I am not sure what ultimately stops a Google or Apple developing their own alternative to these approaches, they have much bigger resources and the top talent.
A single company running a system like this without crippling identity checks and compliance costs is illegal pretty much everywhere, and the requirements vary from country to country. That's why it's being done on p2p networks that no individual is responsible for.
There's no shortage of engineering talent working on scaling these systems, good engineers will make more money and have more fun outside google or apple. Making p2p consensus systems scale is just a hard engineering problem, that's why it's not getting solved overnight.
I suppose it depends what you see as the ultimate uses for a lot of this technology.
I can see some, but I also see a lot of projects where you are doing a "decentralized" version of something that already exists, with the presumption because those in this space don't trust governments and authorities, decentralized and anonymized is better.
When the reason big brands are trusted is and can charge many multiples for products you can buy anywhere, because they are a centralizing organisation, where you know who they are and what you are getting.
So is having a worldwide decentralised p2p blockchain of digital assets better than knowing I get the correct asset of a certain quality from Apple.
Most of crypto now feels a lot like a game where the ultimate goal is a game of musical chairs, such that when the music stops you are the one with the bitcoin and the price is very high, then that is the final dump.
I feel like I need a PhD to understand this subject.
The main thing people need to understand about cryptocurrency is that you see something being professionally promoted, it's fraud.
Apart from that it's fine to just ignore it until you see a use that looks useful to you.
Most of crypto now feels a lot like a game where the ultimate goal is a game of musical chairs, such that when the music stops you are the one with the bitcoin and the price is very high, then that is the final dump.
I feel like I need a PhD to understand this subject.
The main thing people need to understand about cryptocurrency is that you see something being professionally promoted, it's fraud.
Apart from that it's fine to just ignore it until you see a use that looks useful to you.
Or Cardano, where it is unprofessionally promoted :-)
Most of crypto now feels a lot like a game where the ultimate goal is a game of musical chairs, such that when the music stops you are the one with the bitcoin and the price is very high, then that is the final dump.
I feel like I need a PhD to understand this subject.
The main thing people need to understand about cryptocurrency is that you see something being professionally promoted, it's fraud.
Apart from that it's fine to just ignore it until you see a use that looks useful to you.
Or Cardano, where it is unprofessionally promoted :-)
They used to have a bunch of guys down in Osaka doing MLM-style hard sales on elderly people. I've met Charles Hoskinson and he does hire some actual researchers so I don't know if I'd go so far as to say Cardano is fraud, but you should definitely not have money anywhere near that project.
Most of crypto now feels a lot like a game where the ultimate goal is a game of musical chairs, such that when the music stops you are the one with the bitcoin and the price is very high, then that is the final dump.
I feel like I need a PhD to understand this subject.
The main thing people need to understand about cryptocurrency is that you see something being professionally promoted, it's fraud.
Apart from that it's fine to just ignore it until you see a use that looks useful to you.
Or Cardano, where it is unprofessionally promoted :-)
They used to have a bunch of guys down in Osaka doing MLM-style hard sales on elderly people. I've met Charles Hoskinson and he does hire some actual researchers so I don't know if I'd go so far as to say Cardano is fraud, but you should definitely not have money anywhere near that project.
I am no crypto expert, but I heard coded in Haskell....and went WTF...that was a language I used years ago as an undergrad as an exemplar language for learning functional programming concepts, not for building anything for the next gen future.
I wasn't seriously suggesting it was a fraud, certainly not by crypto standards, where simply lying about everything to do with your project, having fictitious CEOs etc, isn't exactly uncommon.
Most of crypto now feels a lot like a game where the ultimate goal is a game of musical chairs, such that when the music stops you are the one with the bitcoin and the price is very high, then that is the final dump.
I feel like I need a PhD to understand this subject.
The main thing people need to understand about cryptocurrency is that you see something being professionally promoted, it's fraud.
Apart from that it's fine to just ignore it until you see a use that looks useful to you.
Or Cardano, where it is unprofessionally promoted :-)
They used to have a bunch of guys down in Osaka doing MLM-style hard sales on elderly people. I've met Charles Hoskinson and he does hire some actual researchers so I don't know if I'd go so far as to say Cardano is fraud, but you should definitely not have money anywhere near that project.
I am no crypto expert, but I heard coded in Haskell....and went WTF...that was a language I used years ago as an undergrad as an exemplar language for learning functional programming concepts, not for building anything for the next gen future.
I wasn't seriously suggesting it was a fraud, certainly not by crypto standards.
I mean, fraud wouldn't be far off.
Their schtick is that it's *academic*. Basically Charles, a young hustler cosplaying a middle-aged mathematician, did this hard-sales job on Japanese old people and took the money to create "partnerships" with universities. They use Haskell which is not used much in production systems but a certain type of computer science boffin is really into, and they make a big deal about creating mathematical proofs of their system's soundness. But the proofs don't really tell you much about whether the system works, because they rely on very narrow assumptions that don't necessarily apply in the real world.
The tricky thing about crypto for people who aren't used to free software is that the things that are normally signs of credibility in an organization are really signs of fraud, and vice versa. So the shady projects like Cardano - another similar one was Iota - will gather a lot of money with bold claims and glitzy PR, then use it to pay organizations you've heard of to do these "partnerships". Legitimate projects don't do this, because their focus is on actually building something, not creating an appearance of respectability to suck in investors.
President Nayib Bukele on Monday said that El Salvador has bought its first 200 bitcoins, as the country approaches the planned formalization of the cryptocurrency as legal tender.
A currency where transfer $20 from one person to another costs $2.50 in transaction fees, and where it can take three or four hours before you know it's gone through.
Roll on Lightning.
I have had a very fun 2 weeks selling the shovels to all the NFT idiots.
I probably should buy an NFT now with all the profits :-)
Forgive my ignorance…
Do you mean you’re flogging graphics cards?
No. Basically all NFTs all currently purchased in Ethereum, Solana and Cardono, so I went a loaded up in a bag of those crypto 3-4 weeks or so ago, and then slowly been selling them back into the market. It is blindingly obvious especially with Ethereum, all that gas fees (the cost of doing transactions), would force the price up, as the idiots fight over first trying to get an NFT at release, and then all the trading of them.
Solana in particular has gone through the roof. 3x in a month. Ethereum up 40%. Cardono 100%.
People are paying $200, $500, even a $1000 worth of Ethereum just to do a transaction at particularly crazy times. With that going on, just impossible that price wouldn't go up. Then, people got priced out of Ethereum NFTs, so went to the other currencies.
If you're paying $300 to do a transaction then something is FUBARd.
Its worse....they are paying these transaction fees, but often the network is so busy, by the time they complete, the thing they are trying to buy has been sold to somebody else....and you don't get your transaction fee back!
The problem is Ethereum wasn't designed to have millions of people trying to hammer some contract all at the same time to buy a silly avatar, as if they are bidding on an ebay auction.
There are a whole load of solutions to sit ontop of Ethereum being worked on, and these other currencies like Solana, that can just all of this much faster and more efficiently already (and hence transaction costs are much much lower).
I wouldn't bet my house on any of this stuff, but it seemed like an easy win to buy up these coins and sell them back when all the madness kicked off. I am not sure what ultimately stops a Google or Apple developing their own alternative to these approaches, they have much bigger resources and the top talent.
Badoit and San Pellegrino have a nice volcanic taste.
All British mineral water tastes like nothing and is a waste of money.
Nonsense
Highland springs tastes different to buxton which tastes different to malvern
The best is that posh one, Hildon, tho I do confess that might be because it is served in expensive places and in expensive bottles. We are all susceptible to branding
I bet someone could switch the labels on them and you wouldn't tell the difference.
My girlfriend did it on me. Buxton versus highland. I got it right
And anyone who can't tell the difference between Dasani and Fiji Water has presumably been smoking 40-a-day for quite a long time.
That's easy. We can't buy Dasani in Britain. You must be one of those Russian trolls we've been warned against. Here is Tom Scott's entertaining explanation of why it all went wrong for Dasani (which I have bookmarked!). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wD79NZroV88
I apologise, I live in the US, and frankly Dasani is better than LA tap water.
Never apologise for providing an excuse to watch Tom Scott videos, especially that one!
We could do the bottled water challenge on Boris haters by telling them a policy was Sir Keir’s idea and see how they fawn
Not plausible. Sir Keir? An idea? Pah!
We've done this variant of the bottled water challenge in 2019 when Boris pinched the popular bits from Labour 2017. Neither PB Tories nor lefties saw through the blue label to policies they had previously condemned or applauded respectively. Perhaps backbenchers have recently started to wonder.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
This story essentially tells us the Government have contingency plans. That’s it. Also the first paragraph makes zero sense. While not optimal at the moment for the NHS it’s not overwhelmed by any measure. Admissions are starting to show a very slight decline but are essentially flat. While everything could go pear shaped very quickly, this source sounds like Michie or Reicher, although they’re not shy about being on the record TBF.
I think the first paragraph meant to say “current rate of increase” not “current level”
But fully agree - it’s government having contingency plans.
All this worry about covid meltdown....but still no decision, let alone jabbing, of oldies.
We should have done kids over summer hols, and no jabbering, just jabbing the oldies now.
We are starting with our staff at our NHS Trust around the 20th September. Pfizer boosters along with flu jabs for all our 11,000 or so staff who want it.
I would expect vulnerable people and 80 plus will start around a similar time, maybe begining of October.
Norway made sure the resources benefitted its population and largely developed them using state-owned companies... the UK left it up to private companies, and didn't negotiate a good deal. This analysis reckons UK missed out on hundreds of billions of revenue.
BP was state owned at the time. So the British government gained on the privatisation of BP later in the decade.
Now, it may be that the terms offered to companies for exploiting the North Sea were more favourable for the Norwegian government, but it is also worth remembering that when initial licenses were being auctioned, no-one was really sure it was going to work. The UK Continental Shelf Act was in 1963/64 and then there were a succession of dry holes. I forget the actual number, but I think of the first 48 or 49 wells drilled in the North Sea, none found oil. (Although a few found gas, which at the time was massively less valuable.)
Only with Ecofisk (which was the last well Phillips petroleum was planning on drilling, so unhappy were they with the North Sea), that things were transformed.
The Norwegians were lucky. They sold licenses later. And therefore they got the benefit of people knowing that oil was there.
As the link notes - a few extra billion from privatizations doesn't change the overall arithmetic. It wasn't luck - > better judgment & not being ideologically driven to privatise, instead being open for the public sector to take on risk. Ultimately a very costly mistake not to keep equity in case of a large upside.
It would also have been an equally costly mistake to have tried to carry the costs and risks for themselves though. A quick trawl through the history of the North sea and how many companies went bust or were only saved from going bust by being bought out by other companies shows how much risk would have been involved. Only 1 in 7 wells drilled in the North Sea ever found hydrocarbons and only 1 in 11 ever led to development.
The history of BNOC/Britoil is instructive in this case but they were only one amongst very many.
Sharing the risks would have been smart (upside and downside). It doesn't matter that many companies went bust and most wells didn't lead to development... overall it was incredibly profitable and sadly the UK missed out on much of what it could have had.
When you say "the UK missed out", do you mean:
(a) that more oil would have been extracted at lower cost (b) that more tax revenue could have been collected or (c) that British firms could have owned more of the licenses
Ultimately, a certain amount of oil was collected and sold. It generated jobs, tax revenue and a thriving oil industry in the UK. It *may* have been the case that more tax revenue was collectable - but that might also have led to less investment.
It's easy to make perfect decisions with perfect knowledge. People making investment decisions in the 70s and 80s did not have that.
And it is one of the most inhospitable places in the world (or was a t the time) to drill for oil.
I would like to put up a photo of the last time I was offshore in 2013 which would illustrate this well but I lack the technical ability...
Thanks to Robert for showing me how to do this. This was taken from the Solan platform West of Shetlands and shows the rig I was sat on at the time during a small blow. This is the Semi-sub Ocean Valiant, one of the largest drilling units out there.
The stresses on those legs must be fantastic; especially from a fatigue viewpoint.
Do remember that the legs aren't connected to the sea floor - it'll be a semisubmersible. Crazy technology. Really impressive.
Yes, but even so, the waves are trying to throw the rig around, and the legs, in more stable, deeper water, are trying to resist that force. That creates some huge large bending forces on the legs.
And IANAE (and someone on here will be able to answer): aren't semi-submersible rigs kept in place with anchors, i.e. huge blocks of concrete, connected by cables to the rig? Lots of forces will be transferred through those as well.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Plus work from home requests.
I'm back in the office for the first time on Monday but we've planned for WFH happening between November and February.
I'm beginning to suspect I will not be back in office this year - I could if I was of a mind to - but I see no upside in 120 mins a day in a petri dish - err on a train
To be honest I can see me kicking this into the long grass and rescheduling the return to the office into the New Year.
I've already let two people work from home until the new year (one four months pregnant and the other her partner has long covid and kids, so it is easier for her to stay at home.)
Meanwhile London had its busiest rush hour since March 2020 today.
If England does this month what Scotland has in the last month, we’ll be at almost 150k cases a day by not long after harvest festival.
The more the merrier.
Let it burn out before Christmas and if some antivaxxers get ill, they get ill.
This lockdown madness has to be over.
Slightly unfortunate expression in the context, unless one is of a certain bent:
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Plus work from home requests.
I'm back in the office for the first time on Monday but we've planned for WFH happening between November and February.
I'm beginning to suspect I will not be back in office this year - I could if I was of a mind to - but I see no upside in 120 mins a day in a petri dish - err on a train
To be honest I can see me kicking this into the long grass and rescheduling the return to the office into the New Year.
I've already let two people work from home until the new year (one four months pregnant and the other her partner has long covid and kids, so it is easier for her to stay at home.)
Meanwhile London had its busiest rush hour since March 2020 today.
If England does this month what Scotland has in the last month, we’ll be at almost 150k cases a day by not long after harvest festival.
The more the merrier.
Let it burn out before Christmas and if some antivaxxers get ill, they get ill.
This lockdown madness has to be over.
Slightly unfortunate expression in the context, unless one is of a certain bent:
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Plus work from home requests.
I'm back in the office for the first time on Monday but we've planned for WFH happening between November and February.
I'm beginning to suspect I will not be back in office this year - I could if I was of a mind to - but I see no upside in 120 mins a day in a petri dish - err on a train
To be honest I can see me kicking this into the long grass and rescheduling the return to the office into the New Year.
I've already let two people work from home until the new year (one four months pregnant and the other her partner has long covid and kids, so it is easier for her to stay at home.)
Meanwhile London had its busiest rush hour since March 2020 today.
If England does this month what Scotland has in the last month, we’ll be at almost 150k cases a day by not long after harvest festival.
The more the merrier.
Let it burn out before Christmas and if some antivaxxers get ill, they get ill.
This lockdown madness has to be over.
Slightly unfortunate expression in the context, unless one is of a certain bent:
Wow I did not know that was the etymology of that phrase.
Are you sure? I thought it was to do with food shortages:
The more the merrier; the fewer the more to eat
Apparently much, much older than Christie:
" This thought was expressed by Cicero, but the precise phrase first appeared in English as “The mo the meryer; the fewer, the better fare” (Jehan Palsgrave, 1530) and was credited by some to have been said first by King James I of Scotland (ca. 1423)."
Badoit and San Pellegrino have a nice volcanic taste.
All British mineral water tastes like nothing and is a waste of money.
Nonsense
Highland springs tastes different to buxton which tastes different to malvern
The best is that posh one, Hildon, tho I do confess that might be because it is served in expensive places and in expensive bottles. We are all susceptible to branding
I bet someone could switch the labels on them and you wouldn't tell the difference.
My girlfriend did it on me. Buxton versus highland. I got it right
And anyone who can't tell the difference between Dasani and Fiji Water has presumably been smoking 40-a-day for quite a long time.
That's easy. We can't buy Dasani in Britain. You must be one of those Russian trolls we've been warned against. Here is Tom Scott's entertaining explanation of why it all went wrong for Dasani (which I have bookmarked!). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wD79NZroV88
I apologise, I live in the US, and frankly Dasani is better than LA tap water.
Interesting that The Sun headline calls it a "tax hike", and only mentions NI later on. I think the government may struggle to sell this as a rise in NI contributions, which it would like to do, if the tabloids just call it a rise in tax. An increase in NI contributions sounds more benign than a tax increase.
That's the charitable interpretation of why increasing NI polls better than increasing income tax.
The uncharitable interpretation is that some people (teacher stare) have clocked that they don't pay NI.
The putative NI rise is also being sold as hypothecated to the NHS (and social care in brackets) which probably helps with the polling.
I'm not sure this will go ahead. The Sun quotes an unnamed "top minister" rather than a Number 10 or Treasury source.
Beth Rigby just saying that the PM is setting out a plan tomorrow followed by a new conference with the Chancellor.
Looks past the point of no return now.
The bastards. Screw Boris. Screw Rishi. Screw the Tories.
I've been saying they will u-turn all day, but looking at tonight's front pages it is hard to see how they can now.
NI it is.
Would it be rude to point out that this is a tip of the old hat from Johnson to that master of finance and politics, Gordon Brown?
Tories stealing the economics of this countries worst Chancellor in modern times?
Screw the lot of them. I am so angry.
I never thought Sunak would morph in Brown. I win £5000 if he becomes our next PM so selfishly I'd love to see that, but politically were it not for that I'd want him to lose now.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
"Rail fares between London and Edinburgh are set to tumble from next month.
A new “open access” train operator, branded Lumo, is to take on the state-owned LNER on the East Coast main line – with one-way fares starting at below £15 for nearly 400 miles of rail travel.
From 25 October, Lumo will offer up to 10 services a day between London King’s Cross and Edinburgh Waverley. They will take around four-and-a-half hours and serve Newcastle and the Northumberland town of Morpeth en route – with some trains calling at Stevenage in Hertfordshire, close to Luton airport."
Well, looking at front pages if Johnson does u-turn on NI it is going to be massively embarrassing for him.
Boris is not for turning and judging by the polling the public support the rise in NI
Of course it will annoy some conservatives, but he is apparently to announce it in the HOC and then have a joint press conference with Rishi and Sajid Javid
This is a big moment in politics
He’s an arsehole for it. Not getting my vote. None of those three are. And I say that as someone for whom paying a bit more NI is far more personally beneficial than higher income tax or god forbid a wealth tax.
You may see those as well yet
No, “we” may see those yet. It’s the whole crux of this dispute. Are we all “in it together?” Or are we gonna just hammer workers to protect the fortunes of non-workers.
As a political movement, feels to me that British conservatism has become intellectually bankrupt. It no longer has any guiding principles beyond protecting the interests of its client voters. HY practically admitted as much earlier.
It appears the triple lock goes with a 2.5% increase rather than 8.5% so big drop in the expected rise for pensioners
No not a big drop, a 2.5% increase.
There hasn't been an 8.5% increase in wages, its an entirely artificial "rise" being missed and a smaller but still considerable increase instead.
This is like Labour saying Cameron was "cutting" then NHS when spending was going up.
Interesting if so. Not getting 6% pension increase would cost a typical pensioner £400 or so. Not paying NI saves roughly 2% of income. So the combination screws low-income pensioners but protects working pensioners (like me), and the better they're earning the more it protects them. I think that if you're a pensioner dependent on the national pension - which by any definition makes you pretty poor - you'll be just as annoyed as people of working age. I don't do class war rhetoric, but explicitly protecting rich pensioners does seem to me to pander to the Conservative core vote in an indefensible way.
The 8.5% rise is just an artefact of the way wages have responded to COVID. Pensioners are not being “screwed” they just being asked not to pocket something they wouldn’t normally have got
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
In a parallel universe, you are the Prime Minister. It is October this year, the number of Covid patients in hospital is now over 12,000, and your advisers are screaming (yet again) about the collapse of the healthcare system by Christmas.
80% of the Covid patients in hospital are vaccine refusers. Your advisers tell you that you can rescue the situation either by taking punitive measures against the refusers, or by putting the whole population into an Auckland-style lockdown until Easter.
Personally I like: "tax the wealthy not the workers".
Most people have some wealth. But not many think of themselves as wealthy. Almost everyone thinks of themselves as a worker.
5% of UK estates pay iht for which the threshold is 325,000. Seems a reasonable proxy for wealthy.
The other 30% avoid it.
Why is 35% the whole pie here?
I doubt avoidance is ever 100%. If you are putting 100m into trust to avoid iht you are probably keeping more than 325,000 worth of stuff for your own personal use, because of the rules against retaining a partial interest in what you give away, so you end up paying something.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
In a parallel universe, you are the Prime Minister. It is October this year, the number of Covid patients in hospital is now over 12,000, and your advisers are screaming (yet again) about the collapse of the healthcare system by Christmas.
80% of the Covid patients in hospital are vaccine refusers. Your advisers tell you that you can rescue the situation either by taking punitive measures against the refusers, or by putting the whole population into an Auckland-style lockdown until Easter.
What do you do?
If these are the same advisors who told me not to push the vaccine passports, not to vaccinate children to reduce infection rates and to hold off on boosters my first decision is to fire them.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
In a parallel universe, you are the Prime Minister. It is October this year, the number of Covid patients in hospital is now over 12,000, and your advisers are screaming (yet again) about the collapse of the healthcare system by Christmas.
80% of the Covid patients in hospital are vaccine refusers. Your advisers tell you that you can rescue the situation either by taking punitive measures against the refusers, or by putting the whole population into an Auckland-style lockdown until Easter.
What do you do?
I have a lot of respect for anyone's sincerely held beliefs. think we should set up a chain of special hospitals for the refusers, to be run on strictly homeopathic principles.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
In a parallel universe, you are the Prime Minister. It is October this year, the number of Covid patients in hospital is now over 12,000, and your advisers are screaming (yet again) about the collapse of the healthcare system by Christmas.
80% of the Covid patients in hospital are vaccine refusers. Your advisers tell you that you can rescue the situation either by taking punitive measures against the refusers, or by putting the whole population into an Auckland-style lockdown until Easter.
What do you do?
If these are the same advisors who told me not to push the vaccine passports, not to vaccinate children to reduce infection rates and to hold off on boosters my first decision is to fire them.
Here is a serious question.
What big calls have SAGE got right?
Probably advising a lockdown at the very start earlier than the PM and Cummings were willing to consider it.
Personally I like: "tax the wealthy not the workers".
Most people have some wealth. But not many think of themselves as wealthy. Almost everyone thinks of themselves as a worker.
5% of UK estates pay iht for which the threshold is 325,000. Seems a reasonable proxy for wealthy.
The other 30% avoid it.
Why is 35% the whole pie here?
I doubt avoidance is ever 100%. If you are putting 100m into trust to avoid iht you are probably keeping more than 325,000 worth of stuff for your own personal use, because of the rules against retaining a partial interest in what you give away, so you end up paying something.
Whilst this is right in my experience the estates who end up paying significant IHT are those where the unexpected has happened such as sudden death with potentially exempt transfers and accident. It has more characteristics of an inverse lottery than a tax.
Personally I like: "tax the wealthy not the workers".
Most people have some wealth. But not many think of themselves as wealthy. Almost everyone thinks of themselves as a worker.
5% of UK estates pay iht for which the threshold is 325,000. Seems a reasonable proxy for wealthy.
The other 30% avoid it.
Why is 35% the whole pie here?
I doubt avoidance is ever 100%. If you are putting 100m into trust to avoid iht you are probably keeping more than 325,000 worth of stuff for your own personal use, because of the rules against retaining a partial interest in what you give away, so you end up paying something.
You’re talking about the super wealthy. I’m thinking of the owners of one of Hyufd’s ‘average homes’ in the SE who get up to all sorts of tricks to avoid IHT.
Well, looking at front pages if Johnson does u-turn on NI it is going to be massively embarrassing for him.
Boris is not for turning and judging by the polling the public support the rise in NI
Of course it will annoy some conservatives, but he is apparently to announce it in the HOC and then have a joint press conference with Rishi and Sajid Javid
This is a big moment in politics
He’s an arsehole for it. Not getting my vote. None of those three are. And I say that as someone for whom paying a bit more NI is far more personally beneficial than higher income tax or god forbid a wealth tax.
You may see those as well yet
No, “we” may see those yet. It’s the whole crux of this dispute. Are we all “in it together?” Or are we gonna just hammer workers to protect the fortunes of non-workers.
As a political movement, feels to me that British conservatism has become intellectually bankrupt. It no longer has any guiding principles beyond protecting the interests of its client voters. HY practically admitted as much earlier.
It appears the triple lock goes with a 2.5% increase rather than 8.5% so big drop in the expected rise for pensioners
No not a big drop, a 2.5% increase.
There hasn't been an 8.5% increase in wages, its an entirely artificial "rise" being missed and a smaller but still considerable increase instead.
This is like Labour saying Cameron was "cutting" then NHS when spending was going up.
Interesting if so. Not getting 6% pension increase would cost a typical pensioner £400 or so. Not paying NI saves roughly 2% of income. So the combination screws low-income pensioners but protects working pensioners (like me), and the better they're earning the more it protects them. I think that if you're a pensioner dependent on the national pension - which by any definition makes you pretty poor - you'll be just as annoyed as people of working age. I don't do class war rhetoric, but explicitly protecting rich pensioners does seem to me to pander to the Conservative core vote in an indefensible way.
The 8.5% rise is just an artefact of the way wages have responded to COVID. Pensioners are not being “screwed” they just being asked not to pocket something they wouldn’t normally have got
If they don't get the full whack then an awful lot of them are going to eject toys from pram, because they'll feel robbed and because they were promised the triple lock would be maintained. Made all the worse by the fact that the latter is undeniably true. As with all entitlements, the recipients don't care about mammoth costs, which they expect to be paid by other people whom they regard as less deserving than themselves.
The arguments about the triple lock are a classic example of the fallout of bad legislation (which is also at the root of the needless rows about trimming the overseas aid budget when the national debt has just shot up by the better part of half-a-trillion pounds.) The peculiar consequences of the pandemic-induced wage inflexion might not have been easily anticipated but the potential disruptive power of any number of "events" - economic depression, war, major natural disasters - ought to have been recognised and an emergency brake built into the system. Apart from anything else, it would've kept pensioners alive to the possibility that they might not get the raise they were expecting if the Black Death made a comeback or Manchester was levelled by an asteroid.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
In a parallel universe, you are the Prime Minister. It is October this year, the number of Covid patients in hospital is now over 12,000, and your advisers are screaming (yet again) about the collapse of the healthcare system by Christmas.
80% of the Covid patients in hospital are vaccine refusers. Your advisers tell you that you can rescue the situation either by taking punitive measures against the refusers, or by putting the whole population into an Auckland-style lockdown until Easter.
What do you do?
If these are the same advisors who told me not to push the vaccine passports, not to vaccinate children to reduce infection rates and to hold off on boosters my first decision is to fire them.
Here is a serious question.
What big calls have SAGE got right?
Probably advising a lockdown at the very start earlier than the PM and Cummings were willing to consider it.
But after that, I’m struggling.
Did SAGE not come up with the idea of focussing on first jabs and a longer gap between them which proved to be efficacious? Not sure who gets the credit for that but it probably saved more lives than any individual decision once the vaccines were bought.
Hello everyone. Lovely morning here, clear skies and warmer than to be expected at 15degC.
TBH I am rather surprised that the Government, or at least the part of it that makes the decisions, appears to have gone for such a simplistic 'answer' to the problem of funding care, both social and the NHS.
I suspect that when the PM stands up in the House this afternoon there will be some sort of rabbit pulled out of the hat. Whether it will be sparkly white and different or the usual mangy brown, I, and all of us, wait to see.
Well, looking at front pages if Johnson does u-turn on NI it is going to be massively embarrassing for him.
Boris is not for turning and judging by the polling the public support the rise in NI
Of course it will annoy some conservatives, but he is apparently to announce it in the HOC and then have a joint press conference with Rishi and Sajid Javid
This is a big moment in politics
He’s an arsehole for it. Not getting my vote. None of those three are. And I say that as someone for whom paying a bit more NI is far more personally beneficial than higher income tax or god forbid a wealth tax.
You may see those as well yet
No, “we” may see those yet. It’s the whole crux of this dispute. Are we all “in it together?” Or are we gonna just hammer workers to protect the fortunes of non-workers.
As a political movement, feels to me that British conservatism has become intellectually bankrupt. It no longer has any guiding principles beyond protecting the interests of its client voters. HY practically admitted as much earlier.
It appears the triple lock goes with a 2.5% increase rather than 8.5% so big drop in the expected rise for pensioners
No not a big drop, a 2.5% increase.
There hasn't been an 8.5% increase in wages, its an entirely artificial "rise" being missed and a smaller but still considerable increase instead.
This is like Labour saying Cameron was "cutting" then NHS when spending was going up.
Interesting if so. Not getting 6% pension increase would cost a typical pensioner £400 or so. Not paying NI saves roughly 2% of income. So the combination screws low-income pensioners but protects working pensioners (like me), and the better they're earning the more it protects them. I think that if you're a pensioner dependent on the national pension - which by any definition makes you pretty poor - you'll be just as annoyed as people of working age. I don't do class war rhetoric, but explicitly protecting rich pensioners does seem to me to pander to the Conservative core vote in an indefensible way.
The 8.5% rise is just an artefact of the way wages have responded to COVID. Pensioners are not being “screwed” they just being asked not to pocket something they wouldn’t normally have got
If they don't get the full whack then an awful lot of them are going to eject toys from pram, because they'll feel robbed and because they were promised the triple lock would be maintained. Made all the worse by the fact that the latter is undeniably true. As with all entitlements, the recipients don't care about mammoth costs, which they expect to be paid by other people whom they regard as less deserving than themselves.
The arguments about the triple lock are a classic example of the fallout of bad legislation (which is also at the root of the needless rows about trimming the overseas aid budget when the national debt has just shot up by the better part of half-a-trillion pounds.) The peculiar consequences of the pandemic-induced wage inflexion might not have been easily anticipated but the potential disruptive power of any number of "events" - economic depression, war, major natural disasters - ought to have been recognised and an emergency brake built into the system. Apart from anything else, it would've kept pensioners alive to the possibility that they might not get the raise they were expecting if the Black Death made a comeback or Manchester was levelled by an asteroid.
In which case Johnson will deserve our sincere congratulations. He will have managed the unique feat among populists of coming up with a set of policies that pisses off absolutely everybody.
@CorrectHorseBattery may be on to a good thing with his bet on a Labour poll lead.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
In a parallel universe, you are the Prime Minister. It is October this year, the number of Covid patients in hospital is now over 12,000, and your advisers are screaming (yet again) about the collapse of the healthcare system by Christmas.
80% of the Covid patients in hospital are vaccine refusers. Your advisers tell you that you can rescue the situation either by taking punitive measures against the refusers, or by putting the whole population into an Auckland-style lockdown until Easter.
What do you do?
If these are the same advisors who told me not to push the vaccine passports, not to vaccinate children to reduce infection rates and to hold off on boosters my first decision is to fire them.
Here is a serious question.
What big calls have SAGE got right?
Probably advising a lockdown at the very start earlier than the PM and Cummings were willing to consider it.
But after that, I’m struggling.
Did SAGE not come up with the idea of focussing on first jabs and a longer gap between them which proved to be efficacious? Not sure who gets the credit for that but it probably saved more lives than any individual decision once the vaccines were bought.
I thought that was the JCVI but I’m happy to concede the point if I’m wrong.
Hello everyone. Lovely morning here, clear skies and warmer than to be expected at 15degC.
TBH I am rather surprised that the Government, or at least the part of it that makes the decisions, appears to have gone for such a simplistic 'answer' to the problem of funding care, both social and the NHS.
I suspect that when the PM stands up in the House this afternoon there will be some sort of rabbit pulled out of the hat. Whether it will be sparkly white and different or the usual mangy brown, I, and all of us, wait to see.
Difficult for any rabbit Johnson pulls out of his arse to be white and sparkly.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
In a parallel universe, you are the Prime Minister. It is October this year, the number of Covid patients in hospital is now over 12,000, and your advisers are screaming (yet again) about the collapse of the healthcare system by Christmas.
80% of the Covid patients in hospital are vaccine refusers. Your advisers tell you that you can rescue the situation either by taking punitive measures against the refusers, or by putting the whole population into an Auckland-style lockdown until Easter.
What do you do?
If these are the same advisors who told me not to push the vaccine passports, not to vaccinate children to reduce infection rates and to hold off on boosters my first decision is to fire them.
Here is a serious question.
What big calls have SAGE got right?
Probably advising a lockdown at the very start earlier than the PM and Cummings were willing to consider it.
But after that, I’m struggling.
Did SAGE not come up with the idea of focussing on first jabs and a longer gap between them which proved to be efficacious? Not sure who gets the credit for that but it probably saved more lives than any individual decision once the vaccines were bought.
I thought that was the JCVI but I’m happy to concede the point if I’m wrong.
You may be right. Success has many fathers etc.
But I take your general point that the advice that the government has received has not often proven to be particularly wise. The JCVI equivocation on children's vaccines is the latest frustration.
Hello everyone. Lovely morning here, clear skies and warmer than to be expected at 15degC.
TBH I am rather surprised that the Government, or at least the part of it that makes the decisions, appears to have gone for such a simplistic 'answer' to the problem of funding care, both social and the NHS.
I suspect that when the PM stands up in the House this afternoon there will be some sort of rabbit pulled out of the hat. Whether it will be sparkly white and different or the usual mangy brown, I, and all of us, wait to see.
Difficult for any rabbit Johnson pulls out of his arse to be white and sparkly.
You have a point.
At least yesterday I've been able to keep an eye on Essex vs Gloucs which has cheered me up somewhat.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
In a parallel universe, you are the Prime Minister. It is October this year, the number of Covid patients in hospital is now over 12,000, and your advisers are screaming (yet again) about the collapse of the healthcare system by Christmas.
80% of the Covid patients in hospital are vaccine refusers. Your advisers tell you that you can rescue the situation either by taking punitive measures against the refusers, or by putting the whole population into an Auckland-style lockdown until Easter.
What do you do?
Nightingales but with more treatment capacity. Dedicated non Covid hospitals to maintain a functional system
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
In a parallel universe, you are the Prime Minister. It is October this year, the number of Covid patients in hospital is now over 12,000, and your advisers are screaming (yet again) about the collapse of the healthcare system by Christmas.
80% of the Covid patients in hospital are vaccine refusers. Your advisers tell you that you can rescue the situation either by taking punitive measures against the refusers, or by putting the whole population into an Auckland-style lockdown until Easter.
What do you do?
If these are the same advisors who told me not to push the vaccine passports, not to vaccinate children to reduce infection rates and to hold off on boosters my first decision is to fire them.
The whole remit of the JCVI needs to change. Having advised not to boost kids, even though it makes sense Adam Finn is on the media every chance he gets telling parents it's a very fine/difficult choice. The man has no concept of the messaging needed; it could objectively be the easiest choice in the world and plenty of parents will still worry. And Harndern saying it should be "parents choice" even though he was on the board that didn't recommend any sort of rollout at all ! Getting the longer dosing schedule right doesn't excuse every other unforced error - the JCVI needs to now ask to produce a body of fact and the decisions taken by the CMOs in conjunction with the MHRA for future boosters/new vaccines.
Hello everyone. Lovely morning here, clear skies and warmer than to be expected at 15degC.
TBH I am rather surprised that the Government, or at least the part of it that makes the decisions, appears to have gone for such a simplistic 'answer' to the problem of funding care, both social and the NHS.
I suspect that when the PM stands up in the House this afternoon there will be some sort of rabbit pulled out of the hat. Whether it will be sparkly white and different or the usual mangy brown, I, and all of us, wait to see.
Difficult for any rabbit Johnson pulls out of his arse to be white and sparkly.
You have a point.
At least yesterday I've been able to keep an eye on Essex vs Gloucs which has cheered me up somewhat.
It hasn’t cheered me up at all.
And any Somerset fan will be fuming if they get away with that wicket without penalty.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
In a parallel universe, you are the Prime Minister. It is October this year, the number of Covid patients in hospital is now over 12,000, and your advisers are screaming (yet again) about the collapse of the healthcare system by Christmas.
80% of the Covid patients in hospital are vaccine refusers. Your advisers tell you that you can rescue the situation either by taking punitive measures against the refusers, or by putting the whole population into an Auckland-style lockdown until Easter.
What do you do?
I have a lot of respect for anyone's sincerely held beliefs. think we should set up a chain of special hospitals for the refusers, to be run on strictly homeopathic principles.
Personally I've a great deal of sympathy for the idea of ejecting them from the NHS and bussing them all to a network of makeshift field hospitals, staffed by small numbers of Army medics offering basic care, and leaving them to take their chances.
What will actually happen under the kind of circumstances that I described (and despite the fact that the Tories are so frequently derided as cruel and merciless) is, of course, that all the Covid sufferers will receive equal priority and the entire country will be put back into lockdown for months to stop too many of the anti-vaxxers from getting sick at once.
Under such circumstances, I would imagine that giving the state the power to force everyone to accept vaccination (even if that means Chinese-style snatch squads of heavies in hazmat suits pinning screaming refusers to the ground and shoving wide bore needles into their arses) would suddenly become a very popular policy.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
In a parallel universe, you are the Prime Minister. It is October this year, the number of Covid patients in hospital is now over 12,000, and your advisers are screaming (yet again) about the collapse of the healthcare system by Christmas.
80% of the Covid patients in hospital are vaccine refusers. Your advisers tell you that you can rescue the situation either by taking punitive measures against the refusers, or by putting the whole population into an Auckland-style lockdown until Easter.
What do you do?
If these are the same advisors who told me not to push the vaccine passports, not to vaccinate children to reduce infection rates and to hold off on boosters my first decision is to fire them.
Here is a serious question.
What big calls have SAGE got right?
Probably advising a lockdown at the very start earlier than the PM and Cummings were willing to consider it.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
In a parallel universe, you are the Prime Minister. It is October this year, the number of Covid patients in hospital is now over 12,000, and your advisers are screaming (yet again) about the collapse of the healthcare system by Christmas.
80% of the Covid patients in hospital are vaccine refusers. Your advisers tell you that you can rescue the situation either by taking punitive measures against the refusers, or by putting the whole population into an Auckland-style lockdown until Easter.
What do you do?
If these are the same advisors who told me not to push the vaccine passports, not to vaccinate children to reduce infection rates and to hold off on boosters my first decision is to fire them.
Here is a serious question.
What big calls have SAGE got right?
Probably advising a lockdown at the very start earlier than the PM and Cummings were willing to consider it.
But after that, I’m struggling.
Did SAGE not come up with the idea of focussing on first jabs and a longer gap between them which proved to be efficacious? Not sure who gets the credit for that but it probably saved more lives than any individual decision once the vaccines were bought.
I thought that was the JCVI but I’m happy to concede the point if I’m wrong.
You may be right. Success has many fathers etc.
But I take your general point that the advice that the government has received has not often proven to be particularly wise. The JCVI equivocation on children's vaccines is the latest frustration.
Their equivocation is, as a teacher, understandable. It’s a fairly tight decision. The concern I have is whether they’re making it for the right reasons. Equally, their reasoning isn’t that different from what a lot of teenagers would argue - that they shouldn’t be jabbed while others elsewhere who need it more go without.
The problem is, if our advisory groups are always giving dud advice - what’s the point of them?
Well, looking at front pages if Johnson does u-turn on NI it is going to be massively embarrassing for him.
Boris is not for turning and judging by the polling the public support the rise in NI
Of course it will annoy some conservatives, but he is apparently to announce it in the HOC and then have a joint press conference with Rishi and Sajid Javid
This is a big moment in politics
He’s an arsehole for it. Not getting my vote. None of those three are. And I say that as someone for whom paying a bit more NI is far more personally beneficial than higher income tax or god forbid a wealth tax.
You may see those as well yet
No, “we” may see those yet. It’s the whole crux of this dispute. Are we all “in it together?” Or are we gonna just hammer workers to protect the fortunes of non-workers.
As a political movement, feels to me that British conservatism has become intellectually bankrupt. It no longer has any guiding principles beyond protecting the interests of its client voters. HY practically admitted as much earlier.
It appears the triple lock goes with a 2.5% increase rather than 8.5% so big drop in the expected rise for pensioners
No not a big drop, a 2.5% increase.
There hasn't been an 8.5% increase in wages, its an entirely artificial "rise" being missed and a smaller but still considerable increase instead.
This is like Labour saying Cameron was "cutting" then NHS when spending was going up.
Interesting if so. Not getting 6% pension increase would cost a typical pensioner £400 or so. Not paying NI saves roughly 2% of income. So the combination screws low-income pensioners but protects working pensioners (like me), and the better they're earning the more it protects them. I think that if you're a pensioner dependent on the national pension - which by any definition makes you pretty poor - you'll be just as annoyed as people of working age. I don't do class war rhetoric, but explicitly protecting rich pensioners does seem to me to pander to the Conservative core vote in an indefensible way.
The 8.5% rise is just an artefact of the way wages have responded to COVID. Pensioners are not being “screwed” they just being asked not to pocket something they wouldn’t normally have got
If they don't get the full whack then an awful lot of them are going to eject toys from pram, because they'll feel robbed and because they were promised the triple lock would be maintained. Made all the worse by the fact that the latter is undeniably true. As with all entitlements, the recipients don't care about mammoth costs, which they expect to be paid by other people whom they regard as less deserving than themselves.
The arguments about the triple lock are a classic example of the fallout of bad legislation (which is also at the root of the needless rows about trimming the overseas aid budget when the national debt has just shot up by the better part of half-a-trillion pounds.) The peculiar consequences of the pandemic-induced wage inflexion might not have been easily anticipated but the potential disruptive power of any number of "events" - economic depression, war, major natural disasters - ought to have been recognised and an emergency brake built into the system. Apart from anything else, it would've kept pensioners alive to the possibility that they might not get the raise they were expecting if the Black Death made a comeback or Manchester was levelled by an asteroid.
I’m not a politician
Because my response would be tell them to STFU and accept that it is the right thing to do
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
In a parallel universe, you are the Prime Minister. It is October this year, the number of Covid patients in hospital is now over 12,000, and your advisers are screaming (yet again) about the collapse of the healthcare system by Christmas.
80% of the Covid patients in hospital are vaccine refusers. Your advisers tell you that you can rescue the situation either by taking punitive measures against the refusers, or by putting the whole population into an Auckland-style lockdown until Easter.
What do you do?
If these are the same advisors who told me not to push the vaccine passports, not to vaccinate children to reduce infection rates and to hold off on boosters my first decision is to fire them.
The whole remit of the JCVI needs to change. Having advised not to boost kids, even though it makes sense Adam Finn is on the media every chance he gets telling parents it's a very fine/difficult choice. The man has no concept of the messaging needed; it could objectively be the easiest choice in the world and plenty of parents will still worry. And Harndern saying it should be "parents choice" even though he was on the board that didn't recommend any sort of rollout at all ! Getting the longer dosing schedule right doesn't excuse every other unforced error - the JCVI needs to now ask to produce a body of fact and the decisions taken by the CMOs in conjunction with the MHRA for future boosters/new vaccines.
Agreed. I have no problem with scientists saying that the marginal benefit for children is less than it is for adults. That is fair comment. But their conclusion that on balance the welfare of the children still favours vaccination and the societal benefit (which of course includes reduced disruption of said children's education) really has to be unequivocal and clear without all this moral angst crap.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
In a parallel universe, you are the Prime Minister. It is October this year, the number of Covid patients in hospital is now over 12,000, and your advisers are screaming (yet again) about the collapse of the healthcare system by Christmas.
80% of the Covid patients in hospital are vaccine refusers. Your advisers tell you that you can rescue the situation either by taking punitive measures against the refusers, or by putting the whole population into an Auckland-style lockdown until Easter.
What do you do?
Nightingales but with more treatment capacity. Dedicated non Covid hospitals to maintain a functional system
You can't wriggle out of the problem that easily or the Government would already have done it. There aren't enough staff to operate the whole existing hospital network and a large string of new hospitals at the same time, i.e. to ramp up capacity by enough to give all the extra patients the standard of care they deserve.
You can, of course, have your dedicated fever hospitals anyway, but they'll have almost no staff and the prognosis for anyone dumped in them will be bleak. So, do you segregate the anti-vaxxers into crap care and reserve the proper hospitals for everyone else, or do you insist on not "othering" anybody and tell all the Covid patients to take their chances in the fever hospitals?
Once the healthcare system starts to buckle then there are no ducking the hard choices. Some combination of restrictions on public freedoms and/or healthcare rationing are required. So, do you shit on the refusers or do you shit on everyone?
I suspect those who might complain about not getting 8% slapped onto their pensions will be vocal, and get media coverage, but also be a minority. My mother has sod all sympathy for the WASPI types, and I expect a similar sentiment from many pensioners towards those who think in the present circumstances they deserve 8%.
The pandemic is a legitimate reason for certain manifesto commitments, particularly regarding financial matters, not to be kept. This seems a rather obvious point...
Hello everyone. Lovely morning here, clear skies and warmer than to be expected at 15degC.
TBH I am rather surprised that the Government, or at least the part of it that makes the decisions, appears to have gone for such a simplistic 'answer' to the problem of funding care, both social and the NHS.
I suspect that when the PM stands up in the House this afternoon there will be some sort of rabbit pulled out of the hat. Whether it will be sparkly white and different or the usual mangy brown, I, and all of us, wait to see.
Difficult for any rabbit Johnson pulls out of his arse to be white and sparkly.
You have a point.
At least yesterday I've been able to keep an eye on Essex vs Gloucs which has cheered me up somewhat.
It hasn’t cheered me up at all.
And any Somerset fan will be fuming if they get away with that wicket without penalty.
There only appeared to be any problem on the first day. And Sam Cook (Little Chef, as he is known) must be on Englands list of bowlers to watch. Although we do seem to be doing well with faster ones at the moment.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
In a parallel universe, you are the Prime Minister. It is October this year, the number of Covid patients in hospital is now over 12,000, and your advisers are screaming (yet again) about the collapse of the healthcare system by Christmas.
80% of the Covid patients in hospital are vaccine refusers. Your advisers tell you that you can rescue the situation either by taking punitive measures against the refusers, or by putting the whole population into an Auckland-style lockdown until Easter.
What do you do?
If these are the same advisors who told me not to push the vaccine passports, not to vaccinate children to reduce infection rates and to hold off on boosters my first decision is to fire them.
Here is a serious question.
What big calls have SAGE got right?
Probably advising a lockdown at the very start earlier than the PM and Cummings were willing to consider it.
But after that, I’m struggling.
Did SAGE not come up with the idea of focussing on first jabs and a longer gap between them which proved to be efficacious? Not sure who gets the credit for that but it probably saved more lives than any individual decision once the vaccines were bought.
I thought that was the JCVI but I’m happy to concede the point if I’m wrong.
You may be right. Success has many fathers etc.
But I take your general point that the advice that the government has received has not often proven to be particularly wise. The JCVI equivocation on children's vaccines is the latest frustration.
Their equivocation is, as a teacher, understandable. It’s a fairly tight decision. The concern I have is whether they’re making it for the right reasons. Equally, their reasoning isn’t that different from what a lot of teenagers would argue - that they shouldn’t be jabbed while others elsewhere who need it more go without.
The problem is, if our advisory groups are always giving dud advice - what’s the point of them?
Like @Charles you are clearly not a politician. I would have thought that their point is obvious from the politician's perspective.
Personally I like: "tax the wealthy not the workers".
Most people have some wealth. But not many think of themselves as wealthy. Almost everyone thinks of themselves as a worker.
Labour would do better to focus on other groups being exempted from the care tax - such as those living off investment income and landlords - rather than just highlighting pensioners
Burnham on r4 wants 10% from all estates to cover costs. Points out that estates will be bigger because they won't have been whittled down by care costs.
Also reserving right to go for wealth tax, increase cgt.
I suspect those who might complain about not getting 8% slapped onto their pensions will be vocal, and get media coverage, but also be a minority. My mother has sod all sympathy for the WASPI types, and I expect a similar sentiment from many pensioners towards those who think in the present circumstances they deserve 8%.
The pandemic is a legitimate reason for certain manifesto commitments, particularly regarding financial matters, not to be kept. This seems a rather obvious point...
I'd like my 8%, but if the country as a whole can't afford it, so be it.
I do know one or two people for whom the situation isn't as easy, though.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
On the last point anti-vaxxers want to be able to have their cake and eat it too: refusing the vaccine that will prevent them getting sick and ending up at the NHS, but still expecting treatment to be offered as a "fundamental principle of the NHS" despite having refused the vaccine.
Except that fundamental principle isn't so fundamental. The NHS is already today prepared to take an individuals behaviour into account for their treatment plans.
If more patients require liver transplants than available livers, then don't alcoholics who refuse to give up drinking get denied liver transplants - despite the fact they need a new liver to survive and despite the "fundamental principles of the NHS".
Alcoholism is at least a recognised illness and still people get denied treatment based upon it - I see no divine right antivaxxers should be granted special extra attention at the NHS having refused the earlier vaccine offered to them.
It was the big Brexit lie. No, not the £350m a week to spend on the NHS or the “bonfire” of red tape. The lie was that the shambles now enveloping British trade with Europe was an unavoidable price worth paying to leave the EU. That was rubbish.
Brexit need never have so devastated the British economy. The damage has come from one decision, to depart the single market. The sensible path now would be for Johnson to eat humble pie and seek, as far and as fast as possible, readmission to that market. Britain would imitate the protocol it has agreed for Northern Ireland. This would not mean rejoining the EU, just rejoining Ireland – the most delicious of historical ironies.
Negotiating the single market in 1987 was Margaret Thatcher’s proudest free-trade achievement. It was in Britain’s and Europe’s interest and proved a success. Johnson reversed that achievement in an act of naked political ambition. He pretended it was necessary for Brexit. It was his biggest lie.
I suspect those who might complain about not getting 8% slapped onto their pensions will be vocal, and get media coverage, but also be a minority. My mother has sod all sympathy for the WASPI types, and I expect a similar sentiment from many pensioners towards those who think in the present circumstances they deserve 8%.
The pandemic is a legitimate reason for certain manifesto commitments, particularly regarding financial matters, not to be kept. This seems a rather obvious point...
That's fine so long as people are all in it together.
But that's not the case with NI tax rise. Its a tax on workers while unearned income gets let off untaxed.
We should be abolishing NI and treating all income the same, not further punitively taxing earned income.
It was the big Brexit lie. No, not the £350m a week to spend on the NHS or the “bonfire” of red tape. The lie was that the shambles now enveloping British trade with Europe was an unavoidable price worth paying to leave the EU. That was rubbish.
Brexit need never have so devastated the British economy. The damage has come from one decision, to depart the single market. The sensible path now would be for Johnson to eat humble pie and seek, as far and as fast as possible, readmission to that market. Britain would imitate the protocol it has agreed for Northern Ireland. This would not mean rejoining the EU, just rejoining Ireland – the most delicious of historical ironies.
Negotiating the single market in 1987 was Margaret Thatcher’s proudest free-trade achievement. It was in Britain’s and Europe’s interest and proved a success. Johnson reversed that achievement in an act of naked political ambition. He pretended it was necessary for Brexit. It was his biggest lie.
A woman called Mary Mallon (died 1938) was an asymptomatic carrier of typhoid. She was imprisoned because she refused to curb her ways. It was her right to encourage the spread of typhoid fever. The UK government and the law disagreed. She went down in history as 'Typhoid Mary'.
How about the same treatment for the anti-vaxxers?
Burnham on r4 wants 10% from all estates to cover costs. Points out that estates will be bigger because they won't have been whittled down by care costs.
Also reserving right to go for wealth tax, increase cgt.
I think this general approach, which is not a mile away from May's infamous dementia tax, is the way to go. If your parent is unfortunate enough to need extensive end of care life in a home the cost of that should be borne by their estate in so far as it is capable of doing so and the cost of that care has a better claim on the estate than the children.
Hopefully, such hardship will be capable of being offset by insurance products and the government should encourage these but I just don't see what else is going to produce the money required. 1p on NI isn't even a sticking plaster.
10% on all estates spreads the load across society but will create a tax avoidance industry the likes of which we have not seen since Lawson made our tax system fit for purpose. Insurance is a better option in my view.
A woman called Mary Mallon (died 1938) was an asymptomatic carrier of typhoid. She was imprisoned because she refused to curb her ways. It was her right to encourage the spread of typhoid fever. The UK government and the law disagreed. She went down in history as 'Typhoid Mary'.
How about the same treatment for the anti-vaxxers?
Mary M, Typhoid Mary was born in the UK but lived from the time she was 15 or so in the US, which has a somewhat different view of liberty to the UK.
A woman called Mary Mallon (died 1938) was an asymptomatic carrier of typhoid. She was imprisoned because she refused to curb her ways. It was her right to encourage the spread of typhoid fever. The UK government and the law disagreed. She went down in history as 'Typhoid Mary'.
How about the same treatment for the anti-vaxxers?
A woman called Mary Mallon (died 1938) was an asymptomatic carrier of typhoid. She was imprisoned because she refused to curb her ways. It was her right to encourage the spread of typhoid fever. The UK government and the law disagreed. She went down in history as 'Typhoid Mary'.
How about the same treatment for the anti-vaxxers?
"Mallon herself never believed that she was a carrier. With the help of a friend, she sent several samples to an independent New York laboratory. All came back negative for typhoid.[31] "
Just like that woman with that fucking alpaca.
The dweebs who rabbit on about vaccine passports infringing liberties, fail to notice that refusers are trying to infringe everyone's liberties by engineering a new lockdown. Forcible quarantine for refusers gets my approval.
It was the big Brexit lie. No, not the £350m a week to spend on the NHS or the “bonfire” of red tape. The lie was that the shambles now enveloping British trade with Europe was an unavoidable price worth paying to leave the EU. That was rubbish.
Brexit need never have so devastated the British economy. The damage has come from one decision, to depart the single market. The sensible path now would be for Johnson to eat humble pie and seek, as far and as fast as possible, readmission to that market. Britain would imitate the protocol it has agreed for Northern Ireland. This would not mean rejoining the EU, just rejoining Ireland – the most delicious of historical ironies.
Negotiating the single market in 1987 was Margaret Thatcher’s proudest free-trade achievement. It was in Britain’s and Europe’s interest and proved a success. Johnson reversed that achievement in an act of naked political ambition. He pretended it was necessary for Brexit. It was his biggest lie.
I need to go to Falkirk but that is the most awful tosh. The EU themselves were crystal clear that they were not offering free trade without membership and the subscriptions. Why on earth would they? And, of course, it is not on offer now.
A woman called Mary Mallon (died 1938) was an asymptomatic carrier of typhoid. She was imprisoned because she refused to curb her ways. It was her right to encourage the spread of typhoid fever. The UK government and the law disagreed. She went down in history as 'Typhoid Mary'.
How about the same treatment for the anti-vaxxers?
Not sure the UK government had much to do with it, given she lived, was imprisoned and died in New York.
It was the big Brexit lie. No, not the £350m a week to spend on the NHS or the “bonfire” of red tape. The lie was that the shambles now enveloping British trade with Europe was an unavoidable price worth paying to leave the EU. That was rubbish.
Brexit need never have so devastated the British economy. The damage has come from one decision, to depart the single market. The sensible path now would be for Johnson to eat humble pie and seek, as far and as fast as possible, readmission to that market. Britain would imitate the protocol it has agreed for Northern Ireland. This would not mean rejoining the EU, just rejoining Ireland – the most delicious of historical ironies.
Negotiating the single market in 1987 was Margaret Thatcher’s proudest free-trade achievement. It was in Britain’s and Europe’s interest and proved a success. Johnson reversed that achievement in an act of naked political ambition. He pretended it was necessary for Brexit. It was his biggest lie.
Labour are useless. Where is the "Tory tax bombshell" line or "Tax rise on workers"?
Labour are a weaker opposition than the Tories in 1997 or 2001. They've got no clue and their leader is fool.
Perhaps it is wise for Labour to actually wait for an announcement to be made before they respond? They'd look pretty foolish if they ran with "tax rise on workers" if the whole proposal is pulled in the next couple of days, which is quite possible.
If it gets pulled they look great because their opposition to it has forced a u-turn. Labour just had no energy. They're in opposition but look and feel like a spent force that's recently been kicked out after 20 years in government.
The NI rise has been briefed widely enough than any backtrack will be seen as a significant u-turn.
Well said.
All an Opposition needs is just enough of a catchphrase to be taken seriously - preferably one that can be boiled down to a few words that can be repeated ad nauseum - not a full detailed plan.
But they can't even be able to come up with that.
I'm not a Labour supporter so don't back their worldview but if I was Labour I'd be thinking along the lines of going hard on the fact NI isn't paid on unearned income and say something like "tax the wealthiest not hard working families".
That's the worst one. For example, I have significant dividend income from a start up company I backed 5 or so years ago that has now become profitable after floating and is paying dividends, because it's not in an ISA the income is taxable but I don't pay any NI on it. It's ridiculous that money I do nothing for has a lesser rate of tax than money I go out and work hard for. Something in this country is broken and no one seems to want to fix it.
To get income you go and do a day's work and someone hands you money at the end of it. Low risk.
Dividends/capital gains are high risk... You might never see them, you might actually lose money in the pursuit of them.
If the government taxes these at the same level as income what would that do for investment?
Its higher risk but higher reward, that's why people go for the investment.
How about investing in property - why should a landlord extracting rents be taxed less than somebody going out to work for a living?
It's not necessarily higher risk either. I'm just as likely to lose my job in an economic downturn as an investor is to see the capital values drop or dividends halted. We also do incentivise risk taking by taxing capital gain at a much lower rate than income.
Losing your job is not the same as losing money you invested. Lose your job you go get another one.
Losing money you invested is like having a negative job, a job that takes money from you. Totally different. You may think being a landlord is safe, free money, but it's far from it. Risk of a house price crash. Risk of tenants of tenants defaulting, wrecking your property, risk of the building having a structural fault, I could go on and on.
So that's exactly why landlords should be taxed less. Unless you want lots of landlords to decide it's not worth it, sell up, and this country becomes a less attractive place to invest.
It was the big Brexit lie. No, not the £350m a week to spend on the NHS or the “bonfire” of red tape. The lie was that the shambles now enveloping British trade with Europe was an unavoidable price worth paying to leave the EU. That was rubbish.
Brexit need never have so devastated the British economy. The damage has come from one decision, to depart the single market. The sensible path now would be for Johnson to eat humble pie and seek, as far and as fast as possible, readmission to that market. Britain would imitate the protocol it has agreed for Northern Ireland. This would not mean rejoining the EU, just rejoining Ireland – the most delicious of historical ironies.
Negotiating the single market in 1987 was Margaret Thatcher’s proudest free-trade achievement. It was in Britain’s and Europe’s interest and proved a success. Johnson reversed that achievement in an act of naked political ambition. He pretended it was necessary for Brexit. It was his biggest lie.
It was the big Brexit lie. No, not the £350m a week to spend on the NHS or the “bonfire” of red tape. The lie was that the shambles now enveloping British trade with Europe was an unavoidable price worth paying to leave the EU. That was rubbish.
Brexit need never have so devastated the British economy. The damage has come from one decision, to depart the single market. The sensible path now would be for Johnson to eat humble pie and seek, as far and as fast as possible, readmission to that market. Britain would imitate the protocol it has agreed for Northern Ireland. This would not mean rejoining the EU, just rejoining Ireland – the most delicious of historical ironies.
Negotiating the single market in 1987 was Margaret Thatcher’s proudest free-trade achievement. It was in Britain’s and Europe’s interest and proved a success. Johnson reversed that achievement in an act of naked political ambition. He pretended it was necessary for Brexit. It was his biggest lie.
I need to go to Falkirk but that is the most awful tosh. The EU themselves were crystal clear that they were not offering free trade without membership and the subscriptions. Why on earth would they? And, of course, it is not on offer now.
Yes, our Brexit troubles are a totally self-inflicted wound.
Labour are useless. Where is the "Tory tax bombshell" line or "Tax rise on workers"?
Labour are a weaker opposition than the Tories in 1997 or 2001. They've got no clue and their leader is fool.
Perhaps it is wise for Labour to actually wait for an announcement to be made before they respond? They'd look pretty foolish if they ran with "tax rise on workers" if the whole proposal is pulled in the next couple of days, which is quite possible.
If it gets pulled they look great because their opposition to it has forced a u-turn. Labour just had no energy. They're in opposition but look and feel like a spent force that's recently been kicked out after 20 years in government.
The NI rise has been briefed widely enough than any backtrack will be seen as a significant u-turn.
Well said.
All an Opposition needs is just enough of a catchphrase to be taken seriously - preferably one that can be boiled down to a few words that can be repeated ad nauseum - not a full detailed plan.
But they can't even be able to come up with that.
I'm not a Labour supporter so don't back their worldview but if I was Labour I'd be thinking along the lines of going hard on the fact NI isn't paid on unearned income and say something like "tax the wealthiest not hard working families".
That's the worst one. For example, I have significant dividend income from a start up company I backed 5 or so years ago that has now become profitable after floating and is paying dividends, because it's not in an ISA the income is taxable but I don't pay any NI on it. It's ridiculous that money I do nothing for has a lesser rate of tax than money I go out and work hard for. Something in this country is broken and no one seems to want to fix it.
To get income you go and do a day's work and someone hands you money at the end of it. Low risk.
Dividends/capital gains are high risk... You might never see them, you might actually lose money in the pursuit of them.
If the government taxes these at the same level as income what would that do for investment?
Its higher risk but higher reward, that's why people go for the investment.
How about investing in property - why should a landlord extracting rents be taxed less than somebody going out to work for a living?
It's not necessarily higher risk either. I'm just as likely to lose my job in an economic downturn as an investor is to see the capital values drop or dividends halted. We also do incentivise risk taking by taxing capital gain at a much lower rate than income.
Losing your job is not the same as losing money you invested. Lose your job you go get another one.
Losing money you invested is like having a negative job, a job that takes money from you. Totally different. You may think being a landlord is safe, free money, but it's far from it. Risk of a house price crash. Risk of tenants of tenants defaulting, wrecking your property, risk of the building having a structural fault, I could go on and on.
So that's exactly why landlords should be taxed less. Unless you want lots of landlords to decide it's not worth it, sell up, and this country becomes a less attractive place to invest.
I'm entirely fine with landlords selling up and houses going onto the market as a place for people to buy to live in rather than "an attractive investment".
It was the big Brexit lie. No, not the £350m a week to spend on the NHS or the “bonfire” of red tape. The lie was that the shambles now enveloping British trade with Europe was an unavoidable price worth paying to leave the EU. That was rubbish.
Brexit need never have so devastated the British economy. The damage has come from one decision, to depart the single market. The sensible path now would be for Johnson to eat humble pie and seek, as far and as fast as possible, readmission to that market. Britain would imitate the protocol it has agreed for Northern Ireland. This would not mean rejoining the EU, just rejoining Ireland – the most delicious of historical ironies.
Negotiating the single market in 1987 was Margaret Thatcher’s proudest free-trade achievement. It was in Britain’s and Europe’s interest and proved a success. Johnson reversed that achievement in an act of naked political ambition. He pretended it was necessary for Brexit. It was his biggest lie.
Burnham on r4 wants 10% from all estates to cover costs. Points out that estates will be bigger because they won't have been whittled down by care costs.
Also reserving right to go for wealth tax, increase cgt.
I think this general approach, which is not a mile away from May's infamous dementia tax, is the way to go. If your parent is unfortunate enough to need extensive end of care life in a home the cost of that should be borne by their estate in so far as it is capable of doing so and the cost of that care has a better claim on the estate than the children.
Hopefully, such hardship will be capable of being offset by insurance products and the government should encourage these but I just don't see what else is going to produce the money required. 1p on NI isn't even a sticking plaster.
10% on all estates spreads the load across society but will create a tax avoidance industry the likes of which we have not seen since Lawson made our tax system fit for purpose. Insurance is a better option in my view.
Not least because paying tax when you are dead is preferable to when alive.
Can Labour get any traction with what is potentially an attractive line? It’s weakness - and the reason of course why our ultra-cynical PM has chosen it - is that people don’t really understand National Insurance in the first place.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
On the last point anti-vaxxers want to be able to have their cake and eat it too: refusing the vaccine that will prevent them getting sick and ending up at the NHS, but still expecting treatment to be offered as a "fundamental principle of the NHS" despite having refused the vaccine.
Except that fundamental principle isn't so fundamental. The NHS is already today prepared to take an individuals behaviour into account for their treatment plans.
If more patients require liver transplants than available livers, then don't alcoholics who refuse to give up drinking get denied liver transplants - despite the fact they need a new liver to survive and despite the "fundamental principles of the NHS".
Alcoholism is at least a recognised illness and still people get denied treatment based upon it - I see no divine right antivaxxers should be granted special extra attention at the NHS having refused the earlier vaccine offered to them.
Is that right? Foxy would know, but I don't think treatment is denied because alcoholism makes you a less deserving case. They may refuse you a new liver if they think you will continue drinking with it, but that is because it's a waste of a liver. It's based on likely future conduct, not directly on past.
Labour are useless. Where is the "Tory tax bombshell" line or "Tax rise on workers"?
Labour are a weaker opposition than the Tories in 1997 or 2001. They've got no clue and their leader is fool.
Perhaps it is wise for Labour to actually wait for an announcement to be made before they respond? They'd look pretty foolish if they ran with "tax rise on workers" if the whole proposal is pulled in the next couple of days, which is quite possible.
If it gets pulled they look great because their opposition to it has forced a u-turn. Labour just had no energy. They're in opposition but look and feel like a spent force that's recently been kicked out after 20 years in government.
The NI rise has been briefed widely enough than any backtrack will be seen as a significant u-turn.
Labour are useless. Where is the "Tory tax bombshell" line or "Tax rise on workers"?
Labour are a weaker opposition than the Tories in 1997 or 2001. They've got no clue and their leader is fool.
Perhaps it is wise for Labour to actually wait for an announcement to be made before they respond? They'd look pretty foolish if they ran with "tax rise on workers" if the whole proposal is pulled in the next couple of days, which is quite possible.
If it gets pulled they look great because their opposition to it has forced a u-turn. Labour just had no energy. They're in opposition but look and feel like a spent force that's recently been kicked out after 20 years in government.
The NI rise has been briefed widely enough than any backtrack will be seen as a significant u-turn.
Rachel Reeves tweet
‘A rise in National Insurance would hit low earners and young people hard, and place an enormous burden on businesses trying to get back on their feet.
The Conservative's unfair and misguided approach shows they’re out of touch and out of ideas.’
This is populism in action; a product of being led by polling and their dunderhead focus groups. This isn't about logic and fairness and principle. It is about what is sellable to the majority of people. And an increased NI, which Joe Public doesn't understand and which will be hypothecated for the national religion the NHS, trumps an income tax increase comfortably.
Seems to me that those railing against these populist proposals now were quite keen on populism when it brought us Brexit.
One of Nicola Sturgeon’s advisers has ridiculed the economic plans for independence for a “complete lack of specificity” and said that it would take decades to restabilise the economy after a “yes” vote. Mark Blyth, professor of international economics at the Watson Institute of Brown University in Rhode Island, also rejected the assumption often pushed by some members of the SNP that an independent Scotland would automatically operate in a similar manner to Scandinavian countries.
“The problem that I’ve seen so far is the complete lack of specificity as to ‘here is what the Scottish business model is now, here is where we want to be, this is how we’re going to get from here to here by doing this’,” he said in an online interview. “Instead of that what we’ve got is ‘Denmark is awesome, we should be like Denmark, if we were independent we would be Denmark’. No, you wouldn’t be Denmark. Denmark took 600 years to become Denmark.
Internet users should be able to accept all cookie requests with a single click of a button, the UK’s privacy watchdog has said.
Elizabeth Denham, the Information Commissioner, said she wanted tech companies to let people choose their privacy settings on their device or web browser that would then apply to any website they visited.
She said such a system would avoid the "fatigue" that people felt at having endless pop-ups asking them to set their privacy requirements for every website.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
On the last point anti-vaxxers want to be able to have their cake and eat it too: refusing the vaccine that will prevent them getting sick and ending up at the NHS, but still expecting treatment to be offered as a "fundamental principle of the NHS" despite having refused the vaccine.
Except that fundamental principle isn't so fundamental. The NHS is already today prepared to take an individuals behaviour into account for their treatment plans.
If more patients require liver transplants than available livers, then don't alcoholics who refuse to give up drinking get denied liver transplants - despite the fact they need a new liver to survive and despite the "fundamental principles of the NHS".
Alcoholism is at least a recognised illness and still people get denied treatment based upon it - I see no divine right antivaxxers should be granted special extra attention at the NHS having refused the earlier vaccine offered to them.
Is that right? Foxy would know, but I don't think treatment is denied because alcoholism makes you a less deserving case. They may refuse you a new liver if they think you will continue drinking with it, but that is because it's a waste of a liver. It's based on likely future conduct, not directly on past.
I think you're right that its based on likely future conduct in their thinking, but is set as far as I understand directly on the past. I believe from memory (and I could be wrong) that alcoholics need to be sober something like a year before they can be considered for a liver.
Either way, actions have had consequences in the past, not just potentially for antivaxxers.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
On the last point anti-vaxxers want to be able to have their cake and eat it too: refusing the vaccine that will prevent them getting sick and ending up at the NHS, but still expecting treatment to be offered as a "fundamental principle of the NHS" despite having refused the vaccine.
Except that fundamental principle isn't so fundamental. The NHS is already today prepared to take an individuals behaviour into account for their treatment plans.
If more patients require liver transplants than available livers, then don't alcoholics who refuse to give up drinking get denied liver transplants - despite the fact they need a new liver to survive and despite the "fundamental principles of the NHS".
Alcoholism is at least a recognised illness and still people get denied treatment based upon it - I see no divine right antivaxxers should be granted special extra attention at the NHS having refused the earlier vaccine offered to them.
Your transplant case is doesn’t work - it’s a medical decision based on the likelihood of successful treatment
A woman called Mary Mallon (died 1938) was an asymptomatic carrier of typhoid. She was imprisoned because she refused to curb her ways. It was her right to encourage the spread of typhoid fever. The UK government and the law disagreed. She went down in history as 'Typhoid Mary'.
How about the same treatment for the anti-vaxxers?
Mary M, Typhoid Mary was born in the UK but lived from the time she was 15 or so in the US, which has a somewhat different view of liberty to the UK.
The difference is that she had the disease and was actively spreading it. Not she had refused a preventative intervention.
(The facts are a little more sympathetic to Mary than popular memory - she was a washerwoman with no other skills and no social security so faced a choice of working or starving)
The Tánaiste has said Ireland expects Britain to announce further extensions to post-Brexit grace periods on goods imports into both Northern Ireland and into the rest of the United Kingdom.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
On the last point anti-vaxxers want to be able to have their cake and eat it too: refusing the vaccine that will prevent them getting sick and ending up at the NHS, but still expecting treatment to be offered as a "fundamental principle of the NHS" despite having refused the vaccine.
Except that fundamental principle isn't so fundamental. The NHS is already today prepared to take an individuals behaviour into account for their treatment plans.
If more patients require liver transplants than available livers, then don't alcoholics who refuse to give up drinking get denied liver transplants - despite the fact they need a new liver to survive and despite the "fundamental principles of the NHS".
Alcoholism is at least a recognised illness and still people get denied treatment based upon it - I see no divine right antivaxxers should be granted special extra attention at the NHS having refused the earlier vaccine offered to them.
Is that right? Foxy would know, but I don't think treatment is denied because alcoholism makes you a less deserving case. They may refuse you a new liver if they think you will continue drinking with it, but that is because it's a waste of a liver. It's based on likely future conduct, not directly on past.
I think you're right that its based on likely future conduct in their thinking, but is set as far as I understand directly on the past. I believe from memory (and I could be wrong) that alcoholics need to be sober something like a year before they can be considered for a liver.
Either way, actions have had consequences in the past, not just potentially for antivaxxers.
Coronation Street had (possibly still has) a storyline on this very point. IIRC the character had to remain alcohol-free for a while, and to do so once the transplant had taken place. I think it's one of their public health story-lines.
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
On the last point anti-vaxxers want to be able to have their cake and eat it too: refusing the vaccine that will prevent them getting sick and ending up at the NHS, but still expecting treatment to be offered as a "fundamental principle of the NHS" despite having refused the vaccine.
Except that fundamental principle isn't so fundamental. The NHS is already today prepared to take an individuals behaviour into account for their treatment plans.
If more patients require liver transplants than available livers, then don't alcoholics who refuse to give up drinking get denied liver transplants - despite the fact they need a new liver to survive and despite the "fundamental principles of the NHS".
Alcoholism is at least a recognised illness and still people get denied treatment based upon it - I see no divine right antivaxxers should be granted special extra attention at the NHS having refused the earlier vaccine offered to them.
Is that right? Foxy would know, but I don't think treatment is denied because alcoholism makes you a less deserving case. They may refuse you a new liver if they think you will continue drinking with it, but that is because it's a waste of a liver. It's based on likely future conduct, not directly on past.
It was the big Brexit lie. No, not the £350m a week to spend on the NHS or the “bonfire” of red tape. The lie was that the shambles now enveloping British trade with Europe was an unavoidable price worth paying to leave the EU. That was rubbish.
Brexit need never have so devastated the British economy. The damage has come from one decision, to depart the single market. The sensible path now would be for Johnson to eat humble pie and seek, as far and as fast as possible, readmission to that market. Britain would imitate the protocol it has agreed for Northern Ireland. This would not mean rejoining the EU, just rejoining Ireland – the most delicious of historical ironies.
Negotiating the single market in 1987 was Margaret Thatcher’s proudest free-trade achievement. It was in Britain’s and Europe’s interest and proved a success. Johnson reversed that achievement in an act of naked political ambition. He pretended it was necessary for Brexit. It was his biggest lie.
I need to go to Falkirk but that is the most awful tosh. The EU themselves were crystal clear that they were not offering free trade without membership and the subscriptions. Why on earth would they? And, of course, it is not on offer now.
A woman called Mary Mallon (died 1938) was an asymptomatic carrier of typhoid. She was imprisoned because she refused to curb her ways. It was her right to encourage the spread of typhoid fever. The UK government and the law disagreed. She went down in history as 'Typhoid Mary'.
How about the same treatment for the anti-vaxxers?
Mary M, Typhoid Mary was born in the UK but lived from the time she was 15 or so in the US, which has a somewhat different view of liberty to the UK.
The difference is that she had the disease and was actively spreading it. Not she had refused a preventative intervention.
(The facts are a little more sympathetic to Mary than popular memory - she was a washerwoman with no other skills and no social security so faced a choice of working or starving)
According to Wikipedia she was a cook. She was offered 'freedom' if she gave up cooking for other people but refused because it was the best paid job she was qualified to do.
It was the big Brexit lie. No, not the £350m a week to spend on the NHS or the “bonfire” of red tape. The lie was that the shambles now enveloping British trade with Europe was an unavoidable price worth paying to leave the EU. That was rubbish.
Brexit need never have so devastated the British economy. The damage has come from one decision, to depart the single market. The sensible path now would be for Johnson to eat humble pie and seek, as far and as fast as possible, readmission to that market. Britain would imitate the protocol it has agreed for Northern Ireland. This would not mean rejoining the EU, just rejoining Ireland – the most delicious of historical ironies.
Negotiating the single market in 1987 was Margaret Thatcher’s proudest free-trade achievement. It was in Britain’s and Europe’s interest and proved a success. Johnson reversed that achievement in an act of naked political ambition. He pretended it was necessary for Brexit. It was his biggest lie.
A massive oversimplification. Just as Scottish nationalism is about economics, politics, sovereignty and principle so is the UK and Brexit.
If the Common Market had stayed as a trade association doing boring things to ensure a single market for goods and services there would never have been a big issue. Such a movement required no flags, parliament, presidents, overriding powers, Euro, central bank, anthems or uncontrolled movement of peoples.
Responsibility lies in hubris, and in successive UK governments taking us further in without referenda. Yes, there are no perfect outcomes. But at least we can stop seeing poorer EU countries as an infinite supply of cheap labour,
The Government has drawn up plans for an October “firebreak” Covid lockdown should hospitalisations continue at their current level and threaten to overload the NHS, a senior Government scientist has told i.
The member of the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) said the UK is about to enter “an extended peak” of infections and hospitalisations, which are in danger of pushing the NHS beyond breaking point and could force the Government to re-introduce restrictions over the school half term period at the end of next month.
A full lockdown is unlikely and would be a last resort, but there are a range of measures the government could introduce.
“This is essentially the precautionary break that Sage suggested last year,” said the Sage source. “It would be sensible to have contingency plans, and if a lockdown is required, to time it so that it has minimal economic and societal impact.
“We are going to be at a peak, albeit an extended peak, quite soon, so it’s not really the same situation as last year, when failure to reduce prevalence would have resulted in collapse of NHS and people dying in car parks,” he said.
“Hospitals might be overflowing before deaths reach the same level. Acting early will prevent this level.”
It is understood that the Government’s contingency plan for a “firebreak” lockdown could lead to an extension of the half-term, from one week for most schools to two weeks from late October into early November.
I do wish people wouldn't use the word lockdown when it doesn't mean lockdown.
I know the Independent want to sell papers but they should be responsible about their language too.
If there are a NHS crashing number of cases the government will introduce social distancing and masks, lockdown will be the last mitigation.
Indeed I would expect us to go back to Stage 3 first - eg mandatory table service and masks in pubs
Except pretty much everyone knows that this doesn't have any effect on covid at-all, other than to shaft the hospitality sector (again).
It's wrong that everyone should pay the price for something that's happening because of those who refuse to be vaccinated when they had the opportunity.
How about * vaccine passports * restarting the nightingales * clear down non essential NHS capacity to allow for more covid capacity * Tax those who aren't vaccinated to pay for the expected extra medical treatment they'll require * worst case, if capacity is totally shot, triage unvaccinated at a lower priority to everyone else
* othering is not a good path to go down * Fine although they are more maintenance * Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done * Administratively a nightmare * Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
In a parallel universe, you are the Prime Minister. It is October this year, the number of Covid patients in hospital is now over 12,000, and your advisers are screaming (yet again) about the collapse of the healthcare system by Christmas.
80% of the Covid patients in hospital are vaccine refusers. Your advisers tell you that you can rescue the situation either by taking punitive measures against the refusers, or by putting the whole population into an Auckland-style lockdown until Easter.
What do you do?
Nightingales but with more treatment capacity. Dedicated non Covid hospitals to maintain a functional system
The problem is staff. Covid surge capacity for wards and ICU comes from redeployment from elective work. There aren't staff sitting around doing nothing, indeed attrition means that there are fewer staff to do anything.
The failure to train and recruit staff is not just an HGV driver or food industry issue. For years we have flogged people with overtime rather than invested in training in the health care sector. Chickens are now roosting everywhere.
Indeed in my darker moments, I think Covid-19 will be the end of the NHS as anything more than a fairly rudimentary safety net service.
Most of crypto now feels a lot like a game where the ultimate goal is a game of musical chairs, such that when the music stops you are the one with the bitcoin and the price is very high, then that is the final dump.
I feel like I need a PhD to understand this subject.
My first rule of investment is to never invest in an enterprise that you cannot understand where they make their profit.
I may have missed some opportunities this way, but missed far more speculative bubbles.
A woman called Mary Mallon (died 1938) was an asymptomatic carrier of typhoid. She was imprisoned because she refused to curb her ways. It was her right to encourage the spread of typhoid fever. The UK government and the law disagreed. She went down in history as 'Typhoid Mary'.
How about the same treatment for the anti-vaxxers?
Mary M, Typhoid Mary was born in the UK but lived from the time she was 15 or so in the US, which has a somewhat different view of liberty to the UK.
The difference is that she had the disease and was actively spreading it. Not she had refused a preventative intervention.
(The facts are a little more sympathetic to Mary than popular memory - she was a washerwoman with no other skills and no social security so faced a choice of working or starving)
Mainly a cook, not a washerwoman, and she knowingly killed people. Many of them wealthy bankers, mind you; some might think that made a difference, I couldn't possibly comment. And it seems she did refuse interventions, though when you see what the interventions were it's easy to sympathise.
The big news in Germany this morning is the announced abandonment of whole class quarantine when a schoolchild is found infected.
The local Wahlkampf headline is the CSU fearing a fall below 30% in Bavaria.
SPD-Green government is the regional paper’s expectation.
Even 30% or close to it would be significantly higher for the CSU than the CDU will poll in the rest of Germany under Laschet. Indeed excluding Bavaria it is possible the CDU could even fall below 20% and Bavaria could end up being the only state in Germany the Union wins
The Tánaiste has said Ireland expects Britain to announce further extensions to post-Brexit grace periods on goods imports into both Northern Ireland and into the rest of the United Kingdom.
The Tánaiste has said Ireland expects Britain to announce further extensions to post-Brexit grace periods on goods imports into both Northern Ireland and into the rest of the United Kingdom.
This saga of immoveable objects and irresistible forces may well go on for years. The card the UK holds is that we don't mind a bit if there is unchecked traffic between UK/NI and RoI/EU but they, on dogmatic grounds, care a lot, even about a few high quality sausages.
The logic of that is that the EU/RoI would put up a wall within the island of Ireland, while we won't. But politically the EU/RoI can't. The protocols try to make this a UK problem. Boris is determined to make it a RoI/EU one. It is a fascinating game of chicken, and a huge amount is at stake.
Mr. Mark, that's why going for a heavy reliance on renewables is foolish. I'm not against renewables but there are times when wind (particularly bad for this) just isn't blowing right and then there's a shortfall.
So you need energy you can summon on command, which is coal/gas. So you still need that capacity, in addition to all the wind farms and so forth. Solar is more predictable, likewise tidal.
Comments
I can see some, but I also see a lot of projects where you are doing a "decentralized" version of something that already exists, with the presumption because those in this space don't trust governments and authorities, decentralized and anonymized is better.
When the reason big brands are trusted is and can charge many multiples for products you can buy anywhere, because they are a centralizing organisation, where you know who they are and what you are getting.
So is having a worldwide decentralised p2p blockchain of digital assets better than knowing I get the correct asset of a certain quality from Apple.
Apart from that it's fine to just ignore it until you see a use that looks useful to you.
I wasn't seriously suggesting it was a fraud, certainly not by crypto standards, where simply lying about everything to do with your project, having fictitious CEOs etc, isn't exactly uncommon.
Their schtick is that it's *academic*. Basically Charles, a young hustler cosplaying a middle-aged mathematician, did this hard-sales job on Japanese old people and took the money to create "partnerships" with universities. They use Haskell which is not used much in production systems but a certain type of computer science boffin is really into, and they make a big deal about creating mathematical proofs of their system's soundness. But the proofs don't really tell you much about whether the system works, because they rely on very narrow assumptions that don't necessarily apply in the real world.
The tricky thing about crypto for people who aren't used to free software is that the things that are normally signs of credibility in an organization are really signs of fraud, and vice versa. So the shady projects like Cardano - another similar one was Iota - will gather a lot of money with bold claims and glitzy PR, then use it to pay organizations you've heard of to do these "partnerships". Legitimate projects don't do this, because their focus is on actually building something, not creating an appearance of respectability to suck in investors.
So far, it has not been a notable success.
But fully agree - it’s government having contingency plans.
Which is what they are supposed to do
Although I see the EU hasn’t replied to our July proposal or agreed the scope of talks
And IANAE (and someone on here will be able to answer): aren't semi-submersible rigs kept in place with anchors, i.e. huge blocks of concrete, connected by cables to the rig? Lots of forces will be transferred through those as well.
The more the merrier; the fewer the more to eat
" This thought was expressed by Cicero, but the precise phrase first appeared in English as “The mo the meryer; the fewer, the better fare” (Jehan Palsgrave, 1530) and was credited by some to have been said first by King James I of Scotland (ca. 1423)."
https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/more+the+merrier,+the
‘Tax wealth not work.’
King of the North has been saying it.
Personally I like: "tax the wealthy not the workers".
Most people have some wealth. But not many think of themselves as wealthy. Almost everyone thinks of themselves as a worker.
* Fine although they are more maintenance
* Part of the problem is the stuff that isn’t been done
* Administratively a nightmare
* Undermine the fundamental principles of the NHS
A new “open access” train operator, branded Lumo, is to take on the state-owned LNER on the East Coast main line – with one-way fares starting at below £15 for nearly 400 miles of rail travel.
From 25 October, Lumo will offer up to 10 services a day between London King’s Cross and Edinburgh Waverley. They will take around four-and-a-half hours and serve Newcastle and the Northumberland town of Morpeth en route – with some trains calling at Stevenage in Hertfordshire, close to Luton airport."
https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/train-london-edinburgh-lumo-lner-b1915341.html
80% of the Covid patients in hospital are vaccine refusers. Your advisers tell you that you can rescue the situation either by taking punitive measures against the refusers, or by putting the whole population into an Auckland-style lockdown until Easter.
What do you do?
I doubt avoidance is ever 100%. If you are putting 100m into trust to avoid iht you are probably keeping more than 325,000 worth of stuff for your own personal use, because of the rules against retaining a partial interest in what you give away, so you end up paying something.
What big calls have SAGE got right?
Probably advising a lockdown at the very start earlier than the PM and Cummings were willing to consider it.
But after that, I’m struggling.
Some whingeing old people write...
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/sep/06/pensioners-have-already-paid-their-fair-share-in-tax
If they don't get the full whack then an awful lot of them are going to eject toys from pram, because they'll feel robbed and because they were promised the triple lock would be maintained. Made all the worse by the fact that the latter is undeniably true. As with all entitlements, the recipients don't care about mammoth costs, which they expect to be paid by other people whom they regard as less deserving than themselves.
The arguments about the triple lock are a classic example of the fallout of bad legislation (which is also at the root of the needless rows about trimming the overseas aid budget when the national debt has just shot up by the better part of half-a-trillion pounds.) The peculiar consequences of the pandemic-induced wage inflexion might not have been easily anticipated but the potential disruptive power of any number of "events" - economic depression, war, major natural disasters - ought to have been recognised and an emergency brake built into the system. Apart from anything else, it would've kept pensioners alive to the possibility that they might not get the raise they were expecting if the Black Death made a comeback or Manchester was levelled by an asteroid.
Lovely morning here, clear skies and warmer than to be expected at 15degC.
TBH I am rather surprised that the Government, or at least the part of it that makes the decisions, appears to have gone for such a simplistic 'answer' to the problem of funding care, both social and the NHS.
I suspect that when the PM stands up in the House this afternoon there will be some sort of rabbit pulled out of the hat. Whether it will be sparkly white and different or the usual mangy brown, I, and all of us, wait to see.
@CorrectHorseBattery may be on to a good thing with his bet on a Labour poll lead.
But I take your general point that the advice that the government has received has not often proven to be particularly wise. The JCVI equivocation on children's vaccines is the latest frustration.
At least yesterday I've been able to keep an eye on Essex vs Gloucs which has cheered me up somewhat.
Having advised not to boost kids, even though it makes sense Adam Finn is on the media every chance he gets telling parents it's a very fine/difficult choice.
The man has no concept of the messaging needed; it could objectively be the easiest choice in the world and plenty of parents will still worry.
And Harndern saying it should be "parents choice" even though he was on the board that didn't recommend any sort of rollout at all !
Getting the longer dosing schedule right doesn't excuse every other unforced error - the JCVI needs to now ask to produce a body of fact and the decisions taken by the CMOs in conjunction with the MHRA for future boosters/new vaccines.
And any Somerset fan will be fuming if they get away with that wicket without penalty.
What will actually happen under the kind of circumstances that I described (and despite the fact that the Tories are so frequently derided as cruel and merciless) is, of course, that all the Covid sufferers will receive equal priority and the entire country will be put back into lockdown for months to stop too many of the anti-vaxxers from getting sick at once.
Under such circumstances, I would imagine that giving the state the power to force everyone to accept vaccination (even if that means Chinese-style snatch squads of heavies in hazmat suits pinning screaming refusers to the ground and shoving wide bore needles into their arses) would suddenly become a very popular policy.
Sequencing of jabs
The problem is, if our advisory groups are always giving dud advice - what’s the point of them?
Because my response would be tell them to STFU and accept that it is the right thing to do
You can, of course, have your dedicated fever hospitals anyway, but they'll have almost no staff and the prognosis for anyone dumped in them will be bleak. So, do you segregate the anti-vaxxers into crap care and reserve the proper hospitals for everyone else, or do you insist on not "othering" anybody and tell all the Covid patients to take their chances in the fever hospitals?
Once the healthcare system starts to buckle then there are no ducking the hard choices. Some combination of restrictions on public freedoms and/or healthcare rationing are required. So, do you shit on the refusers or do you shit on everyone?
I suspect those who might complain about not getting 8% slapped onto their pensions will be vocal, and get media coverage, but also be a minority. My mother has sod all sympathy for the WASPI types, and I expect a similar sentiment from many pensioners towards those who think in the present circumstances they deserve 8%.
The pandemic is a legitimate reason for certain manifesto commitments, particularly regarding financial matters, not to be kept. This seems a rather obvious point...
Although we do seem to be doing well with faster ones at the moment.
Also reserving right to go for wealth tax, increase cgt.
I do know one or two people for whom the situation isn't as easy, though.
Except that fundamental principle isn't so fundamental. The NHS is already today prepared to take an individuals behaviour into account for their treatment plans.
If more patients require liver transplants than available livers, then don't alcoholics who refuse to give up drinking get denied liver transplants - despite the fact they need a new liver to survive and despite the "fundamental principles of the NHS".
Alcoholism is at least a recognised illness and still people get denied treatment based upon it - I see no divine right antivaxxers should be granted special extra attention at the NHS having refused the earlier vaccine offered to them.
Brexit need never have so devastated the British economy. The damage has come from one decision, to depart the single market. The sensible path now would be for Johnson to eat humble pie and seek, as far and as fast as possible, readmission to that market. Britain would imitate the protocol it has agreed for Northern Ireland. This would not mean rejoining the EU, just rejoining Ireland – the most delicious of historical ironies.
Negotiating the single market in 1987 was Margaret Thatcher’s proudest free-trade achievement. It was in Britain’s and Europe’s interest and proved a success. Johnson reversed that achievement in an act of naked political ambition. He pretended it was necessary for Brexit. It was his biggest lie.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/06/boris-johnsons-biggest-lie-europe-coming-home-single-market
But that's not the case with NI tax rise. Its a tax on workers while unearned income gets let off untaxed.
We should be abolishing NI and treating all income the same, not further punitively taxing earned income.
Brexiteers = morons
How about the same treatment for the anti-vaxxers?
Hopefully, such hardship will be capable of being offset by insurance products and the government should encourage these but I just don't see what else is going to produce the money required. 1p on NI isn't even a sticking plaster.
10% on all estates spreads the load across society but will create a tax avoidance industry the likes of which we have not seen since Lawson made our tax system fit for purpose. Insurance is a better option in my view.
Just like that woman with that fucking alpaca.
The dweebs who rabbit on about vaccine passports infringing liberties, fail to notice that refusers are trying to infringe everyone's liberties by engineering a new lockdown. Forcible quarantine for refusers gets my approval.
Losing money you invested is like having a negative job, a job that takes money from you. Totally different. You may think being a landlord is safe, free money, but it's far from it. Risk of a house price crash. Risk of tenants of tenants defaulting, wrecking your property, risk of the building having a structural fault, I could go on and on.
So that's exactly why landlords should be taxed less. Unless you want lots of landlords to decide it's not worth it, sell up, and this country becomes a less attractive place to invest.
"US (New York) government surely?"
Correct. My mistake, It is early.
But she spent thirty years locked up.
The local Wahlkampf headline is the CSU fearing a fall below 30% in Bavaria.
SPD-Green government is the regional paper’s expectation.
Can Labour get any traction with what is potentially an attractive line? It’s weakness - and the reason of course why our ultra-cynical PM has chosen it - is that people don’t really understand National Insurance in the first place.
This is populism in action; a product of being led by polling and their dunderhead focus groups. This isn't about logic and fairness and principle. It is about what is sellable to the majority of people. And an increased NI, which Joe Public doesn't understand and which will be hypothecated for the national religion the NHS, trumps an income tax increase comfortably.
Seems to me that those railing against these populist proposals now were quite keen on populism when it brought us Brexit.
“The problem that I’ve seen so far is the complete lack of specificity as to ‘here is what the Scottish business model is now, here is where we want to be, this is how we’re going to get from here to here by doing this’,” he said in an online interview. “Instead of that what we’ve got is ‘Denmark is awesome, we should be like Denmark, if we were independent we would be Denmark’. No, you wouldn’t be Denmark. Denmark took 600 years to become Denmark.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/e292634e-0f5e-11ec-868a-b68487b876a6?shareToken=696e9221d03ad12beb0b45fb21f49026
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/09/07/give-internet-users-one-click-stop-endless-cookies-pop-ups-says/
Internet users should be able to accept all cookie requests with a single click of a button, the UK’s privacy watchdog has said.
Elizabeth Denham, the Information Commissioner, said she wanted tech companies to let people choose their privacy settings on their device or web browser that would then apply to any website they visited.
She said such a system would avoid the "fatigue" that people felt at having endless pop-ups asking them to set their privacy requirements for every website.
Either way, actions have had consequences in the past, not just potentially for antivaxxers.
(The facts are a little more sympathetic to Mary than popular memory - she was a washerwoman with no other skills and no social security so faced a choice of working or starving)
The Tánaiste has said Ireland expects Britain to announce further extensions to post-Brexit grace periods on goods imports into both Northern Ireland and into the rest of the United Kingdom.
https://twitter.com/RTEbusiness/status/1434869493004652545?s=20
I think it's one of their public health story-lines.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58469238
If the Common Market had stayed as a trade association doing boring things to ensure a single market for goods and services there would never have been a big issue. Such a movement required no flags, parliament, presidents, overriding powers, Euro, central bank, anthems or uncontrolled movement of peoples.
Responsibility lies in hubris, and in successive UK governments taking us further in without referenda. Yes, there are no perfect outcomes. But at least we can stop seeing poorer EU countries as an infinite supply of cheap labour,
The failure to train and recruit staff is not just an HGV driver or food industry issue. For years we have flogged people with overtime rather than invested in training in the health care sector. Chickens are now roosting everywhere.
Indeed in my darker moments, I think Covid-19 will be the end of the NHS as anything more than a fairly rudimentary safety net service.
I may have missed some opportunities this way, but missed far more speculative bubbles.
The logic of that is that the EU/RoI would put up a wall within the island of Ireland, while we won't. But politically the EU/RoI can't. The protocols try to make this a UK problem. Boris is determined to make it a RoI/EU one. It is a fascinating game of chicken, and a huge amount is at stake.
So you need energy you can summon on command, which is coal/gas. So you still need that capacity, in addition to all the wind farms and so forth. Solar is more predictable, likewise tidal.