General British politics discussion thread

timsey tiger

Peregrinus wrote: »

We are well past the point where closing of ports and borders would make any difference. The infection is well-established in Ireland, and it's internal measures that will affect how matters progress from here.

Closing of ports and borders might have symbolic significance, in bringhing home to those who still don't get it how serious the situation is. But as an infection control measure, its impact would be negligible.

If we don't close our ports and borders we will continue to get reinfected, extending the duration of the lockdown.

mickdw

timsey tiger wrote: »

If we don't close our ports and borders we will continue to get reinfected, extending the duration of the lockdown.

I saw someone make a point that any number entering the country at this stage by plane etc is tiny compared to the community transmitted cased and claimed that it was meaningless as a result.
Does this not miss the point that you could be starting multiple new clusters of infection with further exponential growth?

Peregrinus

timsey tiger wrote: »

If we don't close our ports and borders we will continue to get reinfected, extending the duration of the lockdown.

We will continue to get infected anyway. There's nothing magic about people who cross borders.

International travel has already been hugely reduced, by a combination of people following advice not to travel and a substantial reduction in services. It cannot be completely eliminated, because there are categories of people who simply have to cross borders - transport workers facilitating critical goods and supplies, frontier workers, people who need to travel to provide care to family, etc. The difference between the degree of restriction we already have and the higher degree of restriction we could achieve if we "closed the borders" is pretty modest, and certainly not significant from an epidemiological point of view.

As already stated, it might have symbolic signficance in bringing home the seriousness of the situation to the slow-witted. It might also be useful in encouraging neighbouring countries to up their antiviral game a little, but that is a bit more iffy.

So I'm not saying "never do it". I'm saying "don't imagine you will derive any meaningful epidemiological benefit directly by doing it; you won't. If you do do it, at least to it for a good and realistic reason."

timsey tiger

I don't imagine it will meaningfully shift the numbers at the peak , but look at China now, their new cases are all imported meaning that they can't relax or they will be back to square one

Chips Lovell

Mod Note

Please read the charter. Dumps of links to videos and Twitter not permitted. This is a discussion forum, not a news feed.

Thanks

Leroy42

timsey tiger wrote: »

I don't imagine it will meaningfully shift the numbers at the peak , but look at China now, their new cases are all imported meaning that they can't relax or they will be back to square one

The China numbers don't make any sense. The outbreak was under way for a few weeks before they shut down Wuhan, during which time they ignored and actively tried to hide the information. During that time how many people contacted the virus and then travelled?

And now they have it all done, yet Italy are struggling?

Listen to the messaging coming out, saying that the only new cases are people returning, setting up the blame for the second wave to internationals.

[Deleted User]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-52017910

London Underground commuters have been warned that if they do not stop packing into trains more people will die from coronavirus.
Mayor of London Sadiq Khan issued the alert after photos showed crowds in Tube carriages for a second morning running.
Mr Khan insisted that the network was running for essential workers only.
A transport union called for police officers to be deployed at major stations to stop overcrowding.
More than 130 people have died in London from Covid-19 - a third of the whole of the UK.

Short of closing down public transport in London, it is hard to see how they can maintain social distancing.

Public transport is currently meant to be for "critical workers" only but it doesn't seem to be working.

Union reps on the tube have been left apoplectic for a second day because lines have been very very busy, particularly at the start of the service.

Far too many businesses believe that their staff are "critical workers", they really need to reevaluate whether their staff work in places that could affect the health of the general public, rather than the health of the bottom line!

Leroy42

dolanbaker wrote: »

Short of closing down public transport in London, it is hard to see how they can maintain social distancing.

The problem is that they reduced the service. Either have it full, to allow space, or cancel it.

This is the worst of both worlds.

Peregrinus

I see that the UK Health Secretary has called for more trains to be laid on, to reduce overcrowding.

Perhaps the UK Transport Secretary should now call for more hospitals to be laid on, to reduce overcrowding?

Rosahane

Leroy42 wrote: »

The China numbers don't make any sense. The outbreak was under way for a few weeks before they shut down Wuhan, during which time they ignored and actively tried to hide the information. During that time how many people contacted the virus and then travelled?

And now they have it all done, yet Italy are struggling?

Listen to the messaging coming out, saying that the only new cases are people returning, setting up the blame for the second wave to internationals.

Maybe all is not as it seems, official reports say that the number of cellphone users in China has dropped by 21 Million. While it’s probable that some of this decline is down to business accounts shut down by the virus it seems a huge figure.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-closing-of-21-million-cell-phone-accounts-in-china-may-suggest-a-high-ccp-virus-death-toll_3281291.html

beggars_bush

Rosahane wrote: »

Maybe all is not as it seems, official reports say that the number of cellphone users in China has dropped by 21 Million. While it’s probable that some of this decline is down to business accounts shut down by the virus it seems a huge figure.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-closing-of-21-million-cell-phone-accounts-in-china-may-suggest-a-high-ccp-virus-death-toll_3281291.html

Business cell phones most likely

sid waddell

Rosahane wrote: »

Maybe all is not as it seems, official reports say that the number of cellphone users in China has dropped by 21 Million. While it’s probable that some of this decline is down to business accounts shut down by the virus it seems a huge figure.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-closing-of-21-million-cell-phone-accounts-in-china-may-suggest-a-high-ccp-virus-death-toll_3281291.html

The Epoch Times is a disinformation site and I would put zero store in anything reported by it.

PommieBast

Rosahane wrote: »

Maybe all is not as it seems, official reports say that the number of cellphone users in China has dropped by 21 Million. While it’s probable that some of this decline is down to business accounts shut down by the virus it seems a huge figure.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-closing-of-21-million-cell-phone-accounts-in-china-may-suggest-a-high-ccp-virus-death-toll_3281291.html

Don't think 21 million is that much on the scale of things in PRC.

Capt'n Midnight

In addition to business users there's also this
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-23/china-s-mobile-carriers-lose-15-million-users-as-virus-bites

Part of the drop could be caused by migrant workers -- who often have one subscription for where they work and another for their home region

And there's probably a lot of non-human subscriptions cancelled too for remote diagnostics kit, car hotspots and trackers, and the whole "internet of things" like vending machines texting to be restocked. And animal trackers.

Tourist subs are likely to be down a tad too.

timsey tiger

Peregrinus wrote: »

We are well past the point where closing of ports and borders would make any difference. The infection is well-established in Ireland, and it's internal measures that will affect how matters progress from here.

Closing of ports and borders might have symbolic significance, in bringhing home to those who still don't get it how serious the situation is. But as an infection control measure, its impact would be negligible.

Medical experts in Irish times now calling for government to seriously consider closing borders. Be very interesting to see how this would work up North, could we get them to join on an all island basis like for foot and mouth. On will nordies be like we could act with you for animals but people meh not so much.

BonnieSituation

timsey tiger wrote: »

Medical experts in Irish times now calling for government to seriously consider closing borders. Be very interesting to see how this would work up North, could we get them to join on an all island basis like for foot and mouth. On will nordies unionists be like we could act with you for animals but people meh not so much.

Be careful with your use of words. They're important.

timsey tiger

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Be careful with your use of words. They're important.

Governments share collective responsibility.

BonnieSituation

timsey tiger wrote: »

Governments share collective responsibility.

Yes?

"Nordies" aren't a collective as you mention above.

timsey tiger

Well, I'm hardly referring to the people of Northern Ireland. In the context I'm clearly referring to the Executive, and as you've agreed governments have collective responsibility, so I'm happy with my usage.

grayzer75

timsey tiger wrote: »

Well, I'm hardly referring to the people of Northern Ireland. In the context I'm clearly referring to the Executive, and as you've agreed governments have collective responsibility, so I'm happy with my usage.

You'd be better referring to us as the people of Ireland because we're all in this together. There's no need to close the border as there is only those of us who have to cross it as frontline workers doing so - I crossed at 7am this morning and there was only a handful of trucks / cars on the road where there would usually be hundreds.

BonnieSituation

timsey tiger wrote: »

Well, I'm hardly referring to the people of Northern Ireland. In the context I'm clearly referring to the Executive, and as you've agreed governments have collective responsibility, so I'm happy with my usage.

Agreed? Hardly?

It's exactly who I thought you may be referring to. AS I said, words are important. Perhap using "Executive" would have been a better idea?

Even referring to the Executive and their apparent collective responsibility seems to give Unionists a pass.

It's amazing how they are all in this together all of a sudden and yet SF were lambasted a couple of weeks back for being "petulant" for disagreeing with the UKG and Unionist stance.

timsey tiger

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Agreed? Hardly?

It's exactly who I thought you may be referring to. AS I said, words are important. Perhap using "Executive" would have been a better idea?

Even referring to the Executive and their apparent collective responsibility seems to give Unionists a pass.

It's amazing how they are all in this together all of a sudden and yet SF were lambasted a couple of weeks back for being "petulant" for disagreeing with the UKG and Unionist stance.

I wish I had now, I was not expecting my point about securing the border being derailed by this sort of pot kettle black silliness at a time when, we really are all in this together.

The question I'm interested in is secure the Island or just the state.

timsey tiger

grayzer75 wrote: »

You'd be better referring to us as the people of Ireland because we're all in this together. There's no need to close the border as there is only those of us who have to cross it as frontline workers doing so - I crossed at 7am this morning and there was only a handful of trucks / cars on the road where there would usually be hundreds.

Question, how many cases can arise from one single infected person?

Answer - all of them!

BonnieSituation

timsey tiger wrote: »

I wish I had now, I was not expecting my point about securing the border being derailed by this sort of pot kettle black silliness at a time when, we really are all in this together.

The question I'm interested in is secure the Island or just the state.

The island would be more secure but for unionism. That's why I was being a stickler.

But yes, secure the island, not just the State.

Sam Russell

BonnieSituation wrote: »

The island would be more secure but for unionism. That's why I was being a stickler.

But yes, secure the island, not just the State.

Well, some of the PPE stuff that arrived yesterday is destined for the north.

That should be a good news item and a sign of solidarity.

BonnieSituation

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, some of the PPE stuff that arrived yesterday is destined for the north.

That should be a good news item and a sign of solidarity.

The South is rarely short of solidarity with the north. It's almost par for the course.

Unfortunately, belligerent unionism isn't capable of seeing such things as a sensible approach and always see it as an attack.

timsey tiger

BonnieSituation wrote: »

The South is rarely short of solidarity with the north. It's almost par for the course.

Unfortunately, belligerent unionism isn't capable of seeing such things as a sensible approach and always see it as an attack.

Give it a rest please, maybe they think we are all like you. You've won I won't be posting here anymore you ruined it for me.

Capt'n Midnight

Just in case anyone's worried about the Russians eavesdropping, Boris handed everything over to Zoom. It's amateur hour.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/04/01/zoom_spotlight/

UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson sparked security concerns on Tuesday when he shared a screenshot of “the first ever digital Cabinet” on his Twitter feed. It revealed the country’s most senior officials and ministers were using bog-standard Zoom to discuss critical issues facing Blighty.

The tweet also disclosed the Zoom meeting ID was 539-544-323, and fortunately that appears to have been password protected. That's a good thing because miscreants hijacking unprotected Zoom calls is a thing.

Crucially, the use of the Zoom software is likely to have infuriated the security services, while also raising questions about whether the UK government has its own secure video-conferencing facilities. We asked GCHQ, and it told us that it was a Number 10 issue. Downing Street declined to comment.

CelticRambler

Weren't we supposed to have had a report on Russian interference in British politics published by now? Did I miss it in all the Covid noise or is someone in Downing Street still sitting on it? Perhaps the dog ate it ...

serfboard

CelticRambler wrote: »

Weren't we supposed to have had a report on Russian interference in British politics published by now? ... Perhaps the dog ate it ...

That dog has been very busy these days!