Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The Boundary changes – the winners and losers – politicalbetting.com

1356712

Comments

  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,654

    Just wanted to put this out there... it is now two weeks since Cummings tried to get Boris.. we had all the hype about how it was going to be a game changer, and who is talking about Cummings now , two weeks on....?

    You are. HTH.
    Bit late to the party but thank you for your observation. I said at the time that Cummings was a shit of the first order and was likewise tomorrow's fish and chip paper. Perfectly reasonable however to question Boris's judgement in appointing him and risible that the left who.loathe him tried to use him as their talisman.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 3,835

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    Love these reviews always a load of NIMPS - Not in my parliamentary seat!

    Agreed. My Westminster constituency is Dundee West which includes bits of Angus where I live and Perthshire where my daughter lives. So what? The object of this exercise is to ensure that my vote and your vote have roughly equal value which is not the case at the moment where a Welsh vote is worth about 20% more.

    We are currently operating off a 2001 census. It is absurd. The government should do the minimum consultation to stop legal impediments and then push this through. We also need to make sure that we never end up with these kinds of delays again. It is undemocratic, much more so than some town being split in 2.
    FPTP isn't particularly good as a system for fair representation, and removing 50 MPs would have been even worse for smaller parties.
    Of course scrapping it and going to STV or some such would be the 'fairest' idea. But this is not what we are offered. We are offered a choice between FPTP on very out of date boundaries or more up to date boundaries.
    Obviously the more level numbers of constituents per constituency are better than previous.
    I think STV is my least favourite system.
    It's the fairest system, the downside is generally weaker Gov'ts than FPTP.
    Strangely, probably for both of us, I agree with Nick Palmer here.

    If we're going to have PR I'd prefer open list by historic county/city/region (where necessary).

    STV is contrived and tedious. It can take days and days to reallocate rounds and rounds of votes that ends in gridlocked parliament. It's death by preference.

    No thanks.
    I think County-based Open List would probably keep quite a lot of people happy across the political spectrum. I know I'd be happy with it.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 36,540
    Barnesian said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    Love these reviews always a load of NIMPS - Not in my parliamentary seat!

    Agreed. My Westminster constituency is Dundee West which includes bits of Angus where I live and Perthshire where my daughter lives. So what? The object of this exercise is to ensure that my vote and your vote have roughly equal value which is not the case at the moment where a Welsh vote is worth about 20% more.

    We are currently operating off a 2001 census. It is absurd. The government should do the minimum consultation to stop legal impediments and then push this through. We also need to make sure that we never end up with these kinds of delays again. It is undemocratic, much more so than some town being split in 2.
    FPTP isn't particularly good as a system for fair representation, and removing 50 MPs would have been even worse for smaller parties.
    Of course scrapping it and going to STV or some such would be the 'fairest' idea. But this is not what we are offered. We are offered a choice between FPTP on very out of date boundaries or more up to date boundaries.
    Obviously the more level numbers of constituents per constituency are better than previous.
    I think STV is my least favourite system.
    It's the fairest system, the downside is generally weaker Gov'ts than FPTP.
    Strangely, probably for both of us, I agree with Nick Palmer here.

    If we're going to have PR I'd prefer open list by historic county/city/region (where necessary).

    STV is contrived and tedious. It can take days and days to reallocate rounds and rounds of votes that ends in gridlocked parliament. It's death by preference.

    No thanks.
    It doesn't have to take days and days to reallocate rounds. The Irish do it that way to heighten the drama. It also gives many betting opportunities between rounds. But it can be automated in an auditable way to be done overnight.

    Gridlocked parliament?? 2017 May's government? Many local authorities are NOC but function perfectly well and represent over 50% of electors unlike FPTP.
    I have always said that PB'ers would absolutely love STV, with its myriad nuances depending on how the preferences fall, and the level of analysis, and potential edge for punters with the knowledge and judgement, would knock our enjoyment of the current system into the park.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,963
    Dura_Ace said:

    The draw of the royal yacht was that it was royal, hence invitations were coveted, it offered something no other nation could, where heads of state could kick off their shoes with ours, and it therefore fulfilled a useful diplomatic purpose.

    Even if it were 'royal' that doesn't make it unique. Mohammed Bin Salman's yacht is better than this thing is ever going to be.
    MBS a has a big boat that looks like every other rich guy’s big boat - even if it’s bigger than almost all of them.

    A replacement for Britannia, that looks like the proposed design, is something very different, and quite unique.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 64,406

    Taz said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Tim Farron looks done on the boundary changes, his Kendall stronghold and better rural wards split asunder.

    Let's face it, he is no great loss. A disastrous leader of the Lib Dems, at least as bad as most of his successors, with no interesting ideas that I can remember.
    His constituents seemed to like him
    Absolutely. He may be a poor Lib Dem leader but he seems a well liked constituency MP
    When was the last time a leader former leader of one of the three national parties removed by the electorate?
    For the Liberal Democrats its happened in the last two to three elections in a row, depending upon how you define it.

    2019 their then leader was removed, Jo "next PM" Swinson.
    2017 was the last time a then-former leader was removed, Nick Clegg.
    2015 former Acting Leader Vince Cable was removed.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 11,156

    I feel so incredibly sorry for one of the presumably many whose futures are staked on the 'will we, won't we' of 21 June, via their businesses.

    The mental torture must be absolutely horrendous. Yesterday Johnson seemed to suggest it was going ahead as planned, and today we have the report in the Times of a delay. On/off, on/off. Incessantly, right up to the final moment, which it increasingly looks like will be a crushing disappointment.

    Talk about a roller coaster. Poor people.

    Quite right.

    Did you see the PB Wedding Experts try to excuse this yesterday? Apparently it is brides’ fault for postponing their weddings by a year, before the roadmap was even dreamt up, then expecting a decision on May 24 when the government had promised a decision on… May 24.

    Now thousands of brides face losing their deposits and cancelling their weddings with a few days’ notice. But that’s okay because “caution”.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 4,372
    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Tim Farron looks done on the boundary changes, his Kendall stronghold and better rural wards split asunder.

    Let's face it, he is no great loss. A disastrous leader of the Lib Dems, at least as bad as most of his successors, with no interesting ideas that I can remember.
    His constituents seemed to like him
    Absolutely. He may be a poor Lib Dem leader but he seems a well liked constituency MP
    When was the last time a leader former leader of one of the three national parties removed by the electorate?
    Nick Clegg?
    Wasn't it that nice Jo Swinson 2019 (who deserved better)

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,963

    Good morning

    Just heard Burley on Sky say that Whitty and Vallance briefed the government yesterday suggesting it is 'grim'

    To be honest I have not heard them say that and does anyone challenge Burley's sources

    It was word of mouth from 'cabinet source' in the Times this morning.
    Deaths - not grim.

    Hospital admissions - not grim.

    Vaccination progress - not grim.

    Prospects for Covid specialists to carry on their high-profile role of saving the Universe ad infinitem? Grim....
    Funny.

    Six months ago on here every SAGE member was a veritable saint, dedicated solely to saving lives. Superhumans, no less, with no personal agendas or foibles.
    Need to be careful. All that has been said is a quote from a 'cabinet source', not an actual briefing to the media. We all know that there are plenty who will leak stories to the media with an agenda, and it looks very like this is happening here. None of us know what Whitty and Vallence actually said.
    Indeed. I’ve been critical of the media throughout the pandemic, and the Times headline this morning is a prime example.

    They simply can’t live with the fact that the actual decision is a week away, and are going to spend this week bouncing from one extreme possibility to another, unnecessarily worrying people as they do so.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 97,887

    I'm shocked I tell you! Shocked!

    Dominic Cummings has not provided written evidence of his allegations against Hancock, Jeremy Hunt tells Times Radio: "We will put those allegations to him but we haven't received the written evidence to back those claims up that we were expecting."

    https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1402169666081067009?s=20

    As I called it, Dom Cummings = All fart and no follow through.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 52,013
    Thread - Christina Pagel, Fisked:

    The description of genomic analyses in this piece about the spread of the Delta variant in the UK has major inaccuracies, and hindsight bias.

    https://twitter.com/jcbarret/status/1402168856022601729?s=20
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 68,480
    IanB2 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    MaxPB said:

    Yawn. Boundary reviews.

    File under Ain’t Gonna Happen.

    Again.

    This time they've already happened. This is the boundary commission telling MPs what the new boundaries are.
    Not for the first time. We are now going to have public consultations etc. before a final 2023 report.

    However, what is different this time is that the government has a majority.
    Anyone proposing a change to their proposed constituency should be required to suggest where the losing (or gaining) constituency should gain or lose from with a proposed chain that ends up with everything in quota.

    At least on this board ;)
    That's the catch with counter-proposals: people often say "don't split my town" but fail to offer a viable alternative or to realise that sometimes the Commission has no choice.

    That said, for North East London last time, a guy who is a regular on the 'vote' boundary forums and, AFAIK, is a 'boundary geek' rather than a political activist, redrew completely the boundaries for all of that patch - about 14 seats as I remember - and the Commission was so impressed with his work that it adopted his counter-proposal for the whole area.
    I've proposed a change to Bassetlaw and Newark on the basis of geographical neatness. Will have to see if it is taken up.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 97,887

    I tell you what — starting a new job in a new industry 100% remote is really rubbish from a business perspective, never mind a personal perspective. Not productive at all.

    If you think that's bad I had to give remote access to my laptop to a new starter back in October.

    (I was in the middle of an investigation of a staff member who had been sending unsolicited 'interesting' pictures of himself from a work phone.)
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 64,406
    Barnesian said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    Love these reviews always a load of NIMPS - Not in my parliamentary seat!

    Agreed. My Westminster constituency is Dundee West which includes bits of Angus where I live and Perthshire where my daughter lives. So what? The object of this exercise is to ensure that my vote and your vote have roughly equal value which is not the case at the moment where a Welsh vote is worth about 20% more.

    We are currently operating off a 2001 census. It is absurd. The government should do the minimum consultation to stop legal impediments and then push this through. We also need to make sure that we never end up with these kinds of delays again. It is undemocratic, much more so than some town being split in 2.
    FPTP isn't particularly good as a system for fair representation, and removing 50 MPs would have been even worse for smaller parties.
    Of course scrapping it and going to STV or some such would be the 'fairest' idea. But this is not what we are offered. We are offered a choice between FPTP on very out of date boundaries or more up to date boundaries.
    Obviously the more level numbers of constituents per constituency are better than previous.
    I think STV is my least favourite system.
    It's the fairest system, the downside is generally weaker Gov'ts than FPTP.
    Strangely, probably for both of us, I agree with Nick Palmer here.

    If we're going to have PR I'd prefer open list by historic county/city/region (where necessary).

    STV is contrived and tedious. It can take days and days to reallocate rounds and rounds of votes that ends in gridlocked parliament. It's death by preference.

    No thanks.
    It doesn't have to take days and days to reallocate rounds. The Irish do it that way to heighten the drama. It also gives many betting opportunities between rounds. But it can be automated in an auditable way to be done overnight.

    Gridlocked parliament?? 2017 May's government? Many local authorities are NOC but function perfectly well and represent over 50% of electors unlike FPTP.
    Just to be clear are you suggesting that 2017 May's Government was the height of excellence you want to see repeated in perpetuity?

    Or a calamity to be avoided where possible?

    I'm firmly in the latter camp.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 7,915
    TOPPING said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    The draw of the royal yacht was that it was royal, hence invitations were coveted, it offered something no other nation could, where heads of state could kick off their shoes with ours, and it therefore fulfilled a useful diplomatic purpose.

    Even if it were 'royal' that doesn't make it unique. Mohammed Bin Salman's yacht is better than this thing is ever going to be.
    Never been on HMY Britannia, have been on the Queen's Flight. Seemed reassuringly comfy. Can't see Mohammed Bin Salman's stinkpot being able to get quite the same shade of beige.

    Edit: without wishing to start a conversation on YOU KNOW WHAT again today.
    The interior of Johnson's new VVIP A321LR is a flex as it was originally commissioned by the Four Seasons hotel group. That A330 MRTT he spent a million quid repainting obviously wasn't up the standards expected by YOU KNOW WHO. I doubt he's going to let the royals anywhere near it.


  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 25,225

    Good morning fellow Pb-ers. Promising one again, weather-wise

    There's a cross.border seat just N of here. Part in Essex, part in Suffolk. Not sure how well that'll go down in tractor-country.

    I couldn't find it? No changes proposed to the northern border of Harwich and North Essex
    Haverhill & Halstead.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,963
    algarkirk said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Tim Farron looks done on the boundary changes, his Kendall stronghold and better rural wards split asunder.

    Let's face it, he is no great loss. A disastrous leader of the Lib Dems, at least as bad as most of his successors, with no interesting ideas that I can remember.
    His constituents seemed to like him
    Absolutely. He may be a poor Lib Dem leader but he seems a well liked constituency MP
    When was the last time a leader former leader of one of the three national parties removed by the electorate?
    Nick Clegg?
    Wasn't it that nice Jo Swinson 2019 (who deserved better)

    Indeed so, I stand corrected.

    (Although if I were to be overly pedantic, it could be argued that she wasn’t a former leader, and didn’t lead one of the the three largest parties ;) )
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 11,156

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    I agree it’s a very weak story by The Times, but it’s unhelpful in the extreme, as people are wont to believe The Times. So the government needs to get in front of it.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,984

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    Maybe. But if so it is shocking government discipline verging on criminal.

    My guess is that a quote from a "Cabinet Minister" doesn't end up on the front page of The Times by accident and without knowledge from No.10.

    They are fucking with us. Fair enough, for many this is no great surprise. But for many others it is seriously damaging to their mental health, financial situation and much else.

    If they now open, distress will have been caused by this headline, if they postpone, distress will be caused because they postpone.

    No doubt the PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society will cheer on whatever the govt decides and how they decide it.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 97,887
    This is like hardcore porn for electoral geeks day.

    I'll need a cigarette by the end of it.

    The Times reckons Ben Wallace becomes homeless.

    Also did like this.

    However, Matt Hancock faces some awkward conversations at the Department of Health as his West Suffolk constituency is merged with that of Jo Churchill, the public health minister, to form a Newmarket & Bury St Edmunds seat. But a new North Suffolk seat offers an alternative as the East of England overall gains three seats.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ben-wallace-among-ministers-caught-by-constituency-boundary-changes-gw05kzfhg
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818

    I feel so incredibly sorry for one of the presumably many whose futures are staked on the 'will we, won't we' of 21 June, via their businesses.

    The mental torture must be absolutely horrendous. Yesterday Johnson seemed to suggest it was going ahead as planned, and today we have the report in the Times of a delay. On/off, on/off. Incessantly, right up to the final moment, which it increasingly looks like will be a crushing disappointment.

    Talk about a roller coaster. Poor people.

    Quite right.

    Did you see the PB Wedding Experts try to excuse this yesterday? Apparently it is brides’ fault for postponing their weddings by a year, before the roadmap was even dreamt up, then expecting a decision on May 24 when the government had promised a decision on… May 24.

    Now thousands of brides face losing their deposits and cancelling their weddings with a few days’ notice. But that’s okay because “caution”.
    Similarly holidays. Goodness. Finally we get today from Eustace what they intended all along. Stay at home. FFS.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 97,887

    I feel so incredibly sorry for one of the presumably many whose futures are staked on the 'will we, won't we' of 21 June, via their businesses.

    The mental torture must be absolutely horrendous. Yesterday Johnson seemed to suggest it was going ahead as planned, and today we have the report in the Times of a delay. On/off, on/off. Incessantly, right up to the final moment, which it increasingly looks like will be a crushing disappointment.

    Talk about a roller coaster. Poor people.

    You said the pubs wouldn't open in May, you're like the Ancient Mariner.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,859
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/small-nations-could-sink-g7-tax-deal-campaigners-warn-b5xsd33t9

    The Times has got the tax agreement specifics to bring AWS and other highly profitable business units into the high margin rate. Rishi isn't going to get caught out on something so basic.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 64,406

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    I agree it’s a very weak story by The Times, but it’s unhelpful in the extreme, as people are wont to believe The Times. So the government needs to get in front of it.
    They have. Environment Secretary on Sky this morning has said it is "too early to say" which is exactly the line its been all along.

    The announcement is going to be made next Monday FFS. I know people are impatient, but on Monday we will get an answer one way or another, that has always been the timeline.
  • NickyBreakspearNickyBreakspear Posts: 130
    I think that the current Lib Dem seats are OK on these English proposals, apart from Tim Farron. Are any of the new proposals feasible for him to hold on?

    Are the changes around Wimbledon Lib Dem friendly?

    OXWAB losses, broadly, the north of A40 but gains the centre of Oxford from East.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,741
    edited June 8
    The Secret Program That Hid an Even More Secret Program

    25 minutes on Youtube about secret US Air Force aerial combat training with real MIGs. Lots of detail about what MIGs were better and worse at than American fighters. The even more secret program was the development and evaluation of the F117 stealth fighter.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeBNyPsysiI

    How was the stealth fighter kept secret for more than a decade? Partly by flying only at night. And (in one sentence) partly by reported sightings being put down to UFOs. Sorry, chaps.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 11,156
    TOPPING said:

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    Maybe. But if so it is shocking government discipline verging on criminal.

    My guess is that a quote from a "Cabinet Minister" doesn't end up on the front page of The Times by accident and without knowledge from No.10.

    They are fucking with us. Fair enough, for many this is no great surprise. But for many others it is seriously damaging to their mental health, financial situation and much else.

    If they now open, distress will have been caused by this headline, if they postpone, distress will be caused because they postpone.

    No doubt the PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society will cheer on whatever the govt decides and how they decide it.
    Indeed. You can hear the fanboys clapping from here.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 97,887
    Also The Times speculates the PM might call a 2023 before the boundary changes are enacted to avoid any grief over MPs losing their constituencies.

    It would be very Boris Johnson.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,984
    Dura_Ace said:

    TOPPING said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    The draw of the royal yacht was that it was royal, hence invitations were coveted, it offered something no other nation could, where heads of state could kick off their shoes with ours, and it therefore fulfilled a useful diplomatic purpose.

    Even if it were 'royal' that doesn't make it unique. Mohammed Bin Salman's yacht is better than this thing is ever going to be.
    Never been on HMY Britannia, have been on the Queen's Flight. Seemed reassuringly comfy. Can't see Mohammed Bin Salman's stinkpot being able to get quite the same shade of beige.

    Edit: without wishing to start a conversation on YOU KNOW WHAT again today.
    The interior of Johnson's new VVIP A321LR is a flex as it was originally commissioned by the Four Seasons hotel group. That A330 MRTT he spent a million quid repainting obviously wasn't up the standards expected by YOU KNOW WHO. I doubt he's going to let the royals anywhere near it.


    If that's the "booze room" it is certainly making an effort. Whatever matt black they put around the bottles of Grey Goose.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,133
    Stocky said:

    Good morning

    Just heard Burley on Sky say that Whitty and Vallance briefed the government yesterday suggesting it is 'grim'

    To be honest I have not heard them say that and does anyone challenge Burley's sources

    It was word of mouth from 'cabinet source' in the Times this morning.
    Deaths - not grim.

    Hospital admissions - not grim.

    Vaccination progress - not grim.

    Prospects for Covid specialists to carry on their high-profile role of saving the Universe ad infinitem? Grim....
    Funny.

    Six months ago on here every SAGE member was a veritable saint, dedicated solely to saving lives. Superhumans, no less, with no personal agendas or foibles.
    What's going on? Are they drunk on power?

    The stats are good, no reason not to continue with the road map.

    Or maybe the government is toying with the public for maximum effect? Dunno - hope not.
    I'm a broken record, but I don't think the stats are that good.
    I'm worried we are turning a corner and are starting to see a lot of growth in hospitalizations.
    In any case - we will have another week of data before the govt needs to decide.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 97,887
    Sandpit said:

    algarkirk said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Tim Farron looks done on the boundary changes, his Kendall stronghold and better rural wards split asunder.

    Let's face it, he is no great loss. A disastrous leader of the Lib Dems, at least as bad as most of his successors, with no interesting ideas that I can remember.
    His constituents seemed to like him
    Absolutely. He may be a poor Lib Dem leader but he seems a well liked constituency MP
    When was the last time a leader former leader of one of the three national parties removed by the electorate?
    Nick Clegg?
    Wasn't it that nice Jo Swinson 2019 (who deserved better)

    Indeed so, I stand corrected.

    (Although if I were to be overly pedantic, it could be argued that she wasn’t a former leader, and didn’t lead one of the the three largest parties ;) )
    2017 then.

    When my fellow constituents ousted Nick Clegg for the ghastly Jared O'Mara.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 46,309

    I feel so incredibly sorry for one of the presumably many whose futures are staked on the 'will we, won't we' of 21 June, via their businesses.

    The mental torture must be absolutely horrendous. Yesterday Johnson seemed to suggest it was going ahead as planned, and today we have the report in the Times of a delay. On/off, on/off. Incessantly, right up to the final moment, which it increasingly looks like will be a crushing disappointment.

    Talk about a roller coaster. Poor people.

    Quite right.

    Did you see the PB Wedding Experts try to excuse this yesterday? Apparently it is brides’ fault for postponing their weddings by a year, before the roadmap was even dreamt up, then expecting a decision on May 24 when the government had promised a decision on… May 24.

    Now thousands of brides face losing their deposits and cancelling their weddings with a few days’ notice. But that’s okay because “caution”.
    My son is marrying his partner on the 31st July, having postponed it from last August

    However, they had booked the reception hotel for 125 prior to covid and they transfered the booking to this July, only now having to cancel as they have no outdoor space

    They have arranged a marquee following the Church service, max 30, but have no idea how many will be able to attend

    It takes away all the excitement of wedding planning, and to make matters worse the hotel has kept their reservation deposit

    And they could have married anytime in the last 11 years they have been together.

    That word hindsight comes to the fore again
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 25,225

    I tell you what — starting a new job in a new industry 100% remote is really rubbish from a business perspective, never mind a personal perspective. Not productive at all.

    The son of a cousin, in similar circumstance (new job in accountancy, straight out of Uni) was given a 'buddy' to contact, and, AIUI, contacted him regularly.
    Seemed to work quite well.
    In New Zealand, so all back to normal now.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 3,835
    Data confirms the anecdotes that people are ill in hospital for less time:

    https://twitter.com/JamesWard73/status/1402027574214156290

    Down from 10 days to 7.5 days (and deaths are lower proportionally too).

    Odds are that it's partly a factor of the younger admissions (while younger echelons are less likely to get seriously ill, that still leaves a significant number getting ill, and when you effectively remove the older admissions by double-vaccination, it means the young are an ever-greater proportion).
    Partly the fact that the middle-aged admissions have had one dose and are partially protected, limiting the severity.

    I reckon it means that if there's any delay, it'll be tied to double-vaxxing levels. Every week sees another 2.5 million double-vaxxed and 1.5 million single-vaxxed (and single-vaxxing does help to a degree, and add that to the decreased base rate of hospitalisation of the younger and you get further benefit).

    Still need more data to see if hospital occupancy levels are trending up or if it's a blip. And if they are trending up, how steeply. Any rise, despite being exponential, will be progressively retarded by ever-increasing vaxxing (so the exponent gradually ticks downwards). If it's fairly shallow to start with, then couple that with the low level we reached, and there may not be much extra pressure even with a rise. Given the ever-eroding compliance and there may not be much point to a delay. Needs more data.

    On Thursday, NHS England publish the monthly data-by-age-range, which will also be useful to see.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 64,406
    TOPPING said:

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    Maybe. But if so it is shocking government discipline verging on criminal.

    My guess is that a quote from a "Cabinet Minister" doesn't end up on the front page of The Times by accident and without knowledge from No.10.

    They are fucking with us. Fair enough, for many this is no great surprise. But for many others it is seriously damaging to their mental health, financial situation and much else.

    If they now open, distress will have been caused by this headline, if they postpone, distress will be caused because they postpone.

    No doubt the PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society will cheer on whatever the govt decides and how they decide it.
    I wholeheartedly disagree with you.

    If Hunt or Gove have a contrarian story they want to leak to the Times with their own spin then they can do so without the knowledge or approval of Number 10. That's rather the point, isn't it?

    Anyone who gets distress from a front page headline needs to get a grip. The line all along has been that it will be announced 14 June, if on 14 June its announced that we're opening then who is seriously going to care about a Times article a week earlier? That's preposterous.

    As for "PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society" I'm not sure who you include as its members. I can see no valid reason for postponing 21 June and have made my position clear and so have almost all PBers one way or another it seems.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    TOPPING said:

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    Maybe. But if so it is shocking government discipline verging on criminal.

    My guess is that a quote from a "Cabinet Minister" doesn't end up on the front page of The Times by accident and without knowledge from No.10.

    They are fucking with us. Fair enough, for many this is no great surprise. But for many others it is seriously damaging to their mental health, financial situation and much else.

    If they now open, distress will have been caused by this headline, if they postpone, distress will be caused because they postpone.

    No doubt the PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society will cheer on whatever the govt decides and how they decide it.
    This is what too much compliance breeds. Overweening arrogance and callousness. Ministers tweet vaccination numbers excitedly, because they are excited. Not just by the protection offered, but by the astonishing levels of compliance. Look at what we can make people do!

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 36,540

    I think that the current Lib Dem seats are OK on these English proposals, apart from Tim Farron. Are any of the new proposals feasible for him to hold on?

    Are the changes around Wimbledon Lib Dem friendly?

    OXWAB losses, broadly, the north of A40 but gains the centre of Oxford from East.

    Sw London is growing so the seats are getting smaller, which is unlikely a problem for the incumbents. If they are lucky the wards moving out will give them a foothold in a new constituency.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 36,540

    Also The Times speculates the PM might call a 2023 before the boundary changes are enacted to avoid any grief over MPs losing their constituencies.

    It would be very Boris Johnson.

    And well done for answering the question - that is the one way that the proposals can effectively be scrapped by MPs.

    I'm not clear on whether they still come into force for the GE after, or whether in the event that there's a GE the proposals fall?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 25,225
    edited June 8
    Barnesian said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    Love these reviews always a load of NIMPS - Not in my parliamentary seat!

    Agreed. My Westminster constituency is Dundee West which includes bits of Angus where I live and Perthshire where my daughter lives. So what? The object of this exercise is to ensure that my vote and your vote have roughly equal value which is not the case at the moment where a Welsh vote is worth about 20% more.

    We are currently operating off a 2001 census. It is absurd. The government should do the minimum consultation to stop legal impediments and then push this through. We also need to make sure that we never end up with these kinds of delays again. It is undemocratic, much more so than some town being split in 2.
    FPTP isn't particularly good as a system for fair representation, and removing 50 MPs would have been even worse for smaller parties.
    Of course scrapping it and going to STV or some such would be the 'fairest' idea. But this is not what we are offered. We are offered a choice between FPTP on very out of date boundaries or more up to date boundaries.
    Obviously the more level numbers of constituents per constituency are better than previous.
    I think STV is my least favourite system.
    It's the fairest system, the downside is generally weaker Gov'ts than FPTP.
    Strangely, probably for both of us, I agree with Nick Palmer here.

    If we're going to have PR I'd prefer open list by historic county/city/region (where necessary).

    STV is contrived and tedious. It can take days and days to reallocate rounds and rounds of votes that ends in gridlocked parliament. It's death by preference.

    No thanks.
    It doesn't have to take days and days to reallocate rounds. The Irish do it that way to heighten the drama. It also gives many betting opportunities between rounds. But it can be automated in an auditable way to be done overnight.

    Gridlocked parliament?? 2017 May's government? Many local authorities are NOC but function perfectly well and represent over 50% of electors unlike FPTP.
    2010 Parliament had No Overall Majority, but got an agreement to govern. Made some dreadful decisions, but, as a parliament, functioned.

    Ed. proof-reading + plus predictive text.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 11,156

    Also The Times speculates the PM might call a 2023 before the boundary changes are enacted to avoid any grief over MPs losing their constituencies.

    It would be very Boris Johnson.

    There you go, that’s one road out.

    Another is that the ‘public consultation’ is gamed and the boundaries look nothing like originally proposed.

    In any case, the review as proposed this morning Ain’t Gonna Happen.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 11,156
    edited June 8

    TOPPING said:

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    Maybe. But if so it is shocking government discipline verging on criminal.

    My guess is that a quote from a "Cabinet Minister" doesn't end up on the front page of The Times by accident and without knowledge from No.10.

    They are fucking with us. Fair enough, for many this is no great surprise. But for many others it is seriously damaging to their mental health, financial situation and much else.

    If they now open, distress will have been caused by this headline, if they postpone, distress will be caused because they postpone.

    No doubt the PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society will cheer on whatever the govt decides and how they decide it.
    I wholeheartedly disagree with you.

    If Hunt or Gove have a contrarian story they want to leak to the Times with their own spin then they can do so without the knowledge or approval of Number 10. That's rather the point, isn't it?

    Anyone who gets distress from a front page headline needs to get a grip. The line all along has been that it will be announced 14 June, if on 14 June its announced that we're opening then who is seriously going to care about a Times article a week earlier? That's preposterous.

    As for "PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society" I'm not sure who you include as its members. I can see no valid reason for postponing 21 June and have made my position clear and so have almost all PBers one way or another it seems.
    I don’t think anyone was including you in it Philip!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 36,540

    Also The Times speculates the PM might call a 2023 before the boundary changes are enacted to avoid any grief over MPs losing their constituencies.

    It would be very Boris Johnson.

    There you go, that’s one road out.

    Another is that the ‘public consultation’ is gamed and the boundaries look nothing like originally proposed.

    In any case, the review as proposed this morning Ain’t Gonna Happen.
    That's shifting the goalposts! Everyone knows the preliminary proposals aren't going to be implemented as is.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 64,406

    Also The Times speculates the PM might call a 2023 before the boundary changes are enacted to avoid any grief over MPs losing their constituencies.

    It would be very Boris Johnson.

    There you go, that’s one road out.

    Another is that the ‘public consultation’ is gamed and the boundaries look nothing like originally proposed.

    In any case, the review as proposed this morning Ain’t Gonna Happen.
    No first draft of a review ever goes through unamended. That's the whole point of having a first draft and a consultation period then.
  • BannedinnParisBannedinnParis Posts: 1,591

    - Constituencies representing natural communities and areas
    - Equal population-sized constituencies
    - One MP per constituency

    Pick two.

    As a country, we've gone for numbers 2 and 3, and we try to pretend we go for number 1 as well, despite being as convincing as a puppy next to a big poo on the floor trying to look completely innocent.

    We could validly go with a system starting at Land's End and counting population inwards, cutting it off down the middle of a street if necessary, and iterating to the next seat. Forget the regular pretence that actually Reading North and some villages and Reading South and some other villages were a natural community but that some population growth in Slough means that actually NOW Reading West and some villages is a natural community instead, as well as Reading East and some villages.

    It'd be gratifying for constituencies to have some more honest names like "Abingdon and the bits of Oxfordshire left over from the other seats" so we don't have to try to handwave justify things.

    vaguer or more historical names? I mean, in this example, Oxford West and Abingdon does describe the land covered, as might North-East Vale of White Horse or Abingdon and Vale of White Horse.

    Banbury, which currently includes both Banbury and Bicester, is broadly Cherwell district anyway.

    Almost as if the names ...
  • isamisam Posts: 38,526
    Regarding the cricketers ‘offensive’ tweets from years ago, by the logic being used if anyone heard a prospective, or current, England player making a similar joke in real life, or laughing at someone else making one, at any time in the past, shouldn’t they be suspended as well? Social media shouldn’t trump real life
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 97,887
    IanB2 said:

    Also The Times speculates the PM might call a 2023 before the boundary changes are enacted to avoid any grief over MPs losing their constituencies.

    It would be very Boris Johnson.

    And well done for answering the question - that is the one way that the proposals can effectively be scrapped by MPs.

    I'm not clear on whether they still come into force for the GE after, or whether in the event that there's a GE the proposals fall?
    The changes will happen in one form or another, that's the law.

    However what this does is kick the fight over constituencies into circa 2027, the PM will assume retirements will help free up seats and avoid arguments.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 11,156
    IanB2 said:

    Also The Times speculates the PM might call a 2023 before the boundary changes are enacted to avoid any grief over MPs losing their constituencies.

    It would be very Boris Johnson.

    There you go, that’s one road out.

    Another is that the ‘public consultation’ is gamed and the boundaries look nothing like originally proposed.

    In any case, the review as proposed this morning Ain’t Gonna Happen.
    That's shifting the goalposts! Everyone knows the preliminary proposals aren't going to be implemented as is.
    They won’t happen. Mark my words!
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,741

    Also The Times speculates the PM might call a 2023 before the boundary changes are enacted to avoid any grief over MPs losing their constituencies.

    It would be very Boris Johnson.

    When are census results announced? They might give political cover for another rethink, especially if there are significant differences between population and registration.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 34,927

    Yawn. Boundary reviews.

    File under Ain’t Gonna Happen.

    Again.

    I don’t think MPs get to vote anymore
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,984

    TOPPING said:

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    Maybe. But if so it is shocking government discipline verging on criminal.

    My guess is that a quote from a "Cabinet Minister" doesn't end up on the front page of The Times by accident and without knowledge from No.10.

    They are fucking with us. Fair enough, for many this is no great surprise. But for many others it is seriously damaging to their mental health, financial situation and much else.

    If they now open, distress will have been caused by this headline, if they postpone, distress will be caused because they postpone.

    No doubt the PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society will cheer on whatever the govt decides and how they decide it.
    I wholeheartedly disagree with you.

    If Hunt or Gove have a contrarian story they want to leak to the Times with their own spin then they can do so without the knowledge or approval of Number 10. That's rather the point, isn't it?

    Anyone who gets distress from a front page headline needs to get a grip. The line all along has been that it will be announced 14 June, if on 14 June its announced that we're opening then who is seriously going to care about a Times article a week earlier? That's preposterous.

    As for "PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society" I'm not sure who you include as its members. I can see no valid reason for postponing 21 June and have made my position clear and so have almost all PBers one way or another it seems.
    "Anyone who gets distress from a front page headline needs to get a grip."

    Do you tell people with mental illness to "pull themselves together" also?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,280
    isam said:

    Regarding the cricketers ‘offensive’ tweets from years ago, by the logic being used if anyone heard a prospective, or current, England player making a similar joke in real life, or laughing at someone else making one, at any time in the past, shouldn’t they be suspended as well? Social media shouldn’t trump real life

    The twenty first century waves hullo.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,741

    TOPPING said:

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    Maybe. But if so it is shocking government discipline verging on criminal.

    My guess is that a quote from a "Cabinet Minister" doesn't end up on the front page of The Times by accident and without knowledge from No.10.

    They are fucking with us. Fair enough, for many this is no great surprise. But for many others it is seriously damaging to their mental health, financial situation and much else.

    If they now open, distress will have been caused by this headline, if they postpone, distress will be caused because they postpone.

    No doubt the PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society will cheer on whatever the govt decides and how they decide it.
    I wholeheartedly disagree with you.

    If Hunt or Gove have a contrarian story they want to leak to the Times with their own spin then they can do so without the knowledge or approval of Number 10. That's rather the point, isn't it?

    Anyone who gets distress from a front page headline needs to get a grip. The line all along has been that it will be announced 14 June, if on 14 June its announced that we're opening then who is seriously going to care about a Times article a week earlier? That's preposterous.

    As for "PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society" I'm not sure who you include as its members. I can see no valid reason for postponing 21 June and have made my position clear and so have almost all PBers one way or another it seems.
    If you look at the last thread, two camps emerged: Evil King Boris versus Noble King Boris being undermined by impertinent and treacherous Cabinet Ministers. It will be interesting to see how that develops over the next couple of days.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,984

    TOPPING said:

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    Maybe. But if so it is shocking government discipline verging on criminal.

    My guess is that a quote from a "Cabinet Minister" doesn't end up on the front page of The Times by accident and without knowledge from No.10.

    They are fucking with us. Fair enough, for many this is no great surprise. But for many others it is seriously damaging to their mental health, financial situation and much else.

    If they now open, distress will have been caused by this headline, if they postpone, distress will be caused because they postpone.

    No doubt the PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society will cheer on whatever the govt decides and how they decide it.
    I wholeheartedly disagree with you.

    If Hunt or Gove have a contrarian story they want to leak to the Times with their own spin then they can do so without the knowledge or approval of Number 10. That's rather the point, isn't it?

    Anyone who gets distress from a front page headline needs to get a grip. The line all along has been that it will be announced 14 June, if on 14 June its announced that we're opening then who is seriously going to care about a Times article a week earlier? That's preposterous.

    As for "PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society" I'm not sure who you include as its members. I can see no valid reason for postponing 21 June and have made my position clear and so have almost all PBers one way or another it seems.
    And as for the PBGCAS everyone has cheered them on when they made a bonfire of our liberties. Right up until YOU decided that they had gone too far. By which time it was too late. Our liberties are in the dustbin.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,963

    Sandpit said:

    algarkirk said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Tim Farron looks done on the boundary changes, his Kendall stronghold and better rural wards split asunder.

    Let's face it, he is no great loss. A disastrous leader of the Lib Dems, at least as bad as most of his successors, with no interesting ideas that I can remember.
    His constituents seemed to like him
    Absolutely. He may be a poor Lib Dem leader but he seems a well liked constituency MP
    When was the last time a leader former leader of one of the three national parties removed by the electorate?
    Nick Clegg?
    Wasn't it that nice Jo Swinson 2019 (who deserved better)

    Indeed so, I stand corrected.

    (Although if I were to be overly pedantic, it could be argued that she wasn’t a former leader, and didn’t lead one of the the three largest parties ;) )
    2017 then.

    When my fellow constituents ousted Nick Clegg for the ghastly Jared O'Mara.
    That’s the one.

    How proud are you, to live in the place that elected such a total moron as their representative - and then replaced him with Jared O’Mara?
  • isamisam Posts: 38,526
    isam said:

    Regarding the cricketers ‘offensive’ tweets from years ago, by the logic being used if anyone heard a prospective, or current, England player making a similar joke in real life, or laughing at someone else making one, at any time in the past, shouldn’t they be suspended as well? Social media shouldn’t trump real life

    Anyway, I’ll be cheering NZ on this week
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 34,927
    MaxPB said:

    DavidL said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Meanwhile in the world of the clowncar

    "Plan to build UK trade ship will break WTO agreement, warn experts"
    "But while Number 10 has announced its “intention” to build the as yet unnamed ship in the UK, this would breach an agreement that Britain signed up to only eight months ago.

    Ministers failed to exclude the construction of civilian ships from the list of contracts that must be opened to global competition when it signed the WTO “government procurement agreement” (GPA) covering 48 countries last October."

    "Liz Truss, trade secretary, boasted in October that the GPA would allow British companies to keep bidding for public sector contracts around the world worth £1.3tr a year. Likewise, she said, overseas groups would be able to continue to bid for UK public sector contracts, “delivering better value for UK taxpayers”.

    But that could frustrate the government’s attempts to use a “Buy British” approach to building the new yacht. Item 47 of annex 4 of the UK schedule of the GPA explicitly says the procurement of “ships, boats and floating structures, except warships” must be advertised internationally and awarded without discrimination."

    https://www.ft.com/content/c77b7aa1-cebc-47c6-a04a-d21eef2d1d38#comments-anchor

    They truly are dumb bastards.

    Flaggy McFlagface is also a significant cut in capability for the RN. It will need a whole frigate's worth of crew for which the RN are not receiving any extra funding at a time when 2 x T23 frigates are harbour queens due to... er... lack of crew.
    If it is manned entirely by RN personnel surely we can class it as a warship for this purpose?
    Yes it's like Boris Force One. It's a military ship with a bunch of flags as the paint job. Honestly, who exactly is going to lodge a complaint anyway? It's a tiny contract.
    Jolyon Maugham?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,984
    DavidL said:

    isam said:

    Regarding the cricketers ‘offensive’ tweets from years ago, by the logic being used if anyone heard a prospective, or current, England player making a similar joke in real life, or laughing at someone else making one, at any time in the past, shouldn’t they be suspended as well? Social media shouldn’t trump real life

    The twenty first century waves hullo.
    The most surprising thing about the whole episode for me was that there was twitter 10 years ago!
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 65,118
    Woopsie.....

    BBC News - ANOM: Hundreds arrested in massive global crime sting
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-57394831
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 4,554
    TOPPING said:

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    Maybe. But if so it is shocking government discipline verging on criminal.

    My guess is that a quote from a "Cabinet Minister" doesn't end up on the front page of The Times by accident and without knowledge from No.10.

    They are fucking with us. Fair enough, for many this is no great surprise. But for many others it is seriously damaging to their mental health, financial situation and much else.

    If they now open, distress will have been caused by this headline, if they postpone, distress will be caused because they postpone.

    No doubt the PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society will cheer on whatever the govt decides and how they decide it.
    I've no doubt that they have discussed whether a short delay is (a) needed and (b) can be sold on the basis of the vaccination programme. George Eustace was talking about a short delay just now on R5. Personally I think they should not but I will not now be surprised if there is a delay. I think the preference may be to do away with the restrictions in one go, rather than the step 3.5 approach, and that may be how it is sold.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 97,887
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    algarkirk said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Tim Farron looks done on the boundary changes, his Kendall stronghold and better rural wards split asunder.

    Let's face it, he is no great loss. A disastrous leader of the Lib Dems, at least as bad as most of his successors, with no interesting ideas that I can remember.
    His constituents seemed to like him
    Absolutely. He may be a poor Lib Dem leader but he seems a well liked constituency MP
    When was the last time a leader former leader of one of the three national parties removed by the electorate?
    Nick Clegg?
    Wasn't it that nice Jo Swinson 2019 (who deserved better)

    Indeed so, I stand corrected.

    (Although if I were to be overly pedantic, it could be argued that she wasn’t a former leader, and didn’t lead one of the the three largest parties ;) )
    2017 then.

    When my fellow constituents ousted Nick Clegg for the ghastly Jared O'Mara.
    That’s the one.

    How proud are you, to live in the place that elected such a total moron as their representative - and then replaced him with Jared O’Mara?
    Still better than Sir Irvine Patnick who, for my eternal shame, I voted for in 1997.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,654
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    Maybe. But if so it is shocking government discipline verging on criminal.

    My guess is that a quote from a "Cabinet Minister" doesn't end up on the front page of The Times by accident and without knowledge from No.10.

    They are fucking with us. Fair enough, for many this is no great surprise. But for many others it is seriously damaging to their mental health, financial situation and much else.

    If they now open, distress will have been caused by this headline, if they postpone, distress will be caused because they postpone.

    No doubt the PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society will cheer on whatever the govt decides and how they decide it.
    I wholeheartedly disagree with you.

    If Hunt or Gove have a contrarian story they want to leak to the Times with their own spin then they can do so without the knowledge or approval of Number 10. That's rather the point, isn't it?

    Anyone who gets distress from a front page headline needs to get a grip. The line all along has been that it will be announced 14 June, if on 14 June its announced that we're opening then who is seriously going to care about a Times article a week earlier? That's preposterous.

    As for "PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society" I'm not sure who you include as its members. I can see no valid reason for postponing 21 June and have made my position clear and so have almost all PBers one way or another it seems.
    "Anyone who gets distress from a front page headline needs to get a grip."

    Do you tell people with mental illness to "pull themselves together" also?
    Just think.of all those poor people who buy the Daily Star..
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 64,406
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    Maybe. But if so it is shocking government discipline verging on criminal.

    My guess is that a quote from a "Cabinet Minister" doesn't end up on the front page of The Times by accident and without knowledge from No.10.

    They are fucking with us. Fair enough, for many this is no great surprise. But for many others it is seriously damaging to their mental health, financial situation and much else.

    If they now open, distress will have been caused by this headline, if they postpone, distress will be caused because they postpone.

    No doubt the PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society will cheer on whatever the govt decides and how they decide it.
    I wholeheartedly disagree with you.

    If Hunt or Gove have a contrarian story they want to leak to the Times with their own spin then they can do so without the knowledge or approval of Number 10. That's rather the point, isn't it?

    Anyone who gets distress from a front page headline needs to get a grip. The line all along has been that it will be announced 14 June, if on 14 June its announced that we're opening then who is seriously going to care about a Times article a week earlier? That's preposterous.

    As for "PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society" I'm not sure who you include as its members. I can see no valid reason for postponing 21 June and have made my position clear and so have almost all PBers one way or another it seems.
    "Anyone who gets distress from a front page headline needs to get a grip."

    Do you tell people with mental illness to "pull themselves together" also?
    No.

    But the front pages are designed to get attention for people to pick up the paper, or nowadays as clickbait.

    If you're not capable of handling that, then maybe stop paying attention to the papers. If something like newspaper speculation is so distressing to you, then stop reading the speculation and pay attention to what actually happens instead.
  • TazTaz Posts: 2,475

    IanB2 said:

    Also The Times speculates the PM might call a 2023 before the boundary changes are enacted to avoid any grief over MPs losing their constituencies.

    It would be very Boris Johnson.

    There you go, that’s one road out.

    Another is that the ‘public consultation’ is gamed and the boundaries look nothing like originally proposed.

    In any case, the review as proposed this morning Ain’t Gonna Happen.
    That's shifting the goalposts! Everyone knows the preliminary proposals aren't going to be implemented as is.
    They won’t happen. Mark my words!
    Why won’t they happen .
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,984

    TOPPING said:

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    Maybe. But if so it is shocking government discipline verging on criminal.

    My guess is that a quote from a "Cabinet Minister" doesn't end up on the front page of The Times by accident and without knowledge from No.10.

    They are fucking with us. Fair enough, for many this is no great surprise. But for many others it is seriously damaging to their mental health, financial situation and much else.

    If they now open, distress will have been caused by this headline, if they postpone, distress will be caused because they postpone.

    No doubt the PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society will cheer on whatever the govt decides and how they decide it.
    I've no doubt that they have discussed whether a short delay is (a) needed and (b) can be sold on the basis of the vaccination programme. George Eustace was talking about a short delay just now on R5. Personally I think they should not but I will not now be surprised if there is a delay. I think the preference may be to do away with the restrictions in one go, rather than the step 3.5 approach, and that may be how it is sold.
    I think a delay is coming. Whether that is a continuation of where we are or further relaxing but the maintenance of, say, masks and wfh.

    Either way I am shocked and amazed because all of PB is telling us that they should have opened up fully weeks ago.

    I will be interested to see the reaction of many on here if they decide to wait a while.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,963

    Woopsie.....

    BBC News - ANOM: Hundreds arrested in massive global crime sting
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-57394831

    One step better than EncroChat - this time the spooks created the ‘encrypted phone network’ in the first place!
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 21,873

    Also The Times speculates the PM might call a 2023 before the boundary changes are enacted to avoid any grief over MPs losing their constituencies.

    It would be very Boris Johnson.

    On the other hand it does give an opportunity to get rid of some trouble causers.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,197

    TOPPING said:

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    Maybe. But if so it is shocking government discipline verging on criminal.

    My guess is that a quote from a "Cabinet Minister" doesn't end up on the front page of The Times by accident and without knowledge from No.10.

    They are fucking with us. Fair enough, for many this is no great surprise. But for many others it is seriously damaging to their mental health, financial situation and much else.

    If they now open, distress will have been caused by this headline, if they postpone, distress will be caused because they postpone.

    No doubt the PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society will cheer on whatever the govt decides and how they decide it.
    This is what too much compliance breeds. Overweening arrogance and callousness. Ministers tweet vaccination numbers excitedly, because they are excited. Not just by the protection offered, but by the astonishing levels of compliance. Look at what we can make people do!

    I note that everyone is following a quote from a "Cabinet Minister".

    Is this the same reliable source that told us that the Chancellor was going to do absolutely nothing in the face of the lockdown - an hour before the Chancellor stood up to announce a tidal wave of money (furlough etc)? Or a different, reliable source?
  • isamisam Posts: 38,526
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    algarkirk said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Tim Farron looks done on the boundary changes, his Kendall stronghold and better rural wards split asunder.

    Let's face it, he is no great loss. A disastrous leader of the Lib Dems, at least as bad as most of his successors, with no interesting ideas that I can remember.
    His constituents seemed to like him
    Absolutely. He may be a poor Lib Dem leader but he seems a well liked constituency MP
    When was the last time a leader former leader of one of the three national parties removed by the electorate?
    Nick Clegg?
    Wasn't it that nice Jo Swinson 2019 (who deserved better)

    Indeed so, I stand corrected.

    (Although if I were to be overly pedantic, it could be argued that she wasn’t a former leader, and didn’t lead one of the the three largest parties ;) )
    2017 then.

    When my fellow constituents ousted Nick Clegg for the ghastly Jared O'Mara.
    That’s the one.

    How proud are you, to live in the place that elected such a total moron as their representative - and then replaced him with Jared O’Mara?
    Cleggs party didn’t get in the top three, seat or vote wise, at the the previous election, mind you
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,984
    edited June 8

    TOPPING said:

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    Maybe. But if so it is shocking government discipline verging on criminal.

    My guess is that a quote from a "Cabinet Minister" doesn't end up on the front page of The Times by accident and without knowledge from No.10.

    They are fucking with us. Fair enough, for many this is no great surprise. But for many others it is seriously damaging to their mental health, financial situation and much else.

    If they now open, distress will have been caused by this headline, if they postpone, distress will be caused because they postpone.

    No doubt the PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society will cheer on whatever the govt decides and how they decide it.
    This is what too much compliance breeds. Overweening arrogance and callousness. Ministers tweet vaccination numbers excitedly, because they are excited. Not just by the protection offered, but by the astonishing levels of compliance. Look at what we can make people do!

    I note that everyone is following a quote from a "Cabinet Minister".

    Is this the same reliable source that told us that the Chancellor was going to do absolutely nothing in the face of the lockdown - an hour before the Chancellor stood up to announce a tidal wave of money (furlough etc)? Or a different, reliable source?
    As I said, shockingly, bad government discipline, verging on almost criminally negligent.

    They have the nation's mental health in their hands and they are fucking with us.

    @Philip_Thompson thinks we should all pull ourselves together. Perhaps some of those here on PB who have opened up about their own mental health conditions this past year should respond.

    And on that - I must away. We rise at dawn (to be there for 9.30-ish, as it turns out).
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 21,873

    I feel so incredibly sorry for one of the presumably many whose futures are staked on the 'will we, won't we' of 21 June, via their businesses.

    The mental torture must be absolutely horrendous. Yesterday Johnson seemed to suggest it was going ahead as planned, and today we have the report in the Times of a delay. On/off, on/off. Incessantly, right up to the final moment, which it increasingly looks like will be a crushing disappointment.

    Talk about a roller coaster. Poor people.

    Have you been to any of the pubs you said wouldn't open ?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 97,887
    isam said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    algarkirk said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Tim Farron looks done on the boundary changes, his Kendall stronghold and better rural wards split asunder.

    Let's face it, he is no great loss. A disastrous leader of the Lib Dems, at least as bad as most of his successors, with no interesting ideas that I can remember.
    His constituents seemed to like him
    Absolutely. He may be a poor Lib Dem leader but he seems a well liked constituency MP
    When was the last time a leader former leader of one of the three national parties removed by the electorate?
    Nick Clegg?
    Wasn't it that nice Jo Swinson 2019 (who deserved better)

    Indeed so, I stand corrected.

    (Although if I were to be overly pedantic, it could be argued that she wasn’t a former leader, and didn’t lead one of the the three largest parties ;) )
    2017 then.

    When my fellow constituents ousted Nick Clegg for the ghastly Jared O'Mara.
    That’s the one.

    How proud are you, to live in the place that elected such a total moron as their representative - and then replaced him with Jared O’Mara?
    Cleggs party didn’t get in the top three, seat or vote wise, at the the previous election, mind you
    The original question was 'When was the last time a leader former leader of one of the three national parties removed by the electorate?'

    The SNP aren't a national party ergo the Lib Dems were the third largest national party by MPs.
  • glwglw Posts: 7,775
    Sandpit said:

    Woopsie.....

    BBC News - ANOM: Hundreds arrested in massive global crime sting
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-57394831

    One step better than EncroChat - this time the spooks created the ‘encrypted phone network’ in the first place!
    I'm always amazed at just how bad organised crime is at security.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 64,406

    isam said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    algarkirk said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Tim Farron looks done on the boundary changes, his Kendall stronghold and better rural wards split asunder.

    Let's face it, he is no great loss. A disastrous leader of the Lib Dems, at least as bad as most of his successors, with no interesting ideas that I can remember.
    His constituents seemed to like him
    Absolutely. He may be a poor Lib Dem leader but he seems a well liked constituency MP
    When was the last time a leader former leader of one of the three national parties removed by the electorate?
    Nick Clegg?
    Wasn't it that nice Jo Swinson 2019 (who deserved better)

    Indeed so, I stand corrected.

    (Although if I were to be overly pedantic, it could be argued that she wasn’t a former leader, and didn’t lead one of the the three largest parties ;) )
    2017 then.

    When my fellow constituents ousted Nick Clegg for the ghastly Jared O'Mara.
    That’s the one.

    How proud are you, to live in the place that elected such a total moron as their representative - and then replaced him with Jared O’Mara?
    Cleggs party didn’t get in the top three, seat or vote wise, at the the previous election, mind you
    The original question was 'When was the last time a leader former leader of one of the three national parties removed by the electorate?'

    The SNP aren't a national party ergo the Lib Dems were the third largest national party by MPs.
    Lib Dems are only national if you exclude Northern Ireland of course.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 20,197

    Data confirms the anecdotes that people are ill in hospital for less time:

    https://twitter.com/JamesWard73/status/1402027574214156290

    Down from 10 days to 7.5 days (and deaths are lower proportionally too).

    Odds are that it's partly a factor of the younger admissions (while younger echelons are less likely to get seriously ill, that still leaves a significant number getting ill, and when you effectively remove the older admissions by double-vaccination, it means the young are an ever-greater proportion).
    Partly the fact that the middle-aged admissions have had one dose and are partially protected, limiting the severity.

    I reckon it means that if there's any delay, it'll be tied to double-vaxxing levels. Every week sees another 2.5 million double-vaxxed and 1.5 million single-vaxxed (and single-vaxxing does help to a degree, and add that to the decreased base rate of hospitalisation of the younger and you get further benefit).

    Still need more data to see if hospital occupancy levels are trending up or if it's a blip. And if they are trending up, how steeply. Any rise, despite being exponential, will be progressively retarded by ever-increasing vaxxing (so the exponent gradually ticks downwards). If it's fairly shallow to start with, then couple that with the low level we reached, and there may not be much extra pressure even with a rise. Given the ever-eroding compliance and there may not be much point to a delay. Needs more data.

    On Thursday, NHS England publish the monthly data-by-age-range, which will also be useful to see.

    What's your guesstimate to when the % take-up on the vaccine will tail off?

    Wales will be a useful barometer on this. We are not far off Israel's take up number, now.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 21,873
    TOPPING said:

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    Maybe. But if so it is shocking government discipline verging on criminal.

    My guess is that a quote from a "Cabinet Minister" doesn't end up on the front page of The Times by accident and without knowledge from No.10.

    They are fucking with us. Fair enough, for many this is no great surprise. But for many others it is seriously damaging to their mental health, financial situation and much else.

    If they now open, distress will have been caused by this headline, if they postpone, distress will be caused because they postpone.

    No doubt the PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society will cheer on whatever the govt decides and how they decide it.
    I don't think we have 'discipline' in anything political these days.

    Scheming and gossiping being more fun.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 3,835

    - Constituencies representing natural communities and areas
    - Equal population-sized constituencies
    - One MP per constituency

    Pick two.

    As a country, we've gone for numbers 2 and 3, and we try to pretend we go for number 1 as well, despite being as convincing as a puppy next to a big poo on the floor trying to look completely innocent.

    We could validly go with a system starting at Land's End and counting population inwards, cutting it off down the middle of a street if necessary, and iterating to the next seat. Forget the regular pretence that actually Reading North and some villages and Reading South and some other villages were a natural community but that some population growth in Slough means that actually NOW Reading West and some villages is a natural community instead, as well as Reading East and some villages.

    It'd be gratifying for constituencies to have some more honest names like "Abingdon and the bits of Oxfordshire left over from the other seats" so we don't have to try to handwave justify things.

    vaguer or more historical names? I mean, in this example, Oxford West and Abingdon does describe the land covered, as might North-East Vale of White Horse or Abingdon and Vale of White Horse.

    Banbury, which currently includes both Banbury and Bicester, is broadly Cherwell district anyway.

    Almost as if the names ...
    Technically, OxWAb was "North East Vale of White Horse plus some of Oxford plus a bit of Cherwell" Cut across three districts (still does on the new proposals) and could have managed to take in some of the other two Oxfordshire Districts with just one ward from each.
    I'm almost disappointed they didn't do that. Would have been funky to see.

    "Oxford West and Abingdon" was also a bit harsh on Kidlington. Which was certainly not west of Oxford or near Abingdon (Kidlington being north of Oxford while Abingdon is south).

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 68,480
    The only way these boundary changes don't happen is if Boris calls a 2023 election and messes it up so badly we get another parliament similar to 17 - 19.
    It's possible, but unlikely.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 97,887
    glw said:

    Sandpit said:

    Woopsie.....

    BBC News - ANOM: Hundreds arrested in massive global crime sting
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-57394831

    One step better than EncroChat - this time the spooks created the ‘encrypted phone network’ in the first place!
    I'm always amazed at just how bad organised crime is at security.
    Yeah, this did make me chuckle.

    The Justice Department said on Monday that it had seized much of the ransom that a major U.S. pipeline operator had paid last month to a Russian hacking collective, turning the tables on the hackers by reaching into a digital wallet to snatch back millions of dollars in cryptocurrency.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/07/us/politics/pipeline-attack.html
  • MattWMattW Posts: 10,808

    "Other countries, including the US, Canada, Japan and Australia, have, by contrast, ensured that their GPA agreements exclude civil shipbuilding."

    Could it be that the UK can't negotiate for shit?

    Have we changed our WTA terms?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 97,887

    isam said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    algarkirk said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Tim Farron looks done on the boundary changes, his Kendall stronghold and better rural wards split asunder.

    Let's face it, he is no great loss. A disastrous leader of the Lib Dems, at least as bad as most of his successors, with no interesting ideas that I can remember.
    His constituents seemed to like him
    Absolutely. He may be a poor Lib Dem leader but he seems a well liked constituency MP
    When was the last time a leader former leader of one of the three national parties removed by the electorate?
    Nick Clegg?
    Wasn't it that nice Jo Swinson 2019 (who deserved better)

    Indeed so, I stand corrected.

    (Although if I were to be overly pedantic, it could be argued that she wasn’t a former leader, and didn’t lead one of the the three largest parties ;) )
    2017 then.

    When my fellow constituents ousted Nick Clegg for the ghastly Jared O'Mara.
    That’s the one.

    How proud are you, to live in the place that elected such a total moron as their representative - and then replaced him with Jared O’Mara?
    Cleggs party didn’t get in the top three, seat or vote wise, at the the previous election, mind you
    The original question was 'When was the last time a leader former leader of one of the three national parties removed by the electorate?'

    The SNP aren't a national party ergo the Lib Dems were the third largest national party by MPs.
    Lib Dems are only national if you exclude Northern Ireland of course.
    Well they have a sister party in NI, The Alliance.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Ireland_Liberal_Democrats
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,741
    alex_ said:

    Little comment on the political impact in Wales of losing 1/5 of their seats (however justified on the numbers)?

    Traditionally Wales has been over-represented (ie had more, smaller seats) to reflect its status as a nation or country, just as smaller American states are over-represented in their Senate. Scotland was the same until devolution, but Welsh devolution was far more limited in terms of powers. If I were Plaid Cymru, I'd be planning campaigns around how this reduction proves the Conservatives hate Wales. If I were Labour I'd be demanding more powers are devolved to Cardiff.

    CCHQ under Cameron/Osborne got frightfully upset because the Tories were locked out of Wales, but since they started actually campaigning there, blue MPs were elected once more. Now there are 22 Labour MPs in Wales and 14 Conservative (and four PC).

  • MattWMattW Posts: 10,808
    edited June 8

    IanB2 said:

    RobD said:

    IanB2 said:

    tlg86 said:

    In Berkshire, Hampshire, and Surrey, it has been necessary to propose two constituencies that cross county boundaries. We have proposed one constituency that contains electors from both Berkshire and Surrey, which combines the town of Windsor and the town of Egham. We have also proposed one constituency that contains electors from both Surrey and Hampshire, which combines the town of Bordon from the district of East Hampshire in a constituency with the towns of Farnham and Haslemere in Surrey’s Borough of Waverley.

    In Sussex, it has been necessary to propose one constituency that crosses the boundary between East Sussex and West Sussex. We have proposed that this constituency contain electors from three districts (Lewes, Mid Sussex, and Wealden), combining the towns of East Grinstead and Uckfield.


    I predict a riot.

    Both very good illustrations of the consequences of working to a very rigid and relatively narrow allowable range in terms of electors - something, until the Tories got their hands on the rules - that in the past the Commission had some scope to avoid when there were strong enough community justification to deploy a bit of extra flexibility.
    I think it's a reasonable requirement that seats be of equal size. Especially immediately after a redrawing of the boundaries.
    community ties
    No longer exist.

    We've all got cars, travel all over the place and vote for Boris against evil Corbyn.

    I'll put my more sanguine post another way. No one gives a shit which constituency they're in.

    It's the MPs who will kick off about this. And political anoraks. No one else will care.
    Not sure about that, anywhere.

    At the least people living in social housing stay for a very long time.

    Though there is also a shifting, rootless demographic :smile: .
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818

    TOPPING said:

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    Maybe. But if so it is shocking government discipline verging on criminal.

    My guess is that a quote from a "Cabinet Minister" doesn't end up on the front page of The Times by accident and without knowledge from No.10.

    They are fucking with us. Fair enough, for many this is no great surprise. But for many others it is seriously damaging to their mental health, financial situation and much else.

    If they now open, distress will have been caused by this headline, if they postpone, distress will be caused because they postpone.

    No doubt the PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society will cheer on whatever the govt decides and how they decide it.
    This is what too much compliance breeds. Overweening arrogance and callousness. Ministers tweet vaccination numbers excitedly, because they are excited. Not just by the protection offered, but by the astonishing levels of compliance. Look at what we can make people do!

    I note that everyone is following a quote from a "Cabinet Minister".

    Is this the same reliable source that told us that the Chancellor was going to do absolutely nothing in the face of the lockdown - an hour before the Chancellor stood up to announce a tidal wave of money (furlough etc)? Or a different, reliable source?
    Ah, so we can expect Number 10 to junk this story soon. That's a relief!
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 64,406
    Looking at the data it looks like the UK could overtake the USA in "share of population fully vaccinated" today.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 68,480

    Data confirms the anecdotes that people are ill in hospital for less time:

    https://twitter.com/JamesWard73/status/1402027574214156290

    Down from 10 days to 7.5 days (and deaths are lower proportionally too).

    Odds are that it's partly a factor of the younger admissions (while younger echelons are less likely to get seriously ill, that still leaves a significant number getting ill, and when you effectively remove the older admissions by double-vaccination, it means the young are an ever-greater proportion).
    Partly the fact that the middle-aged admissions have had one dose and are partially protected, limiting the severity.

    I reckon it means that if there's any delay, it'll be tied to double-vaxxing levels. Every week sees another 2.5 million double-vaxxed and 1.5 million single-vaxxed (and single-vaxxing does help to a degree, and add that to the decreased base rate of hospitalisation of the younger and you get further benefit).

    Still need more data to see if hospital occupancy levels are trending up or if it's a blip. And if they are trending up, how steeply. Any rise, despite being exponential, will be progressively retarded by ever-increasing vaxxing (so the exponent gradually ticks downwards). If it's fairly shallow to start with, then couple that with the low level we reached, and there may not be much extra pressure even with a rise. Given the ever-eroding compliance and there may not be much point to a delay. Needs more data.

    On Thursday, NHS England publish the monthly data-by-age-range, which will also be useful to see.

    What's your guesstimate to when the % take-up on the vaccine will tail off?

    Wales will be a useful barometer on this. We are not far off Israel's take up number, now.
    Won't welsh takeup be a bit higher than the UK as a whole ? It's a bit older and whiter than average I think..
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 3,835

    - Constituencies representing natural communities and areas
    - Equal population-sized constituencies
    - One MP per constituency

    Pick two.

    As a country, we've gone for numbers 2 and 3, and we try to pretend we go for number 1 as well, despite being as convincing as a puppy next to a big poo on the floor trying to look completely innocent.

    We could validly go with a system starting at Land's End and counting population inwards, cutting it off down the middle of a street if necessary, and iterating to the next seat. Forget the regular pretence that actually Reading North and some villages and Reading South and some other villages were a natural community but that some population growth in Slough means that actually NOW Reading West and some villages is a natural community instead, as well as Reading East and some villages.

    It'd be gratifying for constituencies to have some more honest names like "Abingdon and the bits of Oxfordshire left over from the other seats" so we don't have to try to handwave justify things.

    vaguer or more historical names? I mean, in this example, Oxford West and Abingdon does describe the land covered, as might North-East Vale of White Horse or Abingdon and Vale of White Horse.

    Banbury, which currently includes both Banbury and Bicester, is broadly Cherwell district anyway.

    Almost as if the names ...
    Technically, OxWAb was "North East Vale of White Horse plus some of Oxford plus a bit of Cherwell" Cut across three districts (still does on the new proposals) and could have managed to take in some of the other two Oxfordshire Districts with just one ward from each.
    I'm almost disappointed they didn't do that. Would have been funky to see.

    "Oxford West and Abingdon" was also a bit harsh on Kidlington. Which was certainly not west of Oxford or near Abingdon (Kidlington being north of Oxford while Abingdon is south).

    District-wise, the seats careen merrily around.

    Wantage and Didcot is some of Vale of White Horse and some of South Oxfordshire
    Witney is some of Vale of White Horse and some of West Oxfordshire
    OxWAb is some of Vale of White Horse, and some of Oxford (losing its Cherwell wards)
    Bicester is some of West Oxfordshire and some of Cherwell
    Banbury is some more of West Oxfordshire and some more of Cherwell.

    Henley is all in one District, being the parts of South Oxfordshire left over from Wantage and Didcot
    As is Oxford East, being the rest of Oxford left over from OxWAb
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 52,013
    Alpha succeeded because it delayed the immune response vs earlier variants, so when the immune response finally did kick in it did so more vigorously, resulting in greater coughing/sneezing and hence transmission - (pre-print, not peer reviewed):

    Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants, including the globally successful B.1.1.7 lineage, suggests viral adaptations to host selective pressures resulting in more efficient transmission. Although much effort has focused on Spike adaptation for viral entry and adaptive immune escape, B.1.1.7 mutations outside Spike likely contribute to enhance transmission. Here we used unbiased abundance proteomics, phosphoproteomics, mRNA sequencing and viral replication assays to show that B.1.1.7 isolates more effectively suppress host innate immune responses in airway epithelial cells. We found that B.1.1.7 isolates have dramatically increased subgenomic RNA and protein levels of Orf9b and Orf6, both known innate immune antagonists. Expression of Orf9b alone suppressed the innate immune response through interaction with TOM70, a mitochondrial protein required for RNA sensing adaptor MAVS activation, and Orf9b binding and activity was regulated via phosphorylation. We conclude that B.1.1.7 has evolved beyond the Spike coding region to more effectively antagonise host innate immune responses through upregulation of specific subgenomic RNA synthesis and increased protein expression of key innate immune antagonists. We propose that more effective innate immune antagonism increases the likelihood of successful B.1.1.7 transmission, and may increase in vivo replication and duration of infection.

    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.06.446826v1

    via:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/07/health/covid-alpha-uk-variant.html (the Cliffs Notes version)
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,280
    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    isam said:

    Regarding the cricketers ‘offensive’ tweets from years ago, by the logic being used if anyone heard a prospective, or current, England player making a similar joke in real life, or laughing at someone else making one, at any time in the past, shouldn’t they be suspended as well? Social media shouldn’t trump real life

    The twenty first century waves hullo.
    The most surprising thing about the whole episode for me was that there was twitter 10 years ago!
    And PB 7 years before that!
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 65,118
    First it was actors can't play gay characters unless they are gay, now journalists shouldn't be introducing segments on news shows about such issues....

    https://order-order.com/2021/06/08/pink-news-ceo-picks-fight-with-today-programmes-justin-webb-over-stonewall-controversy/
  • The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    I agree it’s a very weak story by The Times, but it’s unhelpful in the extreme, as people are wont to believe The Times. So the government needs to get in front of it.
    The newspaper of broken record

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,490
    edited June 8
    Looks like the boundary changes will see the usual shift in MPs from the North, Scotland and Wales to London and the South.

    They would not benefit the Tories under Boris as much as they would have done the Tories under Cameron a decade ago however. For example, at the last general election the Tories got a higher voteshare in the East Midlands, which will get just 1 extra MP, than in the South East which will get 7 extra MPs.

    Labour also did better in London in 2019, which will get 2 extra MPs, than Wales, the North and West Midlands which will lose MPs overall. So Starmer's London based Labour party having lost the Red Wall also is less damaged by boundary reviews.

    There will be some backbench opposition to the changes however, Michael Fabricant this morning for one is very angry at the proposal to split his Lichfield seat in two
    https://twitter.com/Mike_Fabricant/status/1402165360208580610?s=20
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,963

    Data confirms the anecdotes that people are ill in hospital for less time:

    https://twitter.com/JamesWard73/status/1402027574214156290

    Down from 10 days to 7.5 days (and deaths are lower proportionally too).

    Odds are that it's partly a factor of the younger admissions (while younger echelons are less likely to get seriously ill, that still leaves a significant number getting ill, and when you effectively remove the older admissions by double-vaccination, it means the young are an ever-greater proportion).
    Partly the fact that the middle-aged admissions have had one dose and are partially protected, limiting the severity.

    I reckon it means that if there's any delay, it'll be tied to double-vaxxing levels. Every week sees another 2.5 million double-vaxxed and 1.5 million single-vaxxed (and single-vaxxing does help to a degree, and add that to the decreased base rate of hospitalisation of the younger and you get further benefit).

    Still need more data to see if hospital occupancy levels are trending up or if it's a blip. And if they are trending up, how steeply. Any rise, despite being exponential, will be progressively retarded by ever-increasing vaxxing (so the exponent gradually ticks downwards). If it's fairly shallow to start with, then couple that with the low level we reached, and there may not be much extra pressure even with a rise. Given the ever-eroding compliance and there may not be much point to a delay. Needs more data.

    On Thursday, NHS England publish the monthly data-by-age-range, which will also be useful to see.

    What's your guesstimate to when the % take-up on the vaccine will tail off?

    Wales will be a useful barometer on this. We are not far off Israel's take up number, now.
    Here’s a graph of the top few countries. Israel have done almost nothing for two months, are on the secondary school children now. USA tailing off at around half the population, China rapidly accelerating (from a low base, mostly with the Sinovac dud) and everyone else in pretty much a straight line.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 64,406

    isam said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    algarkirk said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Tim Farron looks done on the boundary changes, his Kendall stronghold and better rural wards split asunder.

    Let's face it, he is no great loss. A disastrous leader of the Lib Dems, at least as bad as most of his successors, with no interesting ideas that I can remember.
    His constituents seemed to like him
    Absolutely. He may be a poor Lib Dem leader but he seems a well liked constituency MP
    When was the last time a leader former leader of one of the three national parties removed by the electorate?
    Nick Clegg?
    Wasn't it that nice Jo Swinson 2019 (who deserved better)

    Indeed so, I stand corrected.

    (Although if I were to be overly pedantic, it could be argued that she wasn’t a former leader, and didn’t lead one of the the three largest parties ;) )
    2017 then.

    When my fellow constituents ousted Nick Clegg for the ghastly Jared O'Mara.
    That’s the one.

    How proud are you, to live in the place that elected such a total moron as their representative - and then replaced him with Jared O’Mara?
    Cleggs party didn’t get in the top three, seat or vote wise, at the the previous election, mind you
    The original question was 'When was the last time a leader former leader of one of the three national parties removed by the electorate?'

    The SNP aren't a national party ergo the Lib Dems were the third largest national party by MPs.
    Lib Dems are only national if you exclude Northern Ireland of course.
    Well they have a sister party in NI, The Alliance.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Ireland_Liberal_Democrats
    The Alliance MP sat on the opposition benches 2010-2015 so I don't think you can count them.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,741
    glw said:

    Sandpit said:

    Woopsie.....

    BBC News - ANOM: Hundreds arrested in massive global crime sting
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-57394831

    One step better than EncroChat - this time the spooks created the ‘encrypted phone network’ in the first place!
    I'm always amazed at just how bad organised crime is at security.
    Not just organised crime. Britain and America have been doing the same with whole countries by flogging them insecure cipher machines for the past 60 years. We've still been taken by surprise by almost every war that has broken out since but hey, who's counting?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 64,406

    TOPPING said:

    The Times briefing today is an effing disgrace.

    Can we have Boris on the record ASAP. As Morris and Alex have pointed out, we are doing better than even the BEST CASE Sage scenario.

    Boris is on the record as saying nothing in the data to postpone the date.

    Until he says otherwise I'd take anonymous briefings from "a Cabinet Minister" with an entire box of salt.
    Maybe. But if so it is shocking government discipline verging on criminal.

    My guess is that a quote from a "Cabinet Minister" doesn't end up on the front page of The Times by accident and without knowledge from No.10.

    They are fucking with us. Fair enough, for many this is no great surprise. But for many others it is seriously damaging to their mental health, financial situation and much else.

    If they now open, distress will have been caused by this headline, if they postpone, distress will be caused because they postpone.

    No doubt the PB Govt Covid Appreciation Society will cheer on whatever the govt decides and how they decide it.
    This is what too much compliance breeds. Overweening arrogance and callousness. Ministers tweet vaccination numbers excitedly, because they are excited. Not just by the protection offered, but by the astonishing levels of compliance. Look at what we can make people do!

    I note that everyone is following a quote from a "Cabinet Minister".

    Is this the same reliable source that told us that the Chancellor was going to do absolutely nothing in the face of the lockdown - an hour before the Chancellor stood up to announce a tidal wave of money (furlough etc)? Or a different, reliable source?
    Ah, so we can expect Number 10 to junk this story soon. That's a relief!
    Yes, its already been junked as "too early to say" (which was always the official line) and on Monday 14 June when the announcement is actually made there'll be something to say then.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 11,156
    Taz said:

    IanB2 said:

    Also The Times speculates the PM might call a 2023 before the boundary changes are enacted to avoid any grief over MPs losing their constituencies.

    It would be very Boris Johnson.

    There you go, that’s one road out.

    Another is that the ‘public consultation’ is gamed and the boundaries look nothing like originally proposed.

    In any case, the review as proposed this morning Ain’t Gonna Happen.
    That's shifting the goalposts! Everyone knows the preliminary proposals aren't going to be implemented as is.
    They won’t happen. Mark my words!
    Why won’t they happen .
    Some boundaries in some constituencies will change at some undefined point in the future.

    However, when that point is, and what those boundaries are, will bear little or no resemblance to the paper released today.

    Ergo, forget about it.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195

    First it was actors can't play gay characters unless they are gay, now journalists shouldn't be introducing segments on news shows about such issues....

    https://order-order.com/2021/06/08/pink-news-ceo-picks-fight-with-today-programmes-justin-webb-over-stonewall-controversy/

    On an issue of less than burning importance for 99% of the population
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,963

    glw said:

    Sandpit said:

    Woopsie.....

    BBC News - ANOM: Hundreds arrested in massive global crime sting
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-57394831

    One step better than EncroChat - this time the spooks created the ‘encrypted phone network’ in the first place!
    I'm always amazed at just how bad organised crime is at security.
    Yeah, this did make me chuckle.

    The Justice Department said on Monday that it had seized much of the ransom that a major U.S. pipeline operator had paid last month to a Russian hacking collective, turning the tables on the hackers by reaching into a digital wallet to snatch back millions of dollars in cryptocurrency.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/07/us/politics/pipeline-attack.html
    Bitcoin is good for moving money around for all sorts of activities, but really bad at moving “hot” money that the FBI are actively looking for.

    Looks like the hackers weren’t prepared to move that much through the laundry, nor for the reaction by the authorities. They’ve got away with less than a million of their $4.5m heist.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 25,225
    Floater said:

    First it was actors can't play gay characters unless they are gay, now journalists shouldn't be introducing segments on news shows about such issues....

    https://order-order.com/2021/06/08/pink-news-ceo-picks-fight-with-today-programmes-justin-webb-over-stonewall-controversy/

    On an issue of less than burning importance for 99% of the population
    With historical characters, how would one know?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 64,406

    First it was actors can't play gay characters unless they are gay, now journalists shouldn't be introducing segments on news shows about such issues....

    https://order-order.com/2021/06/08/pink-news-ceo-picks-fight-with-today-programmes-justin-webb-over-stonewall-controversy/

    I think the more amusing objection is complaining about inviting "two different gay people [to talk] about trans issues […] without a single trans voice"

    If he's saying that he's incapable of representing trans people's voice then maybe he shouldn't step forward to do so, so someone else can be invited instead?
This discussion has been closed.