Oh dear… ODA… – politicalbetting.com

FF43 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

FF43 said:

In truth, I think the vaccine nationalism rows would be even grimmer if we were in the EU rather than outside. Maybe we can chalk that up as a relative "benefit" of Brexit ?

It may be. Certainly we can all chalk up the EU's performance on the procurement as abysmal, and their temper tantrums and attempts at blame-shifting as disgraceful.

Actually, I think the EU will do fine, just as the UK would have done fine if the EU hadn't helpfully provided us with their early vaccines. There are plenty of vaccines coming down the pike everywhere and once you have vaccinated your own people you are relaxed about allowing your supply to go to other countries.

Hold on, Pfizer is an EU state owned compa y now? In what way are Pfizer vaccines "their" vaccines? I'm absolutely certain that if Pfizer were unable to export from Belgium to the UK the UK would have helped Pfizer set up manufacturing in the UK as part of the deal. We did it with AZ, Novavax and Valneva.

BluestBlue said:

Endillion said:

Just to note that I had AstraZeneca jab #1 about 24 hours ago, and if how I feel now is "mild" compared to the real illness, then count me extremely grateful I had the cure before the disease.

I am probably younger than most of the people who've had it prior (a statement that, I guess, will be true of almost everyone, but it's bloody unpleasant. My wife (younger still) seems to be having an even worse time of it.

Sorry to hear that. There are a fair few anecdotes of stronger reactions in younger people, though whether that's because they've already had Covid or just have stronger immune systems in general isn't certain. Hope the side-effects clear up soon.

To add to that anecdotal directionalism. Our old cleaner had it - old in both senses, she isn't our cleaner now, and she's 80 - and did not feel a single thing. No side affects at all.

TimT said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

TimT said:

Richard, I simply do not agree with your analysis. I think we would have buckled, and joined the consensus on how to approach the whole vaccine issue. It is possible, just possible, that the push to a unified approach was Brexit-induced, but I strongly doubt that too.

The EU is a one-directional ratchet, towards evermore centralized power, decision-making and control. This was coming, regardless of Brexit, IMO.

In any case, it is moot. We are where we are, and what iffery does not change that.

Actually the ratchet has very much jumped backwards on this one. You won't be seeing any future involvement of the Commission in healthcare and procurement after this debacle. Member states make little secret of the fact that they think it was a disaster.

Fair enough. But it has taken international humiliation for that one instance of reversing direction to happen.

And the EU already calling for more Europe in response.

Pagan2 said:

RobD said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

TimT said:

Richard, I simply do not agree with your analysis. I think we would have buckled, and joined the consensus on how to approach the whole vaccine issue. It is possible, just possible, that the push to a unified approach was Brexit-induced, but I strongly doubt that too.

The EU is a one-directional ratchet, towards evermore centralized power, decision-making and control. This was coming, regardless of Brexit, IMO.

In any case, it is moot. We are where we are, and what iffery does not change that.

Actually the ratchet has very much jumped backwards on this one. You won't be seeing any future involvement of the Commission in healthcare and procurement after this debacle. Member states make little secret of the fact that they think it was a disaster.

Except they are already talking about a health union. The EU only has one direction.

and like the band one direction they are equally dire....von der leyden is the harry styles of the eu

That doesn't quite work. Styles was the star of One Direction.

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Smear, a short analysis.

'The SNP’s links with Iran are of the gravest concern

...It is not simply that it operates a network of fake social media and internet sites pushing the SNP’s cause; it is that leading SNP figures, from Nicola Sturgeon down, appear to have what one might charitably call a lack of concern about consorting with figures who are either, in effect, agents of the regime or who are deeply sympathetic to it.'

Provide not an iota of proof or even an allegation of who these 'figures' might be.

Job done.

https://twitter.com/JewishChron/status/1370079724488298499?s=20

This dude for starters.

Sturgeon’s link to anti-gay Iran cleric

EXCLUSIVE: Scotland’s First Minister shared platform with firebrand Iranian cleric who compared gay marriage to bestiality

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/sturgeon-s-link-to-anti-gay-iran-cleric-1.512738

Seems a lot of A was in the same room as B who said C and attended event D.

Is the Quds rally a regular legal event in London?

"You mean the Nigel Farage, who sits in the European Parliament with Rudolf Strauss MEP from Austria, whose party leader's next door neighbour once had a conversation with a lady from Innsbruck whose great grandfather was in the SS? THAT Nigel Farage?"

MaxPB said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Endillion said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

You really think Cameron or any other Europhile Tory leader - or Corbyn on the Labour side - would have dared to stand aside from the EU vaccination scheme when every other country joined it? There is not a cat in hells chance.

I have far more confidence in my nation freed from the Eurofanatics than you do given you think we are incapable of surviving without being part of the EU. Have some confidence in your own independent nation, man.

We'll never know, but FWIW I think that is almost certainly 100% wrong. By the time the EU started to get its act together we were already well set up with our own investment and procurement programme. That had been kicked off by Patrick Vallance and Jonathan van Tam very early on, first informally and then as formal initiative in April 2020:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-launches-vaccine-taskforce-to-combat-coronavirus

It is inconceivable that we'd have abandoned that to join in with the EU programme, which didn't even become a proposal until mid-June, by which time Kate Bingham was already well advanced in the procurement.

And it wouldn't exactly be the first time that the UK, when it was an EU member, didn't join in.

I think it's inconceivable the EU wouldn't have brought all the pressure it could to bear (Ursula VdL should be good at that) on folding our program into theirs, and nicking any benefit of us having been ahead of the game. In particular can you imagine how the EU and UK having competing contracts with AZ would have played out?

I think we'd have told them to get stuffed. Healthcare is not an EU competence (in either sense of the word!). In fact, probably if we had still been members it would have ended up with it being left to member states; it may have been partly the obsession with 'unity' as a reaction to Brexit which led the EU down the foolish path they took.

As if that would work. A lovely QMV ruling to say all vaccines delivered within the EU have to been part of the EU scheme. Vaccines stolen.

Not convinced.

Germany, France, Spain etc were already talking with vaccine suppliers in Apr 2020, yet they were made to back down and grovel in favour of the EU shared process.

https://www.investmentweek.co.uk/investment-week/news/3006760/moodys-warns-scotland-exit-leave-country-facing-junk-rating

isam said:

kinabalu said:

isam said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Another victim of cancel culture? Or is it racist patriarchy that did for it?

The Mash Report will not return for another series.

Maybe it is just because it wasn't my cup of tea, but The Mash Report seemed to be not much more than some lefties sarcastically reading out quotes from Conservative MP's whilst rolling their eyes - I cant help thinking none of them were the funny ones at school

That can be fertile comedic soil, though, what Conservative MPs say. They've got some rum characters in their ranks who come out with some quite choice remarks.

I found it funny in the mid 80s; Friday/Saturday Night Live hosted by Ben Elton? I recorded them and rewatched religiously

Now you're deftly insinuating you've grown up and I haven't. Like I say, on fire today!

kinabalu said:

Pagan2 said:

RobD said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

TimT said:

Richard, I simply do not agree with your analysis. I think we would have buckled, and joined the consensus on how to approach the whole vaccine issue. It is possible, just possible, that the push to a unified approach was Brexit-induced, but I strongly doubt that too.

The EU is a one-directional ratchet, towards evermore centralized power, decision-making and control. This was coming, regardless of Brexit, IMO.

In any case, it is moot. We are where we are, and what iffery does not change that.

Actually the ratchet has very much jumped backwards on this one. You won't be seeing any future involvement of the Commission in healthcare and procurement after this debacle. Member states make little secret of the fact that they think it was a disaster.

Except they are already talking about a health union. The EU only has one direction.

and like the band one direction they are equally dire....von der leyden is the harry styles of the eu

That doesn't quite work. Styles was the star of One Direction.

Well being the star of a teeny band which lasted maybe two years is hardly a plaudit. He will end up driving a taxi and boring passengers about how he almost was famous for a bit

kinabalu said:

Pagan2 said:

RobD said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

TimT said:

Richard, I simply do not agree with your analysis. I think we would have buckled, and joined the consensus on how to approach the whole vaccine issue. It is possible, just possible, that the push to a unified approach was Brexit-induced, but I strongly doubt that too.

The EU is a one-directional ratchet, towards evermore centralized power, decision-making and control. This was coming, regardless of Brexit, IMO.

In any case, it is moot. We are where we are, and what iffery does not change that.

Actually the ratchet has very much jumped backwards on this one. You won't be seeing any future involvement of the Commission in healthcare and procurement after this debacle. Member states make little secret of the fact that they think it was a disaster.

Except they are already talking about a health union. The EU only has one direction.

and like the band one direction they are equally dire....von der leyden is the harry styles of the eu

That doesn't quite work. Styles was the star of One Direction.

He was saying the band was crap.

MattW said:

MaxPB said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Endillion said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

You really think Cameron or any other Europhile Tory leader - or Corbyn on the Labour side - would have dared to stand aside from the EU vaccination scheme when every other country joined it? There is not a cat in hells chance.

I have far more confidence in my nation freed from the Eurofanatics than you do given you think we are incapable of surviving without being part of the EU. Have some confidence in your own independent nation, man.

We'll never know, but FWIW I think that is almost certainly 100% wrong. By the time the EU started to get its act together we were already well set up with our own investment and procurement programme. That had been kicked off by Patrick Vallance and Jonathan van Tam very early on, first informally and then as formal initiative in April 2020:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-launches-vaccine-taskforce-to-combat-coronavirus

It is inconceivable that we'd have abandoned that to join in with the EU programme, which didn't even become a proposal until mid-June, by which time Kate Bingham was already well advanced in the procurement.

And it wouldn't exactly be the first time that the UK, when it was an EU member, didn't join in.

I think it's inconceivable the EU wouldn't have brought all the pressure it could to bear (Ursula VdL should be good at that) on folding our program into theirs, and nicking any benefit of us having been ahead of the game. In particular can you imagine how the EU and UK having competing contracts with AZ would have played out?

I think we'd have told them to get stuffed. Healthcare is not an EU competence (in either sense of the word!). In fact, probably if we had still been members it would have ended up with it being left to member states; it may have been partly the obsession with 'unity' as a reaction to Brexit which led the EU down the foolish path they took.

As if that would work. A lovely QMV ruling to say all vaccines delivered within the EU have to been part of the EU scheme. Vaccines stolen.

Not convinced.

Germany, France, Spain etc were already talking with vaccine suppliers in Apr 2020, yet they were made to back down and grovel in favour of the EU shared process.

https://www.investmentweek.co.uk/investment-week/news/3006760/moodys-warns-scotland-exit-leave-country-facing-junk-rating

No I mean after the deliveries started and it became clear how big the gulf in deliveries for the UK were compared to the EU scheme.

kinabalu said:

isam said:

kinabalu said:

isam said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Another victim of cancel culture? Or is it racist patriarchy that did for it?

The Mash Report will not return for another series.

Maybe it is just because it wasn't my cup of tea, but The Mash Report seemed to be not much more than some lefties sarcastically reading out quotes from Conservative MP's whilst rolling their eyes - I cant help thinking none of them were the funny ones at school

That can be fertile comedic soil, though, what Conservative MPs say. They've got some rum characters in their ranks who come out with some quite choice remarks.

I found it funny in the mid 80s; Friday/Saturday Night Live hosted by Ben Elton? I recorded them and rewatched religiously

Now you're deftly insinuating you've grown up and I haven't. Like I say, on fire today!

No!!! I prepared myself a protein shake after making that comment, and as I did so thought it could be taken that way.. and maybe I half meant it to, but the reality is I think I was quite a politically attuned 11-12 year old and maybe I was right then and wrong now

So I have just watched Joe Biden's Independence Day speech. Yep. Very good. Smart and to the point. A clear rallying cry.

Great to see the grownups are back in charge in the States.

williamglenn said:

BluestBlue said:

Endillion said:

Just to note that I had AstraZeneca jab #1 about 24 hours ago, and if how I feel now is "mild" compared to the real illness, then count me extremely grateful I had the cure before the disease.

I am probably younger than most of the people who've had it prior (a statement that, I guess, will be true of almost everyone, but it's bloody unpleasant. My wife (younger still) seems to be having an even worse time of it.

Sorry to hear that. There are a fair few anecdotes of stronger reactions in younger people, though whether that's because they've already had Covid or just have stronger immune systems in general isn't certain. Hope the side-effects clear up soon.

Thinking out loud, if younger people have a stronger immune response, maybe they don't need as big a dose, so we could reduce the dose and vaccinate more people quicker?

Sod that. Give me the dose they tested and know works.

I'll swallow the increased delay between shots, but I'd want a damned good explanation for lowering the dosage.

Selebian said:

TimT said:

dixiedean said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Gallowgate said:

Leon said:

A US professor at Georgetown University has been fired for expressing sadness and frustration that black students don't do as well as they should at the college. She actually said she feels "angst" at the situation.

Yet still got fired. Just for mentioning this inequality. Take that in, and what it implies for the future.

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/georgetown-law-professor-fired-after-comments-about-black-students/2603777/

By the same logic, someone in the police or politics saying they feel bad at black people being poorer should also be fired.

What an odd story. I feel there must be more to it?

Normally you would, but the US is having a meltdown at the moment....see Sharon Osborne having to apologize for defending a friend against unsubstantiated claims of racism based solely on tone used when talking.

Since it is Mandarin for um or er, I doubt the PM will be giving any press conferences in Chinese.

I don't know the whole story, but I think some of the things that will trigger from that excerpt of the conversation is:

1. general statement that black students do worse without evidence or context
2. 'some really good ones' could readily be understood that others are there because of positive discrimination in recruitment
3. much research shows that social expectations drive much of student performance in hard subjects because it creates an angst in the students' minds as to whether they can perform to standard, and this taxes both their cognitive resources and their willpower. It has been shown to be a real effect in women in mathematics, minorities in law schools, and many other fields. If you set positive expectations and remove that angst, performance in these groups goes up; if you set expectations that they will struggle, guess what - they do struggle.

It may well be in relation to 3. that the school is most upset with the professor.

I think had I been the other academic on the call I would have questioned that statement - asked for some more context/evidence. I can't be sure, of course,* but I am an academic and I would find this a very odd conversation to be having, talking about students in a class I had taken and generalising by ethnic group (or sex, whatever). My experience has been that variation within ethnic group (or any other group you might think of) is much bigger than variation between groups.

I wouldn't fire the professor for this, but make sure that they realised it was unprofessional and look, based on whether there was evidence for the things said, at whether there were more issues.

There may well be more to this in terms of other incidents/history, but of course we don't know.

*I do recall a conversation in the last year, in a group whatsapp where someone else made a unsubstantiated generalisation, which I challenged. I was the senior person active in the group, so I felt that it fell to me, but I'd like to think I would have done the same with someone on the same level or senior. That didn't go any further, but I don't know what would have happened had it become public. I imagine there would have been some formal disciplinary process.

If you're interested in my third point, it is called "Stereotype threat". I got interested in this when I heard Steele interviewed on the radio about how he personally became interested in the subject. Some papers on it:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/cogs.12558
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2976617/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2976624/

Pagan2 said:

FF43 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

FF43 said:

In truth, I think the vaccine nationalism rows would be even grimmer if we were in the EU rather than outside. Maybe we can chalk that up as a relative "benefit" of Brexit ?

It may be. Certainly we can all chalk up the EU's performance on the procurement as abysmal, and their temper tantrums and attempts at blame-shifting as disgraceful.

Actually, I think the EU will do fine, just as the UK would have done fine if the EU hadn't helpfully provided us with their early vaccines. There are plenty of vaccines coming down the pike everywhere and once you have vaccinated your own people you are relaxed about allowing your supply to go to other countries.

The eu didnt provide us with anything Pfizer provided us with the vaccines we had contracted for. Simple as that

The EU acted against its own interest in not securing those vaccine doses. The point I am making is that UK success, defined as being quicker than other countries, particularly the EU, depends on the EU not securing its own supply.

Fine. The UK was lucky and people in the EU are pissed off, hence Charles Michel's pretence that it was act of international sovereignty rather than EU incompetence. Nobody is buying that.

If the EU had been more competent, the UK would have had 3 million doses rather than 11 million in February, but domestic supply would ramp up and a couple of months later the UK would have plenty of supply, just as the EU looks like it will have plenty of supply. So what's the big deal?

The further comment I would make is that the lesson people will take from this is that the vaccine programme success demonstrates "the superiority of the Brexit system" (old Communist terminology). But as it is something of a prisoners' dilemma, I should also mention the unspoken more fundamental truth of that analogy: if you are going to betray your fellow prisoners make sure you get away and never see them again, otherwise they will beat you up. Brexit, at least of the aggressive kind pursued by our government, only works as a strategy if you never have any dependencies on the EU. January's truly grim trade figures show the limitations of that approach.

MaxPB said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

RobD said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

TimT said:

Richard, I simply do not agree with your analysis. I think we would have buckled, and joined the consensus on how to approach the whole vaccine issue. It is possible, just possible, that the push to a unified approach was Brexit-induced, but I strongly doubt that too.

The EU is a one-directional ratchet, towards evermore centralized power, decision-making and control. This was coming, regardless of Brexit, IMO.

In any case, it is moot. We are where we are, and what iffery does not change that.

Actually the ratchet has very much jumped backwards on this one. You won't be seeing any future involvement of the Commission in healthcare and procurement after this debacle. Member states make little secret of the fact that they think it was a disaster.

Except they are already talking about a health union. The EU only has one direction.

Who are 'they'? The EU is not a homogenous organisation with a single view, it's a treaty-defined collection of member states which themselves have different views and priorities. 'They' may be proposing more integration, but they're not going to get it. Member states and 'they' are not the same thing.

We were assured that the UK would never lose veto power over financial regulations, yet it happened. Again, see the EU for what it really is, not what you want it to be.

You think Germany is going to hand over more power to the Commission over healthcare and procurement after this mess? Really?

isam said:

kinabalu said:

isam said:

Northern_Al said:

RobD said:

Northern_Al said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1370369777055756290?s=20
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1370370453370503174?s=20

Reminder #28495951 that Goodwin used to be quite an interesting academic before he became a populist berk forever tweeting on behalf of the right in the culture war. Wouldn't be surprised to see him joining Lozza Fox's new outfit and standing for something somewhere.

But the tweet is accurate. Cameron was right about twitter.

Yes, I don't dispute that. But Goodwin tweets endlessly, re-tweeting every poll that's published. And occasionally venturing further - for example, a recent tweet likening Nigel Farage to Wat Tyler. He's transformed from an independent academic into a partisan hack, and uses Twitter to provoke the culture war himself.

Maybe he is more concerned about making a living than staying true to other peoples idea of what he should be

That's a creative defence of grift! You're on fire.

I don't mean to defend him, sorry. But maybe he knows what he is doing, that what he is criticised for on here, but just wants to get publicity to sell books, get on tv, pay the mortgage whatever, and doesn't really care. I think that is quite possible, as is the idea that he is not all that clever, or just latched on to an idea, applies it to everything and is a bit blinkered by it... it has been known!

He irritates me but is far from the worst and sometimes has some interesting angles. I think that's a fair and accurate representation of how I feel about him when I'm in a sunny mood.

Endillion said:

williamglenn said:

BluestBlue said:

Endillion said:

Just to note that I had AstraZeneca jab #1 about 24 hours ago, and if how I feel now is "mild" compared to the real illness, then count me extremely grateful I had the cure before the disease.

I am probably younger than most of the people who've had it prior (a statement that, I guess, will be true of almost everyone, but it's bloody unpleasant. My wife (younger still) seems to be having an even worse time of it.

Sorry to hear that. There are a fair few anecdotes of stronger reactions in younger people, though whether that's because they've already had Covid or just have stronger immune systems in general isn't certain. Hope the side-effects clear up soon.

Thinking out loud, if younger people have a stronger immune response, maybe they don't need as big a dose, so we could reduce the dose and vaccinate more people quicker?

Sod that. Give me the dose they tested and know works.

I'll swallow the increased delay between shots, but I'd want a damned good explanation for lowering the dosage.

We won't need to resort to such measures anyway, the supply situation is going to be 2x better for the next couple of months. We should be able to do around 40m doses in the next 7-9 weeks. With 14m second doses to complete in that time we will be able to give everyone over the age of 24 a dose by then and assuming some level of rejection all adults will have been offered it and we'll be into the second dose programme with only under 18s and those who previously rejected it needing first doses.

kjh said:

kinabalu said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TOPPING said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Nigelb said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

MattW said:

Oops.

https://twitter.com/politicsforali/status/1370095872273420295

I posted that last night.

I fail to see the outrage, unless you're an actual heifer.

I mean what adjectives do you use for someone who managed to lose a council seat to the Tories and then a parliamentary seat to the Tories that the Tories have never held before in a little over two years?

If only we had @ydoethur around.
There's an Eric Heifer pun dying to be made.

I assume his absence is due to the return to school rather than anything else I have missed?

And what about @Sandpit I was pondering the other day? Not noticed him but then I've been on a bit less of late.

He is around. I have noticed him 'liking' a few posts today.

Including a couple of mine - so something might have happened to him.

Sandpit is generous with his likes and across the political spectrum so I doubt he has had a blow to the head nor have you worn him down and converted him into a lefty.

One can dare to dream.

Pulpstar said:

Endillion said:

williamglenn said:

BluestBlue said:

Endillion said:

Just to note that I had AstraZeneca jab #1 about 24 hours ago, and if how I feel now is "mild" compared to the real illness, then count me extremely grateful I had the cure before the disease.

I am probably younger than most of the people who've had it prior (a statement that, I guess, will be true of almost everyone, but it's bloody unpleasant. My wife (younger still) seems to be having an even worse time of it.

Sorry to hear that. There are a fair few anecdotes of stronger reactions in younger people, though whether that's because they've already had Covid or just have stronger immune systems in general isn't certain. Hope the side-effects clear up soon.

Thinking out loud, if younger people have a stronger immune response, maybe they don't need as big a dose, so we could reduce the dose and vaccinate more people quicker?

Sod that. Give me the dose they tested and know works.

I'll swallow the increased delay between shots, but I'd want a damned good explanation for lowering the dosage.

The dosage is going to be a touch on the low side for me (And most other 6 ft+ men) if they've based it on an average person tbh.

Nice humblebrag there.

Hadn't thought of that. My wife is tiny, which could explain her reaction.

But do vaccines even work that way? The purpose is to expose your immune system to a dead copy of the virus, and the reaction is your immune system trying to work out how to get rid of it. Does your body mass really make a difference to that?

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Smear, a short analysis.

'The SNP’s links with Iran are of the gravest concern

...It is not simply that it operates a network of fake social media and internet sites pushing the SNP’s cause; it is that leading SNP figures, from Nicola Sturgeon down, appear to have what one might charitably call a lack of concern about consorting with figures who are either, in effect, agents of the regime or who are deeply sympathetic to it.'

Provide not an iota of proof or even an allegation of who these 'figures' might be.

Job done.

https://twitter.com/JewishChron/status/1370079724488298499?s=20

This dude for starters.

Sturgeon’s link to anti-gay Iran cleric

EXCLUSIVE: Scotland’s First Minister shared platform with firebrand Iranian cleric who compared gay marriage to bestiality

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/sturgeon-s-link-to-anti-gay-iran-cleric-1.512738

Seems a lot of A was in the same room as B who said C and attended event D.

Is the Quds rally a regular legal event in London?

Pass, I've never attended a Quds rally, I try and avoid Muslim centric events.

This bit did strike me as odd, another dude.

Mr Mohamad is strongly linked to a charity called the Ahl al-Bait Society, which has received hundreds of thousands of pounds in grants from the Scottish government. In 2015, he took former First Minister Alex Salmond on an official visit to Tehran.

Although I have to say I would love to visit Tehran once the theocracy has gone. Apparently flying into Tehran over the Alborz mountains is a wonderful experience.

Pagan2 said:

kjh said:

kinabalu said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TOPPING said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Nigelb said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

MattW said:

Oops.

https://twitter.com/politicsforali/status/1370095872273420295

I posted that last night.

I fail to see the outrage, unless you're an actual heifer.

I mean what adjectives do you use for someone who managed to lose a council seat to the Tories and then a parliamentary seat to the Tories that the Tories have never held before in a little over two years?

If only we had @ydoethur around.
There's an Eric Heifer pun dying to be made.

I assume his absence is due to the return to school rather than anything else I have missed?

And what about @Sandpit I was pondering the other day? Not noticed him but then I've been on a bit less of late.

He is around. I have noticed him 'liking' a few posts today.

Including a couple of mine - so something might have happened to him.

Sandpit is generous with his likes and across the political spectrum so I doubt he has had a blow to the head nor have you worn him down and converted him into a lefty.

Indeed even I have had likes from you Kinablu doesn't mean I think I have made you a non leftie

Sometimes I use a "like" not to indicate agreement or approval or admiration but just to say ... "Watching you. Watching you quite closely."

MattW said:

FF43 said:

MattW said:

FF43 said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

CarlottaVance said:

Two strongest EU vaccinators are from "small countries which bought outside the EU procurement scheme that was supposed to protect small countries":

https://www.politico.eu/coronavirus-in-europe/

Yes, also demonstrates my point that had we still been part of the EU we would most likely not have been part of the EU scheme, we would have done our own thing.

Sorry Brexiteers, but your only claim to good news about Brexit is, like everything else you have claimed, a crock of shit.

I think Brexiteers are making a broader point, that doing your own thing is better than being part of the collective, where the EU represents the collective way of doing things. I think that point is reasonable. If the EU isn't for the collective way of doing things, then what is it for? Whether the issue is the way the EU has gone about it and collectives are in principle OK, or that collectives are never a good idea isn't explored.

My personal view is that UK's vaccine success, which is a genuine one, is essentially a prisoner's dilemma, given the extent to which the UK programme depends on EU supplied vaccines. From its own PoV, the EU slipped up by not maximally securing its own supply. The success of the UK programme depended on the EU making that mistake. The context to Charles Michel's comments this week was his trying to justify the export of vaccines as international solidarity, rather than EU incompetence. No-one believed him.

The UK programme does not depend on EU supplied vaccines.

8 million vaccines supplied from the EU against 11 million innoculations delivered in February (NYTimes and OurWorldinData respectively).

Eventually there would be enough vaccines to do everyone in the UK as will happen in all developed countries as it is. But the claimed success for the UK programme is that it is doing it quicker than other countries, not that it is doing it at all. That success depended on the EU not securing vaccines for itself that it could have done.

I don't really agree there.

Leaving aside the obvious point that Pfizer jabs are from Pfizer not "The EU", so Plan B would be for Pfizer to supply them from somewhere else if it exists, we have 100m AZ jabs in the pipeline anyway - which alone is ~95% of the total we need for adults (2 x 53m).

The Pfizer supplies are ultimately marginal.

Combine that with another vaccine approved, and another about to be approved, which will be produced in the UK. And I am not really sure that any delay would be that significant.

Actually, I agree and have commented on here to that effect. For the same reason, the EU programme will probably be OK too. That's if you define success as getting there in the end, rather than getting there first.

Richard_Nabavi said:

MaxPB said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

RobD said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

TimT said:

Richard, I simply do not agree with your analysis. I think we would have buckled, and joined the consensus on how to approach the whole vaccine issue. It is possible, just possible, that the push to a unified approach was Brexit-induced, but I strongly doubt that too.

The EU is a one-directional ratchet, towards evermore centralized power, decision-making and control. This was coming, regardless of Brexit, IMO.

In any case, it is moot. We are where we are, and what iffery does not change that.

Actually the ratchet has very much jumped backwards on this one. You won't be seeing any future involvement of the Commission in healthcare and procurement after this debacle. Member states make little secret of the fact that they think it was a disaster.

Except they are already talking about a health union. The EU only has one direction.

Who are 'they'? The EU is not a homogenous organisation with a single view, it's a treaty-defined collection of member states which themselves have different views and priorities. 'They' may be proposing more integration, but they're not going to get it. Member states and 'they' are not the same thing.

We were assured that the UK would never lose veto power over financial regulations, yet it happened. Again, see the EU for what it really is, not what you want it to be.

You think Germany is going to hand over more power to the Commission over healthcare and procurement after this mess? Really?

Yes, look at how the punishment beatings were meted out to the Netherlands and the other frugal nations who didn't want to write blank cheques for virus recovery funding. They're cast into the "anti-European" role by the EU and eventually they give in. Germany will be subject to the same singling out and eventually they'll cave, the EU will slowly and incompletely take over healthcare provision in Europe.

isam said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Smear, a short analysis.

'The SNP’s links with Iran are of the gravest concern

...It is not simply that it operates a network of fake social media and internet sites pushing the SNP’s cause; it is that leading SNP figures, from Nicola Sturgeon down, appear to have what one might charitably call a lack of concern about consorting with figures who are either, in effect, agents of the regime or who are deeply sympathetic to it.'

Provide not an iota of proof or even an allegation of who these 'figures' might be.

Job done.

https://twitter.com/JewishChron/status/1370079724488298499?s=20

This dude for starters.

Sturgeon’s link to anti-gay Iran cleric

EXCLUSIVE: Scotland’s First Minister shared platform with firebrand Iranian cleric who compared gay marriage to bestiality

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/sturgeon-s-link-to-anti-gay-iran-cleric-1.512738

Seems a lot of A was in the same room as B who said C and attended event D.

Is the Quds rally a regular legal event in London?

"You mean the Nigel Farage, who sits in the European Parliament with Rudolf Strauss MEP from Austria, whose party leader's next door neighbour once had a conversation with a lady from Innsbruck whose great grandfather was in the SS? THAT Nigel Farage?"

I believe my opinion of Farage is pretty much independent of who he may or may not have consorted with. Of course that opinion might have a bearing on what I think of those who have consorted with him.

RobD said:

FF43 said:

Pagan2 said:

FF43 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

FF43 said:

In truth, I think the vaccine nationalism rows would be even grimmer if we were in the EU rather than outside. Maybe we can chalk that up as a relative "benefit" of Brexit ?

It may be. Certainly we can all chalk up the EU's performance on the procurement as abysmal, and their temper tantrums and attempts at blame-shifting as disgraceful.

Actually, I think the EU will do fine, just as the UK would have done fine if the EU hadn't helpfully provided us with their early vaccines. There are plenty of vaccines coming down the pike everywhere and once you have vaccinated your own people you are relaxed about allowing your supply to go to other countries.

The eu didnt provide us with anything Pfizer provided us with the vaccines we had contracted for. Simple as that

The EU acted against its own interest in not securing those vaccine doses. The point I am making is that UK success, defined as being quicker than other countries, particularly the EU, depends on the EU not securing its own supply.

Fine. The UK was lucky and people in the EU are pissed off, hence Charles Michel's pretence that it was act of international sovereignty rather than EU incompetence. Nobody is buying that.

If the EU had been more competent, the UK would have had 3 million doses rather than 11 million in February, but domestic supply would ramp up and a couple of months later the UK would have plenty of supply, just as the EU looks like it will have plenty of supply. So what's the big deal?

The further comment I would make is that the lesson people will take from this is that the vaccine programme success demonstrates "the superiority of the Brexit system" (old Communist terminology). But as it is something of a prisoners' dilemma, I should also mention the unspoken more fundamental truth of that analogy: if you are going to betray your fellow prisoners make sure you get away and never see them again, otherwise they will beat you up. Brexit, at least of the aggressive kind pursued by our government, only works as a strategy if you never have any dependencies on the EU. January's truly grim trade figures show the limitations of that approach.

The UK was lucky? That's doing a huge disservice to those involved.

Either way, the UK has a well run vaccine programme. If the EU had secured those vaccines, it would still be a well run programme. No disservice at all.

Endillion said:

Pulpstar said:

Endillion said:

williamglenn said:

BluestBlue said:

Endillion said:

Just to note that I had AstraZeneca jab #1 about 24 hours ago, and if how I feel now is "mild" compared to the real illness, then count me extremely grateful I had the cure before the disease.

I am probably younger than most of the people who've had it prior (a statement that, I guess, will be true of almost everyone, but it's bloody unpleasant. My wife (younger still) seems to be having an even worse time of it.

Sorry to hear that. There are a fair few anecdotes of stronger reactions in younger people, though whether that's because they've already had Covid or just have stronger immune systems in general isn't certain. Hope the side-effects clear up soon.

Thinking out loud, if younger people have a stronger immune response, maybe they don't need as big a dose, so we could reduce the dose and vaccinate more people quicker?

Sod that. Give me the dose they tested and know works.

I'll swallow the increased delay between shots, but I'd want a damned good explanation for lowering the dosage.

The dosage is going to be a touch on the low side for me (And most other 6 ft+ men) if they've based it on an average person tbh.

Nice humblebrag there.

Hadn't thought of that. My wife is tiny, which could explain her reaction.

But do vaccines even work that way? The purpose is to expose your immune system to a dead copy of the virus, and the reaction is your immune system trying to work out how to get rid of it. Does your body mass really make a difference to that?

I doubt it, but I'm not a vaccine specialist.

TimT said:

FF43 said:

MattW said:

FF43 said:

MattW said:

FF43 said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

CarlottaVance said:

Two strongest EU vaccinators are from "small countries which bought outside the EU procurement scheme that was supposed to protect small countries":

https://www.politico.eu/coronavirus-in-europe/

Yes, also demonstrates my point that had we still been part of the EU we would most likely not have been part of the EU scheme, we would have done our own thing.

Sorry Brexiteers, but your only claim to good news about Brexit is, like everything else you have claimed, a crock of shit.

I think Brexiteers are making a broader point, that doing your own thing is better than being part of the collective, where the EU represents the collective way of doing things. I think that point is reasonable. If the EU isn't for the collective way of doing things, then what is it for? Whether the issue is the way the EU has gone about it and collectives are in principle OK, or that collectives are never a good idea isn't explored.

My personal view is that UK's vaccine success, which is a genuine one, is essentially a prisoner's dilemma, given the extent to which the UK programme depends on EU supplied vaccines. From its own PoV, the EU slipped up by not maximally securing its own supply. The success of the UK programme depended on the EU making that mistake. The context to Charles Michel's comments this week was his trying to justify the export of vaccines as international solidarity, rather than EU incompetence. No-one believed him.

The UK programme does not depend on EU supplied vaccines.

8 million vaccines supplied from the EU against 11 million innoculations delivered in February (NYTimes and OurWorldinData respectively).

Eventually there would be enough vaccines to do everyone in the UK as will happen in all developed countries as it is. But the claimed success for the UK programme is that it is doing it quicker than other countries, not that it is doing it at all. That success depended on the EU not securing vaccines for itself that it could have done.

I don't really agree there.

Leaving aside the obvious point that Pfizer jabs are from Pfizer not "The EU", so Plan B would be for Pfizer to supply them from somewhere else if it exists, we have 100m AZ jabs in the pipeline anyway - which alone is ~95% of the total we need for adults (2 x 53m).

The Pfizer supplies are ultimately marginal.

Combine that with another vaccine approved, and another about to be approved, which will be produced in the UK. And I am not really sure that any delay would be that significant.

Actually, I agree and have commented on here to that effect. For the same reason, the EU programme will probably be OK too. That's if you define success as getting there in the end, rather than getting there first.

you seem to be making the point Robert has made many times - the difference in getting there between the fastest and slowest of the rich countries is going to be measured in weeks and months, not quarters and years.

Indeed. Although I should qualify that slightly with my concerns about vaccine scepticism in certain countries. Not all in the EU: the USA and Russia have big issues too.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

Black_Rook said:

The latest outbreak of AZ paranoia has been reported from Bulgaria, where they've halted their immunisation program over a single case.

Basically, it would appear than one obese woman with heart disease died (of heart failure, surprise surprise) some hours after having her vaccination. As a result, the Government is wetting its pants and waiting for more reassurance from the European Medicines Agency, even though it has already backed the thing.

In the meantime, the populace of the nation that already has the slowest vaccination rollout in the entire EU continues to go unprotected.

Christ sake, these reactions are utterly ridiculous.

It is just like that Daily Mail front page which went heavy on a person who died after receiving the vaccine with the inference that the vaccine caused the death.

Good thing the Daily Mail doesn't control the vaccine programme then!

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Smear, a short analysis.

'The SNP’s links with Iran are of the gravest concern

...It is not simply that it operates a network of fake social media and internet sites pushing the SNP’s cause; it is that leading SNP figures, from Nicola Sturgeon down, appear to have what one might charitably call a lack of concern about consorting with figures who are either, in effect, agents of the regime or who are deeply sympathetic to it.'

Provide not an iota of proof or even an allegation of who these 'figures' might be.

Job done.

https://twitter.com/JewishChron/status/1370079724488298499?s=20

This dude for starters.

Sturgeon’s link to anti-gay Iran cleric

EXCLUSIVE: Scotland’s First Minister shared platform with firebrand Iranian cleric who compared gay marriage to bestiality

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/sturgeon-s-link-to-anti-gay-iran-cleric-1.512738

Seems a lot of A was in the same room as B who said C and attended event D.

Is the Quds rally a regular legal event in London?

Pass, I've never attended a Quds rally, I try and avoid Muslim centric events.

This bit did strike me as odd, another dude.

Mr Mohamad is strongly linked to a charity called the Ahl al-Bait Society, which has received hundreds of thousands of pounds in grants from the Scottish government. In 2015, he took former First Minister Alex Salmond on an official visit to Tehran.

Although I have to say I would love to visit Tehran once the theocracy has gone. Apparently flying into Tehran over the Alborz mountains is a wonderful experience.

Al Quds is the Arabic name for Jerusalem. So Al Quds day is more a Palestinian rather than Muslim thing, albeit initiated by the Iranians.

FF43 said:

Pagan2 said:

FF43 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

FF43 said:

In truth, I think the vaccine nationalism rows would be even grimmer if we were in the EU rather than outside. Maybe we can chalk that up as a relative "benefit" of Brexit ?

It may be. Certainly we can all chalk up the EU's performance on the procurement as abysmal, and their temper tantrums and attempts at blame-shifting as disgraceful.

Actually, I think the EU will do fine, just as the UK would have done fine if the EU hadn't helpfully provided us with their early vaccines. There are plenty of vaccines coming down the pike everywhere and once you have vaccinated your own people you are relaxed about allowing your supply to go to other countries.

The eu didnt provide us with anything Pfizer provided us with the vaccines we had contracted for. Simple as that

The EU acted against its own interest in not securing those vaccine doses. The point I am making is that UK success, defined as being quicker than other countries, particularly the EU, depends on the EU not securing its own supply.

Fine. The UK was lucky and people in the EU are pissed off, hence Charles Michel's pretence that it was act of international sovereignty rather than EU incompetence. Nobody is buying that.

If the EU had been more competent, the UK would have had 3 million doses rather than 11 million in February, but domestic supply would ramp up and a couple of months later the UK would have plenty of supply, just as the EU looks like it will have plenty of supply. So what's the big deal?

The further comment I would make is that the lesson people will take from this is that the vaccine programme success demonstrates "the superiority of the Brexit system" (old Communist terminology). But as it is something of a prisoners' dilemma, I should also mention the unspoken more fundamental truth of that analogy: if you are going to betray your fellow prisoners make sure you get away and never see them again, otherwise they will beat you up. Brexit, at least of the aggressive kind pursued by our government, only works as a strategy if you never have any dependencies on the EU. January's truly grim trade figures show the limitations of that approach.

I think it would have been perfectly possible to do an EU version of the elements of supply chain and distribution infrastructure that was done here across the EU-27, but one crucial mistake was that the EU-programme focus was on *buying* vaccines (that did not exist yet) like packs of bulk sausages from Aldi, whereas on this occasion the focus should have been on *creating* vaccines.

For me that is the biggest failure in this.

And because EC believe in a sort of moral superiority, it has been floudering and hitting out everywhere rather than realising that the "halo" is just a projection.

This is a spoof right?

https://www.gofundme.com/f/harry-and-meghan-5-to-pay-off-mortgage

kinabalu said:

Pagan2 said:

kjh said:

kinabalu said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TOPPING said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Nigelb said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

MattW said:

Oops.

https://twitter.com/politicsforali/status/1370095872273420295

I posted that last night.

I fail to see the outrage, unless you're an actual heifer.

I mean what adjectives do you use for someone who managed to lose a council seat to the Tories and then a parliamentary seat to the Tories that the Tories have never held before in a little over two years?

If only we had @ydoethur around.
There's an Eric Heifer pun dying to be made.

I assume his absence is due to the return to school rather than anything else I have missed?

And what about @Sandpit I was pondering the other day? Not noticed him but then I've been on a bit less of late.

He is around. I have noticed him 'liking' a few posts today.

Including a couple of mine - so something might have happened to him.

Sandpit is generous with his likes and across the political spectrum so I doubt he has had a blow to the head nor have you worn him down and converted him into a lefty.

Indeed even I have had likes from you Kinablu doesn't mean I think I have made you a non leftie

Sometimes I use a "like" not to indicate agreement or approval or admiration but just to say ... "Watching you. Watching you quite closely."

You are weaponising a "like"?

Fun to see Lefties getting triggered by the canning of the MASH Report.

The only time "fun"and "MASH report" have appeared in the same sentence.

Pagan2 said:

kinabalu said:

Pagan2 said:

RobD said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

TimT said:

Richard, I simply do not agree with your analysis. I think we would have buckled, and joined the consensus on how to approach the whole vaccine issue. It is possible, just possible, that the push to a unified approach was Brexit-induced, but I strongly doubt that too.

The EU is a one-directional ratchet, towards evermore centralized power, decision-making and control. This was coming, regardless of Brexit, IMO.

In any case, it is moot. We are where we are, and what iffery does not change that.

Actually the ratchet has very much jumped backwards on this one. You won't be seeing any future involvement of the Commission in healthcare and procurement after this debacle. Member states make little secret of the fact that they think it was a disaster.

Except they are already talking about a health union. The EU only has one direction.

and like the band one direction they are equally dire....von der leyden is the harry styles of the eu

That doesn't quite work. Styles was the star of One Direction.

Well being the star of a teeny band which lasted maybe two years is hardly a plaudit. He will end up driving a taxi and boring passengers about how he almost was famous for a bit

In fact they sold a shedload of records, made millions, and frontman Harry Styles is now reinventing himself as an actor. He was in Dunkirk and was far from a disgrace in it.

Richard_Tyndall said:

NerysHughes said:

MarqueeMark said:

Floater said:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/03/12/president-biden-crumbling-eyes/

I watched less than 60 seconds of his last public announcement and had to turn it off

25ths going to be invoked.

Acting President Kamala Harris, possibly before year end.

Trump will go big on the "who knew what, when " angle.

It is totally mad having someone that age being president, his public appearances will get less and less and he will be gone in 2 years.

I can't agree with that. It is worth remembering that both the UK and US had war time leaders who were known to be unwell and one of whom died in office. What matters is what they do whilst they are in office, not necessarily how long they were there for.

Agreed.
I was asking earlier if there was a market on the midterms. I think one or two of the pro Republican doomsters might be surprised by how well the Democrats do.

AnneJGP said:

FF43 said:

MattW said:

FF43 said:

MattW said:

FF43 said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

CarlottaVance said:

Two strongest EU vaccinators are from "small countries which bought outside the EU procurement scheme that was supposed to protect small countries":

https://www.politico.eu/coronavirus-in-europe/

Yes, also demonstrates my point that had we still been part of the EU we would most likely not have been part of the EU scheme, we would have done our own thing.

Sorry Brexiteers, but your only claim to good news about Brexit is, like everything else you have claimed, a crock of shit.

I think Brexiteers are making a broader point, that doing your own thing is better than being part of the collective, where the EU represents the collective way of doing things. I think that point is reasonable. If the EU isn't for the collective way of doing things, then what is it for? Whether the issue is the way the EU has gone about it and collectives are in principle OK, or that collectives are never a good idea isn't explored.

My personal view is that UK's vaccine success, which is a genuine one, is essentially a prisoner's dilemma, given the extent to which the UK programme depends on EU supplied vaccines. From its own PoV, the EU slipped up by not maximally securing its own supply. The success of the UK programme depended on the EU making that mistake. The context to Charles Michel's comments this week was his trying to justify the export of vaccines as international solidarity, rather than EU incompetence. No-one believed him.

The UK programme does not depend on EU supplied vaccines.

8 million vaccines supplied from the EU against 11 million innoculations delivered in February (NYTimes and OurWorldinData respectively).

Eventually there would be enough vaccines to do everyone in the UK as will happen in all developed countries as it is. But the claimed success for the UK programme is that it is doing it quicker than other countries, not that it is doing it at all. That success depended on the EU not securing vaccines for itself that it could have done.

I don't really agree there.

Leaving aside the obvious point that Pfizer jabs are from Pfizer not "The EU", so Plan B would be for Pfizer to supply them from somewhere else if it exists, we have 100m AZ jabs in the pipeline anyway - which alone is ~95% of the total we need for adults (2 x 53m).

The Pfizer supplies are ultimately marginal.

Combine that with another vaccine approved, and another about to be approved, which will be produced in the UK. And I am not really sure that any delay would be that significant.

Actually, I agree and have commented on here to that effect. For the same reason, the EU programme will probably be OK too. That's if you define success as getting there in the end, rather than getting there first.

Success as getting there in the end is good, but I'd suggest that a lot of the value in being ahead of the game lies in the population's mental health. That wouldn't apply to places where they are highly sceptical about vaccines, but it's certainly a factor in the UK.

Its not just mental health its how much each day of lockdown costs our economys

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Pagan2 said:

kjh said:

kinabalu said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TOPPING said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Nigelb said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

MattW said:

Oops.

https://twitter.com/politicsforali/status/1370095872273420295

I posted that last night.

I fail to see the outrage, unless you're an actual heifer.

I mean what adjectives do you use for someone who managed to lose a council seat to the Tories and then a parliamentary seat to the Tories that the Tories have never held before in a little over two years?

If only we had @ydoethur around.
There's an Eric Heifer pun dying to be made.

I assume his absence is due to the return to school rather than anything else I have missed?

And what about @Sandpit I was pondering the other day? Not noticed him but then I've been on a bit less of late.

He is around. I have noticed him 'liking' a few posts today.

Including a couple of mine - so something might have happened to him.

Sandpit is generous with his likes and across the political spectrum so I doubt he has had a blow to the head nor have you worn him down and converted him into a lefty.

Indeed even I have had likes from you Kinablu doesn't mean I think I have made you a non leftie

Sometimes I use a "like" not to indicate agreement or approval or admiration but just to say ... "Watching you. Watching you quite closely."

You are weaponising a "like"?

Careful.
He may escalate to a love bomb.

Maybe England should just play test matches like T20s?

MattW said:

FF43 said:

Pagan2 said:

FF43 said:

Actually, I think the EU will do fine, just as the UK would have done fine if the EU hadn't helpfully provided us with their early vaccines. There are plenty of vaccines coming down the pike everywhere and once you have vaccinated your own people you are relaxed about allowing your supply to go to other countries.

The eu didnt provide us with anything Pfizer provided us with the vaccines we had contracted for. Simple as that

The EU acted against its own interest in not securing those vaccine doses. The point I am making is that UK success, defined as being quicker than other countries, particularly the EU, depends on the EU not securing its own supply.

Fine. The UK was lucky and people in the EU are pissed off, hence Charles Michel's pretence that it was act of international sovereignty rather than EU incompetence. Nobody is buying that.

If the EU had been more competent, the UK would have had 3 million doses rather than 11 million in February, but domestic supply would ramp up and a couple of months later the UK would have plenty of supply, just as the EU looks like it will have plenty of supply. So what's the big deal?

The further comment I would make is that the lesson people will take from this is that the vaccine programme success demonstrates "the superiority of the Brexit system" (old Communist terminology). But as it is something of a prisoners' dilemma, I should also mention the unspoken more fundamental truth of that analogy: if you are going to betray your fellow prisoners make sure you get away and never see them again, otherwise they will beat you up. Brexit, at least of the aggressive kind pursued by our government, only works as a strategy if you never have any dependencies on the EU. January's truly grim trade figures show the limitations of that approach.

I think it would have been perfectly possible to do an EU version of the elements of supply chain and distribution infrastructure that was done here across the EU-27, but one crucial mistake was that the EU-programme focus was on *buying* vaccines (that did not exist yet) like packs of bulk sausages from Aldi, whereas on this occasion the focus should have been on *creating* vaccines.

For me that is the biggest failure in this.

And because EC believe in a sort of moral superiority, it has been floudering and hitting out everywhere rather than realising that the "halo" is just a projection.

I disagree with you on this, however. The constraint with early vaccine supply everywhere is limited production capacity, not investment. The UK "bought up" early EU supplies ahead of the EU itself. That's why it had those 8 million extra doses in February that weren't available to the EU. The hundreds of millions of doses that will turn up in Q2 do come from investment - they are not produced within existing capacity - but by then hopefully there won't be any quantity constraints,

CorrectHorseBattery said:

MarqueeMark said:

Fun to see Lefties getting triggered by the canning of the MASH Report.

The only time "fun"and "MASH report" have appeared in the same sentence.

Do you agree that if this was a right-wing program you would be calling it cancel culture - along with others - but because it's a left-wing program it's just because it's shit?

We're pointing out the hypocrisy, as usual.

I agree BTW, it was shit.

You mean hypocrisy like lefties crying because one academic on Twitter happens to be right-wing, or because one extremely unfunny woke comedy show has been cancelled?

CorrectHorseBattery said:

MarqueeMark said:

Fun to see Lefties getting triggered by the canning of the MASH Report.

The only time "fun"and "MASH report" have appeared in the same sentence.

Do you agree that if this was a right-wing program you would be calling it cancel culture - along with others - but because it's a left-wing program it's just because it's shit?

We're pointing out the hypocrisy, as usual.

I agree BTW, it was shit.

I enjoyed it. If you are being satirical it is pretty hard to be a right wing comic (although possible). It is much easier to criticize from the left. I enjoyed Geoff Norcott on it. I think he struggles elsewhere. His skit on the LDs was excellent (I have to be able to take a joke).

TimT said:

FF43 said:

MattW said:

FF43 said:

MattW said:

FF43 said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

CarlottaVance said:

Two strongest EU vaccinators are from "small countries which bought outside the EU procurement scheme that was supposed to protect small countries":

https://www.politico.eu/coronavirus-in-europe/

Yes, also demonstrates my point that had we still been part of the EU we would most likely not have been part of the EU scheme, we would have done our own thing.

Sorry Brexiteers, but your only claim to good news about Brexit is, like everything else you have claimed, a crock of shit.

I think Brexiteers are making a broader point, that doing your own thing is better than being part of the collective, where the EU represents the collective way of doing things. I think that point is reasonable. If the EU isn't for the collective way of doing things, then what is it for? Whether the issue is the way the EU has gone about it and collectives are in principle OK, or that collectives are never a good idea isn't explored.

My personal view is that UK's vaccine success, which is a genuine one, is essentially a prisoner's dilemma, given the extent to which the UK programme depends on EU supplied vaccines. From its own PoV, the EU slipped up by not maximally securing its own supply. The success of the UK programme depended on the EU making that mistake. The context to Charles Michel's comments this week was his trying to justify the export of vaccines as international solidarity, rather than EU incompetence. No-one believed him.

The UK programme does not depend on EU supplied vaccines.

8 million vaccines supplied from the EU against 11 million innoculations delivered in February (NYTimes and OurWorldinData respectively).

Eventually there would be enough vaccines to do everyone in the UK as will happen in all developed countries as it is. But the claimed success for the UK programme is that it is doing it quicker than other countries, not that it is doing it at all. That success depended on the EU not securing vaccines for itself that it could have done.

I don't really agree there.

Leaving aside the obvious point that Pfizer jabs are from Pfizer not "The EU", so Plan B would be for Pfizer to supply them from somewhere else if it exists, we have 100m AZ jabs in the pipeline anyway - which alone is ~95% of the total we need for adults (2 x 53m).

The Pfizer supplies are ultimately marginal.

Combine that with another vaccine approved, and another about to be approved, which will be produced in the UK. And I am not really sure that any delay would be that significant.

Actually, I agree and have commented on here to that effect. For the same reason, the EU programme will probably be OK too. That's if you define success as getting there in the end, rather than getting there first.

you seem to be making the point Robert has made many times - the difference in getting there between the fastest and slowest of the rich countries is going to be measured in weeks and months, not quarters and years.

Not if enough of the French refuse to take the shot and they never actually get to herd immunity.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

MarqueeMark said:

Fun to see Lefties getting triggered by the canning of the MASH Report.

The only time "fun"and "MASH report" have appeared in the same sentence.

Do you agree that if this was a right-wing program you would be calling it cancel culture - along with others - but because it's a left-wing program it's just because it's shit?

We're pointing out the hypocrisy, as usual.

I agree BTW, it was shit.

First, show me a right-wing programme to cancel.

I doubt it would get four series. Because it would be shit.

FF43 said:

MattW said:

FF43 said:

Pagan2 said:

FF43 said:

Actually, I think the EU will do fine, just as the UK would have done fine if the EU hadn't helpfully provided us with their early vaccines. There are plenty of vaccines coming down the pike everywhere and once you have vaccinated your own people you are relaxed about allowing your supply to go to other countries.

The eu didnt provide us with anything Pfizer provided us with the vaccines we had contracted for. Simple as that

The EU acted against its own interest in not securing those vaccine doses. The point I am making is that UK success, defined as being quicker than other countries, particularly the EU, depends on the EU not securing its own supply.

Fine. The UK was lucky and people in the EU are pissed off, hence Charles Michel's pretence that it was act of international sovereignty rather than EU incompetence. Nobody is buying that.

If the EU had been more competent, the UK would have had 3 million doses rather than 11 million in February, but domestic supply would ramp up and a couple of months later the UK would have plenty of supply, just as the EU looks like it will have plenty of supply. So what's the big deal?

The further comment I would make is that the lesson people will take from this is that the vaccine programme success demonstrates "the superiority of the Brexit system" (old Communist terminology). But as it is something of a prisoners' dilemma, I should also mention the unspoken more fundamental truth of that analogy: if you are going to betray your fellow prisoners make sure you get away and never see them again, otherwise they will beat you up. Brexit, at least of the aggressive kind pursued by our government, only works as a strategy if you never have any dependencies on the EU. January's truly grim trade figures show the limitations of that approach.

I think it would have been perfectly possible to do an EU version of the elements of supply chain and distribution infrastructure that was done here across the EU-27, but one crucial mistake was that the EU-programme focus was on *buying* vaccines (that did not exist yet) like packs of bulk sausages from Aldi, whereas on this occasion the focus should have been on *creating* vaccines.

For me that is the biggest failure in this.

And because EC believe in a sort of moral superiority, it has been floudering and hitting out everywhere rather than realising that the "halo" is just a projection.

I disagree with you on this, however. The constraint with early vaccine supply everywhere is limited production capacity, not investment. The UK "bought up" early EU supplies ahead of the EU itself. That's why it had those 8 million extra doses in February that weren't available to the EU. The hundreds of millions of doses that will turn up in Q2 do come from investment - they are not produced within existing capacity - but by then hopefully there won't be any quantity constraints,

Gosh don't you talk a total load of bollocks, the UK invested in setting up manufacturers too it didn't just buy up vaccine supplies

The Covid dashboard update for today continues to indicate that the overall UK case rate has basically levelled off, but deaths and hospitalisations continued to drop like a stone. And yes, I know that it would take 2-3 weeks from March 8th for any effect from opening the schools to show up in the hospital numbers, but it's good at least to see progress being maintained, for now. And in more good news, as reported earlier today, both the R estimate and the infection growth rate have been revised downwards again.

Floater said:

This is a spoof right?

https://www.gofundme.com/f/harry-and-meghan-5-to-pay-off-mortgage

Given that there are donors I'd say you're right.