Westministenders: Brevid

[RedToothBrush]

The government have FINALLY started to treat no deal brexit and covid as one entity in terms of fucking the economy.

On the one hand you have one camp who think they can sneak No Deal through as a consequence of Covid. On the other you have people who realise that it might be quite a good idea not to doubly screw your entire economy and to continue to be able to import medical supplies freely.

We now no that No Deal Brexit will involve passports to get into Kent and 7 mile queues of trucks because this has passed the lips of Gove. Y'know one of those who has been denying this for the past 4 years and presenting it as 'scaremongering'.

We are now firmly into the end game where businesses have to make plans based on the government plans and technology. Y'know the ones that aren't complete yet despite it only being 2 months to go.

Johnson has today done an interview about covid restrictions in the NE in which he got all the detail wrong. Its almost as if he forgot the lines he was instructed to recite and have no fundamental understanding of what rules he's putting into place to control the lives of the population.

As we lurch into October, there is speculation of full local lockdowns being brought in to try and deal with the spiralling number of cases which have to be the result, in no small part, of a dire lack of local testing facilities in the North of England. Meanwhile we've got The App finally. The one that doesn't work and the police and many health care staff are being advised not to use cos its so bobbins and will lead to them constantly isolating needlessly. Thats just something the rest of us have to contend with.

The feeling is that Cummings is up for No Deal. Johnson has been brainwashed into it, which lets face it, isn't too hard given how hard of thinking he is. However there is a growing sense that Johnson may now bottle it and declare victory in the jaws of defeat. That might be a premature hope.

We await the answer and the all important question of whether Christmas is indeed cancelled - that is for everyone who hasn't already cancelled it due to financial hardship...

That's it then no amendments to be allowed to coronavirus bill.

Come back Bercow!!

Surely they have the opt of voting it down? Then we get to see how strong their conviction is to democracy

I've noticed even in my village of about 8,000 people that during the last 3 months at least 2 banks of several bright yellow e-bikes for hire have been built, with a yellow e-car next door.

So the idea has spread even to my rural area of reducing pollution and reducing the number of personal vehicles

I agree that it will only be a small % at first who won't want at least 1 car per family
However, like alternative electricity sources, suddenly it takes off from a low base to become a major player.

Peregrina
What was it?
Try a google search and then cut n' paste your answer.

"Theresa May has repeatedly claimed that the PD would allow the UK to operate an independent trade policy. That would only be possible if you believed in a fantastical, magical creature – a unicorn with three horns, known as the Chequers facilitated customs arrangement."

MPs will have to face their angry constituents
and explain why they voted to give the govt a blank slate to impose any restrictions they like, however confusing, however disruptive, whether based on science or not

I'm in favour of some SD measures, even tightening where & when need be, but I want Parliament to vote on them first
You know, the boring democracy thing ....

If it's an absolute sudden emergency to impose something - which probably means someone in a key job massively fucked up. Again - then allow it, but to be confirmed within 48 hours by Parliament

The issue is Patel trying to send migrants to remote islands on the other side of the world, rather than merely offshore.

I wouldn't get too excited - different versions of this story everywhere;

"Whitehall brainstorming session prompted by Priti Patel led to the idea being floated of sending asylum seekers to a volcanic island in the South Atlantic, the Guardian understands" ...

"However, according to Home Office sources, the proposal only arose after Patel sought advice on how other countries deal with asylum applications. Australia, for example, keeps them on overseas islands while it processes claims."

"The source said Patel asked the Foreign Office for ideas, and among those raised were “implausible ones” such as the use of Ascension or St Helena."

@Clavinova

Peregrina What was it? Try a google search and then cut n' paste your answer.

"Theresa May has repeatedly claimed that the PD would allow the UK to operate an independent trade policy. That would only be possible if you believed in a fantastical, magical creature – a unicorn with three horns, known as the Chequers facilitated customs arrangement."

.... and BJ is continuing the proud tradition of Tory PMs believing in a fantastical, magical creature – a unicorn

2003 "Blair wants asylum-seeker camp in Africa."

"Mr Blair described the proposed scheme as "sensible" and the discussions with Tanzania as "perfectly amicable". ...

"The Prime Minister was barracked by Tory MPs, who accused him of adopting the Tory policy of deporting asylum-seekers arriving in Britain to a "far offshore" island to have their claims processed. David Davis, the shadow Home Secretary, said: "This smacks of sheer hypocrisy. The Government has continually mocked Conservative plans to deal with asylum-seekers offshore, and now it has decided to adopt them on the quiet."

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/blair-wants-asylum-seeker-camp-in-africa-71062.html

@Clavinova

The issue is Patel trying to send migrants to remote islands on the other side of the world, rather than merely offshore.

I wouldn't get too excited - different versions of this story everywhere;

"Whitehall brainstorming session prompted by Priti Patel led to the idea being floated of sending asylum seekers to a volcanic island in the South Atlantic, the Guardian understands" ...

"However, according to Home Office sources, the proposal only arose after Patel sought advice on how other countries deal with asylum applications. Australia, for example, keeps them on overseas islands while it processes claims."

"The source said Patel asked the Foreign Office for ideas, and among those raised were “implausible ones” such as the use of Ascension or St Helena."

... "Implausible" to Patel too, or just to everyone else ?

It would be far more sensible to work to obtain an international consensus on modifying the international law on refugees

• which was mostly written for a time of a few tens of thousands fleeing the threat of concentration camps -

and developing a new international strategy - with resources from the wealthier countries - to handle e.g. the estimated 65 million refugees from war and dictatorship, plus the 200 million climate change refugees likely in the near future

Obviously the West simply can't take them all, so a longterm joined up humane policy is needed

Sheesh - why try to pretend Patel didn't take ascension seriously - we know she's thick, the chances of her immediately understanding any suggestion of using ascension would be a joke are zilch.

[quote Clavinova]2003 "Blair wants asylum-seeker camp in Africa."

"Mr Blair described the proposed scheme as "sensible" and the discussions with Tanzania as "perfectly amicable". ...

"The Prime Minister was barracked by Tory MPs, who accused him of adopting the Tory policy of deporting asylum-seekers arriving in Britain to a "far offshore" island to have their claims processed. David Davis, the shadow Home Secretary, said: "This smacks of sheer hypocrisy. The Government has continually mocked Conservative plans to deal with asylum-seekers offshore, and now it has decided to adopt them on the quiet."

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/blair-wants-asylum-seeker-camp-in-africa-71062.html[/quote]
....
2003 Blair ? 😂
An idea 17 years ago from a has-been, the Day Before Yesterday's Man

Since we're going back 17 years, we can return to blaming MrsT for things she actually did that affect us now.

All this whataboutery to defend a government actually in power
Why not go back to Harold Wilson too - e.g. in his first term, homosexuality was illegal, punishable by prison

So no amendments. Will the Tory MPs rebel and vote against? Will the vote be whipped? I'm going to guess 3 line whip, and that not enough will rebel to defeat the motion.

Abortion too

All illegal until Roy Jenkins new laws from 1968

I'd expect many Tory MPs will have a torrid time explaining their lack of spine to their constituents,
especially in the former "Red Wall" seats, but not just there

An idea 17 years ago from a has-been, the Day Before Yesterday's Man

A "has-been"? Why does he keep popping up all over the place?

🐿"Cosmic Microwave Background radiation, a relic of the Big Bang, was accidentally discovered in 1965 by radioastronomers Penzias and Wilson; they initially thought the constant background 'noise' detected by their antenna was due to pigeon droppings. Therefore, the words and actions of today's government are fiiiiiiiine." 🐿

Why not go back to Harold Wilson too. Roy Jenkins
we can return to blaming MrsT

Pretty obvious why not.

"Blair and Major urge MPs to reject Internal Market Bill."

So, we shouldn't listen to anything they say because they are "has-beens" from the "Day Before Yesterday's Man"? Fine by me.

I'm slightly disturbed at a unicorn with three horns being described as a fantastical magical creature and I can't quite figure out why. Does whoever said that think a unicorn without three horns isn't a fantastical magical creature? How is it a unicorn if it has three horns? Wouldn't it be a tricorn?

@LouiseCollins28

I really, really can't see a big move away from the notion of the car as personal transport, it seems absolutely central to its appeal to me. Particularly in "Covid World" the idea of "on demand" autonomous vehicles owned by some agency or company, not by private individuals seems likely to be a hiding to nothing.

When I was deeply involved in strategy and planning, one of the "gurus" gave a talk entitled "It's all about me" which noted that people rarely grasp the significance of progress until it's happened.

If you go back even as recent as the 1960s, quite a few people would have said the opposite to what you do. That's they really couldn't see a need for a car in every drive (certainly the housebuilders did). And this isn't some weird research. Even in 1974 when my DM passed her test and owned her own car it was fairly uncommon. Uncommon enough that our friendly next door but one Conservative councillor accused my DF of stealing it since he couldn't afford one car, let alone the 3 our family had (between two).

But my feeling is the shift will start in situations where the environment can be tailored around the vehicle - so city centres. Think of it as the LDR on steroids ...

Well, apparently they can have two horns. British Library - medieval manuscripts blog;

"How many horns does a unicorn have? It's the kind of trick question you might encounter when watching the British television series QI. One, I hear you say — everyone knows that. Unicorns only have ONE horn (the clue is in the name). And that's what I used to think too, but it seems we’ve all been duped. Sometimes a unicorn can have TWO horns. I know, right? Whatever next?"

blogs.bl.uk/digitisedmanuscripts/2017/11/how-many-horns-does-a-unicorn-have.html#:~:text=Unicorns%20only%20have%20ONE%20horn,clue%20is%20in%20the%20name).&text=Sometimes%20a%20unicorn%20can%20have%20TWO%20horns.

I really can't get upset about the Royal Family anymore. I could understand the Queen and DofE needing to isolate - both being well into their 90s, but once Wills and Kate decamped to Norfolk, I had had enough. Not that it stopped the apologists saying 'oh but they live in Norfolk', ignoring the fact that their children go to a little private school in London.

Back in 1960 Theodore Levitt published an article called "Marketing Myopia" in Harvard Business Review. It was so appropriate and clearly written that I used to use it in training sessions about marketing back in the 1990s! Ie that it's about understanding your customers' needs and desires, and not being focussed on the product you are currently producing/selling.

In it, he points out (for example) that the US railway industry didn't understand that they weren't in the transportation business rather than the railroad business and therefore didn't/couldn't see the threat from cars, planes - and even phones.

I used to tippex out "date indentifying" bits (surprisingly few ) before photocopying it and getting people to work out when it was written. They were always shocked to find out it was over 30 years old

It's still amazingly relevant today!

https://instructure-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com/account18750000000000001/attachments/1451475/Marketing%20Myopia.pdf?response-content-disposition=attachment%3B%20filename%3D%22Marketing%20Myopia.pdf%22%3B%20filename%2A%3DUTF-8%27%27Marketing%2520Myopia.pdf&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIAJDW777BLV26JM2MQ%2F20200930%2Fus-east-1%2Fs3%2Faws44_request&X-Amz-Date=20200930T121942Z&X-Amz-Expires=86400&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Signature=def4737ad747102ad26902b5a3719ed8ffaa37104a38a4671b180df82e7a12d6

Elements I am loving your work.

Re the RF: Where's their Blirtz spirit?