Do you remember when the New York Post was being held up as one fo the few media that was reporting real stories? (Other media either not posting them at all or mis-reporting.)
Last edited:
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
A gun to to head would be about the only possible encouragement that would suffice
I note that Labour has been extremely clear that contact is required between business and Whitehall.
But that it has to be open - above board, recorded (as appropriate), and without corruption.
Just where does PM failing to follow the rules, the law, fall on Johnson's "essential for government" scale?
The European Parliament has voted to ratify the EU's post-Brexit trade deal with Britain, but not without issuing bitter final warnings that trouble lies ahead in cross-Channel ties.
The official result of the vote was not to be published until tomorrow morning, but the decision was not in doubt.
"Today the European Parliament voted on the most far reaching agreement the EU has ever reached with a third country," the president of the assembly, David Sassoli, said.
"This can form the foundation on which we build a new forward-looking EU-UK relationship," he said, warning that MEPs would monitor the implementation of the deal and "not accept any backsliding from the UK government".
"You cannot have the advantages of EU membership while being on the outside. However, this agreement goes a long way to mitigate its worst consequences."
The vote ratifies the bare bones trade deal that was sealed on Christmas Eve after nine months of bad-tempered negotiations.
This will provide the framework for Britain's new relationship with the 27-member union, five years after British voters shocked the world by voting to end its 47-year membership.
But the EU parliament vote comes amid multiple feuds over the UK's implementation of Brexit agreements and angry finger-pointing about the supply of the Covid-19 vaccine from AstraZeneca.
"We know it will not always be easy and there is a lot of vigilance, diligence and hard work ahead of us," EU chief Ursula von der Leyen told a session of parliament ahead of the vote.
"But while today's vote is obviously an end, it is also the beginning of a new chapter," she said.
Britain left the EU on 30 January 2020, but its new life with Europe only really began after a transition period ended on 31 December, when London was no longer bound by the bloc's laws and rules.
Officially called a trade and cooperation agreement (TCA), the deal creates a new relationship that provides for zero tariffs and zero quotas on goods traded between the EU and UK.
But it is less ambitious than many Europeans had hoped for, with nothing on foreign policy and defence nor any commitment to close alignment on environment, health and other regulations.
More harmonised rules would have removed the requirement for some customs checks and paperwork on goods moving between the EU and UK, which has made business more burdensome and stirred unrest in Northern Ireland.
Cross-Channel trade volumes have plummeted, with EU imports from the UK down by nearly 50% and exports into Britain down 20% in the first two months of the deal's application.
The deal also makes no provision for financial services, threatening the City of London's preeminence as the European hub for capital markets, banking and investment.
MEPs had demanded extra time to vet the pact, which also includes a painfully won deal on fishing that saw EU boat crews lose much of their access to bountiful UK waters.
The European Parliament further delayed its vote in part to protest unilateral delays by London in implementing customs checks in Northern Ireland, one of the most contentious issues in the divorce.
Brussels has launched legal action against London over the Northern Ireland protocol, while a row over the supply of UK-based AstraZeneca's coronavirus jab has also embittered cross-Channel relations.
But, despite the acrimony, the European Commission, which handles ties with the UK for the Europeans, urged MEPs to approve the pact, arguing that it will better help keep Britain in line.
The UK, meanwhile, had made it clear that it would not approve any further delays, despite the risk of the whole deal being annulled if the MEPs did not vote by 30 April.
The official result of the vote was not to be published until tomorrow morning, but the decision was not in doubt.
"Today the European Parliament voted on the most far reaching agreement the EU has ever reached with a third country," the president of the assembly, David Sassoli, said.
"This can form the foundation on which we build a new forward-looking EU-UK relationship," he said, warning that MEPs would monitor the implementation of the deal and "not accept any backsliding from the UK government".
"You cannot have the advantages of EU membership while being on the outside. However, this agreement goes a long way to mitigate its worst consequences."
The vote ratifies the bare bones trade deal that was sealed on Christmas Eve after nine months of bad-tempered negotiations.
This will provide the framework for Britain's new relationship with the 27-member union, five years after British voters shocked the world by voting to end its 47-year membership.
But the EU parliament vote comes amid multiple feuds over the UK's implementation of Brexit agreements and angry finger-pointing about the supply of the Covid-19 vaccine from AstraZeneca.
"We know it will not always be easy and there is a lot of vigilance, diligence and hard work ahead of us," EU chief Ursula von der Leyen told a session of parliament ahead of the vote.
"But while today's vote is obviously an end, it is also the beginning of a new chapter," she said.
Britain left the EU on 30 January 2020, but its new life with Europe only really began after a transition period ended on 31 December, when London was no longer bound by the bloc's laws and rules.
Officially called a trade and cooperation agreement (TCA), the deal creates a new relationship that provides for zero tariffs and zero quotas on goods traded between the EU and UK.
But it is less ambitious than many Europeans had hoped for, with nothing on foreign policy and defence nor any commitment to close alignment on environment, health and other regulations.
More harmonised rules would have removed the requirement for some customs checks and paperwork on goods moving between the EU and UK, which has made business more burdensome and stirred unrest in Northern Ireland.
Cross-Channel trade volumes have plummeted, with EU imports from the UK down by nearly 50% and exports into Britain down 20% in the first two months of the deal's application.
The deal also makes no provision for financial services, threatening the City of London's preeminence as the European hub for capital markets, banking and investment.
MEPs had demanded extra time to vet the pact, which also includes a painfully won deal on fishing that saw EU boat crews lose much of their access to bountiful UK waters.
The European Parliament further delayed its vote in part to protest unilateral delays by London in implementing customs checks in Northern Ireland, one of the most contentious issues in the divorce.
Brussels has launched legal action against London over the Northern Ireland protocol, while a row over the supply of UK-based AstraZeneca's coronavirus jab has also embittered cross-Channel relations.
But, despite the acrimony, the European Commission, which handles ties with the UK for the Europeans, urged MEPs to approve the pact, arguing that it will better help keep Britain in line.
The UK, meanwhile, had made it clear that it would not approve any further delays, despite the risk of the whole deal being annulled if the MEPs did not vote by 30 April.
Another chapter in the "How to break up a union by ignoring three quarters of the nations and displaying extreme ignorance" saga.
NHS app will be used as Covid ‘vaccine passport’ for foreign travel
Grant Shapps says work has started on app many people already use to book GP appointments
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/28/covid-nhs-app-will-be-used-as-vaccine-passport-for-foreign-travel
Note: the NHS app is not available in Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland! And, at least for Wales, there is no broadly equivalent app.
And, what if we do not have a smart phone?
NHS app will be used as Covid ‘vaccine passport’ for foreign travel
Grant Shapps says work has started on app many people already use to book GP appointments
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/28/covid-nhs-app-will-be-used-as-vaccine-passport-for-foreign-travel
Note: the NHS app is not available in Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland! And, at least for Wales, there is no broadly equivalent app.
And, what if we do not have a smart phone?
Does the UK know that its Covid passports will have no validity in the EU?...or indeed anywhere outside the UK?.
Here is one of Johnson's earlier sordid jibes
Apparently "Mandy" did something Johnson never will, resigned over sleaze.
Apparently "Mandy" did something Johnson never will, resigned over sleaze.
Looking for historical comparisons suitable to use for Johnson, should we substitute Judas for Captain Oates?Here is one of Johnson's earlier sordid jibes
Apparently "Mandy" did something Johnson never will, resigned over sleaze.
We have already seen references to St Peter in the number 10 denied three times comments.
Hooray!
Tory sleaze row: Electoral Commission announces investigation into Johnson flat makeover – live
Tory sleaze row: Electoral Commission announces investigation into Johnson flat makeover – live
That doesn’t matter in the slightest. Most EU countries want to tap into the U.K. travel industry. They’ll let U.K. residents in, absolutely no problem.
He couldn't have got that more wrong, confusing a domestic program of vaccination with future economic success. Italy has always run rings around us where true success is concerned.
I remember almost 70 years ago at the time when our economic failures had come to a head, in one of the last newspapers I ever read, the London Evening Standard, they had a brief editorial commenting on the state of Italy. It ran on these lines:
"Italy's 50th government since 1945 has just collapsed. Much of the time they've run without a government and everything appears to be a shambles. The Italians routinely ignore all their laws yet no-one does anything about that.
So why is it that all their citizens appear to be so happy, stylish and prosperous?"
That editorial succinctly grasped what is really important in how a country runs, how happy its citizens are with there own lives.
.
Of course the EU want UK tourism. It depends on what the terms are. While I hope we are in the end game of this epidemic, I am not really confident that CV21 is not just around the corner. The infection rates globally are not decreasing and the longer it goes on, with high infection rates, the greater the chances of a new nasty.
Have been wondering at what point some variant would eventually get named Covid-21/22 or whatever.
Liz Saville Roberts, the Plaid Cymru leader at Westminster, also reads out the seven Nolan principles of public life. What happens when a PM goes rogue, given that that the PM is the judge of the ministerial code?
Johnson says people have a choice. The Labour government in Wales is failing, he says.
Johnson should know what a non sequitur is.
Johnson says people have a choice. The Labour government in Wales is failing, he says.
Johnson should know what a non sequitur is.
According to a rather pro smartphone survey, only 84% have a smartphone. However some 65% of them dont use anything like the data they are paying for, pointing to another fact. That a large proportion of smartphone owners use them only simplistically, mainly for phone calls, texting and snapping. The more complex apps are widely ignored, so probably something over 25% wouldn't use a phone app passport. The same survey reports that almost half the over 55s don't use a smartphone, which alone brings into doubt their claim that 84% own a smartphone.
Shapps says, "app many people already use to book GP appointments", but his many isn't all that many since the app is riddled with problems. I came across a review site for it and every entry was angrily complaining about it, not one single favourable review.
Having been given a smartphone I attempted to load and use that GP app and it took several attempts over days to get it loaded due largely to lack of an approval code supposedly immediately sent back to me. It in fact turned up three days after requested!
But it still left me no further ahead since I was then left with an app awaiting my GP practice to approve my access, promised with 24 hours to appear in my app. Five days later it hadn't happened so after rechecking that all permissions were favourable, I phoned them. They assured me they'd done that but repeated the approval, but still nothing received, the app indicating the approval was in process by the GP practice.
So I phoned the support line of the company who provided the app. They checked it out online and assured me that all was well and I would get the approval in a day or two. But of course that never happened, even a week later. So I emailed that support centre explaining their advice hadn't worked, but the reply to it was to repeat that it would eventually arrive. That was another week ago and it hasn't. Clearly even the apps designers haven't a clue of how to solve its many failings.
Aware of all the apps failings, as mentioned before my GP practice has established a new website with all of the apps promised facilities, but none of its failings, so I'm now back to far more sensible computer access. Not much help at an airport of course!
.
the problem happens when they return home. Would they have to self isolate for 10 days? Would they have to pay £200 for their PCR test?
There are many people who do not have smart phones - and for a variety of reasons.
Physical issues - they are not easy for blind people to use, for one example.
Signal issues - if you don't have a signal where you live, what would be the point? And there are quite a lot of locations round here without a signal.
Health issues - people with various forms of infirmity might be unable to use them, or even charge them. Yet there is no reason they can't go on a holiday.
Cost issues - yes, they are pretty inexpensive at the bottom end. But add in the cost of some sort of network access, some sort of charger, etc., it mounts up as an extra cost.
Freedom issues - Johnson proclaims himself as libertarian. Then imposes the numerous impacts that smart phones have in terms as above plus various trackong issues, etc. (Despite Apple enhancing protection just yesterday, you don't have the same options with a bottom-of-range or secondhand phone.)
Then we have ask, what happens if, when you get to the point at which it requires to be checked, there is a technical issue? Network down. Phone runs out of charge. Phone gets dropped. App fails to launch. Screen deemed too dark to read by person or machine that is supposed to do so.
Entirely the wrong way round. First produce a workable paper system - perhaps you get a certificate from your GP surgery. Then offer smart phone access to speed it up, make it easier, etc.
And what if you got vaccinated elsewhere? Possibly even just in Wales if the system is England-based. Or anywhere else around the globe.
We have for a long time now been in a phase of introducing inadequately developed technologies.
It started years ago with speech to text on computers which produced around 92 % accuracy which was effectively useless since who wants to have to read through what they've just spoken at length and correct at least every twelfth word, often more.
That led to voice control of cars, TVs, phones and now personal assistants, which works so badly that it's become a sketch staple of comedians, amusing us with the often hilarious responses from said cars, phones and personal assistants.
And now to the weakest technology of all, self driving cars which are back in the news again today. After a decade of promising full self driving level 5 within a couple of years, all we have is a nominal level 3 which in practice is more like level 2 in most circumstances, so not worth bothering with for most people.
The announced restrictions being placed on its use in the next year or two are such that I can't see anyone using it. For example limited to truck speeds on motorways. Driver alertness checks every 20 seconds, no response and the car stops. How many will be happy with being in the slow lane between two 40 tonne trucks with constant need to respond to the car in some way or be suddenly brought to a halt with a 40 tonner bearing down on them?
We need to get to an age when all technology is fully proven and using standardised systems and protocols before being marketed, yes smartphones from Apple and Android, I'm looking at you in particular.
.
Last edited:
true but we have to make a start somewhere.
Within months, we should have stats to support better speed on motorways.