Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
I can perhaps believe them having the capacity and infrastructure required but given that these days involve Christmas Eve, Day and Boxing Day, plus NYE, he’ll have a hard time persuading that many to turn up
I do think it was at least partially political as PVA suggested earlier, however, there’s no harm reiterating the message...some people don’t appear to be able to make decisions for themselves unless there’s a tv briefing/statement to tell them what to do. Hopefully this will be the kick up the arse they needed
It's not playing politics you utterOr, to put it another way, they are avoiding playing party politics at the expense of public health and instead are siding with the government to save lives.
There are many, many things you can criticise Labour for, but backing life saving measures is not one of them.
Capacity and infrastructure is one thing, although it would need to be in place ready to open tomorrow morning which seems short notice. Getting a million plus people a day to turn up and get jabbed is an entirely different proposition.I can perhaps believe them having the capacity and infrastructure required but given that these days involve Christmas Eve, Day and Boxing Day, plus NYE, he’ll have a hard time persuading that many to turn up
Capacity and infrastructure is one thing, although it would need to be in place ready to open tomorrow morning which seems short notice. Getting a million plus people a day to turn up and get jabbed is an entirely different proposition.
Why do they set these ridiculous targets. Its like everything having to be world beating. They know they can do 500K a day so why not say we'll get everyone done by mid-january and give yourself a chance?It just isn’t going to happen on Christmas Eve or Day, for example. Just looks like someone’s realised their homework’s due in in the morning
It's not playing politics you utter. The restrictions in themselves are useless without enablers, where was his pressure on sick pay / reinstating furlough?
He's basically conceding an argument where NHS capacity (always stretched at winter) is something that nothing can be done about aside from restrictions.
A million booster target a day is nothing - ok
What happens if they don't meet that target? Nothing.
I could set myself a target of running the world by next Christmas and having made love to a million women but if I'm not going to penalise myself if I don't achieve it it means nothing.
Just like all the climate change 'targets'. There's never any penalty for not achieving them so they're never met. Utterly meaningless.
Why do they set these ridiculous targets. Its like everything having to be world beating. They know they can do 500K a day so why not say we'll get everyone done by mid-january and give yourself a chance?
Targets, especially publicly declared ones, are normally counter productive and drive the wrong sorts of behaviours. They become an end in themselves rather than a means of delivering a useful outcome. We saw this under Hancock, especially with the testing target, when they ended up stuffing tests into envelopes on the last day to say they could meet the target. Many of the tests didn't work ir went to the wrong places. Similar things happened with PPE, when they resorted to counting each glove separately.Why do they set these ridiculous targets. Its like everything having to be world beating. They know they can do 500K a day so why not say we'll get everyone done by mid-january and give yourself a chance?
Ah come on mate, you're being too hard on yourself, you can manage 2 more by then!What happens if they don't meet that target? Nothing.
I could set myself a target of running the world by next Christmas and having made love to a million women but if I'm not going to penalise myself if I don't achieve it it means nothing.
Just like all the climate change 'targets'. There's never any penalty for not achieving them so they're never met. Utterly meaningless.
What happens if they don't meet that target? Nothing.
I could set myself a target of running the world by next Christmas and having made love to a million women but if I'm not going to penalise myself if I don't achieve it it means nothing.
Just like all the climate change 'targets'. There's never any penalty for not achieving them so they're never met. Utterly meaningless.
It's not playing politics you utter. The restrictions in themselves are useless without enablers, where was his pressure on sick pay / reinstating furlough?
He's basically conceding an argument where NHS capacity (always stretched at winter) is something that nothing can be done about aside from restrictions.
Ah come on mate, you're being too hard on yourself, you can manage 2 more by then!
Starmers inability to oppose gets worse every week
I await to hear his latest interrogation to the Prime Minister - I expect to see some revelation as to what the quiz questions were at the party, more insight into the 10 worst rides at Pappa Pig land and a demand to call in the Met to investigate an incident that may have occurred 10 years ago when Boris Johnson’s hand inadvertently touched an observer journalists knee.
Meanwhile Mr Johnson passes a law that states citizenship can be removed if you vote labour ever again and he - and most of his supporters don’t even notice
Whether you think its playing politics or not is irrelevant. That's how it'd be played.
Voting against Covid restrictions would be utter suicide for Labour. Its absurd to suggest otherwise.
No good would come of it. Total hiding to nothing. Absolute open goal for the Tories.
Here's Starmer pressuring about furlough, unemployment, part time jobs etc. He also said sick pay should be paid from day 1.
Coronavirus: Sir Keir Starmer calls for furlough scheme replacement - BBC News
The Labour leader also warns of the "scarring effect" of "mass unemployment" on communities.www.bbc.co.uk
Not even making any conditions on it at all, Labour will be completely straitjacketed by this if the restrictions are found to be completely ineffective and / or have a negative impact in themselves.Keir Starmer confirmed on Sunday that Labour would support all plan B measures.
Starmers inability to oppose gets worse every week
Why have you sent me a link to a story from 15th September (and a speech at the TUC)?
Boris Johnson may face biggest rebellion so far over new Covid rules | Conservatives | The Guardian
Not even making any conditions on it at all, Labour will be completely straitjacketed by this if the restrictions are found to be completely ineffective and / or have a negative impact in themselves.
Starmers inability to oppose gets worse every week
But but a man on an Internet forum says otherwiseOh and...
What a fucking dickhead this man is.
Some idiots actually think he's a man of the people.
The "science" is concerned only with stopping the spread of a virus. The government is concerned with that and a host of other things.You can't be a party that says it trusts the science and then not follow the science
Madness
Let's be honest.
This rollout initially and the campaign around it has been lacklustre and not handled at the outset like/as efficiently as the first time.
It went better under the MP for Stratford.
Let's be honest.
This rollout initially and the campaign around it has been lacklustre and not handled at the outset like/as efficiently as the first time.
It went better under the MP for Stratford.
All those parties have taken it out of him!
Rightly there won’t be much sympathy for Johnson but at his age, nearly dying from Covid, two newborns and a never ending pandemic. Rather him than me !
If Starmer didn’t have the political acumen of a Twix he could take advantage of a potential Tory rebellion to negotiate some financial support for those forced to self-isolate and thus increase compliance with the rules.Why have you sent me a link to a story from 15th September (and a speech at the TUC)?
Boris Johnson may face biggest rebellion so far over new Covid rules | Conservatives | The Guardian
Not even making any conditions on it at all, Labour will be completely straitjacketed by this if the restrictions are found to be completely ineffective and / or have a negative impact in themselves.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?