It is hard to see Old Bexley & Sidcup being other than a comfortable CON hold – politicalbetting.com
Options
Comments
-
Actually, they look pretty good at suppressing transmission. Within the fully vaccinated group, transmission lines die out quite quickly - just not instantly.glw said:
One thing that hasn't sunk in is that as good as the current covid vaccines are, relative to other vaccines, they aren't really much good at preventing transmission. Covid is simply too easily spread for the current vaccines to hold it in check. The vaccines are useful for suppressing serious illness but we will likely incur a lot of cases no matter what.MaxPB said:
People have gone a bit crazy. I think there's a big element of Boris/Brexit derangement syndrome too. The people agitating for it don't really care about the virus, they just want to oppose the government. There's so many other valid areas to do that on, picking COVID just seems a bit mad, especially as cases are falling.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
On Tuesday when we had the delayed deaths number rolled in my colleague pointed out that the lockdown fascists would use it without context to agitate for restrictions, so it came to pass.
Further restrictions like NPIs would have to be open-ended, because until we get better vaccines or good treatments we will face a flare up of covid each time we relax restrictions. So anyone arguing for mandatory masks, social distancing, or closing certain bits of the economy is effectively asking for those things to be done for a very long time, not a few weeks or months.
It's the unvaxxed that provide the engine room for ongoing transmission.
Leakage from teens to parents is main driver of cases rise in the older, more vaxxed population. Remove that engine room, and cases should drop considerably. The muffling effect of immunity on every virus generation as it tries to move through an unfriendly vaccinated population causes those chains to exponentially decay.5 -
The problem isn't that the horse has bolted, but the sheer quantity of shit that it has left behind. What an utter fiasco.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Bit late to close the stable door now.Big_G_NorthWales said:BBC now reporting significant u turn and the reforms will not apply to Paterson
4 -
I'm sorry Scott, you may have enjoyed the political paralysis that the country reached, but I didn't. Thankfully it was resolved before Covid.Scott_xP said:
It was so "pragmatic" the idiots who did the deal have spent every waking moment since trying to undo some of the damage.turbotubbs said:at the end of the day it was pragmatic politics. Now that the issues are pressing, we move on.
Sometimes being stuck is better than the alternative...2 -
Be that much more difficult to sweep the next heap of shite under the carpet. Looking forward to whomsoever is next investigated.OnlyLivingBoy said:
The problem isn't that the horse has bolted, but the sheer quantity of shit that it has left behind. What an utter fiasco.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Bit late to close the stable door now.Big_G_NorthWales said:BBC now reporting significant u turn and the reforms will not apply to Paterson
1 -
Well I think Covid has had a pretty big effect too.noneoftheabove said:
Last ever or last of the same year are quite different things.turbotubbs said:
Sometimes you get into a situation, perhaps not of your making, that is really hard to get out of. That's Brexit. Everything was stuck. Frost and Johnson got us out, with a very imperfect deal. Yes they trumpeted it etc, and its facile to mock that, but at the end of the day it was pragmatic politics. Now that the issues are pressing, we move on. Did you expect the TCA to be the last ever word on the matter? Of course not.RochdalePioneers said:
How odd. If the TCA is so good why is Frost out to renegotiate it? Why is Frost attacking it?Philip_Thompson said:
You mean the fantastically good negotiation carried out by Lord Frost, don't you?RochdalePioneers said:
When he says "delivered Brexit" does he mean the act of leaving the EU? Or the Brexit deal that its chief negotiator is in Paris to try and amend because of the appallingly poor negotiation carried out by Lord Frost?LostPassword said:
It was the only point in the interview when he sounded comfortable.kle4 said:
Is that a parody? He cannot have been so robotic surely?Scott_xP said:Nick Robinson: can you give one single example of @BorisJohnson promoting and upholding the principles of standards in public life?
Kwasi Kwarteng: "We had a manifesto commitment to deliver Brexit and we delivered Brexit"
@BBCr4today
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1456175002055761927
If Frost had stuck with Robbins former arrangements there'd have been no Article 16 and no way out of the backstop. That Frost managed to get Article 16 into the arrangements, which can now be used to get a better deal is a masterclass in how you do good negotiations.
And contrary to the myth some like to spread, its not "bad faith" either since the conditions to trigger Article 16 have been met. That people foresaw the fact that the Protocol would lead to problems doesn't mean those problems aren't a trigger for Article 16 - nowhere in the conditions for Article 16 does it say the problems have to be unforeseen.
And as for A16 it is what happens *after* we inevitab;y trigger it which nobody has answers to. "Just trigger A16!!!" seems to be the cry as if that is the final play. It is just the start of a whole new process of once against trying to jam a square peg into a round hole.0 -
I advocate nothing. Thats my point. It isn't my opinion that matters. Its Whitty, Van-Tam, Taylor et al whose opinions matter.Anabobazina said:
What restrictions do you advocate immediately and to what level would the data need to fall for you to advocate the status quo?RochdalePioneers said:
They're falling from the 52k mini peak but maintaining in the c. 40k new cases a day range that is still way too high. Hospitalisation too high. The genuine pressure on the NHS that could cause it to collapse very real.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
That is why they have both Plan B and apparently Plan C. Not because I am "hysterical" as you kindly put it. Because the NHS management is "hysterical".
The CEO of the NHS Confederation has set out in detail the perils that the NHS faces. Backed by the government health advisers. Listen to them, not me. The problem is that as you have already set your face to "Covid is over" and describe any data against as "hysterical" you are blind to the data...0 -
Owenmnishambles0
-
Agreed. All very odd.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Bit late to close the stable door now.Big_G_NorthWales said:BBC now reporting significant u turn and the reforms will not apply to Paterson
Are they planning to re-hold the vote on Paterson's suspension then?0 -
Absolutely it needs to be broken.Scott_xP said:Jacob Rees-Mogg...
"I fear last night's debate conflated the individual case with the general concern.
"This link needs to be broken".
🧐
https://twitter.com/robpowellnews/status/1456209930805993473
But JRM isn't exactly helping on this ....1 -
It’s like government by the world’s least competent crime family
https://twitter.com/twlldun/status/14562146196645683202 -
A colleague here (a pharmacist) thinks many of the unvaxxed are not anti-vaxxers, they just can't be bothered. So the focus needs to be to make it easy to get the jab (visit workplaces, as happens at the Uni) and then think about taking a van round to their houses. I think some would have it if you are on the door.Anabobazina said:
Spot on. This hysterical headline-chasing simply serves to take the pressure off the vax rollout. It’s deeply dissatisfactory behaviour.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.
Obviously there are still the complete, out and out idiots to deal with, but hey, they must all have had covid soon, right.
Including a PhD student here, who was very anti-vax, and now has it...1 -
Appalling. His vote was wrong. But threats and vandalism are far far more wrong. As I keep saying we need to drop the heated rhetoric against MPs. Yes some are no good, some vote in a way we dislike, some get done for corruption. But we cannot accept this kind of vigilate response - and all the MPs whose language has helped create this need to stop and think. Peter Bone is as far from being guilty of this as its possible to be.Scott_xP said:Peter Bone says his office was vandalised last night because of how he voted on Paterson last night
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/14562128501255454732 -
Sam Coates confirms on Sky that HMG does a full 'fat' climbdown and in the next few days a motion will be put to mps to confirm the 30 day suspension for Paterson and trigger a by election0
-
The irony is, if Paterson is now thrown under the bus, he is much more likely to face a by-election and he may well lose it because of this fiasco.1
-
YesPhilip_Thompson said:
Agreed. All very odd.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Bit late to close the stable door now.Big_G_NorthWales said:BBC now reporting significant u turn and the reforms will not apply to Paterson
Are they planning to re-hold the vote on Paterson's suspension then?0 -
Can they chose to simply ignore it? Various things get voted for in parliament that just get set aside. As the government have both forced the vote and now indicated they will not implement it, I assume they can just ignore the thing they strongly advocated on this morning's media round.Philip_Thompson said:
Agreed. All very odd.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Bit late to close the stable door now.Big_G_NorthWales said:BBC now reporting significant u turn and the reforms will not apply to Paterson
Are they planning to re-hold the vote on Paterson's suspension then?
It seems to be the new political rule. The more desperate and debased the minister's arguments are on the media round, the greater the likelihood the government is about to do a complete u-turn.0 -
Yesterday on radio 5 I listened in shock as a scientist pointed out how much higher our testing regime is than other countries, and if you take that into account we are not so out of step with our community levels of Covid. Refreshing.NickPalmer said:
Focusing on the vaccine is definitely right - regardless of how one reads the figures, there is plenty of Covid still around and plenty of people on ventilators. Not going all out to promote boosters (and IMO vaccination of children) is a collective own goals - and that's nothing to do with being pro- or anti-lockdown.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.
Personally I'm trying not to react too much to the daily figures. When the number dropped under 40K there were people saying "See? It's beaten!" and when it went back over 40K there were people shouting "Plan B now". Overall the picture looks fairly stable at a high plateau.2 -
What a shambolic mess. 🤦♂️Big_G_NorthWales said:
YesPhilip_Thompson said:
Agreed. All very odd.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Bit late to close the stable door now.Big_G_NorthWales said:BBC now reporting significant u turn and the reforms will not apply to Paterson
Are they planning to re-hold the vote on Paterson's suspension then?2 -
I'm not sure how much this will affect the Tories' poll ratings but Johnson has surely lost capital with his own MPs.4
-
I'm not seeing 100K a day yet - thought that was nailed on?NickPalmer said:
Focusing on the vaccine is definitely right - regardless of how one reads the figures, there is plenty of Covid still around and plenty of people on ventilators. Not going all out to promote boosters (and IMO vaccination of children) is a collective own goals - and that's nothing to do with being pro- or anti-lockdown.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.
Personally I'm trying not to react too much to the daily figures. When the number dropped under 40K there were people saying "See? It's beaten!" and when it went back over 40K there were people shouting "Plan B now". Overall the picture looks fairly stable at a high plateau.0 -
There were nearly 20k opposition votes in North Shropshire in 2019.. with some organisation the 10k signatures for recall should now easily be cleared.. a week a go would that be the case? https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1456215365361545218/photo/10
-
JRM has confirmed that they are planning on revoting on Paterson. Strikes me a recall election is now inevitable.RochdalePioneers said:
Can they chose to simply ignore it? Various things get voted for in parliament that just get set aside. As the government have both forced the vote and now indicated they will not implement it, I assume they can just ignore the thing they strongly advocated on this morning's media round.Philip_Thompson said:
Agreed. All very odd.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Bit late to close the stable door now.Big_G_NorthWales said:BBC now reporting significant u turn and the reforms will not apply to Paterson
Are they planning to re-hold the vote on Paterson's suspension then?
It seems to be the new political rule. The more desperate and debased the minister's arguments are on the media round, the greater the likelihood the government is about to do a complete u-turn.
I give the Government no credit at all for this U-turn. They got caught with their hands in the sweetie jar and only backed down because of the amount of flak they were getting and how damaging it was going to be to them politically. Their intent was clear and pretending otherwise is just further dishonesty.5 -
Corrupt, incompetent and unprincipled. Impressive work.4
-
I honestly don't know why the government thought that protecting Owen Paterson was a good idea.4
-
It was completely unavoidable and is embarrassingPhilip_Thompson said:
What a shambolic mess. 🤦♂️Big_G_NorthWales said:
YesPhilip_Thompson said:
Agreed. All very odd.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Bit late to close the stable door now.Big_G_NorthWales said:BBC now reporting significant u turn and the reforms will not apply to Paterson
Are they planning to re-hold the vote on Paterson's suspension then?3 -
I've only been scanning the threads so missed that.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Yes, I made the same point yesterday about the discrepancy between Paterson's current claim that the investigation contributed to his wife's suicide and his earlier statements. Something doesn't quite add up there, and I say that as someone who has also lost a spouse (though not to suicide).Cyclefree said:
Suicide is an appalling thing to hit a family, a husband, even one as stupid or sleazy as Paterson. I have great sympathy for him on that.Theuniondivvie said:
I see Paterson is saying that the process of having his lobbying examined was a major contributor to his wife’s suicide while also saying that he would act in exactly the same way if he had the time again.Nigelb said:The Guardian has a fairly good analysis of why Paterson claims the rules didn't apply to him:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/nov/03/owen-paterson-his-claims-and-how-they-stack-up-in-analysis
His argument lacks credibility, to put it mildly. Effectively he's arguing that if an MP believes he's exempt from the rules, that should be the end of the matter.
And it is not an argument which would be significantly altered by any witness statements. The essential facts of the case are not in dispute.
Apart from all the other egregiousness, he strikes me as a deeply stupid man.
But. But.
He now says this investigation was a factor in her suicide. It is suggested that this is what led to it. Leaving aside the fact that personal tragedy is not a reason for stopping the process of justice, this does not appear to be consistent with what he said at the time.
He did an interview 10 months after her death with Woman's Hour. It can be heard here - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000v2pt (the first item).
He says that he had "no inkling" of what was to happen. When they were looking for her he & his son "never ever considered what actually happened". He goes on to say "we had absolutely no warning of this". He talks about the mental impact of Covid (which she caught) on her, her disappointment at the cancellation of the Grand National. He mentions the pressures in his life in passing but not the investigation. He talks about her anxiety, says that he was unaware of the signs of someone in distress & that had he had more training he might have spotted the signs & been able to help his wife.
It is very moving. But not really compatible with what he is now saying - that the investigation into his behaviour was a cause of his wife's suicide. If he did not know then why she did what she did, how can he be so certain now?
And if he is not certain - and who can ever really understand what drives people to do this unless they explain themselves in advance - using his wife's tragedy to avoid responsibility for his actions feels, well .... I don't know what words to use, really.
Having suffered suicide in my family, I thought at the time his interview was a brave attempt to get people to be more sensitive about the pressures which those close to us can be under so that help can be sought.
Now I wonder whether we are being cynically played. We have another woman, the Standards Commissioner, being accused of being unfair, biased, incompetent & being pressured out of her job in an unsubtle attempt to protect Paterson from the consequences of his actions. No-one seems to care about the stress on her. It reflects very badly indeed on all of them.
Still when the prevailing view is that corruption does not exist if Tory MPs say it doesn't (ca. @HYUFD) & politics is not a moral philosophy class, with voters not minding politicians wetting their beaks as they'd like to do it too (ca. @isam), then there seems little point debating it further.
We must accept I suppose that we now have a Berlusconi-style government (corrupt, incompetent, mainly interested in party advantage) led by a man with a rackety private life & scant regard for morality or rules. Politics seems largely pointless, especially with an Opposition barely capable of taking the skin off a rice pudding.
Personally I'm just hoping we'll soon have the Mediterranean weather & style to go with the Italianisation of our public life.
There is a great deal of dishonourable conduct going on. And plenty of people to defend it.0 -
I have to say that the only un-vaxxed I have come across are anti-vaxxers.turbotubbs said:
A colleague here (a pharmacist) thinks many of the unvaxxed are not anti-vaxxers, they just can't be bothered. So the focus needs to be to make it easy to get the jab (visit workplaces, as happens at the Uni) and then think about taking a van round to their houses. I think some would have it if you are on the door.Anabobazina said:
Spot on. This hysterical headline-chasing simply serves to take the pressure off the vax rollout. It’s deeply dissatisfactory behaviour.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.
Obviously there are still the complete, out and out idiots to deal with, but hey, they must all have had covid soon, right.
Including a PhD student here, who was very anti-vax, and now has it...0 -
A barefaced lie. Show me the post where I say Covid is over? Clue: you won’t be able to because I have said the exact opposite, repeatedly. It’s probably with us forever.RochdalePioneers said:
I advocate nothing. Thats my point. It isn't my opinion that matters. Its Whitty, Van-Tam, Taylor et al whose opinions matter.Anabobazina said:
What restrictions do you advocate immediately and to what level would the data need to fall for you to advocate the status quo?RochdalePioneers said:
They're falling from the 52k mini peak but maintaining in the c. 40k new cases a day range that is still way too high. Hospitalisation too high. The genuine pressure on the NHS that could cause it to collapse very real.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
That is why they have both Plan B and apparently Plan C. Not because I am "hysterical" as you kindly put it. Because the NHS management is "hysterical".
The CEO of the NHS Confederation has set out in detail the perils that the NHS faces. Backed by the government health advisers. Listen to them, not me. The problem is that as you have already set your face to "Covid is over" and describe any data against as "hysterical" you are blind to the data...
As for the rest of your post, you have no opinion now? How convenient. You can attack others but avoid any commitment yourself. Maybe you are right and hysterical is not the right descriptor. Let’s go with sanctimonious instead.0 -
After an incredibly slow start, I think this is probably the most important thing to keep an eye on for the winter.turbotubbs said:
Yesterday on radio 5 I listened in shock as a scientist pointed out how much higher our testing regime is than other countries, and if you take that into account we are not so out of step with our community levels of Covid. Refreshing.NickPalmer said:
Focusing on the vaccine is definitely right - regardless of how one reads the figures, there is plenty of Covid still around and plenty of people on ventilators. Not going all out to promote boosters (and IMO vaccination of children) is a collective own goals - and that's nothing to do with being pro- or anti-lockdown.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.
Personally I'm trying not to react too much to the daily figures. When the number dropped under 40K there were people saying "See? It's beaten!" and when it went back over 40K there were people shouting "Plan B now". Overall the picture looks fairly stable at a high plateau.
I don't understand why the USA is dragging its heels so much in the booster rollout considering they had a big head start on that. Its worth remembering that although the UK rolled out jabs first, we prioritised first jabs first, so other nations had a higher share of second jabs for a while that need boosting sooner.
America was for a very long time ahead of us on second jabs, so they should be well ahead on boosters and they're just not.1 -
HopefullyFrankBooth said:I'm not sure how much this will affect the Tories' poll ratings but Johnson has surely lost capital with his own MPs.
0 -
You are probably right, and I am understating the degree to which tranmission is reduced, but doesn't that chart show that the only groups where rates are falling are the most recently vaccinated young adults, and the recently boosted elderly? Everyone else is seeing higher rates. What am I misunderstanding? Surely this chart suggests that everybody will need a regular booster, because efficacy wanes quite quickly.Andy_Cooke said:Actually, they look pretty good at suppressing transmission. Within the fully vaccinated group, transmission lines die out quite quickly - just not instantly.
It's the unvaxxed that provide the engine room for ongoing transmission.
Leakage from teens to parents is main driver of cases rise in the older, more vaxxed population. Remove that engine room, and cases should drop considerably. The muffling effect of immunity on every virus generation as it tries to move through an unfriendly vaccinated population causes those chains to exponentially decay.
So if I restate my point I'd say, the vaccine does not confer lifelong protection — having your jab does not mean covid is over for you, as too many seem to think — and that we will need regular vaccination campaigns to suppress transmission.
I realise this is basically quibling about the probably small difference between your "pretty good" and my "aren't really much good" viewpoints.0 -
I assume there has to be another vote in the Commons. Perhaps Johnson will still achieve his aim of weakening the process, even if Paterson is sacrificed.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Bit late to close the stable door now.Big_G_NorthWales said:BBC now reporting significant u turn and the reforms will not apply to Paterson
And then there's the benefit of degrading Tory MPs by having them vote for the thing yesterday.
Sometimes it feels like instability is the method in the madness. There's often only a cursory attempt to defend a position that it makes the government hard to pin down.1 -
There does seem to be an element that wants vaccination to fail, or at any rate, to be seen as a failure.Anabobazina said:
Spot on. This hysterical headline-chasing simply serves to take the pressure off the vax rollout. It’s deeply dissatisfactory behaviour.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.2 -
The incompetence is the amazing bit. The government is brilliant at populist stunts, and utterly useless about political management.Jonathan said:Corrupt, incompetent and unprincipled. Impressive work.
So its back to *why*. The vote was explicitly a putsch against the standards commissioner - Kwarteng confirmed that repeatedly this morning. And we know what she is planning to go after next - Carrie and the redecoration.
So I get the motives. How are they so godawful at the strategy, never mind the tactics.2 -
I agree.Richard_Tyndall said:
JRM has confirmed that they are planning on revoting on Paterson. Strikes me a recall election is now inevitable.RochdalePioneers said:
Can they chose to simply ignore it? Various things get voted for in parliament that just get set aside. As the government have both forced the vote and now indicated they will not implement it, I assume they can just ignore the thing they strongly advocated on this morning's media round.Philip_Thompson said:
Agreed. All very odd.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Bit late to close the stable door now.Big_G_NorthWales said:BBC now reporting significant u turn and the reforms will not apply to Paterson
Are they planning to re-hold the vote on Paterson's suspension then?
It seems to be the new political rule. The more desperate and debased the minister's arguments are on the media round, the greater the likelihood the government is about to do a complete u-turn.
I give the Government no credit at all for this U-turn. They got caught with their hands in the sweetie jar and only backed down because of the amount of flak they were getting and how damaging it was going to be to them politically. Their intent was clear and pretending otherwise is just further dishonesty.
I defended the right to have an appeal yesterday and I stand by that. But this hokey-cokey is just ridiculous. If they thought they were in the right yesterday (and I was OK with it) then they should have stuck with it, to flip flop after less than 24 hours makes the whole thing a politicised farce and not justice.0 -
That would confirm that Paterson is expendable having proved useful in taking the future sting out of the Standards Commissioner and Committee's future anticipated action against the cost of Carrie's wallpaper.Big_G_NorthWales said:BBC now reporting significant u turn and the reforms will not apply to Paterson
All very clever stuff from Johnson.
However, if there is a recall after this furore, Paterson could be much weakened personally from where he stood yesterday. His chances of retaking the seat might also be somewhat diminished.1 -
The horses' arses have definitely bolted.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Bit late to close the stable door now.Big_G_NorthWales said:BBC now reporting significant u turn and the reforms will not apply to Paterson
0 -
Yep that's how my wife and I got it. Thankfully my son had his first jab yesterday at school so we are slowly closing the loopholes.Andy_Cooke said:
Actually, they look pretty good at suppressing transmission. Within the fully vaccinated group, transmission lines die out quite quickly - just not instantly.glw said:
One thing that hasn't sunk in is that as good as the current covid vaccines are, relative to other vaccines, they aren't really much good at preventing transmission. Covid is simply too easily spread for the current vaccines to hold it in check. The vaccines are useful for suppressing serious illness but we will likely incur a lot of cases no matter what.MaxPB said:
People have gone a bit crazy. I think there's a big element of Boris/Brexit derangement syndrome too. The people agitating for it don't really care about the virus, they just want to oppose the government. There's so many other valid areas to do that on, picking COVID just seems a bit mad, especially as cases are falling.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
On Tuesday when we had the delayed deaths number rolled in my colleague pointed out that the lockdown fascists would use it without context to agitate for restrictions, so it came to pass.
Further restrictions like NPIs would have to be open-ended, because until we get better vaccines or good treatments we will face a flare up of covid each time we relax restrictions. So anyone arguing for mandatory masks, social distancing, or closing certain bits of the economy is effectively asking for those things to be done for a very long time, not a few weeks or months.
It's the unvaxxed that provide the engine room for ongoing transmission.
Leakage from teens to parents is main driver of cases rise in the older, more vaxxed population. Remove that engine room, and cases should drop considerably. The muffling effect of immunity on every virus generation as it tries to move through an unfriendly vaccinated population causes those chains to exponentially decay.0 -
Sky reports indicate a huge conservative mp rebellion forcing this climbdown
Boris must be damaged by this and time for change1 -
Yes, I think he’s right about that. Lots of young people have (rightly) calculated that they are not at much personal risk from covid and thus (wrongly) been apathetic about being vaxxed. There’s still plenty of low hanging fruit around: the first focus is on that!turbotubbs said:
A colleague here (a pharmacist) thinks many of the unvaxxed are not anti-vaxxers, they just can't be bothered. So the focus needs to be to make it easy to get the jab (visit workplaces, as happens at the Uni) and then think about taking a van round to their houses. I think some would have it if you are on the door.Anabobazina said:
Spot on. This hysterical headline-chasing simply serves to take the pressure off the vax rollout. It’s deeply dissatisfactory behaviour.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.
Obviously there are still the complete, out and out idiots to deal with, but hey, they must all have had covid soon, right.
Including a PhD student here, who was very anti-vax, and now has it...0 -
Excellent. I've been thinking the same, but didn't have the courage to write it, given the sensitivities.Cyclefree said:
Suicide is an appalling thing to hit a family, a husband, even one as stupid or sleazy as Paterson. I have great sympathy for him on that.Theuniondivvie said:
I see Paterson is saying that the process of having his lobbying examined was a major contributor to his wife’s suicide while also saying that he would act in exactly the same way if he had the time again.Nigelb said:The Guardian has a fairly good analysis of why Paterson claims the rules didn't apply to him:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/nov/03/owen-paterson-his-claims-and-how-they-stack-up-in-analysis
His argument lacks credibility, to put it mildly. Effectively he's arguing that if an MP believes he's exempt from the rules, that should be the end of the matter.
And it is not an argument which would be significantly altered by any witness statements. The essential facts of the case are not in dispute.
Apart from all the other egregiousness, he strikes me as a deeply stupid man.
But. But.
He now says this investigation was a factor in her suicide. It is suggested that this is what led to it. Leaving aside the fact that personal tragedy is not a reason for stopping the process of justice, this does not appear to be consistent with what he said at the time.
He did an interview 10 months after her death with Woman's Hour. It can be heard here - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000v2pt (the first item).
He says that he had "no inkling" of what was to happen. When they were looking for her he & his son "never ever considered what actually happened". He goes on to say "we had absolutely no warning of this". He talks about the mental impact of Covid (which she caught) on her, her disappointment at the cancellation of the Grand National. He mentions the pressures in his life in passing but not the investigation. He talks about her anxiety, says that he was unaware of the signs of someone in distress & that had he had more training he might have spotted the signs & been able to help his wife.
It is very moving. But not really compatible with what he is now saying - that the investigation into his behaviour was a cause of his wife's suicide. If he did not know then why she did what she did, how can he be so certain now?
And if he is not certain - and who can ever really understand what drives people to do this unless they explain themselves in advance - using his wife's tragedy to avoid responsibility for his actions feels, well .... I don't know what words to use, really.
Having suffered suicide in my family, I thought at the time his interview was a brave attempt to get people to be more sensitive about the pressures which those close to us can be under so that help can be sought.
Now I wonder whether we are being cynically played. We have another woman, the Standards Commissioner, being accused of being unfair, biased, incompetent & being pressured out of her job in an unsubtle attempt to protect Paterson from the consequences of his actions. No-one seems to care about the stress on her. It reflects very badly indeed on all of them.
Still when the prevailing view is that corruption does not exist if Tory MPs say it doesn't (ca. @HYUFD) & politics is not a moral philosophy class, with voters not minding politicians wetting their beaks as they'd like to do it too (ca. @isam), then there seems little point debating it further.
We must accept I suppose that we now have a Berlusconi-style government (corrupt, incompetent, mainly interested in party advantage) led by a man with a rackety private life & scant regard for morality or rules. Politics seems largely pointless, especially with an Opposition barely capable of taking the skin off a rice pudding.
Personally I'm just hoping we'll soon have the Mediterranean weather & style to go with the Italianisation of our public life.
If Paterson is now arguing that his wife's tragic suicide was linked to the investigation, surely he must take some personal responsibility for this? If he hadn't egregiously broken the rules, there would have been no investigation. If he had admitted 'guilt', or offered to repay the money from the consultancies, the investigation would have been over quickly. Instead, he arrogantly persisted in defending the indefensible for months upon end. Either way, the pressure on his family derived from his own actions.
I'd also add that the PM mentioning the suicide yesterday at PMQs in response to a question from Rayner was a disgrace. Given the forthcoming vote, it was tantamount to emotional blackmail, and totally spurious to the issue at hand.5 -
Sure but the clue might be in the name Covid19 given the TCA was agreed in December 2020.turbotubbs said:
Well I think Covid has had a pretty big effect too.noneoftheabove said:
Last ever or last of the same year are quite different things.turbotubbs said:
Sometimes you get into a situation, perhaps not of your making, that is really hard to get out of. That's Brexit. Everything was stuck. Frost and Johnson got us out, with a very imperfect deal. Yes they trumpeted it etc, and its facile to mock that, but at the end of the day it was pragmatic politics. Now that the issues are pressing, we move on. Did you expect the TCA to be the last ever word on the matter? Of course not.RochdalePioneers said:
How odd. If the TCA is so good why is Frost out to renegotiate it? Why is Frost attacking it?Philip_Thompson said:
You mean the fantastically good negotiation carried out by Lord Frost, don't you?RochdalePioneers said:
When he says "delivered Brexit" does he mean the act of leaving the EU? Or the Brexit deal that its chief negotiator is in Paris to try and amend because of the appallingly poor negotiation carried out by Lord Frost?LostPassword said:
It was the only point in the interview when he sounded comfortable.kle4 said:
Is that a parody? He cannot have been so robotic surely?Scott_xP said:Nick Robinson: can you give one single example of @BorisJohnson promoting and upholding the principles of standards in public life?
Kwasi Kwarteng: "We had a manifesto commitment to deliver Brexit and we delivered Brexit"
@BBCr4today
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1456175002055761927
If Frost had stuck with Robbins former arrangements there'd have been no Article 16 and no way out of the backstop. That Frost managed to get Article 16 into the arrangements, which can now be used to get a better deal is a masterclass in how you do good negotiations.
And contrary to the myth some like to spread, its not "bad faith" either since the conditions to trigger Article 16 have been met. That people foresaw the fact that the Protocol would lead to problems doesn't mean those problems aren't a trigger for Article 16 - nowhere in the conditions for Article 16 does it say the problems have to be unforeseen.
And as for A16 it is what happens *after* we inevitab;y trigger it which nobody has answers to. "Just trigger A16!!!" seems to be the cry as if that is the final play. It is just the start of a whole new process of once against trying to jam a square peg into a round hole.0 -
Covid will never be over. Its like saying the cold is over, or flu is over, or AIDS is over.Anabobazina said:
A barefaced lie. Show me the post where I say Covid is over? Clue: you won’t be able to because I have said the exact opposite, repeatedly. It’s probably with us forever.RochdalePioneers said:
I advocate nothing. Thats my point. It isn't my opinion that matters. Its Whitty, Van-Tam, Taylor et al whose opinions matter.Anabobazina said:
What restrictions do you advocate immediately and to what level would the data need to fall for you to advocate the status quo?RochdalePioneers said:
They're falling from the 52k mini peak but maintaining in the c. 40k new cases a day range that is still way too high. Hospitalisation too high. The genuine pressure on the NHS that could cause it to collapse very real.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
That is why they have both Plan B and apparently Plan C. Not because I am "hysterical" as you kindly put it. Because the NHS management is "hysterical".
The CEO of the NHS Confederation has set out in detail the perils that the NHS faces. Backed by the government health advisers. Listen to them, not me. The problem is that as you have already set your face to "Covid is over" and describe any data against as "hysterical" you are blind to the data...
As for the rest of your post, you have no opinion now? How convenient. You can attack others but avoid any commitment yourself. Maybe you are right and hysterical is not the right descriptor. Let’s go with sanctimonious instead.2 -
Morning PB.
Managed to get my mother's Covid booster done today after booking on NHS website last week.
That's a month earlier than the appointment she'd been offered by the GP. Things seems to be swinging into gear with the booster campaign thankfully.2 -
Vote to take place before the recess on the 10th NovemberLostPassword said:
I assume there has to be another vote in the Commons. Perhaps Johnson will still achieve his aim of weakening the process, even if Paterson is sacrificed.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Bit late to close the stable door now.Big_G_NorthWales said:BBC now reporting significant u turn and the reforms will not apply to Paterson
And then there's the benefit of degrading Tory MPs by having them vote for the thing yesterday.
Sometimes it feels like instability is the method in the madness. There's often only a cursory attempt to defend a position that it makes the government hard to pin down.0 -
PS Just seen this:IshmaelZ said:
That vote was an unforced error. His complaint is that the rules of natural justice do not apply to his case. There are two rules of natural justice, and one of them is nemo iudex in causa sua.Carnyx said:
That is actually blatantly pro Patterson. No reference to his repeated advocacy while concealing his links, or voting in his own case, and so on. And if it comes out with that conclusion ...Big_G_NorthWales said:This is worth a read especially given the source
This is one of the biggest own goals I can recall no matter @HYUFD lame attempts to defend it
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1456185652429664258?t=2Bok1eq6y-lMcxGkOJriqA&s=19
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/11/03/owen-paterson-calls-parliaments-chief-sleaze-inquisitor-quit/
Obvs not just seeking to act as a judge in his own case ...0 -
That is AAA rated government incompetence.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sam Coates confirms on Sky that HMG does a full 'fat' climbdown and in the next few days a motion will be put to mps to confirm the 30 day suspension for Paterson and trigger a by election
2 -
I think they were hoping that she would resign yesterday off the back of this. The fact that she did not may well have caused them to realise their plan had failed. I am more and more inclined to the idea this was a targeted attack on the Commissioner who they believe to be biased.RochdalePioneers said:
The incompetence is the amazing bit. The government is brilliant at populist stunts, and utterly useless about political management.Jonathan said:Corrupt, incompetent and unprincipled. Impressive work.
So its back to *why*. The vote was explicitly a putsch against the standards commissioner - Kwarteng confirmed that repeatedly this morning. And we know what she is planning to go after next - Carrie and the redecoration.
So I get the motives. How are they so godawful at the strategy, never mind the tactics.3 -
It looks more likely as the hours go by that Paterson was a stalking horse, sacrificed to protect Johnson.Sean_F said:I honestly don't know why the government thought that protecting Owen Paterson was a good idea.
Quite a clever wizard wheeze.1 -
The TCA isn't being renegotiated.noneoftheabove said:
Sure but the clue might be in the name Covid19 given the TCA was agreed in December 2020.turbotubbs said:
Well I think Covid has had a pretty big effect too.noneoftheabove said:
Last ever or last of the same year are quite different things.turbotubbs said:
Sometimes you get into a situation, perhaps not of your making, that is really hard to get out of. That's Brexit. Everything was stuck. Frost and Johnson got us out, with a very imperfect deal. Yes they trumpeted it etc, and its facile to mock that, but at the end of the day it was pragmatic politics. Now that the issues are pressing, we move on. Did you expect the TCA to be the last ever word on the matter? Of course not.RochdalePioneers said:
How odd. If the TCA is so good why is Frost out to renegotiate it? Why is Frost attacking it?Philip_Thompson said:
You mean the fantastically good negotiation carried out by Lord Frost, don't you?RochdalePioneers said:
When he says "delivered Brexit" does he mean the act of leaving the EU? Or the Brexit deal that its chief negotiator is in Paris to try and amend because of the appallingly poor negotiation carried out by Lord Frost?LostPassword said:
It was the only point in the interview when he sounded comfortable.kle4 said:
Is that a parody? He cannot have been so robotic surely?Scott_xP said:Nick Robinson: can you give one single example of @BorisJohnson promoting and upholding the principles of standards in public life?
Kwasi Kwarteng: "We had a manifesto commitment to deliver Brexit and we delivered Brexit"
@BBCr4today
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1456175002055761927
If Frost had stuck with Robbins former arrangements there'd have been no Article 16 and no way out of the backstop. That Frost managed to get Article 16 into the arrangements, which can now be used to get a better deal is a masterclass in how you do good negotiations.
And contrary to the myth some like to spread, its not "bad faith" either since the conditions to trigger Article 16 have been met. That people foresaw the fact that the Protocol would lead to problems doesn't mean those problems aren't a trigger for Article 16 - nowhere in the conditions for Article 16 does it say the problems have to be unforeseen.
And as for A16 it is what happens *after* we inevitab;y trigger it which nobody has answers to. "Just trigger A16!!!" seems to be the cry as if that is the final play. It is just the start of a whole new process of once against trying to jam a square peg into a round hole.
Its the Protocol that is and that was agreed in October (I think?) 2019.
It makes perfect sense to renegotiate the Protocol now that we have the TCA.0 -
The Fat Lying Sack of Jizz doesn't give a fuck about his MPs because, much like Trump, he disintermediates the political process and speaks directly to the voters going around or through the elected representatives.FrankBooth said:I'm not sure how much this will affect the Tories' poll ratings but Johnson has surely lost capital with his own MPs.
2 -
It's interesting isn't it. We are calling it a "booster" when in actual fact it is a "third jab".Philip_Thompson said:
After an incredibly slow start, I think this is probably the most important thing to keep an eye on for the winter.turbotubbs said:
Yesterday on radio 5 I listened in shock as a scientist pointed out how much higher our testing regime is than other countries, and if you take that into account we are not so out of step with our community levels of Covid. Refreshing.NickPalmer said:
Focusing on the vaccine is definitely right - regardless of how one reads the figures, there is plenty of Covid still around and plenty of people on ventilators. Not going all out to promote boosters (and IMO vaccination of children) is a collective own goals - and that's nothing to do with being pro- or anti-lockdown.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.
Personally I'm trying not to react too much to the daily figures. When the number dropped under 40K there were people saying "See? It's beaten!" and when it went back over 40K there were people shouting "Plan B now". Overall the picture looks fairly stable at a high plateau.
I don't understand why the USA is dragging its heels so much in the booster rollout considering they had a big head start on that. Its worth remembering that although the UK rolled out jabs first, we prioritised first jabs first, so other nations had a higher share of second jabs for a while that need boosting sooner.
America was for a very long time ahead of us on second jabs, so they should be well ahead on boosters and they're just not.
What implications this has for a "fourth jab", and a "fifth jab" is an interesting question.0 -
Polling changes will be negligible. You'll never be able to "get" Boris on sleaze, incompetence etc etc. He's teflon!FrankBooth said:I'm not sure how much this will affect the Tories' poll ratings but Johnson has surely lost capital with his own MPs.
0 -
But you knew that anyway, right? Marr last Sunday stated that we have more new infections than the rest of Europe combined - what nonsense - yet Sunak didn't challenge him. He should have gone for Marr at that point for promoting such a falsehood.turbotubbs said:
Yesterday on radio 5 I listened in shock as a scientist pointed out how much higher our testing regime is than other countries, and if you take that into account we are not so out of step with our community levels of Covid. Refreshing.NickPalmer said:
Focusing on the vaccine is definitely right - regardless of how one reads the figures, there is plenty of Covid still around and plenty of people on ventilators. Not going all out to promote boosters (and IMO vaccination of children) is a collective own goals - and that's nothing to do with being pro- or anti-lockdown.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.
Personally I'm trying not to react too much to the daily figures. When the number dropped under 40K there were people saying "See? It's beaten!" and when it went back over 40K there were people shouting "Plan B now". Overall the picture looks fairly stable at a high plateau.2 -
I can't imagine there will be any difficulty attracting 8,300 signatures in North Shropshire to force a by-election, and Paterson should be required to stand down in favour of another candidate.3
-
So Paterson much more likely to face a recall vote & by election, Stone strengthened in her position and this government (yet again) revealed to be corrupt incompetents.Carnyx said:
PS Just seen this:IshmaelZ said:
That vote was an unforced error. His complaint is that the rules of natural justice do not apply to his case. There are two rules of natural justice, and one of them is nemo iudex in causa sua.Carnyx said:
That is actually blatantly pro Patterson. No reference to his repeated advocacy while concealing his links, or voting in his own case, and so on. And if it comes out with that conclusion ...Big_G_NorthWales said:This is worth a read especially given the source
This is one of the biggest own goals I can recall no matter @HYUFD lame attempts to defend it
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1456185652429664258?t=2Bok1eq6y-lMcxGkOJriqA&s=19
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/11/03/owen-paterson-calls-parliaments-chief-sleaze-inquisitor-quit/
Obvs not just seeking to act as a judge in his own case ...
A cracking day's work!0 -
Late to the party this morning but the HPV vaccine news is bloody brilliant. Vaccines work. That message needs to be drummed home morning , noon and night12
-
It does seem to be a pattern with this government that they back down only having extracted the maximum embarrassment from the situation. I suppose this is a consequence of Johnson having made a career out of bare-faced cheek. At the moment they are getting away with it, but it does seem the sort of behavior that will eventually cause them to come a cropper.Philip_Thompson said:
I agree.Richard_Tyndall said:
JRM has confirmed that they are planning on revoting on Paterson. Strikes me a recall election is now inevitable.RochdalePioneers said:
Can they chose to simply ignore it? Various things get voted for in parliament that just get set aside. As the government have both forced the vote and now indicated they will not implement it, I assume they can just ignore the thing they strongly advocated on this morning's media round.Philip_Thompson said:
Agreed. All very odd.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Bit late to close the stable door now.Big_G_NorthWales said:BBC now reporting significant u turn and the reforms will not apply to Paterson
Are they planning to re-hold the vote on Paterson's suspension then?
It seems to be the new political rule. The more desperate and debased the minister's arguments are on the media round, the greater the likelihood the government is about to do a complete u-turn.
I give the Government no credit at all for this U-turn. They got caught with their hands in the sweetie jar and only backed down because of the amount of flak they were getting and how damaging it was going to be to them politically. Their intent was clear and pretending otherwise is just further dishonesty.
I defended the right to have an appeal yesterday and I stand by that. But this hokey-cokey is just ridiculous. If they thought they were in the right yesterday (and I was OK with it) then they should have stuck with it, to flip flop after less than 24 hours makes the whole thing a politicised farce and not justice.5 -
I couldn't care less if we have a fourth, fifth . . . 80th etc jab having a new one every six or twelve months if required.TOPPING said:
It's interesting isn't it. We are calling it a "booster" when in actual fact it is a "third jab".Philip_Thompson said:
After an incredibly slow start, I think this is probably the most important thing to keep an eye on for the winter.turbotubbs said:
Yesterday on radio 5 I listened in shock as a scientist pointed out how much higher our testing regime is than other countries, and if you take that into account we are not so out of step with our community levels of Covid. Refreshing.NickPalmer said:
Focusing on the vaccine is definitely right - regardless of how one reads the figures, there is plenty of Covid still around and plenty of people on ventilators. Not going all out to promote boosters (and IMO vaccination of children) is a collective own goals - and that's nothing to do with being pro- or anti-lockdown.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.
Personally I'm trying not to react too much to the daily figures. When the number dropped under 40K there were people saying "See? It's beaten!" and when it went back over 40K there were people shouting "Plan B now". Overall the picture looks fairly stable at a high plateau.
I don't understand why the USA is dragging its heels so much in the booster rollout considering they had a big head start on that. Its worth remembering that although the UK rolled out jabs first, we prioritised first jabs first, so other nations had a higher share of second jabs for a while that need boosting sooner.
America was for a very long time ahead of us on second jabs, so they should be well ahead on boosters and they're just not.
What implications this has for a "fourth dose", and a "fifth dose" is an interesting question.
The flu jab is annual, why can't the Covid jab be annual or biannual?
If that's what it takes to ensure people are protected and we don't need any other bullshit to live our lives normally, then that's what it takes.3 -
Johnson's a classicist. It'd be a pig, sheep or ox (I think chickens are too small to count for Tory MPs). And the best sacrifices came in sets of three, the suovetaurilia. Wonder who nos. 2 and 3 will be?Mexicanpete said:
It looks more likely as the hours go by that Paterson was a stalking horse, sacrificed to protect Johnson.Sean_F said:I honestly don't know why the government thought that protecting Owen Paterson was a good idea.
Quite a clever wizard wheeze.1 -
A totally avoidable mess. Worse, one caused by a lack of both morality and intelligence within the government.4
-
Clown car executes remarkable U-turn: Prime Minister Johnson junks unilateral reform of Commons standards procedures, Owen Paterson to face suspension after all #shambles
https://twitter.com/afneil/status/14562198812427755571 -
Exactly right. Who cares?Philip_Thompson said:
I couldn't care less if we have a fourth, fifth . . . 80th etc jab having a new one every six or twelve months if required.TOPPING said:
It's interesting isn't it. We are calling it a "booster" when in actual fact it is a "third jab".Philip_Thompson said:
After an incredibly slow start, I think this is probably the most important thing to keep an eye on for the winter.turbotubbs said:
Yesterday on radio 5 I listened in shock as a scientist pointed out how much higher our testing regime is than other countries, and if you take that into account we are not so out of step with our community levels of Covid. Refreshing.NickPalmer said:
Focusing on the vaccine is definitely right - regardless of how one reads the figures, there is plenty of Covid still around and plenty of people on ventilators. Not going all out to promote boosters (and IMO vaccination of children) is a collective own goals - and that's nothing to do with being pro- or anti-lockdown.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.
Personally I'm trying not to react too much to the daily figures. When the number dropped under 40K there were people saying "See? It's beaten!" and when it went back over 40K there were people shouting "Plan B now". Overall the picture looks fairly stable at a high plateau.
I don't understand why the USA is dragging its heels so much in the booster rollout considering they had a big head start on that. Its worth remembering that although the UK rolled out jabs first, we prioritised first jabs first, so other nations had a higher share of second jabs for a while that need boosting sooner.
America was for a very long time ahead of us on second jabs, so they should be well ahead on boosters and they're just not.
What implications this has for a "fourth dose", and a "fifth dose" is an interesting question.
The flu jab is annual, why can't the Covid jab be annual or biannual?
If that's what it takes to ensure people are protected and we don't need any other bullshit to live our lives normally, then that's what it takes.3 -
This isn't just any climbdown, this is an M&S climbdown.glw said:
That is AAA rated government incompetence.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sam Coates confirms on Sky that HMG does a full 'fat' climbdown and in the next few days a motion will be put to mps to confirm the 30 day suspension for Paterson and trigger a by election
4 -
Very well said!Richard_Tyndall said:Late to the party this morning but the HPV vaccine news is bloody brilliant. Vaccines work. That message needs to be drummed home morning , noon and night
Between that and the Cleo Smith rescue in Australia, that's some really good news at the moment.1 -
Evergreen post with BoZo in charge...JosiasJessop said:A totally avoidable mess. Worse, one caused by a lack of both morality and intelligence within the government.
0 -
This is typical Johnson supermarket trolley vacillation stuff. Just as Cummings said.0
-
On other news, a rather positive move:
First pill to treat Covid gets approval in UK
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-591638995 -
Good job they haven't drawn attention to it at all then. Such sleight of hand.Mexicanpete said:
It looks more likely as the hours go by that Paterson was a stalking horse, sacrificed to protect Johnson.Sean_F said:I honestly don't know why the government thought that protecting Owen Paterson was a good idea.
Quite a clever wizard wheeze.
Wallpapergate, nobody cares, SKS looks like a prat standing in John Lewis.
It's not the crime it's the cover up though.
I wonder if the odd person will start to care once this plays out.2 -
He needs to have a stiff word with the voters who are vandalising his MPs' offices (and who are probably exactly the types who were prancing about outside parliament with mock gallows). These are his people now.Dura_Ace said:
The Fat Lying Sack of Jizz doesn't give a fuck about his MPs because, much like Trump, he disintermediates the political process and speaks directly to the voters going around or through the elected representatives.FrankBooth said:I'm not sure how much this will affect the Tories' poll ratings but Johnson has surely lost capital with his own MPs.
0 -
Blimey. My opinion - as it always has been - is to follow the science. Which is not being "hysterical" as you previously suggested.Anabobazina said:
A barefaced lie. Show me the post where I say Covid is over? Clue: you won’t be able to because I have said the exact opposite, repeatedly. It’s probably with us forever.RochdalePioneers said:
I advocate nothing. Thats my point. It isn't my opinion that matters. Its Whitty, Van-Tam, Taylor et al whose opinions matter.Anabobazina said:
What restrictions do you advocate immediately and to what level would the data need to fall for you to advocate the status quo?RochdalePioneers said:
They're falling from the 52k mini peak but maintaining in the c. 40k new cases a day range that is still way too high. Hospitalisation too high. The genuine pressure on the NHS that could cause it to collapse very real.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
That is why they have both Plan B and apparently Plan C. Not because I am "hysterical" as you kindly put it. Because the NHS management is "hysterical".
The CEO of the NHS Confederation has set out in detail the perils that the NHS faces. Backed by the government health advisers. Listen to them, not me. The problem is that as you have already set your face to "Covid is over" and describe any data against as "hysterical" you are blind to the data...
As for the rest of your post, you have no opinion now? How convenient. You can attack others but avoid any commitment yourself. Maybe you are right and hysterical is not the right descriptor. Let’s go with sanctimonious instead.
Right here and now the science and the health experts say we need Plan B - something you described as "irrational". So I can say that you are "agitating" for Covid - the pandemic driving restrictions as opposed to the literal virus - to be over because you consistently are and have been in this very thread.0 -
Absolutely but it is the messaging that is important. If we are going to have to have jabs for the foreseeable future then that needs to be introduced. "Booster" implies some kind of finality. 2x jabs then a booster and you're done.Philip_Thompson said:
I couldn't care less if we have a fourth, fifth . . . 80th etc jab having a new one every six or twelve months if required.TOPPING said:
It's interesting isn't it. We are calling it a "booster" when in actual fact it is a "third jab".Philip_Thompson said:
After an incredibly slow start, I think this is probably the most important thing to keep an eye on for the winter.turbotubbs said:
Yesterday on radio 5 I listened in shock as a scientist pointed out how much higher our testing regime is than other countries, and if you take that into account we are not so out of step with our community levels of Covid. Refreshing.NickPalmer said:
Focusing on the vaccine is definitely right - regardless of how one reads the figures, there is plenty of Covid still around and plenty of people on ventilators. Not going all out to promote boosters (and IMO vaccination of children) is a collective own goals - and that's nothing to do with being pro- or anti-lockdown.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.
Personally I'm trying not to react too much to the daily figures. When the number dropped under 40K there were people saying "See? It's beaten!" and when it went back over 40K there were people shouting "Plan B now". Overall the picture looks fairly stable at a high plateau.
I don't understand why the USA is dragging its heels so much in the booster rollout considering they had a big head start on that. Its worth remembering that although the UK rolled out jabs first, we prioritised first jabs first, so other nations had a higher share of second jabs for a while that need boosting sooner.
America was for a very long time ahead of us on second jabs, so they should be well ahead on boosters and they're just not.
What implications this has for a "fourth dose", and a "fifth dose" is an interesting question.
The flu jab is annual, why can't the Covid jab be annual or biannual?
If that's what it takes to ensure people are protected and we don't need any other bullshit to live our lives normally, then that's what it takes.
What are they going to call jab #4?1 -
Had Grant Shapps and the hamster that lives on top of his head been sent out to defend it on Sky News?Scott_xP said:Clown car executes remarkable U-turn: Prime Minister Johnson junks unilateral reform of Commons standards procedures, Owen Paterson to face suspension after all #shambles
https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1456219881242775557
That is the usual harbinger of a U-turn within 4-6 hours.0 -
Waffle.RochdalePioneers said:
Blimey. My opinion - as it always has been - is to follow the science. Which is not being "hysterical" as you previously suggested.Anabobazina said:
A barefaced lie. Show me the post where I say Covid is over? Clue: you won’t be able to because I have said the exact opposite, repeatedly. It’s probably with us forever.RochdalePioneers said:
I advocate nothing. Thats my point. It isn't my opinion that matters. Its Whitty, Van-Tam, Taylor et al whose opinions matter.Anabobazina said:
What restrictions do you advocate immediately and to what level would the data need to fall for you to advocate the status quo?RochdalePioneers said:
They're falling from the 52k mini peak but maintaining in the c. 40k new cases a day range that is still way too high. Hospitalisation too high. The genuine pressure on the NHS that could cause it to collapse very real.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
That is why they have both Plan B and apparently Plan C. Not because I am "hysterical" as you kindly put it. Because the NHS management is "hysterical".
The CEO of the NHS Confederation has set out in detail the perils that the NHS faces. Backed by the government health advisers. Listen to them, not me. The problem is that as you have already set your face to "Covid is over" and describe any data against as "hysterical" you are blind to the data...
As for the rest of your post, you have no opinion now? How convenient. You can attack others but avoid any commitment yourself. Maybe you are right and hysterical is not the right descriptor. Let’s go with sanctimonious instead.
Right here and now the science and the health experts say we need Plan B - something you described as "irrational". So I can say that you are "agitating" for Covid - the pandemic driving restrictions as opposed to the literal virus - to be over because you consistently are and have been in this very thread.
My view is that no more restrictions are necessary at this stage.
What’s yours?0 -
Smarkets have some prices on whether there will be a North Shropshire by-election.
https://smarkets.com/event/42453437/politics/uk/by-elections/north-shropshire-by-election4 -
Yes excellent news. Hopefully this will also start bringing down rates of oral and oralpharyngeal cancers which have shown a spike in younger age groups over the past 30 years or so largely as result of HPV.Richard_Tyndall said:Late to the party this morning but the HPV vaccine news is bloody brilliant. Vaccines work. That message needs to be drummed home morning , noon and night
1 -
They only think she is biased because she keeps finding Tory MPs to be in breach of the standards. And she's coming after Boris over who paid for Carrie's wallpaper.Richard_Tyndall said:
I think they were hoping that she would resign yesterday off the back of this. The fact that she did not may well have caused them to realise their plan had failed. I am more and more inclined to the idea this was a targeted attack on the Commissioner who they believe to be biased.RochdalePioneers said:
The incompetence is the amazing bit. The government is brilliant at populist stunts, and utterly useless about political management.Jonathan said:Corrupt, incompetent and unprincipled. Impressive work.
So its back to *why*. The vote was explicitly a putsch against the standards commissioner - Kwarteng confirmed that repeatedly this morning. And we know what she is planning to go after next - Carrie and the redecoration.
So I get the motives. How are they so godawful at the strategy, never mind the tactics.2 -
For a proper exciting 'corruption' story you need to come to Denmark - the 'mink case' is a slowly bubbling constitutional scandal that if it keeps growing (as I think it will) could put Mette Frederiksen's government in danger - the results of the upcoming regional and local elections will provide some info on how seriously voters are taking a breach of the constitution and the use of the police to carry out enforcement of orders they knew and accept were illegal - the social democrats have enjoyed a good corona war but ignoring the constitution could yet bite them. They tale of deleted texts is becoming familiar in political scandals but is getting some here very exercised.
My own view is that it is a serious issue but the situation at the time was extreme and there was near panic about a new variant of covid that domestic animals would pass to humans - the fact the social democrats also achieved their objective of destroying the mink industry is I think largely coincidental. However there needs to be a price paid for government ministers deciding to illegally appropriate property and commit to spending billions in compo on very thin evidence. I'm just not sure what that price should be.
1 -
As an aside I thought the Labour reply in Parliament was poor this morning. Thangam Debbonaire attacked the Government for trying to make the claim MPs were covered by employment law when they were a professional self regulating body. Now that may well be the case. But there have been numerous occasions in the past few years when Labour have specifically tried to get working conditions changed in Parliament on the basis that they run counter to employment legislation. It is hypocritical to now attack the Government on wanting a comparative employment system when that is the argument Labour have been making for years.
(Mind you of course it is hypocritical of the Government to swap their position as well.)5 -
Whitty. Van-Tam. Taylor. The rest of the NHS management. Javid. Even Johnson.Anabobazina said:
Exactly right. Who cares?Philip_Thompson said:
I couldn't care less if we have a fourth, fifth . . . 80th etc jab having a new one every six or twelve months if required.TOPPING said:
It's interesting isn't it. We are calling it a "booster" when in actual fact it is a "third jab".Philip_Thompson said:
After an incredibly slow start, I think this is probably the most important thing to keep an eye on for the winter.turbotubbs said:
Yesterday on radio 5 I listened in shock as a scientist pointed out how much higher our testing regime is than other countries, and if you take that into account we are not so out of step with our community levels of Covid. Refreshing.NickPalmer said:
Focusing on the vaccine is definitely right - regardless of how one reads the figures, there is plenty of Covid still around and plenty of people on ventilators. Not going all out to promote boosters (and IMO vaccination of children) is a collective own goals - and that's nothing to do with being pro- or anti-lockdown.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.
Personally I'm trying not to react too much to the daily figures. When the number dropped under 40K there were people saying "See? It's beaten!" and when it went back over 40K there were people shouting "Plan B now". Overall the picture looks fairly stable at a high plateau.
I don't understand why the USA is dragging its heels so much in the booster rollout considering they had a big head start on that. Its worth remembering that although the UK rolled out jabs first, we prioritised first jabs first, so other nations had a higher share of second jabs for a while that need boosting sooner.
America was for a very long time ahead of us on second jabs, so they should be well ahead on boosters and they're just not.
What implications this has for a "fourth dose", and a "fifth dose" is an interesting question.
The flu jab is annual, why can't the Covid jab be annual or biannual?
If that's what it takes to ensure people are protected and we don't need any other bullshit to live our lives normally, then that's what it takes.
They care. They don't want the NHS to collapse this winter. To protect you.0 -
Yeah but the trouble is a President can always blame Congress for gridlock. A Prime minister is supposed to control the HoC. He got away with it over Brexit but that was a very specific issue of parliament seemingly trying to avoid enacting the referendum result.Dura_Ace said:
The Fat Lying Sack of Jizz doesn't give a fuck about his MPs because, much like Trump, he disintermediates the political process and speaks directly to the voters going around or through the elected representatives.FrankBooth said:I'm not sure how much this will affect the Tories' poll ratings but Johnson has surely lost capital with his own MPs.
I rather doubt a parliament versus the people approach is going to work in the case of Paterson.0 -
That they are *likely* to be needed to stop the NHS collapsing. The difference between me and thee is that when they impose Plan B. Based on the evidence. You will keep saying we don't need it. That it is "irrational".Anabobazina said:
Waffle.RochdalePioneers said:
Blimey. My opinion - as it always has been - is to follow the science. Which is not being "hysterical" as you previously suggested.Anabobazina said:
A barefaced lie. Show me the post where I say Covid is over? Clue: you won’t be able to because I have said the exact opposite, repeatedly. It’s probably with us forever.RochdalePioneers said:
I advocate nothing. Thats my point. It isn't my opinion that matters. Its Whitty, Van-Tam, Taylor et al whose opinions matter.Anabobazina said:
What restrictions do you advocate immediately and to what level would the data need to fall for you to advocate the status quo?RochdalePioneers said:
They're falling from the 52k mini peak but maintaining in the c. 40k new cases a day range that is still way too high. Hospitalisation too high. The genuine pressure on the NHS that could cause it to collapse very real.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
That is why they have both Plan B and apparently Plan C. Not because I am "hysterical" as you kindly put it. Because the NHS management is "hysterical".
The CEO of the NHS Confederation has set out in detail the perils that the NHS faces. Backed by the government health advisers. Listen to them, not me. The problem is that as you have already set your face to "Covid is over" and describe any data against as "hysterical" you are blind to the data...
As for the rest of your post, you have no opinion now? How convenient. You can attack others but avoid any commitment yourself. Maybe you are right and hysterical is not the right descriptor. Let’s go with sanctimonious instead.
Right here and now the science and the health experts say we need Plan B - something you described as "irrational". So I can say that you are "agitating" for Covid - the pandemic driving restrictions as opposed to the literal virus - to be over because you consistently are and have been in this very thread.
My view is that no more restrictions are necessary at this stage.
What’s yours?
If it is "waffle" it is your waffle. I am directly quoting you.0 -
Booster doesn't imply finality it just implies it boosts your protection. If jab 4 is required then that can be called a booster too, or anything else, it doesn't matter.TOPPING said:
Absolutely but it is the messaging that is important. If we are going to have to have jabs for the foreseeable future then that needs to be introduced. "Booster" implies some kind of finality. 2x jabs then a booster and you're done.Philip_Thompson said:
I couldn't care less if we have a fourth, fifth . . . 80th etc jab having a new one every six or twelve months if required.TOPPING said:
It's interesting isn't it. We are calling it a "booster" when in actual fact it is a "third jab".Philip_Thompson said:
After an incredibly slow start, I think this is probably the most important thing to keep an eye on for the winter.turbotubbs said:
Yesterday on radio 5 I listened in shock as a scientist pointed out how much higher our testing regime is than other countries, and if you take that into account we are not so out of step with our community levels of Covid. Refreshing.NickPalmer said:
Focusing on the vaccine is definitely right - regardless of how one reads the figures, there is plenty of Covid still around and plenty of people on ventilators. Not going all out to promote boosters (and IMO vaccination of children) is a collective own goals - and that's nothing to do with being pro- or anti-lockdown.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.
Personally I'm trying not to react too much to the daily figures. When the number dropped under 40K there were people saying "See? It's beaten!" and when it went back over 40K there were people shouting "Plan B now". Overall the picture looks fairly stable at a high plateau.
I don't understand why the USA is dragging its heels so much in the booster rollout considering they had a big head start on that. Its worth remembering that although the UK rolled out jabs first, we prioritised first jabs first, so other nations had a higher share of second jabs for a while that need boosting sooner.
America was for a very long time ahead of us on second jabs, so they should be well ahead on boosters and they're just not.
What implications this has for a "fourth dose", and a "fifth dose" is an interesting question.
The flu jab is annual, why can't the Covid jab be annual or biannual?
If that's what it takes to ensure people are protected and we don't need any other bullshit to live our lives normally, then that's what it takes.
What are they going to call jab #4?
Those who want finality to Covid are in denial. It's something we need to live with.1 -
I think you misread what you were replying to.RochdalePioneers said:
Whitty. Van-Tam. Taylor. The rest of the NHS management. Javid. Even Johnson.Anabobazina said:
Exactly right. Who cares?Philip_Thompson said:
I couldn't care less if we have a fourth, fifth . . . 80th etc jab having a new one every six or twelve months if required.TOPPING said:
It's interesting isn't it. We are calling it a "booster" when in actual fact it is a "third jab".Philip_Thompson said:
After an incredibly slow start, I think this is probably the most important thing to keep an eye on for the winter.turbotubbs said:
Yesterday on radio 5 I listened in shock as a scientist pointed out how much higher our testing regime is than other countries, and if you take that into account we are not so out of step with our community levels of Covid. Refreshing.NickPalmer said:
Focusing on the vaccine is definitely right - regardless of how one reads the figures, there is plenty of Covid still around and plenty of people on ventilators. Not going all out to promote boosters (and IMO vaccination of children) is a collective own goals - and that's nothing to do with being pro- or anti-lockdown.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.
Personally I'm trying not to react too much to the daily figures. When the number dropped under 40K there were people saying "See? It's beaten!" and when it went back over 40K there were people shouting "Plan B now". Overall the picture looks fairly stable at a high plateau.
I don't understand why the USA is dragging its heels so much in the booster rollout considering they had a big head start on that. Its worth remembering that although the UK rolled out jabs first, we prioritised first jabs first, so other nations had a higher share of second jabs for a while that need boosting sooner.
America was for a very long time ahead of us on second jabs, so they should be well ahead on boosters and they're just not.
What implications this has for a "fourth dose", and a "fifth dose" is an interesting question.
The flu jab is annual, why can't the Covid jab be annual or biannual?
If that's what it takes to ensure people are protected and we don't need any other bullshit to live our lives normally, then that's what it takes.
They care. They don't want the NHS to collapse this winter. To protect you.
0/10 try again.1 -
It's like Homer Simpson has been put in charge of County Lines.6
-
You have gone stark raving crackers this morning. That post was in response to the prospect of getting biannual jabs, which I agreed with Philip is absolutely fine, you daft sod.RochdalePioneers said:
Whitty. Van-Tam. Taylor. The rest of the NHS management. Javid. Even Johnson.Anabobazina said:
Exactly right. Who cares?Philip_Thompson said:
I couldn't care less if we have a fourth, fifth . . . 80th etc jab having a new one every six or twelve months if required.TOPPING said:
It's interesting isn't it. We are calling it a "booster" when in actual fact it is a "third jab".Philip_Thompson said:
After an incredibly slow start, I think this is probably the most important thing to keep an eye on for the winter.turbotubbs said:
Yesterday on radio 5 I listened in shock as a scientist pointed out how much higher our testing regime is than other countries, and if you take that into account we are not so out of step with our community levels of Covid. Refreshing.NickPalmer said:
Focusing on the vaccine is definitely right - regardless of how one reads the figures, there is plenty of Covid still around and plenty of people on ventilators. Not going all out to promote boosters (and IMO vaccination of children) is a collective own goals - and that's nothing to do with being pro- or anti-lockdown.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.
Personally I'm trying not to react too much to the daily figures. When the number dropped under 40K there were people saying "See? It's beaten!" and when it went back over 40K there were people shouting "Plan B now". Overall the picture looks fairly stable at a high plateau.
I don't understand why the USA is dragging its heels so much in the booster rollout considering they had a big head start on that. Its worth remembering that although the UK rolled out jabs first, we prioritised first jabs first, so other nations had a higher share of second jabs for a while that need boosting sooner.
America was for a very long time ahead of us on second jabs, so they should be well ahead on boosters and they're just not.
What implications this has for a "fourth dose", and a "fifth dose" is an interesting question.
The flu jab is annual, why can't the Covid jab be annual or biannual?
If that's what it takes to ensure people are protected and we don't need any other bullshit to live our lives normally, then that's what it takes.
They care. They don't want the NHS to collapse this winter. To protect you.1 -
If I were one of the 13 Tory MPs who voted against yesterday's amendment, I'd be feeling pretty smug right now.
I wonder if Angela Richardson, who resigned as a PPS yesterday as she defied the Whip, will get her job back now?6 -
I had my booster yesterday. They seem to have got the booster program back on the road. The NHS web site has changed so it is much clearer. I went to a walk in centre and it was heaving. Today I got my reminder. A bit late but at least there for those who don't know about walk in centres. Very sore arm today and slight ache all over.Philip_Thompson said:
I couldn't care less if we have a fourth, fifth . . . 80th etc jab having a new one every six or twelve months if required.TOPPING said:
It's interesting isn't it. We are calling it a "booster" when in actual fact it is a "third jab".Philip_Thompson said:
After an incredibly slow start, I think this is probably the most important thing to keep an eye on for the winter.turbotubbs said:
Yesterday on radio 5 I listened in shock as a scientist pointed out how much higher our testing regime is than other countries, and if you take that into account we are not so out of step with our community levels of Covid. Refreshing.NickPalmer said:
Focusing on the vaccine is definitely right - regardless of how one reads the figures, there is plenty of Covid still around and plenty of people on ventilators. Not going all out to promote boosters (and IMO vaccination of children) is a collective own goals - and that's nothing to do with being pro- or anti-lockdown.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.
Personally I'm trying not to react too much to the daily figures. When the number dropped under 40K there were people saying "See? It's beaten!" and when it went back over 40K there were people shouting "Plan B now". Overall the picture looks fairly stable at a high plateau.
I don't understand why the USA is dragging its heels so much in the booster rollout considering they had a big head start on that. Its worth remembering that although the UK rolled out jabs first, we prioritised first jabs first, so other nations had a higher share of second jabs for a while that need boosting sooner.
America was for a very long time ahead of us on second jabs, so they should be well ahead on boosters and they're just not.
What implications this has for a "fourth dose", and a "fifth dose" is an interesting question.
The flu jab is annual, why can't the Covid jab be annual or biannual?
If that's what it takes to ensure people are protected and we don't need any other bullshit to live our lives normally, then that's what it takes.2 -
Nifty avatar changeshadsy said:Smarkets have some prices on whether there will be a North Shropshire by-election.
https://smarkets.com/event/42453437/politics/uk/by-elections/north-shropshire-by-election
0 -
That's chicken and egg though.RochdalePioneers said:
They only think she is biased because she keeps finding Tory MPs to be in breach of the standards. And she's coming after Boris over who paid for Carrie's wallpaper.Richard_Tyndall said:
I think they were hoping that she would resign yesterday off the back of this. The fact that she did not may well have caused them to realise their plan had failed. I am more and more inclined to the idea this was a targeted attack on the Commissioner who they believe to be biased.RochdalePioneers said:
The incompetence is the amazing bit. The government is brilliant at populist stunts, and utterly useless about political management.Jonathan said:Corrupt, incompetent and unprincipled. Impressive work.
So its back to *why*. The vote was explicitly a putsch against the standards commissioner - Kwarteng confirmed that repeatedly this morning. And we know what she is planning to go after next - Carrie and the redecoration.
So I get the motives. How are they so godawful at the strategy, never mind the tactics.
Do they think she's biased because she's going after Tories, or is she going after Tories because she's biased?0 -
We know who paid for the wallpaper: we did. Because large political donations are usually transactional and whatever the politicians are offering in return is paid for with our money.RochdalePioneers said:
They only think she is biased because she keeps finding Tory MPs to be in breach of the standards. And she's coming after Boris over who paid for Carrie's wallpaper.Richard_Tyndall said:
I think they were hoping that she would resign yesterday off the back of this. The fact that she did not may well have caused them to realise their plan had failed. I am more and more inclined to the idea this was a targeted attack on the Commissioner who they believe to be biased.RochdalePioneers said:
The incompetence is the amazing bit. The government is brilliant at populist stunts, and utterly useless about political management.Jonathan said:Corrupt, incompetent and unprincipled. Impressive work.
So its back to *why*. The vote was explicitly a putsch against the standards commissioner - Kwarteng confirmed that repeatedly this morning. And we know what she is planning to go after next - Carrie and the redecoration.
So I get the motives. How are they so godawful at the strategy, never mind the tactics.1 -
He crawled through lava on here over the last 24 hours to haughtily defend the indefensible only for the government to then drop it.Farooq said:Thoughts and prayers for HYUFD at this difficult time. Defending the government line is not easy when Caligula is in charge.
Bless.6 -
What’s your position currently is what I asked. Do you advocate restrictions now or not? It’s a very simple question. You are simply embarrassing yourself further by failing to answer it.RochdalePioneers said:
That they are *likely* to be needed to stop the NHS collapsing. The difference between me and thee is that when they impose Plan B. Based on the evidence. You will keep saying we don't need it. That it is "irrational".Anabobazina said:
Waffle.RochdalePioneers said:
Blimey. My opinion - as it always has been - is to follow the science. Which is not being "hysterical" as you previously suggested.Anabobazina said:
A barefaced lie. Show me the post where I say Covid is over? Clue: you won’t be able to because I have said the exact opposite, repeatedly. It’s probably with us forever.RochdalePioneers said:
I advocate nothing. Thats my point. It isn't my opinion that matters. Its Whitty, Van-Tam, Taylor et al whose opinions matter.Anabobazina said:
What restrictions do you advocate immediately and to what level would the data need to fall for you to advocate the status quo?RochdalePioneers said:
They're falling from the 52k mini peak but maintaining in the c. 40k new cases a day range that is still way too high. Hospitalisation too high. The genuine pressure on the NHS that could cause it to collapse very real.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
That is why they have both Plan B and apparently Plan C. Not because I am "hysterical" as you kindly put it. Because the NHS management is "hysterical".
The CEO of the NHS Confederation has set out in detail the perils that the NHS faces. Backed by the government health advisers. Listen to them, not me. The problem is that as you have already set your face to "Covid is over" and describe any data against as "hysterical" you are blind to the data...
As for the rest of your post, you have no opinion now? How convenient. You can attack others but avoid any commitment yourself. Maybe you are right and hysterical is not the right descriptor. Let’s go with sanctimonious instead.
Right here and now the science and the health experts say we need Plan B - something you described as "irrational". So I can say that you are "agitating" for Covid - the pandemic driving restrictions as opposed to the literal virus - to be over because you consistently are and have been in this very thread.
My view is that no more restrictions are necessary at this stage.
What’s yours?
If it is "waffle" it is your waffle. I am directly quoting you.0 -
I doubt it.Northern_Al said:If I were one of the 13 Tory MPs who voted against yesterday's amendment, I'd be feeling pretty smug right now.
I wonder if Angela Richardson, who resigned as a PPS yesterday as she defied the Whip, will get her job back now?0 -
Anabobazina said:Anabobazina said:
You have gone stark raving crackers this morning. That post was in response to the prospect of getting biannual jabs, which I agreed with Philip is absolutely fine, you daft sod.RochdalePioneers said:
Whitty. Van-Tam. Taylor. The rest of the NHS management. Javid. Even Johnson.Anabobazina said:
Exactly right. Who cares?Philip_Thompson said:
I couldn't care less if we have a fourth, fifth . . . 80th etc jab having a new one every six or twelve months if required.TOPPING said:
It's interesting isn't it. We are calling it a "booster" when in actual fact it is a "third jab".Philip_Thompson said:
After an incredibly slow start, I think this is probably the most important thing to keep an eye on for the winter.turbotubbs said:
Yesterday on radio 5 I listened in shock as a scientist pointed out how much higher our testing regime is than other countries, and if you take that into account we are not so out of step with our community levels of Covid. Refreshing.NickPalmer said:
Focusing on the vaccine is definitely right - regardless of how one reads the figures, there is plenty of Covid still around and plenty of people on ventilators. Not going all out to promote boosters (and IMO vaccination of children) is a collective own goals - and that's nothing to do with being pro- or anti-lockdown.LostPassword said:
I don't know. I'm hardly paying attention to it.Anabobazina said:Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
I suppose you could make the argument of pre-emptive action in advance of winter, anticipating more social contact indoors, or the death numbers are still going up, as they catch-up with the latest peak in cases.
Would be much better if there was more attention paid to the vaccine. Immunising more people is the single most effective thing we can do.
Personally I'm trying not to react too much to the daily figures. When the number dropped under 40K there were people saying "See? It's beaten!" and when it went back over 40K there were people shouting "Plan B now". Overall the picture looks fairly stable at a high plateau.
I don't understand why the USA is dragging its heels so much in the booster rollout considering they had a big head start on that. Its worth remembering that although the UK rolled out jabs first, we prioritised first jabs first, so other nations had a higher share of second jabs for a while that need boosting sooner.
America was for a very long time ahead of us on second jabs, so they should be well ahead on boosters and they're just not.
What implications this has for a "fourth dose", and a "fifth dose" is an interesting question.
The flu jab is annual, why can't the Covid jab be annual or biannual?
If that's what it takes to ensure people are protected and we don't need any other bullshit to live our lives normally, then that's what it takes.
They care. They don't want the NHS to collapse this winter. To protect you.
Can anyone explain the agitating over ‘Plan B’ in several corners of the press? Covid positive tests are falling, and have been falling for almost a fortnight - without any restrictions.
Where has this latest bout of irrational panic come from?
Plan B is not biannual jabs.0 -
Reminds me of a discussion with an insurance claims handler. He said that, in his estimation, one in ten thousand people tell the truth and if he thought otherwise, he would be out of a job tomorrow.Cyclefree said:
Suicide is an appalling thing to hit a family, a husband, even one as stupid or sleazy as Paterson. I have great sympathy for him on that.
But. But.
... politics is not a moral philosophy class, with voters not minding politicians wetting their beaks as they'd like to do it too (ca. @isam), then there seems little point debating it further.
...
0 -
That sounds exciting, let's hope it lives up to the hype.JosiasJessop said:On other news, a rather positive move:
First pill to treat Covid gets approval in UK
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59163899
One criticism of our covid approach that did resonate with me was the complaint that we seem ignore all but the very worst cases. If it's bad stay at home. If's its really bad stay at home. If it's really really bad you may need to go to A&E. By which point in a deteriorating case things could be pretty bleak. What do we do about the in between cases?0 -
A tenner on Yes at evens for me.shadsy said:Smarkets have some prices on whether there will be a North Shropshire by-election.
https://smarkets.com/event/42453437/politics/uk/by-elections/north-shropshire-by-election0
This discussion has been closed.