And yet everyone was still out and about up until the 24th, because we weren't in actual lockdown. Like I said, I was still travelling in to the office - it was still open - it hadn't been locked down and nor had I.
See, words are important.
And yet everyone was still out and about up until the 24th, because we weren't in actual lockdown. Like I said, I was still travelling in to the office - it was still open - it hadn't been locked down and nor had I.
See, words are important.
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
We weren't out and about. I didn't see my mother on Mother's Day or my grandparents, first year ever I didn't see my mum on Mother's Day (we chatted via Portal instead). Do you remember what you did on Mother's Day?
And it wouldn't surprise me if Russ is lying about what Hancock said. Any time I've ever seen Hancock speak about the 16th he's very clear that he spoke against non-essential travel etc on the 16th.
Doctor Who must have been behind this newspaper headline from 17 March.
Twitter Link
Again, words are important.
The UK, as was the rest of Europe, was coming to terms with what was very apparently becoming a global epidemic. Hasty guidelines were being put in place regarding social distancing, avoiding crowded spaces etc.
The point at which the UK, later than the rest of Europe but still, realised that it needed actual policy backed up by law and not just guidelines, was the point at which the country locked down. That was following the Prime Minister's speech on the evening of the 23rd. Lockdown became accepted as the conditions we were under from that point forward.
I refer you to the national papers published on the 24th March:
Now you can infer what you like, but it is clear to me that the national perception was that we under an enforced lockdown from the 24th onwards.
Yes lockdown was finalised on 23rd March but it started to be implemented on 16th exactly like I said.
Do you honestly think that saying to stop all non-essential travel, closing all schools in the country, closing all bars, pubs, restaurants, cinemas etc in the country is not a part of lockdown? Do you honestly think that was pre-lockdown?
Lockdown was completed on the 24th but it had begun before then.
How quaint that Brits are arguing about dates of "lockdown"....while the US president is arguing about "best" mortality rates (while also trying to steer golf tournaments to his properties in Scotland).
If it's all the same I believe what the Health Secretary told the House of Commons.
Yes.
For the third time, words are important.
Well I think its a petty, pedantic and meaningless distinction.
SAGE advised action to be taken on the 16th. It was immediately started on the 16th with an immediate change of the advice followed by a rolling order of compulsory closures over the week culminating in it being completely legally mandated by the 24th. Happy with that?
I certainly felt under lockdown on Mother's Day. Do either of you two remember what you did on Mother's Day this year? If you had a meal booked was it cancelled or go ahead?
Does that mean Trump's property in Scotland won't be hosting that big golf event?
I agree, a lot of people need the government to spell it out to them before they start to apply common sense to their behavior.
I saw it very clearly at the beginning of the crisis, while I was maximizing work from home and using hand sanitizer on a regular basis, also avoiding public transport and crowded places, I got the reaction why I was worrying so much about a common flu. Only when government published guidelines things started to change. Interestingly enough everybody instantaneously forgot there were government guidelines and not rules besides the 1,5m distancing, which was an actual rule.
Congratulations America
Well, the fact that I, my colleagues, the rest of this city and indeed much of the rest of the country were allowed to travel in to their place of work, pick up a sandwich and a coffee on the way in, work all day in said offices, and travel home again, and then the following day we were not allowed to do any of that, because we were suddenly locked down, is not petty or pedantic or meaningless, it is quite the opposite.
I'll try to make it clearer: One day you're allowed by law to do a number of things, and the next day by law you are not. The distinction is not petty and it most certainly has meaning.
That's as clear as I can be.
*checking thread title*
Pandemics have a way of turning everything upside down and inside out. Challenging everything we've expected from government officials, and ourselves.
The whole world has been tossed into chaos, a "circus" by a new/unknown microbe. What are you guys *actually* fighting about? If it's politics, you know the virus isn't aware and doesn't care, right?
You could work from the office yes, but you were being told you shouldn't by the government. And this is what you posted on 16 March.Well, the fact that I, my colleagues, the rest of this city and indeed much of the rest of the country were allowed to travel in to their place of work, pick up a sandwich and a coffee on the way in, work all day in said offices, and travel home again, and then the following day we were not allowed to do any of that, because we were suddenly locked down, is not petty or pedantic or meaningless, it is quite the opposite.
I'll try to make it clearer: One day you're allowed by law to do a number of things, and the next day by law you are not. The distinction is not petty and it most certainly has meaning.
That's as clear as I can be.
People are trying to misleadingly suggest the government got the advice on the 16th and did nothing for a week. Its not true, they got the advice on the 16th then passed it on . . . on the 16th. And then started changing the law shutting down schools, then pubs, restaurants etc then everything else but it was all immediately told it should stop on the 16th and as you said on the 16th your office was doing that then.On a conference call this morning (my London office are all instructed to work from home for the forseeable). Chit chat before the meeting kicks off, colleague 1 (UK) asks colleague 2 (India) how his sickness is going. Colleague 2 responds that his fever seems a bit better but the cough is still there so he decided to come into the office. Cue
from colleague 1 and myself.
I know India hasn't been badly affected yet, but come on
It appears my "If RB thinks it, it's almost certainly wrong" heuristic is continuing to pay dividends, so I'll be spending the coming days going through that list to see how right or wrong the individual items are.
What should be the cutoff for a passing grade? 50%? 60%? 70%?
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
LOL, Randblade is trying to rewrite history once again.
We weren't under lock down until after the 23rd, because that was when we were required to stay inside except for essential travel and once per day to exercise and so on. That is what a lockdown is. It's not telling people to 'stay inside maybe', 'work from home if possible' or asking people to 'avoid' pubs, or mandating that only some businesses close (which they didn't do until the 20th). It's not an 'advicedown'.
Matt Hancock is a liar.
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
I haven't been keeping up with this thread in the past few weeks, have we done the bit where Boris Johnson said 'no one knew' about asymptotic transmission, Trump style, in order to excuse his disgraceful comments about care homes yet?
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
Advise is not a lockdown. Advise is advise.
You're right that they did something, which was asking the people if they pretty please would stay at home. Lockdown is when the government took actual measures rather than giving a speech asking people to stay at home. I was also working from home already before the lockdown here started, but that doesn't magically make the lockdown start earlier. I'm even hesitant to call what we had a lockdown, since we were always allowed to leave the house.
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
Is ordering all schools, bars, restaurants, cinemas etc in the country to close taking an "actual measure rather than giving a speech"?
1.Accurate. Hancock said lockdown started on 16th March, when SAGE recommended it, rather than on 24th March. Lockdown started on 24th March; on the 16th, govt. advised people to adhere to social distancing recommendations, but did not in fact impose a lockdown. If that is to be interpreted as a lockdown, then Sweden has been under lockdown for months. Plainly absurd. Point to Russ the tweeter.#TheWeekInTory is a misnomer: this just covers the last 5 days
1. Matt Hancock told Parliament lockdown started on 16th March, the day SAGE told them to, so all those unnecessary deaths didn’t happen
2. But lockdown started on 24th March, and all those unnecessary deaths did
2.These claims are a bit trickier. The part about the "new deal" for infrastructure seems to be a reference to Johnson's misleading remarks to Parliament in response to criticism of the "new deal" and how it had been represented to the public. Afaict, the vast majority of that spending had already been pledged—separately—in campaign manifesto and budget; what's really "new" is that some of that money will be spent sooner than they had initially planned (about £100 million—not billion—of that appears to be newly pledged money), ie. an acceleration of spending rather than a substantial addition of funds. Important context is that those hundreds of billions would have needed to be spent anyway—previous govts had been neglecting pressing infrastructure needs for a long time, and further neglect would've been untenable. The 0.8% figure seems to be in reference to the roughly £5bn worth of accelerated spending: https://www.channel4.com/news/factch...nment-new-deal. Consequently, it might not, strictly speaking, be new money.The govt announced a “New Deal” for infrastructure, with £600bn of new money
Turns out, only 0.8% of that is new money
The £34bn “new money” for the NHS was actually announced in 2018
The govt then announced £3bn of additional funding for a possible second wave
The £34bn—over 5 years—to the chronically underfunded NHS was pledged in 2018, and amounts to £20bn when adjusted for inflation. This is certainly much less than the NHS has repeatedly said it needs. The additional £3bn might put funding just under what the NHS needs for this year. Rating this one as true-ish—true because Johnson's misleading remarks indicated far, far higher new spending in the new package than is actually the case, and "ish" because the 0.8% figure appears to be incorrect, and because the level and adequacy—in terms of £—of the real spending is difficult to determine. Point to Russ.
3. Mandatory face coverings:
This is in reference to the mixed messaging re. face coverings being mandatory in shops and the like starting 24th July. Hancock was asked about whether they'd be mandatory in eg. Pret—because it's a shop, but it does sell coffee and sandwiches—and he said yes, because it's a shop (with the exception of places that have table service, if you eat there). Hours later, a spokesperson for Downing Street said no, because Pret is not a shop: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...usion-12029134Matt Hancock said wearing a mask is mandatory
Downing St said wearing a mask ISN'T mandatory
So Gavin Williamson cleared it all up by saying they're both right
After this, Gavin Williamson—cabinet RB—said... this:
Twitter Link
I'm rating the summary of this tragicomic episode as 99% accurate. Some of our readers will object that this particular display of incompetence occurred 6 days before Russ's thread, whereas Russ claims everything he's talking about happened within the preceding 5 days. However, more astute readers will note that it happened within 5 working days, so it counts. Point to Russ.
4.In reference to this episode: https://news.sky.com/story/chief-nur...s-row-12032755England’s Chief Nurse confirmed she was dropped from briefings cos she refused to back Dominic Cummings
The reporting around this event is somewhat misleading, because she has been careful not to explicitly attribute the decision to her remarks about the controversy surrounding Cummings, and govt. reps have dodged the question. I'm rating this one as wrong, because she doesn't seem to have confirmed that she was dropped because of what she said. No point to Russ for this one.
5.The only global survey I've found that tracks public approval of pandemic management is this one: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/internat...dling-covid-19A poll found public trust in UK gov ability to manage the pandemic is lowest worldwide, and I nearly fainted
From what I can tell, the latest data for the UK is from the 13th, so not within the preceding 5 working days. Moreover, the UK public doesn't seem to hold its govt. in the lowest regard, globally, and, even if they had, who cares? I can't verify this claim as being accurate, and therefore award no points to Russ.
6.In reference to this: https://www.theguardian.com/society/...-reduced-by-84The govt cut the budget to end FGM by 84%
Funds earmarked for tackling FGM have been reduced by roughly 84%, and this was reported on the 19th. While the information was provided on the 14th, it's possible to argue that it falls within the somewhat ambiguously defined time-frame established in the first tweet. Point to Russ.
7.Sadly accurate: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-politics-53472289 point to Russ.A Tory MP texted his intern to ask for “no strings” fun “pweeease”.
She replied that she was having a “bad mental health day”
He said maybe if she thought of “fun times” with him, she’d feel better. Nice.
8.This is in reference to reporting from The Observer: https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...n-tells-huaweiBrexit: and now we’re back in control, it was confirmed the govt cancelled the Huawei 5G project because Donald Trump told them to
It's partly misleading—because, according to the unsourced report, the govt. said geopolitical pressure (obv. from Trump/the US) contributed to the decision, but the additional remarks about maybe being able to revisit the issue once Trump is out of office indicate that that was a substantial contribution. It's a good illustration of the limits on the UK's sovereignty outside the EU, but I won't award any points.
9.Probably a reference to this article: https://www.theguardian.com/politics...es-coronavirusThe Institute for Govt found 61% of businesses have made no preparations at all and that “Britain is fatally ill-prepared” for Brexit
Report: https://www.instituteforgovernment.o...scale-task.pdf
The 61% figure is ascribed to the govt's own data as of June. Though the article heading indicates that "fatally ill-prepared" is a quote, I haven't been able to find the source of the quote—it doesn't seem to be from the report or from IfG's twitter account anyway. Still, point to Russ.
10.Twitter LinkThe business secretary said “Seamless trade is vital for our economy, boosting business, supporting jobs, and ensuring consumers get the best deal”
He was talking about England and Scotland. He still thinks abandoning seamless trade with the EU is a great idea
Point to Russ.
11.More or less accurate: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9629396.htmlThe govt used its majority to vote against protecting the NHS from being sold
The govt used its majority to vote against protection of agriculture and food standards
The govt used its majority to vote against parliament having oversight of any trade deals
I suspect the strength of the govt's justifications will be sorely tested in future negotiations with the US. Point to Russ anyway.
12.Accurate: https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/po...lection/21/07/And now corruption news, and we’ll start small: Robert Jenrick, who you might remember from previous episodes, was in charge of £25m regeneration scheme
60 of the 61 constituencies helped were Tory seats with small majorities, or Tory targets at the general election
Only 2 towns had Tory majorities over 10,000. One was Jenrick’s own seat
Comically corrupt. Should lead to an inquiry. Point to Russ.According to the NAO report, officials came up with seven criteria for deciding which towns should receive cash – including income, low productivity and exposure to Brexit.
While all 40 high-priority towns were automatically selected for funding, the remaining 61 were chosen at ministers’ discretion – 12 were officially classed as “low priority”, with nine of those marginals.
Steve Reed, the shadow communities secretary, told The Times: “There are now serious concerns that ministers may have allocated funding for political gain at the 2019 election, something which breaks strict rules on impartiality.
“The secretary of state must explain as a matter of urgency how ministers decided where to spend this money and why so many communities lost out.”
A spokesman for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government added: “As set out in the report the department put in place a robust process to identify towns for Town Deals, which ministers followed throughout.
“The selection criteria was set by officials and took into account factors including income deprivation, skills, productivity and investment opportunities.”
13.Broadly true: https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ng-app-success and https://www.computerweekly.com/news/...ct-tracing-app for example. We don't know whether this type of contact tracing is useful yet. Still, point to Russ.It was reported the Irish tracing app cost £773,000 and works
14.I can't verify the central claim as being completely true; though Baroness Dido Harding is indeed married to an MP, and is indeed overseeing the NHS's test-and-trace efforts, her role seems to be unpaid—and I can't determine whether the money has gone to any private company affiliated with her or with any MP. I'm also not sure whether the cost was £13m or £12m. Finally, some of this was reported before the 5 day time-frame. No point to Russ.The contract for managing our “world beating” app was given to the wife of a Tory MP, cost £13m in 4 months, it didn’t work
Even if you paid £50,000 to each programmer for 4 months work, £13m buys 260 programmers
The successful app used by Germany – which is open source – lists 17 programmers
15.More or less accurate: https://www.wired.co.uk/article/nhs-...-unlawful-data point to Russ.Also, the govt admitted its “world beating app” broke the law
This appears to be in reference to this report: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/h...-a9626381.html and I will generously award half a point because it appears to be about a council ie. local govt, but is probably true of the rest of the UK.A leaked govt report found our “world beating” trace system is failing
16.Can't verify these claims as being true. No points to Russ.Serco traced 59,000 contacts in 6 weeks, which is less than 1 contact per tracer per fortnight. They got £10bn for that
But the govt claimed it was a success because it managed to find an outbreak in its own call centre
17.Accurate; govt. tried to put notorious Tory failson—and destroyer of everything he touches—Chris Grayling in charge of the ISC, and was humiliated when Julian Lewis beat him, losing the whip in the process for rightly humiliating the govt. Who the fuck nominates Chris Grayling to lead any endeavor they want to see succeed? Point to Russ.Russia report news: The govt attempted to suborn parliament by fixing the appointment of Chris Grayling to chair the Intelligence Sub-Committee (ISC)
It failed, so suspended the MP who did get the job
18.Broadly accurate. The accurate remark about the govt's excuses for the delay being untrue was made by Kevan Jones, who sits on the ISC. The govt. did in fact announce that 900k public sector workers will receive a pay rise. Point to Russ.The ISC said the reasons given by the govt for delaying the report were “simply not true”
As the ISC released the report, the govt announced a pay rise for 900,000 workers.
19.Broadly accurate. Point to Russ.The report confirmed Russian interference in the Scottish Independence referendum
The report “reveals that no one in government knew if Russia interfered in or sought to influence the [Brexit] referendum, because they did not want to know”
20.This is accurate; see: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9630076.html It's also incredibly pathetic given that even the US under Trump at least made an effort to investigate the same type of Russian interference. Point to Russ, and shame on the English Trumpists.The ISC demanded an inquiry into Russian interference in Brexit
The govt immediately said no
21.Partly accurate—this article identifies her as the biggest Tory donor in British history among women: https://www.tatler.com/article/who-i...ry-party-donor. Half a point to Russ.this week it was reported the largest political donor in British history is a Russian Socialite who has paid £1.7m to the Tory party
She paid £160,000 for game of tennis with Boris Johnson
She paid £30,000 for dinner with Gavin Williamson. I know, it’s baffling
The company she runs has assets of £23,000 and liabilities of £8.4m, so it’s a mystery where all that donated money is coming from.
22.Broadly accurate (complex issue): https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...?sref=yMmXm5Iy the UK is facing a severe shortage of pallets of the type that will be required for trade with the EU, and has been struggling to ramp up production capacity. However, he said "palettes". Half a point and a disappointed shake of the head.And finally: it was reported that the UK doesn't even have enough palettes to transport goods after we leave the EU, cos we've been relying on theirs until now, and have neither the wood nor the treatment facilities required to build enough of our own.
> 70%, so he passes. Sorry RB, looks like your govt. sucks.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Most of the serious ones there you've not awarded a point to and most of those you have awarded a point to are either meaningless, out of context or a matter of interpretation.
There are two there that are really serious that I will address.
#7 - This is disgusting, the MP in question should definitely be investigated and probably have the whip suspended (be expelled from the party). I 100% condemn that unequivocally. (See Steely how its done)
#12 - You call this corrupt, I say you must be having a laugh! The definition is so wide and vague as to be meaningless!
Lets look at the claim. 60 of 61 English towns chosen were either "Tory seats" or "Tory targets" . . . yes that is true. But what does that mean? Is it unusual or unexpected? Well lets have a look shall we. The Tories won 65% of all seats in England but where are their seats and targets distributed? Where was the campaign distributed? Where are the seats that were neither Tory seats nor Tory targets?
Virtually every town in England was either a Tory seat or a Tory target!
The seats the Tories neither won nor targeted were confined pretty much to the cities. So to say that virtually every town chosen was a Tory target or Tory seat is meaningless since nearly every town in the country was a Tory target or Tory seat in the first place! That's about as meaningful as saying that every town chosen had a Tory candidate when the Tories stand in every constituency (bar the Speakers). In 2019 the Tories weren't writing off any towns. I'd be curious if you could without Googling name even a single town that was neither a Tory seat nor a Tory target?
Here you go Aimless, to help you so you don't need to Google it, here's a map of the 2019 election results. That should help narrow it down. Identify please the excluded towns that the Tories weren't targeting or didn't hold?
I'll give you another hint, the Tories colour on that map is blue and even if a constituency isn't blue doesn't mean it wasn't a target it just means they didn't win it.
Yes, it is, while I wouldn't call it a lockdown (which is why I said I'm hesitant to call the Dutch measures a lockdown), but that's semantics.
I didn't check the dates but according to you these actions didn't happen on the 16th of March though.
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
It happened on the 20th of March. Hancock lied whichever way you slice it.
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
Fair enough, saying its semantics I can respect and agree with.
As I said it rolled over the week.
16th was telling people they should stay at home, avoid all unnecessary travel, avoid public places like restaurants etc, work from home etc
18th was ordering schools to close (on the 20th)
20th was ordering all restaurants, pubs, bars, cinemas etc etc to close tonight.
Both the 18th and 20th were an order not a request.
RB you irredeemable fuckwit, how many times are we going to have to have this conversation about you needing to read before responding?
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
What did I not read?
Twat Hancock
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
