Stop voting for fucking Tories

Where goats go to escape
Random1
Posts: 611
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:31 pm

I like neeps wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:02 pm
Random1 wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 9:50 pm
I like neeps wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 9:21 pm

Was QE on an unprecedented scale and global financial meltdown too well practiced? In the previous crashes there wasn't the stimulus options on offer.

What has Johnson done well so far? We'll see about the vaccinations which is promising and definitely could save the day. But lockdowns too late causing economic damage - amongst the worse and a very high death rate to boot. He destroyed the start of pandemic good will and has overseen the great 11bn PPE to mates scam. Where are the achievements?

Achievements from my pov;

The suite of industry guidance was very good. The thousands of pages of stuff put together quickly and it gave critical sectors such as construction a strong steer, allowing them to adapt their working practices to work safely. This is a massively under appreciated piece of work

Ventilator industry problem solving. Organising that has put us in decent nick, where others have been short

Getting brexit finalised and no delays. I know you don’t like the treaty, but we could have had a full schism if that had been delayed. It would have been like it is in America, where concentration moved from covid to the election outcome. As it was, the result was decent enough that covid is still the main talking point.

Vaccines. Choosing to stay out of the eu mess and back our scientists with funding. Creating by far the most flexible vaccine option, not just for us, but the world (except South Africa 😅).

Furlough - the scheme is pretty decent compared to others and is unpopular with the right wing. That could have been a very different set of choices.

Suspension of evictions and court actions for rent payments was a brave call considering the competing interests.

Putting proper scientists out to talk the public through things. Again, I bet there were plenty behind the scenes saying vallance et al are verbal chloroform and should be replaced by a comms specialist. So that was not as easy a call as you’d think.

The comms strategy around washing hands, social distancing etc has been very effective from the start.

Those are just some things off the e top of my head, but I’ll repeat, the dust needs to settle before this analysis has any meaning.

There’ll be a meta analysis done in a few years that will show whether we are as high in the fatality charts as currently shown and will pour over what choices were made and which was the best.

Anyway, those are my thoughts.
Fair enough there have been good actions taken. The decision to stay out of the EU vaccine scheme looks smart definitely. I think a lot of people in government have done good I just don't think Johnson is a good figurehead and his late decision making has cost the economy and lives.

I just don't know how much credit you get for a negotiation where you acquiesce to the other side's demand so much so the final treaty resembles their opening offer closely. The deal isn't very good in my opinion, no but from a politicking point of view I don't think it's a major achievement because it's really taking what was given.
Yeah, agree with you that Johnson wouldn’t be my first choice, I think he’s done ok, especially considering the divided cabinet he inherited from Theresa may. Things would’ve been worse with an ill disciplined, leaky cabinet like hers.

Ha! I’m not revisiting out chat on brexit. I want a fucking man on Mars!
I like neeps
Posts: 3585
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:37 am



The Speccie has had an interesting few days trying to untangle Johnson from Trump and themselves from their pro Trump opinion pieces.

This is my favourite "he reads and writes books" haha! Someone hasn't read sales Bible "The Art of the Deal".

Sunak's best man and the Press Sec's husband Speccie Pol Ed James Forsyth had a piece in The Times saying Boris isn't Trump because he respects Parliamentary traditions and conventions. Curiously, he forgot to add BoJo's supreme court defeat for err not respecting parliamentary convention. I'm sure he just forgot, he's had a busy year. Attached here if anyone likes reading "opinion" pieces from the man whose entire career relies on his friends remaining in the cabinet room:

Boris isn't as bad as Trump or as direct a threat to democratic norms. But if you're going to ride the Trump wave don't complain when you get wet.
User avatar
Insane_Homer
Posts: 5389
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:14 pm
Location: Leafy Surrey

Image Image
“Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true.”
Random1
Posts: 611
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:31 pm

Insane_Homer wrote: Sun Jan 10, 2021 9:23 am Image Image
Might be worth highlighting this bit if the article

“ France has also given sugar-beet farmers special permission to use neonicotinoids.

A Defra spokesperson said: “Emergency authorisations for pesticides are only granted in exceptional circumstances where diseases or pests cannot be controlled by any other reasonable means. Emergency authorisations are used by countries across Europe.

“Pesticides can only be used where we judge there to be no harm to human health and animal health, and no unacceptable risks to the environment. The temporary use of this product is strictly limited to a non-flowering crop and will be tightly controlled to minimise any potential risk to pollinators.”

So basically, nothing to see here, certainly nothing to get a bee in your bonnet about.

Edit;spelling
User avatar
C69
Posts: 3336
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:42 pm

Random1 wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 9:50 pm
I like neeps wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 9:21 pm
Random1 wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:45 pm

Yeah, the reaction to the financial crisis was comparatively simple though, and relatively well trodden in terms of theory and the odd example of practice.

This is a novel situation (Spanish flu aside), and requiring a balance between health and the economy, which is really fucking tricky, as you’ll always be pissing someone off no matter what you do.

I’m not sure brown had the ability to inspire trust in him - I remember him being pretty insipid.

Agree on Cameron, and I suspect Blair would’ve been decent enough.

I reckon boris’ lot are middle of the pack. Not very good, but not the worst, and certainly not as bad as being made out on this thread.
Was QE on an unprecedented scale and global financial meltdown too well practiced? In the previous crashes there wasn't the stimulus options on offer.

What has Johnson done well so far? We'll see about the vaccinations which is promising and definitely could save the day. But lockdowns too late causing economic damage - amongst the worse and a very high death rate to boot. He destroyed the start of pandemic good will and has overseen the great 11bn PPE to mates scam. Where are the achievements?

Achievements from my pov;

The suite of industry guidance was very good. The thousands of pages of stuff put together quickly and it gave critical sectors such as construction a strong steer, allowing them to adapt their working practices to work safely. This is a massively under appreciated piece of work

Ventilator industry problem solving. Organising that has put us in decent nick, where others have been short

Getting brexit finalised and no delays. I know you don’t like the treaty, but we could have had a full schism if that had been delayed. It would have been like it is in America, where concentration moved from covid to the election outcome. As it was, the result was decent enough that covid is still the main talking point.

Vaccines. Choosing to stay out of the eu mess and back our scientists with funding. Creating by far the most flexible vaccine option, not just for us, but the world (except South Africa 😅).

Furlough - the scheme is pretty decent compared to others and is unpopular with the right wing. That could have been a very different set of choices.

Suspension of evictions and court actions for rent payments was a brave call considering the competing interests.

Putting proper scientists out to talk the public through things. Again, I bet there were plenty behind the scenes saying vallance et al are verbal chloroform and should be replaced by a comms specialist. So that was not as easy a call as you’d think.

The comms strategy around washing hands, social distancing etc has been very effective from the start.

Those are just some things off the e top of my head, but I’ll repeat, the dust needs to settle before this analysis has any meaning.

There’ll be a meta analysis done in a few years that will show whether we are as high in the fatality charts as currently shown and will pour over what choices were made and which was the best.

Anyway, those are my thoughts.
Tell me about the success of the ventilator strategies.
Random1
Posts: 611
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:31 pm

C69 wrote: Sun Jan 10, 2021 11:14 pm
Random1 wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 9:50 pm
I like neeps wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 9:21 pm

Was QE on an unprecedented scale and global financial meltdown too well practiced? In the previous crashes there wasn't the stimulus options on offer.

What has Johnson done well so far? We'll see about the vaccinations which is promising and definitely could save the day. But lockdowns too late causing economic damage - amongst the worse and a very high death rate to boot. He destroyed the start of pandemic good will and has overseen the great 11bn PPE to mates scam. Where are the achievements?

Achievements from my pov;

The suite of industry guidance was very good. The thousands of pages of stuff put together quickly and it gave critical sectors such as construction a strong steer, allowing them to adapt their working practices to work safely. This is a massively under appreciated piece of work

Ventilator industry problem solving. Organising that has put us in decent nick, where others have been short

Getting brexit finalised and no delays. I know you don’t like the treaty, but we could have had a full schism if that had been delayed. It would have been like it is in America, where concentration moved from covid to the election outcome. As it was, the result was decent enough that covid is still the main talking point.

Vaccines. Choosing to stay out of the eu mess and back our scientists with funding. Creating by far the most flexible vaccine option, not just for us, but the world (except South Africa 😅).

Furlough - the scheme is pretty decent compared to others and is unpopular with the right wing. That could have been a very different set of choices.

Suspension of evictions and court actions for rent payments was a brave call considering the competing interests.

Putting proper scientists out to talk the public through things. Again, I bet there were plenty behind the scenes saying vallance et al are verbal chloroform and should be replaced by a comms specialist. So that was not as easy a call as you’d think.

The comms strategy around washing hands, social distancing etc has been very effective from the start.

Those are just some things off the e top of my head, but I’ll repeat, the dust needs to settle before this analysis has any meaning.

There’ll be a meta analysis done in a few years that will show whether we are as high in the fatality charts as currently shown and will pour over what choices were made and which was the best.

Anyway, those are my thoughts.
Tell me about the success of the ventilator strategies.
Ventilator Challenge hailed a success as UK production finishes
British manufacturers will have helped to produce over 14,000 ventilators during the coronavirus pandemic, thanks to the success of the government’s drive to boost the NHS’s ventilator capacity.

Published 4 July 2020
From:
Cabinet Office, The Rt Hon Michael Gove MP, The Rt Hon Matt Hancock MP, and The Rt Hon Boris Johnson MP

Scientific modelling at the start of the coronavirus crisis predicted that the NHS was going to run out of ventilators, so the Government launched the Ventilator Challenge with a call to arms to manufacturers and medical device companies to step up production of existing designs and design new ventilators from scratch.

The Government received an overwhelming response, with over 5000 companies offering their support and over 7500 members of staff contributing to the effort.

Thanks to the extraordinary sacrifices of the British people, and to businesses across the United Kingdom in joining the national effort, the NHS has been protected throughout the coronavirus crisis and everyone who needed a ventilator has been able to access one.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson said:

The Ventilator Challenge has proven just how much Britain can achieve when confronted with a difficult problem – bringing together the best minds in manufacturing, innovation and design.

Thanks to these efforts, everyone who needed a ventilator has had access to one, and the NHS has the vital machines it needs to continue providing life-saving support against this deadly virus.

UK production of ventilators under the Ventilator Challenge is to draw to a close this weekend with 14,000 devices expected to have been produced in around three months, accounting for over a half of all the ventilators now available to the NHS frontline.

It has also been confirmed that the Penlon ventilator has had its CE mark confirmed, meaning that the device, which was newly adapted for the Ventilator Challenge, is now available for export abroad. Learning from their experiences of the Ventilator Challenge Penlon are now setting up a new line aimed at exporting across the world.

Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Michael Gove said:

The Ventilator Challenge has been a great success and I would like to thank every manufacturer and designer, and their incredible workforces, for the huge part they’ve played in the national effort to protect our NHS and save lives.

In around three months, industry has stepped up to make 14,000 new machines to save lives on the NHS frontline and to help safeguard against any future outbreak.

The Ventilator Challenge has shown that UK manufacturing always rises to the challenge at a time of national need. Everyone involved is truly a hero of the coronavirus crisis.

The programme has formed a key part of a successful three pillar strategy to increase the number of mechanical ventilators, with over 25,000 devices now available in total to the NHS, up from 9,000 before the start of the pandemic. Over 2,500 have been imported from abroad.

Health and Social Care Secretary Matt Hancock said:

We protected the NHS during this global pandemic. The impact of COVID-19 showed the best and the brightest stepping forward to serve their country. The response the government received to this challenge was astonishing.

Alongside the government’s wider ventilator strategy, the Ventilator Challenge has played a crucial role in ensuring everyone who has needed a ventilator during this pandemic has had access to one.

The Government’s strategy involved procuring devices from overseas, scaling up the production of existing devices and calling on manufacturers who do not make ventilators, to help design and build new models.

The Ventilator Challenge helped scale up the production of three models (paraPAC, Vivo65 and Nippy4+) and helped guide one newly adapted model, the Penlon ESO 2, all the way through regulatory approval.

A number of other UK manufacturers also progressed novel designs to advanced stages within weeks. Four of these designs, the Dyson/TTP CoVent, the Babcock Zephyr+, the Cambridge Consultants Veloci-Vent and the Swagelok Piran Vent, were deemed to have achieved a performance level which met the MHRA’s requirements. The independent testing organisation (MD-TEC) concluded that they would have all been clinically usable as pandemic ventilators and could have supported large numbers of critically ill patients. Ultimately these designs were not progressed to mass production as part of the Ventilator Challenge due to reduced demand.

Director of the Medical Devices Testing and Evaluation Centre, which tested the Ventilator Challenge devices, Dr Tom Clutton-Brock, said:

Designing, manufacturing and testing ventilators usually takes years. So it’s outstanding the progress which has been made in a space of months.

Having tested all of these devices, it’s impressive that several new models met the regulator’s requirements.

These models would all have been clinically usable as pandemic ventilators and could have supported large numbers of critically ill patients.

The NHS now has a readily available supply of devices that will enable the health service to have resilience of supply for possible future pandemics.

Penlon and Smiths, who are part of the Ventilator Challenge UK consortium have so far delivered over 10,000 devices. Penlon is now making more ventilators in one day than the company used to deliver in ten months, further underlining the success of the scaling up of the device.

The last Penlon and Smiths devices will be delivered this weekend, subject to final manufacturing and testing, and with the addition of the final Breas devices arriving in the coming weeks, we expect the Ventilator Challenge will produce a total of over 14,000 devices.

In addition, today there are also around 11,000 non-invasive ventilators and almost 5,000 CPAP machines available to the NHS across the UK which were not available before the start of the crisis.

Guru Krishnamoorthy, CEO Penlon said:

It has been an amazing and humbling experience for Penlon to be a part of such a nationally important project. There is nothing more purposeful for a UK medical device company than rising to an occasion like this to save thousands of lives.

Every member of Penlon has put in their best lifetime efforts into this project. We have been supported extremely well by the members and leaders of the Consortium companies, our suppliers and other business partners. We take this opportunity to thank each one of them. We wish the people of the UK and rest of the world a very safe and healthy life. We commit ourselves to do everything required and continue to provide high quality medical devices.

Raffi Stepanian, CEO Breas Medical said:

I would like to thank my colleagues, our suppliers and the UK Cabinet Office for the extraordinary efforts everyone has made to address the emergency need for ventilators and to support us to ramp up capacity. The ingenuity, commitment, pace and collaboration has been breathtaking and truly inspirational all against the backdrop of such demanding circumstances.
User avatar
Caley_Red
Posts: 441
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 5:12 am
Location: Sydney

I like neeps wrote: Sat Jan 09, 2021 1:17 pm

The Speccie has had an interesting few days trying to untangle Johnson from Trump and themselves from their pro Trump opinion pieces.

This is my favourite "he reads and writes books" haha! Someone hasn't read sales Bible "The Art of the Deal".

Sunak's best man and the Press Sec's husband Speccie Pol Ed James Forsyth had a piece in The Times saying Boris isn't Trump because he respects Parliamentary traditions and conventions. Curiously, he forgot to add BoJo's supreme court defeat for err not respecting parliamentary convention. I'm sure he just forgot, he's had a busy year. Attached here if anyone likes reading "opinion" pieces from the man whose entire career relies on his friends remaining in the cabinet room:

Boris isn't as bad as Trump or as direct a threat to democratic norms. But if you're going to ride the Trump wave don't complain when you get wet.
I think you fundamentally misunderstand the Speccie: I read the Spectator every week, it doesn't have editorial opinion pieces, it has an article at the start subbed with an unidentified byline which has never endorsed Trump (it has acknowledged his areas of policy success and criticised where he has got it wrong but it's mainly about Britain).

There are regular columnists who write in the Spectator but they write in an entirely personal capacity, not as an editorial viewpoint.
And on the 7th day, the Lord said "Let there be Finn Russell".
I like neeps
Posts: 3585
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:37 am

The Speccie does have an editorial viewpoint. It's freelance authors are mostly cut from the same cloth. Andrew Neil, Boris Johnson, Charles Moore all former editors. PolEd as embedded in the cabinet one can possibly be. No editorial line or direction? Okay.

Not a criticism, just an observation. They're doing well from it all power to them.
User avatar
Caley_Red
Posts: 441
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 5:12 am
Location: Sydney

I like neeps wrote: Mon Jan 11, 2021 9:33 am The Speccie does have an editorial viewpoint. It's freelance authors are mostly cut from the same cloth. Andrew Neil, Boris Johnson, Charles Moore all former editors. PolEd as embedded in the cabinet one can possibly be. No editorial line or direction? Okay.

Not a criticism, just an observation. They're doing well from it all power to them.
Of course it has an editorial jurisdiction (i.e. an editor decides what goes in it) but the editorial slant is value-based rather than party political (a bit like the old Economist) and it's highly decentralised- which is why I like it. Most authors write what they want and it's just subedited rather than being prescribed. You do of course have to be invited to contribute in the first place, however!
Hence, there is not pro or anti-Trump editorial view, it is mostly the view of individual authors, some of whom are weekly contributors hence, are published weekly e.g. Douglas Murray.

The magazine actually contains a very wide variety of writers from all political backgrounds, Charles Moore does indeed have a column but I can't say I've ever read an Andrew Neil or a Boris Johnson article (the latter was interviewed before the election) in all the time I've read it. That's why it is doing so well in my view.
And on the 7th day, the Lord said "Let there be Finn Russell".
User avatar
Insane_Homer
Posts: 5389
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:14 pm
Location: Leafy Surrey



Maybe we should feed Bojo and Mark Francois et al that and expected it to last a week, they wouldn't be such fat cunts.
“Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true.”
User avatar
Insane_Homer
Posts: 5389
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:14 pm
Location: Leafy Surrey

“Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true.”
Deveron Boy
Posts: 139
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2020 5:51 pm

Marcus Rashford on the warpath again so another kicking and screeching U turn on this beckons..
I like neeps
Posts: 3585
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:37 am



Uh oh
User avatar
Hal Jordan
Posts: 4154
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:48 pm
Location: Sector 2814

Insane_Homer wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:44 am
And I would expect the left hand side doesn't take into account the power of bulk purchasing.
I like neeps
Posts: 3585
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:37 am

Insane_Homer wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:44 am

Tories are hilariously bad with money. £30 they're paying for this box! £30!!!!
robmatic
Posts: 2094
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:46 am

Caley_Red wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 3:56 am
I like neeps wrote: Mon Jan 11, 2021 9:33 am The Speccie does have an editorial viewpoint. It's freelance authors are mostly cut from the same cloth. Andrew Neil, Boris Johnson, Charles Moore all former editors. PolEd as embedded in the cabinet one can possibly be. No editorial line or direction? Okay.

Not a criticism, just an observation. They're doing well from it all power to them.
Of course it has an editorial jurisdiction (i.e. an editor decides what goes in it) but the editorial slant is value-based rather than party political (a bit like the old Economist) and it's highly decentralised- which is why I like it. Most authors write what they want and it's just subedited rather than being prescribed. You do of course have to be invited to contribute in the first place, however!
Hence, there is not pro or anti-Trump editorial view, it is mostly the view of individual authors, some of whom are weekly contributors hence, are published weekly e.g. Douglas Murray.

The magazine actually contains a very wide variety of writers from all political backgrounds, Charles Moore does indeed have a column but I can't say I've ever read an Andrew Neil or a Boris Johnson article (the latter was interviewed before the election) in all the time I've read it. That's why it is doing so well in my view.
I have mixed feelings about the Spectator. I subscribed for quite a few years because the quality of the content is high and I generally agree with the liberal (non-American definition) viewpoints but stopped because I could no longer stomach paying the wages of James Delingpole and Toby Young.
User avatar
JM2K6
Posts: 9797
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:43 am

I like neeps wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:48 am
Insane_Homer wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:44 am

Tories are hilariously bad with money. £30 they're paying for this box! £30!!!!
What do you mean "bad with money"? The money is almost definitely lining the pockets of their friends. That's good with money, from their perspective.
User avatar
SaintK
Posts: 6620
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:49 am
Location: Over there somewhere

Insane_Homer wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:44 am
Who'd have thought it. Company who are Tory party donors making a few extra bob out of Covid from their mates
User avatar
JM2K6
Posts: 9797
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:43 am

robmatic wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:44 am
Caley_Red wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 3:56 am
I like neeps wrote: Mon Jan 11, 2021 9:33 am The Speccie does have an editorial viewpoint. It's freelance authors are mostly cut from the same cloth. Andrew Neil, Boris Johnson, Charles Moore all former editors. PolEd as embedded in the cabinet one can possibly be. No editorial line or direction? Okay.

Not a criticism, just an observation. They're doing well from it all power to them.
Of course it has an editorial jurisdiction (i.e. an editor decides what goes in it) but the editorial slant is value-based rather than party political (a bit like the old Economist) and it's highly decentralised- which is why I like it. Most authors write what they want and it's just subedited rather than being prescribed. You do of course have to be invited to contribute in the first place, however!
Hence, there is not pro or anti-Trump editorial view, it is mostly the view of individual authors, some of whom are weekly contributors hence, are published weekly e.g. Douglas Murray.

The magazine actually contains a very wide variety of writers from all political backgrounds, Charles Moore does indeed have a column but I can't say I've ever read an Andrew Neil or a Boris Johnson article (the latter was interviewed before the election) in all the time I've read it. That's why it is doing so well in my view.
I have mixed feelings about the Spectator. I subscribed for quite a few years because the quality of the content is high and I generally agree with the liberal (non-American definition) viewpoints but stopped because I could no longer stomach paying the wages of James Delingpole and Toby Young.
Delingpole, Young, ROD FUCKING LIDDLE, Brendan O'Neill, Douglas Murray, Mrs Dominic Cummings... no-one can seriously suggest they're a genuinely broad church.
robmatic
Posts: 2094
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:46 am

JM2K6 wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:46 am
robmatic wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:44 am
Caley_Red wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 3:56 am

Of course it has an editorial jurisdiction (i.e. an editor decides what goes in it) but the editorial slant is value-based rather than party political (a bit like the old Economist) and it's highly decentralised- which is why I like it. Most authors write what they want and it's just subedited rather than being prescribed. You do of course have to be invited to contribute in the first place, however!
Hence, there is not pro or anti-Trump editorial view, it is mostly the view of individual authors, some of whom are weekly contributors hence, are published weekly e.g. Douglas Murray.

The magazine actually contains a very wide variety of writers from all political backgrounds, Charles Moore does indeed have a column but I can't say I've ever read an Andrew Neil or a Boris Johnson article (the latter was interviewed before the election) in all the time I've read it. That's why it is doing so well in my view.
I have mixed feelings about the Spectator. I subscribed for quite a few years because the quality of the content is high and I generally agree with the liberal (non-American definition) viewpoints but stopped because I could no longer stomach paying the wages of James Delingpole and Toby Young.
Delingpole, Young, ROD FUCKING LIDDLE, Brendan O'Neill, Douglas Murray, Mrs Dominic Cummings... no-one can seriously suggest they're a genuinely broad church.
It's definitely a specific and limited subset of the Establishment.

Rod Liddle is an interesting one because although he is a bellend, he is a total outlier in terms of social class for a Spectator writer. I suppose he provides some colour at the garden parties though.
User avatar
JM2K6
Posts: 9797
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:43 am

robmatic wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:58 am
JM2K6 wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:46 am
robmatic wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:44 am

I have mixed feelings about the Spectator. I subscribed for quite a few years because the quality of the content is high and I generally agree with the liberal (non-American definition) viewpoints but stopped because I could no longer stomach paying the wages of James Delingpole and Toby Young.
Delingpole, Young, ROD FUCKING LIDDLE, Brendan O'Neill, Douglas Murray, Mrs Dominic Cummings... no-one can seriously suggest they're a genuinely broad church.
It's definitely a specific and limited subset of the Establishment.

Rod Liddle is an interesting one because although he is a bellend, he is a total outlier in terms of social class for a Spectator writer. I suppose he provides some colour at the garden parties though.
He says the things they want to.
Biffer
Posts: 9141
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 6:43 pm

Random1 wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:35 pm
GogLais wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 1:33 pm
Random1 wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 12:44 pm

I’m not a big fan of an unelected chamber - but if an unelected chamber is the only show in town, I reckon beefy is a decent shout.

The point of lords members is supposed to be that they bring expertise from their lives.

Beefy has good knowledge of sport, TV and has massive charity links.

He’s also got a fair bit of experience developing a winery business which is importing and exporting around the world.

I reckon he’d be an interesting perspective to have around the table.
Maybe but there are what 800+ in the HoL? I’d be surprised if he brings any knowledge or experience that isn’t there already.
Sorry, just saw I didn’t respond.

Yeah, 800 is ridiculous for an upper chamber.

Should be limited to the same number as the commons and have a 20 cycle for me.

You get one term, so no re-election skull duggery

So, beefy is fine, but one of the old codgers needs to drop off the conveyor.
I’d have a second chamber that was mixed, part nominated, part elected, and the nominated members come from a wide range within society. For example you’d have the CBI and FSB nominating representatives, balanced by the Trades Unions. Faith based nominations, not just from the CoE, including humanists. Sports and Arts represented, environmental organisations etc. Generally major organisations within society. Then nominations from the major parties, plus have say 30% elected on ten year terms with a split in the terms so that half of the seats are up every five years. Ten year terms all round, no more than two terms allowed, and five year medical examinations to ensure fitness to serve. Then also potentially a voters ballot similar to jury service.
And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
robmatic
Posts: 2094
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:46 am

Biffer wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 12:00 pm
Random1 wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:35 pm
GogLais wrote: Tue Dec 29, 2020 1:33 pm

Maybe but there are what 800+ in the HoL? I’d be surprised if he brings any knowledge or experience that isn’t there already.
Sorry, just saw I didn’t respond.

Yeah, 800 is ridiculous for an upper chamber.

Should be limited to the same number as the commons and have a 20 cycle for me.

You get one term, so no re-election skull duggery

So, beefy is fine, but one of the old codgers needs to drop off the conveyor.
I’d have a second chamber that was mixed, part nominated, part elected, and the nominated members come from a wide range within society. For example you’d have the CBI and FSB nominating representatives, balanced by the Trades Unions. Faith based nominations, not just from the CoE, including humanists. Sports and Arts represented, environmental organisations etc. Generally major organisations within society. Then nominations from the major parties, plus have say 30% elected on ten year terms with a split in the terms so that half of the seats are up every five years. Ten year terms all round, no more than two terms allowed, and five year medical examinations to ensure fitness to serve. Then also potentially a voters ballot similar to jury service.
That sounds eminently sensible but neither main party wants any kind of reform when they can reliably stuff it with appointees whenever they are in power.
Biffer
Posts: 9141
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 6:43 pm

robmatic wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:58 am
JM2K6 wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:46 am
robmatic wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:44 am

I have mixed feelings about the Spectator. I subscribed for quite a few years because the quality of the content is high and I generally agree with the liberal (non-American definition) viewpoints but stopped because I could no longer stomach paying the wages of James Delingpole and Toby Young.
Delingpole, Young, ROD FUCKING LIDDLE, Brendan O'Neill, Douglas Murray, Mrs Dominic Cummings... no-one can seriously suggest they're a genuinely broad church.
It's definitely a specific and limited subset of the Establishment.

Rod Liddle is an interesting one because although he is a bellend, he is a total outlier in terms of social class for a Spectator writer. I suppose he provides some colour at the garden parties though.
I’ve always preferred the economist. Found the spectator overtly political. The Economist has a certain position it’s quite clear about, of centre right economic policies, and doesn’t write articles in the same sucking-off-the-minister way a lot of the spectator articles do.
And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
Biffer
Posts: 9141
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 6:43 pm

robmatic wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 12:04 pm
Biffer wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 12:00 pm
Random1 wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:35 pm

Sorry, just saw I didn’t respond.

Yeah, 800 is ridiculous for an upper chamber.

Should be limited to the same number as the commons and have a 20 cycle for me.

You get one term, so no re-election skull duggery

So, beefy is fine, but one of the old codgers needs to drop off the conveyor.
I’d have a second chamber that was mixed, part nominated, part elected, and the nominated members come from a wide range within society. For example you’d have the CBI and FSB nominating representatives, balanced by the Trades Unions. Faith based nominations, not just from the CoE, including humanists. Sports and Arts represented, environmental organisations etc. Generally major organisations within society. Then nominations from the major parties, plus have say 30% elected on ten year terms with a split in the terms so that half of the seats are up every five years. Ten year terms all round, no more than two terms allowed, and five year medical examinations to ensure fitness to serve. Then also potentially a voters ballot similar to jury service.
That sounds eminently sensible but neither main party wants any kind of reform when they can reliably stuff it with appointees whenever they are in power.
Yeah, realistically I don’t expect it to ever happen in the UK but I have a hope that there will be some kind of second chamber in an independent Scotland which would follow this broader, multi source system.
And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
Biffer
Posts: 9141
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 6:43 pm

More examples of food boxes

And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
User avatar
JM2K6
Posts: 9797
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:43 am

Biffer wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 12:29 pm
robmatic wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:58 am
JM2K6 wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:46 am

Delingpole, Young, ROD FUCKING LIDDLE, Brendan O'Neill, Douglas Murray, Mrs Dominic Cummings... no-one can seriously suggest they're a genuinely broad church.
It's definitely a specific and limited subset of the Establishment.

Rod Liddle is an interesting one because although he is a bellend, he is a total outlier in terms of social class for a Spectator writer. I suppose he provides some colour at the garden parties though.
I’ve always preferred the economist. Found the spectator overtly political. The Economist has a certain position it’s quite clear about, of centre right economic policies, and doesn’t write articles in the same sucking-off-the-minister way a lot of the spectator articles do.
It's a shame that a subscription is so bloody expensive!

I note that the Spectator US let Gavin McInnes write an article decrying cancel culture early last year. That's "Proud Boys" founder Gavin MacInnes, an actual fascist. Hoo boy!
User avatar
C69
Posts: 3336
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:42 pm

Pity the logistics and supply chain fecked it all up then.
It was a shambles, btw I work closely with Breas and their previous incarnation in the UK before they were taken over NIPPY.
User avatar
Openside
Posts: 1713
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:27 pm

JM2K6 wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:44 am
I like neeps wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:48 am
Insane_Homer wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:44 am

Tories are hilariously bad with money. £30 they're paying for this box! £30!!!!
What do you mean "bad with money"? The money is almost definitely lining the pockets of their friends. That's good with money, from their perspective.
I agree its pretty poor but the photo I saw had a load of paper bags on the left hand side which appear to have been cropped out??
User avatar
JM2K6
Posts: 9797
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:43 am

Openside wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:18 pm
JM2K6 wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:44 am
I like neeps wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:48 am


Tories are hilariously bad with money. £30 they're paying for this box! £30!!!!
What do you mean "bad with money"? The money is almost definitely lining the pockets of their friends. That's good with money, from their perspective.
I agree its pretty poor but the photo I saw had a load of paper bags on the left hand side which appear to have been cropped out??
No, it's not a con.


read this thread for lots more.
User avatar
sturginho
Posts: 2432
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:51 pm



That's a bag of coins, but with Tuna in
Dogbert
Posts: 703
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2020 7:32 am

Perfect solution -

Fishermen can't get their product to Europe

Fresh Fish - Healthy and nutritious

Kids Going Hungry

Let them eat Langoustine

Problems solved
Lager & Lime - we don't do cocktails
Slick
Posts: 11913
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:58 pm

sturginho wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:58 pm

That's a bag of coins, but with Tuna in
Is this real? A company has been given £30 pp to put together a food parcel and this is the result? Really?
All the money you made will never buy back your soul
I like neeps
Posts: 3585
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:37 am

robmatic wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:58 am
JM2K6 wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:46 am
robmatic wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:44 am

I have mixed feelings about the Spectator. I subscribed for quite a few years because the quality of the content is high and I generally agree with the liberal (non-American definition) viewpoints but stopped because I could no longer stomach paying the wages of James Delingpole and Toby Young.
Delingpole, Young, ROD FUCKING LIDDLE, Brendan O'Neill, Douglas Murray, Mrs Dominic Cummings... no-one can seriously suggest they're a genuinely broad church.
It's definitely a specific and limited subset of the Establishment.

Rod Liddle is an interesting one because although he is a bellend, he is a total outlier in terms of social class for a Spectator writer. I suppose he provides some colour at the garden parties though.
The modern right is a mix of your JRM's and Douglas Murray: the blue blooded Eton classes. And the Rod Liddle's - white man 50 ish, ex labour but now is fed up with social policies pointing out 50ish year old white men had a good run at it.

Also the Spectator needs pet ex labour party members like Liddle and Cohen to say "we publish anyone". Also, Liddle is a wife beating contraversialist. Just thought I should add how unpleasant a character he is.
I like neeps
Posts: 3585
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:37 am

JM2K6 wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:44 am
I like neeps wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:48 am
Insane_Homer wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:44 am

Tories are hilariously bad with money. £30 they're paying for this box! £30!!!!
What do you mean "bad with money"? The money is almost definitely lining the pockets of their friends. That's good with money, from their perspective.
Okay yes the Tories funneling cash from taxpayers to their mates is a modus operandi these days. But upstanding Tory voters who are happy with £30 of taxes being spent on £5 of food and so £25 of their English pounds going to a Tory chairman's stock options is a strange one for me.
robmatic
Posts: 2094
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:46 am

I like neeps wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 2:40 pm
robmatic wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:58 am
JM2K6 wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:46 am

Delingpole, Young, ROD FUCKING LIDDLE, Brendan O'Neill, Douglas Murray, Mrs Dominic Cummings... no-one can seriously suggest they're a genuinely broad church.
It's definitely a specific and limited subset of the Establishment.

Rod Liddle is an interesting one because although he is a bellend, he is a total outlier in terms of social class for a Spectator writer. I suppose he provides some colour at the garden parties though.
The modern right is a mix of your JRM's and Douglas Murray: the blue blooded Eton classes. And the Rod Liddle's - white man 50 ish, ex labour but now is fed up with social policies pointing out 50ish year old white men had a good run at it.

Also the Spectator needs pet ex labour party members like Liddle and Cohen to say "we publish anyone". Also, Liddle is a wife beating contraversialist. Just thought I should add how unpleasant a character he is.
I did find it funny shortly after Brexit when a number of Spectator writers - the privately educated, snobbish types - suddenly discovered a hitherto unmentioned love, respect and understanding for the 'common man' of the North of England.
User avatar
Openside
Posts: 1713
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:27 pm

JM2K6 wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:21 pm
Openside wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:18 pm
JM2K6 wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:44 am

What do you mean "bad with money"? The money is almost definitely lining the pockets of their friends. That's good with money, from their perspective.
I agree its pretty poor but the photo I saw had a load of paper bags on the left hand side which appear to have been cropped out??
No, it's not a con.


read this thread for lots more.
I am not saying its a con, just that the same photo on the right I saw on twitter with about 5 white paper bags also...
User avatar
sturginho
Posts: 2432
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:51 pm

Slick wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 2:20 pm
sturginho wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:58 pm

That's a bag of coins, but with Tuna in
Is this real? A company has been given £30 pp to put together a food parcel and this is the result? Really?
It's twitter, so take with a pinch of salt (which the govt will provide you in a coin bag)
User avatar
sturginho
Posts: 2432
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:51 pm

Openside wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 3:17 pm
JM2K6 wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:21 pm
Openside wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:18 pm

I agree its pretty poor but the photo I saw had a load of paper bags on the left hand side which appear to have been cropped out??
No, it's not a con.


read this thread for lots more.
I am not saying its a con, just that the same photo on the right I saw on twitter with about 5 white paper bags also...
Different pictures, both of them are on this page if you want to scroll up a bit and compare
Post Reply