politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The nation rallies to Boris but who’ll now make the critical d

isam said:

Clickbait 101. The Mail have deliberately chosen a quote from Klopp that woke people will call a racist stereotype here.

https://twitter.com/mailsport/status/1247785027837947904?s=21

Have any of them done so before we can be sure that was indeed the plan?

Richard_Tyndall said:

LostPassword said:

I'm in favour of more collective decision-making and a less quasi-Presidential system in general, but I think it's true that more collective systems, like the Greek city-states, would often appoint a temporary dictator to see them through a crisis. It's perverse for us to end up doing the reverse. A new Prime Minister is required.

As an aside, this risks showing how useless the Monarchy has become. Any head of state with independent authority would intervene to insist on a replacement head of government, but the Monarchy appears to have decided that inaction at all times is the surest way to preserve their position. The idea that they might provide a bulwark against totalitarianism is exposed as fantasy.

Given that there is no sign of totalitarianism here - quite the opposite in fact - you are clearly making unjustified and unsupportable claims there.

Since the complaint is that in the (hopefully temporary) absence of the Prime Minister, the country is being governed by the Cabinet under collective decision making with the Foreign Sec. acting as a referee... not sure that arrangement sounds very totalitarian....

kle4 said:

isam said:

Clickbait 101. The Mail have deliberately chosen a quote from Klopp that woke people will call a racist stereotype here.

https://twitter.com/mailsport/status/1247785027837947904?s=21

Have any of them done so before we can be sure that was indeed the plan?

Only half a dozen replies, but five are calling Klopp out as a racist

A symbiotic relationship between the Mail and the woke I think

https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1247647646124302340

SandyRentool said:

So let's guess... Adam Boulton will spend most of the morning discussing a non-existent constitutional crisis, and there might be a two minute interlude when the virus situation gets discussed. And even that will likely be some journalist or other wailing about when will the lockdown be lifted.

Quality.

Can I suggest turning off the news and listening to music instead?

The problem of the 24 hour news cycle is that there is an endless demand to talk about the same things. Mind you, it works for PB too.

Richard_Tyndall said:

Very sad to hear this morning of the death of John Prine. One of the greatest of the American folk singer songwriters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1T5NuI6Ai-o

Bugger, noises were being made that he was improving.

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1247647646124302340

Yes indeed. Process and authority questions seem pretty clear. Long term politics would be an issue. Thats enough on it's own without making it a constitutional thing.

Its like the whole PM without a mandate thing we get whenever theres a change without an election. The Guardian raised it with Raab even. Each time it happens its argued from whoever is against it that theres no mandate and there should be an election. And each time that's s political argument and fine to make, not a constitutional question.

Well, it's true that nature abhors a vacuum, but it's not a power vacuum: it's a news vacuum.

Serious question. Since very little happens under a lockdown, 24 hour news is magnifying every tiny thing to fill space. Would it be a sensible government strategy to give them things to talk about? A bit like an election "grid", having one small policy per day and one (suitably socially distanced) ministerial visit to somewhere with members of the public laid on for interviews afterwards. Like distracting a bored child, it wouldn't matter whether the topics were genuine or manufactured, as long as they keep it busy.

Alternative plans, such as banning 24 hour news channels and insisting on mandatory re-runs of old comedy series instead, may be a little totalitarian for the present times.

--AS

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Foss said:

TOPPING said:

Maybe there's method in the decision but from the BBC news site "given Johnson's predicament the decision to review the lockdown has been put back a week" will for better or worse diminish sympathy for him. Everyone has to wait until he recovers before the country can get on with life.

Perhaps if the death rate was dropping. While it keeps going up, people will accept that lockdown was going to continue wherever Johnson was.

No, it is yet another balls-up in the spin department. Either Raab can run the show or crucial decisions need to wait for Boris to return. Which is it?

I suspect in this case, the decision was likely to be to extend for a further three weeks. However, the numbers are not looking bad, but it is too soon to tell, extending by a week seems reasonable.
The constitutional position is surely that Raab is prime minister. He has said that he will continue to govern by Cabinet consensus and following the instructions given by Boris before he went into ICU. The post of Prime Minister doesn't really exist, and has little formal authority. I guess the real problem is that Raab has little informal authority in the Cabinet.
Of course what should have happened is that Boris go on sick leave when he contracted the virus, and Raab declared acting PM. I don't see why that would have been a problem.

AlwaysSinging said:

Well, it's true that nature abhors a vacuum, but it's not a power vacuum: it's a news vacuum.

Serious question. Since very little happens under a lockdown, 24 hour news is magnifying every tiny thing to fill space. Would it be a sensible government strategy to give them things to talk about? A bit like an election "grid", having one small policy per day and one (suitably socially distanced) ministerial visit to somewhere with members of the public laid on for interviews afterwards. Like distracting a bored child, it wouldn't matter whether the topics were genuine or manufactured, as long as they keep it busy.

Alternative plans, such as banning 24 hour news channels and insisting on mandatory re-runs of old comedy series instead, may be a little totalitarian for the present times.

--AS

I used to just dislike and distrust the media, but now I honestly despise many of them. I think your 'alternative plans' would boost the nation's happiness level by 50% at least.

AlwaysSinging said:

Well, it's true that nature abhors a vacuum, but it's not a power vacuum: it's a news vacuum.

Serious question. Since very little happens under a lockdown, 24 hour news is magnifying every tiny thing to fill space. Would it be a sensible government strategy to give them things to talk about? A bit like an election "grid", having one small policy per day and one (suitably socially distanced) ministerial visit to somewhere with members of the public laid on for interviews afterwards. Like distracting a bored child, it wouldn't matter whether the topics were genuine or manufactured, as long as they keep it busy.

Alternative plans, such as banning 24 hour news channels and insisting on mandatory re-runs of old comedy series instead, may be a little totalitarian for the present times.

--AS

The news vacuum thing realties to the savage competition for stories that generate internet traffic - a journalist is often judged now on the click bait they generate.

A nuclear war is good for journalists (apart from the whole sunblock 1,000,000 thing). A news vacuum means rats fighting in a sack.

The sensible answer would be to do more in depth stuff - what about a really deep dive through testing - how it works, the people who do it, technology (current & future) etc. You could have a daily series of 1 hour slots on that for days.... and it might accidentally inform people about facts.

Can we please have a PB reporter?

TOPPING said:

TGOHF666 said:

egg said:

On topic. We know Black Death travelled on fleas. We know at least one tiger has corona virus. Can Raab make a decision about ramping up Tiger Testing?

perhaps the chief medical eggheads can tell us if Germany have tested all their tigers yet?
I mean if the scientist is going to say that whilst stood next to the acting Prime Minister, what’s the thick of it behind the scenes scientists having with this governments equivalent of Alistair Campbell?

https://twitter.com/jamie_blackett/status/1247566812117598215?s=21

Jamie has a particular agenda. Nothing wrong with that but he does.

He has a point though, you can put T2D into remission by adopting a low carb diet. If your body can't tolerate something, it seems sensible to stop eating it. However I am not sure how low-carb the German diet actually is - they eat quite a lot of bread and dumplings.

Foxy said:

TGOHF666 said:

egg said:

On topic. We know Black Death travelled on fleas. We know at least one tiger has corona virus. Can Raab make a decision about ramping up Tiger Testing?

perhaps the chief medical eggheads can tell us if Germany have tested all their tigers yet?
I mean if the scientist is going to say that whilst stood next to the acting Prime Minister, what’s the thick of it behind the scenes scientists having with this governments equivalent of Alistair Campbell?

https://twitter.com/jamie_blackett/status/1247566812117598215?s=21

The rate of Diabetes in Germany is about 7.2%, so about the same as ours. 90% T2.

Meat and cheese don't seem to be protecting the Dutch, or for that matter the Americans.

It's almost as if he is a dairy farmer, not an epidemiologist...

"It's almost as if he is a dairy farmer, not an epidemiologist." - so he is fully qualified to be second guessing the CMO? What are his plans for testing?

Malmesbury said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

BluestBlue said:

Mysticrose said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Foss said:

TOPPING said:

Maybe there's method in the decision but from the BBC news site "given Johnson's predicament the decision to review the lockdown has been put back a week" will for better or worse diminish sympathy for him. Everyone has to wait until he recovers before the country can get on with life.

Perhaps if the death rate was dropping. While it keeps going up, people will accept that lockdown was going to continue wherever Johnson was.

No, it is yet another balls-up in the spin department. Either Raab can run the show or crucial decisions need to wait for Boris to return. Which is it?

Indeed.

The right-wingers on here will myopically criticise the press and shout down anyone who raises issues as a left-winger. However, there's no getting away from the fact that this is a problem and a pretty serious one at that.

The country is in its greatest ever peacetime crisis. Leadership of the right kind: consistent, strong, collective is required. With Boris in hospital I can't honestly say that any of those three adjectives currently apply. In their heart-of-hearts I doubt any of our blue-card carrying friends can either. (Except 666, obvs.)

Bollocks. The simple fact is in within the next ten days Boris' situation is likely to resolve, one way or the other. There is no realistic possibility of the overall coronavirus strategy having to change within that time that would make it worth enacting a formal transition of power right now.

The media just need to keep their piss from sloshing out of their nappies, grow the fuck up, and stop spreading hysteria. So naturally they'll probably do the exact opposite.

The media and Lord Heseltine, a previous Deputy Prime Minister to John Major.

A man who has never missed the opportunity to create trouble for the Tory party ever since they rejected him as leader back in the early 90s.

He seems to have replaced Ted Heath in that role.

I don't like Heseltine, but that is hardly fair.

Luckyguy1983 said:

Malmesbury said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

BluestBlue said:

Mysticrose said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Foss said:

TOPPING said:

Maybe there's method in the decision but from the BBC news site "given Johnson's predicament the decision to review the lockdown has been put back a week" will for better or worse diminish sympathy for him. Everyone has to wait until he recovers before the country can get on with life.

Perhaps if the death rate was dropping. While it keeps going up, people will accept that lockdown was going to continue wherever Johnson was.

No, it is yet another balls-up in the spin department. Either Raab can run the show or crucial decisions need to wait for Boris to return. Which is it?

Indeed.

The right-wingers on here will myopically criticise the press and shout down anyone who raises issues as a left-winger. However, there's no getting away from the fact that this is a problem and a pretty serious one at that.

The country is in its greatest ever peacetime crisis. Leadership of the right kind: consistent, strong, collective is required. With Boris in hospital I can't honestly say that any of those three adjectives currently apply. In their heart-of-hearts I doubt any of our blue-card carrying friends can either. (Except 666, obvs.)

Bollocks. The simple fact is in within the next ten days Boris' situation is likely to resolve, one way or the other. There is no realistic possibility of the overall coronavirus strategy having to change within that time that would make it worth enacting a formal transition of power right now.

The media just need to keep their piss from sloshing out of their nappies, grow the fuck up, and stop spreading hysteria. So naturally they'll probably do the exact opposite.

The media and Lord Heseltine, a previous Deputy Prime Minister to John Major.

A man who has never missed the opportunity to create trouble for the Tory party ever since they rejected him as leader back in the early 90s.

He seems to have replaced Ted Heath in that role.

I don't like Heseltine, but that is hardly fair.

Yes, perhaps that is a bit unfair. Heath went full wacko - outright hatred of democracy and full on love for the Chinese government.

I remember being present for the moment when, publicly, Heseltine realised that the party didn't want him.

AlwaysSinging said:

Well, it's true that nature abhors a vacuum, but it's not a power vacuum: it's a news vacuum.

Serious question. Since very little happens under a lockdown, 24 hour news is magnifying every tiny thing to fill space. Would it be a sensible government strategy to give them things to talk about? A bit like an election "grid", having one small policy per day and one (suitably socially distanced) ministerial visit to somewhere with members of the public laid on for interviews afterwards. Like distracting a bored child, it wouldn't matter whether the topics were genuine or manufactured, as long as they keep it busy.

Alternative plans, such as banning 24 hour news channels and insisting on mandatory re-runs of old comedy series instead, may be a little totalitarian for the present times.

--AS

It's a good idea.

By the way, havrn't seen your posts before, so (ptobably belated!) welcome!

fox327 said:

If Boris does not improve in the next two weeks a temporary PM will be needed. This should preferably be Theresa May. She has the experience and is well known. This is no time for a novice. This is not just a decision for the Cabinet; the 1922 committee and opposition parties should also be involved.

The level of new COVID cases will probably drop soon and NHS COVID capacity is rapidly increasing, so it will be possible to ease some restrictions in a few weeks time. Primary schools should be first to go back. Home schooling for very young children is essentially impossible. It will also massively release strain on parents and enable some of them to return to work.

May back as PM? Are you mad? Her specialities of delay, dither and communicate with no one would be a disaster in this crisis.

rottenborough said:

fox327 said:

If Boris does not improve in the next two weeks a temporary PM will be needed. This should preferably be Theresa May. She has the experience and is well known. This is no time for a novice. This is not just a decision for the Cabinet; the 1922 committee and opposition parties should also be involved.

The level of new COVID cases will probably drop soon and NHS COVID capacity is rapidly increasing, so it will be possible to ease some restrictions in a few weeks time. Primary schools should be first to go back. Home schooling for very young children is essentially impossible. It will also massively release strain on parents and enable some of them to return to work.

May back as PM? Are you mad? Her specialities of delay, dither and communicate with no one would be a disaster in this crisis.

I don't think she would want it. If nothing else, she is probably in the Extremely Vulnerable category (from her diabetes) and is probably self isolating.

TGOHF666 said:

Lol.

https://twitter.com/johnrentoul/status/1247576381845798919?s=21

If Labour want a majority, they'll need a lot more than the 6 Scottish Tory seats.
Doubt there was any strategy that could have prevented SNP 2015 result.

fox327 said:

If Boris does not improve in the next two weeks a temporary PM will be needed. This should preferably be Theresa May. She has the experience and is well known. This is no time for a novice. This is not just a decision for the Cabinet; the 1922 committee and opposition parties should also be involved.

The level of new COVID cases will probably drop soon and NHS COVID capacity is rapidly increasing, so it will be possible to ease some restrictions in a few weeks time. Primary schools should be first to go back. Home schooling for very young children is essentially impossible. It will also massively release strain on parents and enable some of them to return to work.

If there is a need to go outside the existing Cabinet we might as well go with my rotating council of ex pms idea.

kle4 said:

dr_spyn said:

Guess the press conference questions. No 1. Does the Prime Minister want to keep your pussy indoors?

https://twitter.com/BBCNews/status/1247801288227606528

Always keep your pussy close to hand.

President Trump must be at a heightened risk of infection.

fox327 said:

If Boris does not improve in the next two weeks a temporary PM will be needed. This should preferably be Theresa May. She has the experience and is well known. This is no time for a novice. This is not just a decision for the Cabinet; the 1922 committee and opposition parties should also be involved.

The level of new COVID cases will probably drop soon and NHS COVID capacity is rapidly increasing, so it will be possible to ease some restrictions in a few weeks time. Primary schools should be first to go back. Home schooling for very young children is essentially impossible. It will also massively release strain on parents and enable some of them to return to work.

She's also a Type 1 diabetic who should be shielding.

JohnLilburne said:

http://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-fourteen-transport-workers-die-in-london-after-contracting-covid-19-11970283
This story appeals me. They are only just now "trialling" the use of the middle door on buses. Surely, as soon as the 2 metre rule was advised, they should have closed the front door on buses to passenger use, and taken any single-door buses out of service. There is no way you can enter a bus via the front door and stay 2m from the driver.

Whilst I agree that they should be doing more to protect the bus drivers and other staff, do not fall into the trap of assuming that all 14 workers contracted the virus at work.

not evan davies

BluestBlue said:

Oooops ... looks like Gaby's been the first to have a little accident this morning! Now go play with the Duplo while we get the mop and the tissues, OK?

You should try reading it, if you can


Raab’s new status is essentially a means of preventing the chain of command from becoming confused or mired in internecine cabinet rivalries, although it remains to be seen whether he really has the authority to knock his colleagues’ heads together. (Those who wonder why it’s him in charge rather than the Cabinet Office minister, Michael Gove, now self-isolating after a family member showed coronavirus symptoms, perhaps miss the point that Johnson was nominating not a successor but a caretaker.)

And the Times explains why it was Raab, and not anybody else

Dominic Raab was made first secretary of state by Boris Johnson because he offered his “unconditional” support during the Tory leadership contest and was considered “rock solid” on Brexit.

tlg86 said:

JohnLilburne said:

http://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-fourteen-transport-workers-die-in-london-after-contracting-covid-19-11970283
This story appeals me. They are only just now "trialling" the use of the middle door on buses. Surely, as soon as the 2 metre rule was advised, they should have closed the front door on buses to passenger use, and taken any single-door buses out of service. There is no way you can enter a bus via the front door and stay 2m from the driver.

Whilst I agree that they should be doing more to protect the bus drivers and other staff, do not fall into the trap of assuming that all 14 workers contracted the virus at work.

If only we had a design of bus with 2 doors well away from the driver. No, wait.....

DecrepiterJohnL said:

ydoethur said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

paulyork64 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

OT Having finished the Shoestring DVDs (they only made two series before Trevor Eve decided he wanted to be a proper actor) I am about to watch Churchill's Secret, about the Prime Minister recovering from a stroke in office. Sounds a bit far-fetched to me.

Not that far fetched. Bill Clinton got more than a stroke in his office.

This Churchill character starts by praising the Romans' contribution to civilisation. I wonder if we will ever again have a Prime Minister interested in the Classics. In a parallel to today, Churchill was acting as Foreign Secretary while Eden was under the knife.

I thought the Marquis of Salisbury stood in as Foreign Secretary for Eden? Not that I know much about the career of Eden.

According to Wikipedia, it was earlier that Salisbury substituted for Eden:
During the period of the coronation of Elizabeth II, he was appointed Acting Foreign Secretary, as Eden was then seriously ill after a series of botched operations on his bile duct.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Gascoyne-Cecil,_5th_Marquess_of_Salisbury

Yes, that’s when I meant - 1953, when Churchill had his stroke.

ooop cat expert on beeb

Oh no! I bought tiger balm on amazon Ive been compromised all this time

Those headlines ... people who die from coronavirus aren't "fighters"? They just don't have the right mental attitude?

Chris said:

Those headlines ... people who die from coronavirus aren't "fighters"? They just don't have the right mental attitude?

As the news gets more horrifyingly real each day – and somehow, at the same time, more unmanageably unreal – I’m not sure who this register of battle and victory and defeat truly aids. We don’t really require a metaphor to throw the horror of viral death into sharper relief: you have to think it’s bad enough already. Plague is a standalone horseman of the apocalypse – he doesn’t need to catch a ride with war. Equally, it’s probably unnecessary to rank something we keep being informed is virtually a war with things in the past that were literally wars. “Your grandparents were called to war,” runs one popular meme. “You’re being asked to sit on a couch. You can do this.” Unsurprisingly, given this level of bellicose confusion, we have already seen those who visit the park literally branded “traitors”.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/07/horror-coronavirus-real-imaginary-war-britain

What is the latest on Bojo's health - still in intensive care but breathing independently?

Luckyguy1983 said:

What is the latest on Bojo's health - still in intensive care but breathing independently?

https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1247788457839083520

TGOHF666 said:

https://twitter.com/repgosar/status/1247646626786795522?s=21

I honestly wonder if the WHO will survive their handling of this.

tlg86 said:

JohnLilburne said:

http://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-fourteen-transport-workers-die-in-london-after-contracting-covid-19-11970283
This story appeals me. They are only just now "trialling" the use of the middle door on buses. Surely, as soon as the 2 metre rule was advised, they should have closed the front door on buses to passenger use, and taken any single-door buses out of service. There is no way you can enter a bus via the front door and stay 2m from the driver.

Whilst I agree that they should be doing more to protect the bus drivers and other staff, do not fall into the trap of assuming that all 14 workers contracted the virus at work.

It is also very much a London only solution. Middle or rear doors are a rarity elsewhere. It could end up with the unintended consequence of making running any buses outwith London impossible.

Which is not to say it should not be done, just pointing it out.

https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1247785439798235136

CarlottaVance said:

I guess the Boris message for the next couple of days will be:

O'er the wires the electric message came,
"He is no better; he is much the same."

Attrib. Alfred Austin, Poet Laureate, on the Prince of Wales Illness in 1910

1871.

kle4 said:

dr_spyn said:

Guess the press conference questions. No 1. Does the Prime Minister want to keep your pussy indoors?

https://twitter.com/BBCNews/status/1247801288227606528

Always keep your pussy close to hand.

There are so many responses to that which could provoke the ban hammer.....

Which to choose?

FrancisUrquhart said:

TOPPING said:

BBC now amended its story.

No longer "Downing Street confirmed..." lockdown review is delayed because BoJo is ill. Now it is "No.10 suggested..." the review wouldn't go ahead as planned.

Two options.

1. Beeb overreach and misreported the first item, subsequently amended; or
2. Downing Street needed a better line for consumption on why the review wasn't going ahead.

You picks your tinfoil and takes your choice.

It really doesn't matter. We aren't coming out of lockdown for many more weeks. We haven't reached the peak and we don't have the antibody tests.

The media were screaming to be locked down as soon as possible, now after just 2 weeks, they screaming for it to change. Anybody with half a brain can see it will be 2-3 months, just as in Spain, Italy, France.

It certainly wasnt going to be ended or relaxed this week. A delay on a review is not a momentous decision to be sure.

Chris said:

BluestBlue said:

Chris said:

Those headlines ... people who die from coronavirus aren't "fighters"? They just don't have the right mental attitude?

I've seen plenty of such snowflakey complaints about the language. To which I say:

1. It's a perfectly normal metaphor, with a long history.
2. It reflects Boris' personality.
3. Praising one person in such terms implies no disparagement of anyone else.
4. Is language policing really a top priority right now?
5. Grow the fuck up.
6. No, seriously, grow the fuck up.

That response only goes to confirm my opinion about the crass mentality of the original sentiment.

Your inability to actually argue with any of the points is also telling...

BluestBlue said:

Chris said:

BluestBlue said:

Chris said:

Those headlines ... people who die from coronavirus aren't "fighters"? They just don't have the right mental attitude?

I've seen plenty of such snowflakey complaints about the language. To which I say:

1. It's a perfectly normal metaphor, with a long history.
2. It reflects Boris' personality.
3. Praising one person in such terms implies no disparagement of anyone else.
4. Is language policing really a top priority right now?
5. Grow the fuck up.
6. No, seriously, grow the fuck up.

That response only goes to confirm my opinion about the crass mentality of the original sentiment.

Your inability to actually argue with any of the points is also telling...

Pardon me for not coming up with a counter-argument to "Grow the fuck up" or "No, seriously, grow the fuck up".

https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1247812789009293312

Chris said:

BluestBlue said:

Chris said:

BluestBlue said:

Chris said:

Those headlines ... people who die from coronavirus aren't "fighters"? They just don't have the right mental attitude?

I've seen plenty of such snowflakey complaints about the language. To which I say:

1. It's a perfectly normal metaphor, with a long history.
2. It reflects Boris' personality.
3. Praising one person in such terms implies no disparagement of anyone else.
4. Is language policing really a top priority right now?
5. Grow the fuck up.
6. No, seriously, grow the fuck up.

That response only goes to confirm my opinion about the crass mentality of the original sentiment.

Your inability to actually argue with any of the points is also telling...

Pardon me for not coming up with a counter-argument to "Grow the fuck up" or "No, seriously, grow the fuck up".

And the polite and factual points 1-4? Can't see any response to those.

kle4 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

TOPPING said:

BBC now amended its story.

No longer "Downing Street confirmed..." lockdown review is delayed because BoJo is ill. Now it is "No.10 suggested..." the review wouldn't go ahead as planned.

Two options.

1. Beeb overreach and misreported the first item, subsequently amended; or
2. Downing Street needed a better line for consumption on why the review wasn't going ahead.

You picks your tinfoil and takes your choice.

It really doesn't matter. We aren't coming out of lockdown for many more weeks. We haven't reached the peak and we don't have the antibody tests.

The media were screaming to be locked down as soon as possible, now after just 2 weeks, they screaming for it to change. Anybody with half a brain can see it will be 2-3 months, just as in Spain, Italy, France.

It certainly wasnt going to be ended or relaxed this week. A delay on a review is not a momentous decision to be sure.

After the lock down is lifted, how long before the *same* people in the media demanding it be lifted, demand that it be reimposed?

I am going to go for "6 minutes" in the pool.

TOPPING said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

TOPPING said:

BBC now amended its story.

No longer "Downing Street confirmed..." lockdown review is delayed because BoJo is ill. Now it is "No.10 suggested..." the review wouldn't go ahead as planned.

Two options.

1. Beeb overreach and misreported the first item, subsequently amended; or
2. Downing Street needed a better line for consumption on why the review wasn't going ahead.

You picks your tinfoil and takes your choice.

It really doesn't matter. We aren't coming out of lockdown for many more weeks. We haven't reached the peak and we don't have the antibody tests.

The media were screaming to be locked down as soon as possible, now after just 2 weeks, they screaming for it to change. 2 sodding weeks. I have had naps longer than that.

Anybody with half a brain can see it will be 2-3 months, just as in Spain, Italy, France.

Is manifestly not the issue. The issue is the review. The review can say we're nowhere near ready and we need to stay locked down for two more years. And that's fine. It is the fact that there is no review to confirm this as the PM is in no fit state to conduct it and there is no one else available to do so.

Or that given the circumstances a review on that question can reasonably wait a week or two. Unless a review is likely to lead to an imminent change in direction, and if it were I'd think the CMO and CSO would insist on a review, what does a deferred review harm? What was the significance of the date?

Foxy said:

SandyRentool said:

So let's guess... Adam Boulton will spend most of the morning discussing a non-existent constitutional crisis, and there might be a two minute interlude when the virus situation gets discussed. And even that will likely be some journalist or other wailing about when will the lockdown be lifted.

Quality.

Can I suggest turning off the news and listening to music instead?

The problem of the 24 hour news cycle is that there is an endless demand to talk about the same things. Mind you, it works for PB too.

24 hour news creates panic and petty arguments. It’s why I’ve tended to think there will be fewer deaths than predicted, because the news cycle pumps out exaggerations to keep people interested

The media are London sentric, talk amongst themselves about constitutional and other boring minutiae, while the political journalists shame themselves ever seeking the perfect 'gotcha' moment and possess an enormous opinion of themselves while looking ridiculous to most ordinary listeners. Indeed they treat their audience at times as if they are children incapable of seeing a wider picture and expecting them to swallow their mutterings.

To me the downside of all this is that we are losing vital debate, and information, from non politicals that is necessary and informative

All the media have managed to do is discredit themselves to the point of irrelevance at a time of great crisis. In so doing they have become boring to the point that peoople will stop listening

I want the government held to account and somehow the media need to take a long hard look at themselves, and put themselves on the judgment step, and ask are we really promoting public broadcast journalism?