BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread

Subject: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Barb'ry
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 09:27 AM

Well, here we go again!

Mod rules:

No personal insults
No dragging up the same points again and again and again
Stay as polite as you can be...
Respect each other, even if your political opinions differ.
No racism, sexism or other isms

Over to you....

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 09:45 AM

And just in time for the great Brexit debate to start up again. Oh joy!

Coronavirus UK live: No 10 claims Covid-19 crisis strengthens need for UK to be free of EU regulation after 2020

[The spokesman] told journalists:

We will not ask to extend the transition. And, if the EU asks, we will say no. Extending the transition would simply prolong the negotiations, prolong business uncertainty, and delay the moment of control of our borders. It would also keep us bound by EU legislation at a point when we need legislative and economic flexibility to manage the UK response to the coronavirus pandemic.

What is also interesting about this comment is that it shows No 10 is now arguing that coronavirus strengthens the case for the UK to break away from regulatory alignment with the EU. Opposing regulatory alignment could end up with the UK having to negotiate with the EU on WTO terms (what used to be called a “no-deal” Brexit), although of course the government says it wants a Canada-style trade deal.


I have said elsewhere that in any sane world we would see whether we still wanted to leave in 2020 in the light of the delays to negotiation that the virus has caused, not to speak of the economic effects for both the UK and the rest of European. Not necessarily change our mind, but at least give it a clear headed analysis in the light of events. So I would expect at the least some account of why we have stayed on the same course, rather than a simple assertion that nothing relevant has happened. Given the different responses of countries in the EU, this "legislative and economic flexibility to manage the UK response to the coronavirus pandemic" seems 'a figment of the heat-oppressed brain.' You have economic freedom now, you had it before 2016 and before January 2020 and you will have it in future, for example.

I also said I did not guarantee we lived in a sane world.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 10:35 AM

Thanks Barb'ry.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 10:47 AM

Good idea of Pete's over on the closed thread. Brief intro from everyone to help keep this thread civil. May work.

I'm Dave and not really a gnome. Born and bred in Lancashire but embraced the dark side and moved to Yorkshire 7 years back. Recently retired from the day job. Sing a bit. Wrestle an Anglo concertina but it usually beats me. Learning the chest piano. Enjoy hiking, folking and drinking :-D

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 10:59 AM

I'm another Dave, originally from Middlesbrough but have moved N,E,S & W (in the UK) since then. Until further notice I live in Southampton, Hampshire. Mainly sing unaccompanied either solo (in folk clubs) or in choirs (tenor, though those who know more say bass-baritone. I don't argue.)

Graduated in Mathematics but have been involved in all sorts of weird and wonderful stuff (including epidemiology modelling, but that was many decades ago.)

Passing interest in life in general, and as a result of lock-in I am between about 5% and 90% of four online courses.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 12:09 PM

Thanks Dave.

Going on to politics and, hopefully, not breaking rule number 2, would any right wing colleague care to comment on the points I made in the last thread.

The lies Boris Johnson and the government have told as detailed in boris-johnson-lies.com

The running down of the NHS over the last 10 years that has resulted in a service unable to cope with the current crisis

The inactivity of the government in the early days of the crisis against the WHO recommendations

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 12:14 PM

Well I've always been completely open about who I am and where I live. I've been on a number of forums and I've never used a pseudonym. I don't believe in it. Though I have lived a few miles outside Bude for 33 years, following 16 years spent in and around London, I'm an ex-Lancashire lad from Radcliffe, I went to school in Bolton and I still have the accent to prove it. I was a science teacher in secondary schools for many years. My science background has occasionally helped me to see through some of the pseudo-science bullshit peddled here. I live in a nice house with a big garden (needs a few bob spending on it...) close to the sea but that doesn't stop me from being a proud, dyed-in-the-wool leftie, and there aren't many of them round here!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 12:23 PM

How about the isms socialism? Or "Global Regulationism"?

Captain Tom Moore seems a nice chap but in a good nation in a good United Nations there would be no need for private (COMPETING) charities where, if a celebrity gets involved e.g., some get more than they need & others not enough.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 12:44 PM

Fresh new thread, a fair-minded communicative British mod,
and a chance to start anew with positivity and tolerance..

I am pfr, I aspire to be a model [I could ask DMcG for modelling career advice],
a Mr Universe Body Building Champion [over 80s division - must get back in the gym if I survive covid]],
and an ambassador for World Peace.
I like animals, and find two or three people tolerable in short bursts..

I once stood next to Bob Geldof for a few seconds in an art gallery,
in which time he learnt most of his noble humanitarianism from me..
I'm not one to boast though...

I'm anti religion, but believe that when god created the electric guitar and amplification,
he/she/it/they intended it as a kick up the arse for folk music..

I'm always some sort of folkie / indy / outsider musician, and definitely don't want to be a pop star..
[ok.. I'm too lazy to put in the graft and networking arselicking.. and not as boy band good looking as I used to be..]

I live in a miserable town in Scrumpyshire,
and I'm only 61, so I'm sort of most of your younger smartarse work mate...
[not that I'm being ageist, you old gits..]

I'm an over educated working class son of a council estate factory trades unionist, and a care worker/cleaner..

When I left home to seek my fortune, [gave up looking long ago..]
I was informally adopted and raised by middle class militant feminists..

After what felt like a lifetime in a cult,
I escaped their ideologically corrective domination when I ran away to London,
and lived in a shared house with rough arse Irish and Scottish builders,
who swiftly and harshly re-educated me in how to be a proper bloke...

I like Westerns, and Carry On style humour - the intellectual stuff..
Obviously I suffer inner identity conflicts between my progressive politics
and love of non PC vintage comedy, and John Wayne...

.. and as much as I moan about Yankee cultural imperialism and political interference,
I'm not actually anti American.. far from it..
[just to reassure USA mudcat mates...]

I weigh about 4 stone heavier since when I was last fit enough to go to the gym..
and that is after stopping drinking and eating kebabs...

Anything else...???

Oh yes, I'd like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony,
but can't sing, and am actually to much of a misanthrope,
Even though I'm a life long humanist..

Note: I admit some of the above is not entirely serious, and may be slightly enhanced
with Artistic license...
Bob Geldof may disagree with my account of us standing next to each other looking at a painting..
and his Legal team demand I mention he is very tall,
they claim 6' 2?...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 01:19 PM

PFR - :-D

Barb'ry. Can we have another rule? Walkaboutverse is not allowed to turn everything into an opportunity to push his poems. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Raggytash
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 01:51 PM

Like Steve & Dave I too started life in the County Palatine of Lancashire. I started working life, after Grammar school, as a chef. At the age of 25 I realised that I really did not want to do for another 40 years so got myself an education. Firstly at Oxford and then a second qualification in Bradford.

Like many Lancastrians I moved to Yorkshire as a missionary. The aim of the mission was to introduce some Lancashire class and culture to a backward area.

I have to say that although I have studiously carried out this work for 38 years I have thoroughly failed in my endeavours.

That said ………. you can't educate pork. ……….. run for the hills

...again!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: peteglasgow
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 03:35 PM

'raised in a militant feminist cult?'
'you can't educate pork' but you can put lipstick on it?
'there aren't many lefties round here' - well, i was born north of carlisle but south of the border and have lived a good half of me time in scotland. i'm back in west cumbria now - and though i'm very lucky, it's lovely, but flooding will drive us away if we can sell the house. that and the tories - i'd got used to the popularity of the ukippers round here - i don't mind that so much - but then they all voted tory and we lost a good labour mp to a local thug. my current name on here is a reflection of a moment in time when i wanted to show that workington men are not all what was said. i liked the headline 'workington man will decide the election' but i didn't - they never asked me.
uni in stirling and pgce in trotskyism in bolton. i could go on but we'd better get back to the thread.
i've just been out 'for the clapping' - sort of reluctantly i must admit - does anyone else feel it starts to become a duty - a government thing - the 15 minute hate comes to mind.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 03:59 PM

My name is Iain (the name was taken when I joined mudcat 20years ago, hence the s on the end) I was born in Sussex, moved to Surrey at an early age and since graduating have lived all over the place. I started ss a junior geologist for a Canadian mining company prospecting in Snowdonia, then moved to the oil industry, went into engineering geology in the mid 80s during a downturn, then back to the oil industry in the 90s. Have worked as a consultant since 1985. I believe science should be driven by facts, not consensus. The latter is a tool for politicians
I must congratulate the new mod. Let us hope a new chapter is in the offing, policed firmly and fairly.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 05:32 PM

"Science (from the Latin word scientia)...is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe." [wiki]

No mention of "facts" there. That's because facts, if they are true, are true. Science is the pursuit of truth but there are no stepping stones, aka facts, along the way. "Systematic enterprise" refers to the scientific method. One of the tenets thereof is that there can be no certainty, and no "proofs." As for consensus, of course there can be consensus among scientists. There is consensus about anthropogenic climate change and there is consensus about evolution. But consensus doesn't equal truth. Consensus doesn't equal certainty. But consensus does provide us with that working knowledge that allows us to move forward. If you deny that we can move forward because there's no "proof," etc, then let's say that you belong to the Nigel Lawson school of science. Which, basically, is not science at all. There's at least one subscriber to that here.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 06:00 PM

@DMcG:
In response to your post on that thread which must not be mentioned you raise a couple of interesting points. My simplistic response is that you demand a black and white answer to subject matter, that at this moment, can only be expressed in shades of grey.
1)Experts: The government has theirs and rightly or wrongly follow their advice. To try to change course midway, before modelling outcomes can be tested, keeps everyone in a permanent limbo. It has to follow cause, effect response. Many of the counter experts rolled out by the media are there simply to advance their party line and attack the government, as are the media.The media are constantly taking an adverserial approach in their line of questioning and trying to find flaws in everything the government says or does. The impact of this is the right dismiss it all as bullshit and the left are baying for blood. Anyone can see this is nonsensical. Whether the opposing experts are correct or the government experts are correct is a total unknown at this stage.I find it hard to believe the opposing experts have better data than the government simply because of the dynamics of the situation. All report to government first, media second.( and if not what the hell is going on?) What course of action was best/worst will not be known until the crisis has abated and all the facts are collated and studied. Only a fool would say the government action is flawless - no country was prepared for this pandemic no matter how thorough the previous gaming may have been.(and internationally the UK was reckoned to be better prepared than most) We will see just how accurate that was some time down the road.
2)Testing:
This presents major problems. Do they work? What is their accuracy and repeatabilty? Are there enough kits, are the mechanisms in place to test, analyse, distribute results, assess priority, repeat test? collate results. Superficially this appears shambolic - so was Dunkirk! How much is due to conflicting advice, the fluidity of the situation, the uncertainty concerning the accuracy of scarce testing kits? That will not be answered for months I suspect.
3)PPE shortages: The fault of government or the fault of NHS
procurement. The NHS employs a host of "experts" in procurement on salaries vastly in excess of the PM. Automatically blaming the government is far too easy - who let procurement off the hook? Sitting on the sidelines carping is a pastime anyone can indulge in. Perhaps sitting in the trenches for a day or two might sweeten their dispositions.
Most of our drug manufacture is offshored, as is PPE, and likely most NHS equipment.
It is sad that the EU does not insist on competitive tendering for strategic items(ie defence) but stategic items to keep patients alive
can be made in Timbuktu for all they care. Globalisation and offshoring is going to have a major poke in the eye when this little lot is over.
4)WHO advice: My expert is better than your expert/your expert is better than my expert. The reality most likely is that there are   no experts. They are all groping in the dark with an unknown quantity, relying on untested models and developing treatments on the fly. It is a shit world we inhabit - getting the right answers takes time. Perhaps some of the ansers are wrong and people have died as a result. You can hardly label it murder. Someone gave it their best shot and was wrong. We have all been there, done that and got the T shirt.
Government does not hold the answers to everything, neither do doctors.
As far as I am aware there have been sufficient ventilators to date. Wether that changes in the weeks to come is unknown.
My prference is for a lot more transparency on carehome deaths and the reasons for nonhospitalisation, and the extent to which the basic day to day running of hospitals has been stopped due to covid-19 patients. Delaying cancer operations and other life threatening issues
also kills. This necessitates a juggling act that must cause sleepless nights for those involved in decision making.
Automatically blaming the government and accusing them of being murderers is nonsense. The virus kills people and despite intensive care and the best of medical attetion people die. 14000 die of flu every year in the UK. The mortality rate for covid-9 will only exceed thise figures tomorrow. If the vulnerablr catch the virus they will die regardless of how much medical science is devoted to their care.
The government is trying to minimise the rate of exposure in order that everyone has equal care. To turn around and accuse the same gvernment of being murderers is somewhat bizarre, as is saying the government has cut funding. The graph of NHS expenditure shows a year on year increase for decades. It rather stifles debate before it has even started if these two accusations are contunually advanced. No democratic government murders its electorate and if a graph shows a clear increase it can hardly be argued it is decreasing at any moment in time.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 06:27 PM

Hmmmm!! Pedantism????????????????????????

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 07:38 PM

Well your post at least doesn't insult anyone, so congrats on that. The rest of the post is rather aimless waffle, and you know it. Take this:

"The reality most likely is that there are no experts. They are all groping in the dark with an unknown quantity, relying on untested models and developing treatments on the fly. It is a shit world we inhabit - getting the right answers takes time. Perhaps some of the ansers are wrong and people have died as a result. You can hardly label it murder. Someone gave it their best shot and was wrong. We have all been there, done that and got the T shirt.
Government does not hold the answers to everything, neither do doctors.
As far as I am aware there have been sufficient ventilators to date. Wether that changes in the weeks to come is unknown.
My prference is for a lot more transparency on carehome deaths and the reasons for nonhospitalisation, and the extent to which the basic day to day running of hospitals has been stopped due to covid-19 patients. Delaying cancer operations and other life threatening issues
also kills. This necessitates a juggling act that must cause sleepless nights for those involved in decision making.
Automatically blaming the government and accusing them of being murderers is nonsense. The virus kills people and despite intensive care and the best of medical attetion people die. 14000 die of flu every year in the UK. The mortality rate for covid-9 will only exceed thise figures..."

Well yes, there are experts. Dismissing "experts" is tabloidism, and we have not "all been there." "The government may not have answers for everything, neither do doctors." What an incredible false equivalence...Yeah, put Raab and Bozo right up there with medical opinion...

No-one has accused the government of murder. Aunt Sally strikes again. I've accused this government of causing unnecessary deaths via negligence and a couldn't-care-less attitude to ordinary people. And I think that's right, and I think it will be confirmed abundantly in the coming weeks and months as we look back on this disaster.

And this:

"My prference is for a lot more transparency on carehome deaths and the reasons for nonhospitalisation..."

Well you don't say. My mum lives in a care home in which there has been a case. I am acutely aware of all the issues surrounding care homes, don't you worry. We need testing and we need kit. Your comment is anodyne waffle, let's face it. But do carry on trying to be nice. Some progress at least. Sorry to be hard-hitting, but you of all people should be able to take it. Do continue to tread carefully.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 16 Apr 20 - 11:55 PM

Most of us are not specialist 'experts',
many of us are less well informed than we need to be.
We can only fall back on our own experience and judgement
of the values, integrity, and past performance of the two main parties.

Educated guesses become the order of the day..
Intelligent conjecture and speculation on plausible probabilities..

It's been said to death that it's pointless 'whatabouting' if Labour were in govt,
in charge of the covid response..
How competent they might be...???

My OPINION is that, as a result of my personal knowledge of Labour and the tories over four decades,
I would be more inclined to TRUST the Labour party's strategies
as being in the best interest of all citizens in our nation, and beyond..

Conversely, I would deeply DISTRUST the tories motives,
suspecting them of following the dictates of their traditional
ideological disregard for the well being of the majority of our citizens.
I would further suspect the tories of being too much under the influence
and control of American right wing political forces, and USA health/finance corporations..

The reality is, The tories, not Labour, are now in govt, responding to covid;
and I must rely on them to keep my loved one's,
myself, and as many other folks as possible, well and alive...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 12:06 AM

.. and yes I an now see grammar and punctuation errors I missed,
but it's gone 5:00am and I need a few hours vital kip
to try to keep my immune system from crashing..
Bugger all this stress and insomnia...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 02:57 AM

I would agree with the principle that, when presented with conflicting stories, we have to decide which is most likely to be true. Sadly, the govenment's, and particularly Boris's, track record for telling the truth is abysmal. So when our present administration says one thing and another official body says another, I believe the other. This is not shooting the messenger or anti-Tory, it is simply the plain fact that I do not trust this government and its leadership. With good reason.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 03:54 AM

Thank you for that, Iains. There is a lot to cover in response, so I will try to do so, but I am sure I will leave some things out.

I think all of us – even our 61 year old youngster! – are long enough in the tooth not to demand a black and white answer in the face of this crisis. We all know it is complicated and that every country, without exception, is having to work it out as it goes along. In fact, I would suggest that your suggestion that “To try to change course midway, before modelling outcomes can be tested, keeps everyone in a permanent limbo” is more blank-and-white than anything I have suggested, since having made a particular binary choice – and such choices are unavoidable – you do not allow it to be reconsidered until a potentially long time has passed. A modelling outcome cannot be tested until you have amassed enough data.    Having made one particular decision – do we follow our experts or the WHO experts should not mean we are deaf to all other advice and experience elsewhere: we should be looking at the entire advice the whole time. That is complex and requires honest assessment and determination to do your best. It is much simpler to say “We have picked our experts, everything is now their responsibility” but that is both an abdication from responsibility on the one hand, and deceitful on the other, because as I said at the start of this thread, a lot of the decisions are inherently political and pretending those are not happening is misleading. This is not a party political point: it would be true for any party and for any government anywhere is the world that behaved that way.
When it comes to testing, of course we are seeking better tests that are easier to carry out, are reliable and can be produced in bulk. That is completely correct. But it overlooks that we are carrying out tests now, and that we were carrying out tests right at the start of this pandemic. So it is not the existance and reliability of a test that is a problem as such, it is the capacity and widespread use of the tests we already have that are a problem. And we know that Germany in particular has been able to produce such test material and implement a testing regime far in excess of what we are able to. There was an interesting section on Newsnight last evening comparing the UK and the Germany behaviours. We started off following almost the same route of test and trace. And we both moved from ‘confine’ to ‘delay’ at the same time. But at the point Germany continued with the test and trace regime alongside the concentration on delaying the spread, whereas we in the words of Prof Whitty as best I recall them would ‘concentrate our capacity on hospitals’.   That implicit recognition we were reaching our capacity to tests was, I suggest, why we stopped tracing: it was not a scientific decision that stopping tracing was a good idea: it was scientific advice in response to the question ‘if we are running out of the ability to test, what is the best approach?’   I may not be right, of course, but if so it is a misrepresentation to present this as a scientific decision to stop tracing. And, by the way, it is just as much a misrepresentation if it was Prof Whitty standing at a podium who says it as any minister.
Then PPE shortages: again, I think your suggesting we think of it as ‘The fault of the government or the fault of the NHS’ is far more black and white than anything I have suggested. Each has responsibilities: they do not reside with one or the other.

All of the above is not really political at all: it would apply just as much to any government and in broad terms does so to every government in every country at the moment.   But now come to something entirely political and long term: decades long, not the few months of this crisis. You note correctly that most of our drugs and the sources of PPE come from off shore. In that vein, others have said that the reason Germany can apparently get test materials more readily than we can is that the manufacturers are in Germany.

And the question arises why is that? In short, we allowed this to happen because our approach to free market thinking said if the PPE could be got cheaper from elsewhere we should not manufacture it in the UK. Ditto almost everything else where there is a UK shortage. It also said that ‘efficiency’ in the sense of nothing ever wasted was an important aspect. We should not have more capacity to manufacture ventilators than we need, because the ventilating-machine-maker takes up floor space, and needs maintenance, and occasional calibration or whatever: it is not maximising the profitability. The floor space should be used for something where we can make a profit. Similarly use ‘just in time’ and get rid of warehouses as much as we can in the name of ‘efficiency’.

The shortages we are experiencing here – and they could be the same on many other things like fuel, for example – are arising because in our economic model we undervalue the long term security of the country in search of maximising growth and profit. Probably the only sector were we don’t do this is military, but even that shows we recognise there is a limit to where we are prepared to outsource things we critically depend on.   Both left and right wing agree on that: the essential difference is where we draw the line. I would say that given the choice of maximising growth or being able to minimise deaths in a crisis like this my vote is, and always has been, life before profit.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 04:00 AM

if a graph shows a clear increase it can hardly be argued it is decreasing at any moment in time.

Au contraire

If the graph shows an increase in funding of 5% yet costs have increased by 10%, then the funding, in real terms, has decreased.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 05:05 AM

From the hoss's mouth (brought by guido of course.) In glorious technicolour so denial is impossible.
https://order-order.com/2020/04/17/watch-mcdonnell-labour-found-institutionally-antisemitic/#comments

Even Mcdonnell is saying the leaked labour report should be submitted to the EHRC (warts and all)
Perhaps Mr Farage should form an official Opposition party as the present crowd give every impression that crewing a five ring circus would present an insurmountable challenge, let alone provide a vibrant opposition.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 05:24 AM

Troll alert.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 05:34 AM

I suggest he be ignored - he is obviously out to close this thead too by dirictly rejecting what the mod requested
Seems to be a scalp-gathering hobby of his
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 06:01 AM

Just a reminder...

”Mod rules:

No personal insults
No dragging up the same points again and again and again
Stay as polite as you can be...
Respect each other, even if your political opinions differ.
No racism, sexism or other isms“

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 06:02 AM

Yes, divert and distract did not take long to make an appearance did it. No obvious answer to mistrust in the government or the underfunding of vital services so out comes the flamebait. Whatever anyone in the Labour party, or any other party but the Tories for that matter, does or says, it will have no bearing on how the country is govererned for the next few years. When it comes to election time I expect the smears and dirty tricks to be wheeled out again but using them now is blatant smoke and mirrors.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 06:12 AM

No personal insults
No dragging up the same points again and again and again
Stay as polite as you can be...
Respect each other, even if your political opinions differ.
No racism, sexism or other isms“

Seems a few here think none of the above applies to them.
Pride cometh............

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 06:37 AM

If the graph shows an increase in funding of 5% yet costs have increased by 10%, then the funding, in real terms, has decreased.
A lot of "ifs" in rejection of the graph but zero facts to substantiate the if.
By way of contrast I could show a poll showing how Boris popularity has increased reently:https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/boris-johnson-approval-rating
Notice the difference I make a claim and offer proof
You attempt to disparage a claim by empty waffle.

You constantly belittle the government and collectively pat yourselves on the back when you feel you have scored a point. I submit a fully substantiated post outlining fault with the labour party and you try to dodge the issue by calling it trolling and an attempt to close the thread. This is a political thread and strangely enough talking about labour is political. The fact they are in a shambolic state may be a source of embassassment to you but I am afraid you will just have to deal with it.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 08:00 AM

Here’s an opinion piece with which I completely agree. It’s one individual’s opinion, copied from Facebook, I haven’t linked to it or identified the originator because I have no wish to expose them to abuse...

”Is no one else absolutely furious that they’re being gaslit into believing the NHS is a charity that is funded by donations from working class people? That a 99 year old man dragging himself up and down a patch of grass is being celebrated? It is nothing to celebrate. It is not a great example of The Great British Blitz Spirit. That’s what the government and the press who prop them up want you to think so you don’t notice their catastrophic failings. It is a stain on this government and the way this country is being run. It is utterly shameful. Why are we not furious that a pregnant nurse died when she shouldn’t have been at work in the first place while Sicknote Johnson lords it up at his country manor? That care workers are being rewarded for their work with the honour of paying for a fucking badge?

We are being asked to do our bit and dig into our pockets to pay for a service that we already pay for. It is not a charity. You are being asked to pay for the shortcomings of this government. It’s not fucking Comic Relief. Maybe the nasty party should ask their billionaire mates to dig deep or even perhaps pay the taxes that they owe in the first place? The left always knew the last election was literally a matter of life or death and we are seeing it every day and it’s the worst thing to be proven right about. Those of you who voted this utterly disgraceful government into power should be absolutely ashamed of yourselves.

ETA: Those of you arguing on MY post that I shouldn’t be making it political, EVERYTHING IS POLITICAL. Existing is a political act when you’re not a white, middle class, heterosexual, cisgendered man.”

I’ll bet ‘Seaman’ Staines or the Daily Heil don’t report on it.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 08:14 AM

"No dragging up the same points again and again and again"

"Seems a few here think none of the above applies to them."

Seems like YOU think that the above stricture doesn't apply to YOU. Perhaps Barb'ry should have added "hypocrisy prohibited" to her list...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: peteglasgow
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 08:22 AM

good point bwm. yes. we must never forget their record or that the purpose of the tories is to sell off and degrade public services and protect the interests of the wealthy. it must be a bit awkward for them to pretend to care about nhs and care workers but they are inadvertently aided by the charity efforts of good people with good intentions and by our regular clapping, i'm afraid.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 08:29 AM

Well, John, I donated. Not happily, for all the reasons given in your post. In addition, you donate via a platform called Just Giving. They then distribute the money to all the NHS charities (way over a hundred of them) under its umbrella. Just Giving charges a platform fee in countries other than the UK. that's a five percent rakeoff straight away. In this country the default "donation" to Just Giving is ten percent, though you can cancel that as you donate. Naturally, the way to cancel it is shrouded in thick fog. Whatever else, they charge a "card fee" of 1.9% of your donation plus 20p. Just Giving is a dyed-in-the-wool US capitalist setup. If Tom racks up twenty million, they will rake in a million. They wanted to sound nice so they've donated £100,000 back to Tom. Aren't they generous? And if you sign up for Gift Aid, Just Giving takes five percent of that as well. After that, there's the different levels of efficiency achieved by all those NHS charities. I suppose the worst of them will suck up several tens of percent of the dough before any of it gets to the people the donors intended it for...

Political? Nah! :-(

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 08:57 AM

NHS
I go along with Baccie's blog to a point - to a degree, it applies to all charities - all things being equal, our countries are wealthy enough to fund a national health service
Unfortunately, they are not so what do you do till they are ?
It's been a lifetime dilemma with me
I used to refuse to give to national charities on principle - now I am selective about who and why I do
I've never stopped arguing for a change in our rotten society along with this though
I do think some charities should be prevented being self-interest profitable businesses
MY HEART GOES OUT TO THIS FELLER THOUGH
They should strip all the awards given to tossers who have been awarded them for simply becoming successful, melt them down and give them to what he's walking for
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Raggytash
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 09:11 AM

"I submit a fully substantiated post outlining fault with the labour party"

No Iains, you submitted a 150 article from an extreme right-wing blogger with a known criminal past that related to a 850 PAGE document. The article had no content or context.

You do not state what is said in that document, in fact you make no reference to the contents of the article in any way, shape or form.

Try again.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 10:13 AM

What has Johnson's popularity or otherwise to do with NHS underfunding? The NHS has been stripped of the right level of funding for 10 years. Johnson has only presided over that for a few months. More smoke and mirrors but, if required, I am happy to provide statistics on the level of underfunding since the Tories took charge. Plenty to see on FullFact.org but I warn you, it isn't good.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 10:23 AM

Yea, and Tom Moore. He raises £15 million pounds for NHS charities (I donated) while the Duke of Westminster, the world's richest man under 30, donated £10m from his vast fortune. The widow's mite springs to mind yet I suspect the gutter press will be all over Hugh Grosvener.

Captain Tom is from Keighley BTW. They make 'em tough up here :-)

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 10:29 AM

You can lead a horse to water..............
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/labour-leaks-report-antisemitism-racism-diane-abbott-butler-a9468521.html

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/apr/15/labour-must-turn-its-back-on-factionalism-says-keir-starmer


https://www.marxist.com/labour-leaked-report-drain-the-cesspit.htm
and

It appears Labour is so embarrassed by the leaked 850 page document it has been deleted from the internet.
Good job I kept a copy.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: peteglasgow
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 10:47 AM

a few years ago there was a story about 50/60 guys owning as much as half the world - enough to fit on one bus. (do stop if i said this before) now - if they all decided they wanted to pay to sort out those of the worlds problems that can be sorted by money they could - education, schools, polution, health....etc etc. they could do that and keep, say, half a billion each. they would be heroes - everyone would acknowledge how they had transformed the planet for the better. if you were on that bus you would, wouldn't you? why not?

all credit to anyone doing what they can for charity - i do my bit but it is generally sporadic and fairly grudging or dependant on my whim and how i'm feeling that day. . i don't know what to do really as for the vast majority of my life we havn't had so many beggars around - or food banks. these are now normalised - part of our society's safety net. but it wasn't always that way - and needn't be now.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 11:22 AM

According to this article the UK is going to start contract tracing again.

As part of this, it seems to be assuming a phone app will be a significant contribution. I have grave doubts it will. There has been an assessment I read that 80% of people need to use it to help and while the exact number may be open to debate, it seems self evident that unless the vast majority of people are using it, a substantial fraction of the tracing will not be possible, which puts us all at risk. So getting enough people to download it and run it is going to be critical. That seems to me a real problem. But it is exacerbated by reports over the last few days of a dispute between Apple and Google, because they want to limit the data collected to reduce the risk of state monitoring in other ways as far as possible: remember their concerns are not just the UK, but also the US, where there may be constitutional problems, and also nation states where individual freedom is not very highly prized by the authorities. In addition, according to reports the UK design of the app meant it had to be the only application running at the time, which is not only very limiting, but is also error prone. If people have to switch it on and off as they go out, for example, there will be a substantial fraction of people who forget.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 11:25 AM

Mrs Steve wanted to give Tom something. I dislike charity giving and wish we lived in a world where it wasn't needed. We even argued about it, even more when I delved into Just Giving. There are charities whose bosses earn more than head teachers. Just Giving justifies itself by saying that it provides a sound and stable platform for charitable giving (though it crashed yesterday). It is liked by charities, though it charges a fee for them to use its platform, apart from the rakeoff from every donation made as I said before. Some of this is fair but a lot of it doesn't seem to be to me. Just Giving has its overheads, like any business. But so far it's made a net haul of around £800,000 from donations to Tom. And for doing what, you have to ask yourself. Nice little earner for them, is Tom...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 11:26 AM

I suppose distraction tactics are all part of politics now. Shame really and it is usually done in a far more subtle way. Still, at least we know what the right on here have to say about NHS underfunding and Boris being a stranger to the truth don't we. Answers on a postage stamp please. I think you can fit Labour, Jeremy Corbyn and antisemitism if you write very small :-)

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 11:39 AM

Interesting, DMcG. There are also people like me who have the cheapest phone available. Mine is currently a Motorola 5G. Works fine but is very limited in what it can run. I doubt very much if it has enough memory to run this app. I guess the app will also use data. So, it will probably run OK it you can afford a Samsung Galaxy or an iPhone and pay for the data it uses. If course there are those who, due to lack of funds or invpclination, do not run a smart phone at all

I doubt very much if the powers that be have even contemplated that there may be people who just don't have access to the latest technology. :-(

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 11:57 AM

I agree, Dave. It is often the case that those interested in the technical aspects of a job give little thought about the effectiveness in practice. Even more so if they are contractors, as they are rightly more concerned with doing what was asked, rather than any wider implications. In this case I have the impression it is thought of as technical matter, but it is at least as much a 'human factors' issue. And as you say, what people's contracts allow in the way of data usage is something else to be taken into account when thinking about whether it will work in practice. I got the impression that it would be a heavy user of data, but the article I read discussing the app were not very clear what was being required.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 12:27 PM

There is also a proposal(hopefully merely a rumour) that compulsion may be needed in order a tracking app may work. Also that those that do not have a phone capable of using the app may be given a suitable tracking device. Interesting concept that compulsion may be used to overide existing freedoms. Having worn a satellite tracker in dodgy spots I can appreciate there are two distinct sides to the coin. I think the idea would require a lot of selling otherwise a large hammer might have a meeting with a phone.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 02:45 PM

Re Romanian fruit pickers being flown into England, why not our own uni students, as I did years ago in Australia? One of my poems, from WalkaboutsVerse, on a chap I met whilst picking unions at Echuca on Australia's Murray River, "The Picker"

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 02:50 PM

Are you proposing that students be forced to do fruit picking, WAV? I think you may find that the problem is no one else wants to do it!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 03:01 PM

Fruit-picking in the UK seems to have been pushed into history my mechanisation - it was once Traveller occupation -no more, reportedly
The British Government can't possible revival an old custom by transporting the unemployed to Australia - or can it
You never know with that mob
From predictions filtering down on the economic consequences of this crisis, Britain is seriously going to have to go through the whole Brexit fiasco again even to get to where it is
Trump is set fair to send the US onto the rocks an he's going to be in no position to take on lame duck economies - he's more likely to strike a deal with China
Maybe the pandemic really should be used as a 'Fire of London and burn ou the rats all over again
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Raggytash
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 04:00 PM

Hey Jim, re your claim that fruit picking was a "traveller occupation - no more"

I worked on a farm as a "chef" and picking fruit through the late spring and summer of 1972. I cannot recall one traveller on that site or on any of the others in Friday Bridge, Wisbeck.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: The Sandman
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 04:09 PM

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b014qxbg

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 04:25 PM

Today Public Health (England) issued new guidance that in the event of a shortage of gowns it would be acceptable for staff treating coronavirus patients to wear waterproof aprons instead. The WHO (plus previous guidance and a little thought) assert that a suitable medical gown is needed to remain safe.

Clearly this not only puts the staff at risk, but also anyone they might come in contact with. So the advice from the unions others is that staff should refuse to work without proper PPE such as gowns.

We all hope, I am sure, that enough gowns are found, but even Matt Hancock this morning was not able to be confident the supply of gowns would not run out over the weekend.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 04:26 PM

Walky - I was waiting for first tentative hints of a compulsory land army scheme
for the newly furloughed and permanently unemployed...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: The Sandman
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 04:34 PM

well in 2011 retired people were picking apples in herfordshire,if any of you bother to listen to the link i provided,
also one young guy from sunderland was delighted to be doing it saying there was nowhere in his area where he could earn money like that ,but most young people did not know about it

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Donuel
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 04:39 PM

Over here
We are being told that the Johnson administration was conned out of 20 million dollars worth of masks they were trying to buy from China.
Boris should have tried Ebay.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Mossback
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 07:06 PM

Who will free us from this Walkabout drivel??

Hi, I don't think you have read the mod guidelines at the top of the thread. No direct attacks, please. If you don't want to read a post, scroll on by. Many thanks

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 08:23 PM

Hmmm. Tough one, that, Bill. He was born on the day England won the World Cup in 1966. On that day I was a Saturday lad, aged 15, at Victor Value supermarket in Radcliffe, Lancashire. The store manager, a bit of an arse to be honest, hired a black and white telly that afternoon from Radio Rentals, and allowed us to watch the match, on and off. I still had to mop the bloody floors after the game. It made me the man I am today. Anyone here remember Victor Value? Pink stamps...?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Modernrated thread
From: Donuel
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 10:22 PM

This must be the Next ditch attempt. Steve's anecdotes of his good ol days is as ****** as a Leave it to Beaver episode. What's next, UK Politics The Next Generation? Perhaps morality plays could fill this void if the good ol days ever runs dry.

ps ****** = boring   

o
)8( wheres your spirit, get out of the ditch and speak your mind
II

Not sure what to make of this one! Direct attack or incomprehensible... I'm leaving it here but it seems a bit flame-bait-ish to me. Could following posters ignore.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Apr 20 - 11:56 PM

Aren't there already enough BS threads for Americans to dominate...???

If the yanks must come over here,
the least they could do is hand us out some chewing gum, chocolate, and nylon stockings..

Just don't get us pregnant then bugger off back to the States as soon as the crisis ends...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 02:31 AM

"I cannot recall one traveller on that site "
I'm talking from having been told that by Travellers
I don't claim they picked everywhere - they weren't welcome in many red-neck areas, but where they worked they were made welcome as an addition to the rural economy
In Scotland they were a large part of the fruit-picking - a number of fine albums of traditional music came out of 'The berryfields of Blair'
They were part of the otato-picking in East Anglia - they were until recently at the 'tattiee howkin' in Scotland
I think Jasper Smith and his family wen ho-picking in Kent
Kerry Traveller Mikeen McCarthy's family were an essential addition to the South West Ireland rural economy - as tinsmiths and fruit and vegetable pickers - the older ones desperately miss it - or so they told us
Times they have changed - and so is the pickin' Rag
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 02:39 AM

British workers reject fruit-picking jobs

Of course it is not just the current medical crisis where this is relevant. To those who have been suggesting that leaving the EU will create jobs for the British. I ask again, will the British want these jobs? I suspect not. There has always been need of migratory labour. Do people think that will stop?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 03:13 AM

" the British want these jobs? "
Unfortunately Britain has become a place where wanting a certain job has become a long-lost dream Dave - for most of my social group, you take what you are given or you scavenge to survive - go see, 'I Daniel Blake' for a horrifically accurate picture of what Britain has become for many
Knowing the people I grew up with that will have to either change or be accepted by force - surely such mass-dehumanisation can't continue indefinitely
Britain came into being poncing from the poorer nations via the Wmpire - when that went, we gave the work we didn't want to immigrants
Brexit slammed that door of convenient labour very loudly
It will be interesting to see how Brainless Boris tackles that one - it will also be interesting to see if the pandemic lifts the scales from enough eyes to make a few necessary changes - fingers crossed
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 03:50 AM

I agree with your sentiments, Jim, but it is not quite the point I am trying to make. Far from "you take what you are given", these are jobs that even those in need of the money will not take! I expected this to come to the fore when the seasonal jobs cannot be filled because of those who want to "take the country back" but the current crisis has brought it up a lot sooner.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 03:50 AM

tories will never understand that when they are in govt,
they should use the power vested in them
to value, protect, and nurture us,
not just ruthlessly exploit and discard us...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 03:53 AM

I don't usually share facebook posts, but seeing as I wrote this one, I will make an exception!

On Friday 17 April Public Health (England) revised its guidelines so that if there are insufficient gowns medical staff can use an apron instead, or other things like lab coats.

This is a marked lowering of the safety standards for medical staff and hence a marked increase in transmission to both them and other people they meet. Have no doubt: more nursing staff will die than would have if they do so. Moreover, once a medic is infected, they are as likely to transit the disease to a non-infected person as anyone else if they lack PPE: it does not just protect the staff it protects other patients. Also, since we know that whether you are thinking of Wuhan, or Italy, or anywhere else, the nation wide infections start with a single person, lowering the protection for the nurses slightly increases the risk for the entire nation.

Groups like the Royal College of Nursing are making it clear that nurses should refuse to treat patients if they were not happy that the level of PPE available would protect them properly.

It is a desperately difficult decision what to do if the PPE is inadequate: you are trading the potential loss of the life of the person in front of you with the potential loss of a much greater number of others. Moreover, if the medic is infected, they will be unable to treat anyone else for weeks as they are isolated. Those who have studied something called 'The Trolley Problem' will recognise it as this abstract problem turned into something horribly real. But in this case I come down on the side of the Royal College of Nurses: the medics should not put themselves at risk, or risk having to isolate and be unable to treat others.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 03:57 AM

Picking as it used to be by George Orwell

https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/hop-picking/
There was an annual migration out of the east end of London every year for picking. This lasted up until the late 60's when mechanisation meant that one machine could do the work of 150 to 200 hop pickers.

https://theconversation.com/who-picked-british-fruit-and-veg-before-migrant-workers-63279

https://bahs.org.uk/AGHR/ARTICLES/52n2a4.pdf
and a gov reporton migrant workers(2013)

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/257242/migrant-seasonal-workers.
Times change so do people and industries. Post war hop picking in Kent was an escape from slums. Those slums have gone (Although replacement high rise flats hardly match the vision of Le Corbusier of towers in a park) and the need to escape to fresh air no longer applies, nor the need to earn additional money.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 03:57 AM

DtG - tories have always been on the brink of enforcing compulsory workfare..

The thatcherite plan was to sack mass public sector workers,
then make them do exactly the same jobs for minimum dole money...

[errmm.. give or take a few finer details...]

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 04:14 AM

The science of economics is based on trying to fulfil unlimited wants with limited resources. Those resources are divided into three main categories. Materials (or land or natural resources), Labour and Capital. At the simplest level, capitalism or Conservativism, believes that capital and the entrepreneur are the most important while Labour believes that,yes, labour is the most important. In truth, neither can manage without the other. The responsible capitalist understands this and rewards their Labour force accordingly. The other type, of which this government is a prime example, do indeed "just ruthlessly exploit and discard us". Of course, conversely, the responsible socialist understands that to reward the labour force and provide social care, capital is required. There has been precious little evidence of that at work either.

The poor relation in all this has been natural resources. Previous economic models seem to assume that these will always be available or that scarce resources can be saved by increasing the open market price. Sadly we seem to be coming to the realisation that this is not true too late :-( Until a model that satisfies the entrepreneur and the labour force while ensuring we do not run out of basic resources is found, these political arguments will remain unresolved. That model will require compromise by all concerned and it is those unwilling to compromise that cause most rifts.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 04:55 AM

That's a good summary, I would say, Dave. As so often, the stuff I know about subjects comes in a large part from discussions I've had with people who actually know subjects for real, so most of what I know about economics comes via my father-in-law, who was a senior economist in the World Bank. We had many a long chat on the subject.

If we leave aside for the moment how economics affects everyone's lives - as you do! - and just think of it as an academic discipline then wearing my mathematician's hat it is simply an optimisation problem. A big, complex one with lots of constraints, agreed, but in essence it is straightforward. There is some overall objective you are trying to maximise, and you 'set the parameters' and make choices to try to do that. And, in the main, economics tries to optimise growth.

However, relatively few economists ask the question 'is that really what we should be optimising at all?' There are alternatives, particularly coming from people interested in protecting the environment or 'well-being' rather than wealth, but these are still very much away from the mainstream thinking. My hope is that the smarter Universities pay more attention to these alternative approaches in future, but as usual we will have to wait and see.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 05:04 AM

"these are jobs that even those in need of the money will not take! "
That might just have something to do with how much they are paind for doing what can be bloody hard work
As a youngster on the outskirts of Liverpool I quite enjoyed spud-picking in the local farms - it was hard work and in bad weather extremely dirty, but going off into the country with your mates was enjoyable - the pittance we were paid was a bonus
I only stopped when I found out I was doing someone out of a necessary job because the farmers used us s cheap labour
Londoners made hopping in Kent their annual holiday - don't know what the pay was like
At times like these, employers need to be forced to pay their workers a wage that reflects the hardship of their work
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 05:16 AM

"Those slums have gone"
To be replaced by equally escapable slums
THE REAL 'GREEN AND PLEASANT LAND' FOR MANY IN TODAY'S BRITAIN

Maybe it's ok on The Planet Zog, where some people appear to live
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 05:24 AM

Thanks, Dave. I studied economics to an intermediate level and was accepted on a day release (remember that?) Honours degree run by the LSE at Wigan tech! Sadly it was cancelled after about 6 weeks due to there being only 3 of us on it but I kept up my studies for a good while and always retained a keen interest.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 05:27 AM

Londoners made hopping in Kent their annual holiday - don't know what the pay was like

Farmers knew the eastenders treated the annual migration as a holiday and paid accordingly. The best in Kent in 1948 in four weeks could earn £40 - the equivalent of ten weeks' pay for an average man.
The best was generally held to be the traveller contingent, others made far less.
https://www.thegrocer.co.uk/brexit-and-the-workforce/why-are-so-few-brits-prepared-to-pick-fruit/554452.article

It is not so much the money as the rigid unemployment legislation. It is easier to stay unemployed than obtain temporary work and then try to prove your case about unemploment when the job finishes. Government should encourage temporary work not create a bureaucratic paperwork
nightmare for those that seek such work.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 05:51 AM

Employnet regulations are nowhere need as rigid as they need to be and many employers ignore them anyway, as they do the minimum wage laws
As the situation deteriorates, as it will, this will become a growing problem, with ruthless employers using the difficulties to clear out 'troublemakers' and drive wages down
The cry will be, "we have to pull together in these hard times" - just as they "pulled together" when things were don well for them - I don't ***** think !
It's well before time that the authorities began using monetary and even penal measures to stop these predators
Bring back the birch - I say
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 06:07 AM

In post-Brexit UK, I wonder who will be blamed for ‘driving wages down’ now the scapegoats of past years - those nasty immigrants who were demonised by Brexiteers for ‘stealing our jobs’ (at the same time that they were allegedly ‘claiming our benefits’) - are considerably fewer in number here?

I’m sure the Far-Right will dream up some other disadvantaged, defenceless group for their propaganda mouthpieces such as the Daily Fail and the Torygraph to target.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Raggytash
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 06:35 AM

Sorry Jim, once again you are mistaken. Tatty picking in Scotland was done in large part by Irish youngsters, many from County Mayo. There are interesting bits of History regarding the first and last trains onto Achill island and a prophesy made in 17th century.

"The first and last trains on the Achill line have very unfortunate associations. In 1894 a group of over 30 harvesters from Achill drowned in Clew Bay. Their hooker had capsized while carrying a full load of passengers to the steamship in Westport that would bring them to Scotland. A special train was brought into operation to transport the bodies of the victims home, for burial in Achill's Kildavnet Cemetery, even though the Achill railway extension was still under construction at the time of the accident.

Forty-three years later, in September 1937, another special train was put on to return the bodies of ten young boys to their native Achill. They had been working as harvesters in Kirkintilloch, near Glasgow, and had been burnt to death when their bothy or cabin, into which they had been locked for the night, had caught fire.

Two weeks later, on 30 September 1937, the Achill line closed for both goods and passengers, and the tracks were removed shortly afterwards.

These disasters had been prophesied in the 17th century by Brian Rua Ó Ceabháin from Inver in Erris, who was granted knowledge of the future after showing great kindness to a poor widow. He had foretold of the coming of the railway to Achill, describing carriages on iron wheels with smoke and fire. He prophesied that the first and the last trains to the island would carry home the dead.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Raggytash
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 06:39 AM

I should have included that they also picked fruit.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 07:26 AM

"Tatty picking in Scotland was done in large part by Irish youngsters, many from County Mayo."
No idea if that's the case now, but far from being youngsters whole families travelled from Donegal to Scotland for the picking - up to about ten years ago there was a regular bus/ferry service betweer the two
Theer's an excellent and very large study on the subject (no longer available as far as I can find)
Tere's a more recent on under the same title avalaaaaaable with the following description

"This is a true account of what life was really like for the tattie howker. The story tells of hardships endured by potato workers in Scotland in the 1950s and beyond. It refers to customs and beliefs, also how they lived together as one large group for the duration of the harvesting season. They were firmly at the bottom of the social scale, and often referred to sarcastically as “The Tattie Howkers.”
The story is real in that it tells of the author’s experiences working at the potato picking in Scotland during the years of her youth."
The trips were treated like the emigrants were

The best aural descriptions were includec in a wonderful radio programme written by Billy Kayy entitled 'From Gweedore to the Gorbals'

I'm not saying that they didn't come from other parts of Ireland, but Donegal and the Northern counties were the main sources of labour
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: peteglasgow
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 07:30 AM

hello, iain = lovely to see you quoting george orwell - now there was a guy who spoke good, straightforward sense, more please..

i'm sure round aberdeen school kids used to have a week or so (half-term?) to do tatty picking and i'm guessing it was more widespread than that.

as it's a natural emergency this year maybe we could use the armed forces to help out with the harvests? also recruit loads of folk who are wanting to work and pay them a decent hourly rate. those who take to the work and are good at it could maybe get a bit more and some responsibility in the future. i know it sounds unusual but maybe we should take this opportunity to rethink how we do stuff

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 07:37 AM

"In post-Brexit UK, I wonder who will be blamed for ‘driving wages down’"
Can't see why the favourites "Greedy workers and foreigners" shouldn't remain out in front
Breaxit was only the start - you won't have to hold your breath too long for the "send 'em all home" to creep from their holes
The day after the rsult was announced 'people of colour' were bein asked whan they were going home

“It’s not just the ‘what are you still doing here, when are you going home’ stuff,” Drozdowics said in her office. “That’s really become more prevalent since Brexit, more normalised, encouraged by some mainstream politicians. I’m talking about real discrimination in access to jobs, housing, services, benefits.”
DECEMBER 2019

"The rats, the rats
It's time to get rid of the rats"
(Pantomime song remembered fro childhood)
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: The Sandman
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 07:58 AM

pea picking and fruit picking are jobs that require skill the skills can be learned. clearly noone re has botherd to listen to the link i put up about apple picking

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 08:27 AM

I had listened to it, Sandman, and read other articles about it. Yes, there are skills that can be learnt. It is certainly not the 'unskilled' job it is sometimes made out to be. But as with most other jobs someone has to be prepared to pay for relatively low levels of production while these skills are being learnt. So it is not just a matter of whether UK people are prepared to take the job for the salary, it is also are the employers willing to bear that reduced output, rather than take people who are already practised. Importing people from Roumania to do the work looks as if they, or someone organising workers for the farms, are not prepared to.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 09:24 AM

The future problems seem to becoming apparent in the UK
Some Local Councils are beginning to doubt that they can continue and it is being suggested that students may have to take unskilled work for several years after graduating
Medical staff are still having to cope with poor or no protective clothing and are being to they now have to ignore the 'one-use only' instructions on equipment they do have
Trump is now behaving openly certifiable by describing the self-isolation policy as an attack on people's freedom and is expressing concerns on the effect the crisis is having on investment
Time for the back-to-front coat, I think
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 09:51 AM

Lack of indigenous fruitpickers has been a feature of uk life for decades.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-jobs-row-as-romanian-fruit-pickers-arrive-for-harvest-11974364

Not just a uk problem but an Irish problem as well
https://www.echolive.ie/nationalnews/Keelings-under-fire-for-flying-in-fruit-pickers-from-abroad-during-pandemic-3d726a2f-bb4a-4
and I am sure the folk song "Deportees" by Woody Guthrie was not about itinerant Bulgarians.
It will be a choice between making pickers essential workers or let the product rot in the fields with concomitant shortages and eye watering price increases.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 10:13 AM

Keelings problems are far more to do with the decline of the fruit industry due to the fact that the overwhelming amount of fruit on sale is imported because it's cheaper and is not seasonal
The protests are shaming Ireland - a country that has relied on being able to emigrate in order to survive - rednecks get everywhere unfortunately
It's about time Britain realised that it's time they started paying back the dept of having sucked many world economies dry for may centuries. largely to the detriment of those countries indigenous people
Time we leches paid a few debts
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 10:18 AM

You weer right about prices of course - the same with oil
Now if the profit motives in both were removed..
I watced a wonderful Simon Reeve program a week or so again and was astounded at how low oil prices were to the locals in one of the oil-producing South American countries - that's before the multinationals got their greedy hand into the till
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 10:21 AM

tory ideology regards Trade Unions as enemies who must be demonised and crushed...

When they should be the partners of employers.

Important valuable assets for entrepreneurs...


Pfr - OND Busines Studies / Law, Accounting, Economics, A levels..

[then that pesky lefty pefty Humanities Degree, and further post grad studies on Ideologies...]

This is [probably] why I am so balanced and objective in my political thinking...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 11:50 AM

Keelings problems are far more to do with the decline of the fruit industry due to the fact that the overwhelming amount of fruit on sale is imported because it's cheaper and is not seasonal

This is not the story from those directly involved

1)It is important to note this is an industry that cannot source sufficient manpower locally to do the work.

Ireland needs approximately 1,500 seasonal workers to pick soft fruit and vegetables over the next two months.

Defending its reliance on Bulgarian workers this week, Keelings said it had experienced declining interest in Ireland in recent years and needed to employ 900 seasonal pickers between April and October. Up to 70 per cent return year after year.

This year, the company advertised locally for staff more than two weeks ago but had received just 27 applications by last week. It received a further 13 applications on Friday.

2)According to the Irish Farmers’ Association (IFA) “probably 100 per cent of horticulture farms have some form of labour from overseas”, typically from Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and, in recent years, mainly Romania and Bulgaria. “Most of these seasonal workers have been returning to the same jobs and farms for years and therefore are already fully trained and suited to the nature of the work,” it said.
“In the past two weeks there has not been any major interest in jobs advertised in the sector. Even during the last recession when unemployment was at 15 per cent, there was very little interest from the domestic labour force.”

3)On Friday, a statement from the Government said: “Seasonal workers are critical to the agricultural sector in terms of harvesting, planting and tending functions, especially in the current season.”



The EU has defined agricultural seasonal workers as essential workers.

According to the IFA, Germany recently relaxed its rules and is allowing 80,000 seasonal workers into the country during April and May.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 12:11 PM

Are tory ministers and their staff isolated in London,
getting impatient for Escorts, Dominatrixes, and Rent Boys
to be classed as key workers...???

Oh Purleeese. If this isn't a classic flame-bait, I don't know what is! Walk on by, folks.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 12:27 PM

The same could be asked of Labour as well. Best we do not mention Labour and PIE!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 12:37 PM

Barb'ry - though of course, I'd say it's just having a bit of a mischievous laugh on a dull Saturday evening..

Anyway now I've got your attention,
could you please crack down on Americans invading and disruptively sniping in our one and only British thread..

Cheers...

Difficult one that as it is called 'UK politics' and not 'UK Only' so in all honesty, as long as people aren't simply there to troll, there's nothing to be done. I suppose you'd have to have a thread called 'UK Catters' or something.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 01:09 PM

Barb'ry - Ok, but I will be sarcastic here to our USA mates, whenever I think appropriate...

I can't presume you are familiar with our individual personalities,
so the crucial thing you need to know about me,
is that no matter how absurd or vulgar my smart arse wisecracks can be,
there is always a serious underlying political subtext..

That's just the way I am..

My intent being to amuse mates on either side left, or right,
and maybe push my concerns to the forefront for discussion
with a tough of good natured matey humour...

I'm never a vindictive disruptive 'troll' for the sake of creating mayhem...

[one or two puritanical mudcatters might disagree...???]

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 01:24 PM

"This is not the story from those directly involved"
Don't care - this has been a problem for a decade now - I know
Of course, the fact that Irish plums strawberries and cherries compare badly with those from elsewhere - god - how I miss Kentish Knapps and Victoria Plums - about all I do (other than having to drive between 60 and 200 miles for regular good films)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Raggytash
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 01:43 PM

Never used it myself Jim, I can't be bothered watching films, but have you tried Netflix?

Always prefer a book myself.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 01:50 PM

Jim & others discussing crop picking - by coincidence,
I've just received a newsletter from old mates over in The Bridgwater, Somerset, Labour Party..

[yes - that Bridgwater, folk song lovers...]

The Desperate Need for a Land Army


I had a quick read on the bog,
but as far as I could see, no mention of decent pay and conditions,
But, I'd hope that's implicit...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 02:00 PM

Well Jim if there was not a market for the"poor quality" irish fruit it would not be grown and would not require a foreign labout force to pick it now, would it?
Personally Iwould believe Dr. Eamonn Kehoe, Teagasc Soft Fruit Specialist: "At present, we produce about 7,000 tonnes of fresh strawberries per year. This is worth an estimated €37m. The Dutch cultivar ‘Elsanta’ is still the most popular cultivar grown. This is followed by a number of other cultivars including ‘Sonata’, ‘Clery’ and ‘Capri’. The cultivar ‘Malling Centenary’ is the most recent cultivar to be tried here. This was bred by the famous East Malling fruit research centre in East Malling, Kent, and named to celebrate 100 years of fruit research at the centre. So far it has proven very popular. This is especially due to its high-quality attributes.

Protected strawberry production is now the mainstay of Ireland’s soft fruit industry. The area of glasshouses built for protected strawberry production has increased substantially since the turn of the new millennium, and the expansion continues every year.
One of the main advantages of protective cropping is that it allows for the supply of fruit outside of the traditional short season of June to July. In fact, today strawberries are now supplied from late March right up until November. Fruit quality is also much higher, which is demanded by today’s consumer. Protective cropping also allows fruit to be harvested in unfavorable weather, giving pickers a much more comfortable environment to work in.
(Farmgate Value)Sector €million
Cattle 2,300
Dairy 1,800
Pigs 467
Horticulture 433
Sheep 256
Cereals 236
Poultry 157

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 02:27 PM

"Well Jim if there was not a market for the"poor quality" irish fruit it would not be grown "
Have you tried to find good Irish potatoes - historically the staple food?

Since the advent of Aldi and Lidl, Irish fruit has been sold at the side of the road 1-man from kiosks
In the main Wexford apples are sold for cider
The climate has always been a problem
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 02:45 PM

Bridgwater, huh? Reached one of the lowest ebbs of my life one afternoon in Bridgwater, in August 1990. I'd cycled from Manchester, heading for Bude, staying in youth hostels. Chepstow to Exford was Day Three. I'd just cycled over the Levels, southwestward, into the teeth of a persistent force 5/6 southwest wind. No respite, no shelter. I was semi-collapsed on a bench in a Bridgwater park, eating my eleventh banana of the day and swigging yet another litre of processed pineapple juice when I spotted a phone box. No bloody mobiles in those days. I phoned home and Mrs Steve, to paraphrase, told me to grow a pair. Well I made it to Exford hostel just in time for dinner, a sweating wreck wedged among those who had showered... Once cleaned up, I had a very entertaining evening in the pub with a guy who almost started a fist fight on my behalf after a stag-hunting Hooray Henry tried to take the piss out of the shorts I was wearing, as with a sneery rendition of "Donald, where's yer troosers"...

I currently have nothing to say on-topic except, perhaps, Donuel, where's yer troosers, but I'm working on it...Just watching a recording of Dolly at the Grand Ole Opry right now...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 04:15 PM

Have you tried to find good Irish potatoes - historically the staple food?
No point. They do not exist anywhere I have looked. British supermarkets offer better choice and vastly better quality.
On the soft fruit side of things growing under cover negates any negative climatic effects and lengthens the season.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 05:22 PM

100

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 05:23 PM

Ta, Dave! ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 06:16 PM

It was you I had in mind, John :-)

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Apr 20 - 07:23 PM

"Have you tried to find good Irish potatoes - historically the staple food?"

"No point. They do not exist anywhere I have looked. British supermarkets offer better choice and vastly better quality."

And your substantiation for this utter bollix is...?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 02:37 AM

"No point. They do not exist anywhere "
In fact thy do - you just can't get them in Ireland any more
When we first started coming here you could find a couple of shops which bought small amounts of home-gown ones from local farmers, but those were mostly bought privately direct with no middleman
That now seems to have stopped, as has the practice of selling locally caught fish on the street
'Blow in' Dubs, friends of ours, rented a small house in town and opened a greengrocers, that disappeared about five years before we moved here, the internationals and supermarkets killed them all off

During 'Ther Tiger, that began to change, in the larger towns, ou began to get Chinese (first), then Indian, Greek, Thai restaurants - a few made it out to the coastal holidaymaking area such as Miltowwn Malbay and Lahinch
I remamber it happening here thanks to something that happened to a Dublin friend, Finbar Boyle
To accommodate the music crowds that began to pour in thanks to the Clancy Week, one of the bars expanded into a restaurant 'The Ocean View'
On the first morning, Finbar went in for breakfast - it's first customer
A few of us waited for him outside and he was asked, "How was it?"
"Well", he said, "I asked for a boiled egg and they told me the boiled egg machine wasn't working"
WE has a superb string of Italian based vegetarian Indian restaurants, 'The Holywell' - they lasted ten years in all, Tapas bars came and went
There are two Indian restaurant in Ennis now - the rest are gone
The best place to eat there now is a small Indian street food restaurant

Ireland probably still grows excellent fruit and vegetables, but they are grown on a large scale for export - the supermarkets buy from everywhere else

In my opinion,, the Famine never really left the poorer areas of rural Ireland - people ate to out of necessity to fill stomachs rather than to please palettes
You can still get a good meal in a local farmhouse if you are invited but elsewhere, the food tends to be unimaginative if filling

Lovely story of a local election friend working on a contract in a posh hotel in the Mudlands somwhere on Christmas
They laid a mal on for the workers - the lot - waiters, fingerbowls, napkins starters.....
To start, they brought the wine - Paddy was poured a small taste of wine which he walloped down and looked around for more - he was asked "Was that to sir's taste"
The main meal was nouvelle cuisine - "a few piled up spuds and vegetables and a smidgen of meat and feck-all else"
He scooped it up with his fork, swallowed it in one mouthful, nodded and said "Yeah, I'll have some of that"

I really love it here buth there are a few things you have to travel for
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 02:50 AM

Feckin' spellcheck - "electrician friend]
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: The Sandman
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 02:56 AM

I can get irish potaoes that are good , best to grow earlies because of bligh, i have no problem buying locally grown irish vegtables many are organic without a label ,

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: The Sandman
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 02:58 AM

that should read blight not bligh . we cannot blame him for irish potatoes, i wouldnt want a mutiny

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 03:11 AM

You live in a rather pleasant small, small town in the arsehole of nowhere Dick - I know from your local cafe that they buy locally (or used to)
Got some nice apples there too which I think were locally grown
Use to have a good little bookshop too
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 03:36 AM

Incidentally
Last tinne we wer on 'The Jeannie Johnson' (replica Famines ship on The Liffey - well worth a visit) they has a display of 'Lumpers' - experimentally grown pre-Famine potatoes
They hae a reputation of being delicious (but I suspect that was built on their being extremely nutritious at the time needed most) - it would be interesting to find out

Food is like clothing nowadays, produced for appearance and convenient packaging rather than taste - like shoes that are too tight, let in water but look nice (to those who like that sort of thing)
Back at the time of one of the Royal events planned to divert the public away from the fact that they are being shafted, I was forced by circumstance to watch the crowds streaming into Westminster Abbey
It was at the same time the media were taking the piss out of Travellers with one of their "My Big Fat racefests) - weied hats, funny frocks.... as far as the eyes could see, all costing thousands
What the ***'s the difference to that with that and a couple of tasteless Traveller kids letting their hid doen on their one bi day - apart from the cost, of course ?
Anti-racist rant over - sorry Miss Allen
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 04:00 AM

I think this Guardian article entitled How did Britain get its response to coronavirus so wrong? is quite a good account. Naturally, some will reject it out of hand just because it is in the Guardian, and the title is hardly neutral, but I think it gives a fairly straightforward account of where the UKs decisions were different from most of the rest of the world, and it is perfectly proper for us to question now, rather than in some distant future, whether those were 'taking the best scientific advice', for example.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 04:24 AM

And your substantiation for this utter bollix is...?

I suggest you come over and buy spuds in Lidl, Aldi or Supervalu and judge for yourself. My substantiation of this is personal knowledge, and yours is   ????
Ireland imports 20% of her annual potato crop, mainly from the UK. (that produces 15 times the size of the irish crop). Despite this a comparison between what is on sale in an Irish supermarket compared to a british supermarket is pretty stark when it comes to spuds. Prove me wrong!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 04:31 AM

The Times is adding to the criticism of the government for inaction over Exercise Cygnus

Throughout the majority of the last three years there was a frequent refrain that the government's approach to Brexit was making it impossible to put effort into anything else, and there are many articles talking about how civil servants were moved out of other departments to work on Brexit planning. It is at least plausible that part of the reason work was not done to address the shortcomings highlighted by Exercise Cygnus was that all attention was elsewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 05:48 AM

Interestingly the Guardian article compares death rates in UK/Germany, stating that the German population is 'far higher' (in this case roughly 30% higher), but with a much lower death rate.
It obviously wouldn't do for them to compare the rates of deaths with France (similar population to UK) or Spain or Italy (both lower populations) where, in each case, the death rate is higher than here.
The Guardian does appear to be choosing the data which will best fit its intended headline.
And yes, I could have named other countries with much lower death rates, but I am pointing out the Guardian bias, not trying to put forward a bias of my own.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 06:01 AM

Britain stands to be the dubious winner in the death and illness stakes next to the US
Todays times carries an article about Government wiistleblowers who have exposed that the Governemt dragged its feet FOR FIVE WEEKS before ti took action, totally ignoring all scientific and medical advice

Time for Government supporters to gi=o into purdah again - eh Nigel ?
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 06:02 AM

The Times is adding to the criticism of the government for inaction over Exercise Cygnus
Seems to me the report also took aim at NHS beaurocrats on salaries way in excess of anyone in government. The professionals have the duty of care to a far greater extent than government, If they saw deficiencies where are they highlighted? If they did not why are they still employed. Their procurement is similar to the MOD and we all know how flawed that is. The one thing the NHS requires is adaquate oversight, especially among the locusts of administrators.
It is very easy to take a pop at government. The NHS is a vast inefficient overstaffed monolith not fit for purpose. The front line staff are lions led by donkeys. Even some Labour members reluctantly admit the NHS is unfit for purpose and constantly throwing money at it does not root out the underlying problems.
We are told there was a shortage of ventilators. Now we are told that perhaps ventilators do more harm than good. 66% of those placed on ventilators die. It is far too early to start the blame game. The need is to find a way out of lockdown before the cure kills more than the virus. Half the UK trucking fleet is parked up. My local supermarket has gaps on the shelves. Is this because the foodstuffs are not being produced or stuck in a bottleneck, or both. This needs addressing pdq in my view.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 06:03 AM

Not an answer, Iains.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 06:09 AM

I don't follow that argument, Nigel. It seems reasonable to compare the UK against a country warned at much the same time as we were that appears to be succeeding better than we are?   What would be gained by comparing it to countries that are doing the same or worse? Isn't our goal to always do better than we are?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 06:35 AM

You are right shaw you haven't. Are we going to play this silly little game for ever or are you going to stop now?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 06:58 AM

We should be very clear what we mean by "death rate" if we want to compare countries.

*Number of deaths: banner headline stuff but slightly meaningless as countries all have different numbers of people. The US might well be leading the table, but the US has five times as many people as the UK and four times as many as Germany.

*Number of reported deaths: grand if deaths are actually confirmed as having been related to Coronavirus. In this country, that's difficult without widespread testing. Not only that, there's commonly a delay between a death happening and its being added to the statistics, and that delay can be very variable from death to death, which complicates the analysis of trends. And we haven't been counting deaths outside hospitals. Wow. And see the first point.

*Death rate (e.g. deaths per thousand cases) in confirmed Coronavirus cases: great if you can do the confirming, which in many cases we can't. See above. But some countries can, at least a lot better than the UK, and results from different countries are alarmingly variable, which can raise more questions than answers, particularly about the effectiveness of the government's response, the matter of testing and contact tracing, the level of staffing and equipment in hospitals and whether frontline workers are being adequately equipped both for their own safety and the safety of, say, patients in hospital.

*Overall death rate per thousand/million in the population from any cause: would show an increase in a pandemic, which could be compared to past periods of time without pandemics, and we can take seasonal trends into account, but you still have to confirm which extra deaths were related to Coronavirus. This could be quite a useful measure but it isn't rock-solid.

I suppose we get to conclusions about trends and about how well we're doing by taking all of the above combined. But none of it is exact science, same as with issues concerning masks and social distancing effectiveness, for example, which is why I'm getting more and more suspicious of the fob-off line "we're following the science..." Following settled science is grand, but there currently isn't a lot of that around.

And don't get me started on "underlying conditions..."

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 07:37 AM

"Seems to me the report also took aim at NHS beaurocrats on salaries way in excess of anyone in government. "
How in any way does that excuse 5 weeks inaction which has led to a huge number of unnecessary deaths and illnesses
Bureaucracy and high salaries in the NHS are part of the 'modernisation' forced on the system by Government after Government - the Tories being by fat the majority as you have often boasted
It is against the principle atht were set up by NHS, and is bow bing used as a scapegoat for getting rid of or at least downgrading it
You really aren't very good at propaganda either - are you ?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 07:55 AM

Yep, I was wondering when someone would pop up to to try to shield this rotten government by making "NHS top-heavy bureaucracy" the scapegoat...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 08:04 AM

Just to show even-handedness, here is something that the Government is being criticised for, but I think they were right to act as they did:

Michael Gove, the chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, later confirmed that the UK had sent 273,000 items of PPE to Wuhan province in China, where the outbreak started, earlier this year.

This seems to me a prime example where the government was having to deal with the situation as it was. In hindsight, maybe it was a mistake to send it. But at the time I can fully see why they decided to do so, and why I think they took the right decision. SO would not criticise them for it.

The focus at the time was to 'contain' the virus. If you let it spread in and beyond Wuhan than you can be certain that sooner or later someone will bring the virus here. Maybe directly, or maybe by a highly tortuous route, but sooner or later it will get here. So the best way of protecting here is to try and help the authorities contain it there.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 08:21 AM

Johnso has been accused of deliberately skipping 5 Covit meetings - 'Honest' Micky the Gove has denied it of course
I hope there's still room for a guillotine outside the Banqueting Hall in Whitehall
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 08:47 AM

" even-handedness"
If is is true that, at the time the government were't taking the outbreak seriously, as seems to be the case, that would have been simply good business practice Mac
These things aren't given away and they ain't cheap
Around that time The Daily express was raving about France not allowing masks "vital for British use" to cross the French border- there's a great deal of 'not getting their stories straight before going public' going on here
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 08:48 AM

Johnso has been accused of deliberately skipping 5 Covit meetings -
By whom, may we ask???????? and I think you mean Cobra Meetings not covit.
I had better let the accurate Guido bring you the video link where Mr Gove gave a perfectly lucid explanation of how the Cabinet Briefing Rooms actually operate, and also talks straight over the ignoramus Marr, who constantly tried to interrupt.(Funny he never does that to the left! But it all goes into the little red book to close the BBC)
https://order-order.com/2020/04/19/gove-boris-miss-cobra-meetings-though-not-fair-reporting/

and while on the subject of Guido he also raised an issue also repeated by the Guardian. An issue I raised last week.
The denizens of the left may well find their party bankrupted!
Oh Dear. How very sad!

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/apr/19/labour-party-financial-peril-keir-starmer-members-leaked-report
We know of course that if it is printed in the Guardian it is given the same authenticity as papal infallibility.(or so the left argue, although others would posit the rag normally gives biased opinion pieces)

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 08:57 AM

Is there two Iains's on here or a split personality?

Not a personal attack. Just an observation that there are two distincy modes of operation using the same login name.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 09:57 AM

n the news todayy it was announced clearly that Gove had denied accusations by whistleblowers that Johnson had deliberately skipped 5 meetings - take it up with the beeb
HERE
AND ANOTHER
EVEN IN JIMMYLAND
Plenty more, if you want it


Not friggin' Guido Fawkes with a new identity, surely ?
you prefer the logs of a proven criminal blogger with proven links to the BNP to the reporting of a long established and respected journal, - that's about the only thing about you that makes sense
Like all scurrilous propagandists, you only put up what is convenient and a headline and faded out text doesn't hack it
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Mossback
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 11:09 AM

Is there two Iains's on here or a split personality?


Wouldn't be the first time on here that a group of wankers posted under a single pseudonym.

If I extrapolate this remark, it is a clear personal insult. Please read the rules of this thread. Many thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 12:28 PM

Though it is true that we have had multiple members posting as one personality in the past, Barb’ry - ‘Musket’ being one example.

I won’t comment on the suggestion that they are onanists, however. Other people’s sex-lives are of no interest to me.

That was the bit I was getting at, rather than the multiple posters using one name!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 12:43 PM

you prefer the logs of a proven criminal blogger with proven links to the BNP to the reporting of a long established and respected journal, - that's about the only thing about you that makes sense

Some would even dispute video evidence from the BBC and insult the source that uploaded it.
Never mind! The rest of the world can see it for what it is.
Scurrilous Fits you far better than me I believe
Perhaps you should read the opening post
"No personal insults"

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 01:11 PM

"and insult the source that uploaded it."
Like you reject everything that doesn't suit you - you mean
Give us a break
You have been insulting everybody personally since you got here here
as with your attitude to information it's a movable feast with some people

onanists
Always thought this was the singular of polyandrist
You live and learn
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 01:50 PM

Starmer on a Zoom last night was optimistic in the face of historical precedent…

“We have to stop the factionalism in our party. We have to create a different culture… And I’m determined that we’re going to do that.”

I guess he has a hotline to St Jude the patron saint of desperate situations, lost causes ...The Patron Saint of the Impossible.".
The poor lad had a monumental task before the leaked 851 page report of party shenanigins. and Hercules thought he had a problem!

Reaction to the leaking of the report was swift on Monday, with a group of Labour MPs demanding its findings be released "officially" and "in full".

The statement by the Socialist Campaign Group of Labour MPs - populated by 29 of the party's 243 Members of Parliament - also called for an emergency meeting of Labour's National Executive Committee to discuss the document's contents.

"This process must produce a report, that is publically available, which restores faith among Labour members in the practices of our party," it said.

Meanwhileit is said that 18 members hace taken legal advice and may seek damages.
Bye bye labour party!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 02:32 PM

"“We have to stop the factionalism in our party."
Remind us of how many long term MPs were thrown out of your party during Brexit - or maybe not
The tories shredded itself in pieces during Brexit decades long ministers were thrown out without discussion, it lost two Prime Ministers and the country was split down the middle thanks to extremist right wing bully-boy tactics - and you talk about "factionalism
Are you insane ?
Thanks you your mob of political thugs, it will take ed=deaceds to heal the rift after Britain's recent Civil War
Bag of frogs doesn't come near describing your inept and transparent nonsense
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 02:53 PM

The tories shredded itself in pieces during Brexit decades long ministers were thrown out without discussion

Are you insane ? Nope! hows about you? Remember what Joe said to you?
A few gems to ruminate on:
Those mps thrown out of the tory party were treacherous remainiacs. Who in all honesty is going to mourn their passing? The electorate gave them a right larrupping when they tried to stand as remainiacs, just like we gave the push-me pull-me-o Labour party.

More than a dozen people are drawing up legal action against Labour, after they were named in an incendiary leaked report that threatens to plunge the party into financial peril.

Claims covering the Data Protection Act, invasion of privacy and libel are all being considered and could be submitted to the party as soon as this week. The party, individuals and some media commentators are all said to be the subject of legal complaints as a result of the document’s release and remarks made about its contents.

The row caused by the 860-page document has been a huge blow to Keir Starmer’s hopes of uniting Labour under his leadership following years of infighting. It claimed that factional hostility towards Jeremy Corbyn contributed to the party’s ineffective handling of antisemitism complaints and undermined its 2017 election campaign. It also included criticisms of the party and some of its leading figures by staff members in private messages.

Since it emerged last weekend, some of those mentioned in the document have contacted lawyers, with each person said to be considering several different claims. It exposes Labour to a potentially huge bill should it lose in court or opt to settle.
Mark Lewis, a lawyer who has been contacted by those seeking legal action, told the Observer: “There are lots and lots of claims. There are claims under the Data Protection Act, there are claims for breach of confidence or invasion of privacy and there are claims for libel. It is a very lengthy report that mentions a lot of people.
I'm ordering popcorn! Howsabout you?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Raggytash
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 05:07 PM

A few days ago I asked if Johnson would realise just how important the NHS is to the public of the UK and if he would ever thank them.

Well credit where credit is due he was fulsome in his praise of the NHS staff who cared for him during his illness.

Today I have read a letter posted by a Student Nurse who has also suffered from the virus. I believe it is well worth reading.

"If I’ve learned anything from suffering this virus, it’s that my government have really let me and many other people down up until this point. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve really grown fond of Boris Johnson over the past few weeks and his passion for this country is truly inspiring, however that doesn’t mean I can just paint that fondness over all the cracks that were already there. From day 1, being a 17/09 student nurse under his government has been demoralising and testing in so many ways. Being a student nurse in our current NHS is crippling. I’ll be leaving the course with £60000 of debt. I’ll have worked more 40 hour weeks than I can count, for absolutely free. No financial help or recognition. I’ve caught this horrific virus during one of those long, free shifts right at the start when PPE guidance was still unclear and their was a delay in their distribution. If I had died from working that free shift I honestly think it would have been the most laughable tragedy. Since becoming really sick I’ve also come to realise that you will only be tested if you’re clinically deteriorating and need intervention or of course, if you’re famous. Those 100000 tests a day promised by the government seems a hell of a long way off. Boris Johnson had his test on day 1 of symptoms. I’m on day 20 and still recovering from my truly horrific ordeal, however because I’m only a year 3 student nurse who’s volunteered to help the NHS during this crisis, I still haven’t had a swab. I was refused a swab in hospital on day 8 because I am “young and healthy” and “there aren’t enough resources”. I know I’m not as important as the prime minister, but after already being made to feel so insignificant throughout this whole nursing journey already, it’s quite a kick in the teeth. I’m honestly thankful when our prime minister nowadays makes public declarations about the how incredible the NHS is but I’m also equally as frustrated. Most of us already knew our NHS was amazing, it’s just that for most of us it doesn’t take nearly dying to recognise that. So if Boris Johnson and the government learn anything from this virus too, I hope it’s the value of their NHS and every single individual within it, doing their part to make it incredible. I hope they never jeer and laugh as they deny their people in blue pay rises again, before they skip home ecstatic about their own. I hope they put a little more funding into the training of the next generation of healthcare staff instead of making them work themselves into the ground for nothing out of the goodness of their own hearts. I hope they never again talk their NHS down or question it’s sustainability like they have done many times before. I think that at a time when the country needed it and it was about time the government heard it, the NHS has risen up and has spoken for itself. I hope they heard it. I hope they pay attention to it. I know that I will dedicate the rest of my life to it whilst continuing to be in awe of it. Long live our NHS"

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 07:22 PM

"I know I’m not as important as the prime minister..."

She's ten thousand times more important than the prime minister. Cheers, Raggytash. :-(

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 19 Apr 20 - 11:40 PM

I've had a day off mudcat..

Couldn't face up to all this talk about potatoes,
while we only had one left in the house;
until me or the mrs draws the short straw
on a life risking survival trek to tesco..

As for our last potato, I diced it up to go in a leftovers stew.
But it never occurred to me to ask what country it came from,
which seems to be taking xenophobic nationalism to crazy extremes...!!!???

That's brexit gone even madder...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 02:44 AM

At the risk of repeating myself. When the right can only come up with jibes and insults to the Labour party it is pretty obvious they have no arguments to justify the massive governmental failings with the NHS in general and Covid-19 in particular.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 03:03 AM

Jibes and insults to the labour party,
Are you seriously suggesting the leaked report did not exist and make some serious accusations? Besides breaking any number of laws,such as those concerning defamation and data protection.
We shall see who is correct when the writs start flying.
and pray tell what have you been doing to the ruling party ever since the brexit vote. and how about all the insults thrown at the PM from the time of Cameron, May and now Boris?
Typical lefties! Like to dish it out but squeal like stuck pigs when a mere soupçon cometh your way in return pointing out the obvious inadaquacy of the opposition party.
You guys provide endless entertainment!
You lost every election since 2010
your party is insignificant and self destructing.
you have zero influence
your opinions count for nowt
All you can post is negativity, mostly taken from guardian opinion pieces

Would you like starring roles in the new carry on film?
Carry on Squawking

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 03:30 AM

That's all he has Dave
His own attacks on members of the party he defends only serves to underline the mess that The Tory Part, Britain as a whole and even the countries that make up the United Kingdom have been driven into by first Cameron, then Maybush and now Boris the Brainless - three prime ministers, each progressively worse than one another - that has to be worth some sort of a medal
His "Ramainiac" hatred for a fair number of MPs and ordinary members of the party he is rooting for verges on schizophrenia - he only loves the bit of the Party that agrees with him - the rest are scum - "factionalism gone ballistic"
And he digs out a debate about The Labour Party discussing getting together to sing from the same hymn - now that's what I call "joined up thinking" (not)

Not only has the future of Britain been seriously undermined as a trading nation, so has what passes for democracy in Britain
The racist use of Populism has increased RACISM in Britain, making it a dangerous place for millions of its citizens; it has also undermined the Parliamentary system and put the NEO NAZIS BACK ON THE STREETS
These people now HAVE THE SUPPORT of those in the upper echelons of the Party

If this pandemic hadn't happened both Northern Ireland and Scotland would now be seriously questioning whether it is worth staying on board this sinking ship as both of them have been dragged unwillingly out of Europe by this cabinet of clowns and their non-elected bully boy
What a fine mess eh ?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 03:54 AM

pray tell what have you been doing to the ruling party ever since the brexit vote

Simple. Pointing out the failings of that party. What have you been doing? Trying to bring a party that currently has "zero influence" into disrepute. Bringing the governing party to task is a time honoured tradition. Kicking a party when it is down is all you have.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 04:10 AM

This is the future the Tories have more or less guaranteed Britain, first because of BREXIT and then due to an UNAVOIIDABLE PANDEMIC that appears to have been prolonged by bad mishandling
This is more reprehensible because the Tories have managed to trick many of the British people into supporting it with their lies and reneged-on promises
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 04:21 AM

Kicking a party when it is down is all you have.

Yeah and ain't it great! Wouldn't want it doing a Phoenix impersonation now, would we?
It is hardly my fault your party is a never ending shit show, it says more about your poor choices in my view.

non-elected bully boy
Now let me see:
Election 2019 Boris as PM before and relelected with a spiffing majority
by way of a democratic vote. That makes your statement drivelling nonsense I am afraid.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 04:55 AM

You have to ask yourself the question, "which party is doing the most harm?" and I know what my answer would be. If you believe that the Labour party is damaging the country and its population more than the Tories are it would be a simple matter of demonstrating how. Wouldn't it? It has been demonstrated that the Tories have damaged the NHS to the extent that it can no longer cope. On a scale of what is important, today and in the long term, any internal politics in a party that has no influence is a fair bit lower than that.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 05:14 AM

"Yeah and ain't it great! "
Only fort aasmall minds
You don't care about whatt's happening to britain, you hate lage sections of the British people
You despise the less well off and non Brit Britons as do mst so called partiots'
As for unfortunates who have nowhere permanent to stop, no sanitation, now running water.. "thieves, much-spreaders and slave owners"

You accuse those who dare ot criticise Britain's incompetent and indifferent leadership of "anglophobia" yet each and eevery one of them/us shows 100 times more compassion for what is happening to the ordinary British citizen than you ever will
Your rabid hatred of those who wish Britain to stay in Europe or those who would like to see a better life for the poor is palpable, your support for the rightist scvum that now pollutes British streets and your lack of concern that Rees Mogg, who fought to leave Europe and immediate moved his investments to Ireland, has opemly supported the Nazism that our fathers gave their lives to keep out, sums up you and thos who think like you

It is little wonder you refuse to take an intelligent pert in this debate - who would, in your position ?

Let's move on and leave him to wallow fellers - we've tried talking to him far too much - again - now the mask has slipped full-time and he's back to his Mr Hyde
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 06:06 AM

It is little wonder you refuse to take an intelligent pert in this debate - who would, in your position ?

Looking at what is opposing me you are correct. My posts deserve intelligent replies. How often do I get them? You are the piers morgan of mudcat, Everything you post is designed to flame, troll and exaggerate A prime example below that small part that is actually comprehensible.
Only fort aasmall minds
You don't care about whatt's happening to britain, you hate lage sections of the British people
You despise the less well off and non Brit Britons as do mst so called partiots'
As for unfortunates who have nowhere permanent to stop, no sanitation, now running water.. "thieves, much-spreaders and slave owners"
congratulations on moving forward to displaying your usual nonsense. We have been down this road before have we not?

Justify what you post or acknowledge you are merely posting your usual pack of lies and insults, that small part of it that actually makes any sense.
Disgraceful behaviour- go and read the opening post again, or does it not apply to you?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 06:12 AM

Told you he had no intention of joining in - his self obsession and contempt for his superiors says what needs to sum it all really - time to leave this "rotten tub"
GOOD SUGGESTION HERE
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 06:41 AM

An anthem for the left. ENJOY!!!!

No Hopers, Jokers & Rogues

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 06:48 AM

You guys never learn.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 06:50 AM

"an intelligent pert..."

Can't think why, but when I saw this typo I immediately thought "smart-arse..." :-)

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 06:51 AM

Oi, I'm learning! And you're right...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 07:26 AM

"You guys never learn."
I've assuaged by guilt Baccie
I hate cutting people out while all this shit is happening - I tried again and he "wants to be alone"
Feck him - he really isn't worth helping
It did give an opportunity to make points I didn't really have time to make, tanks to the sun shining - I friggin' hate gardening
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 08:08 AM

Shortages of protective equipment have now reached panic level - the gowns desperately;y needed, "when and if they arrive from Turkey are not nearly enough to meet immediate needs"
Elsewhere, countries begin to return to normal (other than the US, which is being "urged to return to normal by Trum despite not being ready to"
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 08:48 AM

I can just see a bunch of worried Tories standing on the white cliffs of Dover, fretfully scanning the skies with their opera glasses for a sighting of a Turkish plane...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Rain Dog
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 09:49 AM

Unfortunately the cliffs are out of bounds at the moment. Closed while council workers try to capture the gulls and then paint them blue. It is for the good of the country you know.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 09:52 AM

Blue birds - reminds me of the winter evenings in the fields surrounding our Kirkby housing estate
We did our best to keep warm though
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 10:12 AM

Your rabid hatred of those who wish Britain to stay in Europe or those who would like to see a better life for the poor is palpable, your support for the rightist scvum that now pollutes British streets and your lack of concern that Rees Mogg, who fought to leave Europe and immediate moved his investments to Ireland, has opemly supported the Nazism that our fathers gave their lives to keep out, sums up you and thos who think like you

From: Jim Carroll - PM Date: 30 Aug 09 - 10:59 AM

On a more personal level, my father returned from Spain on the eve of 'The War Against Fascism', having been wounded and held prisoner there. He received no hero's welcome; rather he was met with excommunication from his church for fighting on the wrong side, was awarded a police record as "a premature anti-fascist" and became unemployed because of having being 'blacklisted' from his job. Unable to find work he became one of McAlpine's Fusiliers, the result being that I don't think my sister and I met him more than a dozen times before my tenth birthday,

Bit of a contradiction there laddie. My father was in uniform from 1938 to 1947, and yours was....? Do try to be accurate and do not try to bamboozle us. You are always found out.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 10:35 AM

" and yours was....?"
Wounded and disabled for having volunteer to fight fascism at a time might have been stopped while Britain was still sucking up to Herr Hitler and trying to appease him
He earned the awrd of being a "premature ant-fascist' and spent the next fifteen years being punished for it as did his wife and children
Had Britain opposed Hitler at his weakest the people of Guernica and Madrid wouldn't have been blanket bombed by the revived Lufftwaffe flexing their muscles
Nor might you and many other fathers had to go to war - but that's capitalis self-interest for you
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 10:51 AM

Well ????
im Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 11:04 AM

My grandad was a genuine Dunkirk hero,
a fine example of British military bearing, right to his end,
and a primary role model of strong proud dignified dependable manhood
for me...

He served from boy soldier long before WW2, to his retirement some time afterwards..

A battle hardened man others turned to in a dire crisis, long after the war..

He died from cancer in the 1970s, so never had to suffer Thatcher.

He would definitely not have a good opinion of what successive tory governments have done to our nation,
the country he would have readily defended to the death;
like too many of his good mates at Dunkirk..

When our family hears tories glibly calling on the 'Dunkirk Spirit'
we laugh in contempt, convinced so many of them would have been on the other side
in that war...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 11:21 AM

"He would definitely not have a good opinion of what successive tory governments have done to our nation,"
He' love to see Robinson and his scum back on the streets becausee of the 'savage invading hordes' policy of the Brexiteers led bt Farage - I'm sure
When the war ended it was Labour who rebullt Britain and tried to make it the "land fit for heroes to live in" promised to men like your father
Avery decent step was opposed by the Tories - health and housing for all, a share in the nations profits, a decent benefit system
What did the Tories say to those "No Pasaran" (They shall not Pass)
Nothing about the Tories has changed in the interim period - look at the way they're behaving in this crisis
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 11:37 AM

Worldwide shortages...???

When will it dawn on our govt that we will need our own permanent PPE,
and other vital supplies manufacturing industry..
State financed if necessary...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 12:02 PM

That related back to my post of 17 Apr 20 - 03:54 AM

Both left and right wing agree that there are limits to what you should leave to the free market when it comes to the welfare of the country. I have yet to hear a free marketeer recommending we disband all the military and hire an army when we need one: the market will provide. But I would not be entirely surprised to learn if there were some.

For PPE we have decided to leave it to the market because we simply buy it if we needed it - well, that idea hasn't *quite* failed yet, but it is decidedly teetering on the brink. And we are only keeping it there because we are lowering the standards from what we previously thought essential (Which makes me think of all the "not lowering standards" such as for food and workers protections we have heard around Brexit: when promises hit the real world the promises vanish.   Let's leave that for another time.)

I would say we need a proper assessment of what we really need to protect this country, not driven by such simplifications as "free market" and the rest. I don't think anything good is likely to come out of Brexit, but if we took a serious look at what do we genuinely need to protect the country, rather than making us even more dependent on "the free market" , it is possible something worthwhile could

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 12:22 PM

I'm in the bathroom now, but even if I wasn't I haven't got time or inclination
to be arsed with googling for confirming fact.

Suffice to say, within the last week I've read plausible news reports
America is using its immense buying power to grab as much worldwide supply of PPE as it can hoard.
Pushing up prices for whatever morsels are left available..

Trump is boasting they have more vital medical gear in storage, than they need at the moment;
and when the time is right for him,
he might show the rest of the world what a wonderful generous leader he is
and possibly share some of it with us..

Obviously on his terms and conditions.. what a hero...

Shame about all the people dying in the rest of the world deprived by his Monopoly,
while we wait for his magnanimous gesture..

This is my encapsulation of what I have seen and heard on the news,
And I'm inclined to believe a lot of it...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Raggytash
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 12:28 PM

Sir Philip Rutnam has launched an Industrial Tribunal claim for constructive dismissal. Oh course his boss was Priti Patel.

He claims that she had made unreasonable demands on staff and had belittled officials in her department.

The outcome of this will be interesting ...…..to say the least.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 12:55 PM

"America is using its immense buying power to grab as much worldwide supply of PPE as it can hoard."
It seems this has been happening for some time - largely ignored until the Government was forced to make it illegal because of major shortages
US big business has been buying and hoarding essential equipmen which has forced prices up - when they reach r=the desired level, they are shipped abroad
Sounds like their 'patriots' aren't very different THAN OURS
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 01:31 PM

Basically, for all the brexit ideologue's rhetoric about independence..

We NEED to be genuinely self sufficient in the supplies and services
vital for keeping our population in healthy well being..

State funded, even nationalised, industry has to be an essential factor
in a truly effective Mixed Econonomy..

It must not be demonised and dismissed as 'communism', 'socialism', or 'anyotherism'..

It's just plain simple common sense...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 01:34 PM

errmm.. yes I do have college qualifications in econonononononomics..

Bastard spellcheck failed to flag that one before I posted...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 02:24 PM

There may be a valid concern about offshoring but you have to remember that competitive tendering applies throuhout the EU in all sectors. The only exemption permitted is for strategic concerns ie defence only.
Having seen attempted hijacking of PPE by Germany and France even contracts within the EU are not honoured.
It is likely this virus will be a wake up call for many sectors of industry to repatriate. However there will be a cost escalation involved. Companies do not offshore for any other reason than to make money. There are many examples where companies have availed themselves of government grants to establish. Once the mandatory time period has elapsed to ensure qualification they have upped sticks, with an EU grant, and shot off to eastern Europe, leaving devastated towns behind them. If China is made a pariah(as seems likely) there will be many supply chains suffering major disruption. It is going to be untidy while it sorts itself out. Just as well we did not offshore spitfire manufacturing to Germany all those years ago.
Much of modern manufacturing relies on rare earths, even if only for control cicuitry. Electric cars, mobile phones, computer memory, DVDs, rechargeable batteries, catalytic converters, magnets, fluorescent lighting and much more......
Here's a look at the countries that mined the most rare earths in 2018, as per the latest data from US Geological Survey.

    China. Mine production: 120,000 MT. ...
    Australia. Mine production: 20,000 MT. ...
    United States. Mine production: 15,000 MT. ...
    Myanmar. Mine production: 5,000 MT.
If China wants to play hardball...Oh Dear!
Might be time to go grovelling among the ice and snow in Greenland.
The Kvanefjeld project has JORC 2012-compliant resources of one billion tonnes.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 02:29 PM

These are crucial concerns which should be above and protected from partisan party politicking...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 02:41 PM

After a respectable absence - no response to my answer Iains
Conceding defeat again IC - and whose to blame you
Don't you dare my family into these discussions again - this is not the first time
France was A VICTIM OF HI-JACKING
France acted in it people's interests bu refusing to let equiplent leave the country when it was badly hit - any country would have done so   
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 02:55 PM

One news item I heard was trump sanctioned the hijack of a ship load of PPE
already en route to the nation that purchased it...

President Pirate.. arrr...

Any truth in that, should be out there..

Personally, I'm happy to take it at face value.. it's so plausible...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Raggytash
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 03:09 PM

Jim ….........…. have you been drinking. That last post was unintelligible even by your standards.

Care to post it again?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 03:17 PM

Don't you dare my family into these discussions again - this is not the first time

As I recall you did, and not for the first time. Would you like the links? You have no compunction in dragging my family in the discussion though. A typical lefty: Do as I say, not as I do.
You make it hard to respond to your points, some because they make no sense, others because they a are purely an extremist view. It would be like talking to indiarubber to refute them. It is simply not worth my time.
Just look at the provocative shite you posted.

He' love to see Robinson and his scum back on the streets becausee of the 'savage invading hordes' policy of the Brexiteers led bt Farage - I'm sure.

I guess you are reverting to your second childhood. Do you really think such posts are helpful, or do you just like crashing threads?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 03:28 PM

Iains - if you didn't relish the sport of provoking Jim so much,
I'm sure he'd not get so distracted, losing his clarity of focus fighting with you.

But that's it isn't it, you don't want Jim to stick to the point posting
serious incisive arguments against your politics and tory government...!!!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 03:52 PM

"Here's a look at the countries that mined the most rare earths in 2018, as per the latest data from US Geological Survey.

    China. Mine production: 120,000 MT. ...
    Australia. Mine production: 20,000 MT. ...
    United States. Mine production: 15,000 MT. ...
    Myanmar. Mine production: 5,000 MT.
If China wants to play hardball...Oh Dear!
Might be time to go grovelling among the ice and snow in Greenland.
The Kvanefjeld project has JORC 2012-compliant resources of one billion tonnes."

Meaningless inexplicable obscurantist out-of-context drivel. We know how much you want to show us how geologically clever you are, but this nonsense simply demonstrates the precise opposite (not for the first time, of course). And it represents severe bad manners to boot. No, I'm not going to bother looking it up.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 04:47 PM

congratulations on being capable ofcopying and pasting shaw. You really wouldbe better off learning how to construct links though.
Perhaps obscurantist to you, but it is shorthand to say the reserves have been calculated in such a fashion as to comply with a recognised standard and thus are reasonably reliable.
    I suspect you are one of the last people on mudcat competant to instruct anyone on manners. You merely display your arrogance to all and sundry. Well done! Would you like me to post cartoons so you can keep up with the narrative?

Personal attack, Iains. Please stop.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 05:07 PM

"The average pundit’s view has been the election of Sir Keir signalled a change in attitude by Labour’s membership away from ideology and towards electability. Left-wingers will therefore be disappointed to see YouGov’s polling today, which shows Boris’s lead on ‘best PM’ has plunged, err, 3% in Keir’s first three weeks as leader – remaining 27% ahead of Sir Keir. Amongst Labour members, Boris has risen from 6% to 8%, with one third not sure. Starmer’s bounce is weak"… He is only polling 4% more than Corbyn. For a politicion's honeymoon period those figures are not good for Starmer.
I had best give the source otherwise someone will .........
https://order-order.com/2020/04/20/starmers-bounce-polls/

The idea of repatriating certain manufacturing processes is obviously something that will discussed thoroughly in coming months. Globalism will collide head on with populism.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 05:14 PM

I think it is a lost cause, Barb'ry :-(

I'm not sure what can be done apart from ban UK politics altogether. Sadly that means the people that want to shut down the criticism of the present government have won on here but what the heck. It is a folk music forum anyway. There are plenty of social media sites where the their tactics are not tolerated.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Raggytash
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 05:22 PM

Oh I don't know Dave, I wouldn't normally lower myself to log-on to Guido. The fact that some people actually respond to his out of context dribblings that have no analysis or depth only helps to confirm my belief that such people are somewhat lacking in critical abilities.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Barb'ry
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 05:34 PM


Evening all. This whole thread goes from being interesting to name calling stupidity in a matter of seconds. I won't shut it down (although I feel there will be other mods who would like to do so) and I will fight your corner. Saying that, there is a real necessity to cut out the name calling, be it overt or poorly veiled. I know politics makes temperatures run high but if we are to keep this thread and ALL its contributors, then you have to be able to recognise flame-bait, trolling etc and scroll past, rather than plunging head first into the abyss.
Thanks everyone
B

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 06:34 PM

Well, Barb'ry, I'm not going to do all that personal attack-dog stuff, but the post I pointed to (in my 03.52 PM post) was just grandstanding, deliberately designed to impress the geological no-nothings (as he sees it) with jargonistic abbreviations which failed to give any indication of net yields of rare earths from ores and with this obscure and unexplained reference: "the Kvanefjeld project has JORC 2012-compliant resources of one billion tonnes." Cor blimey, guv! :-) If we are to have lusty debate we do need to be able to sternly call out nonsense in posts, but without the obnoxious name-calling stuff. I know he doesn't like it, but...

I'm not a geological know-nothing, by the way, unfortunately for him...

And you're doing a grand job!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Mossback
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 06:47 PM

I'm not sure what can be done apart from ban UK politics altogether.

Ahem. One might ban the "gentleman" (and I use the term advisably) who is the major instigator & problem.

Others have been "disappeared" for much more minor offenses.

NB: This is NOT a criticism of Barbara.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 09:37 PM

British Writer Pens The Best Description Of Trump I’ve Read

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 20 Apr 20 - 11:40 PM

"I think it is a lost cause, Barb'ry :-(

I'm not sure what can be done apart from ban UK politics altogether. Sadly that means the people that want to shut down the criticism of the present government have won on here "

DtG - Let's not give into defeatism, mudcat mates..

We mustn't let the bully boy censors win,
whatever tactics they use to shut up debate.....

I don't have time or desire to find another internet site,
with a new crowd of folks to talk politics with..

I've too much time invested here with you lot..

..for better or worse...

This is the only place I know that's enough like a 'friendly' local pub or club
with old familiar faces

Sites likes facebook and twitter are more like scrawling hit-and-run graffiti on a bog door...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 02:18 AM

There may be a valid concern about offshoring but you have to remember that competitive tendering applies throuhout the EU in all sectors. The only exemption permitted is for strategic concerns ie defence only.

One myth that has developed during the while Brexit debate is that peple are either rabid leavers who as so committed to splitting from the EU that they ae prepared for the whole country to collapse, or they are fanatical supporters of the EU and in their eyes it can do no wrong.

Both of those are wrong. There are a substantial number, maybe even the majority, who are closer to a neutral position: it has benefits, and it has failings, but when you add all these together you are somewhat a leaver, or somewhat a remainer. That is one reason why I think Corbyn's much-mocked '7 out of 10' is actually much closer to how people thought (though most in the end were more like 4 out of 10, not 7). Good in parts. perhaps, is a fair way of describing it. I would count myself as a "7 out of 10"-er myself.

I have often said the EU is two projects, one economic and one social. The economic one is very free market, and the rule that all contracts have to be offered to all countries making up the EU is very much part of that. I have not yet located the exact rules, but if it says 'national security' rather than 'defence' (and indeed even if it says defence without qualifying it), it could be argued that things like PPE are necessary for national security. It seems likely most countries would be willing to agree that such things are valid exceptions in future. But in any cases, most of the left-leaning Leave supporters were of this mind anyway: the free market aspects severely restricted state subsidies of industries that the individual countries regarded as important, for example. Hence, again, why Corbyn could not score higher than 7.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 02:46 AM

Ok. Having slept on it, you are right. The thread should continue but let's make Barb'ry's task easier by not responding to name calling, trolling and flame-baiting. Trouble some people insert these activities into otherwise reasonable posts and we cannot expect Barb'ry to remove the rotten bits and leave the sound. She needs to remove the whole lot. So, you know who you are, if you have a genuine point to make, don't add unnecessary insults or flame bait.

I will not respond to any posts, from anyone, if they contain any such nonsense. Even if the rest of the post is a genuine political comment. I can only hope that others will do the same and that the moderation team will remove offending posts and any response to them swiftly.

Hope you have a lot of patience, Barb'ry as I think you will have your work cut out :-(

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 03:15 AM

"Would you like the links? "
Yes please, but I won't hold my breath - not able nowadays anyway
Igf you honetly believe that attacking scumbags like Farage is insulting you really must live way out in the sticks - it is he and his like who opened the floodgates of racism that are engulfing Britain with a POSTER echoing the filth that got Enoch Powell drummed out of politics
The fact that he did is a fair measuring stick of how Britain has changed in a relatively short time - what was unacceptable then is https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2016/06/25/483362200/brexit-whats-race-got-to-do-with-it?t=1587452345369 now

I too welcome Ms Allen's (pet name) new broom, but I find that when we are told to ignore individuals who constantly and deliberately insult bother people' arguments and them as individuals as a replacement for rational argument it's a bit beyond the call..
It means the forum becomes a soapbox for such individuals
I always understood that the guidelines for membership are infinitely sensible and maybe should be more than just guidelines   
This really has gone on for over four/five years now
"These are the times that try men's souls" - as a hero of mine once said - we need to be able to discuss what's happening around us without all this flung shit
JIm

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 03:25 AM

Suit yourself, Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 03:26 AM

It’s so childishly simple, and it’s stated in the Forum advice for dealing with problem posters - Don’t Feed The Troll.

Trolls feed off a lack of self-control on the part of their targets. The troll is desperate to provoke a reaction. When he’s ignored, his flame-baiting increases in intensity. If nobody responds, his obnoxious behaviour sticks out like a sore thumb, and dealing with it becomes so much easier for the mods.

You’re intelligent people. For god’s sake behave like intelligent people and refuse to allow his provocation to affect you. If you want to make a point, do it once only, then leave it - when he comes back with his nonsense, IGNORE IT! If he responds with garbage and insults to something you’ve posted, you’ve WON, walk away! His horse-shit fools nobody who’s of any consequence.

If I can do it, anyone can.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 03:30 AM

"Meaningless inexplicable obscurantist out-of-context drivel."

If the above is not insulting, pray tell, what is it?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 03:37 AM

"Suit yourself, Jim."
I've tried Dave - my "soapbox" point remains, as does the fact that I know people, Irish in particular, who refuse to post because of behaviour such as his - we don't have many from ethnic groups on this forum but it would be a tremendous boost to both parts of it if we did
Travellers are now becoming a part of the Irish music renaissance - they's probably do a runned if they say how that were depicted here
It seems a little self-indulgent and 'gentleman's clubbish' to just 'pass by on the other side
Ok for hardened veterans, but it ain't gonna win new friend and influence them
I would love to see people discuss that rather than the "ignore him" mantra
Sorry
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 03:57 AM

@DMcG Theregulations on compettive tendering within the UK are quite clear.
However exemption can be claimed for emergencies.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/35925/dsd_govt_awareness_guide.p

From the EU guidlines:
Usually, all medium and higher value contracts must be awarded through competitive procedures (tenders), although there are exclusions and exceptions, such as:

    purchasing real estate
    cases of extreme urgency
    situations where there is only one possible supplier

https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/selling-in-eu/public-contracts/public-tendering-rules/index_en.htm
It seems likely most countries would be willing to agree that such things are valid exceptions in future
That is likely the least of many changes.

An interesting article from the economist: The great PPE scramble
Why countries can’t meet the demand for gear against covid-19

https://www.economist.com/international/2020/04/19/why-countries-cant-meet-the-demand-for-gear-against-covid-19?fsrc=newsletter&

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: peteglasgow
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 04:02 AM

well, we tried to reset but it wasn't long before the shadow of a troll came rolling along and jim and others couldn't help but get annoyed. i usually withdraw for a bit until he pushes one or more of my buttons.......they give birth astride a grave the light flashes an instant and then it's dark once more.....Mod would it possible to ban Ian for, say, 6 weeks. just as an expirement - that's all - with the expectation that he comes back after that if he wants to? obviously it wouldn't solve all the problems and others may step up to the abusive plate, then suspend them. some of us do enjoy a political discussion and i don't see why this topic has to be all or nothing. like a football match - you have the choice to wave a yellow card.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 04:46 AM

"Meaningless inexplicable obscurantist out-of-context drivel."

"If the above is not insulting, pray tell, what is it?"

Oh no you don't. That was not an insult. It looks that way if you strip it out of its context, which is precisely what you've done here. When challenged I explained why I said what I did but you've chosen not to quote that post. You deliberately tried to grandstand your "geological knowledge" in an obscurantist section of a post which was intended to bamboozle us, and now you're cross because it didn't work. Some of us are not as daft as you think we are. I'll also add that, in the remark you chose to quote, I attacked (lustily - it is politics, dammit) SOME OF the content of your post, not the person. If we're talking politics, it's fine to say "You're talking rubbish and I can support that contention, thus..." It's not fine to say "You're talking rubbish because you have a brain the size of an amoeba, and I'm going to call you shaw or little jimmie to prove it." Sadly, that's a not-so-subtle difference that you have yet to appreciate.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 04:52 AM

I am wise to your games Shaw.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: peteglasgow
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 05:02 AM

i have long been wise to your game, ian. and will continue to try and stop it. occasionally, when i can be bothered

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Barb'ry
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 05:31 AM


I'm posting on here almost as much as you are!

I've had my say and you've had yours. I don't want to close threads or ban people, nor do I want to start deleting threads or posts.

What you (some, not all) need to understand are the consequences of your posts. The interesting bit comes first, followed by the nastiness, the dig, the insult, which totally negates the trouble you have spent posting in the first place. And then we get the obvious and inescapable retorts and responses that cause the problems. The initial remark can be ignored (yes, Jim, even you can walk on by...) the flame doesn't get fed.

I'm sure you all know this already but maybe this will be the last try. Argue like pleasant, sensible adults - argue all you want but don't let it descend into playground behaviour, please.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: peteglasgow
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 05:42 AM

ok, will try again - but why do we have to abandon the whole game rather than just trying to discipline one or two persistent offenders? it's been done before

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 06:02 AM

"even you can walk on by."
But I hate that squeaky-voiced Dionne Warwick
Give it another try - I'll have to just let my Irish friends know when it's safe to come out
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:32 AM

Sir Keith Starmer: Labour party boss
boasted that if he were in Government, the lockdown would have come earlier, with stricter controls.

   “I think if you look back, what you would have seen from a Labour government is a willingness to act more clearly and more decisively. So we were saying weeks ago that there should be strict controls, that it was clear that the infection was getting out of control, and that the government need to act more quickly and more decisively. And we would have done that.”.

Labour party minion Shadow Chancellor Anneleise Dodds disagreeing with Rory Stewart’s call to enact harsher measures on Westminster Hour on 8 March:

   “I completely take on board what Rory was saying but I’ve been very very impressed by the world of the Chief
Medical Officer and Chief Scientific Advisor… the problem is if you move immediately into, for example measures like stopping large scale events, that can have unintended consequences because people can then congregate in other areas that are actually even more likely to cause contagion.”
    “Rory disagrees.”
    “I feel really strongly about this.”.

Dodds went on to support the Government’s plan, and emphasised the need to listen to the scientific advice the Government is receiving.

    “I don’t think this is a reflection of passivity, just to make that clear. The Action Plan that the Government has set out, and I mean okay the Government are of a different political persuasion to mine, but they have stated that at some point we will have to shift from the containment stage to the delay stage…
    They set out the risks from potentially doing that too early. I’m talking about just medical professionals being involved in this [decision to lock down], it’s also got to be those who understand about the set up of the social care system, of other public services, they need to be part of this decision.”.

Dodds was defending the work of SAGE against Rory Stewart’s claim on the program that politicians need to be the ones to take decisions as scientists often have a narrow focus.
Oh what a tangled web we weave
when first we practise to deceive.......
Labour playing politics with covid-19
"

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:34 AM

What do we reckon to Bozza missing 5 fibre meetings?

From the Daily Heil so a not to be accused of bias :-)

Oh, and 200.

Unless I missed it...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:36 AM

Can you Chadwick! Nicked 200 and didn't even say owt :-P

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:37 AM

Barb'ry, talking politics is a vigorous and lusty pastime, not best done walking on eggshells. I'm a product of those hard-left smoke-filled rooms of the 70s, the difference from here being that we can't eyeball each other on this forum. That gives Iains the "courage" to routinely offend, provoke, and insult. He'd have been given the order of the boot in short measure had he tried that in those heated real debates, for the astonishingly simple reason that he can't debate. We just didn't do what he does. So let us have free rein, within reason. Counsels of perfection are fine, and we should aspire, but we are human beings. Please delete posts that take the mick out of our names ("backwardman," "little jimmie," "shaw" and the like), and that lack any of the sensible content you'd expect in talking politics. And while I'll defend his right to the hilt to make constant references to his favourite far-right criminal blogger and muse, he really shouldn't be sneeringly telling us just about every day that Mr Staines is the only infallible source of political analysis. Don't let him do it. That way, you won't have to keep sending us those green "love-letters." We promise!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Donuel
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:56 AM

Some are merely a product of something. Some are are independant intellectuals and some are painstakingly wise. Idiots go without saying.

The mass produced 'products' annoyingly cry to the teacher/mod that 'so an so' isn't being fair. What a waste.

Stop being a waste product and build something new and improved.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 08:21 AM

Last word on this from me
I go along with Steve with a compromise suggestion
This has been going on for as long as I pointed out and it has sunk many important threads - even made them permanent no-go areas
As Steve says, over-enthusiasm from all of us can be a problem that can be solved without using the pub "no politics, no religion, no football" approach I had to get used to in Liverpool
What happens here is Iain's gets to the point where we all fall into his trap, he realises he has gone too far and tomns his behaviour down for a while (as now) and we all breathe easy until he gets bored and kicks off again
May I respectfully suggest that next time it happens (as it inevitably will) Workingtonman's suggestion is tried
I was barred twice by Joe without hesitation (I believe unfairly) for something off the cuff and far more mild than this - two musical subjects became forbidden which caused us permanently losing a veteran researcher (feel free to go and check - I'm happy to provide the complaint I made to Max - which didn't receive the courtesy of a reply even)
If punishment can be this stringent - why not to our worst serial offender ?
There's th' end on't as far as I'm concerned
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 08:53 AM

What do we reckon to Bozza missing 5 fibre meetings?

Try this: A Government spokesman said: ‘This article (Sunday Times)contains a series of falsehoods and errors and actively misrepresents the enormous amount of work which was going on in government at the earliest stages of the Coronavirus outbreak.’


https://healthmedia.blog.gov.uk/2020/04/19/response-to-sunday-times-insight-article/
It must be pointed out that at least one of the co-authors is more suited to writing fairy tales.Brought by Guido, the man yet to be caught peddling false news!

https://order-order.com/2020/04/21/sunday-times-journalists-discredited-track-record/

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 08:53 AM

Apart from saying go away, Donuel, as you have nothing useful to say, I'll agree with that. Now is not the time to say more.

It must have have been a cold night over on those white cliffs of Dover for those anxious Tories, still fruitlessly scanning the heavens for any sightings of the possible arrival of Turkish kit. It would be bloody funny if it wasn't, in turns, both pathetic and tragic.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 09:00 AM

Agree with Jim, that is. I don't see a denial in either piece about Johnson missing five meetings. Like I said, you don't debate, you merely sidetrack. Not good enough for here.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 09:08 AM

He missed the meetings. Gove admitted it in the Mail piece (of all places).

"Mr Gove, who is part of the so-called 'quad' of ministers steering the government's response while the PM recovers from his own battle with the disease, this morning called the allegations 'off-beam'.

Speaking to Sky's Sophy Ridge, the minister for the cabinet office said: 'There are one or two aspects of the Sunday Times report that are slightly off-beam.'

He confirmed the PM did not attend the Cobra meetings, but added: 'He didn't. But then he wouldn't. Because most Cobra meetings don't have the Prime Minister attending them.'"

Depends who you want to believe, I s'pose...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 09:26 AM

Conversely, ‘Blair and Brown never missed Cobra meetings’, says former Downing Street chief aide

Gove said for a PM to miss Cobra meetings is normal. I think it would be relatively easy for someone with access to the minutes - i.e. some appropriate civil servant, to collate the information for all Prime Ministers from, say, Thatcher onwards. Then we could form our own view how 'normal' it is.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Donuel
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 09:59 AM

Every good story has a villain. I've gone as far as to say Iains was a Russian bot product. But getting rid of the only villain does not mean villains don't exist.
Not being omnicient, sometimes the villain is ourselves.

At worst any villains/trolls here are ankle biters.

Conservatives in my country identify as a culture warriors. The UK conservative is a different sort imo but share with Amurikans an attitude that they hate more than what they aspire to.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 10:20 AM

‘Blair and Brown never missed Cobra meetings’, says former Downing Street chief aide
Interesting Headline from The Scotsman. The use of inverted commas suggests that it is a direct quote from a former chief aide.
What he actually said (in the attached article) was not quite as positive:
The chief scientific adviser under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown has said he cannot recall a Cobra meeting which was not attended by the prime minister of the time.

Just quoting facts, as opposed to headlines, which, for some reason, are often misleading.

And it's COBRA (Cabinet Office Briefing Room A), not FIBRE (something to do with diet).

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 10:21 AM

Whatever the truth of the matter there is little doubt that the Government did not take this virus seriously until it became a major problem - 5 weeks seems a fair estimate
While many countries are preparing to or actually have returned to normal, the Government is still being lambasted by medical staff for it's failure to provide protective clothing
- "leftie fake news" to some, bu not to those who are grateful for the sacrifices these people have made
Pity some people arenet more prepared to discuss failures rather than defending them - rather like squabbling over the results of an inquest
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 10:24 AM

According to the Institute for Government (IFG), “COBRA’s purpose is high-level coordination and decision-making in the event of major or catastrophic emergencies, including natural disasters, terrorist attacks and major industrial accidents or disruption”.

The IFG also says COBRA is designed to "keep ministers appraised of the situation, to ensure that the wider response of the government is coordinated, to record and disseminate key decisions and updates to all relevant ministers and officials, and to provide ministers and the prime minister with up to date information on the situation for any decisions that they may need to make".

The presence of the PMis a red herring as he/she would be fully appraised of any decisions taken and ready totake direct action if required.
The viewpoints of some:
George Eustice was a junior minister in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs during the 2014 floods when the Government was being heavily criticised for lack of action.

He said that when local authorities had been caught out by the Christmas break, COBRA was an effective means to “give everybody a kind of proverbial kick up the backside and get things moving”.

But COBRA has also been criticised in the past. Charles Clarke, who was home secretary during the 7 July 2005 terrorist attacks, warned that ministers should be careful to avoid COBRA meetings “taking up the energies of the key operational people”.

Lord Blair of Boughton, former commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, similarly warned that the frequency of COBRA meetings could cause problems, especially if they were called at "the whim of the chair".

Andy Hayman, the former assistant commissioner in the Metropolitan Police, said that Government should avoid making COBRA meetings too frequent to make sure that operational staff were not "running around servicing meetings but not actually achieving anything”.

There is no point in debating the issue until accurate figures from other premierships are obtained.
It is hardly likely any response would be directly actioned without the consent and knowledge of the acting PM or his acting deputy.
But carry on believing whatever you want to believe.
In 2002 blair convened cobra three times within the first 5 years of taking office.

The meetings referred to as being missed by Boris were convened in January and February. It was not until March 19th that the WHO declared a pandemic.
From the Guardian: Civil servants caution that Cobra is not necessarily at the heart of how British government should be run. It was designed – after Britain watched West Germany’s hapless response to the 1972 Munich hostage crisis – to give a cross-government focus on an emergency incident, a terror attack or a mass-casualty disaster. Officials say it is not part of the normal Whitehall machine.

Some of its meetings, which tend to be hardly reported, are attended only by civil servants. Others are chaired by departmental ministers – Amber Rudd, when home secretary, chaired a Cobra meeting during the Skripal crisis, for instance. The presence of the prime minister is by no means necessary, although in each case the decision to hold a lower-level meeting should have been signed off by No 10.

Some would like to level a charge of incompetance or dereliction of duty it would appear. Totally without substance in my view, and judging by the increasing levels of support Boris is receiving,most would appear to share my view.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 10:46 AM

In my comment next to that link, Nigel, I described a simple way of testing whether it is true Brown and Blair never missed a Cobra meeting, while simultaneously checking Gove's claim that PMs missing such meetings is normal?

Would you support getting actual factual information about attendance at Cobra, rather than relying on Gove's assertions or other people's memory? If not, I am prepared to rely on the advisor's memory in the absence of anything better.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 10:48 AM

Hadn't realised there was a pandemin in 2002 - isn't that whet we're discussing ?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 10:53 AM

No it was cobra meetings.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 11:36 AM

Whatt happened to Blair et-al has nothing to to with the almighty cock up that is still happening, other than to act as a convenient diversion
What meeting Blair missed in relatively serene times measures minute next to the disgraceful way the present spider in the Number Ten web acted in a national emergency - including refusing to be checked after he hobnobbed with virus sufferers - good example for the rest of us, eh what !
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 11:47 AM

What meeting Blair missed in relatively serene times measures minute next to the disgraceful way the present spider in the Number Ten web acted in a national emergency

I recommend a perusal of the Chilcot report and the utter condemnation of Bliar blair taking us off to war under false pretenses. Lack of PPE for troops,lack of dury of care to MOD personnel, not to mention Court action over troops being killed in death trap snatch landrovers. Would you like more?
There was precious little serenity back then as I recall - go ask an Iraqi !

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 12:03 PM

I described a simple way of testing whether it is true Brown and Blair never missed a Cobra meeting, while simultaneously checking Gove's claim that PMs missing such meetings is normal?
Would you support getting actual factual information about attendance at Cobra, rather than relying on Gove's assertions or other people's memory? If not, I am prepared to rely on the advisor's memory in the absence of anything better.

I would always favour facts over opinions. But Gove was not asserting that the PM was there (which would be the opposite of the The Scotsman claim), but that the PM was not required to be there. The frequency of Brown/Blair attendances does not influence that fact.
From: The Institute for Government
Who sits on COBR?
The composition of any COBR meeting will depend on the situation being discussed. It will be a mixture of officials and agency personnel, alongside ministers, from relevant departments and agencies. The meetings are often chaired by the most senior minister in the room, and the prime minister if he or she is attending, but not always.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 12:07 PM

"I recommend a perusal of the Chilcot report and the utter condemnation of Bliar blair taking us off to war under false pretenses.
More whataboutism - Blair was a political thug as is the present crowd
What he did has sfa to do with the presnt crisis other than to act as a diversioion
What about Chamberlain and that piece of paper? - about as relevant as that

I'm not surprised at you but I must say, I expected more from Nigel
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 12:16 PM

Cobra ? cobblers..

just another time wasting waffle distraction..

..at least potatoes were tastier to think about...

Wonder what tomorrows distraction tactic will be...???

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 12:25 PM

As for Iains - for whatever mudcat mod's reasons, we are stuck with him/them,

..so let's at least get some use out of his/their 'contributions'..

I can and do on my own terms...

We need to recruit some more conservative mudcatters to our UK BS debates,
to prevent them stagnating into our own little lefty love-in..

Too much stress has been place on Iains to fill the vacuum left by ake, tezza, and dear old keith..

No wonder Iains shows signs of multiple personality disorder,
having to fill all their shoes...???

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 12:32 PM

"Cobra ? cobblers.."
At least it adds a bit of sting to a somewhat circular discussion - where's me whistle
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 12:43 PM

You should know by now that leftie love-ins never happen, pfr. If there's one thing I learned from those smoke-filled 70s rooms in East London, it's that if you put more than about four lefties in a room for half an hour, you'll end up with two bitter factions...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 01:05 PM

My original question, "what do we think of Bozza missing 5 COBRA meetings" provides no surprise answers really. The right wingers on here try to justify it while those of us further left condemn it. The excuses given are hinged around whether it is common practice of not. The government supporters say it is but, as I have pointed out before, they are not to be trusted. Just look at the litany of lies I have referenced previously to see why that should be the case.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 01:13 PM

"you'll end up with two bitter factions..."
You must have attended different meetings than I did
Only two ?
The left would have strolled home decades ago if they had stuck to socialis principles rather arm-wrestling over tactics
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 01:17 PM

"We need to recruit some more conservative mudcatters to our UK BS debates"

You don't have to look far. Almost any yank here will do.. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 01:19 PM

Steve - "lefty love-in"..
you can guess which cheeky smiley emoticon
I would have used...

4 lefties in a room.. only 2 factions.. that's a bit optimistic innit...???

.. more like 6 - 8 factions - we're that good at it...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 01:19 PM

"Almost any yank here will do.. "
Surely we need English-speakers who aren't always late for everything ;-)
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 01:20 PM

Absolutely, Jim. After ripping each other to pieces for two and a half hours we'd reassure ourselves that we were on the same side but that we merely had "different perspectives..." :-)

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Raggytash
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 01:23 PM

It would be reasonable, I think, to expect senior cabinet ministers, including the Prime Minister to attend all COBRA meetings.

These meetings are called to address urgent issues and again to my mind it would be essential that all senior staff would be au fait with the issue. All parts of that issue.

To receive any information "second hand" does not normally allow a full and clear picture of the situation to be arrived at.

Thus any minister, and certainly the Prime Minister, missing these meeting could be construed as a dereliction of duty.

Please note this applies to any government of any persuasion.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 01:32 PM

What is clear right now,
is that emergency contingency planning
has so far not been anywhere near good enough..

Retro blame games are too much of a distraction.
Now is year zero for starting over fresh, and getting it right for our future...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 02:02 PM

Cobra is not a universal panacea. At the end of the day the day the question to be answered is did the government recognise the severity of the problem and did they step up to the plate? It does not matter if they met in the parlour or squatted in the outside bog. It is not about where they held the meetings as much as how did they deal with the issue.
I am quite happy for an enquiry when the flak settles. Inevitably lessons will be learnt and perhaps even acted on. The opposition constantly needling just illustrates what an absolute mess they are in. They cannot even present a united argument(see Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:32 AM) This is hardly surprising as they have split into a series of squabbling factions.
Just like the flu this virus carries a mortality rate with it. Some it will kill regardless of what medical techniques and equipment is thrown at it. This seems to be overlooked. Have the medical facilities been swamped?
No not yet
Have we run out of ventilators? It has not been reported.
Have we run out of oxygen? It has come close but the German company owning BOC has a similar problem. In Gernmany it is reported demand has increased 10 fold. Manufacturers are demanding regulations are relaxed in order to satisfy demand.
PPE shortagesj are a problem not unique to the UK. The US has been accused of runway piracy, an exaggeration I am sure. European countries have tried commandeering contracted supplies, namely France and Germany. Having outsourced most of its production to China and India, those low prices have come back with a sting in the tail.
Turning over production takes time and any existing contracts on home produced material requires honouring first. NHS procurement also has a part to play in this unhappy tale - they are certainly not blameless.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Donuel
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 02:09 PM

Iains sounds very reasonable. Bottom line, we gotta change our ways.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 02:14 PM


Cobra is not a universal panacea. At the end of the day the day the question to be answered is did the government recognise the severity of the problem and did they step up to the plate?

That is so. But by the account you posted :
According to the Institute for Government (IFG), “COBRA’s purpose is high-level coordination and decision-making in the event of major or catastrophic emergencies, including natural disasters, terrorist attacks and major industrial accidents or disruption”.


That is, COBRA is specifically intended to enable the government to 'step up to the plate'. So whether the PM did or did not attend is a good indicator if he did that plate-stepping.

I agree with pfr that what happens from now on is more important than what went before, but it is unfortunate fact of life that if people make a mess of things, they often need to be faced with it to bring about a change. It is one reason why most businesses do 'Personal Development Interviews' or whatever the jargon is/was in your company. Loking back on what didn't work is an important guide to doing better in future. I don't hold with idea of just keep pushing forward without looking at what mistakes if any are being made ( (c) P Patel) and only when all this is over in who knows how long, have a inquiry lasting a year or two and preferably only reporting after the next election ...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 02:16 PM

Funny, innit. When Labour were in power in 2008 and there was a GLOBAL financial meltdown going on, it was all Labour's fault. Why, we still occasionally hear them blamed, even today. Yet when the Tories execute an almighty screw-up, including ignoring a report from four years ago that shudderingly and precisely predicted that the NHS under the Tories was not fit for purpose and would be pitched into peril should there be a pandemic, it's all the fault of squabbling factions not in power who dare to criticise. We've done worse than every other country except for the US, and the light is not at the end of the tunnel. That can't be explained away by moaning about the opposition.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 02:27 PM

"Cobra is not a universal panacea"
This is real get-out-of-jail-freeism
Whatever the shortcoming of the present system (which only appear to surface hen the cock-up merchants need digging out of Klart-ups of their own making) that is what Briaish politics choose to work with and, if that's what they've got, they are to blame for it
I'd have had my arse kicled from here to breakfast--time if I tried "my screwdriver didn't work boss"
These fuck-pups are unacceptably life threatening (and taking) errors which have been noticed widely by the public and the press but are still being ignored
Perhaps it's time to re-visit Dr Ryan's film blog (Dave?) and note when he was demanding heads should roll

This is excusing the inexcusable for Party political purposes while far too many people are still falling ill and dying   
Maybe it can be pinned on Tony Blair or Corbyn ?
Nothing would surprise me anymore
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 02:41 PM

Philip Pullman in the Guardian:

Philip Pullman has said that the UK government “should be arraigned on charges of conspiracy to murder” if it is found that “for Brexit-related reasons” MPs did not take part in the EU procurement scheme to buy PPE.

The government has previously said it was unable to join the EU schemes as it had not received an email of invitation. But the Guardian revealed last week that the UK missed three opportunities to be part of the EU scheme to bulk-buy masks, gowns and gloves.

In a bitingly critical essay published by Penguin, the author of His Dark Materials says the entire front bench should resign if it is found to be true that MPs declined to participate “for Brexit-related reasons”. But Pullman predicted that no resignations would follow because the MPs responsible “have not a single grain of shame”.

“So they should be arraigned on charges of conspiracy to murder. Nothing less will do. They knew the risks, and thought they’d rather appease the foaming zealots of Brexit..."

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 03:18 PM

So whether the PM did or did not attend is a good indicator if he did that plate-stepping.

Maybe maybe not. But Not enough data to judge either way. It is also important to note the meeting may have been charged to present the PM with reasoned options.As was said earlier it is not essential for the PM to be present. The meeting was in cabinet office briefing room A. We have no knowledge of the frequency of meetings, the subjects discussed, or the constituent members.
The only gaugefor comparison we have in the public domain, that I can find, is that Blair attended 3 cobra meetings in the fist five years of his premiership. Apparently it is a big deal Boris missed a couple of meeting over the space of 2 months. Without knowing the members, or matters up for discussion it is merely a smear from the left. More "window" thrown out to needlessly distract the government from their job, while they have to refute the more outlandish media distortions. I would have thought the left would be better served seeking unity than constantly sniping at thee government, because once those court cases start labour is going to be a busted flush - straight down the pan.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 03:18 PM

.. so what's the peace time equivalent of "War Crimes"...???

.. and not even against a foreign enemy, but your own nation's citizens...!!!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 03:25 PM

buggering cross-post 3:18.. mine should have posted first.. bah...

but anyway..

"I would have thought the left would be better served seeking unity"

Don't worry about that, we are more likely to make genuine attempts seeking that after the crisis,
despite inevitable tory resistance and cover ups...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 03:40 PM

According to this report in The Indepent the is a problem that much of the PPE is the wrong size for women.

I have referred to the book "Invisible Women" before which has a lengthy section on PPE being the wrong size and shape for women. It is mainly taking about army and police kevlar vests and similar, which only fairly recently discovered women have breasts it seems, since they made no allowance for them.

A completely different type of PPE of course, but is it plausible people are thinking more about numbers than whether they will fit? Absolutely.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 04:02 PM

Whatever spin the rabidly-deluded Tory-boys here attempt to put on Johnson’s abject performance so far (words like ‘lipstick’ and the gloriously-apt ‘pig’ spring to mind!), Polly Toynbee nails it in The Guardian.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 04:05 PM

"Apparently it is a big deal Boris missed a couple of meeting over the space of 2 months."

2 = 5

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 04:24 PM

I should ask D. Abbot the queen of mathermagic!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 05:00 PM

More evidence that we are in the hands of a dangerously-incompetent government. From today's Guardian:

"The government has missed opportunities to secure at least 16m face masks for NHS staff in the past four weeks, amid growing frustration from companies who say Britain is losing much-needed equipment to other countries.

As ministers faced relentless questions over a shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE) in hospitals, suppliers said their offers to deliver UK-standard face masks were being met with silence from the government.

And on another day of chaos over the government’s PPE procurement, a senior civil servant said that its decision to stay out of a joint EU scheme was politically motivated. However he was forced to retract his claim within hours after he was contradicted by the health secretary, Matt Hancock.

Adding to the confusion, Hancock claimed that the UK had now joined the scheme – only for EU sources to note that that had happened recently so Britain would not benefit from the supplies of emergency equipment."

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 05:17 PM

As soon as the Guardian is quoted we know it is an opinion piece, full of malicious inuendo and shy on fact.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 05:42 PM

You really do have to stop this. The piece I quoted is a news report, not an opinion piece. Comment is free. Facts are sacred.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:04 PM

"As soon as the Guardian is quoted we know it is an opinion piece, full of malicious inuendo and shy on fact."

well.. I'm not a big fan of the Guardian either..
so I can try to see that as an attempt at a jokey wind up..


But if you seriously believe your accusation is true...!!!???

that's exactly the same kind of crazily biased nonsense
parroted by fanatical far right BBC haters..

oh well.. each to their own conspiracy theories...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Donuel
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:07 PM

Facts are scared not sacred. In this day and age they might be fake.
The main thing is to obey Steve's all powerful facts, preferences and self proclaimed infallibility with profound sacred respect. ;^]

All Kidding aside, THROWING the bums out even if they are guilty of genocidal manslaughter is nearly impossible. Even Isreal and the US can not get rid of their discredited leaders. The last leader who got his just deserts was who, Mousselini , Kadaffy?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:33 PM

"Not a big fan of the Guardian." Y'know, I've posted about stuff like this several times before. When you read any news source you are imbibing what an editor has decided is most important. If that editor decides that an item isn't important, he'll either not tell you about it at all or he'll put in on the bottom of page 27. As soon as I see any front-page item about devastatingly-unimportant shite about Megan, Vicky Beckham or the queer old dean, I know that an attempt is being made to mass-manipulate us to buy their paper. And why not. Unless they can sell papers, we wouldn't have papers. It's even worse wth the Beeb. They have half an hour to tell us what they've decided is important for us to know. At the moment they're telling us overwhelmingly about deaths caused by coronavirus. You'd think that little else was going on in the world. They don't even tell us not to worry, only about one in a hundred will actually die, and that flu, which they never mention, will see just as many of us off, pro rata, every winter.

But here's the rub. The Guardian, the Indy and the Beeb, imperfect and arbitrary tho' their news coverage is, strain themselves to separate news from comment. There are news items that read neutrally, and there are opinion pieces. It's impossible to confuse the two (except for poor Iains, who is so bamboozled by his constant resort to his far-right criminal muse that he can't tell news from comment, as he's just demonstrated, a bit like champions of the Daily Mail). Like it or not, you have to educate yourself to be very discriminating as to what you accept from the mass media, and your default mode should be total scepticism. Bejaysus, the Guardian gets me hopping bloody mad at least one a day. The very worst thing is to indulge in confirmation bias. Go to Staines and he'll always tell you precisely what you want to hear. That's how he makes his money. Poor Iains can't see it. He's never tried to discriminate. He wants to hear only what his puppet-masters have decided he should hear and what they've told him he must pass on. Hence the post at 05.17 PM.

That'll do for now...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:35 PM

Go and have another vat of wine, Donuel. You glaringly don't belong in this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:41 PM

Steve - Siamese fighting fish thread...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:44 PM

Sorry, mate, I'm staying here. Helen patronises, and she's doing it in that thread. She's a bit of a mod manqué.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:58 PM

Steve - well we've been pushed into and penned up in this quarantine ghetto..
while 'they' freely stride in at will,
poking us with sharp sticks for their own petty amusement,
so convinced they are too righteous and superior to leave us alone...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 08:23 PM

You're not wrong, mate. But let's not allow the hypocrisy of that thread pass us by...We are ghettoed whereas they can sneer superciliously from outside the fish tank with impunity... At least, I'm guessing that the cod-metaphor in that thread will be not only allowed to stand but will quietly be celebrated by many a yank who can't bear our lustiness...

Hey, see but I did there? Fighting fish? Cod? I mean, whaddam I like!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 08:33 PM

In the meantime, take in this little snippet about what Toryism really means:

Tenants who asked their billionaire landlord for a rent reduction during the coronavirus pandemic were told to use the money they would have spent on lunches and holidays to pay the full amount due.

More than 100 residents living in a block in Somerford Grove, east London, signed a letter addressed to their management estate agency and the building’s corporate landlords asking for a 20% reduction in rent and an agreement that no tenant would be evicted during the coronavirus pandemic.

But the letting agent, Tower Quay properties, told them their request was “unreasonable” and “unrealistic”, adding that any drop in tenants’ income would be minimised by a reduction in spending on holidays, entertainment, travel, clothes and lunches.

“Subsequently, when all of this is taken into account, in most cases we believe the impact on disposable income will be minimal, and there is therefore no justification for any reduction in rent, especially considering that whilst tenants are isolating the wear and tear in properties is increasing, which will be at the cost of the landlord,” the agent said.

Nice!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 08:35 PM

Don't bring a shrimp to a fish fight...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 08:39 PM

Wonder if the tory govt classify bailiffs as essential workers...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 20 - 08:44 PM

Soft faces, hard cases, hit you with their deadly smile...

And so to bed.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 01:56 AM

All heart aren’t they, those billionaire private landlords?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 02:10 AM

"full of malicious inuendo and shy on fact"
Sez the feller who who baosts about being reliant on blogs from a convicted criminal professional right wing blogger with links to the ultra-right British National Party (and can't spell innuendo)
Yeah - well - I'll have to think long and carefully about that argument
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:10 AM

A further point Iains
Anybody who automatically dismisses a paper of the standing of The Guardian without presenting any evidence as you constantly do, yet relies as heavily as you do on a professional propagandist who employs people to gather his propaganda undermines any chance of his having own credibility accepted in discussions such as this
Nobody with any sense does this without offering back-up argument
I'm not making this as an insult - I'm offering it as a piece of advice
I share the views of those who believe that rational right-wing argument presented in a reasonable if not friendly manner would be a tremendous asset to this forum
As things stand, you don't begin to qualify - sorry
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:11 AM

Pfr an example from the gruniard:
But when asked on Tuesday by the chair of the foreign affairs select committee, Tom Tugendhat, whether there had been policy advice on whether to participate in the EU ventilator scheme, the FCO’s most senior mandarin appeared to contradict the government line.

McDonald told the committee: “It was a political decision. The UK mission in Brussels briefed ministers about what was available, what was on offer, and the decision is known.”

His remarks appeared to blow a hole in the original defence of a “communication confusion” previously put forward by the Cabinet Office minister, Michael Gove.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/21/uk-refusal-of-eu-ventilator-offer-was-political-decision

But we find the Gruniard not only relies on inuendo but also tells a pack of lies unlike the highly esteemed Mr Guido!
How else to explain the following?

Top civil servant is forced into embarrassing U-turn after claiming ministers made a 'political decision' to DELIBERATELY snub EU schemes to buy PPE – and now accepts Downing Street just missed the email

    Sir Simon McDonald made the claim to MPs in remote committee meeting today
    It directly contradicted previous explanation offered by Downing Street
    Matt Hancock later said that the civil servant's version of events was not right
    Health Secretary: 'There was no political decision not to participate in scheme'
    Today Sir Simon wrote to Foreign Affairs committee chair to say he was wrong   

And humiliatingly, Health Secretary Matt Hancock confirmed there was 'no political decision not to participate in the scheme' during this evening's Downing Street press conference.
Sir Simon McDonald told MPs it had been a 'political decision' not to take part in Brussels-orchestrated efforts to bulk-buy protective equipment, but had to U-turn this evening
This evening Sir Simon McDonald sent a letter to the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee in an embarrassing U-turn

In the letter, addressed to chair Tom Tugendhat, Sir Simon admits the 'facts of the situation are as previously set out'.

He says: 'Unfortunately due to a misunderstanding, I inadvertently and wrongly told the Committee that Ministers were briefed by UKMIS on the EU's Joint Procurement Agreement scheme and took a political decision not to participate in it.

'This is incorrect. Ministers were not briefed by our mission in Brussels about the scheme and a political decision was not taken on whether or not to participate.'

He went on: 'Owing to an initial communication problem, the UK did not receive an invitation in time to join in four joint COVID EU procurement schemes.

'As four initial schemes had already gone out to tender we were unable to take part.'

Previously, Sir Simon, the permanent under-secretary at the Foreign Office, told MPs on the committee that officials briefed ministers on what EU schemes were still open to the UK, even though it left the bloc at the end of January.

So we have a sh*t stirring civil serpent and a paper ready to print dirt without fact checking.
Looks like typical lefty politics to me. Utterly disgusting. "quelle surprise" It would appear my first description of the Guardian was seriously in error. The rag is even worse than I initially portrayed it.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: peteglasgow
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:31 AM

at a rough guess, how many people do you think read all that post, Ian? was it about some leek?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:36 AM

Anybody who automatically dismisses a paper of the standing of The Guardian without presenting any evidence as you constantly do, yet relies as heavily as you do on a professional propagandist who employs people to gather his propaganda undermines any chance of his having own credibility accepted in discussions such as this
Funny you should mention propaganda
Guido did a little digging on one of the journalists that wrote the opinion piece on Boris and the missed cobra meetings.
Here for your delectation and delight:
the Sunday Times’ Environment Editor, Jonathan Leake, was one of the authors. Leake’s stories are often full of holes…

One stark mistake in the article was claiming immunologist Peter Openshaw “would have recommended increasing the threat to high”, however Openshaw later tweeted “I wasn’t there so can’t say if I would have dissented if I’d been there to hear the arguments”.
Previous gems include:
    Accused Gove of ordering the “killing of sick squirrels and deer”, with DEFRA subsequently explaining it was completely untrue and he hadn’t approached them for comment
    Asserted based purely on anecdotal evidence that “Pets, zoo animals and even Prince Charles’s cattle have been felled by the rampant disease [TB]” – something, again, the department explicitly said was completely untrue only to not have their statement included in the piece
    Wrongly claimed “French warship chases fishermen from scallop bay”, once again without asking the department who would have informed him the ships in question were 30 miles away from each other
    Misled readers that “metered homes pay 60% more for water” by making inappropriate comparisons between metered and unmetered customers with different water companies

Leake has a promising future as a fiction write, a blithering idiot or a budding propagandist.


By the way I look forward to seeing examples of Guido's propaganda.
Not that you will be able to find any of course. That is not what he does, as you well know. …

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:46 AM

"Guido did a little digging on one of the journalists "
Over and ourt and, for the future of this thread I would highly recommend that a total embargo be operated on all behaviour of this nature
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:50 AM

Sez the feller who who baosts
annd corrects mt spelling in the same line.

A true jim gem!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:55 AM

"a total embargo be operated on all behaviour of this nature" is what is being proposed and what you are refusing to do, Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:10 AM

OK, here’s a suggestion - how about asking the mods to open a separate thread which only Iains and Jim can post to, and block them both from this thread? That way, they can kick, punch, bite, gouge, and spit in each other’s faces to their hearts’ content, and everybody else can get on with intelligent, civilised discussion here.

Sounds like a starter to me.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:18 AM

"and what you are refusing to do, Jim."
I have made my position clear - I made the suggestion in the first place - I asm not relly happy about blanking anybody in the present circumstances, but neither am I happy about allowing that individual just to refuse to debate and just use this forum for propaganda   
He has not been blanked and while he is responded to his propaganda needs to be exposed for what it is
It is unbelievebly mindless to continue as he does at the time people are dying of the inept politics he is defending
I really have finished with him - that was my last try
It's up to everybody else
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:23 AM

Late yesterday afternoon was mired in political farce when the FCO boss Simon McDonald suggested that Britain’s decision not to take part in the EU’s PPE procurement scheme was a “political” one, in direct contradiction to the Government’s given explanation of an email communications failure. Hancock immediately denied the claim by McDonald and hours later the top mandarin issued a correction stating he was wrong and it was, after all, not a political decision. The writers of Yes Minister would have rejected such a scenario…

Regardless of the merits of UK non-participation at first in a scheme being run by a foreign political body we are no longer members of, it is on form for the media to portray theoretical participation in the scheme as a land of milk and honey, when weeks on from the start of the crisis, the EU scheme has not delivered a single piece of PPE equipment to a single member state.

Not only are countries like Italy and Spain reaching the end stages of their Coronavirus pandemic having not seen PPE help from the EU, according to the Irish Medical Times, on the 24th March an EU Commission spokesman said, “The equipment should be available two weeks after the Member States sign the contracts with the bidders, which they should do very rapidly,”. If the UK Government missed a deadline this badly, you can be sure the media would be canning them…
untrammelled facts from Guido

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:26 AM

INCIDENTALLY (Back to the real world
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:27 AM

Cross posted - by the way
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:36 AM

Your real world is a tad out of date. See : 22 Apr 20 - 03:11 AM

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:56 AM

Here is the key passage in McDonald’s retraction letter, despite the gruniard repeating the lie again today:


Unfortunately, due to a misunderstanding, I inadvertently and wrongly told the committee that ministers were briefed by UKMIS [the UK mission in Brussels] on the EU’s joint procurement agreement scheme and took a political decision not to participate in it. This is incorrect. Ministers were not briefed by our mission in Brussels about the scheme and a political decision was not taken on whether or not to participate.

The facts of the situation are as previously set out. Owing to an initial communication problem, the UK did not receive an invitation in time to join in four joint Covid EU procurement schemes. As those four initial schemes had already gone out to tender we were unable to take part.

Needless to say some labour MP is frothing the letter is not credible
With every action and word carefully documented I am sure we will find out exactly what the story is. Right now it is Government 10, servant nil.
Sounds like a case for summary dismissal to me, deliberately trying to sabotage the government .

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 05:02 AM

So, according to the article, The prime minister's spokesperson had initially said the government had not taken part because the U.K. was “no longer a member [of the EU]” and was “making our own efforts”. Then Downing Street claimed it had missed the deadline. Then there was a "communication problem". Then we had not joined because we were not invited. Now, in spite of having missed the deadline and not being invited, we have joined the scheme but the EU are not sending us PPE anyway...

All in the same article. WTF is going on? You would think a group of seasoned liars with the liar in chief presiding would be able to get the story straight. And people wonder why I say they are not to be trusted.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 05:25 AM

In so far as there is a pattern to that, Dave, it is that when people are asked what happened when they weren't necessarily prepared for the question they say it was political, and then it is subsequently 'clarified' that it was not.   

Make of that what you will.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 05:36 AM

A taste of sanity (surprisingly from the guardian)
To Date nothing has been delivered

Since the start of the coronavirus pandemic, the EU has launched four calls for tender for medical equipment and supplies. It invited companies to supply gloves and surgical gowns on 28 February, personal protective equipment (PPE) for eye and respiratory protection on 15 March and medical ventilators and respiratory equipment on the same day. A final call to companies to supply laboratory equipment, including testing kits, was made on 19 March. The total value of PPE being purchased is around €1.5bn (£1.3bn). The EU ceiling for purchases of ventilators is €790m. The first call for tender of PPE on 28 February failed because of a lack of suitable suppliers. It was relaunched on 12 March. Since then all four calls for tender have successfully found companies willing to supply the goods to the scale and quality required. The timeline for delivery varies. Some of the PPE is expected imminently. There is a longer time frame for deliveries of ventilators with the EU warning member states that it could take as long as a year for all the machines to arrive.

So much for much vaunted EU efficiency (and what were we arguing over?)

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 08:36 AM

I gave up reading this thread a few posts back - I'm to busy with real life problems..
I'll try again later..

What I will say now is this..

I try my best to show basic respect and read every word of the few BS threads I follow..
But I've told Iains this before, now I mean it..
His copy and paste posts are too long and boring to read,
with such little reward at the end of the tedium..
So now I can't even be bothered speed read scanning them any more...

This is the final straw - but now you boast it as a virtue...!!!

"Guido did a little digging on one of the journalists that wrote the opinion piece on Boris"

That is no different to the tactics of the BnPs old "RED WATCH" intimidation website..

"We know who you are, where you work, and where you live..
We can get you anytime......"

This supports suspicions of who guidos little helpers really are...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 09:30 AM

I for one have never been arguing that the EU is particularly efficient.

The government should have been pursuing PPE via the EU andindependently from overseas and from local providers. There is no reason at all why pursuing one means you do not pursue the others. Nor does it matter too much in itself whether the EU has yet delivered. Of course, we would prefer it if it did, but if there were a large supply in the offing you should seek it, wherever it comes from, even if it takes several months to arrive. That is actually the logic that has been used for ventilators. If Dyson could deliver many times the number that our domestic resources can, it is worth trying to get them to do that even if it takes months to arrive. (Not that I think Dyson can, but that is the logic.) Meanwhile, of course, you get as much domestic and other supply as you can, and if the EU or Dyson never delivers, well, you are no worse off.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 11:02 AM

" been arguing that the EU is particularly efficient."
As a group of Capitalist countries driven by profit, efficiency is left to the individual countries - it's a mistake (often a deliberate one to treat the EU as a monolith group
It's benefits lie in mutual co-operation, which never suited an ex-empire that couldn't be in charge of
IRELAND did extremely well out of membership
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 11:49 AM

it's a mistake (often a deliberate one to treat the EU as a monolith group
However it was the EU gave out   the invites to join the PPE and ventilator purchase group
From European Commission
DG Health and Food Safety website

The joint procurement of medical countermeasures is included as an article in the 2013 decision on serious cross-border threats to health. As an implementing action of this Decision, the Joint Procurement Agreement (JPA) was adopted on 10 April 2014. To date, the JPA has been signed by 23 EU countries. The Commission launched the procedure to prepare an agreement for the joint procurement of vaccines in the case of a future pandemic.
The JPA enables countries to procure pandemic vaccines and other medical countermeasures and equipment as a group, rather than individually. Through the JPA, any EU country can make a proposal to others to procure medical countermeasures together. A minimum of four Member States, with agreement from the Commission, is needed to launch a joint procurement procedure.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 12:26 PM

It seems right wingers who moan most about EU bureaucracy,
are also the folks most keenly interested in wallowing in it...!!!???

Most of the rest of us, whichever way we voted on brexit,
are bored to death with the over complexities
of all this fathomless red tape officialese...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 12:58 PM

"are bored to death with the over complexities"
I very much doubt if it's now going to happen - (not within may of our lifetimes anyway the way the pandemic is being mishandled)
Economic predictions throughout the world are such that any nation taking such a leap in the dark such as this need to be out of their skull
None of us are going to be left with feet to stand on including prospective trading partners
EVEN THE WORST BREXIT BUMWIPES REALISE THIS

Every cloud hopefully
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 01:50 PM

it has happened, Jim. We left at the end of January. what remains is the future trading relationship. As I have said before the same thing to so is to extend to the end of 2021 but I fully expect the government to stick to Dec 2020.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 02:38 PM

"We left at the end of January."
Technically, yes, of course we did
The CONSEQUENCES HAVE YET TO BE FACED

It wouldn't surprise me if there wasn't a change of heart when this kicks in alongside the grim financial consequences of the Virus becomes clear
Are people really going to dance to Trump's Tune now he's fully exposed himself as a certifiable liability
I hate to think my country has sun as low as that
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 02:44 PM

EVEN THE WORST BREXIT BUMWIPES REALISE THIS (I presume you are attempting to describe the victorious Tory party that has such stalwarts as the esteemed Mr Rees Mogg among its cadre of distuinguished members) A poor loser,or what?

Unless the winning Tory party wish to change the law we are out at the end of the year. With a deal, or no deal. Just imagine how much worse the situation would be right now had Corbyn and his 5 ring circus won the election.
You also have to bear in mind that should we be brainndead enough to seek an extension the EU will hold the UK to ransom as it tries to fill its depleted coffers.
I suspect any eurobonds that may be sold will be worthless 5 years down the road. The latest wheeze is to call them corona bonds - I can see why. They will end uo being extremely toxic to anyone daft enough to buy
them, to say "invest" in them is a bit of a contradiction in terms.
The sooner we are away from their piggy little clutches the better.
Rule Britannia I say

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:07 PM

Bollocks, I say.. to that particular Iains persona...

Not for any content you may be trying to express,
but the negative disagreeable way you chose to express it...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:37 PM

I tailor   my   response to whatever triggered it. I would have thought that was abundantly clear.

Serious questions deserve serious answers   Flippant comments do not.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 03:56 PM

Iains - but you well know we are all stuck in the same boat of having to appease mods
with goody two shoes non insulting behaviour and language...

As tiresome as that is for any of us used to traditional robust British
piss taking humour...

The overseas mods are not so familiar with our kind of blokey wind up banter...

Personally, I'd like our politics threads to be permitted to continue,
even if we must be bowdlerized..[ooer missus..]..

Goody Two shoes is the last thing I am. I'm also not an 'overseas mod' - if I were I think this whole thread would have been closed. I'd like this thread to be able to continue and I don't care about language or behaviour but the people being 'spoken' to certainly get fed up with being insulted and are more than happy to let me know.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Raggytash
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:26 PM

He must mean that nice Mr Mogg, stalwart of the Brexiteers, a major player in the ERG, who as soon as Brexit was on the horizon moved his Somerset Capital Management company to Dublin so that is could remain with Europe.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 04:47 PM

Pfr I think if you look at my responses and what they responded to then you must admit that you are probably talking to the wrong person.
A   position can be stated in several different ways. If deliberately stated or titled in such a way as to cause   maximum   offence to those holding a counter view there can be no surprise if the perpetrator is mocked. Act like a child - be treated as a child is   my view. Check any of my posts and see what previous posting triggered the response I gave. There are few innocents on this forum, especially among those constantly claiming to be so.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 05:07 PM

But there is one individual - Iains - pushing every button he can think of, to cause dissension.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 05:35 PM

So you know what to do, then, Maggie...?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Mossback
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 06:07 PM

So you know what to do, then, Maggie...?

If she doesn't I'm sure Helen can guide her to true enlightenment.

And why the one individual - Iains - pushing every button he can think of, to cause dissension"

having been identified, documented, and acknowledged is tolerated, protected and encouraged is one of the great cosmic mysteries of the age.

Greg F, where are you when we need you???

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Barb'ry
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 06:12 PM


OK, so we remove one person because they disagree with you in a 'robust' manner. Who then comes along to fill the vacuum? Because come they most certainly will.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 06:26 PM

How do you know, Barb'ry? That's just received wisdom, which, along with victim-blaming, is a rather easy fallback for you mods when the more difficult decisions (such as sacking idiots) evade you. As I've always said to Maggie, I'm on your side. You have this shite to put up with and no-one's paying you. The recent history is that Iains stepped in bigtime, like the big girl's blouse he is, when Teribus was sacked. But he was here before that happened and was already a complete pain in the arse. I don't see anyone here who is waiting with baited breath to step into a sacked Iains' shoes. So basically, and I know that you're a lusty soul who suffers no fools gladly and who can take flak, er, don't give me that...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 06:30 PM

My bad - fed the troll.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 06:33 PM

I don't see that you did. And we should be able to discuss stuff without always walking on eggshells. Thats honest.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 06:35 PM

I'll swear that apostrophe was there when I posted. Oh, hello...What's this grease doing on my reading specs...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 07:41 PM

Barb'ry - s'ok.. I know you are one of us Brits..

..and very welcome from our point of view..

If I'm ever being a bit sarky about our American mods,
I'm sure by now they know, I'm not entirely serious in any complaining I indulge in..
Though my underlying points are usually sensible and valid...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 07:50 PM

btw.. If I read your green comment correctly...???

I've already suggested that any mudcatters plaguing mods with PMs,
secretly complaining about and demanding that other mudcatters be punished..
Well, they themselves should be threatened with suspension for bothering mods
with constant petty complaints...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Mossback
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 07:52 PM

My bad - fed the troll.

Not at all,Stilly- a particularly clear analysis of this ludicrous situation.

Would there were more like you.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: peteglasgow
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 08:01 PM

just give it a go - give the troll a break for a few weeks. please. lets see how we get on without him . this shit has been going on for years ffs. it's ridiculous.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 08:42 PM

Bravo. Seconded. Even tho' pfr don't agree...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 22 Apr 20 - 10:58 PM

Steve - Some of us have more stubborn principles about ceretain things other folks don't..

One of my biggies is anti censorship and banning..
If that defines me as some kind of libertarian lefty..
simple enough.. innit...!!!

Remember I became an adult during punk rock,
when the Mary Whitehouse brigade were trying to censor and ban
everything we wanted to hear and see...
..and they succeeded far too much, and got away with it for decades...


It's not that I like or want to keep Iains per se..
But in the absence of any better quality right wing mudcat sparring partners,
he's all we got, and'll have to do..

If only we could swap him for other rightys more stimulating
to debate with...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 02:52 AM

I was there with the anti Whitehouse and Longford too PFR but I would defend their right to say what they believe. I would not defend anyone calling those who disagree with them idiots or worse, deliberately causing trouble and constantly repeating the words of a known agitator. Nor would I defend anyone involved in trying to subvert the democratic process by closing down debates with these tactics.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 02:54 AM

"OK, so we remove one person because they disagree with you in a 'robust' manner. "
I was hoping you weren't going to fall into this trap so soon Barbry
Iains problem has never been his politics - it has been the effect his behavour has been on others in souring up most discussion he has ever taken part in with personal abuse
I once tried to stop him by gathering his abuses into groups and putting them up for public view - 20/30 at a time on several threads
I was accused of objecting to his politics and nothing was done - he continues and will do so while people defend him on the grounds of "censorship"
Go wash yo mouf out - please - personal abuse has never been "robust" - when done on line anonymously it is hate mail
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 03:47 AM

I   have a question for everyone;
Is changing the title of a link from
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1271505/boris-johnson-brexit-latest-update-coronavirus-covid-19-john-curtice

to

EVEN THE WORST BREXIT BUMWIPES REALISE THIS
really designed to spread peace and tranquillity or cause maximum offense to one of the opposite political persuasion?

Do you think deliberately creating flame bait is the way to go?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 03:47 AM

Incidentally
The only time political views should ever become an issue on these threads is when they
(a) directly effect other members - i.e. the effect some people's vies have had on Irish and muslim people not being welcome here
(b) When they breach the incitement to hatred laws of the countries of members involved - no forum should ever be used as a way around those laws - there are far to many sites on the internet that already do that as it is
Iains is not the only one to fall into this category which has had a detrimental effect to the image of this forum
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 05:32 AM

According to reporting of a leaked German account of the Brexit negotiations, the UK is determined not to ask for an extension of the transition period, and also wants access to a number of the security databases run by Europol and others. The Germans, in particular, are strongly opposed to granting such access.

We need to remember these are opening stances in the negotiation, and therefore not necessarily where either side expects to end up.    Nevertheless, the UK will undoubtedly be seen as following another 'having cake eating it' approach, wanting some of the benefits of EU membership while remaining outside it.

A statement from the EU on the proceedings is expected on Friday.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 05:53 AM

As I said wriggle wriggle wriggle. Let us have my actual words with the context of the post instead of your continual distortions. You are a disgrace! Put up or shut up. It seems a simple enough request to me. Obviously a bridge too far for you. Some might reasonably wonder why


DMCcG Interpol existed long before the EU, as did Nato. They served/serve the equivalent functions you allude to. Some things are mutually of benefit. No doubt if the Germans are pigheaded we can bring Bletchley Park back online in a thrice.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 06:06 AM

I agree Interpol existed long before the EU, but the databases, the content and the technology on which they run bear little if any relationship to what existed before the EU. It is not the standard of information that existed prior to the EU that the UK is seeking access to.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 07:01 AM

Any more popcorn, anyone?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 07:23 AM

So much fighting! Left against right - right against left. In these days of pandemic, there is a common enemy that should unite both sides.

So ........

What is the the Lib Dem position on the current situation?


DC

don't throw things at me ... please .....pretty please!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: peteglasgow
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 07:28 AM

liberals will be backing the tories as usual - especially now there is a gap in the tory party where the slightly more sensible ones used to belong.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: DMcG
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 08:13 AM

In these days of pandemic, there is a common enemy that should unite both sides

I agree there is a lot of unhelpful argument. But in fighting the common virus, it is perfectly legitimate for the left to be pointing out how far below the 100,000 promised tests we are and to refuse have the narrative changed to be about the capacity to test rather than the number of tests carried out. If that spurs the government on to do more things like the 'pop-up' test centres that is a good thing.

I think we need to hear rather more what these pop-up testing centres are, and how many of them there are.   I would be looking to see sufficient of them so that every hospital has one in the car park at least once a week, so the NHS staff can be tested weekly. Two or three pop ups for the whole country would be simply PR, but enough to carry out weekly testing of all NHS staff is a minimum moves beyond PR into something worth while. Once than minimum has been reached we should aim to test all NHS and care home workers in short order: if the end of April is the NHS, then before the end of May for all NHS and care homes, for example.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 08:25 AM

The problem with uniting is that some of the medical workers on the virus front-line are the most vocal critics of the Government
It's hardly fair to ask them to unite behind a policy that is putting them at risk daily
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 10:24 AM

Blow in In small rural Irish villages the term 'blow-in' is often used to classify anyone not born in the immediate surrounding locality. In other words a blow-in is a person who has relocated to an area, who has no roots there
I have given you this definition before. Your woke is distinctly wonky.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 10:26 AM

Iains - dredging the bottom of your shitpit of

'wind up Jim, to set him loose to get himself suspended'

tactics now by resorting to the "J" word...

Some mudcatters seem to have the misconception that I'll defend your right to be a malevolent disrupter..

Wrong - if it was a choice of having one of two constantly fighting dogs put down,
I'd always choose Jim to be saved from being destroyed by a vet...

Just because I am against the 'principle' of banning,
don't mean I can't make exceptions for the sake of the peaceful life of a community....
Remenber I'm a pragmatist..

[to the tune of "Remember I'm a Womble"...]

If a mod asked me "decide on banning either Iains or Jim"...

For me, It's a quick easy obvious choice - You...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 10:27 AM

"and shaw[sic] you are no longer in a classroom and I am not one of your unfortunare[sic]pupils.[sic]And as you remind us ad nauseum [sic] it ain't your gig."

Hmmm. Shame really. I could have done wonders for your spelling, grammar and punctuation.

Sorry, John. Smackie Botty. Couldn't resist. I won't do it again! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 10:27 AM

19 Apr 20 - 04:05 PM (Irish homeless thread

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 12:27 PM

The key to peace and tranquility is quite simple: For any with the attention span of a squashed gnat I will repeat the opening post:
No personal insults
No dragging up the same points again and again and again
Stay as polite as you can be...
Respect each other, even if your political opinions differ.
No racism, sexism or other isms
Simples! Do not say or even imply I am a racist and I will not have to defend myself. It is that easy!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: peteglasgow
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 12:37 PM

what was that just open and closed thread in a false name and on a racist theme about then, iain's?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: peteglasgow
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 12:40 PM

apologies for the errant greengrocer's apostrophe

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 12:45 PM

Iains - So you habitually flagrantly contravene all of those edicts
you just quoted,
but only take exception to being called the "R" word...

Ok..

I can't say I've ever seen you denigrate women in any of the few BS threads I follow,
if that's any consolation...

But you do have actively supported known racists..
which could be seen as a bit iffy...!!!???

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 01:05 PM

what was that just open and closed thread in a false name and on a racist theme about then, iain's?
You seem to kmnow all about it.Was it you?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 01:05 PM

Just replied - or thought I had
I ave linked him to what he said
No neesd fro implication - he is an anti-Irish racist and I havent even bothered with the "slave owning dirty thieving Travelling community" yet
I think that's checkmate - leave it there PFR
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: peteglasgow
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 01:09 PM

no, ian - it was you. that is why i asked you about it

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 01:14 PM

Jim - well.. trouble is..

I made a mistake, and owning up to mistakes is ingrained in my personality...

Yes, I now do recall I have seen Iains being insulting to women..

Diane Abbott.. a black women at that...


oh dear iains..
that don't look too good for your protests
at implications of you being racist..

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 01:15 PM

Elections analyst Patrick English compiled data from across the British Election Study, the British Social Attitudes survey, the European Social Survey, European Values Study, and World Values Study. From 2016 to today, Britain has seen the biggest fall in hostility towards immigration since records began. Hostility actually peaked near the end of the Labour Administration then declined, and fell off a cliff post the brexit referendum.
This rather contradicts the received "wisdom" constantly posted by the left on this forum. Do you take humble pie neat or with lashings of custard?

Full details from the font of truth Guido.

He also has an interesting article on a sad old back bencher name of Corbyn who not only disregards social distancing but also breaks the over 70s lock in by attending Parliament. Tsk, Tsk!

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 01:22 PM

St Georges Day.. a cherry picked analyst named "English",
and he's supposedly exonerating Brexit xenophobes...

You're having a laugh...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 01:24 PM

no, ian - it was you.

that is why i asked you about it
Oh goody goody Another one wants to join the put up or shut up club.
I think an apology is required from you for both a lie and an unfounded slur and insult

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 01:35 PM

Tweets in response to the survey. I do not care if you believe it or not. The analysis exists, well known people have commented. Your opinion is of zero significsnce


Nick Robinson
@bbcnickrobinson
·
22 Apr
Replying to
@DouglasCarswell
and
@DanielJHannan
You’re right. We won’t. Not least because that’s not what the study says. Infact it says the opposite ie the fall in concern “has been taking place since well before the 2016 vote – disputing the idea that the Brexit vote has any causal connection ...”1/2
Andrew Lilico
@andrew_lilico
·
22 Apr
I'm sorry but in that graph it's quite clear that there's a collapse in concern after 2016. It might well be extending a pre-existing trend that pre-dated 2016 (possibly from when the referendum was announced in 2013), but there's definitely a huge drop after 2016.
Replies
Douglas Carswell
@DouglasCarswell
·
22 Apr
Replying to
@andrew_lilico
,
@bbcnickrobinson
and
@DanielJHannan
You’d have thought it at least merited some doubt about the researcher’s interpretation of the data, given what the data actually shows. But not for Nick. This is why our commentariat are so serially wrong. Inductivism masquerading as empiricism.
Stefan Reynolds
@StefanReynolds
·
22 Apr
Replying to
@andrew_lilico
,
@bbcnickrobinson
and 2 others
It’s so obvious! But not to the BBC as it fails to agree with their inbuilt bias. As usual...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 01:47 PM

He's got us going again
Leave him to wallow please
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 02:01 PM

Jim - He's got us going...???

.. t'other way round I'd say...!!!


Yeah leave him stewing..

Which is exactly what my dinner is doing,
but towards a more palatable result...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jeri
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 02:19 PM

You know, there was a nasty racist thread deleted earlier. I notice it got 18 replies, all from people who claimed they *thought* it shouldn't be there.

People can't really be that stupid, can they. "This thread should exist, so I'll post to it just to keep it alive."

Admit that the reason for all the trolling in here, and the fact we keep attracting trolls is that You People love them. What would you be posting about if you couldn't engage in a bloodless, painless bar fight?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 02:45 PM

Pfr it is only you lefties make an issue of the MP Diane Abbot being a person of colour. I have not ever mentioned it. I can make an issue of the Abbacus because she has publicly got her figures entirely wrong on several occasions, and she is undeniably severely overweight. Again the question of colour of a hippo was introduced by the left in a pathetic woking exercise.
You lefties, however, made a great issue of the PM Cameron allegedly doing unspeakable things to a pigs head. You ran with it for years despite not having a scintilla of truth backing up the allegation. Very naughty of you. You feel you can insult politicians with gay abandon, This is fair comment on a political thread but it is a bit rich when you all act so precious when the compliment is returned to Corbyn and his latter day clowns. You guys are hilarious, you would not last a week working in the boonies, you might flake your nail polish.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: peteglasgow
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 02:51 PM

what's a boonie?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 03:03 PM

Pfr it is only you lefties make an issue of the MP Diane Abbot being a person of colour. I have not ever mentioned it."
For **** sake

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains - PM
Date: 28 Jul 17 - 04:27 AM
Oh Dear. A member of the public is not too impressed with abbopotomus.

Can we please leave our own home-grown PINNOCHIO to stew in his own juice before he manages to close another thread ?
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 03:19 PM

Laughing about a rich over privileged white man allegedly abusing a dead pig,
might be some obscure 'fetishism',

[just another bizarre tory peccadillo..]

but it definitely aint racism..

Which is rather more frowned upon by civilised society...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 03:46 PM

Laughing about a rich over privileged white man allegedly abusing a dead pig,
might be some obscure 'fetishism',

[just another bizarre tory peccadillo..]

but it definitely aint racism..
Quite so!
and referring to a person who is not too clever checking figures before spouting off and is seriously overweight can legitimately be called an abbacus and/or abbopotomus, but it definitely ain't racism
!
That is a figment of someone's imagination desperately looking to find anything to be affronted by - A woke wally in fact.
(It must be said of course that Labour is never good with figures because it is always some other poor unfortunate's money they are squandering)
Anyway I am getting bored with this. Jim is never going to quote my exact words to try to make his point because they do not exist. He would argue black was white if it served his purpose, or even imagine colours.(as in this case).

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 03:58 PM

...except.. you want us to accept you innocently don't recognise a reference
to a big fat lumbering African beast is absolutely not racist..

while plenty on your side absolutely know it is when they use it as a deliberately hateful insult...

.. pull the other one...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 04:02 PM

"correction", editing buggered up with a double negative..

please read, the less convoluted..

"...except.. you want us to accept you innocently believe a reference
to a big fat lumbering African beast is absolutely not racist.."

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 04:34 PM

"Admit that the reason for all the trolling in here, and the fact we keep attracting trolls is that You People love them."

"You People." As ever, a failure of nerve when it comes to naming names. Not even "Usual Suspects." As ever, you wade in with your negativity and you get it all wrong. pfr engages Iains skilfully and manfully and gets nowhere. Credit for trying. Apart from the odd wacky right-winger, I can probably say with confidence that we mostly hate Iains' guts and several of us have been campaigning for years to get him thrown out. That's how much we "love" him. The truth is that you mods are the ones who love him. You love to see us wallowing so that you can do your victim-blaming, which is precisely what you've just done, and it suits you down to the ground that those who do the wallowing are exclusively Brits. You hate Brits, which is why you've ghettoed us into one thread, and even then you can't keep out. It's a path of least resistance, innit, Jeri? Far easier than doing what good mods do, which is troll control...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 04:49 PM

Whilst I don’t disagree with you Steve, the simple, straightforward answer is for you, pfr, JIm, and all the others who keep wading in, to get a grip on the OCD you all seem to suffer from, and ignore him.

If you don’t respond to him, his posts will become wilder and more extreme. By not responding, you will deny people like Jeri and other anti-UK, anti-Left Mods the opportunity to victim-blame or claim that you are the aggressors, because you won’t appear as victims, nor as aggressors. Then they will have no option but to acknowledge who the real aggressor is.

For intelligent people, you bunch really are pretty dozy sometimes.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 04:54 PM

EDIT to my previous post...

Whilst I don’t disagree with you Steve, the simple, straightforward answer is for you, pfr, JIm, and all the others who keep wading in, to get a grip on the OCD you all seem to suffer from, and ignore him.

His sole purpose is to provoke and draw attention to his Right-Wing Extremist propaganda, and he can’t stand being ignored. If you don’t respond to him, his posts will become wilder and more extreme. By not responding, you will deny people like Jeri and other anti-UK, anti-Left Mods the opportunity to victim-blame or claim that you are the aggressors, because you won’t appear as victims, nor as aggressors. Then they will have no option but to acknowledge who the real aggressor is.

For intelligent people, you bunch really are pretty dozy sometimes.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 05:08 PM

Pfr doesn't agree with you, BWM, and, much as I wouldn't adopt his approach myself, he's entitled to do what he does and he's fairly skilful at it. Jim doesn't agree either, and that's a tough nut for some of us who generally share Jim's politics and outlook and who admire his musical knowledge but who can see the effect he has on the troll. On top of all that, we are at the end of the day a bunch of flawed and passionate human beings. The three US moderators love to see the struggle we have with him, because they don't like us Brits one little bit and, to them, their enemy's enemy is their friend. They showed that they have it in their power to get shut of trolls. They got shut of Teribus, who was a lot less obnoxious than Iains, and they got rid of akenaton because he offended the feminist tendency here. You yourself engaged Iains for quite a while, even thinking that he was actually Teribus reincarnated. Yeah, we're human and we do things that a Mr Spock wouldn't have done. But I rather like being a flawed human. And on any other website I've been on, the mods would have sacked Iains years ago. I'm not going to take the blame for his bad behaviour. In effect, we don't have moderation here. And in criticising us, you're falling into the same victim-blaming trap that the mods so relish. Respect.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 05:18 PM

“You yourself engaged Iains for quite a while...”

Indeed I did. But, unlike others, I studied his MO, watched the results of others’ interactions with him, and learned from experience. What was it Einstein said about insanity - something about doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result?

“There are none so blind as those who will not see.”

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 05:28 PM

Iains is a horrid, nasty piece of work, probably a right-wing plant. He causes almost all the trouble here. So you should be lobbying to get him out. Instead, you persist in blaming us...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 05:33 PM

No Steve, I’m suggesting a way to demonstrate to a group of disbelieving Mods who the true culprit is. I’m on your side, and I’m long enough in the tooth, and sufficiently experienced in managing large groups of adults, to know that there’s more than one way to skin a cat.

Your way has failed.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 05:37 PM

.....Your way has failed, and you’re demonstrating the truth of Einstein’s Theory of Insanity.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 05:47 PM

Well best I do not give a description of you shaw, it might incinerate the ether. Butyou know what I think of you, so little point in repeating it. Teribus had the measure of you, as did poor Keith. and I recall no compliments heading your way from either. Can all three of us be wrong?
I suspect not. Teribus constantly pointed out the error of your ways and is a damm fine singer to boot. How's the prosecco going down? Have you reached the bottom of the vat yet?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 05:58 PM

Iains - you once came up with an explanation [which I forget now],
how your mudcat account suddenly sprang back to life
after several years dormant..

..so very shortly after tezza got the boot...???

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Mossback
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 06:00 PM

the reason for all the trolling in here, and the fact we keep attracting trolls is that You People love them.
No, Jeri, the actual fact is that you & the other mods (not ALL of them) refuse to recognize the troll turds in the bowl for what they are and flush the toilet.

Don't put this on us, thank you very much.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Donuel
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 06:17 PM

ticketyboo

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 06:25 PM

Well said, Bill. Poor Iains...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Barb'ry
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 06:25 PM


Joe plus other mods tell me it is mudcat policy not to allow arguments against mod actions mainly because we can't defend or explain ourselves - we have to stay as neutral as possible. If you are desperate you can pm me.

I'm going to close this thread once you've had the chance to read this and open another one but posts that are mod bashing or asking for people to be removed will be deleted.

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Mossback
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 06:59 PM

Barb, you were the last person I'd have thought would adopt "I'm taking my ball & going home" approach.

I'm not "bashing" a mod or necessarily "asking for people to be removed"

only hoping for someone to accept the reality of what is going on here.

Of course, in Trump's AmeriKKKa, reality is in short supply.....

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 07:46 PM

Barb'ry - one simple strategy would be for you to politely remind non British mudcatters
how unhelpful it is if they persist in entering our ghetto,
just to have snide digs at us..

[..and other mods might try harder to remember this is now your jurisdiction..]

Your green messages are a very welcome sign that you are still willing
to communicate with us as mature equals..
I genuinely welcome that,
and will co-operate as best I can..

No problem if you ever need to tell me off,
we respect firm but fair modding..

Hopefully you don't end up as jaded as other mods might occasionally appear to be..

Now let's start fresh on the new thread...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Jeri
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 08:08 PM

Know what, Mossback, you and the other trolls in here need to go find somebody else's forum to fuck up.

(Still not as rude as you guys.)

And PFR, has it ever dawned on you that you're holding your UK-centric brawl in a USA-based forum? Why? What ever made you think that was an acceptable thing for you to do?

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 08:14 PM

Er, what mod-bashing? Either you will allow reasonable and measured comment or you will be seen as acting incredibly defensively. You mods allow an incredible amount of member-bashing from Iains. You don't control this vicious troll who's abusing us daily yet you cut up rough if we so much as question what you're doing (or not doing, more like). Do what you like, Barb'ry. But it's increasingly looking like you've been told to follow the party line. And none of this unpleasantness would be happening had we Brits not been ghettoised, a situation made all the worse by unwelcome negative input from a US mod who has form when it comes to Brit-bashing... You mods are breeding resentment. And it's by far not the only clumsy move you've ever made...


Grrr...

Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Apr 20 - 08:16 PM

And what a bloody stupid post, Jeri. A post that actually makes you a troll.