politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » 9% of members of the UK cabinet have now tested positive

TheScreamingEagles said:

Am I missing something here?

https://twitter.com/angusmacneilsnp/status/1243511170201530369?s=21

Another unfunny idiot.

Can we source our own ventilators and participate in the EU scheme or is it "both" ?

peter_from_putney said:

Truly shocking numbers just announced for the UK yesterday ... Cumulative Covid-19 Cases increase by 25.1% from 11,658 to 14,579, Cumulative Deaths increase by 31.3% from 578 to 759. In percentage terms, these are worse than just about any other major country and at a time when one might have hoped for some element of downturn after the much harsher controls were introduced on Monday, all the more worrying therefore.

Errrr. We won't see a decline in numbers until the end of next week most likely as there is a lag from locking down to having an effect. And the numbers are pretty similar to other European countries at similar stages of their epidemics (especially when corrected for overall differences in population). The exception is Germany, which has clearly done a lot more testing than pretty much everywhere else.

Luckyguy1983 said:

MarqueeMark said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Am I missing something here?

https://twitter.com/angusmacneilsnp/status/1243511170201530369?s=21

Yes, a smart-arsed SNP MP.

What is cornoravirusus?

He's the first person to turn it into a verb: 'coronavirus us'.

kamski said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

kingbongo said:

Philip_Thompson said:

rcs1000 said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/chrisgreybrexit/status/1243541897387401218

Am I the only one who doesn't give a shit about this story?

No. We got the ventilators we wanted who gives a shit how?

it does seem odd - if the UK wasn't getting ventilators you could understand it but the complaint seems to be that the UK didn't join in a vague procurement arrangement.

There's nothing vague about it. It's a group of Governments advertising a contract and getting suppliers to bid.

I am also stunned how many people on here seem to think, "Brilliant - all our ventilator needs are now met by Dyson". Firstly, we don't know what peak demand for ventilators will be, and would clearly like to get more than Dyson can supply. Secondly, we have the problem of a single supplier who has never made ventilators - hopefully they will meet specs and timescales, but it'd be really good to hedge that risk.

Our government is speaking to manufacturers directly. Why would we need a middle organisation to speak to other suppliers? What is to stop suppliers speaking to the UK directly?

And yet the official reason for not participating is this:
A UK government spokesperson said: "Owing to an initial communication problem, the UK did not receive an invitation in time to join in four joint procurements in response to the coronavirus pandemic.

"As the (European) Commission has confirmed, we are eligible to participate in joint procurements during the transition period, following our departure from the EU earlier this year.

"As those four initial procurement schemes had already gone out to tender we were unable to take part in these, but we will consider participating in future procurement schemes on the basis of public health requirements at the time."
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-52052694

also:
Why are other European governments participating if it's such a waste of time?

Maybe it's not a big deal and won't make a lot of difference at the end of the day, but the robotic insistence by some posters on here that the current UK government can, almost by definition, only have always made the best possible decision in every circumstance is kind of scary.

Why burn a bridge you may want in the future? A polite turn down now is better than burning a bridge and the line "on the basis of public health requirements at the time" is deliberately vague and doesn't commit us to either participating or not participating if it's worthwhile in the future or not.

If you can tell me one advantage to this scheme that wasn't found by speaking to manufacturers directly then I'd be more bothered.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Quite why anyone thinks we should have added an extra layer of EU bureaucracy and EU politics into our urgent sourcing of more ventilators is a mystery to me.

And not or.

Chameleon said:

peter_from_putney said:

Truly shocking numbers just announced for the UK yesterday ... Cumulative Covid-19 Cases increase by 25.1% from 11,658 to 14,579, Cumulative Deaths increase by 31.3% from 578 to 759. In percentage terms, these are worse than just about any other major country and at a time when one might have hoped for some element of downturn after the much harsher controls were introduced on Monday, all the more worrying therefore.

There's a large lag in both infections and deaths. These are figures from 1-2 weeks ago.

You get to see the results of actions ~ 10 days ago in this one. It's the combination of delay and exponential growth that is scary.

Philip_Thompson said:

kamski said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

kingbongo said:

Philip_Thompson said:

rcs1000 said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/chrisgreybrexit/status/1243541897387401218

Am I the only one who doesn't give a shit about this story?

No. We got the ventilators we wanted who gives a shit how?

it does seem odd - if the UK wasn't getting ventilators you could understand it but the complaint seems to be that the UK didn't join in a vague procurement arrangement.

There's nothing vague about it. It's a group of Governments advertising a contract and getting suppliers to bid.

I am also stunned how many people on here seem to think, "Brilliant - all our ventilator needs are now met by Dyson". Firstly, we don't know what peak demand for ventilators will be, and would clearly like to get more than Dyson can supply. Secondly, we have the problem of a single supplier who has never made ventilators - hopefully they will meet specs and timescales, but it'd be really good to hedge that risk.

Our government is speaking to manufacturers directly. Why would we need a middle organisation to speak to other suppliers? What is to stop suppliers speaking to the UK directly?

And yet the official reason for not participating is this:
A UK government spokesperson said: "Owing to an initial communication problem, the UK did not receive an invitation in time to join in four joint procurements in response to the coronavirus pandemic.

"As the (European) Commission has confirmed, we are eligible to participate in joint procurements during the transition period, following our departure from the EU earlier this year.

"As those four initial procurement schemes had already gone out to tender we were unable to take part in these, but we will consider participating in future procurement schemes on the basis of public health requirements at the time."
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-52052694

also:
Why are other European governments participating if it's such a waste of time?

Maybe it's not a big deal and won't make a lot of difference at the end of the day, but the robotic insistence by some posters on here that the current UK government can, almost by definition, only have always made the best possible decision in every circumstance is kind of scary.

Why burn a bridge you may want in the future? A polite turn down now is better than burning a bridge and the line "on the basis of public health requirements at the time" is deliberately vague and doesn't commit us to either participating or not participating if it's worthwhile in the future or not.

If you can tell me one advantage to this scheme that wasn't found by speaking to manufacturers directly then I'd be more bothered.

But why have other European governments decided there is a point to it?

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

RobD said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

RobD said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/chrisgreybrexit/status/1243541897387401218

Given that the UK has left the EU, why would it participate anyway? It has clearly got its own scheme going on.

Not really an either/or, is it? There is nothing at all to prevent participating in a joint procurement AND making own, additional arrangements (as other countries are doing).

There's no such thing as a free lunch.

I don't think you understand how joint procurement processes work.

There is a competition among firms to meet the (joint) order and the offer is either acceptable in which case you sign the contract or not in which case you don't.

Participating was a no-brainer in this case and it is a major concern that the UK (apparently due to some kind of error on our part) didn't.

Why was it a no brainer? Time was of the essence so why outsource our order to third parties who might prioritise early shipments to Italy etc and leave us at the back of the queue?

We needed ventilators. We got ventilators. Job done.

Because you can easily do both.

Participating in a procurement process doesn't prevent you from pursuing other options. If the lead times promised by the successful tenderer are unacceptable, you just don't sign the contract, and there is nothing to prevent you from pursuing other options, even as the procurement proceeds.

Also, it is not (yet) clear that we do have sufficient ventilators. The Dyson order may stumble, and the numbers may be insufficient for our needs. We'd clearly be in a better place with the Dyson order but with the opportunity to get more from other suppliers.

Do you know the rules in this case?

It could be very easily a requirement that you don't procure independently.

kamski said:

Philip_Thompson said:

kamski said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

kingbongo said:

Philip_Thompson said:

rcs1000 said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/chrisgreybrexit/status/1243541897387401218

Am I the only one who doesn't give a shit about this story?

No. We got the ventilators we wanted who gives a shit how?

it does seem odd - if the UK wasn't getting ventilators you could understand it but the complaint seems to be that the UK didn't join in a vague procurement arrangement.

There's nothing vague about it. It's a group of Governments advertising a contract and getting suppliers to bid.

I am also stunned how many people on here seem to think, "Brilliant - all our ventilator needs are now met by Dyson". Firstly, we don't know what peak demand for ventilators will be, and would clearly like to get more than Dyson can supply. Secondly, we have the problem of a single supplier who has never made ventilators - hopefully they will meet specs and timescales, but it'd be really good to hedge that risk.

Our government is speaking to manufacturers directly. Why would we need a middle organisation to speak to other suppliers? What is to stop suppliers speaking to the UK directly?

And yet the official reason for not participating is this:
A UK government spokesperson said: "Owing to an initial communication problem, the UK did not receive an invitation in time to join in four joint procurements in response to the coronavirus pandemic.

"As the (European) Commission has confirmed, we are eligible to participate in joint procurements during the transition period, following our departure from the EU earlier this year.

"As those four initial procurement schemes had already gone out to tender we were unable to take part in these, but we will consider participating in future procurement schemes on the basis of public health requirements at the time."
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-52052694

also:
Why are other European governments participating if it's such a waste of time?

Maybe it's not a big deal and won't make a lot of difference at the end of the day, but the robotic insistence by some posters on here that the current UK government can, almost by definition, only have always made the best possible decision in every circumstance is kind of scary.

Why burn a bridge you may want in the future? A polite turn down now is better than burning a bridge and the line "on the basis of public health requirements at the time" is deliberately vague and doesn't commit us to either participating or not participating if it's worthwhile in the future or not.

If you can tell me one advantage to this scheme that wasn't found by speaking to manufacturers directly then I'd be more bothered.

But why have other European governments decided there is a point to it?

Ask them. Maybe they lack the manufacturers we have in our own country we could deal with directly?

nichomar said:

What is it about southwark, Westminster, lambeth and Brentbthat makes them the notes spots in England?

MPs accommodation?

Pulpstar said:

Chameleon said:

peter_from_putney said:

Truly shocking numbers just announced for the UK yesterday ... Cumulative Covid-19 Cases increase by 25.1% from 11,658 to 14,579, Cumulative Deaths increase by 31.3% from 578 to 759. In percentage terms, these are worse than just about any other major country and at a time when one might have hoped for some element of downturn after the much harsher controls were introduced on Monday, all the more worrying therefore.

There's a large lag in both infections and deaths. These are figures from 1-2 weeks ago.

You get to see the results of actions ~ 10 days ago in this one. It's the combination of delay and exponential growth that is scary.

I think the gap is perhaps slightly longer than that. Don't forget it's typically 12 days from "lockdown" to peak (13-14 in Italy).

And that's because, while you may show symptoms at 7-10 days, you're unlikely to end up in hospital (and therefore get counted) for another 4-7 days.

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1243541321601748993

60% of Italy ‘at the same stage’

Floater said:

ydoethur said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

eadric said:

The Cabinet is going to be a political version of the Diamond Princess.

We can watch the rats of infection, severe illness and so on, and extrapolate to the larger population

Hopefully the rats of infection will tail off.

I am sure it is an issue gnawing at their thoughts. They will need to hole up for a while.

I hope that's a sign you're feeling better, Foxy!

Just about to start a remote meeting. Could be a total disaster as I've never used the tech for group chat before.

hope its not Webex :-)

Use it all the time and superb

peter_from_putney said:

Truly shocking numbers just announced for the UK yesterday ... Cumulative Covid-19 Cases increase by 25.1% from 11,658 to 14,579, Cumulative Deaths increase by 31.3% from 578 to 759. In percentage terms, these are worse than just about any other major country and at a time when one might have hoped for some element of downturn after the much harsher controls were introduced on Monday, all the more worrying therefore.

was that not down to the swap over and so it was 1/2 day versus 1&1/2 days

peter_from_putney said:

nichomar said:

What is it about southwark, Westminster, lambeth and Brentbthat makes them the notes spots in England?

I think 99% of those living outside central London are just staggered that the London Underground system continues to operate to a significant extent. Recent pictures of the passengers crushed inside simply beggar belief, given the huge risks we are all facing. For sure this has to be one of the main reasons for the incidence of the disease in the Capital being so high.

Why have services been cut but not restricted to key workers? It seems utterly bonkers to have a skeleton service running with all the trains packed, do they genuinely have hundreds of drivers off sick and no qualified managers who can replace them?

Pagan2 said:

kamski said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

kingbongo said:

Philip_Thompson said:

rcs1000 said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/chrisgreybrexit/status/1243541897387401218

Am I the only one who doesn't give a shit about this story?

No. We got the ventilators we wanted who gives a shit how?

it does seem odd - if the UK wasn't getting ventilators you could understand it but the complaint seems to be that the UK didn't join in a vague procurement arrangement.

There's nothing vague about it. It's a group of Governments advertising a contract and getting suppliers to bid.

I am also stunned how many people on here seem to think, "Brilliant - all our ventilator needs are now met by Dyson". Firstly, we don't know what peak demand for ventilators will be, and would clearly like to get more than Dyson can supply. Secondly, we have the problem of a single supplier who has never made ventilators - hopefully they will meet specs and timescales, but it'd be really good to hedge that risk.

Our government is speaking to manufacturers directly. Why would we need a middle organisation to speak to other suppliers? What is to stop suppliers speaking to the UK directly?

And yet the official reason for not participating is this:
A UK government spokesperson said: "Owing to an initial communication problem, the UK did not receive an invitation in time to join in four joint procurements in response to the coronavirus pandemic.

"As the (European) Commission has confirmed, we are eligible to participate in joint procurements during the transition period, following our departure from the EU earlier this year.

"As those four initial procurement schemes had already gone out to tender we were unable to take part in these, but we will consider participating in future procurement schemes on the basis of public health requirements at the time."
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-52052694

also:
Why are other European governments participating if it's such a waste of time?

Maybe it's not a big deal and won't make a lot of difference at the end of the day, but the robotic insistence by some posters on here that the current UK government can, almost by definition, only have always made the best possible decision in every circumstance is kind of scary.

There is also a robotic insistence by the pro eu that we should have been part of the scheme with no evidence produced that we will
a) get more ventilators that way
b) get them quicker
c) have not been unable to source them outside the scheme in addition if we joined

I don't have any opinion on ventilator procurement as such, just whenever the british govt does something different to others, there is this insistence that Our Govt can't have made a mistake. it's like believers thinking that their religion has the truth and not noticing that all other religious believers also think that their religion is right.

DecrepiterJohnL said:

felix said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Am I missing something here?

https://twitter.com/angusmacneilsnp/status/1243511170201530369?s=21

I presume he thinks he saw his mother on the day. But there is an unnecessary undertone there which leaves a nasty taste in the mouth.

Or it is just a joke based on Boris's "mis-speak" about Mothers Day.

No. He knows that if the British PM tells the entire population to forego the pleasure of seeing their mother on Mother’s Day, to keep them safe during a national emergency, then sneaks off to see his own mother in secret, and then by misfortune she catches the virus from him, it will be a massive story.

kamski said:

Philip_Thompson said:

kamski said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

kingbongo said:

Philip_Thompson said:

rcs1000 said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/chrisgreybrexit/status/1243541897387401218

Am I the only one who doesn't give a shit about this story?

No. We got the ventilators we wanted who gives a shit how?

it does seem odd - if the UK wasn't getting ventilators you could understand it but the complaint seems to be that the UK didn't join in a vague procurement arrangement.

There's nothing vague about it. It's a group of Governments advertising a contract and getting suppliers to bid.

I am also stunned how many people on here seem to think, "Brilliant - all our ventilator needs are now met by Dyson". Firstly, we don't know what peak demand for ventilators will be, and would clearly like to get more than Dyson can supply. Secondly, we have the problem of a single supplier who has never made ventilators - hopefully they will meet specs and timescales, but it'd be really good to hedge that risk.

Our government is speaking to manufacturers directly. Why would we need a middle organisation to speak to other suppliers? What is to stop suppliers speaking to the UK directly?

And yet the official reason for not participating is this:
A UK government spokesperson said: "Owing to an initial communication problem, the UK did not receive an invitation in time to join in four joint procurements in response to the coronavirus pandemic.

"As the (European) Commission has confirmed, we are eligible to participate in joint procurements during the transition period, following our departure from the EU earlier this year.

"As those four initial procurement schemes had already gone out to tender we were unable to take part in these, but we will consider participating in future procurement schemes on the basis of public health requirements at the time."
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-52052694

also:
Why are other European governments participating if it's such a waste of time?

Maybe it's not a big deal and won't make a lot of difference at the end of the day, but the robotic insistence by some posters on here that the current UK government can, almost by definition, only have always made the best possible decision in every circumstance is kind of scary.

Why burn a bridge you may want in the future? A polite turn down now is better than burning a bridge and the line "on the basis of public health requirements at the time" is deliberately vague and doesn't commit us to either participating or not participating if it's worthwhile in the future or not.

If you can tell me one advantage to this scheme that wasn't found by speaking to manufacturers directly then I'd be more bothered.

But why have other European governments decided there is a point to it?

The EU?

Richard_Nabavi said:

Quite why anyone thinks we should have added an extra layer of EU bureaucracy and EU politics into our urgent sourcing of more ventilators is a mystery to me.

I googled out of interest, and the first few results were in the independent from about a week ago - making it explicitly political (Boris should put pragmatism before Brexit ideology etc etc). If you frame it like that, of course you will get resistance.

It's almost as if they wanted to score political points rather than as a matter of genuine concern.

kamski said:

Pagan2 said:

kamski said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

kingbongo said:

Philip_Thompson said:

rcs1000 said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/chrisgreybrexit/status/1243541897387401218

Am I the only one who doesn't give a shit about this story?

No. We got the ventilators we wanted who gives a shit how?

it does seem odd - if the UK wasn't getting ventilators you could understand it but the complaint seems to be that the UK didn't join in a vague procurement arrangement.

There's nothing vague about it. It's a group of Governments advertising a contract and getting suppliers to bid.

I am also stunned how many people on here seem to think, "Brilliant - all our ventilator needs are now met by Dyson". Firstly, we don't know what peak demand for ventilators will be, and would clearly like to get more than Dyson can supply. Secondly, we have the problem of a single supplier who has never made ventilators - hopefully they will meet specs and timescales, but it'd be really good to hedge that risk.

Our government is speaking to manufacturers directly. Why would we need a middle organisation to speak to other suppliers? What is to stop suppliers speaking to the UK directly?

And yet the official reason for not participating is this:
A UK government spokesperson said: "Owing to an initial communication problem, the UK did not receive an invitation in time to join in four joint procurements in response to the coronavirus pandemic.

"As the (European) Commission has confirmed, we are eligible to participate in joint procurements during the transition period, following our departure from the EU earlier this year.

"As those four initial procurement schemes had already gone out to tender we were unable to take part in these, but we will consider participating in future procurement schemes on the basis of public health requirements at the time."
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-52052694

also:
Why are other European governments participating if it's such a waste of time?

Maybe it's not a big deal and won't make a lot of difference at the end of the day, but the robotic insistence by some posters on here that the current UK government can, almost by definition, only have always made the best possible decision in every circumstance is kind of scary.

There is also a robotic insistence by the pro eu that we should have been part of the scheme with no evidence produced that we will
a) get more ventilators that way
b) get them quicker
c) have not been unable to source them outside the scheme in addition if we joined

I don't have any opinion on ventilator procurement as such, just whenever the british govt does something different to others, there is this insistence that Our Govt can't have made a mistake. it's like believers thinking that their religion has the truth and not noticing that all other religious believers also think that their religion is right.

I don't either have an opinion on it but both sides seems to be insisting their's was the right side and doing anything else was stupid.

rcs1000 said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

rcs1000 said:

eristdoof said:

eadric said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

eadric said:

The Cabinet is going to be a political version of the Diamond Princess.

We can watch the rats of infection, severe illness and so on, and extrapolate to the larger population

Hopefully the rats of infection will tail off.

I am sure it is an issue gnawing at their thoughts. They will need to hole up for a while.

I hope that's a sign you're feeling better, Foxy!

Just about to start a remote meeting. Could be a total disaster as I've never used the tech for group chat before.

Yes, bright enough to potter in the garden. It is a bit up and down though.

IF I had this disease back in January, one of the distinct symptoms is how it fluctuates. You feel terrible, you feel better, you feel terrible again. V weird.

My wife told me last night that when she caught what I had, she had a coughing fit so bad she nearly fainted on the Tube (she'd never told me this before). In retrospect it does seem like we might have had it, maybe the antibody tests will tell me, when they are released.

Good luck to you and your wife.

Severaal people have posted wondering if their flu in January/December/November was Covid-19.

I have to say this is very, very unlikely that you had Covid-19.
My evidence is that the virus is clearly very contageous: even the PM has caught it. But in February there were thousands of tests being carried out and only 100 or so came back positive. The negatives would have included a lot of random testing, and people presenting with flu symptoms wanting to know if it was Flu or Covid.

On top of that in over half of all the early cases there was an obviuos trace back to China. Then there was an obvoius trace back to Italy.

All of these point against the idea that Coronavirus was spreading widely in the UK undetected before mid-February, and the picture is similar in all European countries, just with a different take off date.

Why "even the PM"? Surely, given the number of people he meets, he's one of the most likely people to get it in the country.

I doubt if Boris spends his rush hours on the Tube.

Churchill did though. I know, 'cause I watched that movie.

Boris always got about London on his bike before becoming PM. It is one of the good things about him. I notice that bike shops have exempted from the close down order which is great for me because I've just had a puncture which my bike shop has fixed this afternoon.

IanB2 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

felix said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Am I missing something here?

https://twitter.com/angusmacneilsnp/status/1243511170201530369?s=21

I presume he thinks he saw his mother on the day. But there is an unnecessary undertone there which leaves a nasty taste in the mouth.

Or it is just a joke based on Boris's "mis-speak" about Mothers Day.

No. He knows that if the British PM tells the entire population to forego the pleasure of seeing their mother on Mother’s Day, to keep them safe during a national emergency, then sneaks off to see his own mother in secret, and then by misfortune she catches the virus from him, it will be a massive story.

Yes and unionists trying to pretend it is just sniping at Tory liars shows it up as well. It is not do as I do it is do as I say, one rule for them and one for the plebs.

Philip_Thompson said:

isam said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1243541321601748993

60% of Italy ‘at the same stage’

Yeah that 14 days behind Italy bulkshit has really fallen apart now.

I love the idea of bulkshit.

SERIOUS amounts of bullshit.....

rcs1000 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

kamski said:

Philip_Thompson said:

kamski said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

kingbongo said:

Philip_Thompson said:

rcs1000 said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/chrisgreybrexit/status/1243541897387401218

Am I the only one who doesn't give a shit about this story?

No. We got the ventilators we wanted who gives a shit how?

it does seem odd - if the UK wasn't getting ventilators you could understand it but the complaint seems to be that the UK didn't join in a vague procurement arrangement.

There's nothing vague about it. It's a group of Governments advertising a contract and getting suppliers to bid.

I am also stunned how many people on here seem to think, "Brilliant - all our ventilator needs are now met by Dyson". Firstly, we don't know what peak demand for ventilators will be, and would clearly like to get more than Dyson can supply. Secondly, we have the problem of a single supplier who has never made ventilators - hopefully they will meet specs and timescales, but it'd be really good to hedge that risk.

Our government is speaking to manufacturers directly. Why would we need a middle organisation to speak to other suppliers? What is to stop suppliers speaking to the UK directly?

And yet the official reason for not participating is this:
A UK government spokesperson said: "Owing to an initial communication problem, the UK did not receive an invitation in time to join in four joint procurements in response to the coronavirus pandemic.

"As the (European) Commission has confirmed, we are eligible to participate in joint procurements during the transition period, following our departure from the EU earlier this year.

"As those four initial procurement schemes had already gone out to tender we were unable to take part in these, but we will consider participating in future procurement schemes on the basis of public health requirements at the time."
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-52052694

also:
Why are other European governments participating if it's such a waste of time?

Maybe it's not a big deal and won't make a lot of difference at the end of the day, but the robotic insistence by some posters on here that the current UK government can, almost by definition, only have always made the best possible decision in every circumstance is kind of scary.

Why burn a bridge you may want in the future? A polite turn down now is better than burning a bridge and the line "on the basis of public health requirements at the time" is deliberately vague and doesn't commit us to either participating or not participating if it's worthwhile in the future or not.

If you can tell me one advantage to this scheme that wasn't found by speaking to manufacturers directly then I'd be more bothered.

But why have other European governments decided there is a point to it?

Not all have. And what EU countries besides the UK and Germany currently make ventilators at scale?

If you look at where there is light, flexible manufacturing in in Europe, I would reckon that Northern Italy (ironically), Germany, the Netherlands, Finland, and Sweden could all make ventilators relatively quickly.

Other countries would find it harder: Spain's manufacturing is mostly textiles. Ireland is computer assembly and pharmaceuticals. Portugal and Belgium are a few large plants, as I suspect is much of Eastern Europe. Luxembourg is tiny.

The EU scheme is about distributing ventilators from countries that can produce them to those that can’t. No wonder HMG wasn’t interested.

We'll know its really bad when instead of the death totals we get daily estimates of how many Brits still alive.

malcolmg said:

Burgessian said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Am I missing something here?

https://twitter.com/angusmacneilsnp/status/1243511170201530369?s=21

Angus Brendan has a well-deserved reputation as a bampot of the highest order.

Union Jack knickers showing there

You obviously don't need an eye-test, Malc.

AlastairMeeks said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Quite why anyone thinks we should have added an extra layer of EU bureaucracy and EU politics into our urgent sourcing of more ventilators is a mystery to me.

And not or.

Can you do both directly?

It's usual with this kind of programme that you can't have it both ways. Otherwise the manufacturer can play games on pricing and volumes (you'd also have all sorts of double ordering).

There's a good argument for the benefit of coordinating orders - not the price one, but more about optimising capacity utilisation.

Equally there is a good argument that if everyone else is coordinating then it's better to be the one country that can play around the edges.

rcs1000 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

kamski said:

Philip_Thompson said:

kamski said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

kingbongo said:

Philip_Thompson said:

rcs1000 said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/chrisgreybrexit/status/1243541897387401218

Am I the only one who doesn't give a shit about this story?

No. We got the ventilators we wanted who gives a shit how?

it does seem odd - if the UK wasn't getting ventilators you could understand it but the complaint seems to be that the UK didn't join in a vague procurement arrangement.

There's nothing vague about it. It's a group of Governments advertising a contract and getting suppliers to bid.

I am also stunned how many people on here seem to think, "Brilliant - all our ventilator needs are now met by Dyson". Firstly, we don't know what peak demand for ventilators will be, and would clearly like to get more than Dyson can supply. Secondly, we have the problem of a single supplier who has never made ventilators - hopefully they will meet specs and timescales, but it'd be really good to hedge that risk.

Our government is speaking to manufacturers directly. Why would we need a middle organisation to speak to other suppliers? What is to stop suppliers speaking to the UK directly?

And yet the official reason for not participating is this:
A UK government spokesperson said: "Owing to an initial communication problem, the UK did not receive an invitation in time to join in four joint procurements in response to the coronavirus pandemic.

"As the (European) Commission has confirmed, we are eligible to participate in joint procurements during the transition period, following our departure from the EU earlier this year.

"As those four initial procurement schemes had already gone out to tender we were unable to take part in these, but we will consider participating in future procurement schemes on the basis of public health requirements at the time."
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-52052694

also:
Why are other European governments participating if it's such a waste of time?

Maybe it's not a big deal and won't make a lot of difference at the end of the day, but the robotic insistence by some posters on here that the current UK government can, almost by definition, only have always made the best possible decision in every circumstance is kind of scary.

Why burn a bridge you may want in the future? A polite turn down now is better than burning a bridge and the line "on the basis of public health requirements at the time" is deliberately vague and doesn't commit us to either participating or not participating if it's worthwhile in the future or not.

If you can tell me one advantage to this scheme that wasn't found by speaking to manufacturers directly then I'd be more bothered.

But why have other European governments decided there is a point to it?

Not all have. And what EU countries besides the UK and Germany currently make ventilators at scale?

If you look at where there is light, flexible manufacturing in in Europe, I would reckon that Northern Italy (ironically), Germany, the Netherlands, Finland, and Sweden could all make ventilators relatively quickly.

Other countries would find it harder: Spain's manufacturing is mostly textiles. Ireland is computer assembly and pharmaceuticals. Portugal and Belgium are a few large plants, as I suspect is much of Eastern Europe. Luxembourg is tiny.

I am sure in time Europe has a whole would have no problem making masses of them. I think my point was currently, I believe there are only few firms.

Clearly the UK government are telling porkies, but we don't know why. Remain people will say look its cos Brexit, EU derangement, but nobody has seen what the deal was.

You would think that any rules would include,

a) you can't go off getting your own (see what is happening in the US, with states bidding against one another),

b) you will be centrally allocated based on some criteria that individual countries don't control

c) you have to share capacity with everybody else.

So, the obvious guess would be that the UK firm that produces a load of these already couldn't just keep them all for UK need. And the same with the other 2 strands of the UK approach, Dyson + the IP sharing consortium.

The risk is obviously if Dyson can't live up to their promise or it takes the other consortium a lot longer than they think to make the clones.

malcolmg said:

IanB2 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

felix said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Am I missing something here?

https://twitter.com/angusmacneilsnp/status/1243511170201530369?s=21

I presume he thinks he saw his mother on the day. But there is an unnecessary undertone there which leaves a nasty taste in the mouth.

Or it is just a joke based on Boris's "mis-speak" about Mothers Day.

No. He knows that if the British PM tells the entire population to forego the pleasure of seeing their mother on Mother’s Day, to keep them safe during a national emergency, then sneaks off to see his own mother in secret, and then by misfortune she catches the virus from him, it will be a massive story.

Yes and unionists trying to pretend it is just sniping at Tory liars shows it up as well. It is not do as I do it is do as I say, one rule for them and one for the plebs.

I believe you show symptoms between four and eleven days of contracting the virus, average seven days. Boris shows symptoms Thursday, so he contracted it at some point between a week prior to Mother’s Day and Mother’s Day itself. So, if he visited her, he was surely a carrier. But I have also read you aren’t infectious until at least four days after contracting the virus. So it will be a close run thing. If the odds of contracting it on a single contact are as low as 5% - as has been suggested - then the odds are, fortunately, heavily in her favour.

Charles said:

felix said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Quite why anyone thinks we should have added an extra layer of EU bureaucracy and EU politics into our urgent sourcing of more ventilators is a mystery to me.

I think you are right. Indeed the leaders' conference call yesterday has also gone very badly with the blocking of the Coronabond idea and some unpleasant comments from the Dutch about Spain. All a bit unedifying sadly.

The article I saw (which I think you linked?) had the Dutch opposing mutualised debt.

His criticism was that Spain should have run a budget surplus during the last 10 years and so it would have been able to afford it itself.

A little callous, perhaps, but not really "unpleasant". Frankly the whole "coronabond" idea strikes me as the people who have always wanted mutualised debt trying to avoid a good crisis going to waste.

Were there more comments that I missed?

The phrase "Now is not the time..." comes to mind.

What was it the chap said about "When my neighbours house is on fire, I lend him my hose, not quibble about the price"?

peter_from_putney said:

nichomar said:

What is it about southwark, Westminster, lambeth and Brentbthat makes them the notes spots in England?

I think 99% of those living outside central London are just staggered that the London Underground system continues to operate to a significant extent. Recent pictures of the passengers crushed inside simply beggar belief, given the huge risks we are all facing. For sure this has to be one of the main reasons for the incidence of the disease in the Capital being so high.

It should either be closed altogether or continue to have a regular service so people aren't cramped together. But to keep it open with trains only every 20 minutes is not a good decision.

Charles said:

felix said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Quite why anyone thinks we should have added an extra layer of EU bureaucracy and EU politics into our urgent sourcing of more ventilators is a mystery to me.

I think you are right. Indeed the leaders' conference call yesterday has also gone very badly with the blocking of the Coronabond idea and some unpleasant comments from the Dutch about Spain. All a bit unedifying sadly.

The article I saw (which I think you linked?) had the Dutch opposing mutualised debt.

His criticism was that Spain should have run a budget surplus during the last 10 years and so it would have been able to afford it itself.

A little callous, perhaps, but not really "unpleasant". Frankly the whole "coronabond" idea strikes me as the people who have always wanted mutualised debt trying to avoid a good crisis going to waste.

Were there more comments that I missed?

There are lots of people with a variety of pet projects seeing this as a good crisis. Have you seen what the UBI proponents have been saying, and the far-left nationalisation-of-everything fans?

Ok. Re ventilators.

If, at the end of the crisis, EU countries have done significantly better at having ventilators available, then we can reasonably consider it was a mistake not to join in the joint procurement efforts. On the other hand, if they haven't, then it will be clear there was no mistake.

The die has been cast. We can work out who was right and who was wrong in about eight weeks.

FrancisUrquhart said:

kamski said:

Philip_Thompson said:

kamski said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

kingbongo said:

Philip_Thompson said:

rcs1000 said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/chrisgreybrexit/status/1243541897387401218

Am I the only one who doesn't give a shit about this story?

No. We got the ventilators we wanted who gives a shit how?

it does seem odd - if the UK wasn't getting ventilators you could understand it but the complaint seems to be that the UK didn't join in a vague procurement arrangement.

There's nothing vague about it. It's a group of Governments advertising a contract and getting suppliers to bid.

I am also stunned how many people on here seem to think, "Brilliant - all our ventilator needs are now met by Dyson". Firstly, we don't know what peak demand for ventilators will be, and would clearly like to get more than Dyson can supply. Secondly, we have the problem of a single supplier who has never made ventilators - hopefully they will meet specs and timescales, but it'd be really good to hedge that risk.

Our government is speaking to manufacturers directly. Why would we need a middle organisation to speak to other suppliers? What is to stop suppliers speaking to the UK directly?

And yet the official reason for not participating is this:
A UK government spokesperson said: "Owing to an initial communication problem, the UK did not receive an invitation in time to join in four joint procurements in response to the coronavirus pandemic.

"As the (European) Commission has confirmed, we are eligible to participate in joint procurements during the transition period, following our departure from the EU earlier this year.

"As those four initial procurement schemes had already gone out to tender we were unable to take part in these, but we will consider participating in future procurement schemes on the basis of public health requirements at the time."
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-52052694

also:
Why are other European governments participating if it's such a waste of time?

Maybe it's not a big deal and won't make a lot of difference at the end of the day, but the robotic insistence by some posters on here that the current UK government can, almost by definition, only have always made the best possible decision in every circumstance is kind of scary.

Why burn a bridge you may want in the future? A polite turn down now is better than burning a bridge and the line "on the basis of public health requirements at the time" is deliberately vague and doesn't commit us to either participating or not participating if it's worthwhile in the future or not.

If you can tell me one advantage to this scheme that wasn't found by speaking to manufacturers directly then I'd be more bothered.

But why have other European governments decided there is a point to it?

Not all have. And what EU countries besides the UK and Germany currently make ventilators at scale?

Sweden probably, via Getinge, although from recollection Getinge's Maquet division is based in Baden Baden so it may be counted in Germany

numbertwelve said:

rcs1000 said:

Post 1997, how many people have been forced to resign from the Cabinet more than once?

Blunkett.

Mandelson resigned about 3 times IIRC.

Charles said:

felix said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Quite why anyone thinks we should have added an extra layer of EU bureaucracy and EU politics into our urgent sourcing of more ventilators is a mystery to me.

I think you are right. Indeed the leaders' conference call yesterday has also gone very badly with the blocking of the Coronabond idea and some unpleasant comments from the Dutch about Spain. All a bit unedifying sadly.

The article I saw (which I think you linked?) had the Dutch opposing mutualised debt.

His criticism was that Spain should have run a budget surplus during the last 10 years and so it would have been able to afford it itself.

A little callous, perhaps, but not really "unpleasant". Frankly the whole "coronabond" idea strikes me as the people who have always wanted mutualised debt trying to avoid a good crisis going to waste.

Were there more comments that I missed?

The reality is that debt is currently being mutualised on a massive scale through the ECB.

Floater said:

malcolmg said:

Floater said:

ydoethur said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

eadric said:

The Cabinet is going to be a political version of the Diamond Princess.

We can watch the rats of infection, severe illness and so on, and extrapolate to the larger population

Hopefully the rats of infection will tail off.

I am sure it is an issue gnawing at their thoughts. They will need to hole up for a while.

I hope that's a sign you're feeling better, Foxy!

Just about to start a remote meeting. Could be a total disaster as I've never used the tech for group chat before.

hope its not Webex :-)

Use it all the time and superb

Half of the meetings I end up having to dial in as Audio either doesn't work or cuts out in first 5 minutes

Never had many problems, an odd time some people have to drop video due to bandwidth , but I use all day and apart from a bit slow sharing large spreadsheets now and again it has been great.

Gallowgate said:

I’ve done an emoji round:

1. 🦶🦵 🅱️🗣 (History will be kind to this leader)
2. 👉👌😴 🥳 (Champagne Club)
3. 🤥🤗 🗳🗳 (Architects of austerity)
4. 🖼📹 📷💁‍♂️ (Won a referendum)
5. 🌲🌲 0️⃣5️⃣ (Cereal Rebel)
6. 🇩🇪 😱🗑 (Serial loser)
7. 🚗📈 🚽🍑 (Greta before Greta was cool)
8. 🔑👂 ⭐️👩‍👦‍👦 (Mr Remain)
9. 🦈😬 🇦🇺👼 (Long-term economic plan)

Answers on a post card.
Disclaimer: some of these are really shit.

Very creative!
1. Toe-knee Blair
4. David Cameron?
8. Keir Starmer

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Mark, hulkshit's what you need to really worry about.

Green and.....er...

Gallowgate said:

I’ve done an emoji round:

1. 🦶🦵 🅱️🗣 (History will be kind to this leader)
2. 👉👌😴 🥳 (Champagne Club)
3. 🤥🤗 🗳🗳 (Architects of austerity)
4. 🖼📹 📷💁‍♂️ (Won a referendum)
5. 🌲🌲 0️⃣5️⃣ (Cereal Rebel)
6. 🇩🇪 😱🗑 (Serial loser)
7. 🚗📈 🚽🍑 (Greta before Greta was cool)
8. 🔑👂 ⭐️👩‍👦‍👦 (Mr Remain)
9. 🦈😬 🇦🇺👼 (Long-term economic plan)

Answers on a post card.
Disclaimer: some of these are really shit.

You mean Trump and Bolsanaro are in there ?

Inside the Biden bunker...

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/27/joe-biden-coronavirus-bunker-151302
...The first is how can he actually do any events outside of his basement that will get attention and coverage? The second is what can he say about Trump now? This is a new problem for Democrats. Ever since he rode down the escalator at Trump Tower in 2015 to announce his campaign, there has been absolutely no hesitation by any Democrat to attack Trump. Sometimes in the primaries this year candidates would make a point of emphasizing that they were more interested in explaining their policies rather than ripping into the president. But that’s only because there was a shared understanding between voters and Democratic candidates that Trump was irredeemable in every way.

Now, for the first time, some Democrats are wondering whether there could be a cost to pillorying the president.

“Biden has a thin line,” the outside adviser to Biden said. “As much as I dislike Trump and think what a bad job he’s doing, there’s a danger now that attacking him can backfire on you if you get too far out there. I don’t think the public wants to hear criticism of Trump right now.”

Then there’s the issue of Biden being denied one of his political strengths. Biden thrives on personal connection; the pandemic has robbed him of the ability to meet with actual people. In a recent interview with CNN, he recalled the pain of missing human contact. He can’t even be close to his deceased son Beau’s kids....

Mr. Mark, I was thinking more angry, large, violent, and intent on causing you pain.

Gallowgate said:

rkrkrk said:

Gallowgate said:

I’ve done an emoji round:

1. 🦶🦵 🅱️🗣 (History will be kind to this leader)
2. 👉👌😴 🥳 (Champagne Club)
3. 🤥🤗 🗳🗳 (Architects of austerity)
4. 🖼📹 📷💁‍♂️ (Won a referendum)
5. 🌲🌲 0️⃣5️⃣ (Cereal Rebel)
6. 🇩🇪 😱🗑 (Serial loser)
7. 🚗📈 🚽🍑 (Greta before Greta was cool)
8. 🔑👂 ⭐️👩‍👦‍👦 (Mr Remain)
9. 🦈😬 🇦🇺👼 (Long-term economic plan)

Answers on a post card.
Disclaimer: some of these are really shit.

Very creative!
1. Toe-knee Blair
4. David Cameron?
8. Keir Starmer

Correct
The intended audience are not huge politics nerds so I’ve had to go fairly basic.

7 Caroline Lucas
9 George Osbourne?