You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Is he being an irresponsible arse?
Will he roll over once the bodycount increases?
No he is doing his job. Local businesses and individuals need protected fairly from the impact of forced business closure and should receive proper funding and payments to prevent huge job losses and personal hardship. From what I understand the money offered by central government was nowhere near enough (surprise surprise) so hence the deadlock in negotiations.
This is all of our problem to deal with, not just one region left to fend for themself.
Remember every lost job costs us all far more in welfare and lost productivity than some small payments for a few months to keep jobs intact.
No, he's sticking up for the interests of his constituents against Dictats from Westminster issued by people who clearly couldn't find greater Manchester on a map.
The economic effect on all these places going into Tier 3 will be enormous and the package on offer will do little to negate that. We could be looking at a re-run of the 80's in the North if they go ahead wit this as the lockdown rolls into next year, which it obviously will.
In doing so he has the full support of all the regions Tory MP's and councillors, which include some proper big hitters like Sir Graham Brady, head of the 1922 committee.
The fact that we've heard nothing today after Goves whiney little snipes yesterday would suggest theres no sign of him rolling over
Good! I feel like we've got someone fighting our corner against a government who couldn't give a toss about us. I've heard nothing but support for his position from within Greater Manchester.
No, he’s sticking up for the interests of his constituents against Dictats from Westminster issued by people who clearly couldn’t find greater Manchester on a map.
One of the MP's commented last week that she wasn't invited to a meeting as Cabinet secretaries didn't realise that Wigan was next to Manchester or in the NW of England.
Good! I feel like we’ve got someone fighting our corner against a government who couldn’t give a toss about us
Agreed.
No he is doing his job. Local businesses and individuals need protected fairly from the impact of forced business closure and should receive proper funding and payments to prevent huge job losses and personal hardship.
This.
I'm in the midlands and which we had Burnham on our side.
One of the MP’s commented last week that she wasn’t invited to a meeting as Cabinet secretaries didn’t realise that Wigan was next to Manchester or in the NW of England.
That was Lisa Nandy. The MP for Warrington was also invited to the Liverpool City region meeting, then uninvited when they realised it was in Cheshire.
The Lancashire MP's also pointed out at their meeting that with a Liverpool Derby on Saturday and Liverpool locked down, people would just come over to Ormkirk and Skelmersdale to watch it in the pubs. They were met with blank looks as nobody on the governemnt side had a clue where Ormkirk and Skelmersdale were.
They really are total bunch of ****ing clowns.
Is he being an irresponsible arse?
There may be a degree of posturing, but otherwise no. He does seem to be taking a more holistic view of *all* the ways his constituents can be f****d by COVID - not just the number who get it, but those who lose their jobs, can't get healthcare for unrelated medical issues, can't maintain their mental wellbeing due to strict lockdown etc.
Ignoring for a moment the incompetence/ rank politicking, the Westminster government has fixated solely on the # of new daily cases of COVID, and everything they do is focused solely on bringing that number down, regardless of the relative impact of daily case numbers (COVID is much less lethal than in March because of lessons learned then) vs total economic and infrastructure shutdown. You can't necessarily blame them for that fixation - they're not good with data and have been told it's bad if this number gets big.
*obviously you can and should blame them for the cronyism, incompetence and downright criminal behaviour after that point.
I get annoyed at the narrative that is presented, that it is Andy Burnham against the government, as mention above multiple mp's are also fighting for better support for those places in tier 3.
By making sound like its one man, Gove and his fellow henchmen can make it sound like political point scoring....
change the narrative....northen Mp's and Mayors fight for better suppoort against Gove. Makes it sound more like one man not supporting the north.
Good! I feel like we’ve got someone fighting our corner against a government who couldn’t give a toss about us. I’ve heard nothing but support for his position from within Greater Manchester.
Couldnt agree more!
Its a bit of a no win. Delaying measures will cost lives no doubt - but agreeing without decent finances will cost the economy. On balance he is probably right IMO - as the measures are half arsed anyway.
Balancing lives against the economy is a tricky thing to do.
He's Labour though, so won't be in for an easy ride.
I get annoyed at the narrative that is presented
Agreed. Ministers keep spinning the "party politics" line, and the media keep running with it... despite so many Tory MPs in northern seats speaking out more strongly about the paucity of the proposals, and the government's handling of all this, than Burnham.
I get annoyed at the narrative that is presented, that it is Andy Burnham against the government, as mention above multiple MPs are also fighting for better support for those places in tier 3.
One of those MPs is the head of the 1922 committee, hardly your typical left-wing pariah.
Burnham's done what the government should be doing, saying "sod political differences, what's the best (least worst) path through this that we can all pull together and make work?". No doubt some on the left will disagree about some parts and some on the right will disagree about others but it does show how strong consensus can be. He wouldn't have lasted a day following this course without such consensus.
He’s Labour though, so won’t be in for an easy ride.
Luckily he's about a hundred times more competent and heavyweight a politician than Johnson, and nobody will be more aware of that than Boris.
Anyone seen Boris recently? In a fridge maybe?
He visited our business premises shortly before lockdown. Came across as a really sound and intelligent man.
As has been said - he's doing what a mayor should.
Anyone seen Boris recently?
Taking some American intern to a conference maybe?
He does seem to be taking a more holistic view of *all* the ways his constituents can be f****d by COVID – not just the number who get it, but those who lose their jobs, can’t get healthcare for unrelated medical issues, can’t maintain their mental wellbeing due to strict lockdown etc.
Ignoring for a moment the incompetence/ rank politicking, the Westminster government has fixated solely on the # of new daily cases of COVID, and everything they do is focused solely on bringing that number down, regardless of the relative impact of daily case numbers (COVID is much less lethal than in March because of lessons learned then) vs total economic and infrastructure shutdown. You can’t necessarily blame them for that fixation – they’re not good with data and have been told it’s bad if this number gets big.
Better written than I could have.
It's not just numbers of cases we need to be looking at.
Came across as really sound and intelligent man.
I went to school with him. We used to go to the footy together. He's a top bloke. 100% genuine. Great to see him facing up to this shambles of a government.
Get a room!
I never used to rate him as a politician, when he was an MP... but he'd already proved himself to me to be the right person in his current role before this issue... he's Major of the region first, Labour politician second, and well supported because of that.
I was never a fan of this mayor thing (makes us head down the US route sooner) but the fanfare from tories was always 'elect a mayor, more power and decision making will be held locally, more funding given to the mayor to spend on the best local projects'
Seems when that mayor wants to use some of that power and apply the funding as he sees fit its a different story
now its all 'get on board, do as your told, central government knows best, you're not looking after constituents interests'
The local Conservative MP's have been very vocal also against Bojo and his chums. It's bully boy tactics, and someone needs to look at what Boris is saying - it's outrageous. Who the hell writes his speeches?
They have also told lies about engaging the GM MP's and Mayors - they haven't.
Burnham - King for the North !
Tier 3 restrictions would certainly take an economic toll on Greater MCR, but would they really do much to stem the virus vs. Tier 2? I'm not convinced and I don't think Burnham is either.
It's just tinkering around the edges when England really needs to follow Wales into a short temporary lockdown ASAP.
Tier 3 restrictions would certainly take an economic toll on Greater MCR, but would they really do much to stem the virus vs. Tier 2?
We'll never know because the government won't share their data.
Government seem to have achieved the impossible and united everyone in the North across both parties and the entire political spectrum against them.
As others have said I think he is right to take the stance he has but I assume at some point the government can simply impose tier 3 on the region whether we like it or not.
I met him/heard him speak at a thing about housing policy I was photographing. I never used to rate him but I was impressed. I'd rather he was in charge of Labour than KS personally.
Look at how it's gone for those regions that tried to compromise.
It seems likely the impact of Tier3 restrictions would be measurable, but not enough to offer a path out of Tier3, hard to even guess really, because the measures vary between the regions that have gone in... but once the question is answered... "how do we get out of Tier3 ?", then regions will be more receptive to going in.
Burnham’s done what the government should be doing, saying “sod political differences, what’s the best (least worst) path through this that we can all pull together and make work?”
Actually they are pulling in different directions - the tories want less restrictions because they don't like them Burnham just wants a proper financial package. Its a very fragile alliance that will soon split again
when the question is answered… “how do we get out of Tier3”, then regions will be more receptive to going in.
Given that we were all put into Tier 2 twelve weeks ago, then immediately forgotten about, you can see why it's an issue.
Most people think, with some justification, that once we're in Tier 3 then thats it until next spring. Not a very enticing prospect, not being able to meet anyone outside your own household until well into next year
Hows that test and trace system looking?
It’s just tinkering around the edges when England really needs to follow Wales into a short temporary lockdown ASAP.
And then what? We come out, cases go up, we lockdown again, we come out, cases go up, ad infinitum. This virus is with us, there’s no eradicating it. Vaccines will only protect against that strain, it’s already mutated.
It would help the government if they published some criteria on which these decisions are being made. Nottingham is twice the rate of Manchester. Bristol is higher now than when Bolton went into lockdown. Exeter is higher now than Stockport. That’s what’s leading to mistrust.
Seems that Graham Brady is backing him as well.
And then what? We come out, cases go up, we lockdown again, we come out, cases go up, ad infinitum.
Yep, we do exactly that until there are more effective treatments available - probably Q1 next year.
it’s already mutated
Are you getting your scientific information from random angry people on Facebook?
It would help the government if they published some criteria on which these decisions are being made.
Agreed. The rate of increase in hospital admissions seems to be the key difference between those areas you list though. But we shouldn't be guessing... it should be more transparent, as you say.
You are wiser than me then! Apologies.
EDIT: In reply to the headline to your link (I haven't read it) all viruses are mutating all the time, that is, literally, life. But so far there has been no mutation found that suggests that a working vaccine won't be restricted in its effectiveness by mutations. That could well come at some point... but currently the "it's already mutated, a vaccine won't stop this" meme that I keep seeing on Facebook is adding 2 and 2 and getting 5.
EDIT2: I decided to skim read it... it says much the same as I posted.
I'm glad he's standing firm on this. It's not a Labour/Tory issue as he has his local Tory MPs on side, and it's not a North/South issue (sorry binners), because the principle of protecting livelihoods and businesses potentially affects all areas of the country.
He's ensuring that everyone who could be affected by restrictions gets appropriate protection. Yes, it's risky if the death toll rises, but he's doing the right thing for the right reasons. Which puts clear water between him and the government
I've got a conference call with him next week. That has the potential to be quite entertaining!
He's sound - a genuine guy who does actually care about Manchester. He's also the former Health Secretary under Gordon Brown so he knows exactly how Westminster works. The problem he's facing is that it's reasonably easy for Government to portray him as a lone disagreeable troublemaker being all nasty to them - that slimy toad Michael Gove couldn't wait to accuse him of political posturing.
The fact that Burnham has shown more empathy and understanding of the North in general and Manchester in particular in 3 days than the entire Government has managed in the last 3 years obviously passed by the irony void that is Gove.
Government though are stuck really. If they tell Burnham to get on with things, that's giving devolution to the North and that's the absolute last thing they want to do. But if they try to impose their will on the North, they'll piss off their entire Red Wall. Burnham has fairly broad cross-party support which tells you all you need to know about him as a person and a politician.
I think he's excellent - all the calls I've had with him he's obviously the one politician on the call that everyone else looks up to and admires. When he speaks, people listen.
You are wiser than me then! Apologies.
Apology accepted.
I think he is doing a cracking job and exactly what he should be. It’s nice to see he has built some cross party support with local mps too. We more like him
Hows that test and trace system looking?
After my dealings with them over the last couple of days since my lad tested positive... shambolic!
Contradictory instructions given, multiple phone calls asking the same questions within minutes of each other and one guy who couldn't count to 14 without taking his socks off.
Omnishambles.
FWIW I think Burnham is doing a grand job.
Actually they are pulling in different directions – the tories want less restrictions because they don’t like them Burnham just wants a proper financial package. Its a very fragile alliance that will soon split again
I was going to say this - watch it implode any day. Graham Brady is all for no lockdown type measures, no assistance of business, we can't stop death so let it play out and let businesses have the space to save themselves. Burnham wants a full circuit breaker national lockdown with the same level of financial help as was given out in March. The medium term goals of the two could not possibly be further from each other. It's only because Burnham is digging his heels in to get a better assistance package that they look relatively aligned for a few days.
it’s not a North/South issue (sorry binners), because the principle of protecting livelihoods and businesses potentially affects all areas of the country
Binners has already made that point elsewhere.
The medium term goals of the two could not possibly be further from each other.
True... which way will the government move..? Towards Brady, and move the region down to Tier1... or towards Burnham, and improve the measures and support of Tier3, before moving the region in? Or, keep them both unhappy by moving the region into Tier3 with no changes, and no path out...? Whatever happens, when/if the split between Burnham and Brady (and other Tory MPs) occurs, the political fallout is likely to be worse for the government than for Burnham.
@wiganer - this is moving more to the general Covid thread than one about Andy Burnham. I asked something similar - @Tired responded that it isn't the "headline" figure but a combination of rate of increase (low rate but high rate of increase is worse than medium rate with low rate of increase), which sectors of the populace where showing positive (high rate in students less worrying than in OAPs) and several other factors.
What's better: An indeterminate period of vague recommended restrictions or periodic short term full lockdowns?
I'm unsure as to whether there'll be a viable vaccine even in the medium term. Herd immunity as a goal is unrealistic, we hardly have that for flu which has been around for centuries. Realistically I think we need to be looking at effective, low intervention, treatment that doesn't tie up ICU beds for months. I.e. a drug or cocktail of drugs that would make contracting Covid-19 as inconvenient as the common cold rather than being another form of Influenza.
it’s not a North/South issue (sorry binners),
I never said it was. I don't think they'll treat anywhere else any better once their turn comes. We're just ahead of the curve up here.
They just intend to let 'The Market' decide everything as that is the idealogical prison they're trapped within. They simply can't, or won't countenance any other way of doing things.
Having seen the results of the last time they let that happen, first-hand, Andy clearly thinks different
What’s better: An indeterminate period of vague recommended restrictions or periodic short term full lockdowns?
Are they our only two options?
Point taken re: the topic. Andy Burnham is doing exactly the right thing imo, he’s asking for evidenced based decision making with transparency, followed up with appropriate support. My local MP is William Wragg, he’s a Tory, he’s supporting Andy Burnham.
Point taken about the options - they were just the two currently being used.
At the moment the government have basically said: "This is what you are going to do." The response is: "What's the evidence to support that?" to which the government are saying "you don't need to know that"
I think you two are now having a heated agreement... and I agree also.
Realistically I think we need to be looking at effective, low intervention, treatment that doesn’t tie up ICU beds for months. I.e. a drug or cocktail of drugs that would make contracting Covid-19 as inconvenient as the common cold rather than being another form of Influenza.
For the significant majority of the population getting rid of track and trace would make CV19 far less inconvenient than a cold. Not advocating that... just stating the obvious.
How so? Losing workmates and loved ones isn't "inconvenient"?
The chances of that happening to you remain pretty small. Among the 40k excess deaths I would expect a significant number were people at the end of their lives in some way or another and so would be expected to die at some point in the coming months/year, and the total represents an 8% increase per year maybe? 8% more chance of knowing someone that died say in the last year? Thats not a significant increase in the likelihood of any given person on the street having had someone close to them die in the last 12 months say by comparison to the chances of that having happened in a 'normal' year.
Its not nice and Im not advocating the policy, but the numbers don't support the idea that CV19 is significantly impactful to the population as a whole other than in terms of the effects of restrictions it creates, and we don't yet know what the long term effect of those will be.
But we'd not be talking 40k, if we didn't take the measures we did, and are... such as track/trace/isolate. Anyway.. this isn't what Burnham is opposing, or suggesting... there's another thread if you want to make comparisons between this virus the common cold, or to argue that the possible impact of it is low... happy to talk about such [insert word of choice] over there.
The chances of that happening to you remain pretty small
Thats not a significant increase in the likelihood of any given person on the street having had someone close to them die in the last 12 months say by comparison to the chances of that having happened in a ‘normal’ year.
Cheers Ben, perhaps you could call my wife (with common variable immunoglobulin disorder) and tell her she can die so that you can get back to life without any inconvenience.
The 'small chance' is still someone.
At the moment the government have basically said: “This is what you are going to do.” The response is: “What’s the evidence to support that?” to which the government are saying “you don’t need to know that”
That's mostly because the Government don't know / don't care / can't follow the evidence either!
the “it’s already mutated, a vaccine won’t stop this” meme
My understanding is that while a vaccine may be the long term aim, it's more likely that we'll have effective treatment for Covid initially. Prevention may be better than cure, but we'll all take a cure if there's one going, I'm sure.
Cheers Ben, perhaps you could call my wife (with common variable immunoglobulin disorder) and tell her she can die so that you can get back to life without any inconvenience.
Like I said Im not advocating basing policy on it.
The chances of that happening to you remain pretty small. Among the 40k excess deaths I would expect a significant number were people at the end of their lives in some way or another and so would be expected to die at some point in the coming months/year, and the total represents an 8% increase per year maybe?
It's over 60k excess deaths already, majority of those in a 3M period. When we had a 3M limited lockdown in place.
If those people were likely to die anyway this year, we'd have seen a massive dip below the average line. We haven't ergo it's reasonable to suggest that most of those people would have survived the year.
If we don't get it under control soon, then that 60k excess deaths can easily become 100k this year. Then we're going into next year with 100's of daily deaths.
If we just let it rip, surely we're closer to the initial predictions of 250000 deaths.
chakaping
Full MemberTier 3 restrictions would certainly take an economic toll on Greater MCR, but would they really do much to stem the virus vs. Tier 2?
No, basically. A bit, but if things are bad enough to go up to the highest level of alert, then "a bit" doesn't cut it.
Of course, that's part of the farce of the 3 tiers- there's no low tier, as if nobody ever gets to get better. And there's not really any high tiers either. There's just 3 levels of middle, with not much room between them. It's like a really bad compression damper. All the actual action is going to come from the tier 3 small print "plus other stuff as needed"
If those people were likely to die anyway this year, we’d have seen a massive dip below the average line. We haven’t ergo it’s reasonable to suggest that most of those people would have survived the year.
ehhhh, there has been a dip below the average line. It'd be a stretch to say it's massive - and nobody but a mentalist would argue that the net effect is neutral - but it's there
Like I said Im not advocating basing policy on it.
Wrong thread and totally pointless uneducated speculation.
Wrong thread and totally pointless uneducated speculation.
This whole thread is uneducated speculation.... But no its not the wrong thread, what this thread is about is Andy Burnham's attempt to balance the need for protecting the health of a minority of people against the longterm welfare of the majority, who would be adversely affected by more restrictive lockdowns without adequate additional protections from the government.
The argument being played out in the media is that AB is directly responsible for the additional deaths that may occur in MCR, or alternatively he's a hero looking out for the overall welfare of the city.
This ultimately is where all covid discussions will end up, in a dilemma of balancing the needs of the few with the needs of the many. I was simply reflecting on an earlier point and highlighting that its difficult to determine what the appropriate level of intervention is as one person's treatment, is another persons long term life opportunities restricted, and as MOAA points out, it could be another's death sentence.
Wrong thread and totally pointless uneducated speculation.
Are you new here?
ben - suggest you read TiRed's posts on the Coronavirus thread about equipoise.
We haven't found that point yet.
Burnham has gone from being a decent MP who was an "also ran" to a political heavyweight overnight. I'm fairly impressed by him to be honest, however the scientist side of me is telling me that we need a stricter lockdown. That's not to say Burnham is delaying any kind of lockdown is horseshit - Johnson's cabinet are the ones delaying a proper lockdown and not supporting business properly.
And good luck to Boris and Rishi trying to * over the rest of the local councils the way they just *ed over Lancashire and Liverpool.
All their constituents are presently asking why their leaders didn’t stand up for them like Andy has done for Manchester...
Every time a government minister thanks them for the cooperation
Which they’ve done quite a lot over the last few days
You can tell the only person with any proper political nouse here. And they’re certainly not in Westminster
Sadly I think Burnham is destined to lose this battle with Westminster. When the hospitals fill up and the deaths increase the finger of blame will be pointed solely at him, and they'll say he sacificed x number of people for a political vendetta and to improve his own profile. HIs only chance is if cases start to fall once the spike caused by the students arriving has passed. I suspect he doesn't care though. In this interview at the weekend he says he has no political ambitions left so maybe he's willing to die on this hill.
What I don't get is why they're so determined to cut the furlough support. There's no economic reason not to continue the furlough scheme as it was. The only possible explanation I can think of is that Sunak was getting a bit too popular and Cummings and Boris wanted to clip his wings so ordered him to reduce the level of support to the point that it makes it pointless. The tories get to keep their fictional reputation for financial prudence whilst painting Boris's main rival as the bogey man. Give it a year when the economy has crashed as a result and they'll sack him.
It's like dealing with the school bully - c'mon then, let's have it out now johnson.
Bully makes loads of noise but does nothing to prove him/her self as the better person.
Short term, johnson will prevail because he is PM but he is the long term loser - as are the members of his clown circus.
If johnson took this seriously he would talk direct with Burnham; he delegates to eddie lister and useless jenrick.
That clearly demonstrates how little regard johnson has for the north; johnson's only regard is for his johnson.
Burnham emerges with reputation massively enhanced.
johnson demonstrating, yet again, he is an intellectual and political midget.
What I don’t get is why they’re so determined to cut the furlough support
Tgey are prisoners of their own ideology, which dictates to them that this is all wrong and that they are preventing Them Market’ from sorting everything out for them.
Because we all know how well that always works out.
What worries me now is how far they’re prepared to go to prop up their bankrupt dogma when faced with someone standing up and pointing out the folly of it
That clearly demonstrates how little regard johnson has for the north
He sent Helen Whately to tell ‘the North’ that they were all being put in Tier 3
HELEN ****ING WHATELY
It that doesn’t tell us the esteem in which we’re held, I don’t know what does. Is it any wonder the entire north of the country was immediately united in opposition
Can you think of anything more insulting?
Ooooooooooo.... chinless, corrupt * Robert Jenrick is giving us a noon deadline to do what we’re told.
Tell you what Robert.... why don’t you * right off!
he’s asking for evidenced based decision making with transparency
The problem is this is essentially new science with no reasonable control experiments so there is no compelling evidence one way or the other. The best you can hope for is risk assessment not practical evidence - if course a policy of transparency would make that clear and how you reach the conclusions you do, and which assumptions you used are most critical and most likely to be wrong.
Arbitrary deadline of midday? We can assume an announcement this evening then? I’m guessing that they’ll renounce the financial support already offered and give no exit from tier3 strategy…. proving Burnham right. If you love British pubs… prepare to lose your local this winter, possibly never to return.
https://twitter.com/gmb/status/1318447334540402688?s=21
So, it looks like it's literally high noon today then?
How typical of the government to issue an ultimatum via the media without letting anyone in Greater Manchester know. Once again everyone found out by reading it online. That perfectly illustrates, as if more proof were needed, the utter contempt in which the government hold us up here. Another Westminster dictat issued without consultation. I had a horrible feeling that our de facto PM/dictator, Cummings, was itching for a fight. This is no longer anything to do with health or the economy, it's about Dom asserting his authority.
I hope Andy tells them where to stick it. What exactly are they going to do? Send the troops in?
It's certainly going to be an interesting day in Greater Manchester. Andy seems to have pretty much universal support up here.
And I'm sure every area not already under Tier three is watching this very carefully to see what they're in for, not far down the line. Whatever happens to us today... you're next.
And as the video points out… not just Greater Manchester. Many of us risk being pushed into tier3 without the required support and without a path out of it, this winter. I think plenty of people outside GM can see what the battle really is.
It's a rock and a hard place job he's got.
First is the immediate threat of health or long term health problems, and to balance against that is poverty and deprivation which have much the same result only it's not directly attributed as a cause.
Fundamentally the government is placing restrictions on personal liberty (rightly IMO), but this has an economic fallout. It is the job of a govt to protect its people, and that's exactly what it should be doing, and compensating them for the economic harm caused by that deprivation of liberty.
Protecting the people should be the whole point of having govt. Even the Pharaohs kept reserves of grain etc for times of famine. This mob would simply sell it to their mates.
How typical of the government to issue an ultimatum via the media without letting anyone in Greater Manchester know
Amongst all the rubbish and idiotic stuff this government do, this really annoys me every time it happens and stuff is leaked to the media or posted on twitter late at night
Binners - Andy Burnham definitely needs a piece of your artwork on his wall.
How typical of the government to issue an ultimatum via the media without letting anyone in Greater Manchester know.
How do you know that? They've been in meetings for three days, or by this statement do you mean the public?
Another Westminster dictat issued without consultation.
They've been in consultation for 10 days now.
I hope Andy tells them where to stick it.
Oh dear he isn't, he's going to adhere to the - Tier 3 - law, never mind.
I don't like this governments actions - or lack of - any more that you do Binners, but at least read the news before you rant.
Fundamentally the government is placing restrictions on personal liberty (rightly IMO), but this has an economic fallout. It is the job of a govt to protect its people, and that’s exactly what it should be doing, and compensating them for the economic harm caused by that deprivation of liberty.
Although we could spout on about magic money trees, and "money" would be of help to some, it does not make mental health issues go away, and indeed would create a cliff edge of depravity when that assistance - on which many people would be reliable - is withdrawn. In fact, it couldn't be withdrawn easily for that very reason, so you basically fall into a state funded society and make it even easier for people to manipulate the game and avoid work, squeezing the economy from the other end. You want communism here, then thats the way to go and we'll all end up in miserable Jobs building vaccines in new factories whilst the other half of the population lives on "furlough".
Andy seems to have pretty much universal support up here.
I really hope so, sosh meds is suggesting it's splitting along brexity/political lines
As Cummingses waffen SS stormtroopers bayonet people to death on the street...
"Boris has got such a difficult job..."
"Burnham is just political point scoring..."
"He's a failed mp..."
"We need to get this virus under control before the levelling up begins"
"Uuuuuurrrrrgghh"
How do you know that?
Andy Burnham and all the other parties involved here have made it perfectly clear this morning that they were not made aware of this. They were not given notice. They found out via the media. As seems to be the norm with this shower nowadays. Government via leaks and social media
Maybe its you who needs to read the news?
I don't know why this comes as any surprise to you. They do this all the time. I'm only surprised that it actually came from a minister. Normally it comes from a 'Downing Street Source' (code for Dominic Cummings)
Remember that when we were put into Tier 2, we were 'informed' via Twitter, late at night by little Matty Handjob. Hours before Eid, putting a stop to family gatherings. We're still there 12 weeks later. Has it worked? No, of course it hasn't. Has anyone in Westminster asked anyone up here why not? Of course they haven't. Why will it be any different this time? Of course it wont. Which is why we are placing a lot more faith in our elected representatives here, rather than the gang of incompetents presently masquerading as a government
We're being treated with total contempt by a government that has no interest in our views or our regional economy, and we're heartily ****ing sick of it!!
so you basically fall into a state funded society and make it even easier for people to manipulate the game and avoid work, squeezing the economy from the other end.
It seems to me that there has been, and continues to be an awful lot of 'state funding' of their mates, when awarding multi-million pound contracts without tender and with no oversight
Thats communism, is it?
Looks like crony capitalism to me
Ah, because Andy Burnham told you. While I highly suspect you are absolutely correct, your undwindling belief in our Andy is potentially dangerous. Please remember he's a politician as well.
Notwithstanding that even if Kendrick stood in front of me and told me face to face that he'd told Andy yesterday I'd have massive reservations. Kendrick as your say was just a mouthpiece for Cummings.