Reaping the Whirlwind – politicalbetting.com

System

Reaping the Whirlwind – politicalbetting.com

Accusations of lying flew around the Select Committee room – mostly directed at Matt Hancock. A Minister who, if Cummings is to be believed, could not be trusted, indeed was not trusted by the Cabinet Secretary. Or others.(Apparently. We have yet to hear from Mr Sedwill.) Indeed, judging by how often Cummings was asking the PM to sack his Health Secretary, it’s a wonder anyone in government had any time to worry about dealing with the pandemic so busy were they trying to stab each other in the back.

Read the full story here

DavidL

Yay, a @Cyclefree thread.

turbotubbs

2nd. Damn. So close...

MattW

Third.

I guess the Tories are relieved Miss CF does not live in Batley & Spen.

Peter_the_Punter

DavidL said:

Yay, a @Cyclefree thread.

Indeed. Couldn't be better.

Play nicely everybody.

Philip_Thompson

Funny I thought the whirlwind was sowed decades ago.

For decades we've had politicians from Blair, to Brown to Nick Clegg who've been prepared to say one thing then do the exact opposite. To engage in spin and terminal inexactitudes.

To only complain when Boris does what generations of leaders before him did too, seems to me to be reaping what was sowed too.

If we hadn't had such lies as "we will not implement the EU constitution without a referendum ... oh psych, we had our fingers crossed, its got a new name so suck it up, its too late now what are you going to do about it?" then Boris would likely never have become PM and Cummings would never have been a household name.

TheScreamingEagles

'The Cummings whirlwind' sounds like the title of a porno.

DavidL

You know, I am pretty sure BB (before Brexit, as the calendar should now surely read) not every politician was "a pretty straight kind of guy" as one of them famously put it. I am not convinced that they even always told the truth. I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

But, if it makes you feel better PB (that's post Brexit although we might need a different abbreviation to avoid confusion with this august site) to believe otherwise, fair enough.

kle4

This does crystallise the issue with Cummings' claims, even as many will agree with his criticisms. It's very hard to convince people you mean such things.

Reminds me of Carswell or various other defectors. Sure, breaking ranks is hard and speaking freely about concerns at the end is probably sincere - but if you make it sound like your former position was do obviously awful and you had to get away from it, it begs the question why it took so long to change position.

Cummings did seek to explain that, but it hangs over things, like the rebuttals Keir gets about working under Corbyn without complaint.

DougSeal

TheScreamingEagles said:

'The Cummings whirlwind' sounds like the title of a porno.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_34

TheScreamingEagles

FPT

DavidL said:

TimT said:

Selebian said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Malmesbury said:

Selebian said:

BannedinnParis said:

Selebian said:

SAGE - or perhaps more effectively the processes above SAGE - would probably benefit from a group of scientificly literate but non-specialists for an outside view - for example, bring in some physicists, engineers etc to sense check what the epidemiologists etc are saying and how the politicians/civil servants etc are understanding that.

yes. sorta like getting Feynman in to look at the Challenger, right?

Using a different vernacular, red team the crap out of the plans. Maybe harder to justify in the middle of a pandemic, but that's what 'following the science' would actually look like.

This is where Dom was absolutely nailed on correct - the structure and the normal working processes of government were not fit for purpose before Feb 2020. Its easy to laff at his 'freaks and wierdoes' advert, but that's basically what's been suggested above.

Yep. The other thing is that "the science" was actually pretty non-existent early on. Models of NPIs, sure. But very little on how the thing was actually spreading, when people were infectious. Lots of tiny studies (as those are what can be done quickly) but - not surprisingly - conflicting with each other. So many of the assumptions in the models were little more than guesses.

Part of the problem was that the scientists used the Scientists Syllogism

1) We need a model and a theory
2) This is a model and a theory
3) Therefore this is the model and theory we need.

This comes from a variant of the "face" issue - standing up and saying "I don't know" is a career ending in politics. And some other fields. It takes great self confidence and eminence to get away with that.

What is a shame is that the good answer that should be used but isn't often enough is "I will look into this and get back to you."

I actually use that quite a lot (and hear it quite a lot). Or the simpler "I don't know". It's one of the things I like about academia that bulshitting is not really encouraged.

(Students rarely say it - I rarely did when I was a student; post-docs often reluctant too - but beyond that it does happen a lot, even in meetings with external stakeholders).

I my professional world, consulting, I often say, "Good question, I don't know. Not my field, but I know an expert in that field and will get you an answer." It goes down very well with clients, some of whom say that they don't hear words to that effect very often.

But, in fact, saying "I don't know" should be absolutely fundamental to any learning organization - and in a rapidly changing world, pretty much every organization should be constantly learning and adapting.

For a young lawyer the ability to say I don't know and keep the confidence of the client is an absolutely key stage in development. Some never make it.

I've always found 'I'm not an expert in that field but we have X who is listed in Legal 500' did the trick.

DavidL

turbotubbs said:

2nd. Damn. So close...

In your dreams @turbotubbs , in your dreams.

DougSeal

TheScreamingEagles said:

FPT

DavidL said:

TimT said:

Selebian said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Malmesbury said:

Selebian said:

BannedinnParis said:

Selebian said:

SAGE - or perhaps more effectively the processes above SAGE - would probably benefit from a group of scientificly literate but non-specialists for an outside view - for example, bring in some physicists, engineers etc to sense check what the epidemiologists etc are saying and how the politicians/civil servants etc are understanding that.

yes. sorta like getting Feynman in to look at the Challenger, right?

Using a different vernacular, red team the crap out of the plans. Maybe harder to justify in the middle of a pandemic, but that's what 'following the science' would actually look like.

This is where Dom was absolutely nailed on correct - the structure and the normal working processes of government were not fit for purpose before Feb 2020. Its easy to laff at his 'freaks and wierdoes' advert, but that's basically what's been suggested above.

Yep. The other thing is that "the science" was actually pretty non-existent early on. Models of NPIs, sure. But very little on how the thing was actually spreading, when people were infectious. Lots of tiny studies (as those are what can be done quickly) but - not surprisingly - conflicting with each other. So many of the assumptions in the models were little more than guesses.

Part of the problem was that the scientists used the Scientists Syllogism

1) We need a model and a theory
2) This is a model and a theory
3) Therefore this is the model and theory we need.

This comes from a variant of the "face" issue - standing up and saying "I don't know" is a career ending in politics. And some other fields. It takes great self confidence and eminence to get away with that.

What is a shame is that the good answer that should be used but isn't often enough is "I will look into this and get back to you."

I actually use that quite a lot (and hear it quite a lot). Or the simpler "I don't know". It's one of the things I like about academia that bulshitting is not really encouraged.

(Students rarely say it - I rarely did when I was a student; post-docs often reluctant too - but beyond that it does happen a lot, even in meetings with external stakeholders).

I my professional world, consulting, I often say, "Good question, I don't know. Not my field, but I know an expert in that field and will get you an answer." It goes down very well with clients, some of whom say that they don't hear words to that effect very often.

But, in fact, saying "I don't know" should be absolutely fundamental to any learning organization - and in a rapidly changing world, pretty much every organization should be constantly learning and adapting.

For a young lawyer the ability to say I don't know and keep the confidence of the client is an absolutely key stage in development. Some never make it.

I've always found 'I'm not an expert in that field but we have X who is listed in Legal 500' did the trick.

‘Interesting. I think I’ve seen a new case on that very point just reported. Let me take a quick look and call you right back.’

IanB2

Yes, in a parallel universe somewhere Cummings thought better of going to Barnard Castle (or perhaps gave an honest explanation and fulsome apology), and got a better public hearing.

TheScreamingEagles

The thing that did tickle me the most about yesterday's appearance was this WhatsApp message I received from people who used to work for the Tory party.

Dominic Cummings: Boris Johnson is totally unsuitable to be Prime Minister.

Greg Clark: What's your evidence for that?

Dominic Cummings: Well he employed for me for starters.

Fishing

I don't get the last paragraph:

"Though rather less so for the families of those who died during the pandemic. It is they who have reaped the whirlwind Cummings helped sow."

Is the article arguing that if the government had not spoken (unspecified) lies, nobody would have died? Or if Corbyn had been in power? Or if we'd remained in the EU?

kle4

DavidL said:

I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

We did what now?

Richard_Tyndall

The problem with Cyclefree's thesis is it seems to be based on the idea that Johnson and Cummings are the exception and that anyone involved in high politics is honest.

That is a naive position on which to base an argument. Because in the end it is utterly untrue.

All politicians are fundamentally dishonest. What we want them to be is at least vaguely competent even when being self serving and mendacious.

Johnson and Hancock are clearly lacking in this basic ability.

DavidL

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

We did what now?

Yep. Honestly
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/indonesian-confrontation#:~:text=Between 1963 and 1966, British,a victory for the Commonwealth.

Even now its really pretty much unknown about.

Carnyx

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

We did what now?

https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/indonesian-confrontation

kle4

TheScreamingEagles said:

The thing that did tickle me the most about yesterday's appearance was this WhatsApp message I received from people who used to work for the Tory party.

Dominic Cummings: Boris Johnson is totally unsuitable to be Prime Minister.

Greg Clark: What's your evidence for that?

Dominic Cummings: Well he employed for me for starters.

In fairness as Foxy suggested yesterday Boris does now have the Trump problem (though nowhere near as severely) of needing to trash his former employee who he praised to all and sundry (and used up lots of political capital to defend, including losing a chancellor over him).

A blow out always looked inevitable between them. If Cummings is to be believed it's amazing it wasnt sooner. So why the heck did Boris not fire him earlier when lots demanded it? Hed cause less damage now if so.

Selebian

FPT

DavidL said:

IanB2 said:

DavidL said:

moonshine said:

@rcs Ok I’ve signed up on a wait list for SpaceX shares with equityzen, let’s see how long it takes

With all your promotion on their behalf surely your friends could arrange a quick beam up to wherever you want to go?

Wouldn’t the invention of teleport wreck their business model?

Or create a new one. Musk sees opportunities where others see threats. He's as mad as a box of frogs but the world would be much duller without him.

That's true, but still I can't quite shake the notion that he might be a Bond villain. If it emerges he has cats then I'll be very nervous

williamglenn

"@ganeshran
The number of new doses administered yesterday is 663,577

236K first doses and 427K seconds

England administered 574K compared to 544K last week (FD: 206K, SD: 368K)"

Philip_Thompson

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The thing that did tickle me the most about yesterday's appearance was this WhatsApp message I received from people who used to work for the Tory party.

Dominic Cummings: Boris Johnson is totally unsuitable to be Prime Minister.

Greg Clark: What's your evidence for that?

Dominic Cummings: Well he employed for me for starters.

In fairness as Foxy suggested yesterday Boris does now have the Trump problem (though nowhere near as severely) of needing to trash his former employee who he praised to all and sundry (and used up lots of political capital to defend, including losing a chancellor over him).

A blow out always looked inevitable between them. If Cummings is to be believed it's amazing it wasnt sooner. So why the heck did Boris not fire him earlier when lots demanded it? Hed cause less damage now if so.

Whether its justified or not I suspect most people in the public are familiar with the concept of a bitter ex.

DavidL

TheScreamingEagles said:

FPT

DavidL said:

TimT said:

Selebian said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Malmesbury said:

Selebian said:

BannedinnParis said:

Selebian said:

SAGE - or perhaps more effectively the processes above SAGE - would probably benefit from a group of scientificly literate but non-specialists for an outside view - for example, bring in some physicists, engineers etc to sense check what the epidemiologists etc are saying and how the politicians/civil servants etc are understanding that.

yes. sorta like getting Feynman in to look at the Challenger, right?

Using a different vernacular, red team the crap out of the plans. Maybe harder to justify in the middle of a pandemic, but that's what 'following the science' would actually look like.

This is where Dom was absolutely nailed on correct - the structure and the normal working processes of government were not fit for purpose before Feb 2020. Its easy to laff at his 'freaks and wierdoes' advert, but that's basically what's been suggested above.

Yep. The other thing is that "the science" was actually pretty non-existent early on. Models of NPIs, sure. But very little on how the thing was actually spreading, when people were infectious. Lots of tiny studies (as those are what can be done quickly) but - not surprisingly - conflicting with each other. So many of the assumptions in the models were little more than guesses.

Part of the problem was that the scientists used the Scientists Syllogism

1) We need a model and a theory
2) This is a model and a theory
3) Therefore this is the model and theory we need.

This comes from a variant of the "face" issue - standing up and saying "I don't know" is a career ending in politics. And some other fields. It takes great self confidence and eminence to get away with that.

What is a shame is that the good answer that should be used but isn't often enough is "I will look into this and get back to you."

I actually use that quite a lot (and hear it quite a lot). Or the simpler "I don't know". It's one of the things I like about academia that bulshitting is not really encouraged.

(Students rarely say it - I rarely did when I was a student; post-docs often reluctant too - but beyond that it does happen a lot, even in meetings with external stakeholders).

I my professional world, consulting, I often say, "Good question, I don't know. Not my field, but I know an expert in that field and will get you an answer." It goes down very well with clients, some of whom say that they don't hear words to that effect very often.

But, in fact, saying "I don't know" should be absolutely fundamental to any learning organization - and in a rapidly changing world, pretty much every organization should be constantly learning and adapting.

For a young lawyer the ability to say I don't know and keep the confidence of the client is an absolutely key stage in development. Some never make it.

I've always found 'I'm not an expert in that field but we have X who is listed in Legal 500' did the trick.

But when your an advocate or barrister that is rather an invitation to them to instruct somebody else....

kle4

We know most in politics are not 100% honest. Practical and complex reality even mean it's not always so simple.

But that we cannot actually expect high standards all the time doesnt mean we should fail to be disappointed when standards are low, or stop trying to have high standards.

kle4

williamglenn said:

"@ganeshran
The number of new doses administered yesterday is 663,577

236K first doses and 427K seconds

England administered 574K compared to 544K last week (FD: 206K, SD: 368K)"

I'd be among them if I could find a centre within 30 miles of me!

DavidL

Richard_Tyndall said:

The problem with Cyclefree's thesis is it seems to be based on the idea that Johnson and Cummings are the exception and that anyone involved in high politics is honest.

That is a naive position on which to base an argument. Because in the end it is utterly untrue.

All politicians are fundamentally dishonest. What we want them to be is at least vaguely competent even when being self serving and mendacious.

Johnson and Hancock are clearly lacking in this basic ability.

I would say that it is a little more mixed than that.

As I said yesterday Hancock had an horrendous first 6 months, the period that DC was talking about, but he has got a better grip of things now. Boris will always make lots of mistakes but he also gets slightly more than his fair share of the big calls right.

Philip_Thompson

Selebian said:

FPT

DavidL said:

IanB2 said:

DavidL said:

moonshine said:

@rcs Ok I’ve signed up on a wait list for SpaceX shares with equityzen, let’s see how long it takes

With all your promotion on their behalf surely your friends could arrange a quick beam up to wherever you want to go?

Wouldn’t the invention of teleport wreck their business model?

Or create a new one. Musk sees opportunities where others see threats. He's as mad as a box of frogs but the world would be much duller without him.

That's true, but still I can't quite shake the notion that he might be a Bond villain. If it emerges he has cats then I'll be very nervous

He strikes me as the most interesting person in the world since the passing of Stephen Hawking.

Leon

williamglenn said:

"@ganeshran
The number of new doses administered yesterday is 663,577

236K first doses and 427K seconds

England administered 574K compared to 544K last week (FD: 206K, SD: 368K)"

That’s a lot of immunity being pumped into Brits, every day. Surely we can beat this bug, now. I still have anxious moments when I doubt

williamglenn

https://twitter.com/dademes87/status/1397882801345556484

Today, #Taiwan’s Minister of Health Chen Shih-chung revealed for the first time how (seemingly bowing to Chinese pressure) Germany’s @BioNTech_Group ghosted Taiwanese authorities after a procurement contract for lifesaving vaccines had already been agreed upon.

After Taiwan had sent a signed copy of the contract to @BioNTech_Group on Jan 6, both sides started to negotiate the wording on relevant press releases in English and Chinese. While the company didn’t object to the Taiwanese drafts at first, they suddenly took issue with the term 我國 in the Chinese version, which means something like “this country” and is how local govt documents and laws normally refer to Taiwan. In an email sent just 4-5hrs after the initial confirmation, @BioNTech_Group strongly urged the TWN side to change the wording.

TWN agreed to change 我國 to “Taiwan” in less than a day. Still, @BioNTech_Group kept wanting to change details of the press release and on Jan 15 suddenly changed their minds completely, telling TWN that they would have to delay the signing of the contract for a few weeks.

Is a German company possibly withholding lifesaving vaccines from a country in need just because of political pressure from #Beijing? I urge lawmakers to investigate and ask @BioNTech_Group why the contract hasn’t been signed yet.

DavidL

Selebian said:

FPT

DavidL said:

IanB2 said:

DavidL said:

moonshine said:

@rcs Ok I’ve signed up on a wait list for SpaceX shares with equityzen, let’s see how long it takes

With all your promotion on their behalf surely your friends could arrange a quick beam up to wherever you want to go?

Wouldn’t the invention of teleport wreck their business model?

Or create a new one. Musk sees opportunities where others see threats. He's as mad as a box of frogs but the world would be much duller without him.

That's true, but still I can't quite shake the notion that he might be a Bond villain. If it emerges he has cats then I'll be very nervous

It's not hard to imagine him having a secret lair in an extinct volcano is it?

kle4

Philip_Thompson said:

Selebian said:

FPT

DavidL said:

IanB2 said:

DavidL said:

moonshine said:

@rcs Ok I’ve signed up on a wait list for SpaceX shares with equityzen, let’s see how long it takes

With all your promotion on their behalf surely your friends could arrange a quick beam up to wherever you want to go?

Wouldn’t the invention of teleport wreck their business model?

Or create a new one. Musk sees opportunities where others see threats. He's as mad as a box of frogs but the world would be much duller without him.

That's true, but still I can't quite shake the notion that he might be a Bond villain. If it emerges he has cats then I'll be very nervous

He strikes me as the most interesting person in the world since the passing of Stephen Hawking.

I'll try not to take that personally. *sniff*

Roger

A good header cyclefree. In answer to your central question (rhetorical or not) no one cares about Dominic Cummings personality flaws. He's no more. In his place we have a whole table full of chancers and liars and unlike Cummings they have power in their own right. How many have been sacked for dishonesty in this Brexit government excluding the Red Bus brigade?

You've expressed it Perfectly.

"But there is a more fundamental problem even than this. So what if Matt Hancock lied every time he opened his mouth? Why on earth should this be considered a failing or a criticism in a government led by a serial and unashamed liar, with Ministers in it who have previously admitted lying or who have previously been sacked for lying?"

IanB2

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

"@ganeshran
The number of new doses administered yesterday is 663,577

236K first doses and 427K seconds

England administered 574K compared to 544K last week (FD: 206K, SD: 368K)"

That’s a lot of immunity being pumped into Brits, every day. Surely we can beat this bug, now. I still have anxious moments when I doubt

Stop worrying and get out there with your toboggan.

kle4

DavidL said:

Selebian said:

FPT

DavidL said:

IanB2 said:

DavidL said:

moonshine said:

@rcs Ok I’ve signed up on a wait list for SpaceX shares with equityzen, let’s see how long it takes

With all your promotion on their behalf surely your friends could arrange a quick beam up to wherever you want to go?

Wouldn’t the invention of teleport wreck their business model?

Or create a new one. Musk sees opportunities where others see threats. He's as mad as a box of frogs but the world would be much duller without him.

That's true, but still I can't quite shake the notion that he might be a Bond villain. If it emerges he has cats then I'll be very nervous

It's not hard to imagine him having a secret lair in an extinct volcano is it?

It's not a lair, it's a secure geothermally heated operational facility.

DavidL

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

Selebian said:

FPT

DavidL said:

IanB2 said:

DavidL said:

moonshine said:

@rcs Ok I’ve signed up on a wait list for SpaceX shares with equityzen, let’s see how long it takes

With all your promotion on their behalf surely your friends could arrange a quick beam up to wherever you want to go?

Wouldn’t the invention of teleport wreck their business model?

Or create a new one. Musk sees opportunities where others see threats. He's as mad as a box of frogs but the world would be much duller without him.

That's true, but still I can't quite shake the notion that he might be a Bond villain. If it emerges he has cats then I'll be very nervous

It's not hard to imagine him having a secret lair in an extinct volcano is it?

It's not a lair, it's a secure geothermally heated operational facility.

With some interesting pond life.

TheScreamingEagles

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The thing that did tickle me the most about yesterday's appearance was this WhatsApp message I received from people who used to work for the Tory party.

Dominic Cummings: Boris Johnson is totally unsuitable to be Prime Minister.

Greg Clark: What's your evidence for that?

Dominic Cummings: Well he employed for me for starters.

In fairness as Foxy suggested yesterday Boris does now have the Trump problem (though nowhere near as severely) of needing to trash his former employee who he praised to all and sundry (and used up lots of political capital to defend, including losing a chancellor over him).

A blow out always looked inevitable between them. If Cummings is to be believed it's amazing it wasnt sooner. So why the heck did Boris not fire him earlier when lots demanded it? Hed cause less damage now if so.

This was inevitable the day Boris Johnson appointed him.

I know several people who have worked in close proximity and pretty much they all think he's the biggest [moderated] in the world, even those who agree with him.

As the old saying goes there's not an apple cart Cummings has seen that he doesn't want to overturn.

He might spot a problem but he tells the people that we've done their entire lives is wrong and worthless and now he wants them to what he tells them, even the face of all the evidence that he is wrong.

Remember in 2010 Michael Gove was made Education Secretary and had a lot of good will in the sector for the changes he wanted to enact but Cummings upset them all and Sir Lynton Crosby persuaded David Cameron to demote Gove in 2014 because Gove's ratings were so poor that it would cost Dave a majority in 2015.

For somebody with a galaxy sized brain Cummings is very poor at people skills and de-escalating things.

Remember you and I have paid out many times for Cummings being a [moderated].

What kind of shit calls armed officers on a defenceless woman? One with issues is my guess.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54929809

FrancisUrquhart

Not to be a Debbie downer, but the vaccine numbers, although up, we haven't seen the massive expansion that was suggested 3-4 weeks ago, that was supposed to start mid month. We have seen a decent increase, but not the sort of level of expansion muted.

DavidL

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not to be a Debbie downer, but the vaccine numbers, although up, we haven't seen the massive expansion that was suggested 3-4 weeks ago, that was supposed to start mid month. We have seen a decent increase, but not the sort of level of expansion muted.

I was thinking exactly the same. If we want to nail 21st June we really need to get on with this.

Selebian

DavidL said:

You know, I am pretty sure BB (before Brexit, as the calendar should now surely read) not every politician was "a pretty straight kind of guy" as one of them famously put it. I am not convinced that they even always told the truth. I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

But, if it makes you feel better PB (that's post Brexit although we might need a different abbreviation to avoid confusion with this august site) to believe otherwise, fair enough.

That's certanly true. The problem for me (and I may just be harking back to a nonexistent golden age) is that I seem to recall that a politician being caught lying used to be a big deal, that people cared about it and it sometimes made them unpopular. Now, everyone just shrugs.

Omnium

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not to be a Debbie downer, but the vaccine numbers, although up, we haven't seen the massive expansion that was suggested 3-4 weeks ago, that was supposed to start mid month. We have seen a decent increase, but not the sort of level of expansion muted.

I'm not sure bigger numbers are viable. One percent of the population vaccinated every day. People have day jobs.

If you'd told me this number a year ago I'd have been skeptical, but overall it's the right sort of number to have. Depending where we go it means a jab every 3 months roughly in the future. Although lets hope we don't need that.

Pulpstar

DavidL said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not to be a Debbie downer, but the vaccine numbers, although up, we haven't seen the massive expansion that was suggested 3-4 weeks ago, that was supposed to start mid month. We have seen a decent increase, but not the sort of level of expansion muted.

I was thinking exactly the same. If we want to nail 21st June we really need to get on with this.

After the 6th

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not to be a Debbie downer, but the vaccine numbers, although up, we haven't seen the massive expansion that was suggested 3-4 weeks ago, that was supposed to start mid month. We have seen a decent increase, but not the sort of level of expansion muted.

The rolling average is just off the high we achieved on 22nd April.

TheScreamingEagles

DavidL said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not to be a Debbie downer, but the vaccine numbers, although up, we haven't seen the massive expansion that was suggested 3-4 weeks ago, that was supposed to start mid month. We have seen a decent increase, but not the sort of level of expansion muted.

I was thinking exactly the same. If we want to nail 21st June we really need to get on with this.

My return to the office is still on schedule, looking forward to the 5th of July.

DougSeal

DavidL said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not to be a Debbie downer, but the vaccine numbers, although up, we haven't seen the massive expansion that was suggested 3-4 weeks ago, that was supposed to start mid month. We have seen a decent increase, but not the sort of level of expansion muted.

I was thinking exactly the same. If we want to nail 21st June we really need to get on with this.

We have been getting into the segment of the population with less time on their hands to get vaccinated. People need to take time off, sort out childcare etc etc. It's not as easy to get the numbers in as it was.

CarlottaVance

DavidL said:

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

We did what now?

Yep. Honestly
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/indonesian-confrontation#:~:text=Between 1963 and 1966, British,a victory for the Commonwealth.

Even now its really pretty much unknown about.

At the height of it we stationed some Vulcan bombers in Singapore with hydrogen bombs onboard, flew them to Darwin and while over Java opened the bomb doors.....Sukarno demanded they be shot down but his Air Force talked him out of it - so they burned down the British Embassy instead....

The Indonesians landed two marines in Singapore who planted a bomb at HSBC killing three - they were promptly caught and hanged:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacDonald_House_bombing

The Indonesians rather tactlessly named a warship after them in 2014.

Nigelb

Fishing said:

I don't get the last paragraph:

"Though rather less so for the families of those who died during the pandemic. It is they who have reaped the whirlwind Cummings helped sow."

Is the article arguing that if the government had not spoken (unspecified) lies, nobody would have died? Or if Corbyn had been in power? Or if we'd remained in the EU?

I made such a point in the last thread.
If Hancock etc had not been so concerned with obfuscating their mistakes last spring, they might better have learned the lessons from them.

Isolation of the infected and potentially infected has been basic science for a century. And yet here we are.

williamglenn

"Latest: Russia has again refused to allow today’s Air France flight (Paris-Moscow) to enter its airspace because the flight would have avoided Belarus’ airspace, in line with EU directives. #Belarus"



https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/1397882307680378881

Andy_JS

williamglenn said:

"@ganeshran
The number of new doses administered yesterday is 663,577

236K first doses and 427K seconds

England administered 574K compared to 544K last week (FD: 206K, SD: 368K)"

That's 1% of the entire population of the UK in one day.

Philip_Thompson

Selebian said:

DavidL said:

You know, I am pretty sure BB (before Brexit, as the calendar should now surely read) not every politician was "a pretty straight kind of guy" as one of them famously put it. I am not convinced that they even always told the truth. I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

But, if it makes you feel better PB (that's post Brexit although we might need a different abbreviation to avoid confusion with this august site) to believe otherwise, fair enough.

That's certanly true. The problem for me (and I may just be harking back to a nonexistent golden age) is that I seem to recall that a politician being caught lying used to be a big deal, that people cared about it and it sometimes made them unpopular. Now, everyone just shrugs.

It made them unpopular only if the lie was unpopular with the public. If the lie was popular or something they didn't care about, then they just shrugged.

When Blair and Brown outright lied about holding a referendum on the EU Constitution and ratified Lisbon without one, they moved on like nothing had happened and were defended by their fans for doing os.

When Nick Clegg outright lied about abolishing tuition fees and tripled them instead, he continued in place for five more years. Amusingly he also lied about supporting an EU referendum, campaigning on that, only to react with horror when his Coalition partner chose to implement 2010 Lib Dem policy and hold a referendum as Clegg had campaigned to do!

Omnium

CarlottaVance said:

DavidL said:

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

We did what now?

Yep. Honestly
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/indonesian-confrontation#:~:text=Between 1963 and 1966, British,a victory for the Commonwealth.

Even now its really pretty much unknown about.

At the height of it we stationed some Vulcan bombers in Singapore with hydrogen bombs onboard, flew them to Darwin and while over Java opened the bomb doors.....Sukarno demanded they be shot down but his Air Force talked him out of it - so they burned down the British Embassy instead....

I didn't know any of that. Could you recommend any books about it?

Big_G_NorthWales

This should be fun

https://twitter.com/MitchellCMM/status/1397889846966902786?s=19

williamglenn

Pulpstar said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not to be a Debbie downer, but the vaccine numbers, although up, we haven't seen the massive expansion that was suggested 3-4 weeks ago, that was supposed to start mid month. We have seen a decent increase, but not the sort of level of expansion muted.

The rolling average is just off the high we achieved on 22nd April.

Yes, the rolling average has picked up significantly:

DavidL

Selebian said:

DavidL said:

You know, I am pretty sure BB (before Brexit, as the calendar should now surely read) not every politician was "a pretty straight kind of guy" as one of them famously put it. I am not convinced that they even always told the truth. I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

But, if it makes you feel better PB (that's post Brexit although we might need a different abbreviation to avoid confusion with this august site) to believe otherwise, fair enough.

That's certanly true. The problem for me (and I may just be harking back to a nonexistent golden age) is that I seem to recall that a politician being caught lying used to be a big deal, that people cared about it and it sometimes made them unpopular. Now, everyone just shrugs.

I agree somewhat dully but in an attempt to be more controversial have we undermined the very concept of "lying" by expanding it way beyond its natural boundaries? So, someone who recalls the outcome of a meeting slightly differently from the minutes is "lying", someone who expresses an opinion we believe to be wrong is "lying", someone who adds a little colour to a basically true story to emphasise a point is "lying", politicians who answer the question they wanted to be asked or wanted to answer instead of the one they have been are "lying" and people who omit material things whilst giving truthful information are also "liars".

When you cast your net that wide it is not particularly surprising that a lot of people just shrug. They do the same in their own lives every day and would never consider it lying. When I stand up in court and emphasise the good points of my client's case and rather skip over the bad is that lying? I don't think so but others might, I suppose.

Stuartinromford

kle4 said:

We know most in politics are not 100% honest. Practical and complex reality even mean it's not always so simple.

But that we cannot actually expect high standards all the time doesnt mean we should fail to be disappointed when standards are low, or stop trying to have high standards.

And to those whippersnappers who say that "politicians have always lied", there are two important points to bear in mind.

The first is that "everybody else does it" doesn't work when a bolshy teenager tries it. It doesn't work when the accused tries it in court. There is such a thing as objective right and wrong.

The second is that there used to be a line. For most people, there still is. Only saints tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth all the time. Usually it's the whole truth that is the first against the wall. Spin is about emphasising the favourable (to you) bits of the story and leaving out the inconvenient ones. And that has happened for ages. But the line consisted of two important protections. The first was that telling an outright lie was punished in the court of public opinion. A politician who lied was out. The second, linked one, was that if asked the right question (not easy), you had to give the truthful answer.

Even Cummings just about kept within those rules. He bent them out of all recognition, but he didn't quite break them. £350 million, Durham. Incredibly dishonest, bordering on the absurd, but with a homeopathic dose of truth in them. Johnson, on the other hand, just makes stuff up. And condones other people making stuff up. Doing that without shame genuinely is new, and not in a good way.

But masterful story teller, eh?

Incidentally- bravo @Cyclefree.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. L, AE: Anno Exiti.

WhisperingOracle

If the Home Office continue with this kind of treatment through Border Force for people who have clear return tickets as visitors and tourists, it is shortly going to have an impact on British tourists in Europe, as it should.

"Angelina is a Danish pastry chef who had made a 10-hour trip from Jutland with her boyfriend.“I just went with him to visit his family. I have a job here in Denmark and was planning to stay three weeks.”

Angelina was turned away two weeks ago but decided to return home because Border Force agents at Calais had told her that if she turned around voluntarily then her encounter with them would not be registered. They issued her with an IS81 stamp on her passport indicating “a person had made an application to enter” but no decision on that could be made because they had subsequently withdrawn it.

When she made another attempt to enter the UK, arriving at Heathrow on Sunday night, she discovered the full impact of IS81, which flagged her previous attempt, and she spent the next five hours crying in an airport detention room.

Despite her return ticket for 16 June and insistence that she was exercising her right as an EU citizen to visit the UK without a visa, she feared Border Force officials planned to expel her and prevent her from seeing her boyfriend.

She was allowed out at 10.30pm, after what she described as a “horrific” experience. Border Force officials could not explain why it took them so long, or why she had been deprived of her freedom. They had also searched her bags and questioned her about her job in Denmark and her parents."

Selebian

Philip_Thompson said:

Selebian said:

DavidL said:

You know, I am pretty sure BB (before Brexit, as the calendar should now surely read) not every politician was "a pretty straight kind of guy" as one of them famously put it. I am not convinced that they even always told the truth. I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

But, if it makes you feel better PB (that's post Brexit although we might need a different abbreviation to avoid confusion with this august site) to believe otherwise, fair enough.

That's certanly true. The problem for me (and I may just be harking back to a nonexistent golden age) is that I seem to recall that a politician being caught lying used to be a big deal, that people cared about it and it sometimes made them unpopular. Now, everyone just shrugs.

It made them unpopular only if the lie was unpopular with the public. If the lie was popular or something they didn't care about, then they just shrugged.

When Blair and Brown outright lied about holding a referendum on the EU Constitution and ratified Lisbon without one, they moved on like nothing had happened and were defended by their fans for doing os.

When Nick Clegg outright lied about abolishing tuition fees and tripled them instead, he continued in place for five more years. Amusingly he also lied about supporting an EU referendum, campaigning on that, only to react with horror when his Coalition partner chose to implement 2010 Lib Dem policy and hold a referendum as Clegg had campaigned to do!

Those are broken promises (manifesto promises, no less). Not quite the same - broken promises have been expected and accepted for a long time. It's arguable that a broken promise is not a lie if you're sincere at the point at which you make the promise - I'm not saying any of your examples were sincere!

I'm not fully convinced by your argument that the public just shrugged in relation to Clegg's broken tuition fees promise! I seem to remember some loss of LD seats at the following election...

Richard_Tyndall

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The thing that did tickle me the most about yesterday's appearance was this WhatsApp message I received from people who used to work for the Tory party.

Dominic Cummings: Boris Johnson is totally unsuitable to be Prime Minister.

Greg Clark: What's your evidence for that?

Dominic Cummings: Well he employed for me for starters.

In fairness as Foxy suggested yesterday Boris does now have the Trump problem (though nowhere near as severely) of needing to trash his former employee who he praised to all and sundry (and used up lots of political capital to defend, including losing a chancellor over him).

A blow out always looked inevitable between them. If Cummings is to be believed it's amazing it wasnt sooner. So why the heck did Boris not fire him earlier when lots demanded it? Hed cause less damage now if so.

This was inevitable the day Boris Johnson appointed him.

I know several people who have worked in close proximity and pretty much they all think he's the biggest [moderated] in the world, even those who agree with him.

As the old saying goes there's not an apple cart Cummings has seen that he doesn't want to overturn.

He might spot a problem but he tells the people that we've done their entire lives is wrong and worthless and now he wants them to what he tells them, even the face of all the evidence that he is wrong.

Remember in 2010 Michael Gove was made Education Secretary and had a lot of good will in the sector for the changes he wanted to enact but Cummings upset them all and Sir Lynton Crosby persuaded David Cameron to demote Gove in 2014 because Gove's ratings were so poor that it would cost Dave a majority in 2015.

For somebody with a galaxy sized brain Cummings is very poor at people skills and de-escalating things.

Remember you and I have paid out many times for Cummings being a [moderated].

What kind of shit calls armed officers on a defenceless woman? One with issues is my guess.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54929809

You see you can't even be honest about this.


""police officer stationed at the door of No 10 Downing Street escorted a woman from the front door to exit gates as she did not have a security pass at the time".

About a million miles from "calls armed officers on a defenceless woman"

You complain about Cummings and then post outright lies and you are even too dumb to realise people will check them.

Philip_Thompson

williamglenn said:

Pulpstar said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not to be a Debbie downer, but the vaccine numbers, although up, we haven't seen the massive expansion that was suggested 3-4 weeks ago, that was supposed to start mid month. We have seen a decent increase, but not the sort of level of expansion muted.

The rolling average is just off the high we achieved on 22nd April.

Yes, the rolling average has picked up significantly:

What's remarkable is how much the US vaccine numbers have cratered. Guessing they've ran into a wall of vaccine hesitancy rather than running out of supply?

Quite a funny coincidence that they never overtook us in vaccines done per capita - they came incredibly close where they nearly overtook the UK but were one day behind our totals before falling away again.

algarkirk

Thank you for this article, Cyclefree, interesting as always. But there is a logical leap which should not be overlooked.

Having pointed out that there are good reasons for impugning the credibility of this witness, Cyclefree immediately goes off on a frolic of presumption about everyone else in government lying all the time and its consequences.

Steady on. Government is hard. Facts are complex. Ministers are human. Completeness of truth belongs to divinities alone. Allegations that ministers are lying all the time need detailed accounts, not generalisations.

To attack a government in a general way based on a witness you have decided to discredit won't quite do. The subject of lying is about the hard remorseless detail.

Carnyx

Omnium said:

CarlottaVance said:

DavidL said:

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

We did what now?

Yep. Honestly
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/indonesian-confrontation#:~:text=Between 1963 and 1966, British,a victory for the Commonwealth.

Even now its really pretty much unknown about.

At the height of it we stationed some Vulcan bombers in Singapore with hydrogen bombs onboard, flew them to Darwin and while over Java opened the bomb doors.....Sukarno demanded they be shot down but his Air Force talked him out of it - so they burned down the British Embassy instead....

I didn't know any of that. Could you recommend any books about it?

Doubt that they were armed with nukes very much. Yellow Sun seems to have been nerve-racking enough without bringing tropical heat and humidity into the equation (imagine the humidity getting to the infamous ballbearings and the freezing at altitude).

This account of the Raff side of things, bomber wise, confirms they had HE for taking out the enemy airfields. https://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/documents/research/RAF-Historical-Society-Journals/Journal-13-Seminar-Confrontation-with-Indonesia.pdf

BTW I wonder if the silence on the mattewr had anything to do with the change of regime soon after the standddown - no need to embarrass a more sympatico leader.

Philip_Thompson

Selebian said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Selebian said:

DavidL said:

You know, I am pretty sure BB (before Brexit, as the calendar should now surely read) not every politician was "a pretty straight kind of guy" as one of them famously put it. I am not convinced that they even always told the truth. I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

But, if it makes you feel better PB (that's post Brexit although we might need a different abbreviation to avoid confusion with this august site) to believe otherwise, fair enough.

That's certanly true. The problem for me (and I may just be harking back to a nonexistent golden age) is that I seem to recall that a politician being caught lying used to be a big deal, that people cared about it and it sometimes made them unpopular. Now, everyone just shrugs.

It made them unpopular only if the lie was unpopular with the public. If the lie was popular or something they didn't care about, then they just shrugged.

When Blair and Brown outright lied about holding a referendum on the EU Constitution and ratified Lisbon without one, they moved on like nothing had happened and were defended by their fans for doing os.

When Nick Clegg outright lied about abolishing tuition fees and tripled them instead, he continued in place for five more years. Amusingly he also lied about supporting an EU referendum, campaigning on that, only to react with horror when his Coalition partner chose to implement 2010 Lib Dem policy and hold a referendum as Clegg had campaigned to do!

Those are broken promises (manifesto promises, no less). Not quite the same - broken promises have been expected and accepted for a long time. It's arguable that a broken promise is not a lie if you're sincere at the point at which you make the promise - I'm not saying any of your examples were sincere!

I'm not fully convinced by your argument that the public just shrugged in relation to Clegg's broken tuition fees promise! I seem to remember some loss of LD seats at the following election...

It was an unpopular lie so Clegg paid the price, but because it was unpopular not because he was forced to resign.

TheScreamingEagles

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The thing that did tickle me the most about yesterday's appearance was this WhatsApp message I received from people who used to work for the Tory party.

Dominic Cummings: Boris Johnson is totally unsuitable to be Prime Minister.

Greg Clark: What's your evidence for that?

Dominic Cummings: Well he employed for me for starters.

In fairness as Foxy suggested yesterday Boris does now have the Trump problem (though nowhere near as severely) of needing to trash his former employee who he praised to all and sundry (and used up lots of political capital to defend, including losing a chancellor over him).

A blow out always looked inevitable between them. If Cummings is to be believed it's amazing it wasnt sooner. So why the heck did Boris not fire him earlier when lots demanded it? Hed cause less damage now if so.

This was inevitable the day Boris Johnson appointed him.

I know several people who have worked in close proximity and pretty much they all think he's the biggest [moderated] in the world, even those who agree with him.

As the old saying goes there's not an apple cart Cummings has seen that he doesn't want to overturn.

He might spot a problem but he tells the people that we've done their entire lives is wrong and worthless and now he wants them to what he tells them, even the face of all the evidence that he is wrong.

Remember in 2010 Michael Gove was made Education Secretary and had a lot of good will in the sector for the changes he wanted to enact but Cummings upset them all and Sir Lynton Crosby persuaded David Cameron to demote Gove in 2014 because Gove's ratings were so poor that it would cost Dave a majority in 2015.

For somebody with a galaxy sized brain Cummings is very poor at people skills and de-escalating things.

Remember you and I have paid out many times for Cummings being a [moderated].

What kind of shit calls armed officers on a defenceless woman? One with issues is my guess.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54929809

You see you can't even be honest about this.


""police officer stationed at the door of No 10 Downing Street escorted a woman from the front door to exit gates as she did not have a security pass at the time".

About a million miles from "calls armed officers on a defenceless woman"

You complain about Cummings and then post outright lies and you are even too dumb to realise people will check them.

Richard, I know people who saw the incident, there's a reason why the government paid her an out of court settlement.

FYI - The police officers outside Number 10 are armed, they aren't lawn jockeys.

Pulpstar

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not to be a Debbie downer, but the vaccine numbers, although up, we haven't seen the massive expansion that was suggested 3-4 weeks ago, that was supposed to start mid month. We have seen a decent increase, but not the sort of level of expansion muted.

We're at 595544 / day rolling average. It's not far off the heaviest period which was the week ending 21st March (602266). We're on the strongest week of the rollout so far though.

Theuniondivvie

DavidL said:

I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

Not to mention the unpleasantness in Ireland that various governments preferred to characterise as a wee touch of The Troubles.

Richard_Tyndall

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The thing that did tickle me the most about yesterday's appearance was this WhatsApp message I received from people who used to work for the Tory party.

Dominic Cummings: Boris Johnson is totally unsuitable to be Prime Minister.

Greg Clark: What's your evidence for that?

Dominic Cummings: Well he employed for me for starters.

In fairness as Foxy suggested yesterday Boris does now have the Trump problem (though nowhere near as severely) of needing to trash his former employee who he praised to all and sundry (and used up lots of political capital to defend, including losing a chancellor over him).

A blow out always looked inevitable between them. If Cummings is to be believed it's amazing it wasnt sooner. So why the heck did Boris not fire him earlier when lots demanded it? Hed cause less damage now if so.

This was inevitable the day Boris Johnson appointed him.

I know several people who have worked in close proximity and pretty much they all think he's the biggest [moderated] in the world, even those who agree with him.

As the old saying goes there's not an apple cart Cummings has seen that he doesn't want to overturn.

He might spot a problem but he tells the people that we've done their entire lives is wrong and worthless and now he wants them to what he tells them, even the face of all the evidence that he is wrong.

Remember in 2010 Michael Gove was made Education Secretary and had a lot of good will in the sector for the changes he wanted to enact but Cummings upset them all and Sir Lynton Crosby persuaded David Cameron to demote Gove in 2014 because Gove's ratings were so poor that it would cost Dave a majority in 2015.

For somebody with a galaxy sized brain Cummings is very poor at people skills and de-escalating things.

Remember you and I have paid out many times for Cummings being a [moderated].

What kind of shit calls armed officers on a defenceless woman? One with issues is my guess.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54929809

You see you can't even be honest about this.


""police officer stationed at the door of No 10 Downing Street escorted a woman from the front door to exit gates as she did not have a security pass at the time".

About a million miles from "calls armed officers on a defenceless woman"

You complain about Cummings and then post outright lies and you are even too dumb to realise people will check them.

Richard, I know people who saw the incident, there's a reason why the government paid her an out of court settlement.

FYI - The police officers outside Number 10 are armed, they aren't lawn jockeys.

She was paid an out of court settlement because she was unfairly dismissed not because she was escorted to the gate.

Oh and one of my cousins IS one of the protection officers at Downing Street (and other locations)

DavidL

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. L, AE: Anno Exiti.

I am not so sure that will catch on. But its got to be better than Common Era, which even as an atheist I find annoying.

Pulpstar

Wales might run into a period of lower first doses per day shortly. The low hanging fruit is starting to disappear there.

CarlottaVance

Omnium said:

CarlottaVance said:

DavidL said:

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

We did what now?

Yep. Honestly
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/indonesian-confrontation#:~:text=Between 1963 and 1966, British,a victory for the Commonwealth.

Even now its really pretty much unknown about.

At the height of it we stationed some Vulcan bombers in Singapore with hydrogen bombs onboard, flew them to Darwin and while over Java opened the bomb doors.....Sukarno demanded they be shot down but his Air Force talked him out of it - so they burned down the British Embassy instead....

I didn't know any of that. Could you recommend any books about it?

Not directly related to Konfrontasi but "The Year of Living Dangerously" is a brilliant (fiction) book which captures the febrile atmosphere in Jakarta in the run-up to Sukarno's overthrow.

Carnyx

Theuniondivvie said:

DavidL said:

I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

Not to mention the unpleasantness in Ireland that various governments preferred to characterise as a wee touch of The Troubles.

Also Falklands and the Malayan Emergency. Wars, what wars? Not to mention Aden.

The Malayan thing I think we discussed on PB recently did we not? - it was to do with the insurance business in some way. Like closing down businesses cos of covid. But that presumably does not explain the Falklands, though it might Aden (given the amount of shipping passing that port).

GIN1138

Are Gove's fingerprints all over this?

TheScreamingEagles

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The thing that did tickle me the most about yesterday's appearance was this WhatsApp message I received from people who used to work for the Tory party.

Dominic Cummings: Boris Johnson is totally unsuitable to be Prime Minister.

Greg Clark: What's your evidence for that?

Dominic Cummings: Well he employed for me for starters.

In fairness as Foxy suggested yesterday Boris does now have the Trump problem (though nowhere near as severely) of needing to trash his former employee who he praised to all and sundry (and used up lots of political capital to defend, including losing a chancellor over him).

A blow out always looked inevitable between them. If Cummings is to be believed it's amazing it wasnt sooner. So why the heck did Boris not fire him earlier when lots demanded it? Hed cause less damage now if so.

This was inevitable the day Boris Johnson appointed him.

I know several people who have worked in close proximity and pretty much they all think he's the biggest [moderated] in the world, even those who agree with him.

As the old saying goes there's not an apple cart Cummings has seen that he doesn't want to overturn.

He might spot a problem but he tells the people that we've done their entire lives is wrong and worthless and now he wants them to what he tells them, even the face of all the evidence that he is wrong.

Remember in 2010 Michael Gove was made Education Secretary and had a lot of good will in the sector for the changes he wanted to enact but Cummings upset them all and Sir Lynton Crosby persuaded David Cameron to demote Gove in 2014 because Gove's ratings were so poor that it would cost Dave a majority in 2015.

For somebody with a galaxy sized brain Cummings is very poor at people skills and de-escalating things.

Remember you and I have paid out many times for Cummings being a [moderated].

What kind of shit calls armed officers on a defenceless woman? One with issues is my guess.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54929809

You see you can't even be honest about this.


""police officer stationed at the door of No 10 Downing Street escorted a woman from the front door to exit gates as she did not have a security pass at the time".

About a million miles from "calls armed officers on a defenceless woman"

You complain about Cummings and then post outright lies and you are even too dumb to realise people will check them.

Richard, I know people who saw the incident, there's a reason why the government paid her an out of court settlement.

FYI - The police officers outside Number 10 are armed, they aren't lawn jockeys.

She was paid an out of court settlement because she was unfairly dismissed not because she was escorted to the gate.

Oh and one of my cousins IS one of the protection officers at Downing Street (and other locations)

Even after the settlement she says she was escorted by armed officers, now if that didn't happen the government and their legal team would have insisted in the settlement she shouldn't repeated the allegations, that they didn't speaks volumes.

DavidL

CarlottaVance said:

Omnium said:

CarlottaVance said:

DavidL said:

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

We did what now?

Yep. Honestly
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/indonesian-confrontation#:~:text=Between 1963 and 1966, British,a victory for the Commonwealth.

Even now its really pretty much unknown about.

At the height of it we stationed some Vulcan bombers in Singapore with hydrogen bombs onboard, flew them to Darwin and while over Java opened the bomb doors.....Sukarno demanded they be shot down but his Air Force talked him out of it - so they burned down the British Embassy instead....

I didn't know any of that. Could you recommend any books about it?

Not directly related to Konfrontasi but "The Year of Living Dangerously" is a brilliant (fiction) book which captures the febrile atmosphere in Jakarta in the run-up to Sukarno's overthrow.

A superb film too. I remember it vividly after what must be more than 20 years.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. L, I too am an atheist that finds Common Era to be bloody stupid.

TheScreamingEagles

GIN1138 said:

Are Gove's fingerprints all over this?

Yes, I said back in January this was Gove's bidding.

https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/01/03/after-a-quick-successful-vaccine-rollout-this-is-the-second-most-thing-i-want-to-see-in-2021/

Andy_JS

"Peter Hitchens
@ClarkeMicah

The NHS plans to 'scrape' the medical histories of patients, including sensitive stuff on mental and sexual health, criminal records and abuse, into a database to be shared with third parties. You have less than a month to opt out, if you want to .https://ft.com/content/9fee81"

https://twitter.com/ClarkeMicah/status/1397902030371438595

Selebian

Philip_Thompson said:

Selebian said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Selebian said:

DavidL said:

You know, I am pretty sure BB (before Brexit, as the calendar should now surely read) not every politician was "a pretty straight kind of guy" as one of them famously put it. I am not convinced that they even always told the truth. I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

But, if it makes you feel better PB (that's post Brexit although we might need a different abbreviation to avoid confusion with this august site) to believe otherwise, fair enough.

That's certanly true. The problem for me (and I may just be harking back to a nonexistent golden age) is that I seem to recall that a politician being caught lying used to be a big deal, that people cared about it and it sometimes made them unpopular. Now, everyone just shrugs.

It made them unpopular only if the lie was unpopular with the public. If the lie was popular or something they didn't care about, then they just shrugged.

When Blair and Brown outright lied about holding a referendum on the EU Constitution and ratified Lisbon without one, they moved on like nothing had happened and were defended by their fans for doing os.

When Nick Clegg outright lied about abolishing tuition fees and tripled them instead, he continued in place for five more years. Amusingly he also lied about supporting an EU referendum, campaigning on that, only to react with horror when his Coalition partner chose to implement 2010 Lib Dem policy and hold a referendum as Clegg had campaigned to do!

Those are broken promises (manifesto promises, no less). Not quite the same - broken promises have been expected and accepted for a long time. It's arguable that a broken promise is not a lie if you're sincere at the point at which you make the promise - I'm not saying any of your examples were sincere!

I'm not fully convinced by your argument that the public just shrugged in relation to Clegg's broken tuition fees promise! I seem to remember some loss of LD seats at the following election...

It was an unpopular lie so Clegg paid the price, but because it was unpopular not because he was forced to resign.

Trying to think of other examples, given I see the Clegg thing as a broken promise (maybe also a lie, some evidence he never intended to do it). I guess the obvious fairly recent one is Blair and Iraq WMD, but he probably would have got away with that if Iraq had gone well.

This, also: https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/12/why-don-t-all-ministers-resign-lying-mystery-sackable-offence

So, case closed. I accept your argument (and that I'm now officially an old fogey given to harking back to imaginary golden ages).

CarlottaVance

Carnyx said:

Omnium said:

CarlottaVance said:

DavidL said:

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

We did what now?

Yep. Honestly
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/indonesian-confrontation#:~:text=Between 1963 and 1966, British,a victory for the Commonwealth.

Even now its really pretty much unknown about.

At the height of it we stationed some Vulcan bombers in Singapore with hydrogen bombs onboard, flew them to Darwin and while over Java opened the bomb doors.....Sukarno demanded they be shot down but his Air Force talked him out of it - so they burned down the British Embassy instead....

I didn't know any of that. Could you recommend any books about it?

Doubt that they were armed with nukes very much.

The British government remained coy about their presence - but it appears they were deployed:

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.2968/057001019

squareroot2

Oh dear.. is everything's going to be about Boris being an unashamed liar.. its getting very boring and I suspect the electorate are not interested. Boris must be the teflon dead cat that those who dislike him can thrash away at to little or no effect.

williamglenn

GIN1138 said:

Are Gove's fingerprints all over this?

Keir "forensic" Starmer could have made a joke about that.

AnExileinD4

TheScreamingEagles said:

FPT

DavidL said:

TimT said:

Selebian said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Malmesbury said:

Selebian said:

BannedinnParis said:

Selebian said:

SAGE - or perhaps more effectively the processes above SAGE - would probably benefit from a group of scientificly literate but non-specialists for an outside view - for example, bring in some physicists, engineers etc to sense check what the epidemiologists etc are saying and how the politicians/civil servants etc are understanding that.

yes. sorta like getting Feynman in to look at the Challenger, right?

Using a different vernacular, red team the crap out of the plans. Maybe harder to justify in the middle of a pandemic, but that's what 'following the science' would actually look like.

This is where Dom was absolutely nailed on correct - the structure and the normal working processes of government were not fit for purpose before Feb 2020. Its easy to laff at his 'freaks and wierdoes' advert, but that's basically what's been suggested above.

Yep. The other thing is that "the science" was actually pretty non-existent early on. Models of NPIs, sure. But very little on how the thing was actually spreading, when people were infectious. Lots of tiny studies (as those are what can be done quickly) but - not surprisingly - conflicting with each other. So many of the assumptions in the models were little more than guesses.

Part of the problem was that the scientists used the Scientists Syllogism

1) We need a model and a theory
2) This is a model and a theory
3) Therefore this is the model and theory we need.

This comes from a variant of the "face" issue - standing up and saying "I don't know" is a career ending in politics. And some other fields. It takes great self confidence and eminence to get away with that.

What is a shame is that the good answer that should be used but isn't often enough is "I will look into this and get back to you."

I actually use that quite a lot (and hear it quite a lot). Or the simpler "I don't know". It's one of the things I like about academia that bulshitting is not really encouraged.

(Students rarely say it - I rarely did when I was a student; post-docs often reluctant too - but beyond that it does happen a lot, even in meetings with external stakeholders).

I my professional world, consulting, I often say, "Good question, I don't know. Not my field, but I know an expert in that field and will get you an answer." It goes down very well with clients, some of whom say that they don't hear words to that effect very often.

But, in fact, saying "I don't know" should be absolutely fundamental to any learning organization - and in a rapidly changing world, pretty much every organization should be constantly learning and adapting.

For a young lawyer the ability to say I don't know and keep the confidence of the client is an absolutely key stage in development. Some never make it.

I've always found 'I'm not an expert in that field but we have X who is listed in Legal 500' did the trick.

The cynical client would ask, “how much advertising did that cost?”.

No_Offence_Alan

DavidL said:

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

We did what now?

Yep. Honestly
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/indonesian-confrontation#:~:text=Between 1963 and 1966, British,a victory for the Commonwealth.

Even now its really pretty much unknown about.

Paddy Ashdown mentioned it occasionally - he fought in it.

gealbhan

williamglenn said:

"Latest: Russia has again refused to allow today’s Air France flight (Paris-Moscow) to enter its airspace because the flight would have avoided Belarus’ airspace, in line with EU directives. #Belarus"



https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/1397882307680378881

There’s a war brewing

Malmesbury

Pulpstar said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not to be a Debbie downer, but the vaccine numbers, although up, we haven't seen the massive expansion that was suggested 3-4 weeks ago, that was supposed to start mid month. We have seen a decent increase, but not the sort of level of expansion muted.

We're at 595544 / day rolling average. It's not far off the heaviest period which was the week ending 21st March (602266). We're on the strongest week of the rollout so far though.

Latest from the weekly updates for England

For at least one vaccination -

Age 27th 20th
Under 40 29% 24%
40-44 69% 64%
45-49 77% 75%
50-54 84% 84%
55-59 87% 86%
60-64 89% 89%
65-69 92% 92%
70-74 94% 94%
75-79 95% 95%
80+ 95% 95%

AnExileinD4

DavidL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

The problem with Cyclefree's thesis is it seems to be based on the idea that Johnson and Cummings are the exception and that anyone involved in high politics is honest.

That is a naive position on which to base an argument. Because in the end it is utterly untrue.

All politicians are fundamentally dishonest. What we want them to be is at least vaguely competent even when being self serving and mendacious.

Johnson and Hancock are clearly lacking in this basic ability.

I would say that it is a little more mixed than that.

As I said yesterday Hancock had an horrendous first 6 months, the period that DC was talking about, but he has got a better grip of things now. Boris will always make lots of mistakes but he also gets slightly more than his fair share of the big calls right.

Regardless of whether one agrees with you, what one might ask is what happened after roughly 6 months which meant decision making changed. Correlation doesn’t equal causation but....

DavidL

williamglenn said:

GIN1138 said:

Are Gove's fingerprints all over this?

Keir "forensic" Starmer could have made a joke about that.

What on earth makes you think that? What evidence have you to support the idea that he could make a joke about anything?

Theuniondivvie

Twat tweeting news
https://twitter.com/alexhynes/status/1397900772000534529?s=21

DavidL

No_Offence_Alan said:

DavidL said:

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

We did what now?

Yep. Honestly
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/indonesian-confrontation#:~:text=Between 1963 and 1966, British,a victory for the Commonwealth.

Even now its really pretty much unknown about.

Paddy Ashdown mentioned it occasionally - he fought in it.

My dad was posted to Singapore in 68. There were a lot of echoes and a regiment of Gurkhas on the island who had fought in it too. But it was kept very quiet at the time.

GIN1138

TheScreamingEagles said:

GIN1138 said:

Are Gove's fingerprints all over this?

Yes, I said back in January this was Gove's bidding.

https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/01/03/after-a-quick-successful-vaccine-rollout-this-is-the-second-most-thing-i-want-to-see-in-2021/

Most of your predictions came true except... why did he mostly spare Rishi? Has a deal been done between Gove and Sunak?

Rishi for PM, Gove for COTE maybe?

Selebian

Andy_JS said:

"Peter Hitchens
@ClarkeMicah

The NHS plans to 'scrape' the medical histories of patients, including sensitive stuff on mental and sexual health, criminal records and abuse, into a database to be shared with third parties. You have less than a month to opt out, if you want to .https://ft.com/content/9fee81"

https://twitter.com/ClarkeMicah/status/1397902030371438595

I refer you to:
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/3409312#Comment_3409312
and
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/3409368#Comment_3409368
and @turbotubbs much more succinct:
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/3409427#Comment_3409427

TLDR: This adds GP data to what is already available. Your (anonymised!) health data are already available to third parties unless you opt out and have been for a very long time. Those third parties are given the minimum data required to do their research and have to justify it to the NHS, (often) an ethics committee and IGARD - https://digital.nhs.uk/about-nhs-digital/corporate-information-and-documents/independent-group-advising-on-the-release-of-data/igard-member-profiles

gealbhan

DavidL said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not to be a Debbie downer, but the vaccine numbers, although up, we haven't seen the massive expansion that was suggested 3-4 weeks ago, that was supposed to start mid month. We have seen a decent increase, but not the sort of level of expansion muted.

I was thinking exactly the same. If we want to nail 21st June we really need to get on with this.

Surely 21st of June is coming wether it is 21st June or not?

Does it matter if it’s 4th July, 21st, July, 1st August?

Surely something of this magnitude it’s the direction of travel that matters most than arbitrary dates? Unlock sequentially, let inevitable rise work through over the weeks to measure extent of it, and go further.

I would question anyone’s character if you were greedy for more than that.

TheScreamingEagles

GIN1138 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

GIN1138 said:

Are Gove's fingerprints all over this?

Yes, I said back in January this was Gove's bidding.

https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/01/03/after-a-quick-successful-vaccine-rollout-this-is-the-second-most-thing-i-want-to-see-in-2021/

Most of your predictions came true except... why did he mostly spare Rishi? Has a deal been done between Gove and Sunak?

Rishi for PM, Gove for COTE maybe?

My theory is that people will now think PM Rishi will make Cummings Chief Adviser so that will scare off most Tory MPs leaving the way for Gove.

Carnyx

CarlottaVance said:

Carnyx said:

Omnium said:

CarlottaVance said:

DavidL said:

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

We did what now?

Yep. Honestly
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/indonesian-confrontation#:~:text=Between 1963 and 1966, British,a victory for the Commonwealth.

Even now its really pretty much unknown about.

At the height of it we stationed some Vulcan bombers in Singapore with hydrogen bombs onboard, flew them to Darwin and while over Java opened the bomb doors.....Sukarno demanded they be shot down but his Air Force talked him out of it - so they burned down the British Embassy instead....

I didn't know any of that. Could you recommend any books about it?

Doubt that they were armed with nukes very much.

The British government remained coy about their presence - but it appears they were deployed:

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.2968/057001019

Thanks - that's interesting. Though kept to the bases and RN ship's magazines, it seems.

Omnium

DavidL said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

DavidL said:

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

We did what now?

Yep. Honestly
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/indonesian-confrontation#:~:text=Between 1963 and 1966, British,a victory for the Commonwealth.

Even now its really pretty much unknown about.

Paddy Ashdown mentioned it occasionally - he fought in it.

My dad was posted to Singapore in 68. There were a lot of echoes and a regiment of Gurkhas on the island who had fought in it too. But it was kept very quiet at the time.

It is a little unknown. @CarlottaVance suggestions about bombers etc is astonishing though. (I've no reason to to have any opinion)

Very interested as to what others may know here.

CarlottaVance

DavidL said:

CarlottaVance said:

Omnium said:

CarlottaVance said:

DavidL said:

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

We did what now?

Yep. Honestly
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/indonesian-confrontation#:~:text=Between 1963 and 1966, British,a victory for the Commonwealth.

Even now its really pretty much unknown about.

At the height of it we stationed some Vulcan bombers in Singapore with hydrogen bombs onboard, flew them to Darwin and while over Java opened the bomb doors.....Sukarno demanded they be shot down but his Air Force talked him out of it - so they burned down the British Embassy instead....

I didn't know any of that. Could you recommend any books about it?

Not directly related to Konfrontasi but "The Year of Living Dangerously" is a brilliant (fiction) book which captures the febrile atmosphere in Jakarta in the run-up to Sukarno's overthrow.

A superb film too. I remember it vividly after what must be more than 20 years.

If you saw it when it first came out (1982) nearer 40 years!

GIN1138

TheScreamingEagles said:

GIN1138 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

GIN1138 said:

Are Gove's fingerprints all over this?

Yes, I said back in January this was Gove's bidding.

https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/01/03/after-a-quick-successful-vaccine-rollout-this-is-the-second-most-thing-i-want-to-see-in-2021/

Most of your predictions came true except... why did he mostly spare Rishi? Has a deal been done between Gove and Sunak?

Rishi for PM, Gove for COTE maybe?

My theory is that people will now think PM Rishi will make Cummings Chief Adviser so that will scare of most Tory MPs leaving the way for Gove.

LOL! What a wicked web we weave...

CarlottaVance

Carnyx said:

CarlottaVance said:

Carnyx said:

Omnium said:

CarlottaVance said:

DavidL said:

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

I vaguely recall, for example, our government forgetting to mention that we fought a 3 year war in Borneo in the mid 60s. No doubt it just slipped their mind.

We did what now?

Yep. Honestly
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/indonesian-confrontation#:~:text=Between 1963 and 1966, British,a victory for the Commonwealth.

Even now its really pretty much unknown about.

At the height of it we stationed some Vulcan bombers in Singapore with hydrogen bombs onboard, flew them to Darwin and while over Java opened the bomb doors.....Sukarno demanded they be shot down but his Air Force talked him out of it - so they burned down the British Embassy instead....

I didn't know any of that. Could you recommend any books about it?

Doubt that they were armed with nukes very much.

The British government remained coy about their presence - but it appears they were deployed:

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.2968/057001019

Thanks - that's interesting. Though kept to the bases and RN ship's magazines, it seems.

I suppose that's the whole point about deterrence - they might be onboard!

DavidL

gealbhan said:

DavidL said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not to be a Debbie downer, but the vaccine numbers, although up, we haven't seen the massive expansion that was suggested 3-4 weeks ago, that was supposed to start mid month. We have seen a decent increase, but not the sort of level of expansion muted.

I was thinking exactly the same. If we want to nail 21st June we really need to get on with this.

Surely 21st of June is coming wether it is 21st June or not?

Does it matter if it’s 4th July, 21st, July, 1st August?

Surely something of this magnitude it’s the direction of travel that matters most than arbitrary dates? Unlock sequentially, let inevitable rise work through over the weeks to measure extent of it, and go further.

I would question anyone’s character if you were greedy for more than that.

It matters for a lot of businesses. And for those who have planned the "h" word around it. And for a lot of sporting events.

I think that the restrictions will be lifted on 21st June for a host of reasons but the more vaccines the safer that will be.

Mortimer

gealbhan said:

DavidL said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Not to be a Debbie downer, but the vaccine numbers, although up, we haven't seen the massive expansion that was suggested 3-4 weeks ago, that was supposed to start mid month. We have seen a decent increase, but not the sort of level of expansion muted.

I was thinking exactly the same. If we want to nail 21st June we really need to get on with this.

Surely 21st of June is coming wether it is 21st June or not?

Does it matter if it’s 4th July, 21st, July, 1st August?

Surely something of this magnitude it’s the direction of travel that matters most than arbitrary dates? Unlock sequentially, let inevitable rise work through over the weeks to measure extent of it, and go further.

I would question anyone’s character if you were greedy for more than that.

Lots of events are planned in the two weeks that you seem happy to bin. It will cause an economic hit for what I would consider to be an imperceptible health impact.

GIN1138

Maybe we'll get a "night of long knives" next where Gove, Sunak, Rabb and Priti all get sacked?