one reason why Gordon Brown's repeated Interventions with promises of more federalism have not, er, had much effect.
England doesn't need to be broken up within a Federal system, and the more it is broken up within that system, the more it dominates, as the 'more Englands' there are, the more they can out-vote the other home nations. Indeed, if England is broken up in a way that is commensurate with its population size, it totally swamps the other home nations, and defeats the entire object of federalisation. It becomes Westminster MPs mark 2.
I've made this argument to you a few times, and you've never made a counter-argument, so I'm surprised that you persist in the nonsense that England would need to be broken up to make a federal system work.
Hmm, that actually assumes a homogeneous England. If it is, then you are quite right. But if not, not.
You do realise you're undermining the SNP's whole argument on the hopelessness of Scotland's position wrt Westminster by saying that? English MP's aren't 'homogenous' either. Yet it's portrayed as Scotland being overruled by England.
That's because there is a majoritarian phenomenon in England under FPTP at Westminster, ie the Tories usually winning being part of it. PR would put a very different perspective on the entire matter.
But given that each English Parliament would have a ruling party (and presumably most would be Tory at the moment), that effect would surely be magnified?
The whole point of a federal structure is surely that in some circumstances, England counts as 'just a nation' among nations, and is not granted more influence by virtue of its large population - it 'takes one for the team'. I am comfortable with that. The desire to break England into cantons runs wholly counter to that aim. Scotland and Wales would in effect be 'other Yorkshires' - something which many would strongly object to.
That's the issue - either England accepts that the other nations have a veto (in effect) which would upset a lot of its voters ('why should we count for no more than the Nirish?', they might say). Or it doesn't, and therefore either overrides the other nations by population share, or by being broken up into cantons.
Well yes, that is the issue that got the likes of our Phillip so exercised when I proposed a 'Council of the Isles' to ratify major foreign policy and defence decisions. However, I see no real loss - I suspect it would result in less 'Iraqs' and less expensive defence white elephants. In that sense I see it being very popular with actual English people.
The notion of Scotland etc. having a veto is also one I don't normally bother airing as I get piled on when I even neutrally mention the A/S Heptarchy as one solution in a purely theoretical discussion of federalism - and in any case it seems so improbable given the Zeitgeist. I'm glad you raised it for me!
I imagine the Kingdom of Essex would be quite a place. TOWIE as a selection process for the first monarch?
(I say that as an Essex man born and bred - up to age 18 - so I assume I'm permitted to diss my homeland?)
I'm not sure those numbers are correct* - they certainly don't match the numbers from Bloomberg or the NYTimes.
Also, the EU has told AZ they don't want any more shipments post June, so I'd be very surprised if a lawsuit actually happened.
* They may have been correct in the past, but I don't think they're correct now.
They're on the CDC website - take your pick.
As to the EU suing ANZ:
EU seeking €10 per day per missing dose from #AstraZeneca for its failure to meet delivery schedule, as of 1 July. Plus €10 million for each breach of contract.
AstraZeneca is expected to be 200 million doses short by the end of June.
Yes, but they're not actually going to sue. Because there is no case.
This is all political posturing by the EU, to distract from their failings. And now that they've finally gotten their vaccination drive working, it will be quietly dropped.
Ultimately, there is no case. The contracts are clear, and there is no guarantee and there is certainly no "penalty payment".
This is like when a celebrity says they're going to sue someone for libel. It's a way of changing the conversation away from the EU's failings.
In general, I'd reckon the ratio between "I'm going to sue you" and "People actually getting sued" is probably about 10:1.
Yes, but a random rich nutter making the threat as a posturing position is one thing - an organisation/institution doing so, after lengthy consideration, is even less forgivable, since so many people who must know better are on board with the distraction.
Also: you can fly TOMORROW on Emirates from Dubai to Melbourne for $1,691.
That's not $10k.
Because very few citizens are being admitted:
You can travel to Australia if you are an Australian citizen, a permanent resident or a New Zealand citizen usually resident in Australia.
Australia has strict border measures in place to protect the health of the Australian community. Very limited flights are currently available to and from Australia and you may not be able to travel at this time.
The point is that AUSTRALIAN CITIZENS CAN TRAVEL TO AUSTRALIA.
Limited flights != No flights.
If I were Australian, I could go on-line now and book my quarantine, and book my ticket to Australia. I'm not saying it's not harder than normal, I am just saying that it is very far from impossible.
I was under the impression there was a significant waiting list and/or the price of return is prohibitive, in part because the Aus govt (unlike NZ) hasn’t invested in state run quarantine facilities. Not difficult to find stories of Aussies who were trapped abroad a year ago and are simply unable to return in reality.
Also: you can fly TOMORROW on Emirates from Dubai to Melbourne for $1,691.
That's not $10k.
Because very few citizens are being admitted:
You can travel to Australia if you are an Australian citizen, a permanent resident or a New Zealand citizen usually resident in Australia.
Australia has strict border measures in place to protect the health of the Australian community. Very limited flights are currently available to and from Australia and you may not be able to travel at this time.
The point is that AUSTRALIAN CITIZENS CAN TRAVEL TO AUSTRALIA.
Limited flights != No flights.
If I were Australian, I could go on-line now and book my quarantine, and book my ticket to Australia. I'm not saying it's not harder than normal, I am just saying that it is very far from impossible.
Arrivals are constrained by quarantine capacity - which is why 40,000 are stuck abroad and can't currently get back in. Given the number of celebs rocking up that's causing a degree of unhappiness....
And it looks like Melbourne may be heading to another lockdown:
I see Dominic Cummings has been having a series of epic self-awareness fails.
Does anyone actually believe what he’s saying?
Yes and quite a lot of what he is saying is genuinely interesting and thought provoking. But our press will focus on the political tittle tattle as always.
Also: you can fly TOMORROW on Emirates from Dubai to Melbourne for $1,691.
That's not $10k.
Because very few citizens are being admitted:
You can travel to Australia if you are an Australian citizen, a permanent resident or a New Zealand citizen usually resident in Australia.
Australia has strict border measures in place to protect the health of the Australian community. Very limited flights are currently available to and from Australia and you may not be able to travel at this time.
The point is that AUSTRALIAN CITIZENS CAN TRAVEL TO AUSTRALIA.
Limited flights != No flights.
If I were Australian, I could go on-line now and book my quarantine, and book my ticket to Australia. I'm not saying it's not harder than normal, I am just saying that it is very far from impossible.
Arrivals are constrained by quarantine capacity - which is why 40,000 are stuck abroad and can't currently get back in. Given the number of celebs rocking up that's causing a degree of unhappiness....
And it looks like Melbourne may be heading to another lockdown:
Also: you can fly TOMORROW on Emirates from Dubai to Melbourne for $1,691.
That's not $10k.
Thing is, you can't cherry pick the strategy. When does Australia expect to open its borders? According to that Spiked article, not any time soon. It might be a case of the hare and the tortoise.
They have taken it slowly but for how much longer will the country be closed? Three months? Six months? A couple of years?
That's no way to run a country.
I'd take Boris' option any day of the week and trust me I can't f**king believe I am saying that.
Oh, I agree.
Australia will suffer if its people can't travel abroad and if people can't visit it.
But I imagine they'll open up first to "double vaccinated" people who have test negative before departure and on arrival.
I wonder what the policy will be towards children <18 where it might be a while before they receive their 2x jabs.
It is hard to think of a political pair who have fallen out more spectacularly than Cummings and Johnson. That made Geoffrey Howe’s resignation speech look like a paean of praise to Thatcher
Philip Collins @PhilipJCollins1 · 1h Boris Johnson is both a formidable electoral politician and fundamentally ill-equipped for high office. Lots of senior Tories knew what they were giving us.
Much like Cummings himself of course.
And many leading politicians. We really have got a poor crop.
Also: you can fly TOMORROW on Emirates from Dubai to Melbourne for $1,691.
That's not $10k.
Thing is, you can't cherry pick the strategy. When does Australia expect to open its borders? According to that Spiked article, not any time soon. It might be a case of the hare and the tortoise.
They have taken it slowly but for how much longer will the country be closed? Three months? Six months? A couple of years?
That's no way to run a country.
I'd take Boris' option any day of the week and trust me I can't f**king believe I am saying that.
I've done a quick Google which suggests that international tourism accounts for less than 1% of Australian GDP. If the population really wants to turn the country back into a prison colony again, they can therefore well afford to do so.
This is, of course, suboptimal if you can never visit any other part of the globe ever again, unless you can afford the very considerable time and expense of hotel quarantine when you get back, but if they want to reorganise themselves into a hermit kingdom then that's their choice.
The problem for Australia would be their oil & gas industry: they are making massive investments in developing their gas reserves. And that means that skilled people need to travel to Australia.
They are giving limited exemptions for key workers (and media types). Still have to quarantine for a fortnight though.
I see Dominic Cummings has been having a series of epic self-awareness fails.
Does anyone actually believe what he’s saying?
Yes and quite a lot of what he is saying is genuinely interesting and thought provoking. But our press will focus on the political tittle tattle as always.
That would be a first.
While I can quite believe Hancock’s a liar, Johnson’s a buffoon and SAGE are a bunch of third rate loons with no common sense whatsoever, much of it seems to be saying how wonderful everything would be if he had been in charge.
Yet he was, in effect, in charge.
So why was it not wonderful?
Because ultimately, he is a rather stupid and dishonest narcissist with a track record of failure and incompetence, that he subsequently retcons to look like genius. His work for IDS, his two days working on the NE Assembly referendum, his time at the DfE, his lies in the EU referendum, his mad plans for civil service reform that missed the point entirely, his breaches of quarantine and crazy lies to cover his tracks - they follow a pattern. And so does this.
So whatever he’s saying, it’s not worth listening to.
According to Google Flights, you can fly today from LAX to Melbourne for $2,335. Although you will need to pay for hotel quarantine when you get to the other end.
Well yes, it is going to be expensive, and people with children are going to be highly disincentivized from returning. (Who wants two weeks in a two two star hotel room with a nine year old and a seven year old?)
But that's not the same as being completely banned from returning home.
Having to pay your annual salary for flights and quarantine is a damn effective block on returning for a family of four.
There’s Aussies in my part of the world sleeping on mates’ sofas becuase they can’t get home.
The fact cases are still going up shows that the r0 of the India variant is pretty damn high. Now we've got plenty more to vaccinate, and boosters to come on top as well but still.
I see Dominic Cummings has been having a series of epic self-awareness fails.
Does anyone actually believe what he’s saying?
Yes and quite a lot of what he is saying is genuinely interesting and thought provoking. But our press will focus on the political tittle tattle as always.
Which is why he is so dumb for including it. But he cannot help but love the attention - he always wanted the limelight more than the job allows, and more control.
Going to do a thread with various scientists/experts debunking elements of the coronavirus lab-leak theory. Let’s begin with the argument that zoonotic viruses need time to evolve before becoming highly transmissible among humans: https://twitter.com/Michael_Youhana/status/1397177065250689028
Anyone claiming they know for certain either way is either lying or stupid. And it appears to me that the natural origins hypothesis remind the most likely.
I see Dominic Cummings has been having a series of epic self-awareness fails.
Does anyone actually believe what he’s saying?
Yes and quite a lot of what he is saying is genuinely interesting and thought provoking. But our press will focus on the political tittle tattle as always.
That would be a first.
While I can quite believe Hancock’s a liar, Johnson’s a buffoon and SAGE are a bunch of third rate loons with no common sense whatsoever, much of it seems to be saying how wonderful everything would be if he had been in charge.
Yet he was, in effect, in charge.
So why was it not wonderful?
Because ultimately, he is a rather stupid and dishonest narcissist with a track record of failure and incompetence, that he subsequently retcons to look like genius. His work for IDS, his two days working on the NE Assembly referendum, his time at the DfE, his lies in the EU referendum, his mad plans for civil service reform that missed the point entirely, his breaches of quarantine and crazy lies to cover his tracks - they follow a pattern. And so does this.
So whatever he’s saying, it’s not worth listening to.
Bollocks.
Once again you are letting your own personal bias get in the way of the facts.
He never said it would have been wonderful if he had been in charge, in fact he said exactly the opposite. He admitted he had made many mistakes and got a lot wrong. He was clear about that and also said he should never have been put in a position where he was advising on those decisions.
Of course we all know you hate him because of your personal and professional bigotry, but I will remind you that that record of failure included winning the EU referendum and getting Johnson elected - which in retrospect might have been a failure but not in the way you mean.
You are so blinded by your own hatred that you are also, to quote your own closing dribble, not worth listening to.
Perfect timing! As France announces quarantine for UK arrivals:
Travel news: From tomorrow there will be 2 trains a day between London and Paris. It's lovely to see the service increase after months of only 1 train.
I see Dominic Cummings has been having a series of epic self-awareness fails.
Does anyone actually believe what he’s saying?
Yes and quite a lot of what he is saying is genuinely interesting and thought provoking. But our press will focus on the political tittle tattle as always.
That would be a first.
While I can quite believe Hancock’s a liar, Johnson’s a buffoon and SAGE are a bunch of third rate loons with no common sense whatsoever, much of it seems to be saying how wonderful everything would be if he had been in charge.
Yet he was, in effect, in charge.
So why was it not wonderful?
Because ultimately, he is a rather stupid and dishonest narcissist with a track record of failure and incompetence, that he subsequently retcons to look like genius. His work for IDS, his two days working on the NE Assembly referendum, his time at the DfE, his lies in the EU referendum, his mad plans for civil service reform that missed the point entirely, his breaches of quarantine and crazy lies to cover his tracks - they follow a pattern. And so does this.
So whatever he’s saying, it’s not worth listening to.
He never said it would have been wonderful if he had been in charge, in fact he said exactly the opposite. He admitted he had made many mistakes and got a lot wrong. He was clear about that and also said he should never have been put in a position where he was advising on those decisions.
I don't buy such a claim. You cannot be forced into such a thing, anyone can easily say 'this should not be for me to advise upon'.
Done.
Given the disdain he apparently had for the whole business and many of the people involved that would have been very easy as well, since he wouldn't feel a need to coddle people he did not respect, and would not feel concern at telling them he should not be involved.
It sounds like implausible justification for why he was involved not being at least partly his responsibility. Yes the person who appoints a fool is more to blame than the fool, but Cummings has agency, he wasn't buffeted by the winds of fate.
Brief bit on the Kremlinology of Dom Cummings' select committee appearance, and why the politician who came out of it best was the one he ostentatiously didn't name:
Look at all the actors in today's drama. Senior politicians. Advisors. Civil servants. Commentariat/Media. Other halves.
You gave up your liberties, and still do, for THEM?
You continue to play by all the rules that THEY have set?
You consider that THEY are better judges of what is best for you, your health, and your family than you are?
Really?
You clearly do, given by refusing the vaccine you make lockdowns more likely.
No you made lockdowns more likely by obeying everything the government tells you.
A democratic government could not impose a lockdown on a population that did not want one. It would be impossible.
Luckily they have credulous fools like you on hand to obey everything they say, defend them at every single turn, and attack the very people trying to defend your own liberty.
Of course, if you achieved both of those objectives, then you would be boosting the leadership hopes of any politician who could firmly tick two boxes: one seen in Westminster as impeccably pro-lockdown and one not called Matt Hancock. A politician whom Dominic Cummings had worked with, perhaps. Who, despite his responsibilities including the Cabinet Office, about which Cummings had much to say, was not mentioned once in Cummings’ testimony to MPs. Who has run for the top job in the past, perhaps. Whose undoubted ability to actually deliver a project to completion might be a very useful point of contrast among Conservative MPs with the current incumbent. Called ‘Michael Gove’, maybe.
I'm not sure those numbers are correct* - they certainly don't match the numbers from Bloomberg or the NYTimes.
Also, the EU has told AZ they don't want any more shipments post June, so I'd be very surprised if a lawsuit actually happened.
* They may have been correct in the past, but I don't think they're correct now.
They're on the CDC website - take your pick.
As to the EU suing ANZ:
EU seeking €10 per day per missing dose from #AstraZeneca for its failure to meet delivery schedule, as of 1 July. Plus €10 million for each breach of contract.
AstraZeneca is expected to be 200 million doses short by the end of June.
Yes, but they're not actually going to sue. Because there is no case.
This is all political posturing by the EU, to distract from their failings. And now that they've finally gotten their vaccination drive working, it will be quietly dropped.
Ultimately, there is no case. The contracts are clear, and there is no guarantee and there is certainly no "penalty payment".
This is like when a celebrity says they're going to sue someone for libel. It's a way of changing the conversation away from the EU's failings.
In general, I'd reckon the ratio between "I'm going to sue you" and "People actually getting sued" is probably about 10:1.
But the pharma companies (and no doubt companies in other industries too) are making a note of the attitude.
Why build that new factory in the EU, when putting it in the U.K. or Switzerland comes with a much more positive attitude from government?
If the EU wish for their case to be taken seriously, then no pharma will ever sign a contract with them again. Except cash on delivery, no warranties, express or implied.
Cummings says 99% of civil service jobs should be open to outsiders. Why on earth did he not focus on this rather than all of his other obsessions?
Just change the HR rules to let external people apply by default and sit back and relax in the knowledge you have profoundly transformed Whitehall for all time.
I thought that, to some degree anyway, Thatcher had done that.
It's either that they are not, in fact, advertised, or that (perish the thought) no-one applies.
Under Cameron I think external recruitment was effectively banned (needed v. senior approval, business case etc.) because they wanted to shrink the size of civil service...
Brief bit on the Kremlinology of Dom Cummings' select committee appearance, and why the politician who came out of it best was the one he ostentatiously didn't name:
"Of course, if you achieved both of those objectives, then you would be boosting the leadership hopes of any politician who could firmly tick two boxes: one seen in Westminster as impeccably pro-lockdown and one not called Matt Hancock. A politician whom Dominic Cummings had worked with, perhaps."
Reminder. Sanofi, a French company, who singularly failed to deliver a single working dose and were given a stonking non-refundable deposit have not been taken to court. That’s the EU for you.
I see Dominic Cummings has been having a series of epic self-awareness fails.
Does anyone actually believe what he’s saying?
I find it possible to believe some of what he's saying, despite his complete lack of credibility as a witness. The idea that Hancock might have lied on occasion about the discharge policy (for example) does not stretch my credulity in the least.
Of course, if you achieved both of those objectives, then you would be boosting the leadership hopes of any politician who could firmly tick two boxes: one seen in Westminster as impeccably pro-lockdown and one not called Matt Hancock. A politician whom Dominic Cummings had worked with, perhaps. Who, despite his responsibilities including the Cabinet Office, about which Cummings had much to say, was not mentioned once in Cummings’ testimony to MPs. Who has run for the top job in the past, perhaps. Whose undoubted ability to actually deliver a project to completion might be a very useful point of contrast among Conservative MPs with the current incumbent. Called ‘Michael Gove’, maybe.
I read the Cummings stuff as.. bitter and twisted shit of a man angry at being booted out, lashes out and sticks the knife in to all and sundry, including himself.( to make it more plausible)
He lied about his lockdown escape, why believe anything else he says? I wouldn't trust him to get me a cup of tea.
They used to talk about piling Pelion on Ossa; now they're piling Kinabalu on Thorpe Cloud...
It was only three days ago I learned* what a Kinabalu is. I wouldn't have got this joke last week.
*I was wikipediaing what the highest islands in the world were, after learning Taiwan came 4th. Interestingly, although Great Britain is the 8th largest island, it is only the 125th highest.
Pretty outrageous by the EU, particularly given AZ are not making a profit on this deal. Were it not for the humanitarian side of things, I think AZ would be justified in stopping producing for the EU
Perfect timing! As France announces quarantine for UK arrivals:
Travel news: From tomorrow there will be 2 trains a day between London and Paris. It's lovely to see the service increase after months of only 1 train.
Of course, if you achieved both of those objectives, then you would be boosting the leadership hopes of any politician who could firmly tick two boxes: one seen in Westminster as impeccably pro-lockdown and one not called Matt Hancock. A politician whom Dominic Cummings had worked with, perhaps. Who, despite his responsibilities including the Cabinet Office, about which Cummings had much to say, was not mentioned once in Cummings’ testimony to MPs. Who has run for the top job in the past, perhaps. Whose undoubted ability to actually deliver a project to completion might be a very useful point of contrast among Conservative MPs with the current incumbent. Called ‘Michael Gove’, maybe.
The fact cases are still going up shows that the r0 of the India variant is pretty damn high. Now we've got plenty more to vaccinate, and boosters to come on top as well but still.
Really? Sage have been predicting that cases would be certain to rise at each stage of unlockdown long before they even knew of the existence of the India variant. Now unless you just accept that everything they were saying was just nonsense, why does this necessarily say anything about its transmissibility? Noting also that nobody’s really sure of the extent to which vaccines hinder infection spread, as opposed to levels of symptomatic cases or serious illness.
The 20m extra doses the commission is seeking from the company would make little difference to the EU’s accelerating vaccine rollout. Some countries have restricted the use of AstraZeneca jabs because of rare but potentially fatal side-effects. Denmark has stopped using it altogether.
Philip Collins @PhilipJCollins1 · 1h Boris Johnson is both a formidable electoral politician and fundamentally ill-equipped for high office. Lots of senior Tories knew what they were giving us.
Tories had to choose between the actual alternatives. Once you reject, as inevitably you had to, those who were not clear Brexiteers it is hard to see where else they could go for the particular purpose of delivering Brexit and winning an election.
I see Dominic Cummings has been having a series of epic self-awareness fails.
Does anyone actually believe what he’s saying?
Yes and quite a lot of what he is saying is genuinely interesting and thought provoking. But our press will focus on the political tittle tattle as always.
That would be a first.
While I can quite believe Hancock’s a liar, Johnson’s a buffoon and SAGE are a bunch of third rate loons with no common sense whatsoever, much of it seems to be saying how wonderful everything would be if he had been in charge.
Yet he was, in effect, in charge.
So why was it not wonderful?
Because ultimately, he is a rather stupid and dishonest narcissist with a track record of failure and incompetence, that he subsequently retcons to look like genius. His work for IDS, his two days working on the NE Assembly referendum, his time at the DfE, his lies in the EU referendum, his mad plans for civil service reform that missed the point entirely, his breaches of quarantine and crazy lies to cover his tracks - they follow a pattern. And so does this.
So whatever he’s saying, it’s not worth listening to.
He never said it would have been wonderful if he had been in charge, in fact he said exactly the opposite. He admitted he had made many mistakes and got a lot wrong. He was clear about that and also said he should never have been put in a position where he was advising on those decisions.
I don't buy such a claim. You cannot be forced into such a thing, anyone can easily say 'this should not be for me to advise upon'.
Done.
Given the disdain he apparently had for the whole business and many of the people involved that would have been very easy as well, since he wouldn't feel a need to coddle people he did not respect, and would not feel concern at telling them he should not be involved.
It sounds like implausible justification for why he was involved not being at least partly his responsibility. Yes the person who appoints a fool is more to blame than the fool, but Cummings has agency, he wasn't buffeted by the winds of fate.
Didn’t he even say that he wanted to quit last June but decided to stay on because he was needed to help combat the anticipated October surge. If he was so convinced about how unsuited he was to his role, quitting should have been the easiest decision ever.
The fact cases are still going up shows that the r0 of the India variant is pretty damn high. Now we've got plenty more to vaccinate, and boosters to come on top as well but still.
I think a lot of the cases are in schools. @Malmesbury data shows this. I have a hunch that Indian travellers have infected multigenerational families and it has then spread into the schools. There is very little sign of a rise outside the main areas. If anything the yellow is spreading across the MSOA data map.
Look at all the actors in today's drama. Senior politicians. Advisors. Civil servants. Commentariat/Media. Other halves.
You gave up your liberties, and still do, for THEM?
You continue to play by all the rules that THEY have set?
You consider that THEY are better judges of what is best for you, your health, and your family than you are?
Really?
You clearly do, given by refusing the vaccine you make lockdowns more likely.
No you made lockdowns more likely by obeying everything the government tells you.
A democratic government could not impose a lockdown on a population that did not want one. It would be impossible.
Luckily they have credulous fools like you on hand to obey everything they say, defend them at every single turn, and attack the very people trying to defend your own liberty.
I'm not sure those numbers are correct* - they certainly don't match the numbers from Bloomberg or the NYTimes.
Also, the EU has told AZ they don't want any more shipments post June, so I'd be very surprised if a lawsuit actually happened.
* They may have been correct in the past, but I don't think they're correct now.
They're on the CDC website - take your pick.
As to the EU suing ANZ:
EU seeking €10 per day per missing dose from #AstraZeneca for its failure to meet delivery schedule, as of 1 July. Plus €10 million for each breach of contract.
AstraZeneca is expected to be 200 million doses short by the end of June.
Yes, but they're not actually going to sue. Because there is no case.
This is all political posturing by the EU, to distract from their failings. And now that they've finally gotten their vaccination drive working, it will be quietly dropped.
Ultimately, there is no case. The contracts are clear, and there is no guarantee and there is certainly no "penalty payment".
This is like when a celebrity says they're going to sue someone for libel. It's a way of changing the conversation away from the EU's failings.
In general, I'd reckon the ratio between "I'm going to sue you" and "People actually getting sued" is probably about 10:1.
But the pharma companies (and no doubt companies in other industries too) are making a note of the attitude.
Why build that new factory in the EU, when putting it in the U.K. or Switzerland comes with a much more positive attitude from government?
If the EU wish for their case to be taken seriously, then no pharma will ever sign a contract with them again. Except cash on delivery, no warranties, express or implied.
It’s utterly bonkers. They’re completely trashing their reputation with some huge companies, to try and make political news headlines.
On the same day they’ve fallen out with Switzerland, and not long after their second largest member withdrew from the organisation and is trying hard to attract business.
The fact cases are still going up shows that the r0 of the India variant is pretty damn high. Now we've got plenty more to vaccinate, and boosters to come on top as well but still.
I think a lot of the cases are in schools. @Malmesbury data shows this. I have a hunch that Indian travellers have infected multigenerational families and it has then spread into the schools. There is very little sign of a rise outside the main areas. If anything the yellow is spreading across the MSOA data map.
I have to say, I work in a very ethnically diverse school but I haven’t noticed any significant rise in cases there yet.
Going to do a thread with various scientists/experts debunking elements of the coronavirus lab-leak theory. Let’s begin with the argument that zoonotic viruses need time to evolve before becoming highly transmissible among humans: https://twitter.com/Michael_Youhana/status/1397177065250689028
Anyone claiming they know for certain either way is either lying or stupid. And it appears to me that the natural origins hypothesis remind the most likely.
Natural origin is not incompatible with it getting leaked from a lab. There is a suspicious push to equate it accidentally leaking from a lab with poor safety procedures = humans editing it to cause a pandemic.
Also: you can fly TOMORROW on Emirates from Dubai to Melbourne for $1,691.
That's not $10k.
Because very few citizens are being admitted:
You can travel to Australia if you are an Australian citizen, a permanent resident or a New Zealand citizen usually resident in Australia.
Australia has strict border measures in place to protect the health of the Australian community. Very limited flights are currently available to and from Australia and you may not be able to travel at this time.
The point is that AUSTRALIAN CITIZENS CAN TRAVEL TO AUSTRALIA.
Limited flights != No flights.
If I were Australian, I could go on-line now and book my quarantine, and book my ticket to Australia. I'm not saying it's not harder than normal, I am just saying that it is very far from impossible.
Provided they are very wealthy they can return home. You are clearly very wealthy and assume that everyone else is as well. Have you considered empathy?
Look at all the actors in today's drama. Senior politicians. Advisors. Civil servants. Commentariat/Media. Other halves.
You gave up your liberties, and still do, for THEM?
You continue to play by all the rules that THEY have set?
You consider that THEY are better judges of what is best for you, your health, and your family than you are?
Really?
You keep making this point, as if we, or even our elected representatives had any fucking choice in the matter.
Sweden, Florida and Texas show us there are choices. These are simply choices our authorities do not wish to make. Because they are too hard.
Indeed. My point is that I personally had no choice in giving up my liberties, and nor did you, Mary Berry or Ainsley Harriott. You keep talking as if we were given a choice and are therefore culpable. We weren't. Representative democracy, freedom of association, freedom of speech - all gone in the stroke of a pen. I find the implication that we were all enthusiastic cheerleaders for this while only wise cranky old contrarian sat alone in his eyrie shaking his head slightly irritating.
I see Dominic Cummings has been having a series of epic self-awareness fails.
Does anyone actually believe what he’s saying?
Yes and quite a lot of what he is saying is genuinely interesting and thought provoking. But our press will focus on the political tittle tattle as always.
That would be a first.
While I can quite believe Hancock’s a liar, Johnson’s a buffoon and SAGE are a bunch of third rate loons with no common sense whatsoever, much of it seems to be saying how wonderful everything would be if he had been in charge.
Yet he was, in effect, in charge.
So why was it not wonderful?
Because ultimately, he is a rather stupid and dishonest narcissist with a track record of failure and incompetence, that he subsequently retcons to look like genius. His work for IDS, his two days working on the NE Assembly referendum, his time at the DfE, his lies in the EU referendum, his mad plans for civil service reform that missed the point entirely, his breaches of quarantine and crazy lies to cover his tracks - they follow a pattern. And so does this.
So whatever he’s saying, it’s not worth listening to.
Bollocks.
Once again you are letting your own personal bias get in the way of the facts.
He never said it would have been wonderful if he had been in charge, in fact he said exactly the opposite. He admitted he had made many mistakes and got a lot wrong. He was clear about that and also said he should never have been put in a position where he was advising on those decisions.
Of course we all know you hate him because of your personal and professional bigotry, but I will remind you that that record of failure included winning the EU referendum and getting Johnson elected - which in retrospect might have been a failure but not in the way you mean.
You are so blinded by your own hatred that you are also, to quote your own closing dribble, not worth listening to.
I hate him because he’s a bully and liar who has not merely failed but caused catastrophic damage in everything he’s touched - even where reform was badly needed, as in LEAs and the exam system.
And he’s doing the same thing here.
You don’t need to overthink it beyond that Richard.
The fact cases are still going up shows that the r0 of the India variant is pretty damn high. Now we've got plenty more to vaccinate, and boosters to come on top as well but still.
I think a lot of the cases are in schools. @Malmesbury data shows this. I have a hunch that Indian travellers have infected multigenerational families and it has then spread into the schools. There is very little sign of a rise outside the main areas. If anything the yellow is spreading across the MSOA data map.
I have to say, I work in a very ethnically diverse school but I haven’t noticed any significant rise in cases there yet.
To be more precise, the schools in and around Bolton. I don’t think it is spreading widely, despite being found in many areas.
Good that people are aware the EU did close to the absolute minimum in response to the Belarus highjack. Not even a generalized ban of the Belarus airspace (aircraft crossing Belarus airspace before entering or after leaving EU airspace would be banned)....
....I guess it’s the fear of being extraterritorial. A generalized ban would affect Chinese and American companies. They, China and the US, have no such compunction
The fact cases are still going up shows that the r0 of the India variant is pretty damn high. Now we've got plenty more to vaccinate, and boosters to come on top as well but still.
I think a lot of the cases are in schools. @Malmesbury data shows this. I have a hunch that Indian travellers have infected multigenerational families and it has then spread into the schools. There is very little sign of a rise outside the main areas. If anything the yellow is spreading across the MSOA data map.
I have to say, I work in a very ethnically diverse school but I haven’t noticed any significant rise in cases there yet.
To be more precise, the schools in and around Bolton. I don’t think it is spreading widely, despite being found in many areas.
And Bedford, where one school has gone back to remote learning.
It’s a bit strange though as we have had several students back from the subcontinent. Equally, in my experience the school is very alert at enforcing quarantine. I’ve had huge numbers of emails about students and when they should be back, and if they’re back earlier, message the office straightaway and they will be collected.
Going to do a thread with various scientists/experts debunking elements of the coronavirus lab-leak theory. Let’s begin with the argument that zoonotic viruses need time to evolve before becoming highly transmissible among humans: https://twitter.com/Michael_Youhana/status/1397177065250689028
Anyone claiming they know for certain either way is either lying or stupid. And it appears to me that the natural origins hypothesis remind the most likely.
Natural origin is not incompatible with it getting leaked from a lab. There is a suspicious push to equate it accidentally leaking from a lab with poor safety procedures = humans editing it to cause a pandemic.
Indeed. But either way, natural origin without the involvement of a lab in the process is still the more likely explanation. And editing the least likely, I think.
(And, of course, all explanations remain possible.)
I see Dominic Cummings has been having a series of epic self-awareness fails.
Does anyone actually believe what he’s saying?
Yes and quite a lot of what he is saying is genuinely interesting and thought provoking. But our press will focus on the political tittle tattle as always.
That would be a first.
While I can quite believe Hancock’s a liar, Johnson’s a buffoon and SAGE are a bunch of third rate loons with no common sense whatsoever, much of it seems to be saying how wonderful everything would be if he had been in charge.
Yet he was, in effect, in charge.
So why was it not wonderful?
Because ultimately, he is a rather stupid and dishonest narcissist with a track record of failure and incompetence, that he subsequently retcons to look like genius. His work for IDS, his two days working on the NE Assembly referendum, his time at the DfE, his lies in the EU referendum, his mad plans for civil service reform that missed the point entirely, his breaches of quarantine and crazy lies to cover his tracks - they follow a pattern. And so does this.
So whatever he’s saying, it’s not worth listening to.
He never said it would have been wonderful if he had been in charge, in fact he said exactly the opposite. He admitted he had made many mistakes and got a lot wrong. He was clear about that and also said he should never have been put in a position where he was advising on those decisions.
I don't buy such a claim. You cannot be forced into such a thing, anyone can easily say 'this should not be for me to advise upon'.
Done.
Given the disdain he apparently had for the whole business and many of the people involved that would have been very easy as well, since he wouldn't feel a need to coddle people he did not respect, and would not feel concern at telling them he should not be involved.
It sounds like implausible justification for why he was involved not being at least partly his responsibility. Yes the person who appoints a fool is more to blame than the fool, but Cummings has agency, he wasn't buffeted by the winds of fate.
Like ydoethur you brazenly ignore the fact that he did take responsibility and did say that some of the failings were his. In fact he repeated it on a number of occasions. He also praised many of those he worked with so again you misrepresent his evidence. I wonder if, like ydoethur you didn't actually see any of the evidence and are just commenting on snippets. Or maybe like ydoethur you just chose to ignore anything that doesn't suit your pre conceived ideas.
The fact cases are still going up shows that the r0 of the India variant is pretty damn high. Now we've got plenty more to vaccinate, and boosters to come on top as well but still.
I think a lot of the cases are in schools. @Malmesbury data shows this. I have a hunch that Indian travellers have infected multigenerational families and it has then spread into the schools. There is very little sign of a rise outside the main areas. If anything the yellow is spreading across the MSOA data map.
I have to say, I work in a very ethnically diverse school but I haven’t noticed any significant rise in cases there yet.
To be more precise, the schools in and around Bolton. I don’t think it is spreading widely, despite being found in many areas.
And Bedford, where one school has gone back to remote learning.
It’s a bit strange though as we have had several students back from the subcontinent. Equally, in my experience the school is very alert at enforcing quarantine. I’ve had huge numbers of emails about students and when they should be back, and if they’re back earlier, message the office straightaway and they will be collected.
Not everyone who came back from India will have been infected though.
Cummings says his decision to quit No 10 was linked to Carrie Symonds, the PM’s partner, trying to change various Downing Street appointments. In particular, he says she was trying to change the outcome of one official hiring process in a way that was “completely unethical”.
But he says his relationship with the PM had deteriorated. “Fundamentally I regarded him as unfit for the job,” says Cummings.
That’s actually the big one.
Symonds doesn’t have a job in No.10, but has previously worked for the party and knows everyone.
Presumably she doesn’t hold a security clearance, which would be an interesting line of questioning...
Does it make any significance on the last point that she is not formally hitched to Mr J (apart from the law of contract)? I don't know if it does ... jut seems a long time to wait ...
My thinking was that she might have been privy to stuff she wasn’t entitled to be, either from her betrothed or from others in the key meetings.
Being married or not I don’t think makes a difference, but one imagines that a Norma Major or Sarah Brown wasn’t on the messages with everyone in the meetings as a matter of course.
The long wait, I assume she wants the ‘fairytale’ wedding, which isn’t going to happen this summer as every possible venue was booked solid months ago. I’m surprised if she’s found a decent venue for next summer to be honest, unless they do it in government buildings.
I see Dominic Cummings has been having a series of epic self-awareness fails.
Does anyone actually believe what he’s saying?
Yes and quite a lot of what he is saying is genuinely interesting and thought provoking. But our press will focus on the political tittle tattle as always.
That would be a first.
While I can quite believe Hancock’s a liar, Johnson’s a buffoon and SAGE are a bunch of third rate loons with no common sense whatsoever, much of it seems to be saying how wonderful everything would be if he had been in charge.
Yet he was, in effect, in charge.
So why was it not wonderful?
Because ultimately, he is a rather stupid and dishonest narcissist with a track record of failure and incompetence, that he subsequently retcons to look like genius. His work for IDS, his two days working on the NE Assembly referendum, his time at the DfE, his lies in the EU referendum, his mad plans for civil service reform that missed the point entirely, his breaches of quarantine and crazy lies to cover his tracks - they follow a pattern. And so does this.
So whatever he’s saying, it’s not worth listening to.
He never said it would have been wonderful if he had been in charge, in fact he said exactly the opposite. He admitted he had made many mistakes and got a lot wrong. He was clear about that and also said he should never have been put in a position where he was advising on those decisions.
I don't buy such a claim. You cannot be forced into such a thing, anyone can easily say 'this should not be for me to advise upon'.
Done.
Given the disdain he apparently had for the whole business and many of the people involved that would have been very easy as well, since he wouldn't feel a need to coddle people he did not respect, and would not feel concern at telling them he should not be involved.
It sounds like implausible justification for why he was involved not being at least partly his responsibility. Yes the person who appoints a fool is more to blame than the fool, but Cummings has agency, he wasn't buffeted by the winds of fate.
Like ydoethur you brazenly ignore the fact that he did take responsibility and did say that some of the failings were his. In fact he repeated it on a number of occasions. He also praised many of those he worked with so again you misrepresent his evidence. I wonder if, like ydoethur you didn't actually see any of the evidence and are just commenting on snippets. Or maybe like ydoethur you just chose to ignore anything that doesn't suit your pre conceived ideas.
True. I have only seen summaries, due to having to teach all day and only just having got back in.
But nothing he’s said so far judging by that is exactly surprising nor at variance with my analysis.
I'm not sure those numbers are correct* - they certainly don't match the numbers from Bloomberg or the NYTimes.
Also, the EU has told AZ they don't want any more shipments post June, so I'd be very surprised if a lawsuit actually happened.
* They may have been correct in the past, but I don't think they're correct now.
They're on the CDC website - take your pick.
As to the EU suing ANZ:
EU seeking €10 per day per missing dose from #AstraZeneca for its failure to meet delivery schedule, as of 1 July. Plus €10 million for each breach of contract.
AstraZeneca is expected to be 200 million doses short by the end of June.
Yes, but they're not actually going to sue. Because there is no case.
This is all political posturing by the EU, to distract from their failings. And now that they've finally gotten their vaccination drive working, it will be quietly dropped.
Ultimately, there is no case. The contracts are clear, and there is no guarantee and there is certainly no "penalty payment".
This is like when a celebrity says they're going to sue someone for libel. It's a way of changing the conversation away from the EU's failings.
In general, I'd reckon the ratio between "I'm going to sue you" and "People actually getting sued" is probably about 10:1.
But the pharma companies (and no doubt companies in other industries too) are making a note of the attitude.
Why build that new factory in the EU, when putting it in the U.K. or Switzerland comes with a much more positive attitude from government?
If the EU wish for their case to be taken seriously, then no pharma will ever sign a contract with them again. Except cash on delivery, no warranties, express or implied.
No. they will do business.
In the oil business, there are levels of trust between the companies and national governments....
Norway - their governments handshake is good enough for billions Nigeria - to do a contract with them, they used to have to put billions in escrow in a neutral country like Switzerland. If they break any part of the deal, the money goes automatically to the oil company.
Also: you can fly TOMORROW on Emirates from Dubai to Melbourne for $1,691.
That's not $10k.
Because very few citizens are being admitted:
You can travel to Australia if you are an Australian citizen, a permanent resident or a New Zealand citizen usually resident in Australia.
Australia has strict border measures in place to protect the health of the Australian community. Very limited flights are currently available to and from Australia and you may not be able to travel at this time.
The point is that AUSTRALIAN CITIZENS CAN TRAVEL TO AUSTRALIA.
Limited flights != No flights.
If I were Australian, I could go on-line now and book my quarantine, and book my ticket to Australia. I'm not saying it's not harder than normal, I am just saying that it is very far from impossible.
The issue aiui is getting a slot in quarantine rather than flights.
Cummings says his decision to quit No 10 was linked to Carrie Symonds, the PM’s partner, trying to change various Downing Street appointments. In particular, he says she was trying to change the outcome of one official hiring process in a way that was “completely unethical”.
But he says his relationship with the PM had deteriorated. “Fundamentally I regarded him as unfit for the job,” says Cummings.
That’s actually the big one.
Symonds doesn’t have a job in No.10, but has previously worked for the party and knows everyone.
Presumably she doesn’t hold a security clearance, which would be an interesting line of questioning...
Does it make any significance on the last point that she is not formally hitched to Mr J (apart from the law of contract)? I don't know if it does ... jut seems a long time to wait ...
My thinking was that she might have been privy to stuff she wasn’t entitled to be, either from her betrothed or from others in the key meetings.
Being married or not I don’t think makes a difference, but one imagines that a Norma Major or Sarah Brown wasn’t on the messages with everyone in the meetings as a matter of course.
The long wait, I assume she wants the ‘fairytale’ wedding, which isn’t going to happen this summer as every possible venue was booked solid months ago. I’m surprised if she’s found a decent venue for next summer to be honest, unless they do it in government buildings.
It took a while to find somewhere with the right wallpaper.
I see Dominic Cummings has been having a series of epic self-awareness fails.
Does anyone actually believe what he’s saying?
Yes and quite a lot of what he is saying is genuinely interesting and thought provoking. But our press will focus on the political tittle tattle as always.
That would be a first.
While I can quite believe Hancock’s a liar, Johnson’s a buffoon and SAGE are a bunch of third rate loons with no common sense whatsoever, much of it seems to be saying how wonderful everything would be if he had been in charge.
Yet he was, in effect, in charge.
So why was it not wonderful?
Because ultimately, he is a rather stupid and dishonest narcissist with a track record of failure and incompetence, that he subsequently retcons to look like genius. His work for IDS, his two days working on the NE Assembly referendum, his time at the DfE, his lies in the EU referendum, his mad plans for civil service reform that missed the point entirely, his breaches of quarantine and crazy lies to cover his tracks - they follow a pattern. And so does this.
So whatever he’s saying, it’s not worth listening to.
He never said it would have been wonderful if he had been in charge, in fact he said exactly the opposite. He admitted he had made many mistakes and got a lot wrong. He was clear about that and also said he should never have been put in a position where he was advising on those decisions.
I don't buy such a claim. You cannot be forced into such a thing, anyone can easily say 'this should not be for me to advise upon'.
Done.
Given the disdain he apparently had for the whole business and many of the people involved that would have been very easy as well, since he wouldn't feel a need to coddle people he did not respect, and would not feel concern at telling them he should not be involved.
It sounds like implausible justification for why he was involved not being at least partly his responsibility. Yes the person who appoints a fool is more to blame than the fool, but Cummings has agency, he wasn't buffeted by the winds of fate.
Like ydoethur you brazenly ignore the fact that he did take responsibility and did say that some of the failings were his. In fact he repeated it on a number of occasions. He also praised many of those he worked with so again you misrepresent his evidence. I wonder if, like ydoethur you didn't actually see any of the evidence and are just commenting on snippets. Or maybe like ydoethur you just chose to ignore anything that doesn't suit your pre conceived ideas.
It does, though, rather well illustrate the point that even well merited criticisms will be devalued if they come from him.
I see Dominic Cummings has been having a series of epic self-awareness fails.
Does anyone actually believe what he’s saying?
Yes and quite a lot of what he is saying is genuinely interesting and thought provoking. But our press will focus on the political tittle tattle as always.
That would be a first.
While I can quite believe Hancock’s a liar, Johnson’s a buffoon and SAGE are a bunch of third rate loons with no common sense whatsoever, much of it seems to be saying how wonderful everything would be if he had been in charge.
Yet he was, in effect, in charge.
So why was it not wonderful?
Because ultimately, he is a rather stupid and dishonest narcissist with a track record of failure and incompetence, that he subsequently retcons to look like genius. His work for IDS, his two days working on the NE Assembly referendum, his time at the DfE, his lies in the EU referendum, his mad plans for civil service reform that missed the point entirely, his breaches of quarantine and crazy lies to cover his tracks - they follow a pattern. And so does this.
So whatever he’s saying, it’s not worth listening to.
He never said it would have been wonderful if he had been in charge, in fact he said exactly the opposite. He admitted he had made many mistakes and got a lot wrong. He was clear about that and also said he should never have been put in a position where he was advising on those decisions.
I don't buy such a claim. You cannot be forced into such a thing, anyone can easily say 'this should not be for me to advise upon'.
Done.
Given the disdain he apparently had for the whole business and many of the people involved that would have been very easy as well, since he wouldn't feel a need to coddle people he did not respect, and would not feel concern at telling them he should not be involved.
It sounds like implausible justification for why he was involved not being at least partly his responsibility. Yes the person who appoints a fool is more to blame than the fool, but Cummings has agency, he wasn't buffeted by the winds of fate.
Like ydoethur you brazenly ignore the fact that he did take responsibility and did say that some of the failings were his. In fact he repeated it on a number of occasions. He also praised many of those he worked with so again you misrepresent his evidence. I wonder if, like ydoethur you didn't actually see any of the evidence and are just commenting on snippets. Or maybe like ydoethur you just chose to ignore anything that doesn't suit your pre conceived ideas.
It does, though, rather well illustrate the point that even well merited criticisms will be devalued if they come from him.
I think he is right in about 90% of his criticisms. The problem is I wouldnt trust even 50% of his solutions.
I see Dominic Cummings has been having a series of epic self-awareness fails.
Does anyone actually believe what he’s saying?
Yes and quite a lot of what he is saying is genuinely interesting and thought provoking. But our press will focus on the political tittle tattle as always.
That would be a first.
While I can quite believe Hancock’s a liar, Johnson’s a buffoon and SAGE are a bunch of third rate loons with no common sense whatsoever, much of it seems to be saying how wonderful everything would be if he had been in charge.
Yet he was, in effect, in charge.
So why was it not wonderful?
Because ultimately, he is a rather stupid and dishonest narcissist with a track record of failure and incompetence, that he subsequently retcons to look like genius. His work for IDS, his two days working on the NE Assembly referendum, his time at the DfE, his lies in the EU referendum, his mad plans for civil service reform that missed the point entirely, his breaches of quarantine and crazy lies to cover his tracks - they follow a pattern. And so does this.
So whatever he’s saying, it’s not worth listening to.
He never said it would have been wonderful if he had been in charge, in fact he said exactly the opposite. He admitted he had made many mistakes and got a lot wrong. He was clear about that and also said he should never have been put in a position where he was advising on those decisions.
I don't buy such a claim. You cannot be forced into such a thing, anyone can easily say 'this should not be for me to advise upon'.
Done.
Given the disdain he apparently had for the whole business and many of the people involved that would have been very easy as well, since he wouldn't feel a need to coddle people he did not respect, and would not feel concern at telling them he should not be involved.
It sounds like implausible justification for why he was involved not being at least partly his responsibility. Yes the person who appoints a fool is more to blame than the fool, but Cummings has agency, he wasn't buffeted by the winds of fate.
Like ydoethur you brazenly ignore the fact that he did take responsibility and did say that some of the failings were his. In fact he repeated it on a number of occasions. He also praised many of those he worked with so again you misrepresent his evidence. I wonder if, like ydoethur you didn't actually see any of the evidence and are just commenting on snippets. Or maybe like ydoethur you just chose to ignore anything that doesn't suit your pre conceived ideas.
It does, though, rather well illustrate the point that even well merited criticisms will be devalued if they come from him.
Yep I accept that. He is a deeply flawed character in many ways. But that doesn't mean a word of what he said today was untrue.
Comments
Australia will suffer if its people can't travel abroad and if people can't visit it.
But I imagine they'll open up first to "double vaccinated" people who have test negative before departure and on arrival.
Come on Scotland get your act together. We need a safe space
Paul Waugh
@paulwaugh
We watched every minute of it, so you didn't have to.
The 14 Most Explosive Claims From Dominic Cummings’ Covid Evidence
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1397585601600311302
One year on since Australia shut its borders, there are still at least 40,000 Australians stranded overseas.
Many say they've effectively been blocked from returning home. One group has lodged a human rights complaint with the United Nations.
"No other country has impeded the return of their citizens in this way," Sabrina Tiasha, who arrived home from the UK last month, says.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-55851074
Why build that new factory in the EU, when putting it in the U.K. or Switzerland comes with a much more positive attitude from government?
Does anyone actually believe what he’s saying?
This is, of course, suboptimal if you can never visit any other part of the globe ever again, unless you can afford the very considerable time and expense of hotel quarantine when you get back, but if they want to reorganise themselves into a hermit kingdom then that's their choice.
Johnson wanted to let the bodies pile up high and yet there was no plan to bury them?
Elevation: 287 m
Prominence: 79 m
Don't overdo it - we need you on this board.
They used to talk about piling Pelion on Ossa; now they're piling Kinabalu on Thorpe Cloud...
The point is that AUSTRALIAN CITIZENS CAN TRAVEL TO AUSTRALIA.
Limited flights != No flights.
If I were Australian, I could go on-line now and book my quarantine, and book my ticket to Australia. I'm not saying it's not harder than normal, I am just saying that it is very far from impossible.
I had a case in Belgium once many years ago. I cannot recall if they have rules allowing an application for summary dismissal or strikeout but I would be surprised if they didn't.
The EU's posturing can do nothing but harm them.
I was there two years ago with a group of friends from school and their families. Now this is the sort of thing my own family and I do, but this isn't common to everyone, particularly not when they grow up in London. It was a joy to see the awe and excitement on a bunch of 7-12 year olds' faces that we would be going up there. They swarmed up it - no messing about with the path; straight up the steepest route possible. An absolute joy to see.
But that's not the same as being completely banned from returning home.
(I say that as an Essex man born and bred - up to age 18 - so I assume I'm permitted to diss my homeland?)
And it looks like Melbourne may be heading to another lockdown:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9620023/South-Australia-slams-border-shut-Melbourne-TONIGHT.html
The following day is double that price. Plus the quarantine.
Plus 30% for the USD/AUD conversion.
https://twitter.com/JGForsyth/status/1397589736898838532?s=20
While I can quite believe Hancock’s a liar, Johnson’s a buffoon and SAGE are a bunch of third rate loons with no common sense whatsoever, much of it seems to be saying how wonderful everything would be if he had been in charge.
Yet he was, in effect, in charge.
So why was it not wonderful?
Because ultimately, he is a rather stupid and dishonest narcissist with a track record of failure and incompetence, that he subsequently retcons to look like genius. His work for IDS, his two days working on the NE Assembly referendum, his time at the DfE, his lies in the EU referendum, his mad plans for civil service reform that missed the point entirely, his breaches of quarantine and crazy lies to cover his tracks - they follow a pattern. And so does this.
So whatever he’s saying, it’s not worth listening to.
There’s Aussies in my part of the world sleeping on mates’ sofas becuase they can’t get home.
Now we've got plenty more to vaccinate, and boosters to come on top as well but still.
You gave up your liberties, and still do, for THEM?
You continue to play by all the rules that THEY have set?
You consider that THEY are better judges of what is best for you, your health, and your family than you are?
Really?
I don't think he knows what an adviser does.
Going to do a thread with various scientists/experts debunking elements of the coronavirus lab-leak theory. Let’s begin with the argument that zoonotic viruses need time to evolve before becoming highly transmissible among humans:
https://twitter.com/Michael_Youhana/status/1397177065250689028
Anyone claiming they know for certain either way is either lying or stupid.
And it appears to me that the natural origins hypothesis remind the most likely.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15071971/mystery-ufo-smoke-crashing-into-sea-indonesia/
Once again you are letting your own personal bias get in the way of the facts.
He never said it would have been wonderful if he had been in charge, in fact he said exactly the opposite. He admitted he had made many mistakes and got a lot wrong. He was clear about that and also said he should never have been put in a position where he was advising on those decisions.
Of course we all know you hate him because of your personal and professional bigotry, but I will remind you that that record of failure included winning the EU referendum and getting Johnson elected - which in retrospect might have been a failure but not in the way you mean.
You are so blinded by your own hatred that you are also, to quote your own closing dribble, not worth listening to.
Travel news: From tomorrow there will be 2 trains a day between London and Paris. It's lovely to see the service increase after months of only 1 train.
https://twitter.com/EurostarJustinp/status/1397514568021258241?s=20
Done.
Given the disdain he apparently had for the whole business and many of the people involved that would have been very easy as well, since he wouldn't feel a need to coddle people he did not respect, and would not feel concern at telling them he should not be involved.
It sounds like implausible justification for why he was involved not being at least partly his responsibility. Yes the person who appoints a fool is more to blame than the fool, but Cummings has agency, he wasn't buffeted by the winds of fate.
Brief bit on the Kremlinology of Dom Cummings' select committee appearance, and why the politician who came out of it best was the one he ostentatiously didn't name:
https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1397590698719948801?s=20
A democratic government could not impose a lockdown on a population that did not want one. It would be impossible.
Luckily they have credulous fools like you on hand to obey everything they say, defend them at every single turn, and attack the very people trying to defend your own liberty.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/health/2021/05/why-politician-who-comes-out-best-dom-cummings-testimony-wasnt-mentioned-all
Except cash on delivery, no warranties, express or implied.
"Of course, if you achieved both of those objectives, then you would be boosting the leadership hopes of any politician who could firmly tick two boxes: one seen in Westminster as impeccably pro-lockdown and one not called Matt Hancock. A politician whom Dominic Cummings had worked with, perhaps."
https://twitter.com/EuRollout/status/1397594645585137681?s=20
The idea that Hancock might have lied on occasion about the discharge policy (for example) does not stretch my credulity in the least.
He lied about his lockdown escape, why believe anything else he says? I wouldn't trust him to get me a cup of tea.
*I was wikipediaing what the highest islands in the world were, after learning Taiwan came 4th. Interestingly, although Great Britain is the 8th largest island, it is only the 125th highest.
Pretty outrageous by the EU, particularly given AZ are not making a profit on this deal. Were it not for the humanitarian side of things, I think AZ would be justified in stopping producing for the EU
https://twitter.com/gideonrachman/status/1397554395429154819?s=20
And, somehow, when all the bodies are lying on the floor there will still stand: Michael Gove. Keep an eye on that.
https://twitter.com/miss_mcinerney/status/928175051807043584?s=19
https://www.ft.com/content/dd191c42-3509-42c6-8fd2-e617f16935ec
On the same day they’ve fallen out with Switzerland, and not long after their second largest member withdrew from the organisation and is trying hard to attract business.
And he’s doing the same thing here.
You don’t need to overthink it beyond that Richard.
https://twitter.com/johnrentoul/status/1397555582354210816?s=21
....I guess it’s the fear of being extraterritorial. A generalized ban would affect Chinese and American companies. They, China and the US, have no such compunction
https://twitter.com/MacaesBruno/status/1397599338168299523?s=20
FedEx and Chinese airlines are still overflying Belarus.
It’s a bit strange though as we have had several students back from the subcontinent. Equally, in my experience the school is very alert at enforcing quarantine. I’ve had huge numbers of emails about students and when they should be back, and if they’re back earlier, message the office straightaway and they will be collected.
But either way, natural origin without the involvement of a lab in the process is still the more likely explanation.
And editing the least likely, I think.
(And, of course, all explanations remain possible.)
Being married or not I don’t think makes a difference, but one imagines that a Norma Major or Sarah Brown wasn’t on the messages with everyone in the meetings as a matter of course.
The long wait, I assume she wants the ‘fairytale’ wedding, which isn’t going to happen this summer as every possible venue was booked solid months ago. I’m surprised if she’s found a decent venue for next summer to be honest, unless they do it in government buildings.
But nothing he’s said so far judging by that is exactly surprising nor at variance with my analysis.
In the oil business, there are levels of trust between the companies and national governments....
Norway - their governments handshake is good enough for billions
Nigeria - to do a contract with them, they used to have to put billions in escrow in a neutral country like Switzerland. If they break any part of the deal, the money goes automatically to the oil company.