Brexit...

[MikeO]

Locked for the time being; if the two of you want to continue the discussion please PM each other.

[pete0]

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/stanley-johnson-to-apply-for-french-citizenship-1-6573190?fbclid=IwAR2qTOx985_Qh-H142p4_v4ys6ot4az23sHZHOQvmUr8B1LzlRgEkzdVaAQ

BJs dad applying for a French passport so he doesn't have to live with the ramifications of his spawn. 

[Palfy]

The divisions between leavers and remainers won’t have gone away, the issue is to big to agree to disagree or harmonious argument. 
In reality. 

[holystove]

On 23/03/2020 at 18:25, RPG said:

The debate really needs to move on to how Remainers (and Leavers for that matter) are going to adapt to post Brexit UK but that can only begin when the reality of Brexit is accepted by all and we all look forward to either taking the opportunites afforded by brexit or making the best of brexit.

Point is, the reality of Brexit is yet undefined.  Any future relationship is still on the table.  

I'd say, the current government is in no position to deliver the national unity you speak of.   It is too ideological about the "purity" of brexit that it is blinded to compromise and nuance.  The corona crisis really brings this to the fore.  Johnson refuses to coordinate anything with the EU member states through EU institutions.  I find this baffling as I would have thought the health of UK (and EU) citizens would take a backseat to political ideology.  Cleary this thing will only get resolved through international cooperation at every level.

One recent example: yesterday it became clear the UK is not participating in Corona-related EU procurement schemes to buy ventilators, protective gear for hospital staff or corona virus testing kits.  All of which the UK does not have remotely enough of and thus would be a beneficiary of buying in bulk and distribution amongst the worst hit European states.   We've come a long way from David Cameron and the British Government that were involved in setting up the 2014 EU Joint Procurement Agreement to tackle the H1N1 pandemic...

[Palfy]

If we can’t come together in a time of global crisis when can we come together. 
We will all become losers in the end, because we are allowing our politicians to make decisions on our behalf’s that most right minded people wouldn’t make, whether right left or middle of the road we’ve lost the ability to make our politicians accountable which I find worrying. 

[Palfy]

The government posted if you are not a key worker do not go to work. 
Following day they changed that to only go to work if you cannot work from home. 
That’s not the actions of a prime minister or government that know what they are doing bar putting money before lives. 
They have been encouraging builders to go to work even if there working on contracts including housing how many people need to die to build a house which isn’t vital at the moment. 

[pete0]

12 minutes ago, Palfy said:

The government posted if you are not a key worker do not go to work. 
Following day they changed that to only go to work if you cannot work from home. 
That’s not the actions of a prime minister or government that know what they are doing bar putting money before lives. 
They have been encouraging builders to go to work even if there working on contracts including housing how many people need to die to build a house which isn’t vital at the moment. 

Worst thing the other night was it was purposely vague. They had already messaged companies informing them they can stay open if they are online i.e. We're not gonna support the workers. He should have been clearer in the message and said we're only doing half a job. Absolutely no point in telling people not to meet with their friends and family (and fining them if they do) when you're happy for them to go work in an office with 100s of people. 

[pete0]

9 hours ago, RPG said:

Maybe I am missing something but I can't really think of an office job that can't be done from home. I am sure there must be a few but with all the technology available to facilitate on line meetings there really shouldn't be any need for offices to be full of hundreds of people. Emirates Airline employs around 100,000 people and we are conducting business almost exclusively via email and on line meetings from home. Non safety critical functions that required human interaction have been suspended. We have even suspended all passenger flights.

I think one of the reasons the govt message may have appeared vague is to enable the government to head towards a situation of troops on the street if necessary but to get there one inch at a time. The reasons for that approach may well be buried in the pc changes to UK society that have taken place over the last couple of generations. Personally, I agree to a certain extent with that aspect of the criticism but UK isn't China or Russia and I can understand why Johnson is introducing the restrictions at the pace and in the manner that he is.

Any office that still uses desktops. Most companies rely on certain software so you can't just use your personal computer/laptop at home. 

It was vague as they wanted to sound like they were doing the right thing. What model has the government looked at were this is reduced by people not seeing their mates but still letting them go work in an office with 100s of people? 

Edit: https://www.itv.com/news/granada/2020-03-25/social-distancing-concerns-raised-over-matalan-distribution-centre-in-knowsley/

Essential travel:

- to and from a warehouse

- between coparents houses

The government is basically saying doing your job i.e. making them and their mates money is more important than your health and seeing your kids. 

Back on to the models, big factor being socioeconomic, less paid jobs more likely to have to go in. Easily replaceable low skilled workers who cares if they die... 

[pete0]

6 hours ago, RPG said:

If any company uses only desk tops (and hundreds of them)  then they are so far behind the technology drag curve that they can't be employing key workers (I am sure there might be a couple of exceptions) and the workers should just be stood down.

They should but the government has only closed shops that are open to the public. If they trade online they are allowed to stay open. Which means they need people to manage the stock levels, people to pick the stock, and people to operate the customer service side. 

Can you please provide examples where there are still offices in non essential industries requiring hundreds of people in them. You may be right but I am not aware of any.

The link shows non essential warehouses are open. How come you've not commented on that?

Any how any offices that are attached to any online company (other than those were the company had chosen to look after the staff as the government is unwilling). The government sent them a memo they could keep trading. Can't find the memo but if you don't believe me try ringing a call centre and you'll probably get through. 

Given the gov gave a memo to keep trading do you condemn them or do you agree the lower down on the socioeconomic ladder are needlessly sacrificial? 

The government message is not as you say at all. The government message is very simple. 'Stay at home, help the NHS, Save lives.' That message applies to everyone. I think we need to put partisan politics to one side here and look at what the government has done to fight this unprecedented crisis. No response will ever be perfect, much less perfect first time, but I am absolutely convinced (as are the vast majority of people I speak with) that this government's first priority is protecting health and beating Covid-19 and that they are actually doing a damn good job.

It was worded to sound like that but it was vague when it comes to travel to and from work. They should have been clearer that if you are unable to work from home the gov expects you to go. The whole self isolation concept and advice is fucked by this. 

I don't see your last para as being anything other than a political snipe at a government that is generally acknowledged as doing a damn good job of tackling a massive crisis. Government advice is to stay at home and work from home if you can. Most firms in non key industries have already shut down - either through choice, government instruction or drying up of 'just in time' supply chains. There is a generous compensation scheme in place that is expanding all the time (now covers self employed as of today) and I think the government deserves great credit for the speed and manner with which it has been rolled out. 

They deserve no praise. They've known for months and have dithered at every step. It's gone from don't worry it's less harmless than flu to self isolate (if you can afford to). 

Bottom line is that nothing this government does will ever be enough for some people because their anti tory genetic make up will always prevent an impartial view being taken and prevent credit being given where it is due. I understand that. At the moment I am watching Ed Balls being interviewed on BBC London News and he is full of praise for the way the government is handling the crisis.

Fact is your response is only so long as your tory ideals have been well and truly found out to be unhumanitarian. You didn't get to vote but those who did should be ashamed of themselves. Death is on their hands. Any other government would have had the NHS and the country better prepared. Tory government has prioritised corporations over the public. They are not fit to govern. 

There are still many measures left to be implemented, I am sure. But the best way to beat Covid-19 is to support the government (who are only implementing apolitical expert advice) and let normal political hostilities resume when we have beaten Covid-19.

The advice was to isolate weeks ago. We instead told people to wash their hands for 20 seconds and stand a meter apart if possible. 

I am currently in 14 days isolation (pending results of my second swab test) and working from home on the admin side of my job while trying to manage a 50% pay cut.

The government aren't even checking the NHS and supermarket workers here. Count yourself lucky to be in a country that is better prepared. 

Stay safe.

Get well. 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/breaking-coronavirus-next-closing-entire-21761930?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=mirror_main&fbclid=IwAR2CFCBPiOJLFv-JtbCRMUbNRM2e5-hsgaECT7Sp1ITl5geS1dI2nOu08tU

[Palfy]

What is so difficult for the government to force companies and individuals to stay at home unless they are a key to the welfare of the country. 
Firstly changing your policy mid stream hasn’t helped. 
Secondly still allowing companies and people to make there own choices. 
Thirdly not using powers to punish companies and people who break the rules.
Weak government will cost thousands of people their lives, and the shuttling of the door after the horse has bolted should be a crime in itself, we are weeks behind the strongest measures that should have and in some cases still haven’t been taken. 
Are builders still allowed to go to work if working on none essential projects, yes the government have repeated, why ?thousands have asked and been given a none coherent answer from all ministers who are trying to defend it. 
Warehouses open for the picking of clothes and furniture again why ?because this government is allowing them to operate. 
I don’t see a strong and decisive government far from it I see a weak government devoid of the backbone and strength of its convictions to lockdown completely. 

[Palfy]

9 minutes ago, RPG said:

The problem with a government being swift and decisive at the tactical level (micro managing if you like) is that the response may also subsequently prove to be inappropriate. The situation is a crisis - no question. But knee jerk reactions can make the situation worse, so a balance has to be maintained. That isn't easy and no government can or will get it 100% correct, 100% of the time. I would like to see local councils empowered to make those tactical decisions.

A complete lockdown would be ideal, I agree. I actually think it is coming very soon.

I understand your personal situation as far as you have explained it and I do agree that some government guidance would be good for you and others in your situation but did you not say that you have already stood your workers down and that they are eligible for 80% pay via the compensation scheme? I would call that strong leadership by the government and an excellent decision by yourself.

I don't think the government lacks backbone. I think it is escalating its actions appropriately and in a mature manner. That won't prevent many people being frustrated though and that is totally understandable in crisis management.

I do agree that the compensation scheme is excellent for a vast majority of people, the fact that a need in the future to raise taxes to try and recoup these crippling costs are more palatable than people not being able to live now is something we should all be happy to face. 
The fact that the government have taken the steps to make sure people can survive, should make it easier for a total lockdown I cannot understand why they are not introducing tougher sanctions against people and companies still carrying out none essential work, surely to take the tougher choices earlier would shorten a protracted route to the inevitable anyway, with the potential to save life’s and stop the NHS from going into to meltdown, and most importantly give our NHS heroes a fighting chance to treat people in a more safe environment, after all they are being swamped and putting their lives on the line, and people are still being allowed to leave home to further spread the virus, as a military man you must find this nonsensical, that you put your life on the line to save people yet the people you are trying to save still put themselves at risk, in battle the victors are usually those who make the toughest decisions first. 

[Palfy]

32 minutes ago, RPG said:

I agree 100% with almost everything you wrote. The only comment I would add is that government policy is to acknowledge that we can't wave a magic wand and stop Covid-19 spreading but we can control (to a degree) the pace at which it spreads. Herd immunity I believe it is called. At the moment I think we are slowly transitioning from that herd immunity approach to the full lock down that you suggest and I agree with. By actioning this process, we initially limited the number of people needing hospital care to manageable numbers at any one time, bought the NHS time and hopefully will now avoid a future short term spike in numbers that neither the NHS nor any health care system in the world could cope with.

To continue with your military analogy, we wouldn't want to order a nuclear strike for something that could be achieved by a conventional warhead, but we would have the nuclear strike option ready to go.

The public can help the NHS win this war by staying at home and self isolating. If it takes a total lock down to make this happen then I do believe Johnson will invoke the necessary protocols. For the (short) time being I think he will continue to act on the advice of the apolitical experts.

There is no magic wand but there are things we can do to try and minimise it’s effect, we may or may not be completely on the same page with whether we have done enough to date, but we are all looking for the same result, as my father use to say there’s more than one way to skin a cat. 
I’ve just read that the USA have more confirmed cases of the virus than China or Italy, it makes you wonder if Trump hasn’t played a big part in that with his grasp on the situation weeks ago, telling people carry on there’s no problem here and all the other rhetoric he was coming out with, could the USA end up being a case proven that poor leadership will cost thousands of lives, I hope not but all the signs aren’t looking to good. 
 

We need to stop this agreeing with each other we are spoiling everyone else’s fun. 

[Palfy]

13 minutes ago, RPG said:

Being in the aviation industry, I hate to say this but I think we are largely to blame for the rapid spread. Person to person contact can infect states or even countries but for it to spread globally at such a rate, even Covid-19 needed a bit of a push and I think the travel industry probably gave it that push. The problem is that the horse had already bolted before the stable door was even noticed to be unlocked so, by definition, we begin the fight on the back foot and have to be reactive rather than pro active in the early stages.

It is also worth pointing out that the mortality rate for Covid-19 is not that high. Significantly higher than influenza but it is not the plague and most people will recover. Of course that does not absolve us of the responsibility to minimise its impact on the human race and I think the numbers of infections per country will (generally speaking) soon start to coalesce into groups of countries with liberal attitudes and little respect for law, order and each other being worst affected and countries with (by western standards) harsher governments seeing lower rates and/or a quicker recovery. If this does prove to be the case then it would support your argument for a full lockdown in the early stages.

Without a doubt the travel industry whether business or pleasure as spread the virus quicker, this could be a good thing rather than a slow burn who knows. 
But I wouldn’t lay any blame at the travel industries door they have made the world a more accessible place for all to enjoy, and in their credit they have done more off their own backs to lockdown instead of waiting to be pushed, as some seem to be waiting for this to happen. 

[Chach]

4 hours ago, Palfy said:

What is so difficult for the government to force companies and individuals to stay at home unless they are a key to the welfare of the country. 
Firstly changing your policy mid stream hasn’t helped. 
Secondly still allowing companies and people to make there own choices. 
Thirdly not using powers to punish companies and people who break the rules.
Weak government will cost thousands of people their lives, and the shuttling of the door after the horse has bolted should be a crime in itself, we are weeks behind the strongest measures that should have and in some cases still haven’t been taken. 
Are builders still allowed to go to work if working on none essential projects, yes the government have repeated, why ?thousands have asked and been given a none coherent answer from all ministers who are trying to defend it. 
Warehouses open for the picking of clothes and furniture again why ?because this government is allowing them to operate. 
I don’t see a strong and decisive government far from it I see a weak government devoid of the backbone and strength of its convictions to lockdown completely. 

I've seen this argument a fair bit but it never lays out what is behind door number two, we're a year away minimum from a vaccine. Under the total lockdown, how does it play out?

[Romey 1878]

16 minutes ago, RPG said:

I am hearing (via a normally very reliable source) that Johnson has just tested positive for Covid-19.

We are (or should be) all on the same side here and I wish him a speedy recovery, just as I would to Corbyn if he had tested positive.

Nah, you’re alright. I won’t wish death on him but I won’t be sending any positive thoughts his way or any of that shite. He said it would be a good idea to let this virus run through the population, despite no one really knowing anything about it at the time, so I’m quite happy to let it run through him and watch how the cards land. 

[Romey 1878]

1 hour ago, RPG said:

Whether or not individuals are man enough to admit it or smart enough to realise it, UK needs Johnson to lead the country through this crisis. There is a lot of talent in government but Johnson is the man that puts it all together.

So, if not for his sake, but for those whose lives he is trying to save, we had all better hope he makes a full and speedy recovery. Anything less is just cutting off your nose to spite your face.

But I happen to think he’s done a poor job at leading us during this time, so I wouldn’t mind in the slightest if the job fell to someone else. Someone capable would be nice, in fact. 

[Matt]

16 minutes ago, Romey 1878 said:

But I happen to think he’s done a poor job at leading us during this time, so I wouldn’t mind in the slightest if the job fell to someone else. Someone capable would be nice, in fact. 

Trouble is we’ve not had anyone capable in a decade, anywhere across the parties. I mostly agree, except so say that even someone competent couldn't do much of a better job simply due to the shitstorm of the last 10 years  

[holystove]

6 minutes ago, RPG said:

Who? There really is nobody who cpuld do the job any better that I can think of.

Starmer, Cooper, Benn, Cherry, Hammond, Javid, Hunt, Greg Clark, .. , May.  Easy list to compile, even for someone who only follows UK politics from afar.

[Romey 1878]

16 minutes ago, Matt said:

Trouble is we’ve not had anyone capable in a decade, anywhere across the parties. I mostly agree, except so say that even someone competent couldn't do much of a better job simply due to the shitstorm of the last 10 years  

A shitstorm that he’s been a part of, so let’s trust him to navigate us through something this big...

Not saying you trust him to do that btw. 

[Matt]

14 minutes ago, holystove said:

Starmer, Cooper, Benn, Cherry, Hammond, Javid, Hunt, Greg Clark, .. , May.  Easy list to compile, even for someone who only follows UK politics from afar.

I usually agree with you, but half of not most of them have been part of the problem over the past decade. 

Boris tried the old “tea and biscuits got us through the war” approach which was fucking stupid, but with what he had to work with, I’m not sure what else he was supposed to do (apart from learn from others but how many of the politicians actually do that?)

[Matt]

1 minute ago, Romey 1878 said:

A shitstorm that he’s been a part of, so let’s trust him to navigate us through something this big...

Not saying you trust him to do that btw. 

See above.

And no, I don’t trust him in the slightest 

[johnh]

45 minutes ago, holystove said:

Starmer, Cooper, Benn, Cherry, Hammond, Javid, Hunt, Greg Clark, .. , May.  Easy list to compile, even for someone who only follows UK politics from afar.

Easy list to compile if you want a team of remainers.

[Matt]

9 minutes ago, johnh said:

Easy list to compile if you want a team of remainers.

Depending on which month it was for most of them, they’ve been all over the spectrum...

[Palfy]

58 minutes ago, johnh said:

Easy list to compile if you want a team of remainers.

Trust me John Brexiteers aren’t immune from the virus, so what ever your political persuasion people just want the right person to do the job, and if that’s a Tory remainer or brexiteer does it matter. 

[Matt]

Shows how much damage politicians (locally and globally) and Brexit has done to the population when there’s still such a divide in a time where the country and world needs to come together. Very sad. 

[Palfy]

14 minutes ago, Matt said:

Shows how much damage politicians (locally and globally) and Brexit has done to the population when there’s still such a divide in a time where the country and world needs to come together. Very sad. 

100 % I doubt at my age I will see the divide come together in what’s left of my life. 

[Matt]

10 minutes ago, Palfy said:

100 % I doubt at my age I will see the divide come together in what’s left of my life. 

I fear it’s the same for me and I’m only turning 37 this year!

[Romey 1878]

 I can see why people feel we have effective leadership. 

[Palfy]

The government said that the biggest problem for the country in the coming year’s, was finding the budget to look after the needs of the elderly and infirm, they have now found the solution let them die. 

[Tonsta]

35 minutes ago, Palfy said:

The government said that the biggest problem for the country in the coming year’s, was finding the budget to look after the needs of the elderly and infirm, they have now found the solution let them die. 

This is what they are doing in Spain, old peoples homes abandoned and the army finding dead bodies.