politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Johnson’s former Attorney-General, Geoffrey Cox, says he’ll re
Comments
-
-
Cyclefree said:
You propose leaving women and children in lifeboats in the Atlantic or in the Channel, one of the busiest sea lanes in the world, and hope they will be ok and not drown. Wow!
I am not advocating it just pointing out that it is 100% within the gift of Johnson/Patel to solve this had they the will to do so.
After the first two lifeboats come ashore at Quimper nobody will be buying 5 grand boat rides in Calais.0 -
I'd like the boats stopped, ideally by the Australian method of processing all claims offshore. Now why are you so shy of admitting that your claim that the current Government is implementing UKIP/BXP policy is obvious nonsense?Cyclefree said:
Why are you so shy about saying what you would like to see happen, which is the question I asked you?BluestBlue said:
You can be clear that they are not doing what they would be doing if they were what you accuse them of being.Cyclefree said:
I’m not clear whether you agree with what the government is currently doing or want people in boats to be towed out to sea and left there.BluestBlue said:
So you prove my point that it's not a BXP/UKIP Government - they wouldn't give two hoots about your objections, they'd just do it. Meanwhile, Britain under Big Bad Boris is taking people off boats by the thousands. Bit of a discrepancy, no?Cyclefree said:
The reason migrants can’t be sent back, whether by force or otherwise, is because the government cannot force other countries to accept people. Deportations only happen when the receiving country agrees to receive them. If they don’t you can’t deport no matter how many laws you tear up or lawyers you bar from acting.BluestBlue said:
If this were really a BXP / UKIP Government, its policies would be far, far to the right of where they are under Boris. We'd be sending migrants back from our borders by force, foreign aid would be zero, and there would be no public health regulations for coronavirus at all, just a straight push for herd immunity. It's pure tosh.Cyclefree said:
I take the view that that party died some time ago and what we have in government is a UKIP/Brexit Party Government masquerading as a Conservative Government.WhisperingOracle said:
In a way that last year wasn't, that would surely be the end of the modern Conservative and Unionist Party.Cyclefree said:
I think he can and probably will.WhisperingOracle said:
The Tory critics will intensify if this happens. Clearly Cummings can't throw out Major, May, Howard, Cox, Hague and Lamont and Cameron.HYUFD said:
The government will win thanks to the DUPStocky said:
HYUFD: what is your prediction? Which way will the vote go?HYUFD said:
They won't, however as I said last night it would be amusing if 50 Tory MPs rebelled and the government only won the vote tonight thanks to DUP votesPulpstar said:
I too think the DUP will too vote with the Gov't on this (Regardless of the SDLP's move), which brings the starting majority effectively being 96. Can't see why any other parties would.HYUFD said:
Well that guarantees the DUP will vote with the government then, even if Tory rebels vote with the SDLPScott_xP said:
Interesting times ahead, in the next few weeks.
But - hubris.
In a way it would be best for all these people to be expelled so that Boris’s party’s true colours can be seen for what they really are.
If a boat is in British territorial waters or lands on a British shore, what are you going to do: shoot them? Drown them? Tow them to France? And what happens if the French close their ports to us?0 -
The political significance is that it (probably) gives Boris a week off PMQs.FrancisUrquhart said:
I hope we aren't going to get the same nonsense as when Prince Charles, Boris or Gove got a test and some windbags in the media went nuts about how did they get a test, did they jump the queue, etc.Gallowgate said:twitter.com/danielhewittitv/status/1305459077485678592?s=21
0 -
I am not advocating it just pointing out that it is 100% within the gift of Johnson/Patel to solve this had they the will to do so.Dura_Ace said:Cyclefree said:
You propose leaving women and children in lifeboats in the Atlantic or in the Channel, one of the busiest sea lanes in the world, and hope they will be ok and not drown. Wow!
After the first two lifeboats come ashore at Quimper nobody will be buying 5 grand boat rides in Calais.
I hear the Bay of Biscay is choppy this time of year.0 -
A bit rough off Brest. Notoriously difficult channel too.Dura_Ace said:
Sure, just tow them as far west as Brest.Philip_Thompson said:
This may be an ignorant question but are there any international waters that can reach France but not the UK? I wouldn't have thought there were.Dura_Ace said:
You stick them in partially fuelled lifeboats and tow them to a spot that's outside French territorial waters but in international waters. They only have enough fuel to get to France not the UK.Cyclefree said:
The reason migrants can’t be sent back, whether by force or otherwise, is because the government cannot force other countries to accept people. Deportations only happen when the receiving country agrees to receive them. If they don’t you can’t deport no matter how many laws you tear up or lawyers you bar from acting.
If a boat is in British territorial waters or lands on a British shore, what are you going to do: shoot them? Drown them? Tow them to France? And what happens if the French close their ports to us?
It could 100% be done if the will were there. I am very surprised Johnson and Patel aren't copping more shit over the channel situation.2 -
A way to go yet then.CarlottaVance said:0 -
-
So only 10 rebels so far, still well short of the roughly 55 needed to defeat the government given the DUP will support the governmentCarlottaVance said:0 -
-
Did not have an excuse to fly to AfghanistanPhilip_Thompson said:
Is that the 2020 version of a dentist appointment?Gallowgate said:0 -
So Cox and Green become the latest members of the May cabinet to have lost the Tory whip taking account of those who lost it before the 2019 GE https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1305458599137890305?s=200
-
And if there is no place offshore and a boat full of migrants in British territorial waters, what would you do?BluestBlue said:
I'd like the boats stopped, ideally by the Australian method of processing all claims offshore. Now why are you so shy of admitting that your claim that the current Government is implementing UKIP/BXP policy is obvious nonsense?Cyclefree said:
Why are you so shy about saying what you would like to see happen, which is the question I asked you?BluestBlue said:
You can be clear that they are not doing what they would be doing if they were what you accuse them of being.Cyclefree said:
I’m not clear whether you agree with what the government is currently doing or want people in boats to be towed out to sea and left there.BluestBlue said:
So you prove my point that it's not a BXP/UKIP Government - they wouldn't give two hoots about your objections, they'd just do it. Meanwhile, Britain under Big Bad Boris is taking people off boats by the thousands. Bit of a discrepancy, no?Cyclefree said:
The reason migrants can’t be sent back, whether by force or otherwise, is because the government cannot force other countries to accept people. Deportations only happen when the receiving country agrees to receive them. If they don’t you can’t deport no matter how many laws you tear up or lawyers you bar from acting.BluestBlue said:
If this were really a BXP / UKIP Government, its policies would be far, far to the right of where they are under Boris. We'd be sending migrants back from our borders by force, foreign aid would be zero, and there would be no public health regulations for coronavirus at all, just a straight push for herd immunity. It's pure tosh.Cyclefree said:
I take the view that that party died some time ago and what we have in government is a UKIP/Brexit Party Government masquerading as a Conservative Government.WhisperingOracle said:
In a way that last year wasn't, that would surely be the end of the modern Conservative and Unionist Party.Cyclefree said:
I think he can and probably will.WhisperingOracle said:
The Tory critics will intensify if this happens. Clearly Cummings can't throw out Major, May, Howard, Cox, Hague and Lamont and Cameron.HYUFD said:
The government will win thanks to the DUPStocky said:
HYUFD: what is your prediction? Which way will the vote go?HYUFD said:
They won't, however as I said last night it would be amusing if 50 Tory MPs rebelled and the government only won the vote tonight thanks to DUP votesPulpstar said:
I too think the DUP will too vote with the Gov't on this (Regardless of the SDLP's move), which brings the starting majority effectively being 96. Can't see why any other parties would.HYUFD said:
Well that guarantees the DUP will vote with the government then, even if Tory rebels vote with the SDLPScott_xP said:
Interesting times ahead, in the next few weeks.
But - hubris.
In a way it would be best for all these people to be expelled so that Boris’s party’s true colours can be seen for what they really are.
If a boat is in British territorial waters or lands on a British shore, what are you going to do: shoot them? Drown them? Tow them to France? And what happens if the French close their ports to us?
As to your second question, no: the government is doing what Farage and the Brexit party want on Brexit and is proposing to tear up human rights laws and even withdraw from the ECHR and is also proposing to break the law. This seems to me to be much closer to a UKIP/Brexit-style party than a Conservative one.
You are free to disagree with my opinion.
Now about those boats full of migrants near Dover?0 -
Don't do drugs kids....they screw your brain.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Government just following the science then.Scott_xP said:0 -
Not a very convincing list from the veteran propagandist so far ; surely May is going to at least abstain too, supposedly putting her on the government's expulsion list.HYUFD said:
So only 10 rebels so far, still well short of the roughly 55 needed to defeat the government given the DUP will support the governmentCarlottaVance said:0 -
I wonder who the "senior official" might be...Mexicanpete said:Government just following the science then.
1 -
Didn't she already say she was going to be away this week?WhisperingOracle said:
Not a very convincing list from the veteran propagandist so far ; surely May is going to at least abstain too, supposedly putting her on the government's expulsion list.HYUFD said:
So only 10 rebels so far, still well short of the roughly 55 needed to defeat the government given the DUP will support the governmentCarlottaVance said:0 -
It may increase but it would be funny if the majority ends up being as much as the government's theoretical 78 majority (because of the DUP voting with the government and if more opposition than Tory MPs abstain).HYUFD said:
So only 10 rebels so far, still well short of the roughly 55 needed to defeat the government given the DUP will support the governmentCarlottaVance said:1 -
You're right - I forgot she said she was going to be away on Monday but there later in the week.FrancisUrquhart said:
Didn't she already say she was going to be away this week?WhisperingOracle said:
Not a very convincing list from the veteran propagandist so far ; surely May is going to at least abstain too, supposedly putting her on the government's expulsion list.HYUFD said:
So only 10 rebels so far, still well short of the roughly 55 needed to defeat the government given the DUP will support the governmentCarlottaVance said:
Interestingly convenient.0 -
-
My MP is very enthusiastic about the bill indeed, but bills getting through are always about the silent majority of loyal Gov't backbenchers.Mexicanpete said:
A way to go yet then.CarlottaVance said:0 -
The government won’t be defeated.HYUFD said:
So only 10 rebels so far, still well short of the roughly 55 needed to defeat the government given the DUP will support the governmentCarlottaVance said:0 -
I seemed to remember back on the day, Boris used to find he had terribly important overseas business to deal with when important votes came up.WhisperingOracle said:
You're right - I forgot she said she was going to be away on Monday but there later in the week.FrancisUrquhart said:
Didn't she already say she was going to be away this week?WhisperingOracle said:
Not a very convincing list from the veteran propagandist so far ; surely May is going to at least abstain too, supposedly putting her on the government's expulsion list.HYUFD said:
So only 10 rebels so far, still well short of the roughly 55 needed to defeat the government given the DUP will support the governmentCarlottaVance said:
Interestingly convenient.0 -
The other option would be to tow them east and let them "Transit Ostend" as Marvin Gaye put it.Foxy said:
A bit rough off Brest. Notoriously difficult channel too.
The worst sea states I have ever experienced was on a T23 in the North Sea off Belgium. I was also sleeping on top of two filing cabinets pushed together and sharing a cabin with an intrusively loud masturbator.0 -
Sounds like unfinished monkey business to me.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
May is actually a key person here. If she's not present for the vote after all, the government can get away with expelling some others if not her ; it potentially changes the dynamic of the vote and whatever comes afterward - until the amendment stage.0
-
I'm not worried about Trafalgar so long as they remain an outlier. What I suspect is occurring with them is an attempt to stand apart from the pack with fingers crossed they look brilliant post 3/11. Start with an assumption that there are a ton of people planning to vote for Trump but too embarrassed to admit this even to an anonymous pollster. Do your poll in the trad way. Then bump up Trump's numbers by applying your assumption. Could work, of course it could, but I think - just like the man they are championing - they are cruising for a bruising.Pulpstar said:
North Carolina return stats - The GoodAlistair said:North Carolina Stats given @Pulpstar has been slack
Returned Accepted Ballots
Dems: 14184
GOP: 3385
Other: 7318
Requested Ballots
CONSTITUTION 159
DEMOCRATIC 388,711
GREEN 333
LIBERTARIAN 2,303
REPUBLICAN 127,226
UNAFFILIATED 239,325
Grand Total 758,057
Return Rate
Dems: 3.6%
GOP: 2.7%
Trafalgar polling - The bad
Wisconsin courts - The ugly0 -
He could do the "Double Johnson" and get in a fridge IN Afghanistan.malcolmg22 said:
Did not have an excuse to fly to AfghanistanPhilip_Thompson said:
Is that the 2020 version of a dentist appointment?Gallowgate said:3 -
I hope not, but I'm not confident when it gets to the amendment stage just yet, let alone ping pong* with the Lords.Cyclefree said:
The government won’t be defeated.HYUFD said:
So only 10 rebels so far, still well short of the roughly 55 needed to defeat the government given the DUP will support the governmentCarlottaVance said:
* While Boris is PM is it acceptable to use the term "whiff whaff" instead?0 -
May may back in the Commons for the amendment stage, and then the whole showdown prospect may begin again.Philip_Thompson said:
I hope not, but I'm not confident when it gets to the amendment stage just yet, let alone ping pong* with the Lords.Cyclefree said:
The government won’t be defeated.HYUFD said:
So only 10 rebels so far, still well short of the roughly 55 needed to defeat the government given the DUP will support the governmentCarlottaVance said:
* While Boris is PM is it acceptable to use the term "whiff whaff" instead?0 -
What outcome of the vote will you be rooting for Kinabalu? Can you base your answer on what is better for the country rather than for the Labour Party, I wonder? Personally, while I am uncomfortable with all this I`m rooting for a government win, because defeat will mean that our negotiating position with the EU will be shot otherwise.kinabalu said:
I'll sell that for 10 farthings a point if "rebel" means vote against.Richard_Nabavi said:So what's our spread on the number of Tory rebels tonight? I'm opening the market with a spread of 28-32. (Not for money, just for fun).
2 -
Oh dear. Has he been recording with Morrissey?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Trafalgar in 2016 were correct in being the outlier in the rustbelt swing states.kinabalu said:
I'm not worried about Trafalgar so long as they remain an outlier. What I suspect is occurring with them is an attempt to stand apart from the pack with fingers crossed they look brilliant post 3/11. Start with an assumption that there are a ton of people planning to vote for Trump but too embarrassed to admit this even to an anonymous pollster. Do your poll in the trad way. Then bump up Trump's numbers by applying your assumption. Could work, of course it could, but I think - just like the man they are championing - they are cruising for a bruising.Pulpstar said:
North Carolina return stats - The GoodAlistair said:North Carolina Stats given @Pulpstar has been slack
Returned Accepted Ballots
Dems: 14184
GOP: 3385
Other: 7318
Requested Ballots
CONSTITUTION 159
DEMOCRATIC 388,711
GREEN 333
LIBERTARIAN 2,303
REPUBLICAN 127,226
UNAFFILIATED 239,325
Grand Total 758,057
Return Rate
Dems: 3.6%
GOP: 2.7%
Trafalgar polling - The bad
Wisconsin courts - The ugly
Plus even Trafalgar have had Biden ahead in Michigan and Pennsylvania in at least one poll this year but Trump holding all his other 2016 states and Biden holding the Hillary states.
If that were to come to pass and Biden won NE02 as polling there suggests then it would be 269 269 and a tie but the House awarding the Presidency to Trump, the Senate deciding the VP.
Trafalgar are suggesting Trump could be re elected, they are not suggesting a Trump landslide and even Trafalgar are suggesting Biden will do better than Hillary did0 -
-
-
-
The lapdogs and the sheep. My MP is both.Pulpstar said:
My MP is very enthusiastic about the bill indeed, but bills getting through are always about the silent majority of loyal Gov't backbenchers.Mexicanpete said:
A way to go yet then.CarlottaVance said:0 -
-
-
I bet they don't have to travel 200 miles though or wait a weekFrancisUrquhart said:
I hope we aren't going to get the same nonsense as when Prince Charles, Boris or Gove got a test and some windbags in the media went nuts about how did they get a test, did they jump the queue, etc.Gallowgate said:twitter.com/danielhewittitv/status/1305459077485678592?s=21
0 -
I wonder if the government might end up accepting this amendment?Scott_xP said:
It surely has the same impact as the bill itself, it ensures that the UK can act independently without the EU but just gives Parliament the power to do it - and since it only requires a Commons vote means that the Lords are not an issue. If this amendment is accepted and the Bill can more easily get through the Lords then win/win.
The Government can use its majority along with the DUP when it comes to a future Commons vote.2 -
A relative of my wife's who is in her 80s, had a bad fall in a supermarket where the floor had been left wet. She is in a lot of pain, crying with it. Having been put off twice by her doctor, who remotely diagnosed that she had bruising, she was referred to physiotherapy on the third occasion. They have now been in touch saying that they are not allowed to see patients at present but will send her some exercises to do in the post.
Last Saturday my wife had a back massage as a birthday present from her son.
I mean, WTF is going on? When are we going to stop worrying quite so much about us protecting the NHS and more about when it is protecting us?6 -
The increasing use of the Whip this way will probably outlast Cummings.HYUFD said:So Cox and Green become the latest members of the May cabinet to have lost the Tory whip taking account of those who lost it before the 2019 GE https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1305458599137890305?s=20
Cummings is the ultimate anti-Burkeian. He doesn't want anyone with their own judgment anywhere near law making in this country.1 -
I'm a fan of Ed, and partly understand the rationale for this in these serious times, but somehow it also fits with the image of the young Ed studying diligently at home, and reviewing computer games for LBC radio, as he did in the '80s, while his contemporaries are out partying.HYUFD said:1 -
It's a no brainer. They should immediately accept it. But that might defuse the row they seem to want to have.Philip_Thompson said:
I wonder if the government might end up accepting this amendment?Scott_xP said:
It surely has the same impact as the bill itself, it ensures that the UK can act independently without the EU but just gives Parliament the power to do it - and since it only requires a Commons vote means that the Lords are not an issue. If this amendment is accepted and the Bill can more easily get through the Lords then win/win.
The Government can use its majority along with the DUP when it comes to a future Commons vote.0 -
I think we crossed the line a while back. Rather having a NHS that required protecting we now have a lazy, inefficient and risk-averse NHS.DavidL said:A relative of my wife's who is in her 80s, had a bad fall in a supermarket where the floor had been left wet. She is in a lot of pain, crying with it. Having been put off twice by her doctor, who remotely diagnosed that she had bruising, she was referred to physiotherapy on the third occasion. They have now been in touch saying that they are not allowed to see patients at present but will send her some exercises to do in the post.
Last Thursday my wife had a back massage as a birthday present from her son.
I mean, WTF is going on? When are we going to stop worrying quite so much about us protecting the NHS and more about when it is protecting us?2 -
An 80 seat landslide and Johnson still needs c and s from the DUP?Philip_Thompson said:
I wonder if the government might end up accepting this amendment?Scott_xP said:
It surely has the same impact as the bill itself, it ensures that the UK can act independently without the EU but just gives Parliament the power to do it - and since it only requires a Commons vote means that the Lords are not an issue. If this amendment is accepted and the Bill can more easily get through the Lords then win/win.
The Government can use its majority along with the DUP when it comes to a future Commons vote.
Maybe we need another GE to bolster Johnson's majority.0 -
I can think of no circumstances in which I would grass on my neighbours over this. Sad to think that we are being encouraged into this kind of Stasi like behaviour. Snitches get stitches in SE London anyway.HYUFD said:1 -
The first paragraph certainly sounds like the system isn't working as it should. What does a massage from your wife's son's to your wife have to do with anything though ?DavidL said:A relative of my wife's who is in her 80s, had a bad fall in a supermarket where the floor had been left wet. She is in a lot of pain, crying with it. Having been put off twice by her doctor, who remotely diagnosed that she had bruising, she was referred to physiotherapy on the third occasion. They have now been in touch saying that they are not allowed to see patients at present but will send her some exercises to do in the post.
Last Saturday my wife had a back massage as a birthday present from her son.
I mean, WTF is going on? When are we going to stop worrying quite so much about us protecting the NHS and more about when it is protecting us?0 -
I think its actually more @MaxPB 's "demand 10/10, offer 1/10" analogy.DavidL said:
It's a no brainer. They should immediately accept it. But that might defuse the row they seem to want to have.Philip_Thompson said:
I wonder if the government might end up accepting this amendment?Scott_xP said:
It surely has the same impact as the bill itself, it ensures that the UK can act independently without the EU but just gives Parliament the power to do it - and since it only requires a Commons vote means that the Lords are not an issue. If this amendment is accepted and the Bill can more easily get through the Lords then win/win.
The Government can use its majority along with the DUP when it comes to a future Commons vote.
With the originally drafted bill the government was incredibly audacious and went for 10/10. If they accept this immediately it becomes the new baseline and people will look for more compromises, whereas if they fight until the day then on the day of the votes "compromise" by accepting this without compromising any more then they might just get this through even the Lords too without compromising it any further.0 -
Frustrating waiting in for a plumber.
On such a beautiful day I want to be outside finding people to grass up.7 -
It should be sufficient as a statement of intent. It becomes the UK's backstop.DavidL said:
It's a no brainer. They should immediately accept it. But that might defuse the row they seem to want to have.Philip_Thompson said:
I wonder if the government might end up accepting this amendment?Scott_xP said:
It surely has the same impact as the bill itself, it ensures that the UK can act independently without the EU but just gives Parliament the power to do it - and since it only requires a Commons vote means that the Lords are not an issue. If this amendment is accepted and the Bill can more easily get through the Lords then win/win.
The Government can use its majority along with the DUP when it comes to a future Commons vote.
1 -
On the latest Opinium poll at the weekend there would be a hung parliament and Boris would lose his majority and need DUP confidence and supply just to stay in power a la May 2017 so that is clearly not happeningMexicanpete said:
An 80 seat landslide and Johnson still needs c and s from the DUP?Philip_Thompson said:
I wonder if the government might end up accepting this amendment?Scott_xP said:
It surely has the same impact as the bill itself, it ensures that the UK can act independently without the EU but just gives Parliament the power to do it - and since it only requires a Commons vote means that the Lords are not an issue. If this amendment is accepted and the Bill can more easily get through the Lords then win/win.
The Government can use its majority along with the DUP when it comes to a future Commons vote.
Maybe we need another GE to bolster Johnson's majority.0 -
surely cannot be worse than the channel in a small dinghy, lifeboats can cross oceans.Foxy said:
A bit rough off Brest. Notoriously difficult channel too.Dura_Ace said:
Sure, just tow them as far west as Brest.Philip_Thompson said:
This may be an ignorant question but are there any international waters that can reach France but not the UK? I wouldn't have thought there were.Dura_Ace said:
You stick them in partially fuelled lifeboats and tow them to a spot that's outside French territorial waters but in international waters. They only have enough fuel to get to France not the UK.Cyclefree said:
The reason migrants can’t be sent back, whether by force or otherwise, is because the government cannot force other countries to accept people. Deportations only happen when the receiving country agrees to receive them. If they don’t you can’t deport no matter how many laws you tear up or lawyers you bar from acting.
If a boat is in British territorial waters or lands on a British shore, what are you going to do: shoot them? Drown them? Tow them to France? And what happens if the French close their ports to us?
It could 100% be done if the will were there. I am very surprised Johnson and Patel aren't copping more shit over the channel situation.0 -
How wonderful that those that oppose the restrictions on the grounds of liberty and freedom (I presume) make (un?)veiled threats of violence.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I can think of no circumstances in which I would grass on my neighbours over this. Sad to think that we are being encouraged into this kind of Stasi like behaviour. Snitches get stitches in SE London anyway.HYUFD said:0 -
How can we have a situation where it is ok for a masseuse to provide her services to members of the public all day but it is not ok for a medical professional to see people in person to provide what is likely to be a much less intimate service with the appropriate safeguards? The masseuse has followed government guidance and got back to work. The NHS...not so much.Pulpstar said:
The first paragraph certainly sounds like the system isn't working as it should. What does a massage from your wife's son's to your wife have to do with anything though ?DavidL said:A relative of my wife's who is in her 80s, had a bad fall in a supermarket where the floor had been left wet. She is in a lot of pain, crying with it. Having been put off twice by her doctor, who remotely diagnosed that she had bruising, she was referred to physiotherapy on the third occasion. They have now been in touch saying that they are not allowed to see patients at present but will send her some exercises to do in the post.
Last Saturday my wife had a back massage as a birthday present from her son.
I mean, WTF is going on? When are we going to stop worrying quite so much about us protecting the NHS and more about when it is protecting us?2 -
It will definitely lead to more of the sort of scenes we have seen over mask-ism, where it turns into a big row.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I can think of no circumstances in which I would grass on my neighbours over this. Sad to think that we are being encouraged into this kind of Stasi like behaviour. Snitches get stitches in SE London anyway.HYUFD said:
This should be all about persuasion of the public to stick to the rules as much as possible for the good of granny, with the police going after those deliberately trying to organize mass gatherings like raves.0 -
CMO was one of the ones telling him off!Mexicanpete said:
Government just following the science then.Scott_xP said:0 -
Dura_Ace said:
He could do the "Double Johnson" and get in a fridge IN Afghanistan.malcolmg22 said:
Did not have an excuse to fly to AfghanistanPhilip_Thompson said:
Is that the 2020 version of a dentist appointment?Gallowgate said:
0 -
Just had a horrid flash of BJ and Jo doin' the spitroast.Dura_Ace said:
He could do the "Double Johnson" and get in a fridge IN Afghanistan.malcolmg22 said:
Did not have an excuse to fly to AfghanistanPhilip_Thompson said:
Is that the 2020 version of a dentist appointment?Gallowgate said:0 -
You make him sound like a candidate for a comic strip in Viz magazine, poor chap!WhisperingOracle said:
I'm a fan of Ed, and partly understand the rationale for this in these serious times, but somehow it also fits with the image of the young Ed studying diligently at home, and reviewing computer games for LBC radio, as he did in the '80s, while his contemporaries are out partying.HYUFD said:1 -
Meanwhile they are whinging about needing huge pay rises, it is pathetic.DavidL said:A relative of my wife's who is in her 80s, had a bad fall in a supermarket where the floor had been left wet. She is in a lot of pain, crying with it. Having been put off twice by her doctor, who remotely diagnosed that she had bruising, she was referred to physiotherapy on the third occasion. They have now been in touch saying that they are not allowed to see patients at present but will send her some exercises to do in the post.
Last Saturday my wife had a back massage as a birthday present from her son.
I mean, WTF is going on? When are we going to stop worrying quite so much about us protecting the NHS and more about when it is protecting us?2 -
Because the masseuse needs to work to pay their bills.DavidL said:
How can we have a situation where it is ok for a masseuse to provide her services to members of the public all day but it is not ok for a medical professional to see people in person to provide what is likely to be a much less intimate service with the appropriate safeguards? The masseuse has followed government guidance and got back to work. The NHS...not so much.Pulpstar said:
The first paragraph certainly sounds like the system isn't working as it should. What does a massage from your wife's son's to your wife have to do with anything though ?DavidL said:A relative of my wife's who is in her 80s, had a bad fall in a supermarket where the floor had been left wet. She is in a lot of pain, crying with it. Having been put off twice by her doctor, who remotely diagnosed that she had bruising, she was referred to physiotherapy on the third occasion. They have now been in touch saying that they are not allowed to see patients at present but will send her some exercises to do in the post.
Last Saturday my wife had a back massage as a birthday present from her son.
I mean, WTF is going on? When are we going to stop worrying quite so much about us protecting the NHS and more about when it is protecting us?0 -
So that your wife's son is a professional masseuse and is allowed to practice now (And gave your wife a back massage as a present) was a contrast to draw with the first para ?DavidL said:
How can we have a situation where it is ok for a masseuse to provide her services to members of the public all day but it is not ok for a medical professional to see people in person to provide what is likely to be a much less intimate service with the appropriate safeguards? The masseuse has followed government guidance and got back to work. The NHS...not so much.Pulpstar said:
The first paragraph certainly sounds like the system isn't working as it should. What does a massage from your wife's son's to your wife have to do with anything though ?DavidL said:A relative of my wife's who is in her 80s, had a bad fall in a supermarket where the floor had been left wet. She is in a lot of pain, crying with it. Having been put off twice by her doctor, who remotely diagnosed that she had bruising, she was referred to physiotherapy on the third occasion. They have now been in touch saying that they are not allowed to see patients at present but will send her some exercises to do in the post.
Last Saturday my wife had a back massage as a birthday present from her son.
I mean, WTF is going on? When are we going to stop worrying quite so much about us protecting the NHS and more about when it is protecting us?
Your wife's son visiting your wife would in the absence of other information normally be taken as a social, not a professional visit.0 -
Haha - no, I'm a big fan of Ed, really ;.) If only we had him in charge, instead of Boris.Carnyx said:
You make him sound like a candidate for a comic strip in Viz magazine, poor chap!WhisperingOracle said:
I'm a fan of Ed, and partly understand the rationale for this in these serious times, but somehow it also fits with the image of the young Ed studying diligently at home, and reviewing computer games for LBC radio, as he did in the '80s, while his contemporaries are out partying.HYUFD said:1 -
I'm not capable of actually rooting for this Boris Johnson government but I would be happy to see them win this vote easily - i.e. with a minimum of the drama I believe they themselves are rooting for.Stocky said:
What outcome of the vote will you be rooting for Kinabalu? Can you base your answer on what is better for the country rather than for the Labour Party, I wonder? Personally, while I am uncomfortable with all this I`m rooting for a government win, because defeat will mean that our negotiating position with the EU will be shot otherwise.kinabalu said:
I'll sell that for 10 farthings a point if "rebel" means vote against.Richard_Nabavi said:So what's our spread on the number of Tory rebels tonight? I'm opening the market with a spread of 28-32. (Not for money, just for fun).
1 -
I see LadyG is running in the 3:45 at Thirsk, odds only 1/25 mind you.1
-
If she (he) can get a drink in before, anything's possible.malcolmg22 said:I see LadyG is running in the 3:45 at Thirsk, odds only 1/25 mind you.
1 -
A question for Parliamentary experts . . . lets say hypothetically that the Commons sends through the Bill unamended to the Lords (ie they reject the Neill amendment), but then the Lords were to amend the bill by adding the Neill amendment in (or something very like it) and send it back to the Commons for consideration like that . . .
. . . then could the Government/Commons simply accept the amendment at that point and the Lords have already now agreed so it then goes to Royal Assent? Or if the Commons accepts it do the Lords then have to vote again prior to Royal Assent?0 -
It was a lighthearted comment! I am not against the restrictions, I just don't like the idea of encouraging us all to become a bunch of informers.Pulpstar said:
How wonderful that those that oppose the restrictions on the grounds of liberty and freedom (I presume) make (un?)veiled threats of violence.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I can think of no circumstances in which I would grass on my neighbours over this. Sad to think that we are being encouraged into this kind of Stasi like behaviour. Snitches get stitches in SE London anyway.HYUFD said:2 -
Exotic even by our famous poster(s) though, need a few drinks in to beat horses over 12 furlongsWhisperingOracle said:
If she (he) can get a drink in before, anything's possible.malcolmg22 said:I see LadyG is running in the 3:45 at Thirsk, odds only 1/25 mind you.
2 -
Cummings is CMO now? Wow.RobD said:
CMO was one of the ones telling him off!Mexicanpete said:
Government just following the science then.Scott_xP said:0 -
I thought ping pong stops when both houses agree the text without amendment.Philip_Thompson said:A question for Parliamentary experts . . . lets say hypothetically that the Commons sends through the Bill unamended to the Lords (ie they reject the Neill amendment), but then the Lords were to amend the bill by adding the Neill amendment in (or something very like it) and send it back to the Commons for consideration like that . . .
. . . then could the Government/Commons simply accept the amendment at that point and the Lords have already now agreed so it then goes to Royal Assent? Or if the Commons accepts it do the Lords then have to vote again prior to Royal Assent?0 -
I doubt anyone* will report grandparents visiting a household that has 3 children, large gatherings OTOH I'd hope everyone would dob their neighbours in for that.OnlyLivingBoy said:
It was a lighthearted comment! I am not against the restrictions, I just don't like the idea of encouraging us all to become a bunch of informers.Pulpstar said:
How wonderful that those that oppose the restrictions on the grounds of liberty and freedom (I presume) make (un?)veiled threats of violence.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I can think of no circumstances in which I would grass on my neighbours over this. Sad to think that we are being encouraged into this kind of Stasi like behaviour. Snitches get stitches in SE London anyway.HYUFD said:
*Some might, they'd be told where to go by the police I'd hope though.0 -
Not sure what you mean. In the email he says the opposition came from the CMO and two civil servants. Not the politicians.Mexicanpete said:
Cummings is CMO now? Wow.RobD said:
CMO was one of the ones telling him off!Mexicanpete said:
Government just following the science then.Scott_xP said:0 -
No need to wonder - he explicitly says who "with a telling off from CMO PS DHSC and CabSec"Scott_xP said:
I wonder who the "senior official" might be...Mexicanpete said:Government just following the science then.
0 -
under 12's excluded in Scotland , so if you have young children you can have 6 adults plus as many under 12's as you like.Pulpstar said:
I doubt anyone* will report grandparents visiting a household that has 3 children, large gatherings OTOH I'd hope everyone would dob their neighbours in for that.OnlyLivingBoy said:
It was a lighthearted comment! I am not against the restrictions, I just don't like the idea of encouraging us all to become a bunch of informers.Pulpstar said:
How wonderful that those that oppose the restrictions on the grounds of liberty and freedom (I presume) make (un?)veiled threats of violence.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I can think of no circumstances in which I would grass on my neighbours over this. Sad to think that we are being encouraged into this kind of Stasi like behaviour. Snitches get stitches in SE London anyway.HYUFD said:
*Some might, they'd be told where to go by the police I'd hope though.
PS: from two families0 -
I honestly wouldn't grass up my neighbours about this even if they had a full on rave.Pulpstar said:
I doubt anyone* will report grandparents visiting a household that has 3 children, large gatherings OTOH I'd hope everyone would dob their neighbours in for that.OnlyLivingBoy said:
It was a lighthearted comment! I am not against the restrictions, I just don't like the idea of encouraging us all to become a bunch of informers.Pulpstar said:
How wonderful that those that oppose the restrictions on the grounds of liberty and freedom (I presume) make (un?)veiled threats of violence.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I can think of no circumstances in which I would grass on my neighbours over this. Sad to think that we are being encouraged into this kind of Stasi like behaviour. Snitches get stitches in SE London anyway.HYUFD said:
*Some might, they'd be told where to go by the police I'd hope though.0 -
-
Simple the masseuse only gets paid for doing her job.DavidL said:
How can we have a situation where it is ok for a masseuse to provide her services to members of the public all day but it is not ok for a medical professional to see people in person to provide what is likely to be a much less intimate service with the appropriate safeguards? The masseuse has followed government guidance and got back to work. The NHS...not so much.Pulpstar said:
The first paragraph certainly sounds like the system isn't working as it should. What does a massage from your wife's son's to your wife have to do with anything though ?DavidL said:A relative of my wife's who is in her 80s, had a bad fall in a supermarket where the floor had been left wet. She is in a lot of pain, crying with it. Having been put off twice by her doctor, who remotely diagnosed that she had bruising, she was referred to physiotherapy on the third occasion. They have now been in touch saying that they are not allowed to see patients at present but will send her some exercises to do in the post.
Last Saturday my wife had a back massage as a birthday present from her son.
I mean, WTF is going on? When are we going to stop worrying quite so much about us protecting the NHS and more about when it is protecting us?
The doctor gets paid whether he does his job or not1 -
Anything that keeps the red wall on side.CarlottaVance said:0 -
And the ScoTories.Mexicanpete said:
Anything that keeps the red wall on side.CarlottaVance said:0 -
We've now got the "Reverse Andy Murray" in COVID - when cases are low, or declining, they are in Scotland, when they are high or rising they are in the UK
https://twitter.com/devisridhar/status/1305467814195662848?s=20
https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1304721092838334465?s=201 -
If I were still running a community pharmacy I gather I would be expected, albeit masked, to dispense patients medicines and give them any necessary advise. Plus be available for the general public to ask advice.DavidL said:
How can we have a situation where it is ok for a masseuse to provide her services to members of the public all day but it is not ok for a medical professional to see people in person to provide what is likely to be a much less intimate service with the appropriate safeguards? The masseuse has followed government guidance and got back to work. The NHS...not so much.Pulpstar said:
The first paragraph certainly sounds like the system isn't working as it should. What does a massage from your wife's son's to your wife have to do with anything though ?DavidL said:A relative of my wife's who is in her 80s, had a bad fall in a supermarket where the floor had been left wet. She is in a lot of pain, crying with it. Having been put off twice by her doctor, who remotely diagnosed that she had bruising, she was referred to physiotherapy on the third occasion. They have now been in touch saying that they are not allowed to see patients at present but will send her some exercises to do in the post.
Last Saturday my wife had a back massage as a birthday present from her son.
I mean, WTF is going on? When are we going to stop worrying quite so much about us protecting the NHS and more about when it is protecting us?
That\s certainly what happens at the pharmacy I now, as an OAP, visit reasonable;y regularly.
Meanwhile up the road the GP can do everything over the phone or by video link...... although I gather the media;l profession as a whole is very reluctant to use any form of video link.
0 -
Doesn't make sense. Both comments are valid - because Scotland is within and connected to a wider pool of pox infestation as well as of endogenous pox, and gmt policy has to respond to both. Also cos the testing problem is UK wide, so that stats problem is too.CarlottaVance said:We've now got the "Reverse Andy Murray" in COVID - when cases are low, or declining, they are in Scotland, when they are high or rising they are in the UK
https://twitter.com/devisridhar/status/1305467814195662848?s=20
https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1304721092838334465?s=200 -
Whoa! What happened to the nice green PB website???0
-
Some vegetarian grouse-substitute for me, pleaseCarlottaVance said: 0 -
I can’t remember such a “tomorrow’s chip paper” argument as this one over the Internal Markets Bill. It surprises me that there are any Tory MPs left who have not yet realised that Geoff Cox has a sole aim from his time in politics: self promotion for the benefit of his private Chambers. He’d no doubt be delighted to get kicked out on a “point of principle”, His political career having pretty much exhausted its usefulness to him.
I follow politics closer than most and I can’t even remember what the rebellion was over this time last year that saw all those MPs expelled. Those considering the same now would do well to consider what pathetic figures the likes of Stewart, Gauke and Greening now cut, sniping on Twitter to try and preserve some semblance of relevance. Or Hammond, tarting himself like Blair. Major, May and Blair are hardly disinterested parties either.
It’s all just the rough and tumble of dealing with the EU. I’m in uproar over the government’s Rule of Six and snitching agenda, necessitated only by how ineptly it’s run and communicated the covid response. But I’m giving three cheers that they’re giving a robust response to the EU and are prepared to break a few eggs.2
