Latest Savanta/ComRes lockdown tracker finds declining levels of compliance particularly amongst the

Malmesbury said:

Cookie said:

mwadams said:

Malmesbury said:

eek said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Slackbladder said:

I am truely amazed how the EU and the EU countries are doing this.

Making a mistake is one thing, continuing time after time to cock it up is another, and not learning from any mistakes.

It's a bit like a job I'm working on. I got given a document riddled with errors. I pointed them out. It comes back with even more errors and the errors not all removed.

You really have to lose faith at a point they have any competency.

I remember quite a few years ago hiring an Indian firm to build a website for a new business I setup...it was the most frustrating experience of my life. I would point out issues and obvious mistakes, be told yes yes we have it covered, and the next revision, not only would they not be fixed, they had managed to introduce more. I think it took 3-4 months before I had to bin them off and hire some people in Estonia, who sorted it all in a few weeks.

Quite standard - the productivity multiplier is as real as the wage multiplier.

When you put them together - the cost vs work actually done is rather interesting.

One company I work for discovered that the cheapest locations for software development were, in order

1) London and Eastern Europe tied in first place
2) US
3) Canada
4) India

London and Bulgaria / Sofia from memory.

Eastern Europe can be very expensive now as productivity isn't as great as it might be.

I would argue that nearshoring to other UK cities will easily match London and might work out cheaper.

Quite possibly - though if you pay lower wages than London, all the top talent goes there.

I've encountered a few attempts to setup up software development around the UK. The ones that have succeeded have to pay big wages to stop the drift to London. As in at least 2/3rd of the London rate...

There's a lot of great talent that really doesn't want to work on what are perceived as soul destroying projects in banks. If you look to recruit in Nottingham, Birmingham etc (especially with the ubiquity of remote working, and the ability to build local clusters of employees who can meet up socially) it can improve everyone's quality of life.

'At least two thirds of the London rate' smells about right. Surely it must be possible for businesses to make massive savings locating outsise London on that basis?

If you aren't a fuckwit manager trying to save squillions in one year, yes.

But....

Floater said:

I forgot this little gem

Lisa Nandy’s recent endorsement of a report calling for the army to be abolished and replaced with a woke “peace force

RochdalePioneers said:

The nice thing about being a LibDem is that I can point to bollox on both Labour and Tory sides, knowing that our own policy platform is thin enough for us likely not to have our own position to be pulled up on.

Tories pledged not to cut troop numbers all of 2 years ago. The world and technology hasn't changed that much. They know their core vote thinks the Tories will protect the troops so tell them what they want to know. It doesn't matter that its an utter lie when the opposition are seen as being the ones who would actually cut troop numbers.

There is something genuinely funny watching some of you dancing on a pinhead trying to defend this. Its only @HYUFD on the blue side who has called it for what it is - a manifesto breech. Why not maintain troop numbers AND equip them properly?

Malmesbury said:

another_richard said:

Malmesbury said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Malmesbury said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Excess deaths are over. The second wave is over.

We should be rapidly unlocking at least back to the point we were at in July last year domestically, while keeping the border sealed to protect our gains domestically. That's the trade-off.

Telling people to stay at home when nobody is dying is unforgiveable.

Given what we know about the current strains, a full unlock now would quickly fill up ICU with 30-50 year olds.

That is why the roadmap is linking levels of vaccination to reducing the levels of restrictions.

I think that's a load of bollocks sorry.

More than a fifth over 50s have been vaccinated already, the vulnerable under 50s. The majority of adults have been vaccinated now, which means they're much less likely to pass the virus on.

With our level of vaccinations, even with the new variant, there's little reason why ICUs should escalate any more than they did last July.

Hospital admissions R is around 0.8

Who are all these people being admitted to hospital - *now*?



If you let rip, it's not long before you are back at admissions R of 1.x and then we are in the same position as Europe.

Hence a phased approach.

There's a five week lag between the effect of new vaccinations on hospital admissions.

How low do you think hospital admissions will be in five weeks ?

Hopefully nice and low. Hopefully.

We have a nice 0.8 (or so) R for hospitals at the moment. The issue is that 0.8 turns into 1.05 quite easily.

I don't want to do this all over again. At this point a 5 weeks is not much to ask to get security - at that point we will (the fuckwits willing) have the over 50s done to a high level - including getting areas such as Newham to a better state....

Philip_Thompson said:

Dura_Ace said:

Philip_Thompson said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Philip_Thompson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1374695358979248132

Keir on fire today, Labour can win on the armed forces

😂😂😂😂😂

You watched a different PMQs to me then. Keir was ridiculous and hasn't a leg to stand on.

Surely this is a pretty straight forward one.

Is the government going to cut troop numbers or not?

The armed forces are being modernised with record investment and increased spending, yes.

I'd rather fewer but better equipped armed forces fit for the times, than having more troops operating without the protection, equipment or weaponry that they require. Which would you prefer?

That isn't the choice though, is it? The tories have committed to this global power projection bollocks while cutting 30% of the strategic airlift capability, taking at least a two year capability gap on AWACS and cutting the new AWACS fleet by 40% before the first aircraft even arrives. Etc, etc.

It's all just empty posturing while real capabilities get cut and gapped because they cannot bring themselves to align the goals with the available funding. The government is trying to do global power projection AND have a massive land force committed to NATO on about 60% of the budget needed to do both properly.

I don't disagree that there's been cuts over the past decade, Osborne had no choice but to cut expenditure after what he inherited and that was done in the past I completely agree with you 100% on that. It was also the right thing to do as we needed to fix the black hole in the economy which is why we were able to cope with this pandemic as we went into it without the black hole that had been inherited.

The budget has been increased here - do you believe that the increase in budget would be better spent as the integrated review has advised on more modern equipment, or do you believe that the increase in budget would be better spent on more troops but without the equipment they need?

FrancisUrquhart said:

Sandpit said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

noneoftheabove said:

Cyclefree said:

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

Gallowgate said:

Genuine question: what right does Prince Harry have to work in the USA? Does he have a right to work by virtue of being married to an American? Does he need a visa?

I've always been curious.

It's a non-job.

Not at all. It’s very important.

He’s not just making oodles of money giving speeches to investment bankers and documentaries for Netflix.

He’s working for a *mental health* company

He’s not such a bad guy giving up his valuable time like that...

What does this company actually do? I have an interest in mental health provision because I have personal experience of what it does to people and their families.

Lots of people talk about it. It has become really quite fashionable to do so. Actual practical help is rather thin on the ground, especially afterwards. Try getting a job from companies after explaining that your patchy CV is because of mental health illness and you will find that their interest in better mental health vanishes as fast as snow in summer.

If he is going to do something practical to help with that, good on him. If it's just another talking shop or another forum for him to talk about himself, not so good.

Amazing double standards around Harry. He has set up the Invictus games which changed many peoples lives from overwhelming struggle to one of hope and achievement. That already puts him in the top 0.1% or better of people influencing and improving others lives.

Yes, there are double standards around Invictus.
I remember a few years earlier Jimmy Carr made a joke that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq would mean Britain would soon have a brilliant Paralympic team, and he got absolute pelters for it.

That was the classic case of people being offended on behalf of others.

The war vets, of course, appreciated the dark humour - and went on to get dozens of Paralympic medals!

All that outrage over Lee Hurst joke on twitter over the weekend...I was only thinking yesterday, it was the sort of gag Jimmy Carr would do, as a tame warm up one.

theProle said:

Malmesbury said:

another_richard said:

Malmesbury said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Malmesbury said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Excess deaths are over. The second wave is over.

We should be rapidly unlocking at least back to the point we were at in July last year domestically, while keeping the border sealed to protect our gains domestically. That's the trade-off.

Telling people to stay at home when nobody is dying is unforgiveable.

Given what we know about the current strains, a full unlock now would quickly fill up ICU with 30-50 year olds.

That is why the roadmap is linking levels of vaccination to reducing the levels of restrictions.

I think that's a load of bollocks sorry.

More than a fifth over 50s have been vaccinated already, the vulnerable under 50s. The majority of adults have been vaccinated now, which means they're much less likely to pass the virus on.

With our level of vaccinations, even with the new variant, there's little reason why ICUs should escalate any more than they did last July.

Hospital admissions R is around 0.8

Who are all these people being admitted to hospital - *now*?



If you let rip, it's not long before you are back at admissions R of 1.x and then we are in the same position as Europe.

Hence a phased approach.

There's a five week lag between the effect of new vaccinations on hospital admissions.

How low do you think hospital admissions will be in five weeks ?

Hopefully nice and low. Hopefully.

We have a nice 0.8 (or so) R for hospitals at the moment. The issue is that 0.8 turns into 1.05 quite easily.

I don't want to do this all over again. At this point a 5 weeks is not much to ask to get security - at that point we will (the fuckwits willing) have the over 50s done to a high level - including getting areas such as Newham to a better state....

Actually 5 weeks for an entire country is an awful lot to ask. If we say that a life spent locked down is only getting 50% of its normal value (which I don't think is unreasonable), the 5 weeks of lockdown for the country represents about ~40,000 entire birth-death lifetimes lost, or 3 million years of life lost. That's the same loss of years of life as 300,000 covid deaths.
If I told you that lifting lockdown now risks another 50k deaths (but its unlikely to be that bad, and there is a better than evens chance it's less than 10k), but retaining it for 5 weeks cost 300k deaths, this should be a no brainer.

RochdalePioneers said:

It's official - HMG is looking for somewhere off-shore to house migrants whilst being processed.

Canvey Island? Off shore, suitably horrible, easy to blockade...

Philip_Thompson said:

RochdalePioneers said:

The nice thing about being a LibDem is that I can point to bollox on both Labour and Tory sides, knowing that our own policy platform is thin enough for us likely not to have our own position to be pulled up on.

Tories pledged not to cut troop numbers all of 2 years ago. The world and technology hasn't changed that much. They know their core vote thinks the Tories will protect the troops so tell them what they want to know. It doesn't matter that its an utter lie when the opposition are seen as being the ones who would actually cut troop numbers.

There is something genuinely funny watching some of you dancing on a pinhead trying to defend this. Its only @HYUFD on the blue side who has called it for what it is - a manifesto breech. Why not maintain troop numbers AND equip them properly?

The world has changed, which is what the integrated review was about.

The threats from Russia and China especially are much more understood now than they were. The understanding of drones and the recent war with Turkish drones is new.

The integrated review made sense. The fact that people are criticising this based on the number of jobs, not saying the integrated review was wrong, just goes to say all that needs saying.

Theuniondivvie said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

IanB2 said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1374695358979248132

Keir on fire today, Labour can win on the armed forces

Labour however is choosing whether to oppose based entirely on how it looks. They won’t oppose on anything Brexit related, because it would look bad, despite the fact that the government has got it wrong and is driving small businesses into bankruptcy and individuals into unemployment. Labour will oppose on the armed forces, because they think it looks good, despite the fact that we don’t need so many troops and the changes are probably sensible.

You’d expect Tories like HY who are always banging on about the Tory election manifesto to be more vocal with their criticism. But where are they?

I said on Sunday I thought this decision was appalling and I stick to that now, we made a promise to keep troop numbers as they are and we should stick to that, I know a lot of Tory members are very unhappy with this and Starmer will obviously be able to capitalise on it

Fair play HYUFD.
Still some supine acolytes banging the somewhat reduced in size drum, mind.

We're very different types of Tories.

HYUFD wants a large military he can send in to occupy Scotland and quash independence.

I want a military fit for NATO and the modern world.

He appears to be a Tory that prefers manifesto promises (good or bad) not to to be evanescent bullshit.

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

HYUFD said:

IanB2 said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1374695358979248132

Keir on fire today, Labour can win on the armed forces

Labour however is choosing whether to oppose based entirely on how it looks. They won’t oppose on anything Brexit related, because it would look bad, despite the fact that the government has got it wrong and is driving small businesses into bankruptcy and individuals into unemployment. Labour will oppose on the armed forces, because they think it looks good, despite the fact that we don’t need so many troops and the changes are probably sensible.

You’d expect Tories like HY who are always banging on about the Tory election manifesto to be more vocal with their criticism. But where are they?

I said on Sunday I thought this decision was appalling and I stick to that now, we made a promise to keep troop numbers as they are and we should stick to that, I know a lot of Tory members are very unhappy with this and Starmer will obviously be able to capitalise on it

Once you’re speaking in numbers of troops and not discussing outputs, you are basically saying you don’t care about military capability, you just want pretty parades. You’re like Sadam, with dozens of Mig29s, almost none of which flew.

To recapture the Falklands, for example, we would need troops and special forces and subs and aircraft carriers, to contribute to UN peacekeeping obligations and our NATO commitments we need troops and boots on the ground.

Cyberwarfare and drones will only go so far

1) Theres a garrison, which is enough to deter. 2) Argentina currently presents no military threat to anyone.

Regarding other obligations - why should we do peacekeeping? Leave that to countries without high capabilities, and the high end capabilities are what NATO needs from us. At most, troops in Europe are a speed bump/trip wire while we decide whether to go nuclear. We’ve assumed we’d lose the ground war with Russia since the 1970s. Might as well be a battle group as a division.

Who knows what the Argentine military will be like in a few years time and obviously much of its military is much closer to the islands than ours is so we need a sizeable military garrison to deter it as well as to be able to recapture them if necessary.

We are a UN Security council permanent member, one of just 5 in that role and a key member of NATO, we have obligations as part of both roles. It makes a complete mockery of the supposed post Brexit 'global Britain' to have troop numbers which would be significantly less than the French have for example, our main comparator power within the UN Security Council and NATO

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Sandpit said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

noneoftheabove said:

Cyclefree said:

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

Gallowgate said:

Genuine question: what right does Prince Harry have to work in the USA? Does he have a right to work by virtue of being married to an American? Does he need a visa?

I've always been curious.

It's a non-job.

Not at all. It’s very important.

He’s not just making oodles of money giving speeches to investment bankers and documentaries for Netflix.

He’s working for a *mental health* company

He’s not such a bad guy giving up his valuable time like that...

What does this company actually do? I have an interest in mental health provision because I have personal experience of what it does to people and their families.

Lots of people talk about it. It has become really quite fashionable to do so. Actual practical help is rather thin on the ground, especially afterwards. Try getting a job from companies after explaining that your patchy CV is because of mental health illness and you will find that their interest in better mental health vanishes as fast as snow in summer.

If he is going to do something practical to help with that, good on him. If it's just another talking shop or another forum for him to talk about himself, not so good.

Amazing double standards around Harry. He has set up the Invictus games which changed many peoples lives from overwhelming struggle to one of hope and achievement. That already puts him in the top 0.1% or better of people influencing and improving others lives.

Yes, there are double standards around Invictus.
I remember a few years earlier Jimmy Carr made a joke that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq would mean Britain would soon have a brilliant Paralympic team, and he got absolute pelters for it.

That was the classic case of people being offended on behalf of others.

The war vets, of course, appreciated the dark humour - and went on to get dozens of Paralympic medals!

All that outrage over Lee Hurst joke on twitter over the weekend...I was only thinking yesterday, it was the sort of gag Jimmy Carr would do, as a tame warm up one.

I was pretty much the only one defending that joke on here at the time.

I think the main issue is the audience. A Twitter audience is different from a TV/radio audience, which is different to a comedy club audience - with decreasing expectations of taste and decency.

Dura_Ace said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Dura_Ace said:

Philip_Thompson said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Philip_Thompson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1374695358979248132

Keir on fire today, Labour can win on the armed forces

😂😂😂😂😂

You watched a different PMQs to me then. Keir was ridiculous and hasn't a leg to stand on.

Surely this is a pretty straight forward one.

Is the government going to cut troop numbers or not?

The armed forces are being modernised with record investment and increased spending, yes.

I'd rather fewer but better equipped armed forces fit for the times, than having more troops operating without the protection, equipment or weaponry that they require. Which would you prefer?

That isn't the choice though, is it? The tories have committed to this global power projection bollocks while cutting 30% of the strategic airlift capability, taking at least a two year capability gap on AWACS and cutting the new AWACS fleet by 40% before the first aircraft even arrives. Etc, etc.

It's all just empty posturing while real capabilities get cut and gapped because they cannot bring themselves to align the goals with the available funding. The government is trying to do global power projection AND have a massive land force committed to NATO on about 60% of the budget needed to do both properly.

I don't disagree that there's been cuts over the past decade,

Forgot to say... the cuts I mentioned (AWACS, airlift and two T23 frigates) happened THIS WEEK.

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/MichelReuters/status/1374707621677121538

Dura_Ace said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Dura_Ace said:

Philip_Thompson said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Philip_Thompson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1374695358979248132

Keir on fire today, Labour can win on the armed forces

😂😂😂😂😂

You watched a different PMQs to me then. Keir was ridiculous and hasn't a leg to stand on.

Surely this is a pretty straight forward one.

Is the government going to cut troop numbers or not?

The armed forces are being modernised with record investment and increased spending, yes.

I'd rather fewer but better equipped armed forces fit for the times, than having more troops operating without the protection, equipment or weaponry that they require. Which would you prefer?

That isn't the choice though, is it? The tories have committed to this global power projection bollocks while cutting 30% of the strategic airlift capability, taking at least a two year capability gap on AWACS and cutting the new AWACS fleet by 40% before the first aircraft even arrives. Etc, etc.

It's all just empty posturing while real capabilities get cut and gapped because they cannot bring themselves to align the goals with the available funding. The government is trying to do global power projection AND have a massive land force committed to NATO on about 60% of the budget needed to do both properly.

I don't disagree that there's been cuts over the past decade, Osborne had no choice but to cut expenditure after what he inherited and that was done in the past I completely agree with you 100% on that. It was also the right thing to do as we needed to fix the black hole in the economy which is why we were able to cope with this pandemic as we went into it without the black hole that had been inherited.

The budget has been increased here - do you believe that the increase in budget would be better spent as the integrated review has advised on more modern equipment, or do you believe that the increase in budget would be better spent on more troops but without the equipment they need?

They could afford to keep force levels where they are, rebalance them toward badly needed technical specialties and properly equip if they stopped wasting money on vanity projects and pointless shit.

Why does the MoD own 19 golf courses and operate a squadron of WW2 fighters?

Why has Johnson bought a second and possibly third VVIP aircraft (A321LR) painted at vast expense in the Brexit Belle colours?

Floater said:

RochdalePioneers said:

It's official - HMG is looking for somewhere off-shore to house migrants whilst being processed.

Canvey Island? Off shore, suitably horrible, easy to blockade...

Have you been to Canvey?

Think of their human rights man

kinabalu said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Floater said:

I forgot this little gem

Lisa Nandy’s recent endorsement of a report calling for the army to be abolished and replaced with a woke “peace force

On the defence review the voters are on HMG side

https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1374329461286535172?s=19

But the questions don't follow. Troops aren't battlefield hardware. They're battlefield hardnuts.

eek said:

RochdalePioneers said:

It's official - HMG is looking for somewhere off-shore to house migrants whilst being processed.

Canvey Island? Off shore, suitably horrible, easy to blockade...

Just build another prison on Sheppey. That should ensure they volunteer to return home quickly.

Dura_Ace said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Dura_Ace said:

Philip_Thompson said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Philip_Thompson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1374695358979248132

Keir on fire today, Labour can win on the armed forces

😂😂😂😂😂

You watched a different PMQs to me then. Keir was ridiculous and hasn't a leg to stand on.

Surely this is a pretty straight forward one.

Is the government going to cut troop numbers or not?

The armed forces are being modernised with record investment and increased spending, yes.

I'd rather fewer but better equipped armed forces fit for the times, than having more troops operating without the protection, equipment or weaponry that they require. Which would you prefer?

That isn't the choice though, is it? The tories have committed to this global power projection bollocks while cutting 30% of the strategic airlift capability, taking at least a two year capability gap on AWACS and cutting the new AWACS fleet by 40% before the first aircraft even arrives. Etc, etc.

It's all just empty posturing while real capabilities get cut and gapped because they cannot bring themselves to align the goals with the available funding. The government is trying to do global power projection AND have a massive land force committed to NATO on about 60% of the budget needed to do both properly.

I don't disagree that there's been cuts over the past decade, Osborne had no choice but to cut expenditure after what he inherited and that was done in the past I completely agree with you 100% on that. It was also the right thing to do as we needed to fix the black hole in the economy which is why we were able to cope with this pandemic as we went into it without the black hole that had been inherited.

The budget has been increased here - do you believe that the increase in budget would be better spent as the integrated review has advised on more modern equipment, or do you believe that the increase in budget would be better spent on more troops but without the equipment they need?

They could afford to keep force levels where they are, rebalance them toward badly needed technical specialties and properly equip if they stopped wasting money on vanity projects and pointless shit.

Why does the MoD own 19 golf courses and operate a squadron of WW2 fighters?

Why has Johnson bought a second and possibly third VVIP aircraft (A321LR) painted at vast expense in the Brexit Belle colours?

kamski said:

Leon said:

kamski said:

Chris said:

Malmesbury said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MattW said:

kamski said:

Floater said:

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:

Much worse:

https://twitter.com/jamesfraney/status/1374675700855287812?s=20

So not only stealing from the UK, but also stealing from the less well-off in a pathetic attempt to hide their own failures. Sick.

They need to be publicly shamed by the world community

Has anyone actually stolen any vaccines from Covax?

No.

However, MEPs seem to be going increasingly bananas.

Yes actually.

Doses due to go to Covax have been impounded.

Every day they're impounded rather than injected is lives lost.

https://twitter.com/macaesbruno/status/1374688979472281607?s=21

He's missed out the best bit - COVAX is enthusiastically supported by both the EU and the Italian government.

But surely these poor countries in the developing world fail the reciprocity criterion, because they aren't exporting vaccines to the EU?

Isn't it a good idea to wait to hear from Covax, or any other reputable source, if any vaccine supplies have been delayed before jumping to conclusions?

Talking of ‘jumping to conclusions’, here’s an esteemed EU journalist. Austrian.

https://twitter.com/grimmse/status/1374639886817443844?s=21

So no actual evidence that any Covax vaccines have been stolen? Quick let's retweet some Austrian.

Unfortunately, this site has descended into an ugly form of groupthink.

The rules are you can post anything, no matter how inaccurate, you can just make any crap up, post any irrational conspiracy theory, it's all fine, positively encouraged, so long as the target is the EU or European governments.

It's ugly and shows a worrying fanatical mindset has taken hold in lots of people.

There's plenty to severely criticise the EU for or, for example the German government, while remaining accurate and in touch with reality.

Maybe my impression is coming from a vocal minority of hate-filled posters such as Leon, but I've had enough, I just leave with a plea to people to try to be accurate, and to see how things might look to someone from a different perspective.

BluestBlue said:

RochdalePioneers said:

BluestBlue said:

RochdalePioneers said:

BluestBlue said:

HYUFD said:

IanB2 said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1374695358979248132

Keir on fire today, Labour can win on the armed forces

Labour however is choosing whether to oppose based entirely on how it looks. They won’t oppose on anything Brexit related, because it would look bad, despite the fact that the government has got it wrong and is driving small businesses into bankruptcy and individuals into unemployment. Labour will oppose on the armed forces, because they think it looks good, despite the fact that we don’t need so many troops and the changes are probably sensible.

You’d expect Tories like HY who are always banging on about the Tory election manifesto to be more vocal with their criticism. But where are they?

I said on Sunday I thought this decision was appalling and I stick to that now, we made a promise to keep troop numbers as they are and we should stick to that, I know a lot of Tory members are very unhappy with this and Starmer will obviously be able to capitalise on it

He'll be able to capitalize on it ... how? What taxes will Labour raise and what services will it cut to guarantee no fall in troop levels? Most people will have noticed this little thing called the fiscal black hole caused by the global pandemic, all of which occurred after the manifesto was written.

Got it. We can't afford armed forces. A truly Tory campaign slogan.

Except that as Philip points out, spending is going up, not down.

There's no logical inconsistency in increasing spending overall, but putting more of it into the latest equipment than into maintaining troop levels. There's this thing called technology, which makes it more effective to have one man with a machine gun than a hundred with stone knives.

Oh I understand all that. Its just that your response to objections to cutting troop numbers was to demand to know how Keir would pay for it...

And that demand still stands. There's a gigantic fiscal hole, and so we clearly don't have the money to purchase all the new tech and maintain 100% of troop levels at the same time. Therefore, new cuts or new taxes or new borrowing will be needed, and Labour should state what those would be.

ping said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/MichelReuters/status/1374707621677121538

"As far as we're concerned, we have no willingness, no interest in fuelling permanent controversy with Britain."

They’re doing exactly what they say they don’t want to do.

Brexit - and now our vaccine success - has sent them mad.

Having said that, I agree with iirc Fraser nelson on the spectator podcast, that there is a strong moral argument for helping out the EU vaccinate their oldies before we push ahead with our youngsters.

ping said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/MichelReuters/status/1374707621677121538

"As far as we're concerned, we have no willingness, no interest in fuelling permanent controversy with Britain."

They’re doing exactly what they say they don’t want to do.

Brexit - and now our vaccine success - has sent them mad.

Having said that, I agree with iirc Fraser nelson on the spectator podcast, that there is a strong moral argument for helping out the EU vaccinate their oldies before we push ahead with our youngsters.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

kinabalu said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Floater said:

I forgot this little gem

Lisa Nandy’s recent endorsement of a report calling for the army to be abolished and replaced with a woke “peace force

On the defence review the voters are on HMG side

https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1374329461286535172?s=19

But the questions don't follow. Troops aren't battlefield hardware. They're battlefield hardnuts.

You gov say in the question the size of the army is to be reduced

FrancisUrquhart said:

ping said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/MichelReuters/status/1374707621677121538

"As far as we're concerned, we have no willingness, no interest in fuelling permanent controversy with Britain."

They’re doing exactly what they say they don’t want to do.

Brexit - and now our vaccine success - has sent them mad.

Having said that, I agree with iirc Fraser nelson on the spectator podcast, that there is a strong moral argument for helping out the EU vaccinate their oldies before we push ahead with our youngsters.

You would hope such a good will gesture would be warmly received, but not sure could we trust them then not to continue to play silly buggers over border issues over Brexit.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Leon said:

FT article on the EU vax ban. Seems it is strongly (and rightly) opposed by several northern states, but its being done on QMV, so it will probably go through, and it will hinder our vax program - ie more Brits will die

https://www.ft.com/content/74e30a00-37aa-414b-8200-40ed91767089

(££)

If this happens - and Brits die unnecessarily - I honestly do not see how EU/UK relations will ever recover. It will be like the Cold War.

With friends like this, who needs enemies.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Brom said:

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Sandpit said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

noneoftheabove said:

Cyclefree said:

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

Gallowgate said:

Genuine question: what right does Prince Harry have to work in the USA? Does he have a right to work by virtue of being married to an American? Does he need a visa?

I've always been curious.

It's a non-job.

Not at all. It’s very important.

He’s not just making oodles of money giving speeches to investment bankers and documentaries for Netflix.

He’s working for a *mental health* company

He’s not such a bad guy giving up his valuable time like that...

What does this company actually do? I have an interest in mental health provision because I have personal experience of what it does to people and their families.

Lots of people talk about it. It has become really quite fashionable to do so. Actual practical help is rather thin on the ground, especially afterwards. Try getting a job from companies after explaining that your patchy CV is because of mental health illness and you will find that their interest in better mental health vanishes as fast as snow in summer.

If he is going to do something practical to help with that, good on him. If it's just another talking shop or another forum for him to talk about himself, not so good.

Amazing double standards around Harry. He has set up the Invictus games which changed many peoples lives from overwhelming struggle to one of hope and achievement. That already puts him in the top 0.1% or better of people influencing and improving others lives.

Yes, there are double standards around Invictus.
I remember a few years earlier Jimmy Carr made a joke that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq would mean Britain would soon have a brilliant Paralympic team, and he got absolute pelters for it.

That was the classic case of people being offended on behalf of others.

The war vets, of course, appreciated the dark humour - and went on to get dozens of Paralympic medals!

All that outrage over Lee Hurst joke on twitter over the weekend...I was only thinking yesterday, it was the sort of gag Jimmy Carr would do, as a tame warm up one.

I was pretty much the only one defending that joke on here at the time.

I think the main issue is the audience. A Twitter audience is different from a TV/radio audience, which is different to a comedy club audience - with decreasing expectations of taste and decency.

Most definitely. I also think those who feigned offence had more problems with the teller of the joke than the joke itself. As has been said even in 2021 if that came out the mouth of Jimmy Carr on Channel 4 it would have got a mixture of laughs and a few groans (if there were a studio audience).

Lee Hurst was pretty funny on TTIAO. I thought Nick Hancock made that show, it's a shame much like Mark Lamarr from Buzzcocks they keep a relatively low profile these days given the dross that currently passes for comedy on the Beeb.

Nick Hancock...met him in real life a number of times, what a miserable git.

Jimmy Carr regular put downs are basically I've done your mum / your girlfriend is ugly....no more or less misogynistic than Lee Hurst joke.

Theuniondivvie said:

kamski said:

Leon said:

kamski said:

Chris said:

Malmesbury said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MattW said:

kamski said:

Floater said:

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:

Much worse:

https://twitter.com/jamesfraney/status/1374675700855287812?s=20

So not only stealing from the UK, but also stealing from the less well-off in a pathetic attempt to hide their own failures. Sick.

They need to be publicly shamed by the world community

Has anyone actually stolen any vaccines from Covax?

No.

However, MEPs seem to be going increasingly bananas.

Yes actually.

Doses due to go to Covax have been impounded.

Every day they're impounded rather than injected is lives lost.

https://twitter.com/macaesbruno/status/1374688979472281607?s=21

He's missed out the best bit - COVAX is enthusiastically supported by both the EU and the Italian government.

But surely these poor countries in the developing world fail the reciprocity criterion, because they aren't exporting vaccines to the EU?

Isn't it a good idea to wait to hear from Covax, or any other reputable source, if any vaccine supplies have been delayed before jumping to conclusions?

Talking of ‘jumping to conclusions’, here’s an esteemed EU journalist. Austrian.

https://twitter.com/grimmse/status/1374639886817443844?s=21

So no actual evidence that any Covax vaccines have been stolen? Quick let's retweet some Austrian.

Unfortunately, this site has descended into an ugly form of groupthink.

The rules are you can post anything, no matter how inaccurate, you can just make any crap up, post any irrational conspiracy theory, it's all fine, positively encouraged, so long as the target is the EU or European governments.

It's ugly and shows a worrying fanatical mindset has taken hold in lots of people.

There's plenty to severely criticise the EU for or, for example the German government, while remaining accurate and in touch with reality.

Maybe my impression is coming from a vocal minority of hate-filled posters such as Leon, but I've had enough, I just leave with a plea to people to try to be accurate, and to see how things might look to someone from a different perspective.

Sorry that you feel you have to go. Your clear eyed and often critical view of Germany and the EU were a valuable addition to this place imo.

There are a number of people with similar opinions that come here to sook each other off, a smaller number who find the spectacle queasily fascinating. I accept that if you're not in the latter category, the charms of PB wear thin pretty quickly.

There's other stuff as well of course..

Leon said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Leon said:

FT article on the EU vax ban. Seems it is strongly (and rightly) opposed by several northern states, but its being done on QMV, so it will probably go through, and it will hinder our vax program - ie more Brits will die

https://www.ft.com/content/74e30a00-37aa-414b-8200-40ed91767089

(££)

If this happens - and Brits die unnecessarily - I honestly do not see how EU/UK relations will ever recover. It will be like the Cold War.

With friends like this, who needs enemies.

Imagine if you’re the PM and you have to stand up in the Commons and announce that our vaccine drive is going to slow, enormously, because our contracted, purchased supplies have been illegally seized by the EU. Then you have to say ‘as a result, lockdown will be extended’

The reaction of the British public will be explosive. Blind fury

My slender hope is that this is politicking for show. They will pass the ‘law’ but won’t apply it, because saner minds will prevail. But this is the EU in full-blown psychosis, so who knows. Look at Merkel’s madness, today

felix said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/MichelReuters/status/1374707621677121538

Now that the EU is officially doing ‘the mad thing everyone said they wouldn’t do’, has anyone crunched the numbers to see if this will actually affect the UK vax drive?

Where’s Max when you need him?

Well we have no idea how much Pfizer the UK has been stockpiling and how much capacity AZN is actually producing. The second I don't think AZN even has an idea, as "lumpy" is a bit like Mrs U attempts at making macarons...she never know what's coming out the oven.

You nearly wrote macrons - French cuisine? For a load of hot air?

Brom said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Brom said:

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Sandpit said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

noneoftheabove said:

Cyclefree said:

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

Gallowgate said:

Genuine question: what right does Prince Harry have to work in the USA? Does he have a right to work by virtue of being married to an American? Does he need a visa?

I've always been curious.

It's a non-job.

Not at all. It’s very important.

He’s not just making oodles of money giving speeches to investment bankers and documentaries for Netflix.

He’s working for a *mental health* company

He’s not such a bad guy giving up his valuable time like that...

What does this company actually do? I have an interest in mental health provision because I have personal experience of what it does to people and their families.

Lots of people talk about it. It has become really quite fashionable to do so. Actual practical help is rather thin on the ground, especially afterwards. Try getting a job from companies after explaining that your patchy CV is because of mental health illness and you will find that their interest in better mental health vanishes as fast as snow in summer.

If he is going to do something practical to help with that, good on him. If it's just another talking shop or another forum for him to talk about himself, not so good.

Amazing double standards around Harry. He has set up the Invictus games which changed many peoples lives from overwhelming struggle to one of hope and achievement. That already puts him in the top 0.1% or better of people influencing and improving others lives.

Yes, there are double standards around Invictus.
I remember a few years earlier Jimmy Carr made a joke that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq would mean Britain would soon have a brilliant Paralympic team, and he got absolute pelters for it.

That was the classic case of people being offended on behalf of others.

The war vets, of course, appreciated the dark humour - and went on to get dozens of Paralympic medals!

All that outrage over Lee Hurst joke on twitter over the weekend...I was only thinking yesterday, it was the sort of gag Jimmy Carr would do, as a tame warm up one.

I was pretty much the only one defending that joke on here at the time.

I think the main issue is the audience. A Twitter audience is different from a TV/radio audience, which is different to a comedy club audience - with decreasing expectations of taste and decency.

Most definitely. I also think those who feigned offence had more problems with the teller of the joke than the joke itself. As has been said even in 2021 if that came out the mouth of Jimmy Carr on Channel 4 it would have got a mixture of laughs and a few groans (if there were a studio audience).

Lee Hurst was pretty funny on TTIAO. I thought Nick Hancock made that show, it's a shame much like Mark Lamarr from Buzzcocks they keep a relatively low profile these days given the dross that currently passes for comedy on the Beeb.

Nick Hancock...met him in real life a number of times, what a miserable git.

Jimmy Carr regular put downs are basically I've done your mum / your girlfriend is ugly....no more or less misogynistic than Lee Hurst joke.

He's from Stoke so I wouldn't expect him to be upbeat.

Luckyguy1983 said:

Theuniondivvie said:

kamski said:

Leon said:

kamski said:

Chris said:

Malmesbury said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MattW said:

kamski said:

Floater said:

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:

Much worse:

https://twitter.com/jamesfraney/status/1374675700855287812?s=20

So not only stealing from the UK, but also stealing from the less well-off in a pathetic attempt to hide their own failures. Sick.

They need to be publicly shamed by the world community

Has anyone actually stolen any vaccines from Covax?

No.

However, MEPs seem to be going increasingly bananas.

Yes actually.

Doses due to go to Covax have been impounded.

Every day they're impounded rather than injected is lives lost.

https://twitter.com/macaesbruno/status/1374688979472281607?s=21

He's missed out the best bit - COVAX is enthusiastically supported by both the EU and the Italian government.

But surely these poor countries in the developing world fail the reciprocity criterion, because they aren't exporting vaccines to the EU?

Isn't it a good idea to wait to hear from Covax, or any other reputable source, if any vaccine supplies have been delayed before jumping to conclusions?

Talking of ‘jumping to conclusions’, here’s an esteemed EU journalist. Austrian.

https://twitter.com/grimmse/status/1374639886817443844?s=21

So no actual evidence that any Covax vaccines have been stolen? Quick let's retweet some Austrian.

Unfortunately, this site has descended into an ugly form of groupthink.

The rules are you can post anything, no matter how inaccurate, you can just make any crap up, post any irrational conspiracy theory, it's all fine, positively encouraged, so long as the target is the EU or European governments.

It's ugly and shows a worrying fanatical mindset has taken hold in lots of people.

There's plenty to severely criticise the EU for or, for example the German government, while remaining accurate and in touch with reality.

Maybe my impression is coming from a vocal minority of hate-filled posters such as Leon, but I've had enough, I just leave with a plea to people to try to be accurate, and to see how things might look to someone from a different perspective.

Sorry that you feel you have to go. Your clear eyed and often critical view of Germany and the EU were a valuable addition to this place imo.

There are a number of people with similar opinions that come here to sook each other off, a smaller number who find the spectacle queasily fascinating. I accept that if you're not in the latter category, the charms of PB wear thin pretty quickly.

There's other stuff as well of course..

You can tell yourself that you come here to stoke the nationalist fire by staring into the ugly, gammony face of Toryism, but you're fooling no-one. You come here because it's fun. There's always a lively argument and a well-informed (yes well informed) debate, and clever, interesting and sometimes amusing people, whether or not they agree with you. And consequently this is preferable as an online hangout to an echo chamber of your political comrades.

I hope that generally, @kamski finds the same thing, and although he's finding it trying at present, that he will come back and contribute his valuable viewpoint again.

MalcolmDunn said:

Who would be a remainer now?

Leon said:

FT article on the EU vax ban. Seems it is strongly (and rightly) opposed by several northern states, but its being done on QMV, so it will probably go through, and it will hinder our vax program - ie more Brits will die

https://www.ft.com/content/74e30a00-37aa-414b-8200-40ed91767089

(££)

If this happens - and Brits die unnecessarily - I honestly do not see how EU/UK relations will ever recover. It will be like the Cold War.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Brom said:

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Sandpit said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

noneoftheabove said:

Cyclefree said:

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

Gallowgate said:

Genuine question: what right does Prince Harry have to work in the USA? Does he have a right to work by virtue of being married to an American? Does he need a visa?

I've always been curious.

It's a non-job.

Not at all. It’s very important.

He’s not just making oodles of money giving speeches to investment bankers and documentaries for Netflix.

He’s working for a *mental health* company

He’s not such a bad guy giving up his valuable time like that...

What does this company actually do? I have an interest in mental health provision because I have personal experience of what it does to people and their families.

Lots of people talk about it. It has become really quite fashionable to do so. Actual practical help is rather thin on the ground, especially afterwards. Try getting a job from companies after explaining that your patchy CV is because of mental health illness and you will find that their interest in better mental health vanishes as fast as snow in summer.

If he is going to do something practical to help with that, good on him. If it's just another talking shop or another forum for him to talk about himself, not so good.

Amazing double standards around Harry. He has set up the Invictus games which changed many peoples lives from overwhelming struggle to one of hope and achievement. That already puts him in the top 0.1% or better of people influencing and improving others lives.

Yes, there are double standards around Invictus.
I remember a few years earlier Jimmy Carr made a joke that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq would mean Britain would soon have a brilliant Paralympic team, and he got absolute pelters for it.

That was the classic case of people being offended on behalf of others.

The war vets, of course, appreciated the dark humour - and went on to get dozens of Paralympic medals!

All that outrage over Lee Hurst joke on twitter over the weekend...I was only thinking yesterday, it was the sort of gag Jimmy Carr would do, as a tame warm up one.

I was pretty much the only one defending that joke on here at the time.

I think the main issue is the audience. A Twitter audience is different from a TV/radio audience, which is different to a comedy club audience - with decreasing expectations of taste and decency.

Most definitely. I also think those who feigned offence had more problems with the teller of the joke than the joke itself. As has been said even in 2021 if that came out the mouth of Jimmy Carr on Channel 4 it would have got a mixture of laughs and a few groans (if there were a studio audience).

Lee Hurst was pretty funny on TTIAO. I thought Nick Hancock made that show, it's a shame much like Mark Lamarr from Buzzcocks they keep a relatively low profile these days given the dross that currently passes for comedy on the Beeb.

Nick Hancock...met him in real life a number of times, what a miserable git.

Jimmy Carr regular put downs are basically I've done your mum / your girlfriend is ugly....no more or less misogynistic than Lee Hurst joke.

Time_to_Leave said:

Leon said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Leon said:

FT article on the EU vax ban. Seems it is strongly (and rightly) opposed by several northern states, but its being done on QMV, so it will probably go through, and it will hinder our vax program - ie more Brits will die

https://www.ft.com/content/74e30a00-37aa-414b-8200-40ed91767089

(££)

If this happens - and Brits die unnecessarily - I honestly do not see how EU/UK relations will ever recover. It will be like the Cold War.

With friends like this, who needs enemies.

Imagine if you’re the PM and you have to stand up in the Commons and announce that our vaccine drive is going to slow, enormously, because our contracted, purchased supplies have been illegally seized by the EU. Then you have to say ‘as a result, lockdown will be extended’

The reaction of the British public will be explosive. Blind fury

My slender hope is that this is politicking for show. They will pass the ‘law’ but won’t apply it, because saner minds will prevail. But this is the EU in full-blown psychosis, so who knows. Look at Merkel’s madness, today

Yes the government won’t have any choice. The public will need to see retribution, and will have no interest in compromising with the EU over anything for years.

Sandpit said:

Brom said:

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Sandpit said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

noneoftheabove said:

Cyclefree said:

Charles said:

Cyclefree said:

Gallowgate said:

Genuine question: what right does Prince Harry have to work in the USA? Does he have a right to work by virtue of being married to an American? Does he need a visa?

I've always been curious.

It's a non-job.

Not at all. It’s very important.

He’s not just making oodles of money giving speeches to investment bankers and documentaries for Netflix.

He’s working for a *mental health* company

He’s not such a bad guy giving up his valuable time like that...

What does this company actually do? I have an interest in mental health provision because I have personal experience of what it does to people and their families.

Lots of people talk about it. It has become really quite fashionable to do so. Actual practical help is rather thin on the ground, especially afterwards. Try getting a job from companies after explaining that your patchy CV is because of mental health illness and you will find that their interest in better mental health vanishes as fast as snow in summer.

If he is going to do something practical to help with that, good on him. If it's just another talking shop or another forum for him to talk about himself, not so good.

Amazing double standards around Harry. He has set up the Invictus games which changed many peoples lives from overwhelming struggle to one of hope and achievement. That already puts him in the top 0.1% or better of people influencing and improving others lives.

Yes, there are double standards around Invictus.
I remember a few years earlier Jimmy Carr made a joke that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq would mean Britain would soon have a brilliant Paralympic team, and he got absolute pelters for it.

That was the classic case of people being offended on behalf of others.

The war vets, of course, appreciated the dark humour - and went on to get dozens of Paralympic medals!

All that outrage over Lee Hurst joke on twitter over the weekend...I was only thinking yesterday, it was the sort of gag Jimmy Carr would do, as a tame warm up one.

I was pretty much the only one defending that joke on here at the time.

I think the main issue is the audience. A Twitter audience is different from a TV/radio audience, which is different to a comedy club audience - with decreasing expectations of taste and decency.

Most definitely. I also think those who feigned offence had more problems with the teller of the joke than the joke itself. As has been said even in 2021 if that came out the mouth of Jimmy Carr on Channel 4 it would have got a mixture of laughs and a few groans (if there were a studio audience).

Lee Hurst was pretty funny on TTIAO. I thought Nick Hancock made that show, it's a shame much like Mark Lamarr from Buzzcocks they keep a relatively low profile these days given the dross that currently passes for comedy on the Beeb.

I do miss Mark Lamarr, back in the days when he'd goad guests into walking off Buzzcocks, and didn't care who he offended. Phill Jupitus has also disappeared, and Bill Bailey sticks to his musical comedy show on stage.

The only UK 'comedy' show I regularly watch now is the late-night Countdown, and occasionally HIGNFY - apart from that it's all Youtube podcasts and Netflix specials. Network TV has pretty much lost comedy completely.

Philip_Thompson said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Fake News BBC....finally correcting their story.

We have an update on a story from the Italian newspaper La Stampa, which had reported that some 29 million doses of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine found at a plant near Rome may have been destined for the UK.

A UK government official has since said it was not expecting such a delivery; and the Italian government has said only that “the batches that were inspected were all aimed for Belgium”.

Why would Belgium be getting 29 million doses?

They would be going on from there to somewhere else surely. There's no way 29 million doses were intended for Belgium?

I wonder if they've realised it was Covax being sent out from Belgium and decided its more politically sensitive to say Belgium than to say Covax.

Leon said:

Time_to_Leave said:

Leon said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Leon said:

FT article on the EU vax ban. Seems it is strongly (and rightly) opposed by several northern states, but its being done on QMV, so it will probably go through, and it will hinder our vax program - ie more Brits will die

https://www.ft.com/content/74e30a00-37aa-414b-8200-40ed91767089

(££)

If this happens - and Brits die unnecessarily - I honestly do not see how EU/UK relations will ever recover. It will be like the Cold War.

With friends like this, who needs enemies.

Imagine if you’re the PM and you have to stand up in the Commons and announce that our vaccine drive is going to slow, enormously, because our contracted, purchased supplies have been illegally seized by the EU. Then you have to say ‘as a result, lockdown will be extended’

The reaction of the British public will be explosive. Blind fury

My slender hope is that this is politicking for show. They will pass the ‘law’ but won’t apply it, because saner minds will prevail. But this is the EU in full-blown psychosis, so who knows. Look at Merkel’s madness, today

Yes the government won’t have any choice. The public will need to see retribution, and will have no interest in compromising with the EU over anything for years.

Still, an actual war with the EU will be a good cover for any ‘Brexit slowdown’

‘Exports out of Dover are down 87%!!’

‘Well, yes, that’s because we’re invading Calais and bombing Rotterdam’

I HOPE I’m joking