PM to give 8pm address tonight (Sunday), no new restrictions expected

[bagofconkers]

"As pressure from virus rises, PM will give national address at 8pm tonight, updating the booster programme - sounds like this will NOT include new restrictions"

twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1470076029926522884

"Vaccine passports are a stepping stone to ID cards, that is their point. Nothing to do with the pandemic."

Yawn, not this load of baloney again.

It's seeming more and more like an abusive, manipulative relationship. All the anxiety and speculation leading to 8pm - "I need to have a word with you when you get home"

Then.... Nothing.....

@jgw1

*Why would he do that when he also said that two vaccinations don't offer enough protection from Omicron? What would be the point?

Also not sure what the point of vaccine passports would be given that fact.*

Vaccine passports are a stepping stone to ID cards, that is their point. Nothing to do with the pandemic.

@ChequerBoard

"Vaccine passports are a stepping stone to ID cards, that is their point. Nothing to do with the pandemic."

Yawn, not this load of baloney again.

Well it is clearly not to do with infection control as we have been repeatedly told to get a booster because being vaccinated isn't enough. Those who are vaccinated are more likely to spread covid since they have milder symptoms so may not realise. There must be some other reason for vaccine passports. If not ID cards, perhaps to spread covid to as many people as possible?

Completely agree that vaccine passports make no sense in relation to infection control - even less so now than they did before. If they’re concerned about spread in certain venues then everyone should be required to show proof of a negative test.

@littlepeas

8pm gives me the heebie jeebies.

Well, at least he let us watch the Strictly results first.

Another one tonight at 7pm by Keir Starmer. Also pre-recorded.

More of the same? Starmer is going to tell us to all get boosted?

@XenoBitch

Another one tonight at 7pm by Keir Starmer. Also pre-recorded.

Really, why?

Is he feeling left out? What can he possibly have to add.

@Booklover3

More of the same? Starmer is going to tell us to all get boosted?

It appears to be "in response" to the one last night. So, basically "what he said".

@XenoBitch

Another one tonight at 7pm by Keir Starmer. Also pre-recorded.

Oh man…

He better just be saying same

Starmer needs to tell the nation why Labour have given up opposing the government and demonstrate why they are still a viable alternative to the government.

I suppose people can listen to the one they loathe the least ;

I don’t care as long as message gets through.

^It appears to be "in response" to the one last night.
So, basically "what he said".^

Just as a good opposition leader should

Yay ! Youngest daughter (34) got her booster this morning by walking into an appointment clinic in the village church! All 8 of us are now boostered.
Otherwise, her booked appointment was a 3 hr round trip and not until January.

@bumbleymummy

^It appears to be "in response" to the one last night. So, basically "what he said".^

Just as a good opposition leader should

Well to be fair to him, if the government announces a massive booster programme, labour can hardly say “well that’s a shit idea”.

And if he questions the feasibility of it being done in December (which would be reasonable) he’d still be tediously accused of doubting the nhs, talking the country down, and (worst of all it seems) “playing politics”.

@bumbleymummy

Completely agree that vaccine passports make no sense in relation to infection control - even less so now than they did before. If they’re concerned about spread in certain venues then everyone should be required to show proof of a negative test.

I agree and would support this. But given that the site dishing out LFTs has crashed this morning I don’t think capacity could keep up. We’ve had covid in the house last week and gone though at least three boxes. Imagine if everyone household was doing that.

So the tin-foil hatters that are completely opposed to 'vaccine passports' which are actually just proof of vaccination are fine with mandating the need for proof of completion of a negative test??

You do realise that there is very little difference in the data set required for either?

Honestly what's the bloody difference apart the removal of the use of the emotive term passport?

It seems far more logical to take a test for a venue than simply prove your vaccination status? Call me a tin foil hatter if you like, but having caught Covid from a vaccinated person, stating ones vaccination status alone seems daft. Testing in the moment would seem more sensible, although appreciably, nothing is foolproof 100%. If you want people to be cautious and sensible stating any one measure is the holy grail is ridiculous and open to resistance, when clearly a combination of mitigations would seem to have made a difference.

@MistressoftheDarkSide

It seems far more logical to take a test for a venue than simply prove your vaccination status? Call me a tin foil hatter if you like, but having caught Covid from a vaccinated person, stating ones vaccination status alone seems daft. Testing in the moment would seem more sensible, although appreciably, nothing is foolproof 100%. If you want people to be cautious and sensible stating any one measure is the holy grail is ridiculous and open to resistance, when clearly a combination of mitigations would seem to have made a difference.

That's not the point though.

The objection to 'vaccine passports' has been based on this being an invasion of privacy - the need to show what has been described as personal medical information to access a flight/venue etc.

Those same people are now calling for proof of testing to be provided instead. I am pointing out the inconsistency in their viewpoint that providing proof of vaccination is an infringement of civil liberties but providing proof of a test result is not.

I am in favour of both vaccine and test data being provided as needed depending upon the situation.

Whatever gets us through the pandemic with the least collateral damage gets my vote.

@Buzzinwithbez

It's seeming more and more like an abusive, manipulative relationship. All the anxiety and speculation leading to 8pm - "I need to have a word with you when you get home"

Then.... Nothing.....

I agree.

I am opposed to vaccine passports primarily because they don't accomplish what they imply - and may increase a false sense of security. I also feel that digital surveillance and surveillance capitalism could be used unethically for any number of reasons. There is an intersection here.

Monitoring actual infection status before mixing in large numbers is logical to me because I know the virus exists, and reducing its spread is key.

We are living with weird cognitive dissonance in many areas these days, and as long as most people are doing most mitigations in some combination, I'm in favour of that.

@ChequerBoard

So the tin-foil hatters that are completely opposed to 'vaccine passports' which are actually just proof of vaccination are fine with mandating the need for proof of completion of a negative test??

You do realise that there is very little difference in the data set required for either?

Honestly what's the bloody difference apart the removal of the use of the emotive term passport?

I’m not for mandating any of it actually. I’m just saying that if they’re genuinely concerned about spread it makes no sense to allow people to enter a venue without testing when they could be infected. The vaccines don’t prevent infection and are even less protective against infection from omicron that they were against delta. Completely illogical. They may not pick up all cases but it’s better to at least try to detect them.

And stop with the childish ‘tin foil hat’ nonsense. You just look silly.

Oh look. Goal Post Shift. Day 1.

Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall
The PM’s words last night: “Everyone eligible aged 18 and over in England will have the chance to get their booster before the New Year.”

Vicki Young @BBCVickiYoung
Dept of Health sources clarify that the promise on boosters is to “offer” them by end of December not “deliver” them. Confusion stemmed from PM saying last night that eligible adults in England “will have the chance to get their booster before the New Year” #Booster #vaccine

Red Knight @redknighttrader
He also said in the previous sentence that There was a previous ‘offer’ of a jab by the end of January & he was bringing that forward by one month

Vicki Young @BBCVickiYoung
Yes - the statement was contradictory

Lewis Goodall
@lewis_goodall
So it seems the word “chance” is doing the heavy lifting rather than “to get.” Ie you have the opportunity to get it rather than being assured of actually getting it before new year.

But the way it’s presented here leaves ambiguity and is open to viewers to easily misunderstand (this one certainly did). The gravity of a prime ministerial address also adds to that- it’s a dramatic thing so leads you to idea of a dramatic change/acceleration,

That ambiguity could have been avoided completely if for example PM had said: “the chance to book your booster before the new year.”

Regardless of public confusion obviously this has a virological impact as well. This is less ambitious (though idea of boosting everyone before NY would never have happened). People will only just be getting boosted right at the heart of worst period for NHS- January.

NHS communications clear: “The NHS will give every adult the chance to book a Covid-19 booster vaccine by the end of the year in a race to protect the nation against the Omicron variant.”

Ben has more on this

Ben Chu @BenChu_
Is the government planning to actually put booster jabs into the arms of everyone aged over 18 by the end of the year?

Or merely "offer" everyone a chance to get them (which could include booking them for 2022)?...

...PM's statement last night was techically "offer" and he spoke of "chance" for a booster jab...

...which might imply the calculations of 1m jabs a day needed to hit the target are somewhat exaggerated.

Yet this section of the PM's statement is pretty clear that it's about a massive increase in actual jabs...

....the Health Department is saying the end of year target does technically relate to offers rather than actual needles in arms - but they're not pushing back against the 1m a day calculation - or the idea that the number of jabs delivered a day needs to more than double

Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall
The point about this is that it wasn’t a press conference it was an address. So 1) was tightly scripted and presumably checked and rechecked and checked again so should be less room for ambiguity 2) no possibility of journalist follow up to clarify at broadcast