Jump to content

Don't Miss a Beat

Join the UK's most passionate festival community. Keep up with the latest conversations, line-up rumours, and music news.

250,000+ Members

Connect with a massive network of fellow festival-goers.

Lively Discussions

Thousands of active topics on music, campsites, and tips.

Hot Rumours & News

Hear about secret sets and lineup drops before anyone else.

Create Free Account
OR
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎

When will this shit end?


Chrisp1986

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

We just have to follow the data. I suspect we'll actually be fine for a good while once everyone is vaccinated. 

If I had to bet, we'll be fully open by September, but start administering all the second gen vaccines as boosters and to deal with the new variants in late autumn/early winter this year.

And then we'll probably be done for a while. We'll see.

This feels spot-on timing wise based on all the leaks coming out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, zahidf said:

 

That last quote .. and there we go. They are going to essentially open up what they can control slowly, but realise that people are going to take their social lives into their own hands. It’s a win/win scenario for them, with the key being no blame if it goes wrong and hospitalisations and deaths start to climb again (but they won’t!). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Yes, very strongly by Marr for once.

And he dismissed the conclusions that he acted unlawfully as of no importance.

This government again thinks it is above the law - these are dangerous people.

Am I missing something or was it just them taking a few weeks to publish the contracts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
Just now, zahidf said:

Am I missing something or was it just them taking a few weeks to publish the contracts?

essentially yeah.

The scandal here isn't really with the lateness - because shit happens in a pandemic - it's with them not publishing when they were asked about it, and then spending taxpayers money defending their lateness/refusal to publish in court.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, zahidf said:

Am I missing something or was it just them taking a few weeks to publish the contracts?

Pull the other one...

They have the resources to completely finalise contracts worth 18 billion pounds but don't have the resource to spend 1 minute uploading the documents to the tender database within the statutory 30 days?

The reason they didn't do it was to avoid scrutiny and had it not been for this legal case being brought against them the delays would be even longer and there would be more that we don't know.

The government should be leading by example, not getting into the habit of breaking its own laws.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Matt42 said:

Coupled with younger people missing their friends and family badly and wanting to make up for lost time.

We are bound to get a new variant which isn’t as effective so we need a new vaccine, but that happens with the flu every year - we don’t go into lockdown yearly for the flu.

If a new summer variant of the flu turned up in April this year we would go straight back into full lockdown. The problem is NHS capacity. And there’s a lag on that (as people are often hospitalised for months after catching it) - if we just open up enough to keep us on the cliff edge, anything new that will impact on the NHS will push us back into lockdown.

Not to mention the staff that have been working 50-60 hour weeks for a year and are still doing so, in horrible conditions, and we’ve gone from “clap for the NHS” to “nah they can keep doing that so I can go pub”.

17 hours ago, jparx said:

So hold on, according to that 44% of people left the house for non-allowed reasons? That doesn’t suggest very high compliance to me..? And to be honest, 44% of people bending/breaking the rules seems much more aligned with where I live.

That sounds about right. Plenty of people breaking the rules, but a (small) majority still following them. It’s not 96% compliance but it’s also not “everyone is breaking the rules, they must be as me and all my mates are”.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Pull the other one...

They have the resources to completely finalise contracts worth 18 billion pounds but don't have the resource to spend 1 minute uploading the documents to the tender database within the statutory 30 days?

The reason they didn't do it was to avoid scrutiny and had it not been for this legal case being brought against them the delays would be even longer and there would be more that we don't know.

The government should be leading by example, not getting into the habit of breaking its own laws.

 

Regardless of severity they still broke the law, they are the government they should be following them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Copperface said:

Not being funny and just to avoid confusion, the managed isolation measures are not up for review in March and are not anything to do with the Coronavirus Act (which does have a review in March but will undoubtedly be passed).

They are a Statutory Instrument Reg and can be switched on or off at any time, but unrelated to the Act which is due to expire in 2022.

Ok I should have said that the hotel contracts and pricing are in place till the end of March and those are being reviewed then.

I still think it will be scrapped around then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Paul ™ said:

Ok I should have said that the hotel contracts and pricing are in place till the end of March and those are being reviewed then.

I still think it will be scrapped around then.

Yeah, no problem. It's just that a lot people think that the Coronavirus Act is used for any of the restrictions and that it'll be scrapped in March. It isn't and won't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
Just now, JoeyT said:

Good news in Bristol

 

hmmmm ... not sure how effective they've been. Was dead when I was there yesterday.

Also, has been dreadfully publicised. I only found out by chance on Friday night that my postcode was in the list - but hadn't been listed when I'd looked a week or so before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, xxialac said:

Yeah, that's scientifically illiterate isn't it.

He's also dismissed the reports on the UK having the Euros

https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/uk-euro-2020-host-matt-hancock-b920637.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1613901147

From the quote that he "hasn't seen anything on that" it's possible he just isn't upto date with the latest or an offer of assistance has been made but its not quite what's been reported.

1 hour ago, sisco said:

I just don’t get it anymore.  The idea was we needed lots to be vaccinated for things to open up.  Will we get to the point the following summer where everyone has to be re-vaccinated, and the summer after that etc....

Surely once most are protected, the NHS won’t be overwhelmed and the country can get back to normality?! 

The thinking is that with jabs for all by end of July then most won't actually be protected until August.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, xxialac said:

Yes, very strongly by Marr for once.

And he dismissed the conclusions that he acted unlawfully as of no importance.

This government again thinks it is above the law - these are dangerous people.

And Keir Starmer says he won't be calling for a resignation, because the people "don't want it." Keir Starmer is a dangerous Labour leader atm, I thought they were supposed to be "no more mr nice guy" and yet there's proof that Matt Hancock has been unlawful in handing contracts to tory donors and friends, something he has been bringing up at PMQs recently yet this isn't enought to call for a resignation. 

I know it most falls on the Tory's committing the crimes and injustice, but Keir really values Tory voters and tabloids opinion as those are the people who oppose Labour doing stuff like calling for a resignation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Leyrulion said:

From the quote that he "hasn't seen anything on that" it's possible he just isn't upto date with the latest or an offer of assistance has been made but its not quite what's been reported.

The thinking is that with jabs for all by end of July then most won't actually be protected until August.

Most?! How’s that possible.  Surely only the last 2 weeks of July won’t be protected?! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ace56blaa said:

And Keir Starmer says he won't be calling for a resignation, because the people "don't want it." Keir Starmer is a dangerous Labour leader atm, I thought they were supposed to be "no more mr nice guy" and yet there's proof that Matt Hancock has been unlawful in handing contracts to tory donors and friends, something he has been bringing up at PMQs recently yet this isn't enought to call for a resignation. 

I know it most falls on the Tory's committing the crimes and injustice, but Keir really values Tory voters and tabloids opinion as those are the people who oppose Labour doing stuff like calling for a resignation. 

Or he doesn't think it's much of a story or that people will care about contracts being put on the website a few weeks late in the middle of a pandemic.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, ace56blaa said:

And Keir Starmer says he won't be calling for a resignation, because the people "don't want it." Keir Starmer is a dangerous Labour leader atm, I thought they were supposed to be "no more mr nice guy" and yet there's proof that Matt Hancock has been unlawful in handing contracts to tory donors and friends, something he has been bringing up at PMQs recently yet this isn't enought to call for a resignation. 

I know it most falls on the Tory's committing the crimes and injustice, but Keir really values Tory voters and tabloids opinion as those are the people who oppose Labour doing stuff like calling for a resignation. 

I think a lot of Starmer's decisions are based more on what focus groups and polling are saying at the moment, then what is actually the right thing to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Latest Activity

    • Is anything said we need to be aware of?
    • Just listened to the new Madonna album, it would be a catastrophe if that isn't played on the pyramid!
    • Restore getting more than Lib Dems is not good.
    • https://x.com/amirtibon/status/2083054470871535853   Some thoughts on the Gaza agreement announced overnight, which despite my reservations and concerns, I hope will be implemented. 1. Donald Trump is trying to collect "wins" and "achievements" ahead of the midterm elections. His party is entering that election at a disadvantage, but because Democrats may choose weak and unpopular candidates in specific states, much like Republicans did in 2022, there's a reason for Trump to at least try achieving a surprising result like the one Biden secured four years ago.   2. The will to provide Trump such a "win" was an important motivation for all sides involved in this agreement: Hamas, Netanyahu, Qatar, Egypt, UAE and Turkey. All of them hope, each for their own reasons, that the transactional president will remember their role in the agreement and the positive media coverage it has generated and will continue to generate. You can like it or not, but that's the nature of diplomacy, especially in the Middle East, under Trump.   3. Netanyahu and his band of liars in the Israeli media (and the last few suckers in the American media still buying his spin) are already trying to oversell the agreement and present it in terms that contradict the Board of Peace statements and briefings. Of course, the October 7 Prime Minister can't just say the truth on this one, which goes something like: "I'm trying to stay on good terms with Trump ahead of an election here in Israel that will determine my personal fate and whether or not I go to jail in 2027."   4. For Hamas, the agreement is a way to buy time and survive, which is basically the organization's overarching goal since October 7. They lost most of their leadership and thousands of their fighters; they will also, I believe, give up some of their weapons to the new Gaza-based Palestinian government, which is a good thing. But at the bottom of all their decisions is a simple calculation: being able to say, "we committed the most deadly and humiliating attack against Israel since the start of the conflict, and survived as a movement and an organization to tell about it."   5. Hamas was able to say that yesterday, before the agreement was signed, and it can also say that today, after the conclusion of the negotiations. So in that regard, the agreement is preferable to the murky post-war reality that preceded it, in which Hamas was recruiting again thousands of young fighters, holding on to all its weapons, and controlling 99% of Gaza's population, making money off people buying fuel and cigarettes. Changing even a part of that terrible reality, by collecting some of the weapons and allowing progress on reconstruction under a non-Hamas government, is better. It means coming to terms with the fact that Israel under this government failed to dismantle Hamas and allowed its survival even before this agreement was signed.   6. Do I think the agreement will be fully implemented over the next 300 days, as I understand the timeline? I'm highly skeptical. But I'm also asking: what are the alternatives? Netanyahu, in his quest for political survival at all costs, ignored David Ben-Gurion's national security strategy of seeking short and decisive wars, which was based on Israel's unique internal and external challenges that make it dangerous for this country to have long wars of attrition. The result is an Israel that is hated, isolated and denounced around the world like never before, and is totally reliant on the support of one man (TRUMP) to avoid crushing international sanctions. Going to war in Gaza once again based on the same promise of "finishing Hamas," which this government failed to achieve after three long years, would have been suicidal unless Trump promised his full backing. And Trump, for good reasons, can't give such a commitment after his bitter experience with Netanyahu in Iran and Lebanon.   7. For me and my family, these are all very personal, not only political, questions. My six-year-old daughter will start school on the Gaza border in exactly one month, as we rebuild our life in the same home where Hamas tried to murder us on October 7. We've learned over the years to be highly skeptical of premature victory announcements and diplomatic celebrations. When these things collapse under the cynical realities of the conflict, most of those announcing them are not around to face the consequences. Still, I don't see a better alternative to the 20-Point Plan that Trump presented last year, at least not with Israel's current position of isolation and exhaustion under this government. So I have some hope that the agreement will succeed, even partially, and deliver a period of quiet. For us on the border, that would be significant after three years of war and trauma. And maybe in the long run, with different Israeli and Palestinian leadership, this will become a first step in a broader positive change for the region.
    • Until they're through the first round of votes there's no point believing any reports about who'll win.
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...