Quantcast

Coronavirus - do you trust the UK Government to make the right decisions ?

Coronavirus - do you trust the UK government to make the right decisions?

  • Yes

    Votes: 64 42.7%
  • No

    Votes: 86 57.3%

  • Total voters
    150

Sonic67

Suspended
It's does not a matter how Corbyn would be dealing with this,he is not the elected government,its how the elected government is dealing with it,that matters.
And he was the alternative. Odd how many would rather forget that.
 

steve sph

Well-known Member
Christ - is that the only comeback the Boris fanclub can come up with now - 'oh, but Corbyn would have been even worse'?
Seriously - how could he?
We've got a piecemeal partial lockdown nobody seems to take any notice of whilst the rest of the world get serious, we've got surgeons going on e-bay to buy masks and gowns, we've got commuter trains rammed with tradesman working in London who can't possible maintain a two metre distance, and to cap it all parliament is buggering off for an Easter break from today.
If ever there was a crisis that meant the self-serving wastes of DNA cancelling their jollies and actually putting a shift in for once it's now.
So is there any chance the golf club bores who camp out on these threads exonerating these dithering halfwits 24/7 could possibly go elsewhere to build their Strawman defence of the indefensible?
 

scrowe

Well-known Member
If we needed a remind of how nasty, stupid and clueless a lot of this population are, check the replies to Matt Hancock regarding the NHS volunteer scheme.


How to bring down a message that I for one found extremely positive. And I bet all the negative tweeters to this, trying to score political points are the last ones to try and help or volunteer. Because it's always the governments fault or responsibility, obviously.
 

Solomon Grundy

Distinguished Member
I trust them to make the best decisions for the future of society as a whole...don't trust them at all to make the "best" decisions to tackle this virus.
 

Sonic67

Suspended
To be honest i would been just as scared,he seem indecisive over so many things :(
Empty shelves, no one working, billions of government spending, we can pretend he got elected.
 

scrowe

Well-known Member
I trust them to make the best decisions for the future of society as a whole...don't trust them at all to make the "best" decisions to tackle this virus.
And when the best way to tackle the virus, is not the best for the future of society as a whole ...? Making these overall tough decisions, is exactly what Governments are supposed to do.
 

steve sph

Well-known Member
Making these overall tough decisions, is exactly what Governments are supposed to do.
...which is going to be difficult given that parliament is going on it's collective one month holiday from today.
So no new emergency measures can be voted through anyway.
The biggest crisis facing this country since the second world war and the cabinet are on a collective Easter egg hunt.
 

Solomon Grundy

Distinguished Member
...which is going to be difficult given that parliament is going on it's collective one month holiday from today.
So no new emergency measures can be voted through anyway.
The biggest crisis facing this country since the second world war and the cabinet are on a collective Easter egg hunt.
Don't be daft...not all of them celebrate Easter.
 

richp007

Distinguished Member
Let's keep it civil please...
For the record McBainne made some good points, as did DLPMaybe before him. Even though on different sides of the argument.

Then the usual happened whenever McBainne makes any post, and before you know it - also as usual - Corbyn gets dragged in. Corbyn is irrelevant in a discussion about the government making decisions. I don't know why some are obsessed with involving him still.

Anyways, thought that was a pretty good PMQ's today. A lot more disciplined in tone, how it should be every week. Instead of the playground it becomes.

One thing is for sure, Sunak needs to address the self-employed situation by the end of the week.
 

mcbainne

Well-known Member
Referencing how Corbyn would handle any given situation is as irrelevant as imagining how Ed Miliband or Paddy Ashdown would have, it's totally pointless as an argument as he was rejected by the electorate and will never see high office
Of course, we know the real reason is because certain posters like to use him to deflect any attention or criticism away from their own party......you could say he's a very old, very grey squirrel of sorts :laugh:

From what i've read Sunak seems to be keen on copying the Scandinavian countries model to pay a % on the average of the last 2 or 3 years earnings. These people need to know fast to give them security and get them out of circulation
 

richp007

Distinguished Member
Referencing how Corbyn would handle any given situation is as irrelevant as imagining how Ed Miliband or Paddy Ashdown would have, it's totally pointless as an argument as he was rejected by the electorate and will never see high office
Of course, we know the real reason is because certain posters like to use him to deflect any attention or criticism away from their own party......you could say he's a very old, very grey squirrel of sorts :laugh:

From what i've read Sunak seems to be keen on copying the Scandinavian countries model to pay a % on the average of the last 2 or 3 years earnings. These people need to know fast to give them security and get them out of circulation
Got any link for that? That would be an interesting and unexpected move. Unless I've missed the chatter about it.

One of my mate's is self-employed, fortunately just sold a second house before Xmas so he's not in any trouble right now. But he has said you can see majorly already the loss of earnings, so for those less fortunate without money in the bank it is a major headache.
 

oldfart

Active Member
Sunak could be a PM in waiting after this. The only one of the front bench who looks competent and assured in what he's been saying.
Funny you should say that. After watching him address the nation in the role as Chancellor I indeed thought to myself he will be the next Conservative leader. So articulate in what he says.
 

richp007

Distinguished Member
Funny you should say that. After watching him address the nation in the role as Chancellor I indeed thought to myself he will be the next Conservative leader. So articulate in what he says.
Articulation is a necessity of any leader. It conveys ability and instils confidence in people who are listening. Clearly not all have it!

Although Johnson's address to the television the other night was by far his best moment in his entire career.
 
From what i've read Sunak seems to be keen on copying the Scandinavian countries model to pay a % on the average of the last 2 or 3 years earnings. These people need to know fast to give them security and get them out of circulation
Interesting. I've been suggesting the same for many years now, and stated so many a time on these forums. Normally met with silence...

70% of the average income over the preceding four years, for a maximum of 18 months. Under normal circumstances...

Although in these exceptional circumstances I don't think that is sustainable nor useful nor quick and easy to implement. I'd rather see emergency legislation put in place to provide EVERYONE with the basics; ensure a continued roof over our heads with regards to rent and mortgage payments. Pause required payments for utilities. And distribute equally 'ration' packages for food and fuel coupons to each household and registered vehicle.

Eliminate the need for cash and payments and hoarding in my opinion. Small nutritious rations for all.
 

mcbainne

Well-known Member
Got any link for that? That would be an interesting and unexpected move. Unless I've missed the chatter about it.

One of my mate's is self-employed, fortunately just sold a second house before Xmas so he's not in any trouble right now. But he has said you can see majorly already the loss of earnings, so for those less fortunate without money in the bank it is a major headache.
I noticed it on twitter, Telegraph and behind the paywall but as it's them it's more likely to be based on word within the party

 

Mr Incredible

Distinguished Member
Does anyone know whether the grants of 'up to £2,500' per month for the 'Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme' will be taxable? Or is that in the pocket?
It's taxable. In effect it's a subsidy to the employer to pay wages as normal which in turn is taxable as normal.
Any additional payment by the employer over and above the £2500 or 80% (whichever is the lesser) is entirely optional.
 

kenshingintoki

Well-known Member
Interesting. I've been suggesting the same for many years now, and stated so many a time on these forums. Normally met with silence...

70% of the average income over the preceding four years, for a maximum of 18 months. Under normal circumstances...

Although in these exceptional circumstances I don't think that is sustainable nor useful nor quick and easy to implement. I'd rather see emergency legislation put in place to provide EVERYONE with the basics; ensure a continued roof over our heads with regards to rent and mortgage payments. Pause required payments for utilities. And distribute equally 'ration' packages for food and fuel coupons to each household and registered vehicle.

Eliminate the need for cash and payments and hoarding in my opinion. Small nutritious rations for all.

I agree.

Government have dug themselves a whole with this arbtrirary 80% figure which applies to some but not all.

Self employed waiting until June just for the start of the distribution of money owed to them.
 
The BBC have often unnecesarily got their "reporters" to stand as "a bit of window dressing" outside government buildings, or more frequently, 10 Downing Street, to give a related "report" to an outside broadcast camera, that could have been read by a presenter in the studio. So in the light of the present situation regarding movement, why are they still sending them out?
 

simonblue

Distinguished Member
Not his only mistake,he had a few


Denial of retraction of discredited vaccine paper[edit]
See also: The Lancet § Controversies
On 28 February 1998 Horton published a controversial paper by Dr. Andrew Wakefield and 12 co-authors with the title “Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children" suggesting that vaccines could cause autism. The publication of the paper set off a sharp decline in vaccinations in Europe and America and in subsequent years globally.[18] In the United Kingdom, the Health Protection Agency attributed a large measles outbreak in 2008 and 2009 to a concurrent drop in the number of children receiving the MMR vaccine. Pockets of measles — which can be fatal —have also cropped up in Canada and the United States as a result of parents’ refusal to vaccinate.[19]

Horton was heavily criticised for refusing to take action for so long. He was finally forced to retract the paper in February 2010 after the General Medical Council, which oversees doctors in Britain, said that "there was a biased selection of patients in The Lancet paper" and that Wakefield's "conduct in this regard was dishonest and irresponsible".[20] Horton defended his position by saying "I do not regret publishing the original Wakefield paper. Progress in medicine depends on the free expression of new ideas. I worked at the Royal Free from 1988 to 1990 and met him on many occasions. He is a committed, engaging, and charismatic clinician and scientist. He asks big questions about diseases - what are their ultimate causes? - and his ambition often brings quick and impressive results."[21] However, there are groups criticising Horton for contributing to t

Professor Sir Roy Meadow[edit]
Horton published an article in 2005 supporting Professor Sir Roy Meadow who had been charged with serious professional misconduct by the GMC for giving erroneous and seriously misleading evidence in the Sally Clark trial. This was especially controversial as the article appeared whilst the GMC proceedings were still under away and was published on the first day of Meadow's defence. The article "incensed" Clark, a solicitor who had been the victim of a serious miscarriage of justice. With the support of erroneous statistical (and other) evidence from Meadow the prosecution wrongly convicted her of murder and she spent over three years in prison before her successful second appeal.[23][24]

Her husband wrote a rebuttal letter to The Lancet in order to correct Horton's 'many inaccuracies and one-sided opinions' and to prevent them prejudicing independent observers. Dr James Le Fanu, medical practitioner and writer, also wrote to The Lancet in the same issue and described Horton's words as 'mischief'.[25] The Clark family issued a statement addressing and countering with established fact each of the points making up Horton's biased support of Meadow.

:thumbsdow
 

mcbainne

Well-known Member
This aged well, from 2017 the same year the same government cheered in parliment when all but 1 voted to block a decent payrise for NHS and emergency staff

A recommendation for all frontline NHS staff to be given protective equipment during a flu epidemic was rejected as too costly, an explosive memo reveals.


We now have NHS workers being gagged and threatened if they expose the lack of PPE while being warned their social media is being monitored

 

Latest News

Huawei launches Vision X65 OLED TV in China
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Virgin Media adds more free Sky channels
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Disney Plus reaches 50 million subscribers globally
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Samsung to end Smart View app support on older TVs
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Leema Acoustics offers factory shipping for locked down customers
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom