COVID19

[Digby]

I disagree, they should try not to be anti government, but I wouldn’t go so far as saying pro government.

They should be spreading the message around the crisis but not parroting the government on everything

That you'd try to be more of a mind that we're all in this together and you have a government in charge of a national crisis that you'd hope to support, whatever their political bent, doesn't mean you'd parrot them on everything. All I'd be considering is you'd try to be supportive, that doesn't rule out you might fail in those efforts, and that some of those failures would be for perfectly sound reasons.

Well indeed. But being supportive and being pro government are not the same thing...

Like here: almost every media outlet reports only on the fact there's hardly any deaths comparatively. And how great the government has done. And how badly the mayor of Budapest has done. Because they're all pro government.

But 2 places (online only) report on it as yes, we've done well, but...

You'd want to be supportive of all institutions that can or do tie us together, and government is one of those no matter who happens to be in place

[Stom]

That you'd try to be more of a mind that we're all in this together and you have a government in charge of a national crisis that you'd hope to support, whatever their political bent, doesn't mean you'd parrot them on everything. All I'd be considering is you'd try to be supportive, that doesn't rule out you might fail in those efforts, and that some of those failures would be for perfectly sound reasons.

Well indeed. But being supportive and being pro government are not the same thing...

Like here: almost every media outlet reports only on the fact there's hardly any deaths comparatively. And how great the government has done. And how badly the mayor of Budapest has done. Because they're all pro government.

But 2 places (online only) report on it as yes, we've done well, but...

You'd want to be supportive of all institutions that can or do tie us together, and government is one of those no matter who happens to be in place

Well yes, but there is a big difference between supportive of government and pro government

[Digby]

I don't want to be getting overly technical here, but I think there's a slim chance Faisal Islam is pointing out Dominic Cummings is fucking weirdo. Also worth noting if Cummings has done what one might infer he's in significant breach of the Cabinet Office code of conduct for Special Advisors.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1265 ... 11845.html

[Digby]

Well indeed. But being supportive and being pro government are not the same thing...

Like here: almost every media outlet reports only on the fact there's hardly any deaths comparatively. And how great the government has done. And how badly the mayor of Budapest has done. Because they're all pro government.

But 2 places (online only) report on it as yes, we've done well, but...

You'd want to be supportive of all institutions that can or do tie us together, and government is one of those no matter who happens to be in place

Well yes, but there is a big difference between supportive of government and pro government

Pro government, not pro a government

[Which Tyler]

Right - letter to MP time. I know I'm forgetting something, but can't think what it is right now - any ideas?

Dear Mr Robertson

I am writing to you to express my deep concern around Mr Cummings, and some of the arguments put forward in defence of his actions. For clarity, I’ll bullet point my questions, rather than lengthy prose.

1. If Mr Cummings was “just being a good parent” – does that mean that all those parents who followed the government’s instructions are bad parents?

2. When exactly did following your instincts allow one to break the law with impunity?

3. When exactly did dangerous driving become the standard form of eye test – as opposed to, for example, the ability to read a number plate at 75 feet, or a simple Snellen chart, easily found, with instructions, from all good search engines.

4. This same question goes for Mr Gove, who, this morning, has claimed to use the same tactic to test his eyes.

5. Given the decision to break the law twice in order to test his eyesight (dangerous driving and breaking self-isolation whilst symptomatic) – why would anyone who feels themselves to be dangerous to drive, then take their child to a beauty spot as part of that eye test?

6. Is such child endangerment another indication of being a good parent?

7. Given that Ms Wakefield has family living just a couple of streets away from their London home – why were they not considered good enough as childcare option?

8. Were none of Mr Cummings’ family capable of driving? To come and collect the child in the event of necessity?

9. When Mr Cummings first drove to Durham, could we please have confirmation on whether he was strongly symptomatic, and thus unsafe to drive; or asymptomatic or mildly so, thus rendering the trip unnecessary in the first place.

10. Given that both Mr Cummings and Mr Gove have publicly admitted having broken the law (dangerous driving) do you think that a public inquiry, or a CPS inquiry would be the more appropriate.

11. It is obviously imperative that Mr Cummings should resign or be fired – do you feel that this should also be the case for some of those who have defended his actions? Including those who have defended it by claiming to have broken the law themselves?

Thank you

[Which Tyler]

I slipped, and fell into my car, with my wife and child...

[Sandydragon]

I don't want to be getting overly technical here, but I think there's a slim chance Faisal Islam is pointing out Dominic Cummings is fucking weirdo. Also worth noting if Cummings has done what one might infer he's in significant breach of the Cabinet Office code of conduct for Special Advisors.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1265 ... 11845.html

Could also throw the Road Traffic Act in there as well.

[Digby]

Right - letter to MP time. I know I'm forgetting something, but can't think what it is right now - any ideas?

Dear Mr Robertson

I am writing to you to express my deep concern around Mr Cummings, and some of the arguments put forward in defence of his actions. For clarity, I’ll bullet point my questions, rather than lengthy prose.

1. If Mr Cummings was “just being a good parent” – does that mean that all those parents who followed the government’s instructions are bad parents?

2. When exactly did following your instincts allow one to break the law with impunity?

3. When exactly did dangerous driving become the standard form of eye test – as opposed to, for example, the ability to read a number plate at 75 feet, or a simple Snellen chart, easily found, with instructions, from all good search engines.

4. This same question goes for Mr Gove, who, this morning, has claimed to use the same tactic to test his eyes.

5. Given the decision to break the law twice in order to test his eyesight (dangerous driving and breaking self-isolation whilst symptomatic) – why would anyone who feels themselves to be dangerous to drive, then take their child to a beauty spot as part of that eye test?

6. Is such child endangerment another indication of being a good parent?

7. Given that Ms Wakefield has family living just a couple of streets away from their London home – why were they not considered good enough as childcare option?

8. Were none of Mr Cummings’ family capable of driving? To come and collect the child in the event of necessity?

9. When Mr Cummings first drove to Durham, could we please have confirmation on whether he was strongly symptomatic, and thus unsafe to drive; or asymptomatic or mildly so, thus rendering the trip unnecessary in the first place.

10. Given that both Mr Cummings and Mr Gove have publicly admitted having broken the law (dangerous driving) do you think that a public inquiry, or a CPS inquiry would be the more appropriate.

11. It is obviously imperative that Mr Cummings should resign or be fired – do you feel that this should also be the case for some of those who have defended his actions? Including those who have defended it by claiming to have broken the law themselves?

Thank you

You might want to note his breach in code of conduct for Special Advisors by editing his blog

[Digby]

I don't want to be getting overly technical here, but I think there's a slim chance Faisal Islam is pointing out Dominic Cummings is fucking weirdo. Also worth noting if Cummings has done what one might infer he's in significant breach of the Cabinet Office code of conduct for Special Advisors.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1265 ... 11845.html

Could also throw the Road Traffic Act in there as well.

Indeed you could, and he'd never see it coming

[Galfon]

You could also throw in breach of excercising rule, as he admitted the family (3 persons) left the car to walk around for 15 minutes at Barnard Castle, and also on the return to Durham as the bairn needed a wee...not a quickie at the side of the road, but a family wander round the woods.
So unfortunate to be 'spotted' on both occasions, presumably by characters in dark glasses, ill fitting coats and false beards.

'People are not permitted to venture far from their home while exercising and should remain local, refraining from travelling to a destination to do their exercise.

As per government guidance, groups of more than two people are not allowed, so any exercise should be conducted alone, or with a member of your household.'

[fivepointer]

Have Cummings actions and his comments from yesterday, along with the support of the PM and a number of senior colleagues, been helpful in reinforcing the need for the public to heed Government advice.?

Is it reasonable for an individual to determine what they regard as doing the right thing, rather than to observe the letter and spirit of the regulations and guidance which are there for the benefit of all of us?

[Stones of granite]

If anyone was in doubt about the lack of credibility at the heart of the UK Government, this short video will resolve that for them.
You can almost see his nose grow as he speaks.

[Galfon]

Is it reasonable for an individual to determine what they regard as doing the right thing, rather than to observe the letter and spirit of the regulations and guidance which are there for the benefit of all of us?

No, the thing deemed to be right should be in accordance with the spirit of the rules and guidance, which is to contribute in every way possible to reducing the spread of the disease, exceptions due to extreme cirumstances notwithstanding.
However, as it appears now the interpretation of 'spirit' can vary significantly, depending on personal belief of self-worth and importance, there may be a significant number of the 10,000 or so miscreants who have received fines in scenarios not too disimilar from this one, may consider themselves to have been somewhat stiffed by the authorities and feeling more dischuffed than before.

[Son of Mathonwy]

If anyone was in doubt about the lack of credibility at the heart of the UK Government, this short video will resolve that for them.
You can almost see his nose grow as he speaks.

Nice of the presenter to let him off the hook after he squirmed a little. Could have at least made him utter the word "no" (I have not actually driven 60 miles to test my eyesight).

[Puja]

If anyone was in doubt about the lack of credibility at the heart of the UK Government, this short video will resolve that for them.
You can almost see his nose grow as he speaks.

Jesus fuck.

Just came across this on my FB. I'm not sure whether the person operating the .gov Facebook advertising is a troll, engaging in some impressive viral marketing to get people to comment and share, or just unbelievably naive, but the timing and wording of this ad is just... <chef's kiss>

Screenshot_20200526-144535_Facebook.jpg

Puja

[Digby]

Justice 4 Britain

Less Cummings, more goings!

[Puja]

Justice 4 Britain

Less Cummings, more goings!

IMG-20200526-WA0000.jpg

[Which Tyler]

Anyone remember that time about oh - three weeks, and half a lifetime ago? We were all aghast that America was having to send Doctors out there telling people not to drink bleach to protect against coronavirus?
Welp - we're now sending opticians out there to say that driving 60 miles with your kid in the car is not an evidence-based approach to testing your visual acuity!

[Puja]

Anyone remember that time about oh - three weeks, and half a lifetime ago? We were all aghast that America was having to send Doctors out there telling people not to drink bleach to protect against coronavirus?
Welp - we're now sending opticians out there to say that driving 60 miles with your kid in the car is not an evidence-based approach to testing your visual acuity!

Are there actually messages from opticians?! Link if you can, as I know someone who'd find that fucking hilarious.

Puja

[Son of Mathonwy]

Looking at the latest ONS numbers (and others from Scotland and Northern Ireland):
Up to 15 May, we have:
Positive test UK Covid-19 deaths: 33,998
All UK Covid-19 deaths: 45,231
So the total UK number is 33% higher than the government number. (31% last time)

Assuming this ratio holds to date, we have as of 26 May:
Positive test UK Covid-19 deaths: 37,048
All UK Covid-19 deaths (extrapolated): 49,289

Ultimately a more important number is the excess deaths for any cause, if we assume Covid-19 is the main driver of the excess.
Up to 15 May, we have:
All UK Covid-19 deaths: 45,231
Excess deaths compared with 5 year average: 59,145
Total excess deaths are 31% higher than ONS reported Covid-19 deaths.

Assuming this ratio holds to date, we have:
All UK excess deaths (presumably due to Covid-19) to 26 May: 64,451
which is 74% higher than the government number. (74% last time)

[Son of Mathonwy]

Last week's prediction:

For 15 May (based on 8 May ONS + 15 May gov numbers):
All UK, positive tests only: actual = 33,998
All UK, deaths involving COVID-19: prediction: 44,640
All UK, excess deaths: prediction: 59,085

Comparing with today's actual figures (for 15 May):
All UK, positive tests only: actual = 33,998
All UK, deaths involving COVID-19: prediction: 44,640 actual: 45,231 actual/prediction: 1.3%
All UK, excess deaths: prediction: 59,085 actual: 59,145 actual/prediction: 0.1%

For next week:
Prediction for 22 May (based on 15 May ONS + 22 May gov numbers):
All UK, positive tests only: actual = 36,393
All UK, deaths involving COVID-19: prediction: 48,417
All UK, excess deaths: prediction: 63,311

[Son of Mathonwy]

This is pretty funny. Cummings altering his blog from last year to make him seem prescient:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... rus-threat

[Digby]

This is pretty funny. Cummings altering his blog from last year to make him seem prescient:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... rus-threat

It's another sackable offence

[Which Tyler]

Are there actually messages from opticians?! Link if you can, as I know someone who'd find that fucking hilarious.

There's also this from the chair of the Police Federation of England and Wales


Is that enough? I'm sure google can provide more - I just couldn't be bothered to go past the first page.

[Son of Mathonwy]

New cases today: 4,043

Too early to draw conclusions, but this is the highest since 8th May.