There has been some discussion in the past about the shortage of HGV drivers. This blog from a part-time Polish lorry driver and journalist is an interesting read on the topic.
I think we're going to end up having another lockdown or another increase in restrictions. You heard it here first - I hope as before, I am wrong
Already announced - the vaccine passports for nightclubs from end Sept (too late, as usual). You are probably right that there will be more; reintroducing compulsory masks in various circumstances must be a front-runner.
Will the nightclub passports actually happen, or are they using the idea of it to nudge the 18-25 group into getting jabbed over the summer?
My money would be on the latter.
It won't just be nightclubs. The government is clearly targeting any crowded indoor space. Pub. Theatre. concert. Maybe even workplace.
If and when that happens, I can wave goodbye both to my freedom and my livelihood. I will be a second class citizen. Ostrasized. Frozen out.
With every dose of freedom, this government delivers a punch in the stomach.
I do actually have some sympathy, and almost admire you if you stick to your principles. It would be better though that you get the jab. It is safe.
No I feel sorry for you, because if you think being double jabbed is the last demand the government will make of you for your freedom, you are seriously wrong.
YOu will need a booster, a flu jab and goodness knows what else, soon. And that is just the start of it. Luckily for me I am close to retirement and so can drop off the radar if I want.
Many will not be so lucky.
Oh, and there I was thinking I was being nice! I have worked for/with many of the largest pharma companies as an advisor, so my understanding of the processes they go through gives me a lot more confidence than the nonsense you are clearly influenced by, so you don't need to feel sorry for me, but thanks for your concern anyway.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
Your obsession with polls is really rather silly. The more important thing is whether he can do the job that he was elected to do, which when I last looked is arguably the most powerful and important in the country. If you think he can, fine, make your argument. Being PM is not just a popularity contest.
Are you going to tell the Prime Minister? I'm not sure I fancy being the one to break it to him.
He will need to book if he needs a consultation. I am sure I can fit him in some time in September
Approval of Brown and Blair has increased by 18% amongst the Labour membership compared to before Starmer's election and approval of Corbyn has declined by 18%.
Approval of Ed Milband has also slightly increased by 6%.
Starmer Labour is therefore clearly closer to Brown Ed Miliband Labour at least than Corbyn Labour
Was always going to be a Covid sh!t-show, but surely they’re not going to bin it four days out, at a cost of several billion dollars?
I don't understand why the IOC didn't insist on 10 days mandatory quarantine in a hotel like the Australians did for the tennis. It's a system that works and can clearly be implemented without too much trouble.
Given most Olympics events will be without crowds anyway and the rest will be capped at 50% ie significantly smaller than the Euros crowds were, they should just go ahead, pointless to postpone again
I'm constantly perplexed by how many people on here, and elsewhere, see the 'elderly' and the 'young' as distinctively different groups with different interests. Whether it's Covid strategy, or tax, pensions and NI, people seem to think that the interests of different age groups are in conflict.
But isn't it the case that most of the 'elderly' have children/grandchildren, whose interests they care about very deeply? Even OAPs who are Tory voters whose children don't vote Conservative? I want a government whose priorities are in the interest of all age groups, not just my own. I want my children to have the same, or better, opportunities as I did. And yes, if I have to pay more tax/NI to bring this about, then so be it, I'm comfortable about this. Even though my 'public sector fatcat pension is' actually a very modest amount.
The problem with this view is that the baby boomer generation is, unfortunately, generation selfish. They bought up all the property when prices were low, they closed all of the DB pension schemes when they realised keeping them open would mean their own pensions wouldn't be funded, they introduced fees for university when they all finished their grant funded degrees, they don't want to pay for their own care and invariably vote to tax working age people to fund their own sweeties like free bus passes and the triple lock.
They have none of the self-sacrifice of their parents who fought and lived through the war and are happy to leech off the next generation by sucking them dry with rent and tax.
The continual pandering to them by the Tories is one of the major reasons I've not been tempted to rejoin the party. They are happy to entrench inter-generational unfairness that means working people just continue to be seen as money-piñatas by anyone aged 60 or over.
I'm always happy to find that those of my British grandchildren who can vote share my opinions. I'm a little worried about Grandson 2, but as he's off to Uni (we hope) soon, I'm sure he'll soon be disabused of the values he seems to have acquired in middle-class Kent. Farage lives not far from him.
Was always going to be a Covid sh!t-show, but surely they’re not going to bin it four days out, at a cost of several billion dollars?
Not according to the BBC. Was "never an option" says IOC President although they do promise to discuss it if there is a surge in cases: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/57899915
I think its crazy but like you I really can't see them stopping now.
Given most events will be without crowds anyway and the rest will be capped at 50% ie significantly smaller than the Euros crowds, they should just go ahead, pointless to postpone again
Good to see you are now advising the Olympic Committee on these matters
I think we're going to end up having another lockdown or another increase in restrictions. You heard it here first - I hope as before, I am wrong
Already announced - the vaccine passports for nightclubs from end Sept (too late, as usual). You are probably right that there will be more; reintroducing compulsory masks in various circumstances must be a front-runner.
Will the nightclub passports actually happen, or are they using the idea of it to nudge the 18-25 group into getting jabbed over the summer?
My money would be on the latter.
It won't just be nightclubs. The government is clearly targeting any crowded indoor space. Pub. Theatre. concert. Maybe even workplace.
If and when that happens, I can wave goodbye both to my freedom and my livelihood. I will be a second class citizen. Ostrasized. Frozen out.
With every dose of freedom, this government delivers a punch in the stomach.
I do actually have some sympathy, and almost admire you if you stick to your principles. It would be better though that you get the jab. It is safe.
No I feel sorry for you, because if you think being double jabbed is the last demand the government will make of you for your freedom, you are seriously wrong.
YOu will need a booster, a flu jab and goodness knows what else, soon. And that is just the start of it. Luckily for me I am close to retirement and so can drop off the radar if I want.
Many will not be so lucky.
Oh, and there I was thinking I was being nice! I have worked for/with many of the largest pharma companies as an advisor, so my understanding of the processes they go through gives me a lot more confidence than the nonsense you are clearly influenced by, so you don't need to feel sorry for me, but thanks for your concern anyway.
Mr Remain, you think this is about vaccines? Goodness. Other conditions will soon be added. Social behaviours. It will require ever more obedience to retain the privileges you have been granted.
Approval of Brown and Blair has increased by 18% amongst the Labour membership compared to before Starmer's election and approval of Corbyn has declined by 18%.
Approval of Ed Milband has also slightly increased by 6%.
Starmer Labour is therefore clearly closer to Brown Ed Miliband Labour at least than Corbyn Labour
Nearer to Brown (who saved the world)is frightening enough, Ed and his Edstone.. I think not, what will Starmer be remembered for?
Regular PB readers and posters will not be shocked to find...
John Rentoul @JohnRentoul · 49m Interesting from @jamesjohnson252's focus group for @MattChorley on Times Radio: people tell pollsters they support further restrictions but seem to find excuses for not following them themselves
The last facts about #COVID19 in France are: -a global increase of new cases (6 to 10k/day) -a strong predominance of the #DeltaVariant (blue) -a continuous decline of the #BetaVariant (red) now below 7% (minus 50% in a week) and 4% in continental France.
I think we're going to end up having another lockdown or another increase in restrictions. You heard it here first - I hope as before, I am wrong
Already announced - the vaccine passports for nightclubs from end Sept (too late, as usual). You are probably right that there will be more; reintroducing compulsory masks in various circumstances must be a front-runner.
Will the nightclub passports actually happen, or are they using the idea of it to nudge the 18-25 group into getting jabbed over the summer?
My money would be on the latter.
It won't just be nightclubs. The government is clearly targeting any crowded indoor space. Pub. Theatre. concert. Maybe even workplace.
If and when that happens, I can wave goodbye both to my freedom and my livelihood. I will be a second class citizen. Ostrasized. Frozen out.
With every dose of freedom, this government delivers a punch in the stomach.
I do actually have some sympathy, and almost admire you if you stick to your principles. It would be better though that you get the jab. It is safe.
No I feel sorry for you, because if you think being double jabbed is the last demand the government will make of you for your freedom, you are seriously wrong.
YOu will need a booster, a flu jab and goodness knows what else, soon. And that is just the start of it. Luckily for me I am close to retirement and so can drop off the radar if I want.
Many will not be so lucky.
Oh, and there I was thinking I was being nice! I have worked for/with many of the largest pharma companies as an advisor, so my understanding of the processes they go through gives me a lot more confidence than the nonsense you are clearly influenced by, so you don't need to feel sorry for me, but thanks for your concern anyway.
Mr Remain, you think this is about vaccines? Goodness. Other conditions will soon be added. Social behaviours. It will require ever more obedience to retain the privileges you have been granted.
Given most events will be without crowds anyway and the rest will be capped at 50% ie significantly smaller than the Euros crowds, they should just go ahead, pointless to postpone again
Good to see you are now advising the Olympic Committee on these matters
If the Euros went ahead with sometimes near capacity crowds, Silverstone has just had a crowd of over 100,000 etc then the Olympics can go ahead with restricted capacity crowds.
It would also cost far more to postpone again than go ahead now
Given most events will be without crowds anyway and the rest will be capped at 50% ie significantly smaller than the Euros crowds, they should just go ahead, pointless to postpone again
Good to see you are now advising the Olympic Committee on these matters
If we had locked down in September we would not have had the Christmas catastrophe. It is evident that on every single occasion, locking down earlier would have been a better solution. To argue against even now is just showing the BoJo fans for what they are
With respect the original purpose of a lockdown was to protect the NHS from being overwhelmed. The evidence is that we never got close to that so we locked down too much and too long but better safe than sorry, I suppose.
The purpose of lockdown changed when vaccines became generally available because infection and death were no longer merely deferred but preventable which is why we have had a lock down through most of this year. But the economic costs of that are horrendous and we still need to end it as soon as possible, even if we do not have full protection yet.
The delusion in your thinking is that in a world without vaccines lockdowns saved lives. They didn't. They changed the timing so that the NHS could cope. That's all.
I generally agree, apart from a couple of points: 1. Lockdown is an inexact science, particularly early on - and given the rate of increase in cases and hospitalisations in the early waves, the margin for error was tiny. We had to lockdown in time to not get close to overwhelming the health service, as pushing it closer would have had a large risk of significant overwhelming (as it is, in some areas it was touch and go - I know from clinician contacts that things got very tight in some hospitals) 2. In a world in which vaccines never arrive, lockdowns save some lives by averting overwhelmig of health services and enabling time for studies to establish best treatment patterns, useful medications etc. In the world we live in, the lockdowns will have saved many thousands of lives among the many elderly people who had exposure to Covid delayed past the point of full vaccination. With development of vaccines uncertain, it was of course a gamble either way.
Locking down earlier would have meant smaller waves and fewer deaths before vaccinations came along. It would also have possible additional economic costs. The interesting question is whether there was a level of restrictions - or cycling restrictions short of full lockdown - that would have kept R close to 1 for the original variant with minimal economic costs - if there was, then doing that long term would probably have been the best course, until alpha turned up at least. But there may not have been and I don't think it was feasible really to find that point at the time - the government tried with the tier system.
But, much of it is hindsight. The government were a bit late in March last year, but I want a government that is sceptical of doing what has been done and resists it if possible. I do think they cocked up in the Autumn and over Christmas and in particular with the dithering over schools going back in January. But every government would have made mistakes. I was broadly supportive in March; I thought they were getting it wrong in Autumn and over Christmas/early January. I support, broadly, the actions now (I'd maybe mandate masks on public transport, but that's about it).
I broadly agree with that. I am not suggesting for a moment that the government hasn't made mistakes. Of course they have. I just think those who think that if they had only done X or Y then everything would have been so much better are frankly deluding themselves. This virus is a bastard and its not finished yet.
Regular PB readers and posters will not be shocked to find...
John Rentoul @JohnRentoul · 49m Interesting from @jamesjohnson252's focus group for @MattChorley on Times Radio: people tell pollsters they support further restrictions but seem to find excuses for not following them themselves
Just like tax increases - approve of them on other people.....
Was always going to be a Covid sh!t-show, but surely they’re not going to bin it four days out, at a cost of several billion dollars?
Not according to the BBC. Was "never an option" says IOC President although they do promise to discuss it if there is a surge in cases: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/57899915
I think its crazy but like you I really can't see them stopping now.
The Head of the Olympic organising Committee announced that he does not rule out the cancellation of the event due to covid 19 and the rising number of cases
Just back from shopping expedition. Masks pretty much all on except a handful of (always) younger people (i.e. in 20s or lower). Seemed to be more people about but could just be a fluke. Lidl still has signs on floor and screens, but another local veg shop I went in has removed screens and signs and so on.
They'll be very annoyed when they have to put them back in a month.
Approval of Brown and Blair has increased by 18% amongst the Labour membership compared to before Starmer's election and approval of Corbyn has declined by 18%.
Approval of Ed Milband has also slightly increased by 6%.
Starmer Labour is therefore clearly closer to Brown Ed Miliband Labour at least than Corbyn Labour
Nearer to Brown (who saved the world)is frightening enough, Ed and his Edstone.. I think not, what will Starmer be remembered for?
Milliband is, I think, as one who listens to his 'Reason to be Cheerful' podcast, more than a little embarrassed about the EdStone. He laughs about the bacon sandwich though.
Comes across as a sensible, self-deprecatory sort of chap.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
I'm constantly perplexed by how many people on here, and elsewhere, see the 'elderly' and the 'young' as distinctively different groups with different interests. Whether it's Covid strategy, or tax, pensions and NI, people seem to think that the interests of different age groups are in conflict.
But isn't it the case that most of the 'elderly' have children/grandchildren, whose interests they care about very deeply? Even OAPs who are Tory voters whose children don't vote Conservative? I want a government whose priorities are in the interest of all age groups, not just my own. I want my children to have the same, or better, opportunities as I did. And yes, if I have to pay more tax/NI to bring this about, then so be it, I'm comfortable about this. Even though my 'public sector fatcat pension is' actually a very modest amount.
The problem with this view is that the baby boomer generation is, unfortunately, generation selfish. They bought up all the property when prices were low, they closed all of the DB pension schemes when they realised keeping them open would mean their own pensions wouldn't be funded, they introduced fees for university when they all finished their grant funded degrees, they don't want to pay for their own care and invariably vote to tax working age people to fund their own sweeties like free bus passes and the triple lock.
They have none of the self-sacrifice of their parents who fought and lived through the war and are happy to leech off the next generation by sucking them dry with rent and tax.
The continual pandering to them by the Tories is one of the major reasons I've not been tempted to rejoin the party. They are happy to entrench inter-generational unfairness that means working people just continue to be seen as money-piñatas by anyone aged 60 or over.
I agree that is the result of that generations' actions, it has been to further their own self interest at the clear expense of those who follow. I prefer to think that this is through a misunderstanding of the challenges that face the young combined with nostalgia rather than selfishness though. Unsure if I am being naive in that thought or not.
Approval of Brown and Blair has increased by 18% amongst the Labour membership compared to before Starmer's election and approval of Corbyn has declined by 18%.
Approval of Ed Milband has also slightly increased by 6%.
Starmer Labour is therefore clearly closer to Brown Ed Miliband Labour at least than Corbyn Labour
Nearer to Brown (who saved the world)is frightening enough, Ed and his Edstone.. I think not, what will Starmer be remembered for?
After 14 months of SKS You get a Party out-placed,, out dated and irrelevant to the real needs and you end in the grotesque chaos of a Labour Leadership, a Labour Leadership, hiring taxis to scuttle round the city handing out redundancy notice to its own staff
A quarter of all staff to be cut as in 14 months the financial stability achieved by Jezza is completely destroyed. Income down by a quarter, Membership subs down by a quarter, Union income down by 20%
Labour on the brink of financial and Electoral ruin.
Given most events will be without crowds anyway and the rest will be capped at 50% ie significantly smaller than the Euros crowds, they should just go ahead, pointless to postpone again
Good to see you are now advising the Olympic Committee on these matters
If the Euros went ahead with sometimes near capacity crowds, Silverstone has just had a crowd of over 100,000 etc then the Olympics can go ahead with restricted capacity crowds.
It would also cost far more to postpone again than go ahead now
You seem to have an extraordinary ability to pass observations on something you can have absolutely no knowledge of
I think we're going to end up having another lockdown or another increase in restrictions. You heard it here first - I hope as before, I am wrong
Already announced - the vaccine passports for nightclubs from end Sept (too late, as usual). You are probably right that there will be more; reintroducing compulsory masks in various circumstances must be a front-runner.
Will the nightclub passports actually happen, or are they using the idea of it to nudge the 18-25 group into getting jabbed over the summer?
My money would be on the latter.
It won't just be nightclubs. The government is clearly targeting any crowded indoor space. Pub. Theatre. concert. Maybe even workplace.
If and when that happens, I can wave goodbye both to my freedom and my livelihood. I will be a second class citizen. Ostrasized. Frozen out.
With every dose of freedom, this government delivers a punch in the stomach.
I do actually have some sympathy, and almost admire you if you stick to your principles. It would be better though that you get the jab. It is safe.
No I feel sorry for you, because if you think being double jabbed is the last demand the government will make of you for your freedom, you are seriously wrong.
YOu will need a booster, a flu jab and goodness knows what else, soon. And that is just the start of it. Luckily for me I am close to retirement and so can drop off the radar if I want.
Many will not be so lucky.
Oh, and there I was thinking I was being nice! I have worked for/with many of the largest pharma companies as an advisor, so my understanding of the processes they go through gives me a lot more confidence than the nonsense you are clearly influenced by, so you don't need to feel sorry for me, but thanks for your concern anyway.
Mr Remain, you think this is about vaccines? Goodness. Other conditions will soon be added. Social behaviours. It will require ever more obedience to retain the privileges you have been granted.
I don't want that life.
That is my worry.
Bright Blue are already formulating the ' green social behaviours' that people apparently 'approve of'.
The bar will go up and up until we have an apparatchik class and the rest untouchables.
Morning all. Sorry, only just read the @Cyclefree PT header on the stubborn Tory poll lead. It's a very good helicopter piece.
"If the choice is between the Tories and an empty space, the latter is unlikely to win."
The above line jumped out at me. You read it and reflexively nod and think "too right". It's one of those.
But then - if you're me - you dwell on it a while and wonder whether it is such a slam dunk. This government (and particularly this PM) are increasingly being viewed by anybody with eyes to see and ears to listen and noses to smell and mouths to - ok ok you get the picture - as an utter shambles. No principles. No competence. 'No' as in ZERO.
They've got away with it so far (pollwise) but for how long? Brexit is shedding its potency as iconic wedge issue. Slowly, to be sure, but it is. They can poke the fires of its culture war aspect but is this enough to stay at 40%? I doubt it. Tough times lie ahead with the economy and in Fiscal Corner. Leveling Up, for example, has to move from soundbite to hard policy choices and this will piss some people off. If it doesn't it's not real and remains a soundbite. Which would also start to piss some people off, just a different bunch, those Leavers who voted for this agenda, believing it to be genuine. Because these folk are not total blithering idiots - not in the main and not all the time. Whatever, poll damage is coming either way. Ditto with Social Care. There are no votes in that. Only negative ones if you get serious about it. Ask Andy Burnham or Theresa May. So the same choice there. A solid plan and loss of popularity or a cop out and loss of popularity.
Now we have this mismanaged exit from the pandemic. Plus (the header here) further damaging reveals from Cummings - who was right there in the middle of it - about the response and attitude throughout. The PM at key moments in thrall to bizarre right-wing 'contrarians' for heaven's sake, most of them no wiser than our PB one. His focus not on preventing Covid running amok in England and killing tens of thousands but on something far more important - impressing the Daily Telegraph and the Spectator.
I could go on. The challenge is to stop. But I can do that too. I'm going out maskless in a minute. Big moment. The point is, surely all of this shit is probably going to lead within a year to the Cons polling no better than mid 30s. And then come the GE, given things can only get worse, if the choice is indeed between more of the same or a nice cool empty space fronted by a non-scary, competent, decent sounding bloke who looks like he could run a whelk stall and could manage to tell the truth every now and again, well for me that's a toss up.
I take issue with 'poke the fires of its culture war aspect'. Blaming the right for the culture war is like blaming Poland for World War Two. The right isn't trying to move back to 1953, it just doesn't want to be dragged forward to year zero. All the movement on the culture war is from the left. The right isn't trying to rewrite history. The right is, occasionally, suggesting that perhaps the left might be going a bit too far. Now you're astute, and you'll notice I'm saying 'the left' and not 'the Labour Party'. SKS is trying his hardest to avoid the loonier fringes of the culture war, though his party occasionally drag him into it. But to the electorate as a whole, that's not enough. Neil Kinnock was no culture warrior. But the culture warriors of the wider left - the ILEA, for example - lost him votes. How does SKS distance Labour from the likes of Zarah Sultana and Nadia Whittome?
That is an excellent comment @Cookie. I admire @kinabalu for the way he expresses his views (I don't agree with them) but there is this disingenuous view from many on the left that it is the Right that is amplifying the changes. I suspect this goes back to their (likely) Marxist interpretation of History that such changes are "inevitable" and that anyone who stands in the way of "progress" is an out of date reactionary. What is particularly toxic though about their behaviour compared with previous times is the hounding of opponents. One shudders to think what these types would have been saying in the 1970s when quite a few of their equivalents were promoting the rights of paedophiles.
Additionally toxic is the sense the left sometimes shows of believing it knows in advance and without fail what constitutes 'progress'.
Was always going to be a Covid sh!t-show, but surely they’re not going to bin it four days out, at a cost of several billion dollars?
Sky sports seem to think it is a very real possibility
67 cases now confirmed in the athletes alone apparently
Not being able to rule cancellation out from happening, does not indicate cancellation is likely to happen. If he thought cancellation a 5% chance, he should not be ruling it out, but it would still be very likely to go ahead. I would imagine it is that kind of chance.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
The best way for Boris to really boost his earnings in America of course would be for Trump to return to office in 2024, maybe by beating Harris and then try and get as close to him as possible again (having currently dumped him for Biden).
The 2 PMs who have made by far the most money on the US lecture tour, Thatcher and Blair, did so from appearances at gatherings attended by wealthy US conservatives, Thatcher due to her close relationship with Reagan and Blair because of his close relationship with Bush
Given most events will be without crowds anyway and the rest will be capped at 50% ie significantly smaller than the Euros crowds, they should just go ahead, pointless to postpone again
Good to see you are now advising the Olympic Committee on these matters
If the Euros went ahead with sometimes near capacity crowds, Silverstone has just had a crowd of over 100,000 etc then the Olympics can go ahead with restricted capacity crowds.
It would also cost far more to postpone again than go ahead now
The U.K. crowds (140k at Silverstone on Sunday) were all either tested or vaccinated.
Japan are at 57% of population in vaccines, compared to UK at 121%.
Tokyo have already said no crowds, this is about Covid going round the athletes, many of whom haven’t been vaccinated.
Morning all. Sorry, only just read the @Cyclefree PT header on the stubborn Tory poll lead. It's a very good helicopter piece.
"If the choice is between the Tories and an empty space, the latter is unlikely to win."
The above line jumped out at me. You read it and reflexively nod and think "too right". It's one of those.
But then - if you're me - you dwell on it a while and wonder whether it is such a slam dunk. This government (and particularly this PM) are increasingly being viewed by anybody with eyes to see and ears to listen and noses to smell and mouths to - ok ok you get the picture - as an utter shambles. No principles. No competence. 'No' as in ZERO.
They've got away with it so far (pollwise) but for how long? Brexit is shedding its potency as iconic wedge issue. Slowly, to be sure, but it is. They can poke the fires of its culture war aspect but is this enough to stay at 40%? I doubt it. Tough times lie ahead with the economy and in Fiscal Corner. Leveling Up, for example, has to move from soundbite to hard policy choices and this will piss some people off. If it doesn't it's not real and remains a soundbite. Which would also start to piss some people off, just a different bunch, those Leavers who voted for this agenda, believing it to be genuine. Because these folk are not total blithering idiots - not in the main and not all the time. Whatever, poll damage is coming either way. Ditto with Social Care. There are no votes in that. Only negative ones if you get serious about it. Ask Andy Burnham or Theresa May. So the same choice there. A solid plan and loss of popularity or a cop out and loss of popularity.
Now we have this mismanaged exit from the pandemic. Plus (the header here) further damaging reveals from Cummings - who was right there in the middle of it - about the response and attitude throughout. The PM at key moments in thrall to bizarre right-wing 'contrarians' for heaven's sake, most of them no wiser than our PB one. His focus not on preventing Covid running amok in England and killing tens of thousands but on something far more important - impressing the Daily Telegraph and the Spectator.
I could go on. The challenge is to stop. But I can do that too. I'm going out maskless in a minute. Big moment. The point is, surely all of this shit is probably going to lead within a year to the Cons polling no better than mid 30s. And then come the GE, given things can only get worse, if the choice is indeed between more of the same or a nice cool empty space fronted by a non-scary, competent, decent sounding bloke who looks like he could run a whelk stall and could manage to tell the truth every now and again, well for me that's a toss up.
I could have written a header about all the things the Tories are getting wrong. In fact, I've already written a few of those.
But I wanted to challenge myself to understand why the Tories are in the lead. And in fact it wasn't that hard to do.
I am not a Boris supporter. But I simply cannot drum up any enthusiasm for Labour and Starmer has done some things which actively repel me from voting Labour.
A lot of the things you mention above are perfectly valid. But most people will not pay them much attention or will take the view that any government would probably have made similar mistakes. Is there any evidence at all that Starmer has or had any better plan for dealing with Covid, for instance?
For now, the government is getting the benefit of the doubt. How long that will last I have no idea. There are a lot of things which could go wrong and which could lead to the electorate turning against it. But Labour are simply unable to describe coherently the following:-
- This is who we are - This is what we're for - This is how we behave - This is where we're going and the sort of country we want to lead - This is how we're going to get there
Stringing together a lot of adjectives: "progressive" "fair" is not an answer.
In fact, I am deeply sceptical of any group which includes a lot of adjectives in its description or mission statement. It seems to me to act as a bar to any sort of critical intelligent thought. The word "progressive", in particular, is used as a battering ram to shut down objections as if it is a magic incantation which should stop anyone querying whether the reality of what is being proposed is really as wonderful as claimed.
Say what you are going to do, how you are going to to do these things and explain the consequences of what you are going to do.
The audience can - and will - supply their own adjectives.
Given most events will be without crowds anyway and the rest will be capped at 50% ie significantly smaller than the Euros crowds, they should just go ahead, pointless to postpone again
Good to see you are now advising the Olympic Committee on these matters
If the Euros went ahead with sometimes near capacity crowds, Silverstone has just had a crowd of over 100,000 etc then the Olympics can go ahead with restricted capacity crowds.
It would also cost far more to postpone again than go ahead now
The U.K. crowds (140k at Silverstone on Sunday) were all either tested or vaccinated.
Japan are at 57% of population in vaccines, compared to UK at 121%.
Tokyo have already said no crowds, this is about Covid going round the athletes, many of whom haven’t been vaccinated.
Some Euros players also tested positive for Covid, it still went ahead
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
The best way for Boris to really boost his earnings in America of course would be for Trump to return to office in 2024, maybe by beating Harris and then try and get as close to him as possible again (having currently dumped him for Biden).
The 2 PMs who have made by far the most money on the US lecture tour, Thatcher and Blair, did so from appearances at gatherings of wealthy US conservatives, Thatcher due to her close relationship with Reagan and Blair because of his close relationship with Bush
Why not stand for US President himself? I still think this is his dream and would make him many millions or more.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
The best way for Boris to really boost his earnings in America of course would be for Trump to return to office in 2024, maybe by beating Harris and then try and get as close to him as possible again (having currently dumped him for Biden).
The 2 PMs who have made by far the most money on the US lecture tour, Thatcher and Blair, did so from appearances at gatherings of wealthy US conservatives, Thatcher due to her close relationship with Reagan and Blair because of his close relationship with Bush
Boris could probably make a fair old screw from American universities: politics in the morning; Classics in the afternoon. ETA maybe even a moosehead chair.
If we had locked down in September we would not have had the Christmas catastrophe. It is evident that on every single occasion, locking down earlier would have been a better solution. To argue against even now is just showing the BoJo fans for what they are
With respect the original purpose of a lockdown was to protect the NHS from being overwhelmed. The evidence is that we never got close to that so we locked down too much and too long but better safe than sorry, I suppose.
The purpose of lockdown changed when vaccines became generally available because infection and death were no longer merely deferred but preventable which is why we have had a lock down through most of this year. But the economic costs of that are horrendous and we still need to end it as soon as possible, even if we do not have full protection yet.
The delusion in your thinking is that in a world without vaccines lockdowns saved lives. They didn't. They changed the timing so that the NHS could cope. That's all.
Lockdowns evidently saved lives. To argue otherwise is to argue against the Government itself
Lockdowns when they were needed did.
Premature lockdowns would do squat.
I'm not sure that's strictly true. In pre-vaccination world, the longer we let cases rise, the longer we ended up needing to be in lockdown to ensure cases fell.
After summer, where case levels were very low, and before vaccinations were available, the optimal strategy was to keep R as close to 1 as possible. Any significant growth rate was going to inevitably lead us back to proper lockdown.
Cases went from 1,000 per day through August to 7,000 per day at the end of September. It didn't take a genius to have identified where we were heading in mid-September and tighten restrictions.
Undercooking things led to the first 1-month Autumn lockdown, while the desire for Christmas to be normal despite cases skyrocketing led to the long lockdown we've had early this year.
Sorry but its just not true that having a premature lockdown works and the SAGE experts are right on this, because the second that you lift a premature lockdown cases start rising again.
As you yourself tacictly acknowledged you find a way to maintain an R of below 1 without a lockdown, via Tiers etc, in which case the lockdown is redundant and not needed premature which is what the government attempted to do with Tiers and Rule of 6 in September/October . . .
. . . or you have no way to have an R of below 1, in which case lockdowns prevent the NHS from being overwhelmed but premature lockdowns don't do anything since you just come out of them sooner allowing you to have longer after the premature lockdown to see exponential growth restart. So you end up with a need to keep cycling through "firebreaks" which is even worse and more damaging as stop/start/stop/start/stop/start hokey cokey means throwing out stock and supplies etc [if you deal with anything fresh] every time.
Prior to the Kent variant arising, the 1 month Autumn lockdown worked better than the Welsh 2 week firebreak, because 1 month is actually long enough for cases to meaningfully fall as well as having a month of suppression. A fortnight is not long enough for anything meaningful at all, which is why the Welsh figures by the end of November were the worst of all the four nations of the UK.
The only time a premature lockdown makes sense is if you're going for a New Zealand style eradication strategy. But that was never attempted or realistic in Europe.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
I think he might go for a ‘23 election, but stand down by ‘25.
He does appear to be struggling to live on his public salary, with school fees to pay, and both an ex-wife and new wife to keep happy.
Given most events will be without crowds anyway and the rest will be capped at 50% ie significantly smaller than the Euros crowds, they should just go ahead, pointless to postpone again
Good to see you are now advising the Olympic Committee on these matters
If the Euros went ahead with sometimes near capacity crowds, Silverstone has just had a crowd of over 100,000 etc then the Olympics can go ahead with restricted capacity crowds.
It would also cost far more to postpone again than go ahead now
The U.K. crowds (140k at Silverstone on Sunday) were all either tested or vaccinated.
Japan are at 57% of population in vaccines, compared to UK at 121%.
Tokyo have already said no crowds, this is about Covid going round the athletes, many of whom haven’t been vaccinated.
Sky said 67 confirmed cases in the athletes so far
I think we're going to end up having another lockdown or another increase in restrictions. You heard it here first - I hope as before, I am wrong
Already announced - the vaccine passports for nightclubs from end Sept (too late, as usual). You are probably right that there will be more; reintroducing compulsory masks in various circumstances must be a front-runner.
Will the nightclub passports actually happen, or are they using the idea of it to nudge the 18-25 group into getting jabbed over the summer?
My money would be on the latter.
It won't just be nightclubs. The government is clearly targeting any crowded indoor space. Pub. Theatre. concert. Maybe even workplace.
If and when that happens, I can wave goodbye both to my freedom and my livelihood. I will be a second class citizen. Ostrasized. Frozen out.
With every dose of freedom, this government delivers a punch in the stomach.
I do actually have some sympathy, and almost admire you if you stick to your principles. It would be better though that you get the jab. It is safe.
No I feel sorry for you, because if you think being double jabbed is the last demand the government will make of you for your freedom, you are seriously wrong.
YOu will need a booster, a flu jab and goodness knows what else, soon. And that is just the start of it. Luckily for me I am close to retirement and so can drop off the radar if I want.
Many will not be so lucky.
Oh, and there I was thinking I was being nice! I have worked for/with many of the largest pharma companies as an advisor, so my understanding of the processes they go through gives me a lot more confidence than the nonsense you are clearly influenced by, so you don't need to feel sorry for me, but thanks for your concern anyway.
Mr Remain, you think this is about vaccines? Goodness. Other conditions will soon be added. Social behaviours. It will require ever more obedience to retain the privileges you have been granted.
I don't want that life.
£100 at evens that entry to crowded venues will be entirely dependant on vaccination/covid in 3 years time (Unless vaxports are dropped completely at that stage). Are you up for that bet ?
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
The best way for Boris to really boost his earnings in America of course would be for Trump to return to office in 2024, maybe by beating Harris and then try and get as close to him as possible again (having currently dumped him for Biden).
The 2 PMs who have made by far the most money on the US lecture tour, Thatcher and Blair, did so from appearances at gatherings of wealthy US conservatives, Thatcher due to her close relationship with Reagan and Blair because of his close relationship with Bush
Why not stand for US President himself? I still think this is his dream and would make him many millions or more.
Yes, he would then jump from medium ranked power leader to superpower leader, much closer to his childhood objective of world king.
He would also have broader appeal than Trump did.
Much as many Americans wanted Blair who was a more centrist, articulate version of Bush without the zipper problem of Bill Clinton
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
I think he might go for a ‘23 election, but stand down by ‘25.
He does appear to be struggling to live on his public salary, with school fees to pay, and both an ex-wife and new wife to keep happy.
A '23 election and retirement in '25 makes a lot of sense. As an undefeated two-time general election winner, plus a national referendum winner, plus his time as Mayor etc his legacy in the history books will be pretty secure.
Plus if he times it right retiring at or around Party Conference in '25 then he'll have lasted longer than David Cameron and I get the feeling that matters to him.
Was always going to be a Covid sh!t-show, but surely they’re not going to bin it four days out, at a cost of several billion dollars?
I don't understand why the IOC didn't insist on 10 days mandatory quarantine in a hotel like the Australians did for the tennis. It's a system that works and can clearly be implemented without too much trouble.
It’s astonishing that they haven’t. Everyone should have been told to arrive early, and expect to be confined to their rooms in the Village for 10 days.
Is this the first real world data we have of AZ against beta?
It’s rather depressing the amount of crap AZ get re their vaccine when it’s astonishing good against *all variants* and after *1 dose* at protecting against severe disease.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
The best way for Boris to really boost his earnings in America of course would be for Trump to return to office in 2024, maybe by beating Harris and then try and get as close to him as possible again (having currently dumped him for Biden).
The 2 PMs who have made by far the most money on the US lecture tour, Thatcher and Blair, did so from appearances at gatherings of wealthy US conservatives, Thatcher due to her close relationship with Reagan and Blair because of his close relationship with Bush
Why not stand for US President himself? I still think this is his dream and would make him many millions or more.
Yes, he would then jump from medium ranked power leader to superpower leader, much closer to his childhood objective of world king.
He would also have broader appeal than Trump did.
Much as many Americans wanted Blair who was a more centrist, articulate version of Bush without the zipper problem of Bill Clinton
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
The best way for Boris to really boost his earnings in America of course would be for Trump to return to office in 2024, maybe by beating Harris and then try and get as close to him as possible again (having currently dumped him for Biden).
The 2 PMs who have made by far the most money on the US lecture tour, Thatcher and Blair, did so from appearances at gatherings of wealthy US conservatives, Thatcher due to her close relationship with Reagan and Blair because of his close relationship with Bush
Why not stand for US President himself? I still think this is his dream and would make him many millions or more.
He's not eligible. He's not a natural born citizen anymore.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
The best way for Boris to really boost his earnings in America of course would be for Trump to return to office in 2024, maybe by beating Harris and then try and get as close to him as possible again (having currently dumped him for Biden).
The 2 PMs who have made by far the most money on the US lecture tour, Thatcher and Blair, did so from appearances at gatherings of wealthy US conservatives, Thatcher due to her close relationship with Reagan and Blair because of his close relationship with Bush
Why not stand for US President himself? I still think this is his dream and would make him many millions or more.
He's not eligible. He's not a natural born citizen anymore.
If he gets citizenship back he is surely a natural born citizen? Which has not been defined clearly anyway so he could get the campaign dollars in whether he is eligible or not in the eyes of the supreme court.
I think we're going to end up having another lockdown or another increase in restrictions. You heard it here first - I hope as before, I am wrong
Already announced - the vaccine passports for nightclubs from end Sept (too late, as usual). You are probably right that there will be more; reintroducing compulsory masks in various circumstances must be a front-runner.
Will the nightclub passports actually happen, or are they using the idea of it to nudge the 18-25 group into getting jabbed over the summer?
My money would be on the latter.
It won't just be nightclubs. The government is clearly targeting any crowded indoor space. Pub. Theatre. concert. Maybe even workplace.
If and when that happens, I can wave goodbye both to my freedom and my livelihood. I will be a second class citizen. Ostrasized. Frozen out.
With every dose of freedom, this government delivers a punch in the stomach.
I do actually have some sympathy, and almost admire you if you stick to your principles. It would be better though that you get the jab. It is safe.
No I feel sorry for you, because if you think being double jabbed is the last demand the government will make of you for your freedom, you are seriously wrong.
YOu will need a booster, a flu jab and goodness knows what else, soon. And that is just the start of it. Luckily for me I am close to retirement and so can drop off the radar if I want.
Many will not be so lucky.
Oh, and there I was thinking I was being nice! I have worked for/with many of the largest pharma companies as an advisor, so my understanding of the processes they go through gives me a lot more confidence than the nonsense you are clearly influenced by, so you don't need to feel sorry for me, but thanks for your concern anyway.
Mr Remain, you think this is about vaccines? Goodness. Other conditions will soon be added. Social behaviours. It will require ever more obedience to retain the privileges you have been granted.
I don't want that life.
£100 at evens that entry to crowded venues will be entirely dependant on vaccination/covid in 3 years time (Unless vaxports are dropped completely at that stage). Are you up for that bet ?
No I agree with you. Vaxx passports are coming for many things and, essentially, forever
I don't support it, but that doesn't mean it won't happen. It will.
Was always going to be a Covid sh!t-show, but surely they’re not going to bin it four days out, at a cost of several billion dollars?
I don't understand why the IOC didn't insist on 10 days mandatory quarantine in a hotel like the Australians did for the tennis. It's a system that works and can clearly be implemented without too much trouble.
It’s astonishing that they haven’t. Everyone should have been told to arrive early, and expect to be confined to their rooms in the Village for 10 days.
Many athletes, eg cyclists, have packed summer schedules. They can’t afford to muck about. They just want to get in, compete, and get out.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
The best way for Boris to really boost his earnings in America of course would be for Trump to return to office in 2024, maybe by beating Harris and then try and get as close to him as possible again (having currently dumped him for Biden).
The 2 PMs who have made by far the most money on the US lecture tour, Thatcher and Blair, did so from appearances at gatherings attended by wealthy US conservatives, Thatcher due to her close relationship with Reagan and Blair because of his close relationship with Bush
Boris has absolutely nothing in similar with Trump. Which is why he attacked Trump before he was POTUS and so easily warmly welcomed his successor and dumped Trump even while Trump was still squatting in the Oval Office planning his insurrection.
The thing with Blair and Thatcher is they were both significant PMs in their own right, not just their closeness to the Presidents. Boris is in the same league, like him or loathe him, he is a significant PM. His legacy of Brexit etc means that whether you like him or loathe him, whether you are pro-Brexit or anti-Brexit, he will be a significant figure to be discussed for generations to come.
He will easily attract attention on the lecture tour in his own right when he's ready to retire from Downing Street.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
The best way for Boris to really boost his earnings in America of course would be for Trump to return to office in 2024, maybe by beating Harris and then try and get as close to him as possible again (having currently dumped him for Biden).
The 2 PMs who have made by far the most money on the US lecture tour, Thatcher and Blair, did so from appearances at gatherings of wealthy US conservatives, Thatcher due to her close relationship with Reagan and Blair because of his close relationship with Bush
Why not stand for US President himself? I still think this is his dream and would make him many millions or more.
He is far too left wing to be in with a shout with the Republicans (and possibly even with the Democrats) even if he hadn’t renounced his US citizenship.
If you thing I am exaggerating, quotations from his speeches in support of the NHS would be played on a loop by his opponents and that would be that.
After 14 months of SKS You get a Party out-placed,, out dated and irrelevant to the real needs and you end in the grotesque chaos of a Labour Leadership, a Labour Leadership, hiring taxis to scuttle round the city handing out redundancy notice to its own staff
A quarter of all staff to be cut as in 14 months the financial stability achieved by Jezza is completely destroyed. Income down by a quarter, Membership subs down by a quarter, Union income down by 20%
Labour on the brink of financial and Electoral ruin.
Oh well
Starmer needs to replace Unite's money. Should go and speak to big private sector donors instead.
Is this the first real world data we have of AZ against beta?
It’s rather depressing the amount of crap AZ get re their vaccine when it’s astonishing good against *all variants* and after *1 dose* at protecting against severe disease.
I think we're going to end up having another lockdown or another increase in restrictions. You heard it here first - I hope as before, I am wrong
Already announced - the vaccine passports for nightclubs from end Sept (too late, as usual). You are probably right that there will be more; reintroducing compulsory masks in various circumstances must be a front-runner.
Will the nightclub passports actually happen, or are they using the idea of it to nudge the 18-25 group into getting jabbed over the summer?
My money would be on the latter.
It won't just be nightclubs. The government is clearly targeting any crowded indoor space. Pub. Theatre. concert. Maybe even workplace.
If and when that happens, I can wave goodbye both to my freedom and my livelihood. I will be a second class citizen. Ostrasized. Frozen out.
With every dose of freedom, this government delivers a punch in the stomach.
I do actually have some sympathy, and almost admire you if you stick to your principles. It would be better though that you get the jab. It is safe.
No I feel sorry for you, because if you think being double jabbed is the last demand the government will make of you for your freedom, you are seriously wrong.
YOu will need a booster, a flu jab and goodness knows what else, soon. And that is just the start of it. Luckily for me I am close to retirement and so can drop off the radar if I want.
Many will not be so lucky.
Oh, and there I was thinking I was being nice! I have worked for/with many of the largest pharma companies as an advisor, so my understanding of the processes they go through gives me a lot more confidence than the nonsense you are clearly influenced by, so you don't need to feel sorry for me, but thanks for your concern anyway.
Mr Remain, you think this is about vaccines? Goodness. Other conditions will soon be added. Social behaviours. It will require ever more obedience to retain the privileges you have been granted.
I don't want that life.
£100 at evens that entry to crowded venues will be entirely dependant on vaccination/covid in 3 years time (Unless vaxports are dropped completely at that stage). Are you up for that bet ?
No I agree with you. Vaxx passports are coming for many things and, essentially, forever
I don't support it, but that doesn't mean it won't happen. It will.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
The best way for Boris to really boost his earnings in America of course would be for Trump to return to office in 2024, maybe by beating Harris and then try and get as close to him as possible again (having currently dumped him for Biden).
The 2 PMs who have made by far the most money on the US lecture tour, Thatcher and Blair, did so from appearances at gatherings of wealthy US conservatives, Thatcher due to her close relationship with Reagan and Blair because of his close relationship with Bush
Why not stand for US President himself? I still think this is his dream and would make him many millions or more.
He's not eligible. He's not a natural born citizen anymore.
If he gets citizenship back he is surely a natural born citizen? Which has not been defined clearly anyway so he could get the campaign dollars in whether he is eligible or not in the eyes of the supreme court.
Can you regain natural born citizenship? I don't think so.
If he acquired citizenship he'd need to go through the naturalisation route. In which case he'd be a naturalised citizen and not a natural born one.
1. Axe golf, football, rugby sevens, and tennis, for whom the Olympics is already overshadowed by other competitions. (Also baseball/softball but I believe 2020 is a one-off). Query basketball and hockey for this reason.
2. Review if the number of athletes competing in any particular sport can be trimmed, either in terms of number of events/medals or having more pre-qualification for the tournament.
3. Abolish the emphasis on the Host City and instead place the emphasis on a host nation. Fans will still turn up and besides, most fans are at home. This reduces the number of stadia needed dramatically, because you could already host your e.g. rowing event and your country's existing facilities more often.
$13.2bn was the cost of Rio - just a huge and wasteful sum. If part of the ethos is bringing together people from different nations then surely the irony of a bill the size of the GDP of 20 of the smallest ones put together is obvious.
I think we're going to end up having another lockdown or another increase in restrictions. You heard it here first - I hope as before, I am wrong
Already announced - the vaccine passports for nightclubs from end Sept (too late, as usual). You are probably right that there will be more; reintroducing compulsory masks in various circumstances must be a front-runner.
Will the nightclub passports actually happen, or are they using the idea of it to nudge the 18-25 group into getting jabbed over the summer?
My money would be on the latter.
Ha ha ha 😃.
Oh please, every time the government are asked to rule it out for pubs this winter, they won’t.
Yesterday’s discussion proved once its working the public have huge appetite to see it extended beyond clubs to take in just about everything, pubs, football, and holidays, rather than binning app and TAT, we are only just starting to join up with other apps around the world.
achtung Kuddelmuddel!
Authoritarian approach wins. Libertarians losers.
You thought vaccines and it’s all over did you? Oh how embarrassing. The next stage is match the right behaviours to the good work of vaccines for maximum effect. Yesterday’s briefing was all about behaviours.
But deleted the app now! Just have to reload it then won’t you, if you want to go anywhere get in anywhere.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
The best way for Boris to really boost his earnings in America of course would be for Trump to return to office in 2024, maybe by beating Harris and then try and get as close to him as possible again (having currently dumped him for Biden).
The 2 PMs who have made by far the most money on the US lecture tour, Thatcher and Blair, did so from appearances at gatherings of wealthy US conservatives, Thatcher due to her close relationship with Reagan and Blair because of his close relationship with Bush
Why not stand for US President himself? I still think this is his dream and would make him many millions or more.
He's not eligible. He's not a natural born citizen anymore.
If he gets citizenship back he is surely a natural born citizen? Which has not been defined clearly anyway so he could get the campaign dollars in whether he is eligible or not in the eyes of the supreme court.
Can you regain natural born citizenship? I don't think so.
If he acquired citizenship he'd need to go through the naturalisation route. In which case he'd be a naturalised citizen and not a natural born one.
Would be up to lawyers and judges to decide, he is a believer in special rules for himself and if he chose that path will probably find willing lawyers and politicians to help him.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
The best way for Boris to really boost his earnings in America of course would be for Trump to return to office in 2024, maybe by beating Harris and then try and get as close to him as possible again (having currently dumped him for Biden).
The 2 PMs who have made by far the most money on the US lecture tour, Thatcher and Blair, did so from appearances at gatherings of wealthy US conservatives, Thatcher due to her close relationship with Reagan and Blair because of his close relationship with Bush
Why not stand for US President himself? I still think this is his dream and would make him many millions or more.
He is far too left wing to be in with a shout with the Republicans (and possibly even with the Democrats) even if he hadn’t renounced his US citizenship.
If you thing I am exaggerating, quotations from his speeches in support of the NHS would be played on a loop by his opponents and that would be that.
He would deny saying them! That seems to work both for him and the Republican electorate.
I think we're going to end up having another lockdown or another increase in restrictions. You heard it here first - I hope as before, I am wrong
Already announced - the vaccine passports for nightclubs from end Sept (too late, as usual). You are probably right that there will be more; reintroducing compulsory masks in various circumstances must be a front-runner.
Will the nightclub passports actually happen, or are they using the idea of it to nudge the 18-25 group into getting jabbed over the summer?
My money would be on the latter.
Ha ha ha 😃.
Oh please, every time the government are asked to rule it out for pubs this winter, they won’t.
Yesterday’s discussion proved once its working the public have huge appetite to see it extended beyond clubs to take in just about everything, pubs, football, and holidays, rather than binning app and TAT, we are only just starting to join up with other apps around the world.
achtung Kuddelmuddel!
Authoritarian approach wins. Libertarians losers.
You thought vaccines and it’s all over did you? Oh how embarrassing. The next stage is match the right behaviours to the good work of vaccines for maximum effect. Yesterday’s briefing was all about behaviours.
But deleted the app now! Just have to reload it then won’t you, if you want to go anywhere get in anywhere.
Jabbed, it’s all over? Whole new beginning.
There is a simple reason it will never happen in pubs even if it happens in clubs.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
I think he might go for a ‘23 election, but stand down by ‘25.
He does appear to be struggling to live on his public salary, with school fees to pay, and both an ex-wife and new wife to keep happy.
Tbh I'm surprised no-one has found an effective way to slip Boris (or Carrie) a few quid. Churchill was bailed out more than once.
But Boris's USP is that he always wins elections. 2023 would risk tarnishing that record for little gain unless he does decide he wants to stay on (and it has been rumoured that Carrie wants to).
Singapore is having a discussion on what it will mean to live with endemic COVID - a conversation the UK government needs to start ASAP - this "Freedom Day" foolishness will end in tears - people just want to "get back to normal" - they need to have explained to them that the "old normal" is gone for very many years (probably most of our lifetimes) and we're going to have to get used to a "new" normal - and should have the conversation about what that's going to mean:
Have said for ages that holding the Olympics is batshit crazy and here we are. The Japanese have rightly cancelled the public facing element - costing a fortune in lost revenue. They hope that means that pox won;t be imported en masse into their country.
What they can't control are the athletes, the coaches, the medics. And they're bringing it in with them. So if they press on we have the very real danger that instead of athletic performance determining medals, it is Covid.
It is already, and increasingly will become, a total farce. But if you are the IOC it remains payday. So they will tolerate farce until they absolutely cannot justify it any more.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
The best way for Boris to really boost his earnings in America of course would be for Trump to return to office in 2024, maybe by beating Harris and then try and get as close to him as possible again (having currently dumped him for Biden).
The 2 PMs who have made by far the most money on the US lecture tour, Thatcher and Blair, did so from appearances at gatherings of wealthy US conservatives, Thatcher due to her close relationship with Reagan and Blair because of his close relationship with Bush
Why not stand for US President himself? I still think this is his dream and would make him many millions or more.
Yes, he would then jump from medium ranked power leader to superpower leader, much closer to his childhood objective of world king.
He would also have broader appeal than Trump did.
Much as many Americans wanted Blair who was a more centrist, articulate version of Bush without the zipper problem of Bill Clinton
I think we're going to end up having another lockdown or another increase in restrictions. You heard it here first - I hope as before, I am wrong
Already announced - the vaccine passports for nightclubs from end Sept (too late, as usual). You are probably right that there will be more; reintroducing compulsory masks in various circumstances must be a front-runner.
Will the nightclub passports actually happen, or are they using the idea of it to nudge the 18-25 group into getting jabbed over the summer?
My money would be on the latter.
Ha ha ha 😃.
Oh please, every time the government are asked to rule it out for pubs this winter, they won’t.
Yesterday’s discussion proved once its working the public have huge appetite to see it extended beyond clubs to take in just about everything, pubs, football, and holidays, rather than binning app and TAT, we are only just starting to join up with other apps around the world.
achtung Kuddelmuddel!
Authoritarian approach wins. Libertarians losers.
You thought vaccines and it’s all over did you? Oh how embarrassing. The next stage is match the right behaviours to the good work of vaccines for maximum effect. Yesterday’s briefing was all about behaviours.
But deleted the app now! Just have to reload it then won’t you, if you want to go anywhere get in anywhere.
Jabbed, it’s all over? Whole new beginning.
There is a simple reason it will never happen in pubs even if it happens in clubs.
Pubs don't all have door staff.
The way this government is going they would rather see most pubs closed permanently because they can't make a living with the extra staff to manage a door policy and check vaccine status.
Morning all. Sorry, only just read the @Cyclefree PT header on the stubborn Tory poll lead. It's a very good helicopter piece.
"If the choice is between the Tories and an empty space, the latter is unlikely to win."
The above line jumped out at me. You read it and reflexively nod and think "too right". It's one of those.
But then - if you're me - you dwell on it a while and wonder whether it is such a slam dunk. This government (and particularly this PM) are increasingly being viewed by anybody with eyes to see and ears to listen and noses to smell and mouths to - ok ok you get the picture - as an utter shambles. No principles. No competence. 'No' as in ZERO.
They've got away with it so far (pollwise) but for how long? Brexit is shedding its potency as iconic wedge issue. Slowly, to be sure, but it is. They can poke the fires of its culture war aspect but is this enough to stay at 40%? I doubt it. Tough times lie ahead with the economy and in Fiscal Corner. Leveling Up, for example, has to move from soundbite to hard policy choices and this will piss some people off. If it doesn't it's not real and remains a soundbite. Which would also start to piss some people off, just a different bunch, those Leavers who voted for this agenda, believing it to be genuine. Because these folk are not total blithering idiots - not in the main and not all the time. Whatever, poll damage is coming either way. Ditto with Social Care. There are no votes in that. Only negative ones if you get serious about it. Ask Andy Burnham or Theresa May. So the same choice there. A solid plan and loss of popularity or a cop out and loss of popularity.
Now we have this mismanaged exit from the pandemic. Plus (the header here) further damaging reveals from Cummings - who was right there in the middle of it - about the response and attitude throughout. The PM at key moments in thrall to bizarre right-wing 'contrarians' for heaven's sake, most of them no wiser than our PB one. His focus not on preventing Covid running amok in England and killing tens of thousands but on something far more important - impressing the Daily Telegraph and the Spectator.
I could go on. The challenge is to stop. But I can do that too. I'm going out maskless in a minute. Big moment. The point is, surely all of this shit is probably going to lead within a year to the Cons polling no better than mid 30s. And then come the GE, given things can only get worse, if the choice is indeed between more of the same or a nice cool empty space fronted by a non-scary, competent, decent sounding bloke who looks like he could run a whelk stall and could manage to tell the truth every now and again, well for me that's a toss up.
I could have written a header about all the things the Tories are getting wrong. In fact, I've already written a few of those.
But I wanted to challenge myself to understand why the Tories are in the lead. And in fact it wasn't that hard to do.
I am not a Boris supporter. But I simply cannot drum up any enthusiasm for Labour and Starmer has done some things which actively repel me from voting Labour.
A lot of the things you mention above are perfectly valid. But most people will not pay them much attention or will take the view that any government would probably have made similar mistakes. Is there any evidence at all that Starmer has or had any better plan for dealing with Covid, for instance?
For now, the government is getting the benefit of the doubt. How long that will last I have no idea. There are a lot of things which could go wrong and which could lead to the electorate turning against it. But Labour are simply unable to describe coherently the following:-
- This is who we are - This is what we're for - This is how we behave - This is where we're going and the sort of country we want to lead - This is how we're going to get there
Stringing together a lot of adjectives: "progressive" "fair" is not an answer.
In fact, I am deeply sceptical of any group which includes a lot of adjectives in its description or mission statement. It seems to me to act as a bar to any sort of critical intelligent thought. The word "progressive", in particular, is used as a battering ram to shut down objections as if it is a magic incantation which should stop anyone querying whether the reality of what is being proposed is really as wonderful as claimed.
Say what you are going to do, how you are going to to do these things and explain the consequences of what you are going to do.
The audience can - and will - supply their own adjectives.
The omission from your analysis was that similar problems are facing the left across the developed world. So many of the UK- and Starmer/Johnson-specific issues are secondary details,
1. Axe golf, football, rugby sevens, and tennis, for whom the Olympics is already overshadowed by other competitions. (Also baseball/softball but I believe 2020 is a one-off). Query basketball and hockey for this reason.
2. Review if the number of athletes competing in any particular sport can be trimmed, either in terms of number of events/medals or having more pre-qualification for the tournament.
3. Abolish the emphasis on the Host City and instead place the emphasis on a host nation. Fans will still turn up and besides, most fans are at home. This reduces the number of stadia needed dramatically, because you could already host your e.g. rowing event and your country's existing facilities more often.
$13.2bn was the cost of Rio - just a huge and wasteful sum. If part of the ethos is bringing together people from different nations then surely the irony of a bill the size of the GDP of 20 of the smallest ones put together is obvious.
You can add road cycling to that list: Olympics holds lower status than the grand tours and the monuments, and arguably the world championship.
Was always going to be a Covid sh!t-show, but surely they’re not going to bin it four days out, at a cost of several billion dollars?
I don't understand why the IOC didn't insist on 10 days mandatory quarantine in a hotel like the Australians did for the tennis. It's a system that works and can clearly be implemented without too much trouble.
It’s astonishing that they haven’t. Everyone should have been told to arrive early, and expect to be confined to their rooms in the Village for 10 days.
Many athletes, eg cyclists, have packed summer schedules. They can’t afford to muck about. They just want to get in, compete, and get out.
Well that’s their choice, if they want to go to the Olympics then they should need to quarantine.
The tennis players in Australia were upset, but many of them hadn’t earned money in a year and it was a cost of being there. For many Olympians, it’s the single thing they’ve worked towards for five years, a couple of weeks stuck in quarantine is a minor inconvenience.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
I think he might go for a ‘23 election, but stand down by ‘25.
He does appear to be struggling to live on his public salary, with school fees to pay, and both an ex-wife and new wife to keep happy.
To me he looks increasingly like someone who actually has found out he doesn't like the job.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
The best way for Boris to really boost his earnings in America of course would be for Trump to return to office in 2024, maybe by beating Harris and then try and get as close to him as possible again (having currently dumped him for Biden).
The 2 PMs who have made by far the most money on the US lecture tour, Thatcher and Blair, did so from appearances at gatherings of wealthy US conservatives, Thatcher due to her close relationship with Reagan and Blair because of his close relationship with Bush
Why not stand for US President himself? I still think this is his dream and would make him many millions or more.
He is far too left wing to be in with a shout with the Republicans (and possibly even with the Democrats) even if he hadn’t renounced his US citizenship.
If you thing I am exaggerating, quotations from his speeches in support of the NHS would be played on a loop by his opponents and that would be that.
Not necessarily, Trump remember was a Democrat in the Clinton years though he would need to double down on the anti immigration, anti woke, anti big tech, anti China rhetoric. Even on healthcare 'In a 1995 column unearthed by Business Insider, Boris Johnson called for patients to be charged to use the National Health Service, with free care maintained only for "those who are genuinely sick, and for the elderly" ie much closer to the US insurance based model.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
I think he might go for a ‘23 election, but stand down by ‘25.
He does appear to be struggling to live on his public salary, with school fees to pay, and both an ex-wife and new wife to keep happy.
Tbh I'm surprised no-one has found an effective way to slip Boris (or Carrie) a few quid. Churchill was bailed out more than once.
But Boris's USP is that he always wins elections. 2023 would risk tarnishing that record for little gain unless he does decide he wants to stay on (and it has been rumoured that Carrie wants to).
Carrie appears to love being First Lady, but also expects to have several million as a household income, and hasn’t yet worked out how she can have both.
You’d have thought a private bank or party donor would advance him some cash though, it’s not as if he isn’t going to make big money when he stands down as a politician.
Was always going to be a Covid sh!t-show, but surely they’re not going to bin it four days out, at a cost of several billion dollars?
I don't understand why the IOC didn't insist on 10 days mandatory quarantine in a hotel like the Australians did for the tennis. It's a system that works and can clearly be implemented without too much trouble.
It’s astonishing that they haven’t. Everyone should have been told to arrive early, and expect to be confined to their rooms in the Village for 10 days.
How would that work with the conditioning schedule top athletes follow? 10 days of now workout before a competition?
1. Axe golf, football, rugby sevens, and tennis, for whom the Olympics is already overshadowed by other competitions. (Also baseball/softball but I believe 2020 is a one-off). Query basketball and hockey for this reason.
2. Review if the number of athletes competing in any particular sport can be trimmed, either in terms of number of events/medals or having more pre-qualification for the tournament.
3. Abolish the emphasis on the Host City and instead place the emphasis on a host nation. Fans will still turn up and besides, most fans are at home. This reduces the number of stadia needed dramatically, because you could already host your e.g. rowing event and your country's existing facilities more often.
$13.2bn was the cost of Rio - just a huge and wasteful sum. If part of the ethos is bringing together people from different nations then surely the irony of a bill the size of the GDP of 20 of the smallest ones put together is obvious.
For a global event that is $2 each, or $0.50 per year over the 4 year cycle. A bargain.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
I think he might go for a ‘23 election, but stand down by ‘25.
He does appear to be struggling to live on his public salary, with school fees to pay, and both an ex-wife and new wife to keep happy.
To me he looks increasingly like someone who actually has found out he doesn't like the job.
He has a sense of history: is there a PM whose term he would want to beat (e.g. Cameron) that might give a clue as to when he might retire? Cameron might be a bit too far at just over six years, but it would be embarrassing for him to serve less time that May or Brown.
If we had locked down in September we would not have had the Christmas catastrophe. It is evident that on every single occasion, locking down earlier would have been a better solution. To argue against even now is just showing the BoJo fans for what they are
With respect the original purpose of a lockdown was to protect the NHS from being overwhelmed. The evidence is that we never got close to that so we locked down too much and too long but better safe than sorry, I suppose.
The purpose of lockdown changed when vaccines became generally available because infection and death were no longer merely deferred but preventable which is why we have had a lock down through most of this year. But the economic costs of that are horrendous and we still need to end it as soon as possible, even if we do not have full protection yet.
The delusion in your thinking is that in a world without vaccines lockdowns saved lives. They didn't. They changed the timing so that the NHS could cope. That's all.
Lockdowns evidently saved lives. To argue otherwise is to argue against the Government itself
Lockdowns when they were needed did.
Premature lockdowns would do squat.
I'm not sure that's strictly true. In pre-vaccination world, the longer we let cases rise, the longer we ended up needing to be in lockdown to ensure cases fell.
After summer, where case levels were very low, and before vaccinations were available, the optimal strategy was to keep R as close to 1 as possible. Any significant growth rate was going to inevitably lead us back to proper lockdown.
Cases went from 1,000 per day through August to 7,000 per day at the end of September. It didn't take a genius to have identified where we were heading in mid-September and tighten restrictions.
Undercooking things led to the first 1-month Autumn lockdown, while the desire for Christmas to be normal despite cases skyrocketing led to the long lockdown we've had early this year.
Sorry but its just not true that having a premature lockdown works and the SAGE experts are right on this, because the second that you lift a premature lockdown cases start rising again.
As you yourself tacictly acknowledged you find a way to maintain an R of below 1 without a lockdown, via Tiers etc, in which case the lockdown is redundant and not needed premature which is what the government attempted to do with Tiers and Rule of 6 in September/October . . .
. . . or you have no way to have an R of below 1, in which case lockdowns prevent the NHS from being overwhelmed but premature lockdowns don't do anything since you just come out of them sooner allowing you to have longer after the premature lockdown to see exponential growth restart. So you end up with a need to keep cycling through "firebreaks" which is even worse and more damaging as stop/start/stop/start/stop/start hokey cokey means throwing out stock and supplies etc [if you deal with anything fresh] every time.
Prior to the Kent variant arising, the 1 month Autumn lockdown worked better than the Welsh 2 week firebreak, because 1 month is actually long enough for cases to meaningfully fall as well as having a month of suppression. A fortnight is not long enough for anything meaningful at all, which is why the Welsh figures by the end of November were the worst of all the four nations of the UK.
The only time a premature lockdown makes sense is if you're going for a New Zealand style eradication strategy. But that was never attempted or realistic in Europe.
I deliberately avoided saying we needed a lockdown in September, but rather we should have had stronger restrictions earlier that stopped short of a full lockdown. Lockdowns have got R<1 and so are clearly excessive for keeping R at approximately 1.
The rule of 6 was insufficient, while the Tiers just allowed other regions to catch-up those with higher infection rates - with the Tiers in particular just the sort of confusing stop/start/stop/start type activity you acknowledge is highly damaging.
Instead, the aim should have been to find a level of restrictions that was roughly in equilibrium rather than letting people do everything until the last minute and ending up locked down for 3+ months.
I agree the hype about a 2 week firebreak was a load of nonsense. I'd say the 4 week lockdown before letting things rip in the run-up to Christmas was the same sort of nonsense. We should have exited the November lockdown in stages like we did this year, but no, Boris wanted to be jolly Father Christmas to the nation.
Conservative MP's must be quietly in despair over Johnson, not sure about the members. Think he may go before the party conference.
They would much prefer a leader who was 13% behind in the polls!!!!!
I would say not before the Party Conference. That would look like caving in to political pressure.
Boris may well retire early (and there are signs backbenchers are getting restive) but from Boris's own point of view, there is no point in his going before America is fully reopened so he can hit the lecture circuit. I do not expect Boris to fight another election.
I think he might go for a ‘23 election, but stand down by ‘25.
He does appear to be struggling to live on his public salary, with school fees to pay, and both an ex-wife and new wife to keep happy.
To me he looks increasingly like someone who actually has found out he doesn't like the job.
He has a sense of history: is there a PM whose term he would want to beat (e.g. Cameron) that might give a clue as to when he might retire? Cameron might be a bit too far at just over six years, but it would be embarrassing for him to serve less time that May or Brown.
To match Thatcher and Blair he needs to do 10 years, which would suggest if he is re elected he stands down in spring 2029
Sorry but its just not true that having a premature lockdown works and the SAGE experts are right on this, because the second that you lift a premature lockdown cases start rising again.
But the cases rise from a lower base, meaning you have fewer cases overall. This is the key thing to understand -> an earlier lockdown means fewer cases.
Was always going to be a Covid sh!t-show, but surely they’re not going to bin it four days out, at a cost of several billion dollars?
I don't understand why the IOC didn't insist on 10 days mandatory quarantine in a hotel like the Australians did for the tennis. It's a system that works and can clearly be implemented without too much trouble.
It’s astonishing that they haven’t. Everyone should have been told to arrive early, and expect to be confined to their rooms in the Village for 10 days.
How would that work with the conditioning schedule top athletes follow? 10 days of now workout before a competition?
If we had locked down in September we would not have had the Christmas catastrophe. It is evident that on every single occasion, locking down earlier would have been a better solution. To argue against even now is just showing the BoJo fans for what they are
With respect the original purpose of a lockdown was to protect the NHS from being overwhelmed. The evidence is that we never got close to that so we locked down too much and too long but better safe than sorry, I suppose.
The purpose of lockdown changed when vaccines became generally available because infection and death were no longer merely deferred but preventable which is why we have had a lock down through most of this year. But the economic costs of that are horrendous and we still need to end it as soon as possible, even if we do not have full protection yet.
The delusion in your thinking is that in a world without vaccines lockdowns saved lives. They didn't. They changed the timing so that the NHS could cope. That's all.
Lockdowns evidently saved lives. To argue otherwise is to argue against the Government itself
Lockdowns when they were needed did.
Premature lockdowns would do squat.
I'm not sure that's strictly true. In pre-vaccination world, the longer we let cases rise, the longer we ended up needing to be in lockdown to ensure cases fell.
After summer, where case levels were very low, and before vaccinations were available, the optimal strategy was to keep R as close to 1 as possible. Any significant growth rate was going to inevitably lead us back to proper lockdown.
Cases went from 1,000 per day through August to 7,000 per day at the end of September. It didn't take a genius to have identified where we were heading in mid-September and tighten restrictions.
Undercooking things led to the first 1-month Autumn lockdown, while the desire for Christmas to be normal despite cases skyrocketing led to the long lockdown we've had early this year.
Sorry but its just not true that having a premature lockdown works and the SAGE experts are right on this, because the second that you lift a premature lockdown cases start rising again.
As you yourself tacictly acknowledged you find a way to maintain an R of below 1 without a lockdown, via Tiers etc, in which case the lockdown is redundant and not needed premature which is what the government attempted to do with Tiers and Rule of 6 in September/October . . .
. . . or you have no way to have an R of below 1, in which case lockdowns prevent the NHS from being overwhelmed but premature lockdowns don't do anything since you just come out of them sooner allowing you to have longer after the premature lockdown to see exponential growth restart. So you end up with a need to keep cycling through "firebreaks" which is even worse and more damaging as stop/start/stop/start/stop/start hokey cokey means throwing out stock and supplies etc [if you deal with anything fresh] every time.
Prior to the Kent variant arising, the 1 month Autumn lockdown worked better than the Welsh 2 week firebreak, because 1 month is actually long enough for cases to meaningfully fall as well as having a month of suppression. A fortnight is not long enough for anything meaningful at all, which is why the Welsh figures by the end of November were the worst of all the four nations of the UK.
The only time a premature lockdown makes sense is if you're going for a New Zealand style eradication strategy. But that was never attempted or realistic in Europe.
I deliberately avoided saying we needed a lockdown in September, but rather we should have had stronger restrictions earlier that stopped short of a full lockdown. Lockdowns have got R less than 1 and so are clearly excessive for keeping R at approximately 1.
The rule of 6 was insufficient, while the Tiers just allowed other regions to catch-up those with higher infection rates - with the Tiers in particular just the sort of confusing stop/start/stop/start type activity you acknowledge is highly damaging.
Instead, the aim should have been to find a level of restrictions that was roughly in equilibrium rather than letting people do everything until the last minute and ending up locked down for 3+ months.
I agree the hype about a 2 week firebreak was a load of nonsense. I'd say the 4 week lockdown before letting things rip in the run-up to Christmas was the same sort of nonsense. We should have exited the November lockdown in stages like we did this year, but no, Boris wanted to be jolly Father Christmas to the nation.
I agree that there needed to be a way found to keep R < 1 but that is realistically what was tried with the Tiers and Rule of 6 experiments. It didn't work, but it was tried. That's better than not trying which is what the Welsh did and Starmer wanted.
Same for ending lockdown in November. The lockdown ended and we went in with new, tougher, Tiers. Nowhere was Tier 1 anymore, the new Tier 2 which was the lowest of the Tiers was effectively the old Tier 3, the new Tier 3 was essentially lockdown.
Then of course the Kent variant was discovered, the new Tier 4 was tried then it was back into lockdown and the rest is history.
Sorry but its just not true that having a premature lockdown works and the SAGE experts are right on this, because the second that you lift a premature lockdown cases start rising again.
But the cases rise from a lower base, meaning you have fewer cases overall. This is the key thing to understand -> an earlier lockdown means fewer cases.
No it doesn't, because they just restart rising with exponential growth.
Exponential growth means that whatever amount of cases you start with is pretty irrelevant, before long you end up back at high numbers again.
Unless you can find a way to break the back of exponential growth, then premature lockdowns are useless.
Is this the first real world data we have of AZ against beta?
It’s rather depressing the amount of crap AZ get re their vaccine when it’s astonishing good against *all variants* and after *1 dose* at protecting against severe disease.
Of course they save the moderna for the best and the brightest among us ;-)
And wasn't the blood clotting issue down to the incorrect administration of the vaccine, rather than the vaccine itself?
Well i think the conclusion is there is a problem if the vaccine gets injected into the vein rather than muscle.... incorrect adminstration (pinching the skin) significantly increases the chances of this happening.
So it's a bit of both...but correct administration this issue would be even rarer than currently is rare and of course we know its a potential issue so now anybody with the telltale signs of a blood clot is told to go straight to hospital, so further reducing risk of long term harm.
Morning all. Sorry, only just read the @Cyclefree PT header on the stubborn Tory poll lead. It's a very good helicopter piece.
"If the choice is between the Tories and an empty space, the latter is unlikely to win."
The above line jumped out at me. You read it and reflexively nod and think "too right". It's one of those.
But then - if you're me - you dwell on it a while and wonder whether it is such a slam dunk. This government (and particularly this PM) are increasingly being viewed by anybody with eyes to see and ears to listen and noses to smell and mouths to - ok ok you get the picture - as an utter shambles. No principles. No competence. 'No' as in ZERO.
They've got away with it so far (pollwise) but for how long? Brexit is shedding its potency as iconic wedge issue. Slowly, to be sure, but it is. They can poke the fires of its culture war aspect but is this enough to stay at 40%? I doubt it. Tough times lie ahead with the economy and in Fiscal Corner. Leveling Up, for example, has to move from soundbite to hard policy choices and this will piss some people off. If it doesn't it's not real and remains a soundbite. Which would also start to piss some people off, just a different bunch, those Leavers who voted for this agenda, believing it to be genuine. Because these folk are not total blithering idiots - not in the main and not all the time. Whatever, poll damage is coming either way. Ditto with Social Care. There are no votes in that. Only negative ones if you get serious about it. Ask Andy Burnham or Theresa May. So the same choice there. A solid plan and loss of popularity or a cop out and loss of popularity.
Now we have this mismanaged exit from the pandemic. Plus (the header here) further damaging reveals from Cummings - who was right there in the middle of it - about the response and attitude throughout. The PM at key moments in thrall to bizarre right-wing 'contrarians' for heaven's sake, most of them no wiser than our PB one. His focus not on preventing Covid running amok in England and killing tens of thousands but on something far more important - impressing the Daily Telegraph and the Spectator.
I could go on. The challenge is to stop. But I can do that too. I'm going out maskless in a minute. Big moment. The point is, surely all of this shit is probably going to lead within a year to the Cons polling no better than mid 30s. And then come the GE, given things can only get worse, if the choice is indeed between more of the same or a nice cool empty space fronted by a non-scary, competent, decent sounding bloke who looks like he could run a whelk stall and could manage to tell the truth every now and again, well for me that's a toss up.
I take issue with 'poke the fires of its culture war aspect'. Blaming the right for the culture war is like blaming Poland for World War Two. The right isn't trying to move back to 1953, it just doesn't want to be dragged forward to year zero. All the movement on the culture war is from the left. The right isn't trying to rewrite history. The right is, occasionally, suggesting that perhaps the left might be going a bit too far. Now you're astute, and you'll notice I'm saying 'the left' and not 'the Labour Party'. SKS is trying his hardest to avoid the loonier fringes of the culture war, though his party occasionally drag him into it. But to the electorate as a whole, that's not enough. Neil Kinnock was no culture warrior. But the culture warriors of the wider left - the ILEA, for example - lost him votes. How does SKS distance Labour from the likes of Zarah Sultana and Nadia Whittome?
EDIT - and have you read the Telegraph or the Spectator recently? If the PM has been trying to impress the Telegraph and the Spectator, he's going about it abysmally. What he's trying to do (and succeeding) is to impress the authoritarian lobby which want more laws on other people (like @gealbhan yesterday - although I wasn't sure how serious he was).
EDIT2: And good luck going maskless. Enjoy exchanging smiles with other demaskers!
But the things the ILEA were criticised for, like anti racism and gay rights, are mainstream now, precisely because some brave politicians were willing to make the case in the face of much hostility from the press, the Tories and indeed the public. Attitudes do change, personally I think that's a good thing. Nobody has a monopoly on common sense or wisdom, but I think over the sweep of postwar history, the progressive side have got more of the big calls on social and cultural issues right than the conservative one.
That is selection bias I think. Overall and in a lumpy fashion society has progressed in terms of social norms. Most of those reforms and changes were opposed and resisted to some extent so you can point at the resistors, label them conservatives and then make the incorrect jump to resistance to change is always wrong. Look at eugenics as a counter-example of a major cause supported enthusiastically by most "progressive opinion ". Some of the sexual liberation politics of the '60s and 70's looks very iffy now. Then there is the key question of reform "overreach". Once decent democratic norms have been achieved the restless need for causes means that the production line of ideological battles from academia does not cease. Latest example is Critical Race Theory that has an uncanny resemblance to the theories propounded by Afrikaner academics to justify Apartheid.
I think we're going to end up having another lockdown or another increase in restrictions. You heard it here first - I hope as before, I am wrong
Already announced - the vaccine passports for nightclubs from end Sept (too late, as usual). You are probably right that there will be more; reintroducing compulsory masks in various circumstances must be a front-runner.
Will the nightclub passports actually happen, or are they using the idea of it to nudge the 18-25 group into getting jabbed over the summer?
My money would be on the latter.
Ha ha ha 😃.
Oh please, every time the government are asked to rule it out for pubs this winter, they won’t.
Yesterday’s discussion proved once its working the public have huge appetite to see it extended beyond clubs to take in just about everything, pubs, football, and holidays, rather than binning app and TAT, we are only just starting to join up with other apps around the world.
achtung Kuddelmuddel!
Authoritarian approach wins. Libertarians losers.
You thought vaccines and it’s all over did you? Oh how embarrassing. The next stage is match the right behaviours to the good work of vaccines for maximum effect. Yesterday’s briefing was all about behaviours.
But deleted the app now! Just have to reload it then won’t you, if you want to go anywhere get in anywhere.
Jabbed, it’s all over? Whole new beginning.
There is a simple reason it will never happen in pubs even if it happens in clubs.
Pubs don't all have door staff.
A typical nightclub will be far more of a superspreader than a typical pub tbh too. IF you're going to bring in for pubs then you need to bring in for gigs as well. Gigs are 14+, not 18+ typically - whether the Gov't have realised this is another matter.
Comments
As always, the issue is more complicated than at first appears - https://twitter.com/torynski/status/1417197543549718533?s=21.
Approval of Ed Milband has also slightly increased by 6%.
Starmer Labour is therefore clearly closer to Brown Ed Miliband Labour at least than Corbyn Labour
67 cases now confirmed in the athletes alone apparently
I think its crazy but like you I really can't see them stopping now.
I don't want that life.
John Rentoul
@JohnRentoul
·
49m
Interesting from @jamesjohnson252's focus group for
@MattChorley on Times Radio: people tell pollsters they support further restrictions but seem to find excuses for not following them themselves
The last facts about #COVID19 in France are:
-a global increase of new cases (6 to 10k/day)
-a strong predominance of the #DeltaVariant (blue)
-a continuous decline of the #BetaVariant (red) now below 7% (minus 50% in a week) and 4% in continental France.
https://twitter.com/FranceintheUK/status/1417429227117367296?s=20
It would also cost far more to postpone again than go ahead now
They'll be very annoyed when they have to put them back in a month.
He laughs about the bacon sandwich though.
Comes across as a sensible, self-deprecatory sort of chap.
A quarter of all staff to be cut as in 14 months the financial stability achieved by Jezza is completely destroyed. Income down by a quarter, Membership subs down by a quarter, Union income down by 20%
Labour on the brink of financial and Electoral ruin.
Oh well
The bar will go up and up until we have an apparatchik class and the rest untouchables.
The 2 PMs who have made by far the most money on the US lecture tour, Thatcher and Blair, did so from appearances at gatherings attended by wealthy US conservatives, Thatcher due to her close relationship with Reagan and Blair because of his close relationship with Bush
Japan are at 57% of population in vaccines, compared to UK at 121%.
Tokyo have already said no crowds, this is about Covid going round the athletes, many of whom haven’t been vaccinated.
But I wanted to challenge myself to understand why the Tories are in the lead. And in fact it wasn't that hard to do.
I am not a Boris supporter. But I simply cannot drum up any enthusiasm for Labour and Starmer has done some things which actively repel me from voting Labour.
A lot of the things you mention above are perfectly valid. But most people will not pay them much attention or will take the view that any government would probably have made similar mistakes. Is there any evidence at all that Starmer has or had any better plan for dealing with Covid, for instance?
For now, the government is getting the benefit of the doubt. How long that will last I have no idea. There are a lot of things which could go wrong and which could lead to the electorate turning against it. But Labour are simply unable to describe coherently the following:-
- This is who we are
- This is what we're for
- This is how we behave
- This is where we're going and the sort of country we want to lead
- This is how we're going to get there
Stringing together a lot of adjectives: "progressive" "fair" is not an answer.
In fact, I am deeply sceptical of any group which includes a lot of adjectives in its description or mission statement. It seems to me to act as a bar to any sort of critical intelligent thought. The word "progressive", in particular, is used as a battering ram to shut down objections as if it is a magic incantation which should stop anyone querying whether the reality of what is being proposed is really as wonderful as claimed.
Say what you are going to do, how you are going to to do these things and explain the consequences of what you are going to do.
The audience can - and will - supply their own adjectives.
https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/sports/slovakia-player-staff-member-test-positive-covid-19-euro-2020-coach-2021-06-17/
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/57627620
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-06-22/england-scotland-players-in-isolation-covid-positive-euro-2020/100232846
As you yourself tacictly acknowledged you find a way to maintain an R of below 1 without a lockdown, via Tiers etc, in which case the lockdown is redundant and not needed premature which is what the government attempted to do with Tiers and Rule of 6 in September/October . . .
. . . or you have no way to have an R of below 1, in which case lockdowns prevent the NHS from being overwhelmed but premature lockdowns don't do anything since you just come out of them sooner allowing you to have longer after the premature lockdown to see exponential growth restart. So you end up with a need to keep cycling through "firebreaks" which is even worse and more damaging as stop/start/stop/start/stop/start hokey cokey means throwing out stock and supplies etc [if you deal with anything fresh] every time.
Prior to the Kent variant arising, the 1 month Autumn lockdown worked better than the Welsh 2 week firebreak, because 1 month is actually long enough for cases to meaningfully fall as well as having a month of suppression. A fortnight is not long enough for anything meaningful at all, which is why the Welsh figures by the end of November were the worst of all the four nations of the UK.
The only time a premature lockdown makes sense is if you're going for a New Zealand style eradication strategy. But that was never attempted or realistic in Europe.
He does appear to be struggling to live on his public salary, with school fees to pay, and both an ex-wife and new wife to keep happy.
He would also have broader appeal than Trump did.
Much as many Americans wanted Blair who was a more centrist, articulate version of Bush without the zipper problem of Bill Clinton
Plus if he times it right retiring at or around Party Conference in '25 then he'll have lasted longer than David Cameron and I get the feeling that matters to him.
It’s rather depressing the amount of crap AZ get re their vaccine when it’s astonishing good against *all variants* and after *1 dose* at protecting against severe disease.
A big shame as it’s an excellent vaccine. https://t.co/XNeN1d5gI0
https://twitter.com/ThatRyanChap/status/1417399667541827603?s=19
Of course they save the moderna for the best and the brightest among us ;-)
'World King'
Whatever !!!!!!
I don't support it, but that doesn't mean it won't happen. It will.
The thing with Blair and Thatcher is they were both significant PMs in their own right, not just their closeness to the Presidents. Boris is in the same league, like him or loathe him, he is a significant PM. His legacy of Brexit etc means that whether you like him or loathe him, whether you are pro-Brexit or anti-Brexit, he will be a significant figure to be discussed for generations to come.
He will easily attract attention on the lecture tour in his own right when he's ready to retire from Downing Street.
If you thing I am exaggerating, quotations from his speeches in support of the NHS would be played on a loop by his opponents and that would be that.
If he acquired citizenship he'd need to go through the naturalisation route. In which case he'd be a naturalised citizen and not a natural born one.
1. Axe golf, football, rugby sevens, and tennis, for whom the Olympics is already overshadowed by other competitions. (Also baseball/softball but I believe 2020 is a one-off). Query basketball and hockey for this reason.
2. Review if the number of athletes competing in any particular sport can be trimmed, either in terms of number of events/medals or having more pre-qualification for the tournament.
3. Abolish the emphasis on the Host City and instead place the emphasis on a host nation. Fans will still turn up and besides, most fans are at home. This reduces the number of stadia needed dramatically, because you could already host your e.g. rowing event and your country's existing facilities more often.
$13.2bn was the cost of Rio - just a huge and wasteful sum. If part of the ethos is bringing together people from different nations then surely the irony of a bill the size of the GDP of 20 of the smallest ones put together is obvious.
Oh please, every time the government are asked to rule it out for pubs this winter, they won’t.
Yesterday’s discussion proved once its working the public have huge appetite to see it extended beyond clubs to take in just about everything, pubs, football, and holidays, rather than binning app and TAT, we are only just starting to join up with other apps around the world.
achtung Kuddelmuddel!
Authoritarian approach wins. Libertarians losers.
You thought vaccines and it’s all over did you? Oh how embarrassing. The next stage is match the right behaviours to the good work of vaccines for maximum effect. Yesterday’s briefing was all about behaviours.
But deleted the app now!
Just have to reload it then won’t you, if you want to go anywhere get in anywhere.
Jabbed, it’s all over? Whole new beginning.
Pubs don't all have door staff.
But Boris's USP is that he always wins elections. 2023 would risk tarnishing that record for little gain unless he does decide he wants to stay on (and it has been rumoured that Carrie wants to).
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/health/moving-from-covid-19-pandemic-to-endemic
What they can't control are the athletes, the coaches, the medics. And they're bringing it in with them. So if they press on we have the very real danger that instead of athletic performance determining medals, it is Covid.
It is already, and increasingly will become, a total farce. But if you are the IOC it remains payday. So they will tolerate farce until they absolutely cannot justify it any more.
When was it reported?
The tennis players in Australia were upset, but many of them hadn’t earned money in a year and it was a cost of being there. For many Olympians, it’s the single thing they’ve worked towards for five years, a couple of weeks stuck in quarantine is a minor inconvenience.
https://www.businessinsider.com/boris-johnson-said-patients-charged-to-use-the-nhs-2019-12?r=US&IR=T
He is obviously far too unwoke for the current Democratic party
You’d have thought a private bank or party donor would advance him some cash though, it’s not as if he isn’t going to make big money when he stands down as a politician.
The slogan was absent from podiums yesterday, with JVT mentioning Japan’s ‘Three C’s’ instead.
Understand a new ad campaign is being prepared to be launched later this week, finally with a focus on ventilation.
Only 16 months late.
https://twitter.com/tomhfh/status/1417447193624055809?s=20
https://www.olimpickgames.co.uk/
Anyone for some shin kicking or tug o' war?
The rule of 6 was insufficient, while the Tiers just allowed other regions to catch-up those with higher infection rates - with the Tiers in particular just the sort of confusing stop/start/stop/start type activity you acknowledge is highly damaging.
Instead, the aim should have been to find a level of restrictions that was roughly in equilibrium rather than letting people do everything until the last minute and ending up locked down for 3+ months.
I agree the hype about a 2 week firebreak was a load of nonsense. I'd say the 4 week lockdown before letting things rip in the run-up to Christmas was the same sort of nonsense. We should have exited the November lockdown in stages like we did this year, but no, Boris wanted to be jolly Father Christmas to the nation.
edit: looks like 14.00 now - 1hr10 mins to launch:
https://www.blueorigin.com/
https://youtube.com/watch?v=tMHhXzpwupU
Having the athletes compete in the nude might be a step too far, if only for the sponsors...
This is the key thing to understand -> an earlier lockdown means fewer cases.
Same for ending lockdown in November. The lockdown ended and we went in with new, tougher, Tiers. Nowhere was Tier 1 anymore, the new Tier 2 which was the lowest of the Tiers was effectively the old Tier 3, the new Tier 3 was essentially lockdown.
Then of course the Kent variant was discovered, the new Tier 4 was tried then it was back into lockdown and the rest is history.
@bywirenews
·
1h
NEW: Keir Starmer has almost bankrupted the Labour Party.
The party’s financial reserves are down to just one months’ payroll - with senior staff blaming a huge swathe of lost members and legal fees.
Labour were the richest party in Britain under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.
Exponential growth means that whatever amount of cases you start with is pretty irrelevant, before long you end up back at high numbers again.
Unless you can find a way to break the back of exponential growth, then premature lockdowns are useless.
So it's a bit of both...but correct administration this issue would be even rarer than currently is rare and of course we know its a potential issue so now anybody with the telltale signs of a blood clot is told to go straight to hospital, so further reducing risk of long term harm.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57900320
IF you're going to bring in for pubs then you need to bring in for gigs as well. Gigs are 14+, not 18+ typically - whether the Gov't have realised this is another matter.