Saturday 27th & Sunday 28th June 2020
Posted: Sat 27 Jun, 2020 8:25 am
Morning all.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... ve-england" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;“” This highlights the chasm between government rhetoric and its ability to deliver. A week ago, Hancock promised the Commons that data-sharing rules would not be allowed to get in the way of saving lives. No 10 adviser Dominic Cummings, meanwhile, has routinely touted his own supposed brilliance with data, writing excitedly about cognitive technologies and superforecasting. But faced with the first real-world data challenge of his reign, he has failed.
Public health teams don’t need a superforecast or cutting edge AI. They just need to know where people with infections live and work and where they have been.
At the heart of the government’s data operation is the new Joint Biosecurity Centre. At the beginning of June, Hancock admitted that it did not yet exist, but it is already on its second leader. It will be responsible for getting information to councils, but there is confusion about how it will work with both local government and Public Health England.
One of the most baffling aspects of the government’s response to the pandemic is its obsession with setting up new structures from scratch rather than working with what they already have. It caused confusion and has wasted effort and, above all, precious time, in setting up testing centres, laboratories, supply chains and contact tracing, all divorced from existing local government and NHS operations and dependent on a maze of private sector contracts.
The Joint Biosecurity Centre looks set to continue this folly. It won’t be fully operational until at least the end of the summer, and it seems foolhardy to insert a new, untested body into the pandemic machinery at precisely the time when a potential increase in infections from the relaxation of restrictions and the return of schools will put the system under huge stress.
Meanwhile, councils are preparing their local outbreak management plans. Trading standards, environmental health, social care and many more people besides are collaborating with the public health teams to ensure their response to any flare-ups is quick and robust. But they need the data. “”
It's not baffling at all though, we know why they're doing it, because ideology.frog222 wrote:Move Fast And Break Things !
(YES, it’s Cummings .)
https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... ve-england" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
One of the most baffling aspects of the government’s response to the pandemic is its obsession with setting up new structures from scratch rather than working with what they already have. It caused confusion and has wasted effort and, above all, precious time, in setting up testing centres, laboratories, supply chains and contact tracing, all divorced from existing local government and NHS operations and dependent on a maze of private sector contracts.
Completely agreed on the "not baffling" . The challenge for the Opposition is to find different ways of getting that through to the voters and the remaining One Nation Tories. Some will distrust the word 'ideology', but if we suggest it's like a 'religion' or a 'flat earth cult' that may click better ...gilsey wrote:It's not baffling at all though, we know why they're doing it, because ideology.frog222 wrote:Move Fast And Break Things !
(YES, it’s Cummings .)https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... ve-england" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;One of the most baffling aspects of the government’s response to the pandemic is its obsession with setting up new structures from scratch rather than working with what they already have. It caused confusion and has wasted effort and, above all, precious time, in setting up testing centres, laboratories, supply chains and contact tracing, all divorced from existing local government and NHS operations and dependent on a maze of private sector contracts.
I fear they will learn nothing from the disastrous outcome of their real-life experiment.
A spokesperson for Jenrick said on Friday that Ofer was a “family friend” and that the minister had notified officials, who advised him to step back from the decision on Sirius.
But the spokesperson did not say when Jenrick recused himself and the Guardian understands he retained oversight of Sirius’s request for support for at least six months after the meeting.
They've even locked him out of Mumsnet.AnatolyKasparov wrote:Graham Linehan banned from Twitter - long overdue tbph.
How long is "the matter is closed" going to be tenable, I wonder?RogerOThornhill wrote:Almost like a pattern of dodgy behaviour is beginning to emerge here...
Robert Jenrick admits Israeli billionaire in donor row is family friend
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ily-friend" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
A spokesperson for Jenrick said on Friday that Ofer was a “family friend” and that the minister had notified officials, who advised him to step back from the decision on Sirius.
But the spokesperson did not say when Jenrick recused himself and the Guardian understands he retained oversight of Sirius’s request for support for at least six months after the meeting.
His thread on mumsnet about being banned from twitter is still on there and he has posted replies to posters within the last hour, so I don't think it's true he's been locked out of mumsnet. It would be very sad indeed if a forum set up predominantly for women to talk to each other about things that concern them were to start censoring conversations about women's rights issues. He posts in the feminism 'chat' section where he has been welcomed by the vast majority of regular posters as far as I can tell.refitman wrote:They've even locked him out of Mumsnet.AnatolyKasparov wrote:Graham Linehan banned from Twitter - long overdue tbph.
I was pretty sure I saw a tweet about his thread being locked, but I can't find it now. I may have been incorrect about that. But he's certainly not a feminist ally. There's supporting women's rights, and then there is compiling lists of conversion therapists to 'treat' transgender children (and using legal intimidation to get that information taken down) " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Willow904 wrote:His thread on mumsnet about being banned from twitter is still on there and he has posted replies to posters within the last hour, so I don't think it's true he's been locked out of mumsnet. It would be very sad indeed if a forum set up predominantly for women to talk to each other about things that concern them were to start censoring conversations about women's rights issues. He posts in the feminism 'chat' section where he has been welcomed by the vast majority of regular posters as far as I can tell.refitman wrote:They've even locked him out of Mumsnet.AnatolyKasparov wrote:Graham Linehan banned from Twitter - long overdue tbph.
That's all well and good. But you haven't accused trans people of being paedophiles. Linehan has.Willow904 wrote:I respectfully disagree. Graham Linehan has simply been amplifying women's voices, by highlighting their concerns about trans ideology and I haven't seen anything other than a lot of women struggling to be heard. I've read fascinating articles and opinions from feminists and lesbians that I wouldn't otherwise have come across if he hadn't linked them. And he's not a bigot, he has support from transwomen and transsexuals. He introduced me to the wonderful Miranda Yardley, a transexual who was taken to court unsuccessfully by a woman from Mermaids for supposed "transphobia" which was thrown out of court. Because believing a person born one sex can't change to the other isn't transphobic, it's just objective fact and in no way equates with wishing trans people harm or wanting to stop them getting jobs or enjoying their life.
I'm a woman because I was born biologically female. Not because I wear dresses, high heels or make-up, because I don't wear any of those things. And not because I think or feel like a woman. I have no idea what other women think or feel, so how could a man? My feelings & thoughts are the feelings & thoughts of a woman purely because I'm female, not because there's some specific way that only women think or feel. When women make these points & try to hold on to rights that are based on sex rather than gender it's not because they wish transgender people ill, it's rather the opposite. It's because they believe women should and can be masculine and men should and can be feminine and there's nothing wrong in that. A boy liking "girl's" toys is just a boy. Encouraging children to physically change their body with experimental hormones & eventual surgery just to match some 1950's stereotype of what it means to be a "man" or "woman", that to me is real bigotry and potentially extremely harmful to the well-being of young people. Real progressive thinking would allow women to define themselves, not have them told what it is to be a woman by someone who was born as, & continues to be, biologically male, however "womanly" they may think they feel.
I have nothing against transgender people but transwomen are not women and we really shouldn't have to lie about biology to ensure transwomen are protected against discrimination.
The following quote is the kind of thing that is making me angry:The Disappeared: Skylar Gwynn
I feel the same when I see women's officer roles being taken by transwomen. I see biological women losing what small amount of representation they had. Surely it's possible to make a place for transgender people without taking away the small gains women have made over so many decades?I peak transed (stopped believing) last year, upon my return from NYC World Pride. When I attended the two day Human Rights Conference I went to the ‘Herstory’ session. This is supposed to be Lesbian history. Instead the panel was three gay men and one trans-identified male. Not one Lesbian on the Herstory panel! I was in shock.
Same here. Except I'm cis-female.refitman wrote:I just want to be clear that this isn't an attack on Willow904. I can see a very distinct difference between what she's saying and what people like Linehan have actually done.
While I am cis-male, I am acquainted with several trans and non-binary people, so I can have quite strong feelings on this subject.
I think someone born intersex is born that way, both male and female. I don't think that has any bearing on what I said about someone being born male not being able to change into female (and vice versa), which is what the transgender debate is about. An intersex person doesn't change from one sex to another, they are always the sex they eventually live as.MsChin wrote:"I have nothing against transgender people but transwomen are not women and we really shouldn't have to lie about biology to ensure transwomen are protected against discrimination."
Trans women and trans men already have full protection under equality law against discrimination. There is no hierarchy of rights in which 'sex' trumps 'gender reassignment'.
As you make the distinction that 'sex' is biologically determined, I wonder what your position is with regard to those born as intersex?
Willow, this is a good dissection of the essay she wrote, after it all blew up the other week - https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1270 ... 62689.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; (original thread here: " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ). There's a lot, but it's worth a read.Willow904 wrote:Oh and I'm very glad this isn't an attack on me!
It's definitely been an attack on JK Rowling, though, hasn't it?
I feel she has spoken for a lot of women's reasonable concerns in a very articulate and sensitive way and I've been pretty shocked at the tsunami of hate that has been blown her way. It's not in any way in proportion to what she has said. I haven't seen Graham Linehan say anything extreme, either, but I may have missed a lot of what he's said, but Rowling? I haven't seen anything she's said that warrants the reaction.
I generally stay out of this debate because I don't have a developed view about it, nor any personal experience with friends or family.Willow904 wrote: A boy liking "girl's" toys is just a boy. Encouraging children to physically change their body with experimental hormones & eventual surgery just to match some 1950's stereotype of what it means to be a "man" or "woman", that to me is real bigotry and potentially extremely harmful to the well-being of young people.
The Times
@thetimes
Cummings will announce an overhaul of the Cabinet Office and No 10 next Monday.
The adviser has said his intention was to create a “smaller, more focused and more elite centre”, but his critics will suspect an effort to scapegoat the civil service
Taking Back Control seems to mean "Unelected SpAd does anything he wants".Sir Mark Sedwill, the UK’s most senior civil servant, looks set to announce his departure as early as this week under Boris Johnson’s plans for a Whitehall revolution.
The ousting of Sir Mark will be the most obvious signal that a long-planned shake-up of the Civil Service by Dominic Cummings, Mr Johnson’s chief aide, is gathering pace.
Several sources told The Sunday Telegraph that an announcement would be made about Sir Mark’s future as early as Monday.
And I'm relieved to see that the TSUNAMI of HATRED against JKR didn't spill over here !gilsey wrote:I generally stay out of this debate because I don't have a developed view about it, nor any personal experience with friends or family.Willow904 wrote: A boy liking "girl's" toys is just a boy. Encouraging children to physically change their body with experimental hormones & eventual surgery just to match some 1950's stereotype of what it means to be a "man" or "woman", that to me is real bigotry and potentially extremely harmful to the well-being of young people.
Just to say I agree wholeheartedly with this bit. People are people and children should be allowed to develop completely free of gender stereotypes.
Unfortunately not likely in my lifetime.
No"seems" about it , I was NOT kidding !RogerOThornhill wrote:Oh.Taking Back Control seems to mean "Unelected SpAd does anything he wants".Sir Mark Sedwill, the UK’s most senior civil servant, looks set to announce his departure as early as this week under Boris Johnson’s plans for a Whitehall revolution.
The ousting of Sir Mark will be the most obvious signal that a long-planned shake-up of the Civil Service by Dominic Cummings, Mr Johnson’s chief aide, is gathering pace.
Several sources told The Sunday Telegraph that an announcement would be made about Sir Mark’s future as early as Monday.
I'm not a fan of JKR as it happens, but mild dislike would be a more appropriate description of my feelings than hatred.frog222 wrote:And I'm relieved to see that the TSUNAMI of HATRED against JKR didn't spill over here !gilsey wrote:I generally stay out of this debate because I don't have a developed view about it, nor any personal experience with friends or family.Willow904 wrote: A boy liking "girl's" toys is just a boy. Encouraging children to physically change their body with experimental hormones & eventual surgery just to match some 1950's stereotype of what it means to be a "man" or "woman", that to me is real bigotry and potentially extremely harmful to the well-being of young people.
Just to say I agree wholeheartedly with this bit. People are people and children should be allowed to develop completely free of gender stereotypes.
Unfortunately not likely in my lifetime.
andElection Maps UK
@ElectionMapsUK
Which, if any, of the following people do you think would be the best prime minister?
Keir Starmer: 37% (+3)
Boris Johnson: 35% (=)
Via
@OpiniumResearch
25-26 Jun.
Changes w/ 18-19 Jun.
8:04 PM · Jun 27, 2020·Twitter for Android
NET Approval Ratings for Party Leaders:
Keir Starmer (LAB): +27% (+5)
Nicola Sturgeon (SNP): +17% (+2)
Ed Davey (LDM): -6% (-2)
Boris Johnson (CON): -6% (-1)
Via
@OpiniumResearch
, 25-26 Jun.
Changes w/ 18-19 Jun.
I'm not a fan of JKR as it happens, but mild dislike would be a more appropriate description of my feelings than hatred.frog222 wrote:And I'm relieved to see that the TSUNAMI of HATRED against JKR didn't spill over here !gilsey wrote:I generally stay out of this debate because I don't have a developed view about it, nor any personal experience with friends or family.Willow904 wrote: A boy liking "girl's" toys is just a boy. Encouraging children to physically change their body with experimental hormones & eventual surgery just to match some 1950's stereotype of what it means to be a "man" or "woman", that to me is real bigotry and potentially extremely harmful to the well-being of young people.
Just to say I agree wholeheartedly with this bit. People are people and children should be allowed to develop completely free of gender stereotypes.
Unfortunately not likely in my lifetime.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... in-england" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Ministers were warned by senior policing figures on the eve of chaotic scenes at beaches last week that lifting the lockdown is “madness” and risks prompting fresh disorder.
During a meeting last Wednesday with police and crime commissioners, the Home Office minister Kit Malthouse was told that the decision to reopen pubs on 4 July could lead to increased violence and that coastal resorts could be overrun.
According to the West Midlands police and crime commissioner, Labour’s David Jamieson, Malthouse “brushed the concerns away”.
https://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.com/2020/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Eventually the plan, wouldn’t you just know, is for the ‘best border in the world’, mere competence being anathema to the government and, indeed, something it has successfully avoided thus far.
Chris Cook
@xtophercook
Michael Gove as champion of evidence-based policy is a bit “I found god in prison just before the trial, your honour”
Bottom line is - Starmer needs to get more of these people praising him to actually vote Labour!gilsey wrote:Starmer would make a better PM than Johnson but we'll vote Conservative rather than Labour, seems to be the message of the polls at present.
Following on from people voting tory in 2019 because they wanted a change, more evidence that the Great British public hasn't a clue.
Yep.AnatolyKasparov wrote:Bottom line is - Starmer needs to get more of these people praising him to actually vote Labour!gilsey wrote:Starmer would make a better PM than Johnson but we'll vote Conservative rather than Labour, seems to be the message of the polls at present.
Following on from people voting tory in 2019 because they wanted a change, more evidence that the Great British public hasn't a clue.
Hmm...that's them gone then.But far too often, innovation in Government is treated as though it were a mischief rather than a model. The default mechanism of the NAO, PAC, other select committees and various commentators is that any departure from the status quo must be assumed to be more downside than upside. Had they been able to interrogate George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton in 1783 they would have concluded that American independence was an expensive, untried and unjustifiable innovation. In Treasury terms it would have been novel and contentious and therefore stopped.
Following on from the Boris water-cannon, Boris Airport and the Boris Garden Bridge, we are going to have nobody independent examining value for money on the (privatised) Boris Hospitals . Like the 'Nightingale Hospitals' there won't be any nurses and docs in them, and the existing NHS personnel will still have no pay-rises, and very little CV19 testing !RogerOThornhill wrote:Hmm...that's them gone then.But far too often, innovation in Government is treated as though it were a mischief rather than a model. The default mechanism of the NAO, PAC, other select committees and various commentators is that any departure from the status quo must be assumed to be more downside than upside. Had they been able to interrogate George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton in 1783 they would have concluded that American independence was an expensive, untried and unjustifiable innovation. In Treasury terms it would have been novel and contentious and therefore stopped.
Say hello to giving out assessment of public policy to the private sector - more cash for what used to be the big accounting firms.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... nnexations" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;“This is now urgent. The government must be clear with the Israeli coalition government that concrete action will follow, including a ban on goods entering Britain from the illegal settlements in the West Bank. This is a major step, but such a blatant breach of international law must have consequences. It will take a level of courage that so far ministers have not been willing to show.”
Nandy’s proposal, backed by Keir Starmer, is a significant toughening of Labour’s policy on Israel. In the 2019 manifesto, the party merely called for a diplomatic solution.
The Trump administration’s support for Netanyahu’s plan might discourage UK action for fear of jeopardising a UK-US trade deal, she added. But Britain had a “unique moral responsibility and must step up. Should we fail to do so, the world will pay the price for a long time to come.”"
Saw that & wished I'd greater literary powersAnatolyKasparov wrote:Ed Miliband on today's news bulletins I see - real blast from the past. Though I'm not complaining
RogerOThornhill wrote:Hmm...that's them gone then.But far too often, innovation in Government is treated as though it were a mischief rather than a model. The default mechanism of the NAO, PAC, other select committees and various commentators is that any departure from the status quo must be assumed to be more downside than upside. Had they been able to interrogate George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton in 1783 they would have concluded that American independence was an expensive, untried and unjustifiable innovation. In Treasury terms it would have been novel and contentious and therefore stopped.
Say hello to giving out assessment of public policy to the private sector - more cash for what used to be the big accounting firms.
"Every morning I wake up saddened by the fact we haven't done more to make the most of every talent in our land, reproaching myself that we did not do more especially in children’s social care, primary schooling and secondary schooling to provide opportunities and keep young people safe. I worry that we have not succeeded properly yet in succeeding in reforming the youth justice system, the police, the CPS and the courts."
M. Gove's Precious Thoughts pdf
(cJA edit)frog222 wrote:---
Following on from the Boris water-cannon, Boris Airport and the Boris Garden Bridge, we are going to have nobody independent examining value for money on the (privatised) Boris Hospitals . Like the 'Nightingale Hospitals' there won't be any nurses and docs in them, and the existing NHS personnel will still have no pay-rises, and very little CV19 testing !
Philip Pullman: ‘Boris Johnson doesn’t mind who he hurts. He doesn’t mind if he destroys the truth or not’
https://www.theguardian.com/global/2019 ... d-a-writer" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
citizenJA wrote:(cJA edit)frog222 wrote:---
Following on from the Boris water-cannon, Boris Airport and the Boris Garden Bridge, we are going to have nobody independent examining value for money on the (privatised) Boris Hospitals . Like the 'Nightingale Hospitals' there won't be any nurses and docs in them, and the existing NHS personnel will still have no pay-rises, and very little CV19 testing !
Philip Pullman safely used the second-hand water cannon
I hadn't read this interview with him dated 29 September 2019Philip Pullman: ‘Boris Johnson doesn’t mind who he hurts. He doesn’t mind if he destroys the truth or not’
https://www.theguardian.com/global/2019 ... d-a-writer" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Halfway through the book, Lyra explains what “bullshitting” really is, and, shortly afterwards, a character from the Magisterium is heard elsewhere telling someone that,
“We should delicately and subtly undermine the idea that truth and facts are possible in the first place. Once the people have become doubtful about the truth of anything, all kinds of things will be open to us.”
I wonder if people such as Gove, Johnson and Trump, with their “fake news”, “had enough of experts” and Brexiteering narratives were on his mind when he wrote it.