The polls have been so static it’s hard to bet on a LAB lead in 3 weeks – politicalbetting.com

Andy_JS said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

"@NewsForAllUK

London’s famous New Year’s Eve fireworks display has been cancelled for a second year due to the pandemic."

Insane. Sadiq Khan. FFS

BBC confirmation

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58882954

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

"@NewsForAllUK

London’s famous New Year’s Eve fireworks display has been cancelled for a second year due to the pandemic."

Insane. Sadiq Khan. FFS

He still won't get the night tube running either. The guy is so useless. Women are being put in danger and all he does is talk about it. No action at all.

I don't know anyone that has a single good word for him. God knows who voted for him

And this is universal. It's not just my friends - left and right - who despise him, it's everyone. He is a void. He is inert. He doesn't do anything. His leadership through this crisis has been - nil. Nought. Invisible.

Labour will probably make him leader after Starmer

Theuniondivvie said:

Andy_JS said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

"@NewsForAllUK

London’s famous New Year’s Eve fireworks display has been cancelled for a second year due to the pandemic."

Insane. Sadiq Khan. FFS

BBC confirmation

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58882954

Were the New Year fireworks that big a thing? A whiff of the Gone With the Wind ‘they’re preventing me watching a film I’ve never watched and never will watch’ manufactured outrage.

kle4 said:

Leon said:

Scott_xP said:

At last, an explicit admission that the Johnson government negotiated the WA in bad faith, never had any intention of keeping its word, and lied to the British public in the 2019 election. Quite a moment. https://twitter.com/Dominic2306/status/1448018739623038982

You are reading what Big Dom actually says, right?


"For all the cant about international law, a/ states break it every week, b/ the idea it's the epitome of morality is low grade student politics pushed by lawyers/officials to constrain politics they oppose. Govt shd focus on solving problems & chill viz "i/n law" viz NI #IMBill2"

"Shd we generally stick to deals? Of course. Sometimes break them? Of course. Just like the EU, US, China and every other state does. International diplomacy cannot be judged by the standards of a student duel, and lawyers are hired help not the masters"

I actually kind of agree with him. Not in the sense of simply 'chilling' about it, but the way it is often referred to as immutable and universally agreed set of principles and very specific actions is frequently nonsense. Some of the worst regimes on earth would claim to totally be respecting international law in their actions regarding other nations.

In all honesty the idea you don't break treaties the instant it is convenient for you is probably pretty recent in some ways, if a cursory look at medieval history is any indication. Not that we should do so flippantly, not at all, but talk around international law is very often posturing.

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

Foxy said:

Lockdown worked for me. Hardly any traffic on the way to work. Saved me 30 min every day.

You weren’t actually locked down though were you? So what you are really saying is that other people’s lockdown worked for you. I realise that you had to go into work because you are a ward doctor, but given the discussion is about how lockdown affected you, I don’t see how your comment reveals anything much, other than you like traffic-free roads.

Quite. These people who say "oh lockdown was fine" then you realise they weren't actually locked down at all, during working hours

I work at home, alone, and I live alone. I'm pretty fucking resilient but add that situation to a destroyed social world with no travel, no pubs, no restaurants, no lovers, no crowds, no embracing, no touching, no Christmas, no nothing, and suddenly you have - for me - an extreme dystopia, and all of this happening during one of the bleakest winters for a long while

For many many weeks my entire social life, all of it, consisted of one single walk in a freezing, sleeting London park with a friend, for an hour, once a week, with a thermos of mulled wine, and then back home again to the silence and the loneliness.

Inexpressibly bleak and it drove me close to self destruction

And yet my situation was better than many people: trapped in small flats with a dysfunctional marriage or a deeply unhappy family. That was surely worse. And as for domestic violence...

It was deeply horrific for all too many

FF43 said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

Scott_xP said:

At last, an explicit admission that the Johnson government negotiated the WA in bad faith, never had any intention of keeping its word, and lied to the British public in the 2019 election. Quite a moment. https://twitter.com/Dominic2306/status/1448018739623038982

You are reading what Big Dom actually says, right?


"For all the cant about international law, a/ states break it every week, b/ the idea it's the epitome of morality is low grade student politics pushed by lawyers/officials to constrain politics they oppose. Govt shd focus on solving problems & chill viz "i/n law" viz NI #IMBill2"

"Shd we generally stick to deals? Of course. Sometimes break them? Of course. Just like the EU, US, China and every other state does. International diplomacy cannot be judged by the standards of a student duel, and lawyers are hired help not the masters"

I actually kind of agree with him. Not in the sense of simply 'chilling' about it, but the way it is often referred to as immutable and universally agreed set of principles and very specific actions is frequently nonsense. Some of the worst regimes on earth would claim to totally be respecting international law in their actions regarding other nations.

In all honesty the idea you don't break treaties the instant it is convenient for you is probably pretty recent in some ways, if a cursory look at medieval history is any indication. Not that we should do so flippantly, not at all, but talk around international law is very often posturing.

In medieval history, they went to actual war when one side broke a treaty. Not sure that's a good analogy.

Also I don't think countries do deliberately break treaties very often. They might allow treaties to fall into disuse, if the other side doesn't care too much, through a different interpretation of the obligations and so on.

The purpose of almost any treaty is to get the other side to commit to do something, or to not do something, when they may not be willing when it comes to the point. Precisely the situation of the NIP. These are serious commitments and treated as such.

Leon said:

I work at home, alone, and I live alone. I'm pretty fucking resilient but add that situation to a destroyed social world with no travel, no pubs, no restaurants, no lovers, no crowds, no embracing, no touching, no Christmas, no nothing, and suddenly you have - for me - an extreme dystopia, and all of this happening during one of the bleakest winters for a long while

Farooq said:

bigjohnowls said:

SKS fans please explain how this guy is not a complete useless nonentity.

Can even make crashing a truck boring and humourless


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-58887168

I thought you were a big fan of Starmer?

bigjohnowls said:

SKS fans please explain how this guy is not a complete useless nonentity.

Can even make crashing a truck boring and humourless


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-58887168

MaxPB said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Andy_JS said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

"@NewsForAllUK

London’s famous New Year’s Eve fireworks display has been cancelled for a second year due to the pandemic."

Insane. Sadiq Khan. FFS

BBC confirmation

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58882954

Were the New Year fireworks that big a thing? A whiff of the Gone With the Wind ‘they’re preventing me watching a film I’ve never watched and never will watch’ manufactured outrage.

Fairly big, I know lots of people who went every year. Not something I would do personally but I think they sold out every year and tourists really loved seeing them and this year London is going to have loads of tourists.

rottenborough said:

Anabobazina said:

rottenborough said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

"@NewsForAllUK

London’s famous New Year’s Eve fireworks display has been cancelled for a second year due to the pandemic."

Insane. Sadiq Khan. FFS

He still won't get the night tube running either. The guy is so useless. Women are being put in danger and all he does is talk about it. No action at all.

I don't know anyone that has a single good word for him. God knows who voted for him

And this is universal. It's not just my friends - left and right - who despise him, it's everyone. He is a void. He is inert. He doesn't do anything. His leadership through this crisis has been - nil. Nought. Invisible.

Labour will probably make him leader after Starmer

I have been wondering for years why he is talked about now and again in Labour circles as a future leader (there was a lot of such talk near end of Miliband's term for example).

Utterly beyond me.

Yes, he’s rubbish. His one key achievement was actually delivering the Night Tube after Boris had faffed about for ages and blundered through the union negotiations with characteristic incompetence.

Now he is cocking up his solitary success by mothballing the Night Tube when the rest of London is buzzing.

It’s quite weird, and pathetic.

Oh well, at least we know that there is no way Burnham will let Khan run for the leadership unopposed.

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

Foxy said:

Lockdown worked for me. Hardly any traffic on the way to work. Saved me 30 min every day.

You weren’t actually locked down though were you? So what you are really saying is that other people’s lockdown worked for you. I realise that you had to go into work because you are a ward doctor, but given the discussion is about how lockdown affected you, I don’t see how your comment reveals anything much, other than you like traffic-free roads.

Quite. These people who say "oh lockdown was fine" then you realise they weren't actually locked down at all, during working hours

I work at home, alone, and I live alone. I'm pretty fucking resilient but add that situation to a destroyed social world with no travel, no pubs, no restaurants, no lovers, no crowds, no embracing, no touching, no Christmas, no nothing, and suddenly you have - for me - an extreme dystopia, and all of this happening during one of the bleakest winters for a long while

For many many weeks my entire social life, all of it, consisted of one single walk in a freezing, sleeting London park with a friend, for an hour, once a week, with a thermos of mulled wine, and then back home again to the silence and the loneliness.

Inexpressibly bleak and it drove me close to self destruction

And yet my situation was better than many people: trapped in small flats with a dysfunctional marriage or a deeply unhappy family. That was surely worse. And as for domestic violence...

It was seriously horrific for all too many

MaxPB said:

Anabobazina said:

pigeon said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

stodge said:

SandyRentool said:

I would argue that the social benefits of Covid, such as the WFH revolution and people having an opportunity to reprioritise in their lives, more than outweighs the social harms.

Yet there are those for whom the periods of enforced isolation have been purgatory whether because they are alone or with someone with whom they no longer want to live or for a myriad other reasons.

Many have, as you say, coped not only well but prospered. Getting off the commuting treadmill has been a positive personal benefit but I'd never want to generalise it.

It's clear some on here have found it hard going at times and if this forum has provided some much needed contact I'm delighted we've all managed to help each other through this.

Lockdown was horrific. Depressing. Unbearable. I’m still astounded whenever I hear anyone suggest that they enjoyed it. A closed world is grim.

I'm with you. Lockdown 3 took me close to a total breakdown, and it has left permanent mental scars on me. I can never do it again. I would rather take my chances with a plague + vaccine

I have plenty of friends who weathered most of it just fine (generally richer, older people in big houses, often outside London) tho by the end, even the most relaxed were beginning to fray, in quirky ways

I have other friends who were exactly like us. They hated most of it, and they suffered accordingly. I know of at least 2 divorces

Lockdowns were pretty bad. At least I could still go to work (in manufacturing, so continued to go in throughout the entire horror,) and I have a husband to come home to afterwards. I shudder to think what it was like for single people working from home in officey jobs - for most of them the prolonged isolation must've been dreadful.

A mate of mine falls into that category. He’s quite an introverted guy but absolutely hated lockdown WFH, it took him to the brink of depression. Extremely lonely.

My wife's best friend moved into our spare bedroom in lockdown 3 because she's single, lives alone and her office was shut. She just needed some actual human contact with real people. It was nice to have her stay as well after essentially a year of it being just me and my wife alone together every evening. I love her but it's not easy to only spend time with the same person all day and then all evening and night for months on end.

Anabobazina said:

MaxPB said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Andy_JS said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

"@NewsForAllUK

London’s famous New Year’s Eve fireworks display has been cancelled for a second year due to the pandemic."

Insane. Sadiq Khan. FFS

BBC confirmation

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58882954

Were the New Year fireworks that big a thing? A whiff of the Gone With the Wind ‘they’re preventing me watching a film I’ve never watched and never will watch’ manufactured outrage.

Fairly big, I know lots of people who went every year. Not something I would do personally but I think they sold out every year and tourists really loved seeing them and this year London is going to have loads of tourists.

Yes. Not my bag but a big deal for many. I live on a hill in north London and would often watch them from afar if we hosted guests. Seems a ludicrous decision.

Mexicanpete said:

.

bigjohnowls said:

SKS fans please explain how this guy is not a complete useless nonentity.

Can even make crashing a truck boring and humourless


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-58887168

It was a Kinnock falling into the sea, Milliband bacon sandwich moment, which is why Starmer is dumbfounded.

I agree totally and utterly unacceptable behaviour. One has to ask who is advising Starmer, Boris Johnson? A stupid, stupid stunt.

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

MaxPB said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Andy_JS said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

"@NewsForAllUK

London’s famous New Year’s Eve fireworks display has been cancelled for a second year due to the pandemic."

Insane. Sadiq Khan. FFS

BBC confirmation

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58882954

Were the New Year fireworks that big a thing? A whiff of the Gone With the Wind ‘they’re preventing me watching a film I’ve never watched and never will watch’ manufactured outrage.

Fairly big, I know lots of people who went every year. Not something I would do personally but I think they sold out every year and tourists really loved seeing them and this year London is going to have loads of tourists.

Yes. Not my bag but a big deal for many. I live on a hill in north London and would often watch them from afar if we hosted guests. Seems a ludicrous decision.

Utterly ludicrous

It is also a big advert for LONDON

In recent years the London NYE fireworks have been up there with Sydney and Taipei and UAE, the ones you watch out for, because we make a real effort. And the London Eye is used cleverly

So they're going to lose all that.... why?

London will look pitiable if other big cities, worldwide, go ahead

Khan is telling the world: Nah, London is dead. Go elsewhere. I presume he has a reason but it needs to be really really good

kle4 said:

MaxPB said:

Anabobazina said:

pigeon said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

stodge said:

SandyRentool said:

I would argue that the social benefits of Covid, such as the WFH revolution and people having an opportunity to reprioritise in their lives, more than outweighs the social harms.

Yet there are those for whom the periods of enforced isolation have been purgatory whether because they are alone or with someone with whom they no longer want to live or for a myriad other reasons.

Many have, as you say, coped not only well but prospered. Getting off the commuting treadmill has been a positive personal benefit but I'd never want to generalise it.

It's clear some on here have found it hard going at times and if this forum has provided some much needed contact I'm delighted we've all managed to help each other through this.

Lockdown was horrific. Depressing. Unbearable. I’m still astounded whenever I hear anyone suggest that they enjoyed it. A closed world is grim.

I'm with you. Lockdown 3 took me close to a total breakdown, and it has left permanent mental scars on me. I can never do it again. I would rather take my chances with a plague + vaccine

I have plenty of friends who weathered most of it just fine (generally richer, older people in big houses, often outside London) tho by the end, even the most relaxed were beginning to fray, in quirky ways

I have other friends who were exactly like us. They hated most of it, and they suffered accordingly. I know of at least 2 divorces

Lockdowns were pretty bad. At least I could still go to work (in manufacturing, so continued to go in throughout the entire horror,) and I have a husband to come home to afterwards. I shudder to think what it was like for single people working from home in officey jobs - for most of them the prolonged isolation must've been dreadful.

A mate of mine falls into that category. He’s quite an introverted guy but absolutely hated lockdown WFH, it took him to the brink of depression. Extremely lonely.

My wife's best friend moved into our spare bedroom in lockdown 3 because she's single, lives alone and her office was shut. She just needed some actual human contact with real people. It was nice to have her stay as well after essentially a year of it being just me and my wife alone together every evening. I love her but it's not easy to only spend time with the same person all day and then all evening and night for months on end.

That was a very kind thing you both did, notwithstanding it was pleasant for you both as well. I think most people in that situation would neither request nor receive such an offer.

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Foxy said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

Wednesday’s i - “Ships unable to dock and unload goods for Christmas” #TomorrowsPapersToday https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1448030977222184968/photo/1

The BBC report

BBC News - Felixstowe port says HGV shortage a factor in container logjam
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58888552

Philip_Thompson said:

Just read Frost's speech (well the intro and the NI Protocol bit) and it seems entirely reasonable and fair. Deliberately reasonable and fair, considering he's going into negotiations I suspect. Can't see anything provocative there at all, I don't see why people are complaining.

One element that struck me was this (emphasis mine):
Whether or not you agree with either analysis - the facts on the ground are what matter above all. Maybe there is a world in which the Protocol could have worked, more sensitively implemented. But the situation has now moved on. We now face a very serious situation. The Protocol is not working. It has completely lost consent in one community in Northern Ireland. It is not doing the thing it was set up to do – protect the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement. In fact it is doing the opposite. It has to change.

This matches without spelling it out exactly what a lot of us have said, that if the Trusted Trader scheme had been appropriately implemented then the Protocol as written could have worked. It wasn't, so we are where we are.

No bad faith.

Do you have any evidence that the protocol ever had the consent of the Unionists? I didn't think that you could lose what you never had.

The problem with the protocol as far as Unionists are concerned is that it has significantly integrated the Island. Cross border trade is up, cross Irish Sea trade down.

No of course it never had the consent of the Unionists, and quite right too, they had concerns over what would happen next.

But if the deal had been sensitively implemented with a Trusted Trader scheme etc then would it have raised cross border trade, and lowered cross Sea trade? If a Trusted Trader scheme had been sensitively implemented avoiding all the Unionists concerns then potentially the Protocol could have won their support.

It wasn't, so it didn't, so A16 is appropriate.

I take it 'Trusted Trader' is suddenly the new big thing. Forgive me if I missed it, but have you ever actually mentioned it before this evening?

@Philip_Thompson has mentioned it many times before tonight

Here's one example in January to william when I thought things were going well as the trusted trader scheme was going to happen. Before william saw the light. 😉

https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/3229621#Comment_3229621

Or July proposing Article 16 and a trusted trader scheme once it became clear that the EU weren't going to implement it: https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/3495813#Comment_3495813

Or way back in 2018 when May was still PM: https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/2045105#Comment_2045105

Or February 2019 when May was still PM: https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/2190673#Comment_2190673

Its always been the workable solution to this mess.

kle4 said:

Mexicanpete said:

.

bigjohnowls said:

SKS fans please explain how this guy is not a complete useless nonentity.

Can even make crashing a truck boring and humourless


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-58887168

It was a Kinnock falling into the sea, Milliband bacon sandwich moment, which is why Starmer is dumbfounded.

I agree totally and utterly unacceptable behaviour. One has to ask who is advising Starmer, Boris Johnson? A stupid, stupid stunt.

I'm not sure how I would advise Starmer. Stunts usually backfire, but certainly they seem to do Boris little harm and you do need to get attention, and judging which ones might work is hard. And it's easy for me to say he cannot out Boris Boris and shouldn't try, but it has been awhile, under odd circumstances admittedly, and the cool, calm approach doesn't get many pulses racing.

turbotubbs said:

malcolmg said:

MattW said:

FPT

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

Ministers at Holyrood have been warned that they risk the effectiveness of a public health campaign if they urge “anyone with a cervix” to take a smear test rather than refer directly to women.

In a press release issued yesterday to promote smear tests, the Scottish government pushed “people” to go for a check-up, with the message that “two people” die from cervical cancer each day.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/anyone-with-a-cervix-in-cancer-screening-campaign-puts-women-at-risk-bbs776drw

The pro-cake and pro-eating NHS plays it both ways:-
All women and people with a cervix between the ages of 25 and 64 should go for regular cervical screening.
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/cervical-screening/when-youll-be-invited/

One I missed earlier.

Surely the only other group that is relevant here after "women" are pre-surgical, transgender men, ie women who have changed gender and still have a cervix?

(Unless post-surgical transgender men also qualify - which I do not know without looking it up.)

What are the gender-critical lobby saying about them?

How do you have a cervix if you are not a woman

Asking that at some universities would get you the sack.

rottenborough said:

Foxy said:

Anabobazina said:

Foxy said:

Lockdown worked for me. Hardly any traffic on the way to work. Saved me 30 min every day.

You weren’t actually locked down though were you? So what you are really saying is that other people’s lockdown worked for you. I realise that you had to go into work because you are a ward doctor, but given the discussion is about how lockdown affected you, I don’t see how your comment reveals anything much, other than you like traffic-free roads.

No, tho only time when I was truly locked down was when I had to isolate for 10 days when Mrs Foxy caught it. It was a bit annoying not being able to leave house and garden, and I am glad that I didn't have to do it longer.

It was nice to have a good garden to sit in during the fine weather of the first lockdown. The second wasn't too bad either. The third was tougher but that was when I was helping on ICU. I don't want to go there again.

I don't think there will be a fourth, even though the NHS is a rickety house of cards.

There wont be a fourth. Not in a meaningful way anyway. That's because peeps like me and all my mates (and millions others I suspect) who obeyed the last three are NOT prepared to do it again now that the vulnerable have been vaxed.

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

MaxPB said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Andy_JS said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

"@NewsForAllUK

London’s famous New Year’s Eve fireworks display has been cancelled for a second year due to the pandemic."

Insane. Sadiq Khan. FFS

BBC confirmation

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58882954

Were the New Year fireworks that big a thing? A whiff of the Gone With the Wind ‘they’re preventing me watching a film I’ve never watched and never will watch’ manufactured outrage.

Fairly big, I know lots of people who went every year. Not something I would do personally but I think they sold out every year and tourists really loved seeing them and this year London is going to have loads of tourists.

Yes. Not my bag but a big deal for many. I live on a hill in north London and would often watch them from afar if we hosted guests. Seems a ludicrous decision.

Utterly ludicrous

It is also a big advert for LONDON

In recent years the London NYE fireworks have been up there with Sydney and Taipei and UAE, the ones you watch out for, because we make a real effort. And the London Eye is used cleverly

So they're going to lose all that.... why?

London will look pitiable if other big cities, worldwide, go ahead

Khan is telling the world: Nah, London is dead. Go elsewhere. I presume he has a reason but it needs to be really really good

He's a puritan c*** who wants everyone to stay locked up. He revelled in lockdown and keeping Londoners off the streets and out of the bars and clubs. He's absolutely the worst mayor we've had.

rottenborough said:

Northern_Al said:

kle4 said:

Mexicanpete said:

.

bigjohnowls said:

SKS fans please explain how this guy is not a complete useless nonentity.

Can even make crashing a truck boring and humourless


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-58887168

It was a Kinnock falling into the sea, Milliband bacon sandwich moment, which is why Starmer is dumbfounded.

I agree totally and utterly unacceptable behaviour. One has to ask who is advising Starmer, Boris Johnson? A stupid, stupid stunt.

I'm not sure how I would advise Starmer. Stunts usually backfire, but certainly they seem to do Boris little harm and you do need to get attention, and judging which ones might work is hard. And it's easy for me to say he cannot out Boris Boris and shouldn't try, but it has been awhile, under odd circumstances admittedly, and the cool, calm approach doesn't get many pulses racing.

Maybe it wasn't a stunt. Maybe Starmer's realised there's more money to be made now being an HGV driver than being leader of the opposition.

Not if you can't reverse without actually knocking a bridge over.

Farooq said:

FF43 said:

kle4 said:

FF43 said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

Scott_xP said:

At last, an explicit admission that the Johnson government negotiated the WA in bad faith, never had any intention of keeping its word, and lied to the British public in the 2019 election. Quite a moment. https://twitter.com/Dominic2306/status/1448018739623038982

You are reading what Big Dom actually says, right?


"For all the cant about international law, a/ states break it every week, b/ the idea it's the epitome of morality is low grade student politics pushed by lawyers/officials to constrain politics they oppose. Govt shd focus on solving problems & chill viz "i/n law" viz NI #IMBill2"

"Shd we generally stick to deals? Of course. Sometimes break them? Of course. Just like the EU, US, China and every other state does. International diplomacy cannot be judged by the standards of a student duel, and lawyers are hired help not the masters"

I actually kind of agree with him. Not in the sense of simply 'chilling' about it, but the way it is often referred to as immutable and universally agreed set of principles and very specific actions is frequently nonsense. Some of the worst regimes on earth would claim to totally be respecting international law in their actions regarding other nations.

In all honesty the idea you don't break treaties the instant it is convenient for you is probably pretty recent in some ways, if a cursory look at medieval history is any indication. Not that we should do so flippantly, not at all, but talk around international law is very often posturing.

In medieval history, they went to actual war when one side broke a treaty. Not sure that's a good analogy.

Also I don't think countries do deliberately break treaties very often. They might allow treaties to fall into disuse, if the other side doesn't care too much, through a different interpretation of the obligations and so on.

The purpose of almost any treaty is to get the other side to commit to do something, or to not do something, when they may not be willing when it comes to the point. Precisely the situation of the NIP. These are serious commitments and treated as such.

I was being jokey, but I certainly didn't say nations break treaties often now.

But the medieval analogy I stand by, not on the basis that it led to war, but that it showed that the rule seemed to be that if you felt strong enough you'd break it, since everyone was up to it. Thing are much better now, thankfully.

This is true, but only because the threshold for going to war was lower in the Middle Ages, I think.

War in the Middle Ages was a really difficult affair. Basically the whole world was made up of agricultural societies, with small surpluses. War tended to be seasonal, with soldiers drawn from a peasantry that had to be back home for harvest. Infrastructure and logistics meant that wintertime fighting was... counterproductive.
A frequent feature of battles was an ally reserving its forces an observing the battle. If things went badly they'd sometimes leave without getting involved or, worse, switch sides.
In short, war was a serious undertaking often with dire consequences for the legitimacy of the ruler who chose it, as the ad hoc taxes often needed to finance campaigns would turn the nobility hostile to the monarch.

We tend to think of the mediaeval era has being quite warlike, but many battles were quite small-scale, and wars often contained long fallow periods of no activity.

kle4 said:

MaxPB said:

Anabobazina said:

pigeon said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

stodge said:

SandyRentool said:

I would argue that the social benefits of Covid, such as the WFH revolution and people having an opportunity to reprioritise in their lives, more than outweighs the social harms.

Yet there are those for whom the periods of enforced isolation have been purgatory whether because they are alone or with someone with whom they no longer want to live or for a myriad other reasons.

Many have, as you say, coped not only well but prospered. Getting off the commuting treadmill has been a positive personal benefit but I'd never want to generalise it.

It's clear some on here have found it hard going at times and if this forum has provided some much needed contact I'm delighted we've all managed to help each other through this.

Lockdown was horrific. Depressing. Unbearable. I’m still astounded whenever I hear anyone suggest that they enjoyed it. A closed world is grim.

I'm with you. Lockdown 3 took me close to a total breakdown, and it has left permanent mental scars on me. I can never do it again. I would rather take my chances with a plague + vaccine

I have plenty of friends who weathered most of it just fine (generally richer, older people in big houses, often outside London) tho by the end, even the most relaxed were beginning to fray, in quirky ways

I have other friends who were exactly like us. They hated most of it, and they suffered accordingly. I know of at least 2 divorces

Lockdowns were pretty bad. At least I could still go to work (in manufacturing, so continued to go in throughout the entire horror,) and I have a husband to come home to afterwards. I shudder to think what it was like for single people working from home in officey jobs - for most of them the prolonged isolation must've been dreadful.

A mate of mine falls into that category. He’s quite an introverted guy but absolutely hated lockdown WFH, it took him to the brink of depression. Extremely lonely.

My wife's best friend moved into our spare bedroom in lockdown 3 because she's single, lives alone and her office was shut. She just needed some actual human contact with real people. It was nice to have her stay as well after essentially a year of it being just me and my wife alone together every evening. I love her but it's not easy to only spend time with the same person all day and then all evening and night for months on end.

That was a very kind thing you both did, notwithstanding it was pleasant for you both as well. I think most people in that situation would neither request nor receive such an offer.

Mexicanpete said:

.

rottenborough said:

Farooq said:

bigjohnowls said:

SKS fans please explain how this guy is not a complete useless nonentity.

Can even make crashing a truck boring and humourless


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-58887168

I thought you were a big fan of Starmer?

i) if Boris had done this most of the country would be laughing along with him. It's bloody annoying if you want a non-Tory government, but there we are.

ii) The backward reverse towards a tight parking space is so ripe for an AI solution that it is irrelevant.

Who advised him that this set up was, excuse the pun, anything but an accident waiting to happen?

Starmer isn't getting the rub of the greens. No 2016 Cenotaph footage for Starmer should he ever place his wreath upside down.

Philip_Thompson said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Foxy said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

Wednesday’s i - “Ships unable to dock and unload goods for Christmas” #TomorrowsPapersToday https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1448030977222184968/photo/1

The BBC report

BBC News - Felixstowe port says HGV shortage a factor in container logjam
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58888552

Philip_Thompson said:

Just read Frost's speech (well the intro and the NI Protocol bit) and it seems entirely reasonable and fair. Deliberately reasonable and fair, considering he's going into negotiations I suspect. Can't see anything provocative there at all, I don't see why people are complaining.

One element that struck me was this (emphasis mine):
Whether or not you agree with either analysis - the facts on the ground are what matter above all. Maybe there is a world in which the Protocol could have worked, more sensitively implemented. But the situation has now moved on. We now face a very serious situation. The Protocol is not working. It has completely lost consent in one community in Northern Ireland. It is not doing the thing it was set up to do – protect the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement. In fact it is doing the opposite. It has to change.

This matches without spelling it out exactly what a lot of us have said, that if the Trusted Trader scheme had been appropriately implemented then the Protocol as written could have worked. It wasn't, so we are where we are.

No bad faith.

Do you have any evidence that the protocol ever had the consent of the Unionists? I didn't think that you could lose what you never had.

The problem with the protocol as far as Unionists are concerned is that it has significantly integrated the Island. Cross border trade is up, cross Irish Sea trade down.

No of course it never had the consent of the Unionists, and quite right too, they had concerns over what would happen next.

But if the deal had been sensitively implemented with a Trusted Trader scheme etc then would it have raised cross border trade, and lowered cross Sea trade? If a Trusted Trader scheme had been sensitively implemented avoiding all the Unionists concerns then potentially the Protocol could have won their support.

It wasn't, so it didn't, so A16 is appropriate.

I take it 'Trusted Trader' is suddenly the new big thing. Forgive me if I missed it, but have you ever actually mentioned it before this evening?

@Philip_Thompson has mentioned it many times before tonight

Here's one example in January to william when I thought things were going well as the trusted trader scheme was going to happen. Before william saw the light. 😉

https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/3229621#Comment_3229621

Or July proposing Article 16 and a trusted trader scheme once it became clear that the EU weren't going to implement it: https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/3495813#Comment_3495813

Or way back in 2018 when May was still PM: https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/2045105#Comment_2045105

Or February 2019 when May was still PM: https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/2190673#Comment_2190673

Its always been the workable solution to this mess.

ECJ oversight is surely the main new stumbling block. It's hard to see the EU giving ground on that.

Its hard to see the EU having a choice.

Its back to the same argument I've made for years now, if the UK is prepared to play them then we have all the cards. And Frost unlike May is prepared to play them.

If there's no deal (which is now Article 16) then there's no backstop Protocol so the EU gets maximum disruption and has to either accept a gaping hole in the market, or expel Ireland from the Market, or put a border in Ireland. None of those are pretty options.

If there's a deal on UK terms (so no ECJ, but there's neutral arbitration instead) then they don't get everything they want but there's a working solution.

Game theory suggests they have no choice but to go for the latter option. However much they hate it.

Leon said:

The trans activists are going to turn me into a transphobe, eventually. When I really am NOT



"Professor says career ‘effectively ended’ by union’s transphobia claims"

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/oct/12/professor-says-career-effectively-ended-by-unions-transphobia-claims

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Foxy said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

Wednesday’s i - “Ships unable to dock and unload goods for Christmas” #TomorrowsPapersToday https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1448030977222184968/photo/1

The BBC report

BBC News - Felixstowe port says HGV shortage a factor in container logjam
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58888552

Philip_Thompson said:

Just read Frost's speech (well the intro and the NI Protocol bit) and it seems entirely reasonable and fair. Deliberately reasonable and fair, considering he's going into negotiations I suspect. Can't see anything provocative there at all, I don't see why people are complaining.

One element that struck me was this (emphasis mine):
Whether or not you agree with either analysis - the facts on the ground are what matter above all. Maybe there is a world in which the Protocol could have worked, more sensitively implemented. But the situation has now moved on. We now face a very serious situation. The Protocol is not working. It has completely lost consent in one community in Northern Ireland. It is not doing the thing it was set up to do – protect the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement. In fact it is doing the opposite. It has to change.

This matches without spelling it out exactly what a lot of us have said, that if the Trusted Trader scheme had been appropriately implemented then the Protocol as written could have worked. It wasn't, so we are where we are.

No bad faith.

Do you have any evidence that the protocol ever had the consent of the Unionists? I didn't think that you could lose what you never had.

The problem with the protocol as far as Unionists are concerned is that it has significantly integrated the Island. Cross border trade is up, cross Irish Sea trade down.

No of course it never had the consent of the Unionists, and quite right too, they had concerns over what would happen next.

But if the deal had been sensitively implemented with a Trusted Trader scheme etc then would it have raised cross border trade, and lowered cross Sea trade? If a Trusted Trader scheme had been sensitively implemented avoiding all the Unionists concerns then potentially the Protocol could have won their support.

It wasn't, so it didn't, so A16 is appropriate.

I take it 'Trusted Trader' is suddenly the new big thing. Forgive me if I missed it, but have you ever actually mentioned it before this evening?

@Philip_Thompson has mentioned it many times before tonight

Here's one example in January to william when I thought things were going well as the trusted trader scheme was going to happen. Before william saw the light. 😉

https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/3229621#Comment_3229621

Or July proposing Article 16 and a trusted trader scheme once it became clear that the EU weren't going to implement it: https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/3495813#Comment_3495813

Or way back in 2018 when May was still PM: https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/2045105#Comment_2045105

Or February 2019 when May was still PM: https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/2190673#Comment_2190673

Its always been the workable solution to this mess.

ECJ oversight is surely the main new stumbling block. It's hard to see the EU giving ground on that.

Its hard to see the EU having a choice.

Its back to the same argument I've made for years now, if the UK is prepared to play them then we have all the cards. And Frost unlike May is prepared to play them.

If there's no deal (which is now Article 16) then there's no backstop Protocol so the EU gets maximum disruption and has to either accept a gaping hole in the market, or expel Ireland from the Market, or put a border in Ireland. None of those are pretty options.

If there's a deal on UK terms (so no ECJ, but there's neutral arbitration instead) then they don't get everything they want but there's a working solution.

Game theory suggests they have no choice but to go for the latter option. However much they hate it.

There's no way they'll put a border in Ireland, and they'll be reluctant in the extreme to give up ECJ oversight. I guess that only leaves termination of the Withdrawal Agreement and back to no deal. Interesting times.

Cyclefree said:

Leon said:

The trans activists are going to turn me into a transphobe, eventually. When I really am NOT



"Professor says career ‘effectively ended’ by union’s transphobia claims"

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/oct/12/professor-says-career-effectively-ended-by-unions-transphobia-claims

Worth reading the letter in today's Times from a group of transsexuals supporting Dr Stock. Long-standing PB'ers may recognise one of the signatories.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/times-letters-restoring-public-confidence-in-the-police-lntq6sj0f

Anabobazina said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

MaxPB said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Andy_JS said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

"@NewsForAllUK

London’s famous New Year’s Eve fireworks display has been cancelled for a second year due to the pandemic."

Insane. Sadiq Khan. FFS

BBC confirmation

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58882954

Were the New Year fireworks that big a thing? A whiff of the Gone With the Wind ‘they’re preventing me watching a film I’ve never watched and never will watch’ manufactured outrage.

Fairly big, I know lots of people who went every year. Not something I would do personally but I think they sold out every year and tourists really loved seeing them and this year London is going to have loads of tourists.

Yes. Not my bag but a big deal for many. I live on a hill in north London and would often watch them from afar if we hosted guests. Seems a ludicrous decision.

Utterly ludicrous

It is also a big advert for LONDON

In recent years the London NYE fireworks have been up there with Sydney and Taipei and UAE, the ones you watch out for, because we make a real effort. And the London Eye is used cleverly

So they're going to lose all that.... why?

London will look pitiable if other big cities, worldwide, go ahead

Khan is telling the world: Nah, London is dead. Go elsewhere. I presume he has a reason but it needs to be really really good

He's a puritan c*** who wants everyone to stay locked up. He revelled in lockdown and keeping Londoners off the streets and out of the bars and clubs. He's absolutely the worst mayor we've had.

He's definitely the worst. There have only been three but Khan manages to be in a different, lower division to the other two

I majorly disagreed with Red Ken but Jeez at least he had a chirpy, cockney, hedonistic London spirit. He'd have told Khan where to get off with this no-cakes-and-ale bollocks

Ken was a great mayor. Mr London. A proper go-getter in City Hall. Sadly the drink got him, and he went mad.

MaxPB said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Foxy said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

Wednesday’s i - “Ships unable to dock and unload goods for Christmas” #TomorrowsPapersToday https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1448030977222184968/photo/1

The BBC report

BBC News - Felixstowe port says HGV shortage a factor in container logjam
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58888552

Philip_Thompson said:

Just read Frost's speech (well the intro and the NI Protocol bit) and it seems entirely reasonable and fair. Deliberately reasonable and fair, considering he's going into negotiations I suspect. Can't see anything provocative there at all, I don't see why people are complaining.

One element that struck me was this (emphasis mine):
Whether or not you agree with either analysis - the facts on the ground are what matter above all. Maybe there is a world in which the Protocol could have worked, more sensitively implemented. But the situation has now moved on. We now face a very serious situation. The Protocol is not working. It has completely lost consent in one community in Northern Ireland. It is not doing the thing it was set up to do – protect the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement. In fact it is doing the opposite. It has to change.

This matches without spelling it out exactly what a lot of us have said, that if the Trusted Trader scheme had been appropriately implemented then the Protocol as written could have worked. It wasn't, so we are where we are.

No bad faith.

Do you have any evidence that the protocol ever had the consent of the Unionists? I didn't think that you could lose what you never had.

The problem with the protocol as far as Unionists are concerned is that it has significantly integrated the Island. Cross border trade is up, cross Irish Sea trade down.

No of course it never had the consent of the Unionists, and quite right too, they had concerns over what would happen next.

But if the deal had been sensitively implemented with a Trusted Trader scheme etc then would it have raised cross border trade, and lowered cross Sea trade? If a Trusted Trader scheme had been sensitively implemented avoiding all the Unionists concerns then potentially the Protocol could have won their support.

It wasn't, so it didn't, so A16 is appropriate.

I take it 'Trusted Trader' is suddenly the new big thing. Forgive me if I missed it, but have you ever actually mentioned it before this evening?

@Philip_Thompson has mentioned it many times before tonight

Here's one example in January to william when I thought things were going well as the trusted trader scheme was going to happen. Before william saw the light. 😉

https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/3229621#Comment_3229621

Or July proposing Article 16 and a trusted trader scheme once it became clear that the EU weren't going to implement it: https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/3495813#Comment_3495813

Or way back in 2018 when May was still PM: https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/2045105#Comment_2045105

Or February 2019 when May was still PM: https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/2190673#Comment_2190673

Its always been the workable solution to this mess.

ECJ oversight is surely the main new stumbling block. It's hard to see the EU giving ground on that.

Its hard to see the EU having a choice.

Its back to the same argument I've made for years now, if the UK is prepared to play them then we have all the cards. And Frost unlike May is prepared to play them.

If there's no deal (which is now Article 16) then there's no backstop Protocol so the EU gets maximum disruption and has to either accept a gaping hole in the market, or expel Ireland from the Market, or put a border in Ireland. None of those are pretty options.

If there's a deal on UK terms (so no ECJ, but there's neutral arbitration instead) then they don't get everything they want but there's a working solution.

Game theory suggests they have no choice but to go for the latter option. However much they hate it.

There's no way they'll put a border in Ireland, and they'll be reluctant in the extreme to give up ECJ oversight. I guess that only leaves termination of the Withdrawal Agreement and back to no deal. Interesting times.

Nah, it's never going to be no deal. The TCA is signed and fully ratified on both sides as a separate agreement. It would need all 27 nations for the EU to pull the trigger on their 12 month notice of leaving. This is why the UK hand is so strong, both sides realise that in a world where the EU has got nothing to use as leverage there's no way they can force the UK to not pull the trigger on A16. It's also why after a year of saying no to reopening it, they've reopened it.

Northern_Al said:

rottenborough said:

Northern_Al said:

kle4 said:

Mexicanpete said:

.

bigjohnowls said:

SKS fans please explain how this guy is not a complete useless nonentity.

Can even make crashing a truck boring and humourless


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-58887168

It was a Kinnock falling into the sea, Milliband bacon sandwich moment, which is why Starmer is dumbfounded.

I agree totally and utterly unacceptable behaviour. One has to ask who is advising Starmer, Boris Johnson? A stupid, stupid stunt.

I'm not sure how I would advise Starmer. Stunts usually backfire, but certainly they seem to do Boris little harm and you do need to get attention, and judging which ones might work is hard. And it's easy for me to say he cannot out Boris Boris and shouldn't try, but it has been awhile, under odd circumstances admittedly, and the cool, calm approach doesn't get many pulses racing.

Maybe it wasn't a stunt. Maybe Starmer's realised there's more money to be made now being an HGV driver than being leader of the opposition.

Not if you can't reverse without actually knocking a bridge over.

Well, everybody has to start somewhere. It was his first lesson.

Leon said:

isam said:

…

Mexicanpete said:

.

bigjohnowls said:

SKS fans please explain how this guy is not a complete useless nonentity.

Can even make crashing a truck boring and humourless


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-58887168

It was a Kinnock falling into the sea, Milliband bacon sandwich moment, which is why Starmer is dumbfounded.

I agree totally and utterly unacceptable behaviour. One has to ask who is advising Starmer, Boris Johnson? A stupid, stupid stunt.

I liked the way Kinnock stood up and punched the air after falling into the sea

Rewatching it here, Glynis trips him up I think

https://youtu.be/jh8ktNsie0I

That didn't harm him, at all, as I recall

There was no polling reaction, and no National Cringe. It was just mildly amusing

The Sheffield Rally cringe-fest-moment WAS damaging. I wonder if he still occasionally wakes up in a cold sweat, remembering it

rcs1000 said:

Anabobazina said:

stodge said:

SandyRentool said:

I would argue that the social benefits of Covid, such as the WFH revolution and people having an opportunity to reprioritise in their lives, more than outweighs the social harms.

Yet there are those for whom the periods of enforced isolation have been purgatory whether because they are alone or with someone with whom they no longer want to live or for a myriad other reasons.

Many have, as you say, coped not only well but prospered. Getting off the commuting treadmill has been a positive personal benefit but I'd never want to generalise it.

It's clear some on here have found it hard going at times and if this forum has provided some much needed contact I'm delighted we've all managed to help each other through this.

Lockdown was horrific. Depressing. Unbearable. I’m still astounded whenever I hear anyone suggest that they enjoyed it. A closed world is grim.

The only thing worse than lockdown is other people.

Farooq said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

MaxPB said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Andy_JS said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

"@NewsForAllUK

London’s famous New Year’s Eve fireworks display has been cancelled for a second year due to the pandemic."

Insane. Sadiq Khan. FFS

BBC confirmation

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58882954

Were the New Year fireworks that big a thing? A whiff of the Gone With the Wind ‘they’re preventing me watching a film I’ve never watched and never will watch’ manufactured outrage.

Fairly big, I know lots of people who went every year. Not something I would do personally but I think they sold out every year and tourists really loved seeing them and this year London is going to have loads of tourists.

Yes. Not my bag but a big deal for many. I live on a hill in north London and would often watch them from afar if we hosted guests. Seems a ludicrous decision.

Utterly ludicrous

It is also a big advert for LONDON

In recent years the London NYE fireworks have been up there with Sydney and Taipei and UAE, the ones you watch out for, because we make a real effort. And the London Eye is used cleverly

So they're going to lose all that.... why?

London will look pitiable if other big cities, worldwide, go ahead

Khan is telling the world: Nah, London is dead. Go elsewhere. I presume he has a reason but it needs to be really really good

He's a puritan c*** who wants everyone to stay locked up. He revelled in lockdown and keeping Londoners off the streets and out of the bars and clubs. He's absolutely the worst mayor we've had.

He's definitely the worst. There have only been three but Khan manages to be in a different, lower division to the other two

I majorly disagreed with Red Ken but Jeez at least he had a chirpy, cockney, hedonistic London spirit. He'd have told Khan where to get off with this no-cakes-and-ale bollocks

Ken was a great mayor. Mr London. A proper go-getter in City Hall. Sadly the drink got him, and he went mad.

Can't believe I'm saying this, but yes, in comparison to Khan, Red Ken feels like a Titan, and a proper mayor.

It's a definite skill, being the mayor of a big world city like London. The one thing you need to do, above all else, is exude optimism and can-do. Big cities thrive on political charisma, on sociable get-up-and-go. Khan looks like he'd rather be a managing a small chain of newsagents in Yorkshire, and sadly but diligently closing several of them to streamline the business. Or he's a suburban solicitor for creeps.

He is not a World City Mayor.

If Labour has a total grasp on this gig, can they please give us someone with personality, and insight, and bouncy cheerfulness, next time. Ta

You're just confusing entertainment with politics. I don't see any evidence that a bouncy showman is a better leader than a serious and quiet steward. I suspect the latter is better. Give me an engineer over a gameshow host any day. You can keep your circuses, thanks.

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Foxy said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

Wednesday’s i - “Ships unable to dock and unload goods for Christmas” #TomorrowsPapersToday https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1448030977222184968/photo/1

The BBC report

BBC News - Felixstowe port says HGV shortage a factor in container logjam
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58888552

Philip_Thompson said:

Just read Frost's speech (well the intro and the NI Protocol bit) and it seems entirely reasonable and fair. Deliberately reasonable and fair, considering he's going into negotiations I suspect. Can't see anything provocative there at all, I don't see why people are complaining.

One element that struck me was this (emphasis mine):
Whether or not you agree with either analysis - the facts on the ground are what matter above all. Maybe there is a world in which the Protocol could have worked, more sensitively implemented. But the situation has now moved on. We now face a very serious situation. The Protocol is not working. It has completely lost consent in one community in Northern Ireland. It is not doing the thing it was set up to do – protect the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement. In fact it is doing the opposite. It has to change.

This matches without spelling it out exactly what a lot of us have said, that if the Trusted Trader scheme had been appropriately implemented then the Protocol as written could have worked. It wasn't, so we are where we are.

No bad faith.

Do you have any evidence that the protocol ever had the consent of the Unionists? I didn't think that you could lose what you never had.

The problem with the protocol as far as Unionists are concerned is that it has significantly integrated the Island. Cross border trade is up, cross Irish Sea trade down.

No of course it never had the consent of the Unionists, and quite right too, they had concerns over what would happen next.

But if the deal had been sensitively implemented with a Trusted Trader scheme etc then would it have raised cross border trade, and lowered cross Sea trade? If a Trusted Trader scheme had been sensitively implemented avoiding all the Unionists concerns then potentially the Protocol could have won their support.

It wasn't, so it didn't, so A16 is appropriate.

I take it 'Trusted Trader' is suddenly the new big thing. Forgive me if I missed it, but have you ever actually mentioned it before this evening?

@Philip_Thompson has mentioned it many times before tonight

Here's one example in January to william when I thought things were going well as the trusted trader scheme was going to happen. Before william saw the light. 😉

https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/3229621#Comment_3229621

Or July proposing Article 16 and a trusted trader scheme once it became clear that the EU weren't going to implement it: https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/3495813#Comment_3495813

Or way back in 2018 when May was still PM: https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/2045105#Comment_2045105

Or February 2019 when May was still PM: https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/2190673#Comment_2190673

Its always been the workable solution to this mess.

ECJ oversight is surely the main new stumbling block. It's hard to see the EU giving ground on that.

Philip_Thompson said:

rcs1000 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Foxy said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

Wednesday’s i - “Ships unable to dock and unload goods for Christmas” #TomorrowsPapersToday https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1448030977222184968/photo/1

The BBC report

BBC News - Felixstowe port says HGV shortage a factor in container logjam
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58888552

Philip_Thompson said:

Just read Frost's speech (well the intro and the NI Protocol bit) and it seems entirely reasonable and fair. Deliberately reasonable and fair, considering he's going into negotiations I suspect. Can't see anything provocative there at all, I don't see why people are complaining.

One element that struck me was this (emphasis mine):
Whether or not you agree with either analysis - the facts on the ground are what matter above all. Maybe there is a world in which the Protocol could have worked, more sensitively implemented. But the situation has now moved on. We now face a very serious situation. The Protocol is not working. It has completely lost consent in one community in Northern Ireland. It is not doing the thing it was set up to do – protect the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement. In fact it is doing the opposite. It has to change.

This matches without spelling it out exactly what a lot of us have said, that if the Trusted Trader scheme had been appropriately implemented then the Protocol as written could have worked. It wasn't, so we are where we are.

No bad faith.

Do you have any evidence that the protocol ever had the consent of the Unionists? I didn't think that you could lose what you never had.

The problem with the protocol as far as Unionists are concerned is that it has significantly integrated the Island. Cross border trade is up, cross Irish Sea trade down.

No of course it never had the consent of the Unionists, and quite right too, they had concerns over what would happen next.

But if the deal had been sensitively implemented with a Trusted Trader scheme etc then would it have raised cross border trade, and lowered cross Sea trade? If a Trusted Trader scheme had been sensitively implemented avoiding all the Unionists concerns then potentially the Protocol could have won their support.

It wasn't, so it didn't, so A16 is appropriate.

To be fair, the Trusted Trader programme was never going to be up and running within six months of Brexit and in the middle of a pandemic. What the UK (rightly) is upset about is that we haven't started the implementation process. We should now have an IT vendor putting in place the systems meaning essentially seamless trade in either direction.

The reality is that there is - as yet - no detailed specification. There are proposals, but the commission has been extremely slow - whether a consequence of them being instutitionally slow (which is certainly true) or because they are deliberately dragging their feet.

What I would like to see is a rapid implementation timetable that is stuck to by both sides (albeit with the risk that Accenture ends up being months late on delivery, again). This isn't the most complex thing in the world: detailed specs by year end; then development until July 2022, and with a roll out in the second half of the year. This isn't rocket surgery. Those are achievable timescales.

And if it has all been allowed to be worked on since 2016 instead of Varadkar nixxing it for short-term political gain, then it would have been much easier done by now.

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

MaxPB said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Andy_JS said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

"@NewsForAllUK

London’s famous New Year’s Eve fireworks display has been cancelled for a second year due to the pandemic."

Insane. Sadiq Khan. FFS

BBC confirmation

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58882954

Were the New Year fireworks that big a thing? A whiff of the Gone With the Wind ‘they’re preventing me watching a film I’ve never watched and never will watch’ manufactured outrage.

Fairly big, I know lots of people who went every year. Not something I would do personally but I think they sold out every year and tourists really loved seeing them and this year London is going to have loads of tourists.

Yes. Not my bag but a big deal for many. I live on a hill in north London and would often watch them from afar if we hosted guests. Seems a ludicrous decision.

Utterly ludicrous

It is also a big advert for LONDON

In recent years the London NYE fireworks have been up there with Sydney and Taipei and UAE, the ones you watch out for, because we make a real effort. And the London Eye is used cleverly

So they're going to lose all that.... why?

London will look pitiable if other big cities, worldwide, go ahead

Khan is telling the world: Nah, London is dead. Go elsewhere. I presume he has a reason but it needs to be really really good

He's a puritan c*** who wants everyone to stay locked up. He revelled in lockdown and keeping Londoners off the streets and out of the bars and clubs. He's absolutely the worst mayor we've had.

He's definitely the worst. There have only been three but Khan manages to be in a different, lower division to the other two

I majorly disagreed with Red Ken but Jeez at least he had a chirpy, cockney, hedonistic London spirit. He'd have told Khan where to get off with this no-cakes-and-ale bollocks

Ken was a great mayor. Mr London. A proper go-getter in City Hall. Sadly the drink got him, and he went mad.

Can't believe I'm saying this, but yes, in comparison to Khan, Red Ken feels like a Titan, and a proper mayor.

It's a definite skill, being the mayor of a big world city like London. The one thing you need to do, above all else, is exude optimism and can-do. Big cities thrive on political charisma, on sociable get-up-and-go. Khan looks like he'd rather be a managing a small chain of newsagents in Yorkshire, and sadly but diligently closing several of them to streamline the business. Or he's a suburban solicitor for creeps.

He is not a World City Mayor.

If Labour has a total grasp on this gig, can they please give us someone with personality, and insight, and bouncy cheerfulness, next time. Ta

Red Ken at his best, which is what he was when Boris started running against him in 2007, was the epitome of success for a Mayor up to then. He'd left much of his 'red'ness behind him and had truly mastered the role of London Mayor. He was popular, charismatic and able to succeed in and out of the party machinery.

There's a reason he was such an extremely heavy odds-on favourite for re-election in 2008 originally and why even at heavy odds-on he was still tipped as 'value' for re-election by @MikeSmithson and others in 2007.

The only comparable figure I can think of to Red Ken in how he has so seriously and subsequently gone from master of all his domain to public ridicule is Rudy Giuliani.

Farooq said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

MaxPB said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Andy_JS said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

"@NewsForAllUK

London’s famous New Year’s Eve fireworks display has been cancelled for a second year due to the pandemic."

Insane. Sadiq Khan. FFS

BBC confirmation

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58882954

Were the New Year fireworks that big a thing? A whiff of the Gone With the Wind ‘they’re preventing me watching a film I’ve never watched and never will watch’ manufactured outrage.

Fairly big, I know lots of people who went every year. Not something I would do personally but I think they sold out every year and tourists really loved seeing them and this year London is going to have loads of tourists.

Yes. Not my bag but a big deal for many. I live on a hill in north London and would often watch them from afar if we hosted guests. Seems a ludicrous decision.

Utterly ludicrous

It is also a big advert for LONDON

In recent years the London NYE fireworks have been up there with Sydney and Taipei and UAE, the ones you watch out for, because we make a real effort. And the London Eye is used cleverly

So they're going to lose all that.... why?

London will look pitiable if other big cities, worldwide, go ahead

Khan is telling the world: Nah, London is dead. Go elsewhere. I presume he has a reason but it needs to be really really good

He's a puritan c*** who wants everyone to stay locked up. He revelled in lockdown and keeping Londoners off the streets and out of the bars and clubs. He's absolutely the worst mayor we've had.

He's definitely the worst. There have only been three but Khan manages to be in a different, lower division to the other two

I majorly disagreed with Red Ken but Jeez at least he had a chirpy, cockney, hedonistic London spirit. He'd have told Khan where to get off with this no-cakes-and-ale bollocks

Ken was a great mayor. Mr London. A proper go-getter in City Hall. Sadly the drink got him, and he went mad.

Can't believe I'm saying this, but yes, in comparison to Khan, Red Ken feels like a Titan, and a proper mayor.

It's a definite skill, being the mayor of a big world city like London. The one thing you need to do, above all else, is exude optimism and can-do. Big cities thrive on political charisma, on sociable get-up-and-go. Khan looks like he'd rather be a managing a small chain of newsagents in Yorkshire, and sadly but diligently closing several of them to streamline the business. Or he's a suburban solicitor for creeps.

He is not a World City Mayor.

If Labour has a total grasp on this gig, can they please give us someone with personality, and insight, and bouncy cheerfulness, next time. Ta

You're just confusing entertainment with politics. I don't see any evidence that a bouncy showman is a better leader than a serious and quiet steward. I suspect the latter is better. Give me an engineer over a gameshow host any day. You can keep your circuses, thanks.

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

"@NewsForAllUK

London’s famous New Year’s Eve fireworks display has been cancelled for a second year due to the pandemic."

Insane. Sadiq Khan. FFS

He still won't get the night tube running either. The guy is so useless. Women are being put in danger and all he does is talk about it. No action at all.

I don't know anyone that has a single good word for him. God knows who voted for him

And this is universal. It's not just my friends - left and right - who despise him, it's everyone. He is a void. He is inert. He doesn't do anything. His leadership through this crisis has been - nil. Nought. Invisible.

Labour will probably make him leader after Starmer

Theuniondivvie said:

Andy_JS said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

"@NewsForAllUK

London’s famous New Year’s Eve fireworks display has been cancelled for a second year due to the pandemic."

Insane. Sadiq Khan. FFS

BBC confirmation

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58882954

Were the New Year fireworks that big a thing? A whiff of the Gone With the Wind ‘they’re preventing me watching a film I’ve never watched and never will watch’ manufactured outrage.

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

MaxPB said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Andy_JS said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

"@NewsForAllUK

London’s famous New Year’s Eve fireworks display has been cancelled for a second year due to the pandemic."

Insane. Sadiq Khan. FFS

BBC confirmation

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-58882954

Were the New Year fireworks that big a thing? A whiff of the Gone With the Wind ‘they’re preventing me watching a film I’ve never watched and never will watch’ manufactured outrage.

Fairly big, I know lots of people who went every year. Not something I would do personally but I think they sold out every year and tourists really loved seeing them and this year London is going to have loads of tourists.

Yes. Not my bag but a big deal for many. I live on a hill in north London and would often watch them from afar if we hosted guests. Seems a ludicrous decision.

Utterly ludicrous

It is also a big advert for LONDON

In recent years the London NYE fireworks have been up there with Sydney and Taipei and UAE, the ones you watch out for, because we make a real effort. And the London Eye is used cleverly

So they're going to lose all that.... why?

London will look pitiable if other big cities, worldwide, go ahead

Khan is telling the world: Nah, London is dead. Go elsewhere. I presume he has a reason but it needs to be really really good