BS: Brexit & other UK political topics

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 12 Dec 21 - 06:51 PM

Dave The Gnome:
I think he wants us to get boosted

And is that the right idea?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Dec 21 - 07:09 PM

Yes, it's the right idea.

However.

There's a wider context to all this.

(Not now, Stephen!)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 13 Dec 21 - 02:53 AM

I hate to say this, but I thought his press conference pitch this evening was on the money...

I agree. When I first heard the thing was being pre-recorded I thought the primary reason was to avoid being questioned about the party and the rest. Well, I am sure that is at least partially true, but putting a different spin on it, it avoided the important message being lost amid a media frenzy.

There was a second effect of it though. Apart from the unkempt appearance, 'Boris' was not in evidence. Instead, we had the Prime Minister speaking is a direct way, with no burbling, or obfuscation, or obvious misdirection. It showed that Johnson can be serious when need be.

I saw no obvious edits, and of course we do not know how many attempts to record it were rejected as 'not being serious enough'. But Steve is quite right: this was what was needed.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 13 Dec 21 - 03:20 AM

Because the effectiveness of vaccines fade with time, it is a curious fact that having a very fast roll out of the vaccine against 'alpha' may have made us more vulnerable to 'omicron', because we had more people with a 'faded' level of vaccination. That is why the boosters are so important, of course, but it also shows the 'the fastest roll out in the world' may not be as great as you might first think. This is not to say it was anything but a good idea, of course.

That's the trouble with biology and medicine. It is more complicated than it first appears.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Dec 21 - 03:23 AM

Of course it was the right idea, Nigel, it was the right message, done in the right way.

If he could do the same for all the other issues facing him he could even become a good prime minister. Getting one thing right out of the hundreds of lies hardly qualifies him as a paragon of virtue though does it?

Has anyone else noticed that vaccinations have become the new antisemitism? A couple of years ago if anyone said anything against the Tories it was "Look! Labour antisemitism!" Now if anyone mentions the crashing economy, Brexit failures, destruction of the NHS or government sleaze the only response is to change the subject to the vaccination program. It is undoubtedly good but it doesn't excuse all the other damage.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Dec 21 - 04:04 AM

Apologies for calling the thing a "press conference!" Very nice of y'all not to pick me up on it.

The focus on vaccination is the right one in my opinion. We're conditioned to look for ulterior motives every time he opens his mouth, which is something he's brought on himself. Like millions of others, I suspect, I'm very glad that he has, as yet, declined to cancel Christmas. I can't help thinking that all the stuff about Tory partying has made that idea politically next to impossible for him. In the end, vaccination is overwhelmingly the most important measure for getting the virus under control, and other measures, in comparison, look like piddling around the edges.

And let's not forget that one of the main reasons that we are where we are is that the Tories have run down the NHS in a concerted way since 2010.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 13 Dec 21 - 07:06 AM

It may be a glass-half-full point of view, but in a way I am quite encouraged by the government running out of lateral flow tests and the website crashing because it got overloaded. Both show that the general population is still taking this quite seriously.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Dec 21 - 01:28 PM

Well I've been ordering test kits online up to now. Every test we've done so far has been negative. As we're off to a funeral tomorrow we'll each be doing one this evening. Thing is, as I was worried about running out, I nipped into Boots an hour ago, and they gave me two packs. I didn't need a code, she didn't take my name - just handed over the kits. But the command is that we must report every result. Well if they don't know who's got the bloody kits, they can't keep tabs on that, can they?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Dec 21 - 01:36 PM

Our local pharmacy is quite strict on us using the code and will only issue kits to people with them. They don't have any of the nose only kits though :-(

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Dec 21 - 02:27 PM

Over here Boris' remarks are reduced to "expect a tidal wave of Omicron".

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Dec 21 - 02:27 PM

Over here Boris' remarks are reduced to "expect a tidal wave of Omicron".

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Dec 21 - 04:26 PM

I must say that I thought Keir Starmer struck the right note in his broadcast this evening. He kept the politicking down to the bare minimum and, as a result, sounded far more statesmanlike.

I really want to be wrong about my doom-laden view of his prospects in the next election. The old adage that elections are always lost by the government, never won by the opposition, is still my only hope... Boris will be thinking "This too will pass..." and, knowing his luck, he's probably right...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 13 Dec 21 - 04:48 PM

I was out singing in a choir, so have just listened to it now. To find it I used Google and the first thing that came up was The Express reporting fury that Labour had been given a prime broadcasting slot by the BBC to give a party political broadcast.

Sigh.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Rain Dog
Date: 13 Dec 21 - 05:43 PM

Meanwhile.

BBC - Call for halt to UK elections bill



"Plans to introduce voter identification risk upsetting the balance of the UK’s electoral system, making it more difficult for people to vote and removing an element of the trust inherent in the system, a cross-party group of MPs has said.

The Commons public administration and constitutional affairs committee (PACAC) is urging the government to stop the passage of the elections bill, which would introduce a requirement to show photographic ID to vote at polling stations and could give Downing Street more power over the election watchdog.

A report from the committee released on Monday said more thorough consultations were needed, particularly in regards to the voter ID requirement. It said: “There is a concern that a voter ID requirement will introduce a barrier preventing some people from exercising their vote”."

And

"The chair of the committee, William Wragg, said: “While seeking to secure UK elections from potential voter fraud is a noble cause, we remain unconvinced that the scale of the problem justifies the solutions as they have been put forward. When people can be blocked from voting because they have incorrect documentation, have misplaced it or they have none, we must make doubly sure that the costs of the measures are commensurate with the risk.

“Likewise, any government proposal which might directly or indirectly influence the independent regulator over its operations and decision-making will invite suspicion, especially when plans have been drawn up behind closed doors. The Electoral Commission must be impartial both in practice and in the public perception if it is to credibly maintain the integrity of our electoral system.”

Wragg added: “We feel that the elections bill proposals lack a sufficient evidence base, timely consultation, and transparency, all of which should be addressed before it makes any further progress. We cannot risk any reduction of trust in UK elections, which is why the majority of the committee is calling for the bill to be paused to give time for more work to be done to ensure the measures are fit for purpose.”"

How many of the tory MPs who are threatening to vote against the government tomorrow, will also vote against voter id?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Dec 21 - 06:10 PM

Voter ID is a blatant attempt to make it difficult for less savvy people, poorer people, ethnic minority people, people who for one reason or another suspect "the system" and who would rather stay below the radar, to vote. Let's face it, most of those people wouldn't exactly vote Tory. There is next to no evidence in this country that voter fraud is a problem. The proposal is an egregious attack on democracy and a egregious attempt to favour the Tory vote. Had there been evidence of massive voter fraud, I'd think differently. In the meantime, let's see this proposal for what it is.

So-called vaccine passports (which aren't actually that) are a different matter. There is no compulsion involved in this. You don't have to get vaccinated if you don't want to. I agree with that (I'm fully jabbed and boostered, by the way). But I don't think that unvaccinated people, who are known to be a bigger risk to the rest of us, should enjoy the unfettered right to go into crowded places. That right would be an infringement of our right to stay as safe as we reasonably can whilst still enjoying as normal a life as possible. If I ran Anfield you wouldn't get in unless you could prove that you are vaccinated up to the level that currently obtains for your age group. My choice following your choice. Why would I want to risk the health of the other 50,000 people there? Opportunistic comments from football-haters not welcome...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Dec 21 - 03:54 PM

So the Tories got their Plan B measures through thanks only to Labour voting in favour. It's tempting to think that Labour might have seen the political advantage of that, but I'm resisting that thought. Had I been voting, I'd have reluctantly voted for Plan B (though not in favour of *mandatory* masks, maybe).

We can't go on forever restricting people's freedom to live normal lives. If this crisis came up again next autumn/winter, I would not support another Plan B resurrection. By then, the government must have fulfilled its responsibility, with great science in tow, to be on top of the virus and to have much better vaccines. No holds barred, no finance spared. The public must be bombarded with all the best information and advice. The conspiracy theorists must be stopped in their tracks. We may have to live with this virus for the rest of our lives, but we must be able to live with it on the same footing as the way we live with flu. We had a terrible flu winter five years ago, but no-one even remotely suggested passports or masks.

I do believe that we currently have a real crisis that is threatening the health service and I reluctantly agree with the need to prove yourself before going into crowded venues, as I said in my last post. I think that insisting that you can go to a club or a football match when you've been pig-headed enough to refuse the vaccine is tantamount to an attempted attack on the freedoms of more responsible people than you. But just this once. After this unprecedented wave has passed, that should be it. Normal life, personal responsibility, no compulsions...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 02:08 AM

I partially agree with that, Steve, but not entirely. You are right about the need to get to the point that we can handle this in the same way as we do flu, and if that means annual injections, so be it. It also means dedicating a proportion of our medical researchers to it, predicting likely variants and designing vaccines, just as we do for flu. That comes with both actual and opportunity costs. Again, so be it.

Where I differ, though, is the 'Never again' aspect. The future is inherently unknowable. SO I will agree we need to get to "Use the funding and resources to do all in our power so it does not happen again." But I can't go that final step, and if variant Nabla arrives which is sufficiently extreme, I would vote for another lockdown.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: The Sandman
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 03:48 AM

the whole thing has been mishandled, relying upon vaccines that are only partially eff3ctive, whilst no state of the art fever hospitals have been built. it makes me suspect politicians have been bought to represent the pharma companies. the problem has been caused not just by the virus but by years of hospital underfunding, the hospitals are at a crisis point , yet no one builds virus hospitals
definition of a vaccine
a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.
what we are being told is a vaccine is in fact against covid 19. is in fact a misnomer

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 05:42 AM

The problem is that "lockdowns work" and "masks work" have become received wisdoms. Statistics, which are all we've got, are actually extremely unconvincing for both those measures. We went through summer 2020 with no lockdowns and no masks, horrified by images of beaches stuffed with tens of thousands of people sitting cheek by jowl. And guess what. Cases plummeted to next to nothing. Not saying for one second that there's no truth therein at all. But we simply can't go on splitting up families and friends every time there's a surge. We can't keep having to endure the inhumanity of elderly people and people with dementia unable to see their loved ones. For the last eight months of her life, my mother, profoundly deaf, only ever saw me, wearing a mask and shield, through a Perspex screen, once every two weeks. I had to resort to communicating with her with a whiteboard and marker. Before that, I'd sit with her in her room for hours or take her out for rides at the seaside three times a week. Children cooped up in flats with no gardens for months, deprived of their friends and their schooling. It's all very well for us self-contained wrinklies to espouse lockdowns, but let's think instead about the way that lockdowns affect the mental and physical health of millions of human beings.

Actually, it's almost a dead cert that the transmission of the virus is overwhelming led by schoolchildren. Do you think we should close all the schools for a few months? Along with vaccination, the only other surefire way of knocking the disease on the head? Well I don't think so! But let's not kid ourselves that piffling around with masks and arbitrary restrictions on mixing with friends and family will have anything other than the slightest impact. We have managed for decades to live with the threat of flu every winter, without lockdown, masks or restrictions on social mixing. But with science keeping on top via constant vaccine updating. That's the only way forward in my opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 06:21 AM

Steve:
Voter ID is a blatant attempt to make it difficult for less savvy people, poorer people, ethnic minority people, people who for one reason or another suspect "the system" and who would rather stay below the radar, to vote. Let's face it, most of those people wouldn't exactly vote Tory.

Is this an about-turn?
I thought you were among those who thought that it was allowing the 'less savvy' to vote which won/lost the Brexit vote.
People who would 'prefer to stay below the radar'. Do you mean those working in the 'black economy' who don't contribute properly via taxation?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 06:57 AM

I wasn't aware that working in the black economy disqualified you from voting, Nigel. Super-rich tax-evaders with armies of accountants, the same. And I don't think I've ever said that anyone should have to pass an intelligence test before they can vote. So no about-turn from me. There will be many law-abiding members of ethnic minority groups who are suspicious
of any move by the state to make carrying ID compulsory, just as there are many such who are vaccine-hesitant. To you and me, their concerns may seem groundless, but there is no law against having groundless concerns. If there was evidence of large-scale voter fraud, I'd be with you. But there isn't, so it's right to suspect the motives of those who want to bring in measures that would have the potential to make it harder to vote for those at the bottom of the ladder to combat a non-existent problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 08:16 AM

The object of a vaccine is to lessen the severity of disease, hospitalisation and death, which for covid has been largely successful. It does not prevent transmission, which is una parva distincta de pescados altogether, and is currently the job of masks and social distancing, until such time as appropriate scientific discovery is made.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 10:01 AM

I am in full agreement that schools are super spreaders but I don't know what we can do about it. There is a massive secondary school complete with 6th form at the top of our road. Around 3:30, a bit before and after due to staggering home times, there is a massive surge of teenagers wandering about the area. They are completely unconcerned about social distancing. I am not blaming them as, oddly enough, I remember being a teenager and being the only person that was important!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: The Sandman
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 10:36 AM

more hospitals need to be built to deal with pressure on the NHS,
and in ireland the same criteria should be applied

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 11:48 AM

"PM should introduce 10-day circuit-breaker lockdown, says Independent Sage"

well, I think we will all agree that's not happening. Johnson would be against it anyway, but after yesterday's wholehearted support from his party, it would be somewhat surprising if that is what he announces in about 15 minutes time.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 12:04 PM

The schools situation is even worse in rural areas such as mine, Dave. Loads of the children are bussed in from all over the place, sometimes from a radius of ten miles or more, then spend all day up close with their mates catching God knows what then taking it back into their villages.

The vaccines have done a tremendous job, Dick, call them what you will. They don't stop you catching the virus but they have cut down hospital admissions and deaths to a tenth of what they were last time the infection rate was this high. That is unarguable. Of course we need more hospitals, Dick. They take a while to build. They need to be equipped. Not least, there aren't enough doctors and nurses to run our current hospitals. Long-term aspirations are admirable, but we have a current emergency that needs dealing with very quickly with the resources we have to hand right now.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 12:08 PM

Dave the Gnome:
Schools have "staggering home times"? I thought that was more down to pubs.
Although, thinking back to my time in the sixth form . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 12:29 PM

I agree that staffing them is the main problem, but I think it would make sense to revive some variation of the Nightingale hospitals in some form. Not perhaps so focused on ventilation, but simply increasing the number of beds quickly might be a wise investment.
I said at the time that even though it turned out we barely used the Nightingales, it was still the right decision based on what we knew at the time. I think the same applies now.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 01:36 PM

Nigel - :-D

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: The Sandman
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 03:08 PM

steve shaw , the pandemic has been with us nearly 3 years, and no investment in hospitals being built.how much longer do we have to wait
hospitals designed for viruses, would free the other hospitals for other illnesses.
the vaccines have not done a tremendous job, they have done a moderately good job.
, the problems have been caused by lack of investment over years, in 3 years nothing has improved with the health service.
92 percent of the population has been vaccinated, and the hospitals are still overstretched. time to look at other solutions

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 03:12 PM

This man knows what he is talking about.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 03:37 PM

It's not quite two years actually, Dick, unless you know something we don't...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 04:11 PM

As usual sandman is talking drivel. Even if they sought to build more such hospitals, the money is not there - how many £billion has been spent on furlough, SEISS and bounce back loans?????????????????????

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: The Sandman
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 05:01 PM

the money was there to spend on vaccines according to the finANcial times the uk has spent NEARLY 12 billion on vaccines, if they had spent 8 billion on vaccines they could have spent NEARLY 4 billion on hospital building .bonzo from the FT
UK spending on Covid vaccines hits nearly £12bn, watchdog says
Cost does not cover future multiyear programmes for jabs, National Audit Office says.
        Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email [e-mail] to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour.
        https://www.ft.com/content/58b11945-71b1-4f96-b389-695e162642fb

        

The UK’s push to secure and administer hundreds of millions of doses of coronavirus vaccines is estimated to have cost up to £11.7bn so far, according to the public spending watchdog.

The government has signed deals for five vaccines providing up to 267m doses at an expected cost of £2.9bn, with non-binding agreements with two other companies set to bring total provision to 357m doses, the National Audit Office said in a report published on Wednesday.

Additional costs including those associated with sponsoring trials, distributing and administering the vaccines lifted the total spend to £11.7bn.

The total cost was “likely to change” as officials obtained a clearer understanding of the deployment and quality of the vaccines, the report noted.

Crucially, the figure “does not cover the costs of any future potential multiyear vaccination programmes”. It is still unclear for how long the jabs protect against Covid-19, but experts have said vaccination campaigns will have to be repeated.

The report also said that many drugmakers had requested immunity in the event of legal action, meaning taxpayers may have to pay the costs of claims against them. In four out of five contracts, no cap has been applied to the amount that the government could pay in the event of a successful claim against the pharmaceutical companies in certain, unspecified circumstances.

In negotiating with the EU, drugmakers pursued a similar approach. Both the UK and the EU rejected requests for complete immunity.

Of the £11.7bn, £6.2bn is expected to support the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy’s procurement and manufacturing activities, and £4.9bn to support administration of the vaccines through the Department of Health and Social Care. Additionally, up to £619m will fund global vaccine research efforts, £548m of which has been earmarked to enable low and middle-income countries to access vaccines through the development aid budget.
bonzo, do you know better than the financial times, you are an uninformed driveller

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Dec 21 - 07:56 PM

Thing is, Dick, we are where we are, innit...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Rain Dog
Date: 17 Dec 21 - 01:31 AM

"The Conservatives have lost the North Shropshire seat they held for nearly 200 years to the Liberal Democrats.

The by-election followed the resignation of former MP Owen Paterson who was found to have breached parliamentary rules on lobbying, and had held a majority of nearly 23,000.

New MP Helen Morgan secured a 34% swing with a turnout of 46.3%.

The defeat caps a week of challenges for the prime minister.

Ms Morgan, who stood for the Liberal Democrats in the 2019 general election, said it meant the "party was over" for Boris Johnson.

She thanked the people of North Shropshire "not just for putting your faith in me to be your champion in Parliament" but for the "hard work and sacrifices you have made over the past two years to get our communities through this awful pandemic"."

By election result - BBC

Of course, there are probably a few years to go until the next election.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 17 Dec 21 - 02:31 AM

Revisiting my mythical Conservative election planning office, last seen after the Bexley by election, I think one of the things that will really scare them is that it looks like 12% or so of Labour voters were prepared to vote LibDem to get the Conservatives out. So in both of those by elections, there has been substantial and effective tactical voting.    Had Labour voters not doe so, and the LibDems lost, LibDem voters in places like Bexley might have felt cheated and not loaned theirs to Labour on another occasion. But they did, so tactical voting is looking alive and well.

I had a look yesterday and 186 or so Conservative MPs have a margin of 15,000 votes or less. Expect some very worried MPs ...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Rain Dog
Date: 17 Dec 21 - 05:30 AM

"Dentists’ leaders have said mandatory jabs for healthcare staff will have a “calamitous” impact on dental services in England, as a survey revealed that one in 10 dentists have not been double-vaccinated.

MPs voted this week to approve regulations requiring NHS and social care staff to be vaccinated by April next year. All frontline health and care staff must be fully jabbed with two Covid-19 vaccines before 1 April or risk losing their jobs.

the British Dental Association (BDA) said compulsory vaccination risked “dropping a bomb on a service already stretched to breaking point” because it meant that thousands of dental workers would quit. The mass exodus would have devastating consequences for millions of patients, it said.

The stark warning comes after a survey of high street dentists by the BDA found that 9% had not had a single dose of a coronavirus vaccine. The poll found a further 1% had only had one jab.

The survey of 1,642 dentists in England conducted this month found 10% had received two doses, while 78% had a booster. The remaining 2% of dentists declined to reveal their vaccination status.

Fewer than half (48.4%) of dentists estimated all nurses operating in their practices were fully vaccinated, with 58% saying the same for hygienists, according to the survey.

But the British Dental Association (BDA) said compulsory vaccination risked “dropping a bomb on a service already stretched to breaking point” because it meant that thousands of dental workers would quit. The mass exodus would have devastating consequences for millions of patients, it said.

The stark warning comes after a survey of high street dentists by the BDA found that 9% had not had a single dose of a coronavirus vaccine. The poll found a further 1% had only had one jab.

The survey of 1,642 dentists in England conducted this month found 10% had received two doses, while 78% had a booster. The remaining 2% of dentists declined to reveal their vaccination status.

Fewer than half (48.4%) of dentists estimated all nurses operating in their practices were fully vaccinated, with 58% saying the same for hygienists, according to the survey."

Compulsory Covid jabs ‘calamitous’ for dental services in England, says BDA

I would have thought that the chances of an infected dentist passing on the virus are fairly high compared to other medical practitioners.

On the plus side, your chances of finding a dentist, infected or not, are fairly slim.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Rain Dog
Date: 17 Dec 21 - 07:09 AM

"We also say ‘having a benny’ to mean the same thing - no ‘bennyism’, just a phrase everyone understands."

I did think of Crossroads when I read this. Might the phrase originate from Benny in that show?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Rain Dog
Date: 17 Dec 21 - 07:50 AM

This Old Man

“This Old Man” is a traditional English nursery rhyme and counting song.

The song was collected and published in 1937 by the nursery rhymes collector Anne Gilchrist in “Journal of the English Folk Dance and Song Society”, as she remembered it from her Welsh nurse from the 1870s.

Some years before another version of the song was recorded in the “English Folk-Songs for Schools” collection published in 1906 by the Cecil Sharp and Sabine Baring-Gould.

“This Old Man” Lyrics

This old man, he played one,
He played knick-knack on my thumb;
With a knick-knack paddywhack,
Give the dog a bone,
This old man came rolling home.

All nursery rhymes - This Old Man

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 17 Dec 21 - 07:59 AM

”We also say ‘having a benny’ to mean the same thing - no ‘bennyism’, just a phrase everyone understands."

I did think of Crossroads when I read this. Might the phrase originate from Benny in that show?”

I’ve wondered about that too. Not sure where it originated from but, again, it’s been around and in common use here in Lincs/Notts for many years.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 17 Dec 21 - 08:04 AM

As I said sandman is just having a paddy in his pram.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: The Sandman
Date: 17 Dec 21 - 09:15 AM

NEARLY 12 BILLION Spent on a vaccine ,the money was there. I am not in a pram ,and you are using the term paddy in a way that is derogatory to irish people, you are creating and using the word in a way that stereotypes irish people. typical you lose a point in a discussion bnd resort to using paddy as an insult.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Allan Conn
Date: 17 Dec 21 - 09:41 AM

We did say things like "don't be a Benny" here in the Scottish Borders in my youth and yes AFAIK it was very much to do with Benny the character in Crossroads who had a bit learning difficulties. So aye I think it was a bit derogatory to folks with learning difficulties. Personally I wouldn't use that term now and wouldn't look to use "throw a Paddy" either as obviously it could potentially offend. Though it seems pretty clear that folks are probably using it quite innocently maybe not even connecting it to anything to do with the Irish.

On a newsnet group which was about Scotland but was mostly Americans and Canadians etc they took to replacing the E with an * in anything to do with England. It was just a joke as is the Voldermort name which can't be mentioned type thing. My English wife saw it continually written as *nglish though and she thought it offensive. It hadn't struck me that folks might take it seriously but she did. So I stopped using it. My adage is if you know something might be offensive to someone then why use it??? That is just me though....

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 17 Dec 21 - 09:41 AM

It has, thankfully, been a long time since the 'Guido Fawkes' website has been mentioned on here, but it is being reported elsewhere in the media that whislteblowers have reported to them about two parties held in Simon Case's offices during lockdown. That is the Simon Case investigating office parties in No 10 and elsewhere during lockdown.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: fat B****rd
Date: 17 Dec 21 - 10:40 AM

I had it on good authority that "Benny" was an insult to Falkland
Islanders during the 1980s conflict. Apparently some of our our troops
had hats with the word on them. When reprimanded they changed it to "Not Benny".

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 17 Dec 21 - 11:16 AM

I heard it that, when reprimanded, they changed to calling them "stills" ..... because "he's still a Benny".

The Falkland Islanders called the soldiers "When I was ins" from there constant references to "When I was in Germany ...", "When I was in Cypress ....", "When I was in Hong Kong ..." and the like. Officers were known as "When one was in".

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Dec 21 - 05:03 AM

I see that Simon Case has stood down from the investigation and Sue Gray has taken over. Apparently she is quite a terrier so, hopefully, the investigation will be thorough.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Dec 21 - 05:28 AM

There's something incredibly shabby about all this. Simon Case took on the job knowing that he himself had partied illegally. Did Johnson know that, or did he at least not question him before asking him to take on the enquiry? Or did they do a secret old pals' whitewash deal, knowing that they were both bang to rights? There's something that looks likes an entitled bubble tainting the air about all this. Let's call it corruption. Why not.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 18 Dec 21 - 05:48 AM

Another option, Steve, is that Case knew he held a party but being in charge of the investigation thought he could control the story to the extent that was never examined.

Not a lot better, is it?