****ing hell, I don’t come on this thread for a few days and then I find dozens of post I just have to ‘like’, all ‘cos judging by the number of times he mentions it, it must be getting in our resident racists head. Childish things please childish minds....that’ll be me then . Shame he has me on ignore
You couldn't make this up, many Lib Dems are fasting for Ramadan and this twat finished the daily fast with bacon...
I don't think Ellers realises that 'would-be' means it's what he himself would like rather than what the Telegraph thinks he should be.
I like this!!! I particularly liked the post a page or so ago where when talking about labour the analogy of it would be like hitler appointing Goeballs. He might not read the fail but with words like that I expect he writes for it.
Thanks, interesting response. Why they won't publish the membership is beyond me, and I agree that would some way to quelling the storm that seems to have arisen around this. I have more sympathy with not publishing the minutes, given that SAGE will undoubtedly be analysing multiple scenarios, and making recommendations based on the best available evidence, not certainties. As you hint at, it might well be that the economic hit will hurt much more than the virus itself. If the messaging being published enforces this message and stops people from following Govt advice, I think not publishing them until all of this is over is reasonable. The caveat being that those minutes certainly should be shared with the Privy Council, which includes multiple members of the Opposition front bench, who should (and I believe now will) be constructively critiquing the government approach. As for Cummings' attendance leading to questions around whether the Government was following the science, or vice versa, I'm afraid I still don't but it. If this was Llewellyn under Cameron or Powell under Blair attending this type of meeting, I find it hard to believe people would be speculating in the same way. You can just as easily flip it on its head and say how wonderful it is that Boris sent his most senior advisor to this meeting to hear first hand from the experts etc if one is inclined to support the Govt (which I'm not); and that the CMO briefings directly to the PM are hardly inhibited by one of his advisers attending meetings with other advisers. Storm in a teacup from where I'm sat, which will suit the Government just fine as it means scrutiny is being avoided in areas where they have made serious failings. From reading a few papers today and some posts on here, guess this is just one of those issues where people see it through their political lens first and foremost, and make the facts fit to confirm their bias. Like most issues, of course, and I'm by no means innocent of falling into that particular trap.
Did you read/watch the piece about Johnson's speech in early February? He was of the opinion then (as was Cummings) that lockdown would do more damage than the virus. He even saw lockdowns elsewhere as an economic opportunity for the UK. Is it too much of a stretch to think that Cummings's presence at SAGE meetings might have persuaded the CMO to advise that a laissez-faire, herd immunity approach could be a pragmatic way forward, fitting Johnson's preconception? Why else would our scientists at that time have come to a different conclusion to those of pretty much every country in the world?
Yeah, I did. It's an opinion that could well still be right. It's the path Sweden has taken (where lockdown is far more limited) and I don't think it was out of kilter with what many were thinking at the time, in some of the US states too. Time will tell whether the Swedes or others have got it right, particularly after we see how big the economic hit really is. I'd recommend having a listen to Dame Sally Davies' Desert Island Discs (on quite recently). Dame Sally was the CMO before Whitty, and she speaks well about balancing political pressure with medical advice, essentially arguing that is the job of the CMO to speak truth to power, whatever the personal cost, and she points to some interesting examples from her time (e.g. sugar tax). If someone has risen to the rank of CMO, the most senior doctor in the UK in a field of truly world-class outstanding professionals, and their advice is that significantly altered by the presence of one Downing Street advisor at a meeting, I'd say the problem really is with the CMO. The CMO and the SAGE committee will be used to meeting with powerful people, and will meet the PM and team on a regular basis. It's not like Cummings sitting in with a team of business leaders who are not adept at dealing with political pressure who might be more easily swayed on a decision. Which is my long way of saying, yes, it's a bit of a stretch to suggest his presence at the meeting significantly altered their scientific opinion on such a crucial issue. As I said, those looking to bash the Govt will use him attending a meeting to fit a constructed narrative. That's fine, all part of political discourse. Others will do the same from the other side. I just think there are bigger fish to fry.
It's a long way of not answering the question as to how our scientific advisors could have initially been so far out of step with the rest of the world (Sweden excepted).
Belgium, Sweden, and much of the US, Singapore, and Hong Kong. I'm not claiming to be able to answer the question as to why our scientists took a different approach from most of Europe, at least I don't think I've made that claim! I just think "Cummings was at a SAGE meeting" is a slightly ridiculous answer to that question, and is more than a little insulting to all of the preeminent scientists and doctors in question.
I've just corrected my post, I should have said Sweden not Belgium. My point, which I'm clearly failing to put plainly enough, is that Johnson had already made his mind up about how we should deal with the 'threat' of the virus. It wasn't a threat at all, it was an opportunity. What he needed was some scientific justification for a laissez-faire approach and herd immunity was a convenient answer. No doubt this was one of many options discussed at the SAGE meetings of the time, but perhaps Cummings was influential in this being presented as their conclusion. Since denied of course, but Cummings was reported to have said at the time ‘herd immunity, protect the economy and if that means some pensioners die, too bad’.
Perhaps, of course, being an important word! Doubt we'll agree on the specific role of Cummings in this one and whether it is so bad that he attended the meeting, but I do actually agree with you that Johnson had his mind made up from the outset, and had a fairly drastic change of heart. Would love to know if it was media pressure or scientific advice that really got him to change his mind.
Maybe you are right Stroller. You and your ‘like’ minions may have also felt the same when the paper said Corbyn was unelectable? Although anyone could have seen that... actually not everyone
Watford lets himself down. He wrote a fab post on the other thread which I was about to ‘like’ but finished it with a stupid line about Boris quick ICU recovery. I think he did know who Eustice was?
I didn’t until yesterday’s briefing. Doubt we’ll see much more of him. Boris had a surprisingly short stint in hospital. That’s all. You can still like the post.
You just want your 'likes'. My mate stayed in ICU about the same amount of time Watford... Maybe I should ask him if he was after sympathy? I did say that the Tories got rid of the deadwood and new faces and promotions would happen. Rishi Sunak is a good example of a fast-rising MP.
I see the latest way to discredit, deflect and disrespect people on here is to claim they are doing it for the likes.... Shameful I best get some likes though as that's way more important than my ethics
