Howdy, Stranger!

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

The odds on Starmer for next PM move to a point where he’s now a value bet – politicalbetting.com

123468

Comments

  • FishingFishing Posts: 4,555
    glw said:

    Fishing said:

    Wow 5.6 million of the 3 million EU citizens living in the UK have now applied for Settled Status.

    ... including probably 4 million of the 13,000 who came after the Eastern Europeans joined the EU.
    More than twice as many Romanians have applied as were thought to be in the UK as recently as 2019. Population and residency data for the UK is clearly crap.
    Yes, and New Labour's forecasts of population and residency are clearly dozens of times worse still.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    edited June 2021
    Mr. Thompson, and many alien worlds are intriguingly similar to the area around Vancouver :D

    Edited extra bit: well, Canada. I *think* Vancouver is where the filming was based.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,723
    tlg86 said:

    PM in response to SKS's question

    "What would you say to Ollies family, who i spoke to this morning, a family who lost a son on Friday and who wasnt allowed access to say goodbye under the rules and who were furious with Hancocks rule breaking compared to their sticking to the rules"


    Unbelievable response from PM said it was "a Westminster bubble story"


    FFS what a cloth eared twat

    Sorry, but it’s Starmer who is in the wrong. If he opposed the rule that doesn’t allow any visits to hospitals, then he should say so and ask the PM about it in its own right.

    But I suspect Starmer does support that rule. So instead he uses the distress and heartbreak of that family to score a political point.
    Wheras the PM thinks Hancock breaking the rules is a Westminster bubble story and completely ignores the distress and heartbreak of that family
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,043
    Jeremy Warner: "my own admittedly wholly unscientific assessment, based on the disease’s prevalence among acquaintances, is that it is much more widespread than the official numbers suggest. Many sufferers refuse even to get tested, for fear of the self isolation a positive reading requires."


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/06/30/javid-has-real-chance-turn-page-bungling-government/
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165

    tlg86 said:

    Labour voted for it. They’re as bad as the government.
    Its not about the rule its about law makers becoming Law breakers

    You are as tone deaf as the PM
    Starmer was doing fine when he stuck to embarrassing the PM. But trying to tie it into the suffering of people which he himself supports is disgraceful.

    It’s that sort of thing that makes me despise Labour.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,723
    Peter Kyle making mincemeat of his Tory rival on Politics Live

    Good hour for Labour
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited June 2021
    glw said:

    Owen Jones - The racist campaign against Muslims in Batley & Spen

    "With allies and supporters of Keir Starmer panicking about Labour losing the Batley and Spen by election, a cynical narrative is being pushed - that the left, who are otherwise dismissed as irrelevant, are somehow to blame. But it's even worse - they are paving the way for a narrative that if Labour lose the seat, it's because Muslim voters are disillusioned for legitimate reasons, but rather because of homophobia and antisemitism. This is a racist campaign - and it must be fought."

    Hmmmm....

    More or less saying "It's alright when we do it."
    And its racist towards Muslims to suggest we do it......straight with the race and homophobia cards out the deck.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Labour voted for it. They’re as bad as the government.
    Its not about the rule its about law makers becoming Law breakers

    You are as tone deaf as the PM
    Starmer was doing fine when he stuck to embarrassing the PM. But trying to tie it into the suffering of people which he himself supports is disgraceful.

    It’s that sort of thing that makes me despise Labour.
    With these folk's explicit permission, I gather.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,043

    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    2h
    Since the decision to offer alternatives to AZ to the under-30s was couched entirely in terms of cost-benefit when prevalence was low & it was explicit that the opposite wld be so when prevalence was high, when might that decision be reviewed with a view to reversal?

    Given that Pfizer works faster than AZ and is available to everyone under-30 (indeed most under 30s have already had it) why the heck would you reverse the decision now?

    PM confirmed today that all first doses will be done by 19 July, it will probably be sooner than that, so quite frankly its far too late to change courses now and use AZ given that AZ is slower to build immunity than Pfizer is.
    I think the issue is there is a supply problem with Pfizer.
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,391

    Jeremy Warner: "my own admittedly wholly unscientific assessment, based on the disease’s prevalence among acquaintances, is that it is much more widespread than the official numbers suggest. Many sufferers refuse even to get tested, for fear of the self isolation a positive reading requires."


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/06/30/javid-has-real-chance-turn-page-bungling-government/

    Well we should all hope there are as many cases as possible - given the number of hospitalisations is absolutely known then the more actual infections are being required to drive that, the better off we are and the nearer to cases collapsing.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    tlg86 said:

    PM in response to SKS's question

    "What would you say to Ollies family, who i spoke to this morning, a family who lost a son on Friday and who wasnt allowed access to say goodbye under the rules and who were furious with Hancocks rule breaking compared to their sticking to the rules"


    Unbelievable response from PM said it was "a Westminster bubble story"


    FFS what a cloth eared twat

    Sorry, but it’s Starmer who is in the wrong. If he opposed the rule that doesn’t allow any visits to hospitals, then he should say so and ask the PM about it in its own right.

    But I suspect Starmer does support that rule. So instead he uses the distress and heartbreak of that family to score a political point.
    Wheras the PM thinks Hancock breaking the rules is a Westminster bubble story and completely ignores the distress and heartbreak of that family
    The PM paid his respects and tribute to the family and families like that one.

    Whether Hancock went on a Friday or a Saturday is a Westminster bubble story.

    But this is a rare instance of Boris telling the unvarnished truth but it being bad politics to do so. It was a trap by Starmer and he fell into it head first. Or to use a more timely metaphor, an own goal by Boris even if he was right.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535

    Jeremy Warner: "my own admittedly wholly unscientific assessment, based on the disease’s prevalence among acquaintances, is that it is much more widespread than the official numbers suggest. Many sufferers refuse even to get tested, for fear of the self isolation a positive reading requires."


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/06/30/javid-has-real-chance-turn-page-bungling-government/

    I'd take "much more widespread than the official numbers" with a pinch of salt as there are several different surveys for COVID prevelance. We may not have an exact number, but we should have a decent idea of the scale of infection even if people aren't playing ball.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited June 2021
    After Labour wouldn't allow B&S candidate to give an interview to the Joe reporter, they also wouldn't engage with the Torygraph reporter. Only thing missing is hiding in a fridge.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited June 2021

    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    2h
    Since the decision to offer alternatives to AZ to the under-30s was couched entirely in terms of cost-benefit when prevalence was low & it was explicit that the opposite wld be so when prevalence was high, when might that decision be reviewed with a view to reversal?

    Given that Pfizer works faster than AZ and is available to everyone under-30 (indeed most under 30s have already had it) why the heck would you reverse the decision now?

    PM confirmed today that all first doses will be done by 19 July, it will probably be sooner than that, so quite frankly its far too late to change courses now and use AZ given that AZ is slower to build immunity than Pfizer is.
    I think the issue is there is a supply problem with Pfizer.
    But there isn't.

    Most under-30s have had a Pfizer jab, there's no delays on Pfizer, everyone eligible who comes forwards is forecast to be done by the 19th and anyone who wants a Pfizer jab is eligible to get it now.

    So why use something slower-acting given there's no shortage of Pfizer supply?
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,153

    Peter Kyle making mincemeat of his Tory rival on Politics Live

    Good hour for Labour

    You need a lot of 'good hours' between now and next GE 2024...
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797

    Stocky said:


    Pippa Crerar
    @PippaCrerar
    ·
    8m
    Keir Starmer silences Commons with moving story of Olly who was unable to have his family by his side when he died of leukaemia because of Covid rules.

    Boris Johnson accuses Labour leader of "focusing on stuff that's going on in the Westminster bubble".

    Tone deaf.

    #PMQs

    SKS asks PM to apologise he declines.

    Terrible look for PM
    Why didn't Johnson just say "Yes I agree it is terrible. This is why the honourable member was right to resign."
    He cannot think on his feet and his blustering is, as I have said, embarrassing
    Long Covid again? Boris had appeared to have recovered but now seems to fallen back into a mental fog where he is not responding cleverly or even grasping the point of a question.
    Boris really doesn't look great if you look at the photo of him watching the football from yesterday.

    image
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797

    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    2h
    Since the decision to offer alternatives to AZ to the under-30s was couched entirely in terms of cost-benefit when prevalence was low & it was explicit that the opposite wld be so when prevalence was high, when might that decision be reviewed with a view to reversal?

    Given that Pfizer works faster than AZ and is available to everyone under-30 (indeed most under 30s have already had it) why the heck would you reverse the decision now?

    PM confirmed today that all first doses will be done by 19 July, it will probably be sooner than that, so quite frankly its far too late to change courses now and use AZ given that AZ is slower to build immunity than Pfizer is.
    I think the issue is there is a supply problem with Pfizer.
    But there isn't.

    Most under-30s have had a Pfizer jab, there's no delays on Pfizer, everyone eligible who comes forwards is forecast to be done by the 19th and anyone who wants a Pfizer jab is eligible to get it now.

    So why use something slower-acting given there's no shortage of Pfizer supply?
    The question is second doses - pfizer could be being given on a 4 week window but that isn't being offered as there is a shortfall in the middle.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited June 2021
    eek said:

    Stocky said:


    Pippa Crerar
    @PippaCrerar
    ·
    8m
    Keir Starmer silences Commons with moving story of Olly who was unable to have his family by his side when he died of leukaemia because of Covid rules.

    Boris Johnson accuses Labour leader of "focusing on stuff that's going on in the Westminster bubble".

    Tone deaf.

    #PMQs

    SKS asks PM to apologise he declines.

    Terrible look for PM
    Why didn't Johnson just say "Yes I agree it is terrible. This is why the honourable member was right to resign."
    He cannot think on his feet and his blustering is, as I have said, embarrassing
    Long Covid again? Boris had appeared to have recovered but now seems to fallen back into a mental fog where he is not responding cleverly or even grasping the point of a question.
    Boris really doesn't look great if you look at the photo of him watching the football from yesterday.

    image
    Boris has always been crap at PMQs. I presume down to laziness / poor prep. No girly swatting for him. However, since COVID what he has lost is the ability to crack a funny or a dead cat, which distracts from the issue that he was struggling to answer. As Jeremy Vine pointed out with his story, his traditional I'm not prepared at all, oh cripes, was actually I have actually got some prepared funnies to get me out of trouble, which I know when to deploy.

    He also now definitely suffers this weird issue, where he loses track of what the question even was. Sometimes sure he might be trying to avoid the question entirely, but I have seen him at the COVID pressers get a tame softballer from the public, where it is an easy we done great here and he totally forgets what has been asked and rambles about something or other different.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,723
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Labour voted for it. They’re as bad as the government.
    Its not about the rule its about law makers becoming Law breakers

    You are as tone deaf as the PM
    Starmer was doing fine when he stuck to embarrassing the PM. But trying to tie it into the suffering of people which he himself supports is disgraceful.

    It’s that sort of thing that makes me despise Labour.
    Its about one rule for them, who think they can break the rules, because the rules are for others to obey. Thats what you are supporting

    He asked the family this morning if they wanted him to raise Ollys tragic case, they did


    You are either deliberately missing the point or are a bit thick.

    Even your fellow PB Tories saw what unfolded at todays PMQs and came to the same conclusion as me.

    I am not exactly an SKS fan but he was excellent and your man was disgraceful
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,043

    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    2h
    Since the decision to offer alternatives to AZ to the under-30s was couched entirely in terms of cost-benefit when prevalence was low & it was explicit that the opposite wld be so when prevalence was high, when might that decision be reviewed with a view to reversal?

    Given that Pfizer works faster than AZ and is available to everyone under-30 (indeed most under 30s have already had it) why the heck would you reverse the decision now?

    PM confirmed today that all first doses will be done by 19 July, it will probably be sooner than that, so quite frankly its far too late to change courses now and use AZ given that AZ is slower to build immunity than Pfizer is.
    I think the issue is there is a supply problem with Pfizer.
    But there isn't.

    Most under-30s have had a Pfizer jab, there's no delays on Pfizer, everyone eligible who comes forwards is forecast to be done by the 19th and anyone who wants a Pfizer jab is eligible to get it now.

    So why use something slower-acting given there's no shortage of Pfizer supply?
    So what's this in the Times?

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1410135563089453057
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    eek said:

    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    2h
    Since the decision to offer alternatives to AZ to the under-30s was couched entirely in terms of cost-benefit when prevalence was low & it was explicit that the opposite wld be so when prevalence was high, when might that decision be reviewed with a view to reversal?

    Given that Pfizer works faster than AZ and is available to everyone under-30 (indeed most under 30s have already had it) why the heck would you reverse the decision now?

    PM confirmed today that all first doses will be done by 19 July, it will probably be sooner than that, so quite frankly its far too late to change courses now and use AZ given that AZ is slower to build immunity than Pfizer is.
    I think the issue is there is a supply problem with Pfizer.
    But there isn't.

    Most under-30s have had a Pfizer jab, there's no delays on Pfizer, everyone eligible who comes forwards is forecast to be done by the 19th and anyone who wants a Pfizer jab is eligible to get it now.

    So why use something slower-acting given there's no shortage of Pfizer supply?
    The question is second doses - pfizer could be being given on a 4 week window but that isn't being offered as there is a shortfall in the middle.
    Which is another reason to stick with Pfizer for first doses.

    Once the first doses are finished it will be possible to rapidly finish the second doses since there'll be no more firsts necessary and the 4 week window can be used.

    Whereas if you jab people with AZ now they'll need to wait 8 weeks for the second dose for clinical reasons even though jabs will be available for the second.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,723

    Peter Kyle making mincemeat of his Tory rival on Politics Live

    Good hour for Labour

    You need a lot of 'good hours' between now and next GE 2024...
    Indeed and i cant see Labour under SKS having a lot of good hours but its a start.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,624
    glw said:

    Jeremy Warner: "my own admittedly wholly unscientific assessment, based on the disease’s prevalence among acquaintances, is that it is much more widespread than the official numbers suggest. Many sufferers refuse even to get tested, for fear of the self isolation a positive reading requires."


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/06/30/javid-has-real-chance-turn-page-bungling-government/

    I'd take "much more widespread than the official numbers" with a pinch of salt as there are several different surveys for COVID prevelance. We may not have an exact number, but we should have a decent idea of the scale of infection even if people aren't playing ball.
    "my own admittedly wholly unscientific assessment" = "I don't like the numbers. So here are some I made up my self"
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797

    eek said:

    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    2h
    Since the decision to offer alternatives to AZ to the under-30s was couched entirely in terms of cost-benefit when prevalence was low & it was explicit that the opposite wld be so when prevalence was high, when might that decision be reviewed with a view to reversal?

    Given that Pfizer works faster than AZ and is available to everyone under-30 (indeed most under 30s have already had it) why the heck would you reverse the decision now?

    PM confirmed today that all first doses will be done by 19 July, it will probably be sooner than that, so quite frankly its far too late to change courses now and use AZ given that AZ is slower to build immunity than Pfizer is.
    I think the issue is there is a supply problem with Pfizer.
    But there isn't.

    Most under-30s have had a Pfizer jab, there's no delays on Pfizer, everyone eligible who comes forwards is forecast to be done by the 19th and anyone who wants a Pfizer jab is eligible to get it now.

    So why use something slower-acting given there's no shortage of Pfizer supply?
    The question is second doses - pfizer could be being given on a 4 week window but that isn't being offered as there is a shortfall in the middle.
    Which is another reason to stick with Pfizer for first doses.

    Once the first doses are finished it will be possible to rapidly finish the second doses since there'll be no more firsts necessary and the 4 week window can be used.

    Whereas if you jab people with AZ now they'll need to wait 8 weeks for the second dose for clinical reasons even though jabs will be available for the second.
    You seem to miss my point

    there appears to be a gap between mid July and early August where pfizer appointments were not readily available which can only be explained by a gap in pfizer availability.

  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,257
    eek said:

    Stocky said:


    Pippa Crerar
    @PippaCrerar
    ·
    8m
    Keir Starmer silences Commons with moving story of Olly who was unable to have his family by his side when he died of leukaemia because of Covid rules.

    Boris Johnson accuses Labour leader of "focusing on stuff that's going on in the Westminster bubble".

    Tone deaf.

    #PMQs

    SKS asks PM to apologise he declines.

    Terrible look for PM
    Why didn't Johnson just say "Yes I agree it is terrible. This is why the honourable member was right to resign."
    He cannot think on his feet and his blustering is, as I have said, embarrassing
    Long Covid again? Boris had appeared to have recovered but now seems to fallen back into a mental fog where he is not responding cleverly or even grasping the point of a question.
    Boris really doesn't look great if you look at the photo of him watching the football from yesterday.

    image
    Did the expensive refurb not even include a settee? :wink:
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    2h
    Since the decision to offer alternatives to AZ to the under-30s was couched entirely in terms of cost-benefit when prevalence was low & it was explicit that the opposite wld be so when prevalence was high, when might that decision be reviewed with a view to reversal?

    Given that Pfizer works faster than AZ and is available to everyone under-30 (indeed most under 30s have already had it) why the heck would you reverse the decision now?

    PM confirmed today that all first doses will be done by 19 July, it will probably be sooner than that, so quite frankly its far too late to change courses now and use AZ given that AZ is slower to build immunity than Pfizer is.
    I think the issue is there is a supply problem with Pfizer.
    But there isn't.

    Most under-30s have had a Pfizer jab, there's no delays on Pfizer, everyone eligible who comes forwards is forecast to be done by the 19th and anyone who wants a Pfizer jab is eligible to get it now.

    So why use something slower-acting given there's no shortage of Pfizer supply?
    So what's this in the Times?

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1410135563089453057
    That's talking about the capability to bring second doses forwards before 8 weeks, not an inability to stick to 8 weeks or finish firsts.

    If AZ is used then you can't bring forwards before 8 weeks for clinical reasons, so you're no better off than not using it! Quite the opposite since Pfizer at least keeps the option open for bring forwards before 8 weeks (which I expect will happen by the 19th when first doses will have finished) whereas its not possible with AZ.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535

    Peter Kyle making mincemeat of his Tory rival on Politics Live

    Good hour for Labour

    You need a lot of 'good hours' between now and next GE 2024...
    Indeed and i cant see Labour under SKS having a lot of good hours but its a start.
    One of the weird things about Starmer is that he doesn't do "angry" very well. It never really lands, it always feels like an act.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,089

    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    2h
    Since the decision to offer alternatives to AZ to the under-30s was couched entirely in terms of cost-benefit when prevalence was low & it was explicit that the opposite wld be so when prevalence was high, when might that decision be reviewed with a view to reversal?

    Given that Pfizer works faster than AZ and is available to everyone under-30 (indeed most under 30s have already had it) why the heck would you reverse the decision now?

    PM confirmed today that all first doses will be done by 19 July, it will probably be sooner than that, so quite frankly its far too late to change courses now and use AZ given that AZ is slower to build immunity than Pfizer is.
    I think the issue is there is a supply problem with Pfizer.
    Here's the latest from the go-to number cruncher on vaccine supply;

    https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1410155814925570052?s=20

    It's not so much that there's a supply problem with Pfizer as we're coming to the end of our initial order of 40 million doses, and there may be a gap until the second order comes on-stream (expected late August).

    Had we decided to plough on down the age range with AZ, that would have been fine. Had we got the second order in earlier than we did, that would also be fine. Had Moderna got their vaccine machine working smoothly, that would also have been fine. What was the other vaccine that was meant to be coming on-stream? NovaVax?

    Having had some significant good luck early on, the UK vaccine programme has had a bit of bad luck (coupled with the bad judgement of not upping the Pfizer order early enough, presumably because we thought we wouldn't need it) here. But it could be a lot worse.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Labour voted for it. They’re as bad as the government.
    Its not about the rule its about law makers becoming Law breakers

    You are as tone deaf as the PM
    Starmer was doing fine when he stuck to embarrassing the PM. But trying to tie it into the suffering of people which he himself supports is disgraceful.

    It’s that sort of thing that makes me despise Labour.
    Its about one rule for them, who think they can break the rules, because the rules are for others to obey. Thats what you are supporting

    He asked the family this morning if they wanted him to raise Ollys tragic case, they did


    You are either deliberately missing the point or are a bit thick.

    Even your fellow PB Tories saw what unfolded at todays PMQs and came to the same conclusion as me.

    I am not exactly an SKS fan but he was excellent and your man was disgraceful
    Its about one rule for them, who think they can break the rules, because the rules are for others to obey. Thats what you are supporting

    I would have ended lockdown on 21 June. What the politicians are doing to people now is utterly disgraceful. Do you support the ending of lockdown as I do?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited June 2021
    "The bad faith work done against the AstraZeneca vaccine will cost lives the world over."

    https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/1409860592354091011?s=20

    Well done the likes of Macron.....
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    eek said:

    eek said:

    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    2h
    Since the decision to offer alternatives to AZ to the under-30s was couched entirely in terms of cost-benefit when prevalence was low & it was explicit that the opposite wld be so when prevalence was high, when might that decision be reviewed with a view to reversal?

    Given that Pfizer works faster than AZ and is available to everyone under-30 (indeed most under 30s have already had it) why the heck would you reverse the decision now?

    PM confirmed today that all first doses will be done by 19 July, it will probably be sooner than that, so quite frankly its far too late to change courses now and use AZ given that AZ is slower to build immunity than Pfizer is.
    I think the issue is there is a supply problem with Pfizer.
    But there isn't.

    Most under-30s have had a Pfizer jab, there's no delays on Pfizer, everyone eligible who comes forwards is forecast to be done by the 19th and anyone who wants a Pfizer jab is eligible to get it now.

    So why use something slower-acting given there's no shortage of Pfizer supply?
    The question is second doses - pfizer could be being given on a 4 week window but that isn't being offered as there is a shortfall in the middle.
    Which is another reason to stick with Pfizer for first doses.

    Once the first doses are finished it will be possible to rapidly finish the second doses since there'll be no more firsts necessary and the 4 week window can be used.

    Whereas if you jab people with AZ now they'll need to wait 8 weeks for the second dose for clinical reasons even though jabs will be available for the second.
    You seem to miss my point

    there appears to be a gap between mid July and early August where pfizer appointments were not readily available which can only be explained by a gap in pfizer availability.

    We'll see. It could be that, or it could be that they're concentrating on making as much as possible available before 19 July and the availability after 19 July will be resolved closer to the date.

    Today at PMQs the PM confirmed that "all over 40s" will have the second dose by 19 July and "all adults" a first by then. Meaning just second doses will be getting resolved after 19 July anyway and to be honest a lot of under-40s will have had theirs already by then - I had my second, albeit AZ as that's what my first was, last weekend.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674

    Charles said:

    People may remember we decided to move our daughter to a different school recently. This is why:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9739259/Indoctrination-generation-Racially-segregated-clubs-white-pupils-told-theyre-oppressors.html

    Have I got this right? You were sending your daughter to the £32k a year (Jeeeesus...) American School London and pulled her out because they were teaching students about white privilege?

    £32k a year on school fees might be seen as the literal embodiment of white privilege to many. Even to those of us who are white who don't have a spare £32k a year for school fees.
    Big majority of public do not have that as total income before tax! It is tough at the top right enough.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited June 2021
    I see the zero covidians new goal post moving is because school kids are getting covid we have to stop everything, until we get them jabbed.
  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,435

    eek said:

    Stocky said:


    Pippa Crerar
    @PippaCrerar
    ·
    8m
    Keir Starmer silences Commons with moving story of Olly who was unable to have his family by his side when he died of leukaemia because of Covid rules.

    Boris Johnson accuses Labour leader of "focusing on stuff that's going on in the Westminster bubble".

    Tone deaf.

    #PMQs

    SKS asks PM to apologise he declines.

    Terrible look for PM
    Why didn't Johnson just say "Yes I agree it is terrible. This is why the honourable member was right to resign."
    He cannot think on his feet and his blustering is, as I have said, embarrassing
    Long Covid again? Boris had appeared to have recovered but now seems to fallen back into a mental fog where he is not responding cleverly or even grasping the point of a question.
    Boris really doesn't look great if you look at the photo of him watching the football from yesterday.

    image
    Boris has always been crap at PMQs. I presume down to laziness / poor prep. No girly swatting for him. However, since COVID what he has lost is the ability to crack a funny or a dead cat, which distracts from the issue that he was struggling to answer. As Jeremy Vine pointed out with his story, his traditional I'm not prepared at all, oh cripes, was actually I have actually got some prepared funnies to get me out of trouble, which I know when to deploy.

    He also now definitely suffers this weird issue, where he loses track of what the question even was. Sometimes sure he might be trying to avoid the question entirely, but I have seen him at the COVID pressers get a tame softballer from the public, where it is an easy we done great here and he totally forgets what has been asked and rambles about something or other different.
    meanwhile the big cats on the Tory benches sit there watching and waiting.....
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 4,911
    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Floater said:

    Bloody hell

    Watching a Telegraph piece on YouTube about Bately and Spen

    A Muslim says to camera "Starmer lost Muslim votes when he said Israel had a right to defend itself"

    "to defend itself" .......

    How can Labour keep its disparate wings together ....

    Labour have taken its BAME voters for granted, and part of that issue is not engaging with (as an example) the British Pakistani communities that such attitudes are not acceptable. The other observations that get hurled as abuse of Labour like voter fraud often come out of practices such as a family patriarch voting for the whole family.

    Anti-semitism is the acceptable form of racism apparently. We need to stamp it out wherever it comes from, and that means Labour expelling the anti-semites still riddling their ranks and telling certain BAME voters that their views are reprehensible.

    Better for Labour to have told it straight to this group of voters and lose with dignity than crawl in Galloway's gutter and still lose.
    The problem is a very high percentage of Labour seats today have large Muslim populations, so it would be difficult for the party to use that sort of blunt language without risking maybe 20% of their constituencies.
    That's what having principles and values mean. Sometimes using blunt language to those who don't share them or are opposed to them.
    Who will these Muslims vote for when Labour make it clear they don’t want them? I think I’d rather see Labour keep them on board, win power, Sir Keir become PM and rejoin the EU than risk the consequences of what might happen
    If Labour becomes homophobic, anti-Semitic and misogynistic to keep such voters on board, why would that be better? What would be the point of voting Labour then? And wouldn't it risk losing loads of other voters who think that one of the points of Labour is not to display or appease such ghastly views?
    Exactly, that is precisely why a took a step back from Labour when Corbyn took over. Before I return I would need a clear message that the party is not going to tolerate those views even if they do come from the muslim community.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535

    glw said:

    Jeremy Warner: "my own admittedly wholly unscientific assessment, based on the disease’s prevalence among acquaintances, is that it is much more widespread than the official numbers suggest. Many sufferers refuse even to get tested, for fear of the self isolation a positive reading requires."


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/06/30/javid-has-real-chance-turn-page-bungling-government/

    I'd take "much more widespread than the official numbers" with a pinch of salt as there are several different surveys for COVID prevelance. We may not have an exact number, but we should have a decent idea of the scale of infection even if people aren't playing ball.
    "my own admittedly wholly unscientific assessment" = "I don't like the numbers. So here are some I made up my self"
    Yes, it's possible that the antibody surveys, waste water testing, and blood test sampling (those are the ones I can recall off the top of my head) are all failing to measure the scale of infection in the population, but I'm sure they are a much better approach than simply asking around.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,587
    edited June 2021
    eek said:

    Stocky said:


    Pippa Crerar
    @PippaCrerar
    ·
    8m
    Keir Starmer silences Commons with moving story of Olly who was unable to have his family by his side when he died of leukaemia because of Covid rules.

    Boris Johnson accuses Labour leader of "focusing on stuff that's going on in the Westminster bubble".

    Tone deaf.

    #PMQs

    SKS asks PM to apologise he declines.

    Terrible look for PM
    Why didn't Johnson just say "Yes I agree it is terrible. This is why the honourable member was right to resign."
    He cannot think on his feet and his blustering is, as I have said, embarrassing
    Long Covid again? Boris had appeared to have recovered but now seems to fallen back into a mental fog where he is not responding cleverly or even grasping the point of a question.
    Boris really doesn't look great if you look at the photo of him watching the football from yesterday.

    image
    It would have looked more authentic if Bozza had a few mates around. Maybe Mikey Gove bringing around the half-time refreshments and Dave Cameron cheering on West Ham Villa's Jack Grealish.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535
    edited June 2021

    "The bad faith work done against the AstraZeneca vaccine will cost lives the world over."

    https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/1409860592354091011?s=20

    Well done the likes of Macron.....

    I don't want the one that very rarely may cause a blood clot, I want the one that very rarely may inflame my heart.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 5,997

    I see the zero covidians new goal post moving is because school kids are getting covid we have to stop everything, until we get them jabbed.

    Surely we just have to jab everyone they might infect.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,739
    Selebian said:

    Did the expensive refurb not even include a settee? :wink:

    Maybe Carrie won't let BoZo sit on it after the flat incident...
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,723
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Labour voted for it. They’re as bad as the government.
    Its not about the rule its about law makers becoming Law breakers

    You are as tone deaf as the PM
    Starmer was doing fine when he stuck to embarrassing the PM. But trying to tie it into the suffering of people which he himself supports is disgraceful.

    It’s that sort of thing that makes me despise Labour.
    Its about one rule for them, who think they can break the rules, because the rules are for others to obey. Thats what you are supporting

    He asked the family this morning if they wanted him to raise Ollys tragic case, they did


    You are either deliberately missing the point or are a bit thick.

    Even your fellow PB Tories saw what unfolded at todays PMQs and came to the same conclusion as me.

    I am not exactly an SKS fan but he was excellent and your man was disgraceful
    Its about one rule for them, who think they can break the rules, because the rules are for others to obey. Thats what you are supporting

    I would have ended lockdown on 21 June. What the politicians are doing to people now is utterly disgraceful. Do you support the ending of lockdown as I do?
    If the science says its safe enough i support it. Hopefully that will be 19th July

    You are still missing the point that the issue is about rule breaking by the Elite.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,587

    eek said:

    Stocky said:


    Pippa Crerar
    @PippaCrerar
    ·
    8m
    Keir Starmer silences Commons with moving story of Olly who was unable to have his family by his side when he died of leukaemia because of Covid rules.

    Boris Johnson accuses Labour leader of "focusing on stuff that's going on in the Westminster bubble".

    Tone deaf.

    #PMQs

    SKS asks PM to apologise he declines.

    Terrible look for PM
    Why didn't Johnson just say "Yes I agree it is terrible. This is why the honourable member was right to resign."
    He cannot think on his feet and his blustering is, as I have said, embarrassing
    Long Covid again? Boris had appeared to have recovered but now seems to fallen back into a mental fog where he is not responding cleverly or even grasping the point of a question.
    Boris really doesn't look great if you look at the photo of him watching the football from yesterday.

    image
    Boris has always been crap at PMQs. I presume down to laziness / poor prep. No girly swatting for him. However, since COVID what he has lost is the ability to crack a funny or a dead cat, which distracts from the issue that he was struggling to answer. As Jeremy Vine pointed out with his story, his traditional I'm not prepared at all, oh cripes, was actually I have actually got some prepared funnies to get me out of trouble, which I know when to deploy.

    He also now definitely suffers this weird issue, where he loses track of what the question even was. Sometimes sure he might be trying to avoid the question entirely, but I have seen him at the COVID pressers get a tame softballer from the public, where it is an easy we done great here and he totally forgets what has been asked and rambles about something or other different.
    meanwhile the big cats on the Tory benches sit there watching and waiting.....
    Meow
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    glw said:

    "The bad faith work done against the AstraZeneca vaccine will cost lives the world over."

    https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/1409860592354091011?s=20

    Well done the likes of Macron.....

    I don't want the one that very rarely may cause a blood clot, I want the one that very rarely may inflame my heart.
    And I demand to be able to get on a long haul flight because I want a holiday in the sun......even though that is just as risky when it comes to blood clots.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Labour voted for it. They’re as bad as the government.
    Its not about the rule its about law makers becoming Law breakers

    You are as tone deaf as the PM
    Starmer was doing fine when he stuck to embarrassing the PM. But trying to tie it into the suffering of people which he himself supports is disgraceful.

    It’s that sort of thing that makes me despise Labour.
    Its about one rule for them, who think they can break the rules, because the rules are for others to obey. Thats what you are supporting

    He asked the family this morning if they wanted him to raise Ollys tragic case, they did


    You are either deliberately missing the point or are a bit thick.

    Even your fellow PB Tories saw what unfolded at todays PMQs and came to the same conclusion as me.

    I am not exactly an SKS fan but he was excellent and your man was disgraceful
    Its about one rule for them, who think they can break the rules, because the rules are for others to obey. Thats what you are supporting

    I would have ended lockdown on 21 June. What the politicians are doing to people now is utterly disgraceful. Do you support the ending of lockdown as I do?
    If the science says its safe enough i support it. Hopefully that will be 19th July

    You are still missing the point that the issue is about rule breaking by the Elite.
    Right, so you support the continued suffering of people like Ollie Bibby. Glad we cleared that up.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    I see the zero covidians new goal post moving is because school kids are getting covid we have to stop everything, until we get them jabbed.

    They're wrong. As are those who think it's not worth vaccinating 12 - 17 yr olds at all.
    If we're supply limited, well we're supply limited. If we're not then the dosing gap for mRNA should be brought down to as close to 3 weeks as makes us supply limited.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,926

    dixiedean said:

    PM soaring to new heights of answering a different question today.
    Noticeably less background roaring.

    The long-term reduction in barracking is, I think, due to the Conservative whips because it derails Boris as much as the Opposition. It was always a Conservative tactic, introduced to aid Mrs Thatcher against Jim Callaghan.
    Come to think of it, Boris has mentioned being partially deaf as a child.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,739
    NEW: Of 1,991 #coronavirus cases registered by Public Health Scotland (PHS) recently, TWO THIRDS said they had travelled to London to watch England v Scotland on 18 June

    And a total of 397 of these were fans at the game at Wembley Stadium

    https://twitter.com/DarrenGBNews/status/1410208540665516032
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited June 2021
    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: Of 1,991 #coronavirus cases registered by Public Health Scotland (PHS) recently, TWO THIRDS said they had travelled to London to watch England v Scotland on 18 June

    And a total of 397 of these were fans at the game at Wembley Stadium

    https://twitter.com/DarrenGBNews/status/1410208540665516032

    Who would have guessed this would happen....

    One thing that the likes of Dr John Campbell (and others) has been hypothesising is that original alpha variant nearly impossible to catch outside, he has been saying it may well be that the Indian variant, albeit still much harder, it is now possible to do so...infected exhaust more virus and you need to inhale less virus to get infected (as much better binding).
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Floater said:

    Bloody hell

    Watching a Telegraph piece on YouTube about Bately and Spen

    A Muslim says to camera "Starmer lost Muslim votes when he said Israel had a right to defend itself"

    "to defend itself" .......

    How can Labour keep its disparate wings together ....

    Labour have taken its BAME voters for granted, and part of that issue is not engaging with (as an example) the British Pakistani communities that such attitudes are not acceptable. The other observations that get hurled as abuse of Labour like voter fraud often come out of practices such as a family patriarch voting for the whole family.

    Anti-semitism is the acceptable form of racism apparently. We need to stamp it out wherever it comes from, and that means Labour expelling the anti-semites still riddling their ranks and telling certain BAME voters that their views are reprehensible.

    Better for Labour to have told it straight to this group of voters and lose with dignity than crawl in Galloway's gutter and still lose.
    The problem is a very high percentage of Labour seats today have large Muslim populations, so it would be difficult for the party to use that sort of blunt language without risking maybe 20% of their constituencies.
    That's what having principles and values mean. Sometimes using blunt language to those who don't share them or are opposed to them.
    Who will these Muslims vote for when Labour make it clear they don’t want them? I think I’d rather see Labour keep them on board, win power, Sir Keir become PM and rejoin the EU than risk the consequences of what might happen
    If Labour becomes homophobic, anti-Semitic and misogynistic to keep such voters on board, why would that be better? What would be the point of voting Labour then? And wouldn't it risk losing loads of other voters who think that one of the points of Labour is not to display or appease such ghastly views?
    It's the same challenge as we have for white working class leavers with reactionary social views.

    There's a respectable way to appeal to them - a clear, left of centre economic vision centred on devolving wealth and power (to them). And an unrespectable way - pander to the reactionary social views.

    Ditto here. Respectable way to court Muslim voters - pro Palestine, serious about islamophobia. Unrespectable way - dog whistle antisemitism, pull punches on homophobia and misogyny.

    There's more risk of us pandering to the 1st group than to the 2nd imo.
    Arguably though that's just the 'respectable' end of the same spectrum - by treating Muslim voters as a block whose primary interest is that they're Muslim and have a set of identifiable 'Muslim' interests which are to be advanced at the expense of other interests, you take the first step down the path of splitting people into mutually hostile groups defined by identity rather than interests, the outcome of which can be seen in B&S. You get sectoral interests seen as valid overriding all others, and teachers who offend the sectoral group, and particularly toxic by-elections.
    For me, it's more than ok for Labour to be pro-Palestine and very strong on opposing racism, including the anti-Muslim kind (which I think is quite prevalent). But, yes, I take the point about sectarian targeting. I agree that's a bad thing and our politics is better without it.

    It's interesting though. I often hear how Muslims are unfairly protected from insult and mockery due to our over-sensitivity to their feelings and concerns. I also often hear Muslims being denigrated in a way that suggests the purveyor (who is quite likely to have just said the above) is rather comfortable in doing so.
    I wonder if there are any examples of people being forced into hiding for a perceived slight against a non-Muslim group?
    Yes that was terrible. But I more meant that the normal level of treading on eggshells when assigning negative characteristics to groups is less in evidence when the group is Muslims. That's how it often seems to me anyway.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    I see the zero covidians new goal post moving is because school kids are getting covid we have to stop everything, until we get them jabbed.

    Surely we just have to jab everyone they might infect.
    @Andy_Cooke yesterday was saying there were "Several thousand children have been hospitalised. Well over a hundred thousand children have ended up with chronic illness."

    I can't find the stats but I'm sure he'll provide them for me when he's next on.

    But his was a response to why are we closing down the country on account of a group of people (children) who are at very low risk.

    As he speaks, so do the zero guys.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: Of 1,991 #coronavirus cases registered by Public Health Scotland (PHS) recently, TWO THIRDS said they had travelled to London to watch England v Scotland on 18 June

    And a total of 397 of these were fans at the game at Wembley Stadium

    https://twitter.com/DarrenGBNews/status/1410208540665516032

    Who would have guessed this would happen....
    Who cares that it's happened?

    The vulnerable have been vaccinated.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165
    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: Of 1,991 #coronavirus cases registered by Public Health Scotland (PHS) recently, TWO THIRDS said they had travelled to London to watch England v Scotland on 18 June

    And a total of 397 of these were fans at the game at Wembley Stadium

    https://twitter.com/DarrenGBNews/status/1410208540665516032

    I'm curious to know just how rigorous the checks were for fans going to Wembley for that match. I'm having to provide a negative test to get into The Open, but I'll be interested to see what actually happens on the gate.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,926

    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: Of 1,991 #coronavirus cases registered by Public Health Scotland (PHS) recently, TWO THIRDS said they had travelled to London to watch England v Scotland on 18 June

    And a total of 397 of these were fans at the game at Wembley Stadium

    https://twitter.com/DarrenGBNews/status/1410208540665516032

    Who would have guessed this would happen....

    One thing that the likes of Dr John Campbell (and others) has been hypothesising is that original alpha variant nearly impossible to catch outside, he has been saying it may well be that the Indian variant, albeit still much harder, it is now possible to do so...infected exhaust more virus and you need to inhale less virus to get infected (as much better binding).
    Supporting Scotland is bad for your health.

    On the question of whether Covid is transmissable outside at Wembley stadium, presumably these fans would have travelled together by coach or train, taking far longer than they'd have been at Wembley.

    And that is an important question because the Standard reports a potential stand-off between the government and Transport for London on whether masks should be worn on the tube and buses after 19th July.
    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/tfl-boss-andy-byford-clash-ministers-plan-ditch-masks-tube-b943356.html
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    edited June 2021
    glw said:

    "The bad faith work done against the AstraZeneca vaccine will cost lives the world over."

    https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/1409860592354091011?s=20

    Well done the likes of Macron.....

    I don't want the one that very rarely may cause a blood clot, I want the one that very rarely may inflame my heart.
    There's an argument going on in Australia at the moment about whether people should be able to get AZ if they want it. The federal govt are, sort of, saying "yes", and many of the states are firmly saying "no".

    But ffs i saw a quote from a Chief Medical Officer (no less) in one of the states saying "Covid is harmless to the young. Nobody aged 18 has died of it. How tragic would it be if our first Covid related 18 year old death was from the AZ vaccine!". They're never going to get vaccinated with that sort of emotive approach.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited June 2021

    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: Of 1,991 #coronavirus cases registered by Public Health Scotland (PHS) recently, TWO THIRDS said they had travelled to London to watch England v Scotland on 18 June

    And a total of 397 of these were fans at the game at Wembley Stadium

    https://twitter.com/DarrenGBNews/status/1410208540665516032

    Who would have guessed this would happen....

    One thing that the likes of Dr John Campbell (and others) has been hypothesising is that original alpha variant nearly impossible to catch outside, he has been saying it may well be that the Indian variant, albeit still much harder, it is now possible to do so...infected exhaust more virus and you need to inhale less virus to get infected (as much better binding).
    Supporting Scotland is bad for your health.

    On the question of whether Covid is transmissable outside at Wembley stadium, presumably these fans would have travelled together by coach or train, taking far longer than they'd have been at Wembley.

    And that is an important question because the Standard reports a potential stand-off between the government and Transport for London on whether masks should be worn on the tube and buses after 19th July.
    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/tfl-boss-andy-byford-clash-ministers-plan-ditch-masks-tube-b943356.html
    Fair point. I think the stadium itself was probably fairly low risk....the big groups dancing, hugging and fighting for 12hrs throughout the night probably not such a good idea.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535
    alex_ said:

    glw said:

    "The bad faith work done against the AstraZeneca vaccine will cost lives the world over."

    https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/1409860592354091011?s=20

    Well done the likes of Macron.....

    I don't want the one that very rarely may cause a blood clot, I want the one that very rarely may inflame my heart.
    There's an argument going on in Australia at the moment about whether people should be able to get AZ if they want it. The federal govt are, sort of, saying "yes", and many of the states are firmly saying "no".

    But ffs i saw a quote from a Chief Medical Officer (no less) in one of the states saying "Covid is harmless to the young. Nobody aged 18 has died of it. How tragic would it be if our first Covid related 18 year old death was from the AZ vaccine!". They're never going to get vaccinated with that sort of emotive approach.
    It needs to be said that in the long term the choice is not between no vaccine and the vaccine, it's between natural immunity because you got COVID-19 or the vaccine giving you immunity. You would have to have truly exceptional circumstances to prefer taking the natural option.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,624
    glw said:

    glw said:

    Jeremy Warner: "my own admittedly wholly unscientific assessment, based on the disease’s prevalence among acquaintances, is that it is much more widespread than the official numbers suggest. Many sufferers refuse even to get tested, for fear of the self isolation a positive reading requires."


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/06/30/javid-has-real-chance-turn-page-bungling-government/

    I'd take "much more widespread than the official numbers" with a pinch of salt as there are several different surveys for COVID prevelance. We may not have an exact number, but we should have a decent idea of the scale of infection even if people aren't playing ball.
    "my own admittedly wholly unscientific assessment" = "I don't like the numbers. So here are some I made up my self"
    Yes, it's possible that the antibody surveys, waste water testing, and blood test sampling (those are the ones I can recall off the top of my head) are all failing to measure the scale of infection in the population, but I'm sure they are a much better approach than simply asking around.
    You forgot the Gold Standard of population surveys. Albanian Black Cab drivers.....

    "I 'ad that King Zog in the back, the other day. Now 'e was a proper gent...."
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    It turns out that Trump was right to question some election results

    https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1410065604476903424

    NY counted 135,000 "test" votes that should have been deleted before the system was switched on

    On the upside at least they tested the software, on the downside you couldn't screw things up if you used pencils and paper
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959

    "The bad faith work done against the AstraZeneca vaccine will cost lives the world over."

    https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/1409860592354091011?s=20

    Well done the likes of Macron.....

    They should initiate a Time magazine "Twat of the Year".....now that Donald Trump has taken a few years off as automatic winner.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    2h
    Since the decision to offer alternatives to AZ to the under-30s was couched entirely in terms of cost-benefit when prevalence was low & it was explicit that the opposite wld be so when prevalence was high, when might that decision be reviewed with a view to reversal?

    Given that Pfizer works faster than AZ and is available to everyone under-30 (indeed most under 30s have already had it) why the heck would you reverse the decision now?

    PM confirmed today that all first doses will be done by 19 July, it will probably be sooner than that, so quite frankly its far too late to change courses now and use AZ given that AZ is slower to build immunity than Pfizer is.
    "As of 16 June, an estimated 16.8 million first doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine and 24.5 million first doses of the COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca had been administered, and around 10.9 million and 19.6 million second doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine and COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca respectively. An approximate 0.73 million first doses of the COVID-19 Vaccine Moderna have also now been administered"

    Use of Astra is 4.9 million seconds, perhaps 100k additional firsts and 100k additional seconds.
    So that's 5.1 million.

    ~10.7 million older/healthcare people got Pfizer in the early rollout or so, so we can use 10.7 million Astra for the booster program for them if we're going down the mix and match route with that.

    So ~16.8 million Astra doses spoken for without any younger age group rollout.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 13,766

    "The bad faith work done against the AstraZeneca vaccine will cost lives the world over."

    https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/1409860592354091011?s=20

    Well done the likes of Macron.....

    They should initiate a Time magazine "Twat of the Year".....now that Donald Trump has taken a few years off as automatic winner.
    Boris Johnson has taken his place though
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    Anybody say expectation management....

    Senior Labour figures believe the party has only a 5% to 10% chance of holding the West Yorkshire seat of Batley and Spen in Thursday’s byelection, as Keir Starmer’s team brace themselves for a backbench revolt if the Tories take the seat.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jun/30/chance-of-holding-batley-and-spen-as-low-as-5-say-key-labour-figures
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    TimS said:

    The white privilege issue is yet another example of how a perfectly reasonable concept gets put through the mincing machine of American terminology and comes out the other side as something completely alien to British (especially working class British) ears. It's the culture war equivalent of what we were talking about yesterday with school "proms" and graduation ceremonies. It's an insidious problem, an invasive lexicon that alienates people on all sides of the various political divides.

    "White privilege" struggles as a phrase because in British English privilege has a particular meaning. It means "poshness". No amount of explaining can eliminate this. So you tell a WWC person they have white privilege and it jars. "I'm not privileged, I grew up in a council estate". An American term that doesn't translate.

    Other recent examples: from the left, "defund the police" which sounds like nonsense in a country where the police service like many others suffers from chronic underfunding. The British English interpretation is let's spend less on policing. From the right, references to "liberals" (British English translation: yellow rosette wearing centrists), "socialised medicine" (what?) and obsession with various "amendments" which have absolutely no meaning here. I would say the terminology of the American left has crept further into British politics than the right, largely because the preoccupations of the latter - abortion, gun rights, imaginary voter fraud - are mainly so completely alien in most of the UK that they are just ignored as exotic.

    Perhaps for the good of UK social cohesion we need some British equivalent of the Academie Francaise.

    While linguist differences make it more challenging you are just wrong

    At its heart white privilege ascribes guilt to the current generation for the sins of the past. It divides instead of unifies: we are all one people, equal under God.

    It is a toxic philosophy that must be combatted
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 13,766

    dixiedean said:

    PM soaring to new heights of answering a different question today.
    Noticeably less background roaring.

    The long-term reduction in barracking is, I think, due to the Conservative whips because it derails Boris as much as the Opposition. It was always a Conservative tactic, introduced to aid Mrs Thatcher against Jim Callaghan.
    Come to think of it, Boris has mentioned being partially deaf as a child.
    Probably another lie. This time to cover up for him being a shite parliamentarian.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959

    "The bad faith work done against the AstraZeneca vaccine will cost lives the world over."

    https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/1409860592354091011?s=20

    Well done the likes of Macron.....

    They should initiate a Time magazine "Twat of the Year".....now that Donald Trump has taken a few years off as automatic winner.
    Boris Johnson has taken his place though
    If you think Boris Johnson is a more worthy winner than Macron, you might be up for the award yourself.....
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,089

    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: Of 1,991 #coronavirus cases registered by Public Health Scotland (PHS) recently, TWO THIRDS said they had travelled to London to watch England v Scotland on 18 June

    And a total of 397 of these were fans at the game at Wembley Stadium

    https://twitter.com/DarrenGBNews/status/1410208540665516032

    Who would have guessed this would happen....

    One thing that the likes of Dr John Campbell (and others) has been hypothesising is that original alpha variant nearly impossible to catch outside, he has been saying it may well be that the Indian variant, albeit still much harder, it is now possible to do so...infected exhaust more virus and you need to inhale less virus to get infected (as much better binding).
    Supporting Scotland is bad for your health.

    On the question of whether Covid is transmissable outside at Wembley stadium, presumably these fans would have travelled together by coach or train, taking far longer than they'd have been at Wembley.

    And that is an important question because the Standard reports a potential stand-off between the government and Transport for London on whether masks should be worn on the tube and buses after 19th July.
    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/tfl-boss-andy-byford-clash-ministers-plan-ditch-masks-tube-b943356.html
    I would assume that this is people travelling down in groups from what is already a Covid hotspot, with ~1 individual in the group infected and passing it to the rest, and then the entirely uninfected groups cross-infecting in e.g. the pub.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,087
    edited June 2021
    glw said:

    An exclusive poll for Sky News has revealed that seven in 10 Labour members think Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham would make a better leader of the party than Sir Keir Starmer.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fp8H6nfoyb0

    I'm surprised the number isn't higher. It seems to me that Burnham is more prominent than Khan is nationally, despite Khan's job being the bigger one. I don't agree with Burnham at times, but he certainly does a good job of getting attention for issues relevant to his constituents.
    My take on that would be that Khan has made many more pratfalls, and Burnham seems to have made a decent fist of being mayor and has his problems further in the past.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    MattW said:

    Charles said:

    People may remember we decided to move our daughter to a different school recently. This is why:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9739259/Indoctrination-generation-Racially-segregated-clubs-white-pupils-told-theyre-oppressors.html

    Have I got this right? You were sending your daughter to the £32k a year (Jeeeesus...) American School London and pulled her out because they were teaching students about white privilege?

    £32k a year on school fees might be seen as the literal embodiment of white privilege to many. Even to those of us who are white who don't have a spare £32k a year for school fees.
    Quite the opposite to me Rochdale!

    £32k a year on school fees might be seen as the literal embodiment of money privilege to many. It has nothing to do with skin colour.

    I would not be remotely surprised that many of those able to afford to send their kids to the school would be non-white and the notion that a white kid from Rochdale, or Birkenhead, or Hartlepool etc is "privileged" while a kid going to the ASL school because their parents can afford to pay £32k per year isn't due to their skin colour rather shows what is wrong with this ridiculous idea.
    Looks like being an interesting argument. One benefit of the Mail "ultra-long screed to attract Google" technique is that a lot of information is laid out.

    Including this:

    The scale of the problem was laid bare in an extraordinary dossier sent in April to the Department for Education by Bryn Harris, chief legal counsel to the Free Speech Union [FSU], which campaigns against cancel culture.

    It contained a collection of teaching materials obtained from the concerned parents of children at no fewer than 15 English schools where the FSU alleges that teachers have 'failed to comply with their duties to forbid the promotion of partisan political views and to secure balanced treatment of political issues'.


    It would be interesting to see that litigated. FSU have been a bit of a Rottweiler on this particular issue, and had a certain amount of success.

    (Rottweiler joke: what has 4 legs and an arm?)
    The quotation you include from the Mail is revealing. Toby Young's FSU did their best to get parents to whistle blow and found the promotion of partisan political views in "no fewer than 15 English schools"! Fifteen? Relatively, that's a miniscule number - is that the best they can do? So, a tiny problem rather than a huge issue.

    Going by this, and from my own extensive professional experience, you are more likely to die from Covid than to find a state school that focuses on white privilege/wokeness/partisan political views.

    Perhaps Charles and others who want to avoid the woke stuff should save their money and support their local state schools. Seems to me to be more of a problem in private schools, like ASL (and Eton apparently), than state schools.
    Well I’ve just sent £10k to Michaela to help them expand their sixth form. Admittedly it’s 6 miles away rather than my local state school but they are doing a decent job
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    gealbhan said:

    gealbhan said:


    UK shares land border with EU, but Britain First Brexit government not as smart as Gibraltar government.

    Who do you think supplied Gibraltar with the vaccines?
    That’s why I am saying it’s UK vaccines in EU arms in first line. Duh.

    You are not wiggling off this hook, a mistake has been made that can’t be unmade when the time has passed.
    What mistake? We offered Ireland the vaccines and Ireland said no.

    Are you suggesting we should force it down their throat against their wishes?
    Or are you suggesting we should fly people from Europe to the UK in order to vaccinate them then fly them back?

    PS many people living in the Republic have been vaccinated in Northern Ireland.
    Stomach acid would reduce the effectiveness of an oral vaccine…
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    Charles said:

    TimS said:

    The white privilege issue is yet another example of how a perfectly reasonable concept gets put through the mincing machine of American terminology and comes out the other side as something completely alien to British (especially working class British) ears. It's the culture war equivalent of what we were talking about yesterday with school "proms" and graduation ceremonies. It's an insidious problem, an invasive lexicon that alienates people on all sides of the various political divides.

    "White privilege" struggles as a phrase because in British English privilege has a particular meaning. It means "poshness". No amount of explaining can eliminate this. So you tell a WWC person they have white privilege and it jars. "I'm not privileged, I grew up in a council estate". An American term that doesn't translate.

    Other recent examples: from the left, "defund the police" which sounds like nonsense in a country where the police service like many others suffers from chronic underfunding. The British English interpretation is let's spend less on policing. From the right, references to "liberals" (British English translation: yellow rosette wearing centrists), "socialised medicine" (what?) and obsession with various "amendments" which have absolutely no meaning here. I would say the terminology of the American left has crept further into British politics than the right, largely because the preoccupations of the latter - abortion, gun rights, imaginary voter fraud - are mainly so completely alien in most of the UK that they are just ignored as exotic.

    Perhaps for the good of UK social cohesion we need some British equivalent of the Academie Francaise.

    While linguist differences make it more challenging you are just wrong

    At its heart white privilege ascribes guilt to the current generation for the sins of the past. It divides instead of unifies: we are all one people, equal under God.

    It is a toxic philosophy that must be combatted
    Er no.

    At its heart it ascribes attitudes to our current generation that should have been obliterated years ago. It says that institutionally people who are not white suffer in a white anglo-saxon protestant country. Not everyone and not by everyone. But on the whole we have a long way to go before we reach that equal place and if people kick up a fuss about it to push things along, which seems to have drawn out interesting responses from you, then so much the better.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,772

    eek said:

    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    2h
    Since the decision to offer alternatives to AZ to the under-30s was couched entirely in terms of cost-benefit when prevalence was low & it was explicit that the opposite wld be so when prevalence was high, when might that decision be reviewed with a view to reversal?

    Given that Pfizer works faster than AZ and is available to everyone under-30 (indeed most under 30s have already had it) why the heck would you reverse the decision now?

    PM confirmed today that all first doses will be done by 19 July, it will probably be sooner than that, so quite frankly its far too late to change courses now and use AZ given that AZ is slower to build immunity than Pfizer is.
    I think the issue is there is a supply problem with Pfizer.
    But there isn't.

    Most under-30s have had a Pfizer jab, there's no delays on Pfizer, everyone eligible who comes forwards is forecast to be done by the 19th and anyone who wants a Pfizer jab is eligible to get it now.

    So why use something slower-acting given there's no shortage of Pfizer supply?
    The question is second doses - pfizer could be being given on a 4 week window but that isn't being offered as there is a shortfall in the middle.
    Which is another reason to stick with Pfizer for first doses.

    Once the first doses are finished it will be possible to rapidly finish the second doses since there'll be no more firsts necessary and the 4 week window can be used.

    Whereas if you jab people with AZ now they'll need to wait 8 weeks for the second dose for clinical reasons even though jabs will be available for the second.
    I don't know how large the effectiveness difference is, but they've changed the advice - again - in Ireland to use a 4-week gap between AZ doses, so that they can more rapidly get the number of double-dosed individuals up.

    The vaccine takeup figures for the younger age groups are a bit concerning. It would be good to give some thought to how to improve those.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165
    mwadams said:

    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: Of 1,991 #coronavirus cases registered by Public Health Scotland (PHS) recently, TWO THIRDS said they had travelled to London to watch England v Scotland on 18 June

    And a total of 397 of these were fans at the game at Wembley Stadium

    https://twitter.com/DarrenGBNews/status/1410208540665516032

    Who would have guessed this would happen....

    One thing that the likes of Dr John Campbell (and others) has been hypothesising is that original alpha variant nearly impossible to catch outside, he has been saying it may well be that the Indian variant, albeit still much harder, it is now possible to do so...infected exhaust more virus and you need to inhale less virus to get infected (as much better binding).
    Supporting Scotland is bad for your health.

    On the question of whether Covid is transmissable outside at Wembley stadium, presumably these fans would have travelled together by coach or train, taking far longer than they'd have been at Wembley.

    And that is an important question because the Standard reports a potential stand-off between the government and Transport for London on whether masks should be worn on the tube and buses after 19th July.
    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/tfl-boss-andy-byford-clash-ministers-plan-ditch-masks-tube-b943356.html
    I would assume that this is people travelling down in groups from what is already a Covid hotspot, with ~1 individual in the group infected and passing it to the rest, and then the entirely uninfected groups cross-infecting in e.g. the pub.
    And this is the issue with the whole "tested negative within 48 hours of the game" line. I guess it's unusual to have match going supporters travelling a long distance surrounded by non-ticket holders, but it is a risk that people will get infected on the trains/tubes.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    edited June 2021

    dixiedean said:

    PM soaring to new heights of answering a different question today.
    Noticeably less background roaring.

    The long-term reduction in barracking is, I think, due to the Conservative whips because it derails Boris as much as the Opposition. It was always a Conservative tactic, introduced to aid Mrs Thatcher against Jim Callaghan.
    Come to think of it, Boris has mentioned being partially deaf as a child.
    I'm a bit surprised by your statement re the Whips - I've seen [edit] Mr Johnson's need for barracking adduced as a reason why the Tories were so bitterly against a Covid-sensible Parliament (because Mr Johnson supposedly needed the barracking to support his performance).

    Maybe, however, it is something new, a consequence of his brush with the pox.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    I’ve seen various flags being used to represent the English language - the Union flag, the St George’s cross, the Stars and Stripes, the Irish tricolour etc - but this is a new one on me!

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    tlg86 said:

    mwadams said:

    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: Of 1,991 #coronavirus cases registered by Public Health Scotland (PHS) recently, TWO THIRDS said they had travelled to London to watch England v Scotland on 18 June

    And a total of 397 of these were fans at the game at Wembley Stadium

    https://twitter.com/DarrenGBNews/status/1410208540665516032

    Who would have guessed this would happen....

    One thing that the likes of Dr John Campbell (and others) has been hypothesising is that original alpha variant nearly impossible to catch outside, he has been saying it may well be that the Indian variant, albeit still much harder, it is now possible to do so...infected exhaust more virus and you need to inhale less virus to get infected (as much better binding).
    Supporting Scotland is bad for your health.

    On the question of whether Covid is transmissable outside at Wembley stadium, presumably these fans would have travelled together by coach or train, taking far longer than they'd have been at Wembley.

    And that is an important question because the Standard reports a potential stand-off between the government and Transport for London on whether masks should be worn on the tube and buses after 19th July.
    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/tfl-boss-andy-byford-clash-ministers-plan-ditch-masks-tube-b943356.html
    I would assume that this is people travelling down in groups from what is already a Covid hotspot, with ~1 individual in the group infected and passing it to the rest, and then the entirely uninfected groups cross-infecting in e.g. the pub.
    And this is the issue with the whole "tested negative within 48 hours of the game" line. I guess it's unusual to have match going supporters travelling a long distance surrounded by non-ticket holders, but it is a risk that people will get infected on the trains/tubes.
    Another implication is that they don't normally have that many people travelling between England and Scotland, or at least that the ones who do are less likely to have the pox anyway (or are better behaved so don't catch it). Were thje trains rammed? I believe seat reservations are obligatory.

    I think most had assumed the rise was down to chaps meeting in pubs or at home to watch the fitba.

    I also wonder about the Rangers match a few days before as a seeder event. Maybe the Euros amplified it.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,793
    edited June 2021
    TOPPING said:

    I see the zero covidians new goal post moving is because school kids are getting covid we have to stop everything, until we get them jabbed.

    Surely we just have to jab everyone they might infect.
    @Andy_Cooke yesterday was saying there were "Several thousand children have been hospitalised. Well over a hundred thousand children have ended up with chronic illness."

    I can't find the stats but I'm sure he'll provide them for me when he's next on.

    But his was a response to why are we closing down the country on account of a group of people (children) who are at very low risk.

    As he speaks, so do the zero guys.
    I did respond to you yesterday.

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare?areaType=nation&areaName=England
    Has the hospitalisation stats.
    6,070 17-and-under in England alone (3,062 age 0-5 and 3,008 age 6-17).

    NB - I did not state that we had to close the country to protect them. I've stated that we are highly unlikely to want to do that - but that we should not blithely assume that it will not be an issue for them. Could you provide a link to anywhere that I've said we should lockdown again to protect the kids?

    As it happens, I think that schools breaking up will do a lot to help.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 19,618
    Selebian said:

    eek said:

    Stocky said:


    Pippa Crerar
    @PippaCrerar
    ·
    8m
    Keir Starmer silences Commons with moving story of Olly who was unable to have his family by his side when he died of leukaemia because of Covid rules.

    Boris Johnson accuses Labour leader of "focusing on stuff that's going on in the Westminster bubble".

    Tone deaf.

    #PMQs

    SKS asks PM to apologise he declines.

    Terrible look for PM
    Why didn't Johnson just say "Yes I agree it is terrible. This is why the honourable member was right to resign."
    He cannot think on his feet and his blustering is, as I have said, embarrassing
    Long Covid again? Boris had appeared to have recovered but now seems to fallen back into a mental fog where he is not responding cleverly or even grasping the point of a question.
    Boris really doesn't look great if you look at the photo of him watching the football from yesterday.

    image
    Did the expensive refurb not even include a settee? :wink:
    Non-U.

    A sofa, maybe.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789

    Had we decided to plough on down the age range with AZ, that would have been fine. Had we got the second order in earlier than we did, that would also be fine. Had Moderna got their vaccine machine working smoothly, that would also have been fine. What was the other vaccine that was meant to be coming on-stream? NovaVax?

    Having had some significant good luck early on, the UK vaccine programme has had a bit of bad luck (coupled with the bad judgement of not upping the Pfizer order early enough, presumably because we thought we wouldn't need it) here. But it could be a lot worse.

    The cut off age of 40 was a bit arbitrary. Bringing it down to, say, 38, would have made a meaningful difference to the overall progress of the rollout.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Dickson, that does seem a counter-intuitive choice...
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,343
    glw said:

    Peter Kyle making mincemeat of his Tory rival on Politics Live

    Good hour for Labour

    You need a lot of 'good hours' between now and next GE 2024...
    Indeed and i cant see Labour under SKS having a lot of good hours but its a start.
    One of the weird things about Starmer is that he doesn't do "angry" very well. It never really lands, it always feels like an act.
    Once you have spent a few years reading the depositions and court papers and seeing the photos that the DPP has to look at day in day out it is not easy to get really angry at the ups and downs of politics and the mistakes and circumlocutions of decent but flawed people doing their best from their perch on the greasy pole in a liberal democracy.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    People may remember we decided to move our daughter to a different school recently. This is why:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9739259/Indoctrination-generation-Racially-segregated-clubs-white-pupils-told-theyre-oppressors.html

    Have I got this right? You were sending your daughter to the £32k a year (Jeeeesus...) American School London and pulled her out because they were teaching students about white privilege?

    £32k a year on school fees might be seen as the literal embodiment of white privilege to many. Even to those of us who are white who don't have a spare £32k a year for school fees.
    Quite the opposite to me Rochdale!

    £32k a year on school fees might be seen as the literal embodiment of money privilege to many. It has nothing to do with skin colour.

    I would not be remotely surprised that many of those able to afford to send their kids to the school would be non-white and the notion that a white kid from Rochdale, or Birkenhead, or Hartlepool etc is "privileged" while a kid going to the ASL school because their parents can afford to pay £32k per year isn't due to their skin colour rather shows what is wrong with this ridiculous idea.
    I'm not intending to disappear down this particular cul-de-sac and have already posted that class has as much to do with it as race. Its just that most of the people who manage to get into the stratified upper atmosphere of A+++ are white.

    The real outrage about "white privilege" shouldn't be that it self-evidently is there for a tiny minority, it should be that those people then work very hard to keep the WWC in the gutter.

    We saw the ludicrous situation last week of "concerned" Tories unhappy that poor white kids do so badly in school. The same Tories consistently vote to cut schools budgets, cut council services budgets and even not to feed them in the holidays and then wonder why their kids do so badly in school...
    Why do you think the taxpayer should feed children instead of their parents?
    Says the chap who can afford £32k pa per child for school fees. Are you against Free School Meals for poor families, Charles? Presumably you are, as that is the taxpayer feeding children instead of their parents.
    I’m actually a huge fan of breakfast clubs in particular. Good nutrition is a key part of education. Free school meals are a bit of a blunt instrument but they serve a role.

    However:

    - feeding kids during holidays as well represents a massive erosion of the concept of parental responsibility. If you think benefits are not enough then stand up and argue for an increase in benefits
    - I really dislike the “why do you want kids to go hungry” line of argument if you oppose extension. It’s manipulative bullshit.
    I agree, but the concept of parental responsibility is an interesting one. I agree with it: we should all try to look after our kids. But the other day I mentioned two children my son is friends with. Both have few of the advantages he has, and both have parent/parents who are struggling to cope for varying reasons.

    I love the idea of parental responsibility. But what if the parents cannot cope, for whatever reason, even if they really try? Should we allow the kids to suffer, or help both the children and parents? IMV it is a difficult question to answer, and one that should perhaps be led more with an eye to compassion than finance.

    (In one case, the school made the decision to allow the boy attend with the children of keyworkers during lockdown. I think it was an excellent idea.)
    Of course we should intervene where appropriate. But that’s not extending free school meals to be a year round service.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,089

    eek said:

    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    2h
    Since the decision to offer alternatives to AZ to the under-30s was couched entirely in terms of cost-benefit when prevalence was low & it was explicit that the opposite wld be so when prevalence was high, when might that decision be reviewed with a view to reversal?

    Given that Pfizer works faster than AZ and is available to everyone under-30 (indeed most under 30s have already had it) why the heck would you reverse the decision now?

    PM confirmed today that all first doses will be done by 19 July, it will probably be sooner than that, so quite frankly its far too late to change courses now and use AZ given that AZ is slower to build immunity than Pfizer is.
    I think the issue is there is a supply problem with Pfizer.
    But there isn't.

    Most under-30s have had a Pfizer jab, there's no delays on Pfizer, everyone eligible who comes forwards is forecast to be done by the 19th and anyone who wants a Pfizer jab is eligible to get it now.

    So why use something slower-acting given there's no shortage of Pfizer supply?
    The question is second doses - pfizer could be being given on a 4 week window but that isn't being offered as there is a shortfall in the middle.
    Which is another reason to stick with Pfizer for first doses.

    Once the first doses are finished it will be possible to rapidly finish the second doses since there'll be no more firsts necessary and the 4 week window can be used.

    Whereas if you jab people with AZ now they'll need to wait 8 weeks for the second dose for clinical reasons even though jabs will be available for the second.
    I don't know how large the effectiveness difference is, but they've changed the advice - again - in Ireland to use a 4-week gap between AZ doses, so that they can more rapidly get the number of double-dosed individuals up.

    The vaccine takeup figures for the younger age groups are a bit concerning. It would be good to give some thought to how to improve those.
    They've started making them available right through University exams / end of term, which is going to throw things into disarray (and also make the geographic counting harder as students all head back home).

    I'm assuming Cambridge's overall vaccination numbers are shockingly poor because the student population is included in the figures, for example.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880

    I’ve seen various flags being used to represent the English language - the Union flag, the St George’s cross, the Stars and Stripes, the Irish tricolour etc - but this is a new one on me!

    It's a good job Casino is away being Grant Shapps' plus one at the Goodwood Revival. He would have done his fucking nut over that.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    Another record?

    2,250,458 people in Scotland have been tested for #coronavirus

    The total confirmed as positive has risen by 3,887 to 281,222


    https://twitter.com/scotgov/status/1410221945333895177?s=21
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 19,618

    eek said:

    Stocky said:


    Pippa Crerar
    @PippaCrerar
    ·
    8m
    Keir Starmer silences Commons with moving story of Olly who was unable to have his family by his side when he died of leukaemia because of Covid rules.

    Boris Johnson accuses Labour leader of "focusing on stuff that's going on in the Westminster bubble".

    Tone deaf.

    #PMQs

    SKS asks PM to apologise he declines.

    Terrible look for PM
    Why didn't Johnson just say "Yes I agree it is terrible. This is why the honourable member was right to resign."
    He cannot think on his feet and his blustering is, as I have said, embarrassing
    Long Covid again? Boris had appeared to have recovered but now seems to fallen back into a mental fog where he is not responding cleverly or even grasping the point of a question.
    Boris really doesn't look great if you look at the photo of him watching the football from yesterday.

    image
    It would have looked more authentic if Bozza had a few mates around. Maybe Mikey Gove bringing around the half-time refreshments and Dave Cameron cheering on West Ham Villa's Jack Grealish.
    And Billy Hague, 14 pints down.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    Mr. Dickson, that does seem a counter-intuitive choice...

    I suppose it makes sense, as English is the lingua franca of Europe just as much as it is of India, North America, Australia etc.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    People may remember we decided to move our daughter to a different school recently. This is why:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9739259/Indoctrination-generation-Racially-segregated-clubs-white-pupils-told-theyre-oppressors.html

    Have I got this right? You were sending your daughter to the £32k a year (Jeeeesus...) American School London and pulled her out because they were teaching students about white privilege?

    £32k a year on school fees might be seen as the literal embodiment of white privilege to many. Even to those of us who are white who don't have a spare £32k a year for school fees.
    Quite the opposite to me Rochdale!

    £32k a year on school fees might be seen as the literal embodiment of money privilege to many. It has nothing to do with skin colour.

    I would not be remotely surprised that many of those able to afford to send their kids to the school would be non-white and the notion that a white kid from Rochdale, or Birkenhead, or Hartlepool etc is "privileged" while a kid going to the ASL school because their parents can afford to pay £32k per year isn't due to their skin colour rather shows what is wrong with this ridiculous idea.
    I'm not intending to disappear down this particular cul-de-sac and have already posted that class has as much to do with it as race. Its just that most of the people who manage to get into the stratified upper atmosphere of A+++ are white.

    The real outrage about "white privilege" shouldn't be that it self-evidently is there for a tiny minority, it should be that those people then work very hard to keep the WWC in the gutter.

    We saw the ludicrous situation last week of "concerned" Tories unhappy that poor white kids do so badly in school. The same Tories consistently vote to cut schools budgets, cut council services budgets and even not to feed them in the holidays and then wonder why their kids do so badly in school...
    Why do you think the taxpayer should feed children instead of their parents?
    Says the chap who can afford £32k pa per child for school fees. Are you against Free School Meals for poor families, Charles? Presumably you are, as that is the taxpayer feeding children instead of their parents.
    I’m actually a huge fan of breakfast clubs in particular. Good nutrition is a key part of education. Free school meals are a bit of a blunt instrument but they serve a role.

    However:

    - feeding kids during holidays as well represents a massive erosion of the concept of parental responsibility. If you think benefits are not enough then stand up and argue for an increase in benefits
    - I really dislike the “why do you want kids to go hungry” line of argument if you oppose extension. It’s manipulative bullshit.
    If the parents had the money they would feed their kids. They don't. And thats not because they are are crackheads as that Tory MP suggested. So the choice is either direct application of service provision or they go hungry.

    Either way they are going to do shit at school because you don't want to pay. Hence the need to spin it as anything other than what it is.
    Data please

    In any event I thought you lot didn’t like directed grants because they were patronising
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    I see the zero covidians new goal post moving is because school kids are getting covid we have to stop everything, until we get them jabbed.

    Surely we just have to jab everyone they might infect.
    @Andy_Cooke yesterday was saying there were "Several thousand children have been hospitalised. Well over a hundred thousand children have ended up with chronic illness."

    I can't find the stats but I'm sure he'll provide them for me when he's next on.

    But his was a response to why are we closing down the country on account of a group of people (children) who are at very low risk.

    As he speaks, so do the zero guys.
    I did respond to you yesterday.

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare?areaType=nation&areaName=England
    Has the hospitalisation stats.
    6,070 17-and-under in England alone (3,062 age 0-5 and 3,008 age 6-17).

    NB - I did not state that we had to close the country to protect them. I've stated that we are highly unlikely to want to do that - but that we should not blithely assume that it will not be an issue for them. Could you provide a link to anywhere that I've said we should lockdown again to protect the kids?

    As it happens, I think that schools breaking up will do a lot to help.
    Right. So a 0.045% risk of a child 0-17 being hospitalised with Covid.

    What about the "well over a hundred thousand children with chronic illness"?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 19,618
    Scott_xP said:

    NEW: Of 1,991 #coronavirus cases registered by Public Health Scotland (PHS) recently, TWO THIRDS said they had travelled to London to watch England v Scotland on 18 June

    And a total of 397 of these were fans at the game at Wembley Stadium

    https://twitter.com/DarrenGBNews/status/1410208540665516032


    Are many/any of these Scottish fans actually sick? Or have they just supplied a positive test?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,624

    TOPPING said:

    I see the zero covidians new goal post moving is because school kids are getting covid we have to stop everything, until we get them jabbed.

    Surely we just have to jab everyone they might infect.
    @Andy_Cooke yesterday was saying there were "Several thousand children have been hospitalised. Well over a hundred thousand children have ended up with chronic illness."

    I can't find the stats but I'm sure he'll provide them for me when he's next on.

    But his was a response to why are we closing down the country on account of a group of people (children) who are at very low risk.

    As he speaks, so do the zero guys.
    I did respond to you yesterday.

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare?areaType=nation&areaName=England
    Has the hospitalisation stats.
    6,070 17-and-under in England alone (3,062 age 0-5 and 3,008 age 6-17).

    NB - I did not state that we had to close the country to protect them. I've stated that we are highly unlikely to want to do that - but that we should not blithely assume that it will not be an issue for them. Could you provide a link to anywhere that I've said we should lockdown again to protect the kids?

    As it happens, I think that schools breaking up will do a lot to help.
    IIRC the conversation was in the context of "why vaccinate children?"

    Well, the side effects of the vaccine in question (Pfizer) are orders of magnitude less than the probability of ending up in hospital (for children), if Delta spreads through the population.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797

    I’ve seen various flags being used to represent the English language - the Union flag, the St George’s cross, the Stars and Stripes, the Irish tricolour etc - but this is a new one on me!

    Are you sure they aren't just doing it to annoy the French - I seem to remember the French have started to try to get the EU to stop English from being the default language.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    I see the zero covidians new goal post moving is because school kids are getting covid we have to stop everything, until we get them jabbed.

    Surely we just have to jab everyone they might infect.
    @Andy_Cooke yesterday was saying there were "Several thousand children have been hospitalised. Well over a hundred thousand children have ended up with chronic illness."

    I can't find the stats but I'm sure he'll provide them for me when he's next on.

    But his was a response to why are we closing down the country on account of a group of people (children) who are at very low risk.

    As he speaks, so do the zero guys.
    I did respond to you yesterday.

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare?areaType=nation&areaName=England
    Has the hospitalisation stats.
    6,070 17-and-under in England alone (3,062 age 0-5 and 3,008 age 6-17).

    NB - I did not state that we had to close the country to protect them. I've stated that we are highly unlikely to want to do that - but that we should not blithely assume that it will not be an issue for them. Could you provide a link to anywhere that I've said we should lockdown again to protect the kids?

    As it happens, I think that schools breaking up will do a lot to help.
    IIRC the conversation was in the context of "why vaccinate children?"

    Well, the side effects of the vaccine in question (Pfizer) are orders of magnitude less than the probability of ending up in hospital (for children), if Delta spreads through the population.
    0.045% chance of someone 0-17 ending up in hospital with Covid.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797

    Had we decided to plough on down the age range with AZ, that would have been fine. Had we got the second order in earlier than we did, that would also be fine. Had Moderna got their vaccine machine working smoothly, that would also have been fine. What was the other vaccine that was meant to be coming on-stream? NovaVax?

    Having had some significant good luck early on, the UK vaccine programme has had a bit of bad luck (coupled with the bad judgement of not upping the Pfizer order early enough, presumably because we thought we wouldn't need it) here. But it could be a lot worse.

    The cut off age of 40 was a bit arbitrary. Bringing it down to, say, 38, would have made a meaningful difference to the overall progress of the rollout.
    Another approach would have been to separate men from women as from memory the blood clot issue was a female issue.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,624
    eek said:

    I’ve seen various flags being used to represent the English language - the Union flag, the St George’s cross, the Stars and Stripes, the Irish tricolour etc - but this is a new one on me!

    Are you sure they aren't just doing it to annoy the French - I seem to remember the French have started to try to get the EU to stop English from being the default language.
    It is quite remarkable to see the extent to which companies in Europe operate in English, in day to day meetings etc.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    edited June 2021
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    People may remember we decided to move our daughter to a different school recently. This is why:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9739259/Indoctrination-generation-Racially-segregated-clubs-white-pupils-told-theyre-oppressors.html

    Have I got this right? You were sending your daughter to the £32k a year (Jeeeesus...) American School London and pulled her out because they were teaching students about white privilege?

    £32k a year on school fees might be seen as the literal embodiment of white privilege to many. Even to those of us who are white who don't have a spare £32k a year for school fees.
    Quite the opposite to me Rochdale!

    £32k a year on school fees might be seen as the literal embodiment of money privilege to many. It has nothing to do with skin colour.

    I would not be remotely surprised that many of those able to afford to send their kids to the school would be non-white and the notion that a white kid from Rochdale, or Birkenhead, or Hartlepool etc is "privileged" while a kid going to the ASL school because their parents can afford to pay £32k per year isn't due to their skin colour rather shows what is wrong with this ridiculous idea.
    I'm not intending to disappear down this particular cul-de-sac and have already posted that class has as much to do with it as race. Its just that most of the people who manage to get into the stratified upper atmosphere of A+++ are white.

    The real outrage about "white privilege" shouldn't be that it self-evidently is there for a tiny minority, it should be that those people then work very hard to keep the WWC in the gutter.

    We saw the ludicrous situation last week of "concerned" Tories unhappy that poor white kids do so badly in school. The same Tories consistently vote to cut schools budgets, cut council services budgets and even not to feed them in the holidays and then wonder why their kids do so badly in school...
    Why do you think the taxpayer should feed children instead of their parents?
    Says the chap who can afford £32k pa per child for school fees. Are you against Free School Meals for poor families, Charles? Presumably you are, as that is the taxpayer feeding children instead of their parents.
    I’m actually a huge fan of breakfast clubs in particular. Good nutrition is a key part of education. Free school meals are a bit of a blunt instrument but they serve a role.

    However:

    - feeding kids during holidays as well represents a massive erosion of the concept of parental responsibility. If you think benefits are not enough then stand up and argue for an increase in benefits
    - I really dislike the “why do you want kids to go hungry” line of argument if you oppose extension. It’s manipulative bullshit.
    If the parents had the money they would feed their kids. They don't. And thats not because they are are crackheads as that Tory MP suggested. So the choice is either direct application of service provision or they go hungry.

    Either way they are going to do shit at school because you don't want to pay. Hence the need to spin it as anything other than what it is.
    Data please

    In any event I thought you lot didn’t like directed grants because they were patronising
    I covered that earlier - so I will cut and paste the same reply - and having thought about it more would emphasis the last sentence. It's very possible for highly functioning people to end up completely dysfunctional due to external pressures and other health issues.

    The current approach does have a big problem - which is that if you have a tight budget or cannot budget at all the sudden (and yes I know School holidays are scheduled but remember the issue here is potentially dysfunctional parents) need to find £10-20 to pay for breakfast / lunch is something a fair number of people cannot cope with.

    Now I haven't a clue what the fix is but there is an issue there regardless of Charle's viewpoint that the parents should be able to manage. The simple fact is that a lot of parents simply can't.

    And I've seen degree educated parents (who have then drawn very dire and unlucky hands) who have got themselves into this situation.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,624
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    I see the zero covidians new goal post moving is because school kids are getting covid we have to stop everything, until we get them jabbed.

    Surely we just have to jab everyone they might infect.
    @Andy_Cooke yesterday was saying there were "Several thousand children have been hospitalised. Well over a hundred thousand children have ended up with chronic illness."

    I can't find the stats but I'm sure he'll provide them for me when he's next on.

    But his was a response to why are we closing down the country on account of a group of people (children) who are at very low risk.

    As he speaks, so do the zero guys.
    I did respond to you yesterday.

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare?areaType=nation&areaName=England
    Has the hospitalisation stats.
    6,070 17-and-under in England alone (3,062 age 0-5 and 3,008 age 6-17).

    NB - I did not state that we had to close the country to protect them. I've stated that we are highly unlikely to want to do that - but that we should not blithely assume that it will not be an issue for them. Could you provide a link to anywhere that I've said we should lockdown again to protect the kids?

    As it happens, I think that schools breaking up will do a lot to help.
    IIRC the conversation was in the context of "why vaccinate children?"

    Well, the side effects of the vaccine in question (Pfizer) are orders of magnitude less than the probability of ending up in hospital (for children), if Delta spreads through the population.
    0.045% chance of someone 0-17 ending up in hospital with Covid.
    Yes, and the side effects are extremely rare. So rare, in fact, that at a not very high level of COVID in the community, the risk from the vaccines would be orders of magnitude less than the risk from COVID.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    eek said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    People may remember we decided to move our daughter to a different school recently. This is why:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9739259/Indoctrination-generation-Racially-segregated-clubs-white-pupils-told-theyre-oppressors.html

    Have I got this right? You were sending your daughter to the £32k a year (Jeeeesus...) American School London and pulled her out because they were teaching students about white privilege?

    £32k a year on school fees might be seen as the literal embodiment of white privilege to many. Even to those of us who are white who don't have a spare £32k a year for school fees.
    Quite the opposite to me Rochdale!

    £32k a year on school fees might be seen as the literal embodiment of money privilege to many. It has nothing to do with skin colour.

    I would not be remotely surprised that many of those able to afford to send their kids to the school would be non-white and the notion that a white kid from Rochdale, or Birkenhead, or Hartlepool etc is "privileged" while a kid going to the ASL school because their parents can afford to pay £32k per year isn't due to their skin colour rather shows what is wrong with this ridiculous idea.
    I'm not intending to disappear down this particular cul-de-sac and have already posted that class has as much to do with it as race. Its just that most of the people who manage to get into the stratified upper atmosphere of A+++ are white.

    The real outrage about "white privilege" shouldn't be that it self-evidently is there for a tiny minority, it should be that those people then work very hard to keep the WWC in the gutter.

    We saw the ludicrous situation last week of "concerned" Tories unhappy that poor white kids do so badly in school. The same Tories consistently vote to cut schools budgets, cut council services budgets and even not to feed them in the holidays and then wonder why their kids do so badly in school...
    Why do you think the taxpayer should feed children instead of their parents?
    Says the chap who can afford £32k pa per child for school fees. Are you against Free School Meals for poor families, Charles? Presumably you are, as that is the taxpayer feeding children instead of their parents.
    I’m actually a huge fan of breakfast clubs in particular. Good nutrition is a key part of education. Free school meals are a bit of a blunt instrument but they serve a role.

    However:

    - feeding kids during holidays as well represents a massive erosion of the concept of parental responsibility. If you think benefits are not enough then stand up and argue for an increase in benefits
    - I really dislike the “why do you want kids to go hungry” line of argument if you oppose extension. It’s manipulative bullshit.
    If the parents had the money they would feed their kids. They don't. And thats not because they are are crackheads as that Tory MP suggested. So the choice is either direct application of service provision or they go hungry.

    Either way they are going to do shit at school because you don't want to pay. Hence the need to spin it as anything other than what it is.
    The current approach does have a big problem - which is that if you have a tight budget or cannot budget at all the sudden (and yes I know School holidays are scheduled but remember the issue here is potentially dysfunctional parents) need to find £10-20 to pay for breakfast / lunch is something a fair number of people cannot cope with.

    Now I haven't a clue what the fix is but there is an issue there regardless of Charle's viewpoint that the parents should be able to manage. The simple fact is that a lot of parents simply can't.

    And I've seen degree educated parents (who have then drawn very dire and unlucky hands) who have got themselves into this situation.
    My view wasn’t “the parents should be able to manage”

    It is: if the welfare system isn’t giving them enough money to feed their kids it needs to be increased. Imposition of free school meals demeans parents and undermines the concept of responsibility and the family unit.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    I see the zero covidians new goal post moving is because school kids are getting covid we have to stop everything, until we get them jabbed.

    Surely we just have to jab everyone they might infect.
    @Andy_Cooke yesterday was saying there were "Several thousand children have been hospitalised. Well over a hundred thousand children have ended up with chronic illness."

    I can't find the stats but I'm sure he'll provide them for me when he's next on.

    But his was a response to why are we closing down the country on account of a group of people (children) who are at very low risk.

    As he speaks, so do the zero guys.
    I did respond to you yesterday.

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare?areaType=nation&areaName=England
    Has the hospitalisation stats.
    6,070 17-and-under in England alone (3,062 age 0-5 and 3,008 age 6-17).

    NB - I did not state that we had to close the country to protect them. I've stated that we are highly unlikely to want to do that - but that we should not blithely assume that it will not be an issue for them. Could you provide a link to anywhere that I've said we should lockdown again to protect the kids?

    As it happens, I think that schools breaking up will do a lot to help.
    Yeah it was really a non-point you were making. You asked me, when I queried if Freedom Day would really be Freedom day when children might be kept from school, why I persisted "in ignoring the thousands of hospitalisations of under-18s, and chronic illnesses there".

    Whereas you don't think it will cause delay to July 19th. So it was just hand wringing on your part for no obvious reason.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,013
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    People may remember we decided to move our daughter to a different school recently. This is why:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9739259/Indoctrination-generation-Racially-segregated-clubs-white-pupils-told-theyre-oppressors.html

    Have I got this right? You were sending your daughter to the £32k a year (Jeeeesus...) American School London and pulled her out because they were teaching students about white privilege?

    £32k a year on school fees might be seen as the literal embodiment of white privilege to many. Even to those of us who are white who don't have a spare £32k a year for school fees.
    Quite the opposite to me Rochdale!

    £32k a year on school fees might be seen as the literal embodiment of money privilege to many. It has nothing to do with skin colour.

    I would not be remotely surprised that many of those able to afford to send their kids to the school would be non-white and the notion that a white kid from Rochdale, or Birkenhead, or Hartlepool etc is "privileged" while a kid going to the ASL school because their parents can afford to pay £32k per year isn't due to their skin colour rather shows what is wrong with this ridiculous idea.
    I'm not intending to disappear down this particular cul-de-sac and have already posted that class has as much to do with it as race. Its just that most of the people who manage to get into the stratified upper atmosphere of A+++ are white.

    The real outrage about "white privilege" shouldn't be that it self-evidently is there for a tiny minority, it should be that those people then work very hard to keep the WWC in the gutter.

    We saw the ludicrous situation last week of "concerned" Tories unhappy that poor white kids do so badly in school. The same Tories consistently vote to cut schools budgets, cut council services budgets and even not to feed them in the holidays and then wonder why their kids do so badly in school...
    Why do you think the taxpayer should feed children instead of their parents?
    Says the chap who can afford £32k pa per child for school fees. Are you against Free School Meals for poor families, Charles? Presumably you are, as that is the taxpayer feeding children instead of their parents.
    I’m actually a huge fan of breakfast clubs in particular. Good nutrition is a key part of education. Free school meals are a bit of a blunt instrument but they serve a role.

    However:

    - feeding kids during holidays as well represents a massive erosion of the concept of parental responsibility. If you think benefits are not enough then stand up and argue for an increase in benefits
    - I really dislike the “why do you want kids to go hungry” line of argument if you oppose extension. It’s manipulative bullshit.
    If the parents had the money they would feed their kids. They don't. And thats not because they are are crackheads as that Tory MP suggested. So the choice is either direct application of service provision or they go hungry.

    Either way they are going to do shit at school because you don't want to pay. Hence the need to spin it as anything other than what it is.
    Data please

    In any event I thought you lot didn’t like directed grants because they were patronising
    It isn't patronising or condescending when you can't feed your kids.

    "Data please" of what - the number of kids who needed emergency feeding due to schools no longer doing so? I take it that you're now trying to suggest there isn't a problem, perhaps these kids don't exist at all...

    You can afford £32k a year in school fees and then complain about what they teach but don't have a clue how people live.
This discussion has been closed.