8-Jan-2022 : LAB: 39 / CON: 34 / LDEM: 11 / GRN: 5

[somerjohn]

Alec: More Brexit silliness - www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jan/09/brexit-decision-left-uk-firms-paying-10-more-than-eu-rivals-for-emissions

Because Frost demanded we were different, UK firms pay more for varbon credits.

Daft as brushes, the lost of them.


While I'm all for highlighting the malign effects of brexit as they pile up, I was a bit puzzled by the Guardian story. Here's the relevant quote:

"UK companies are paying more than £75 a tonne for the carbon they emit, while similar industries in the EU are paying up to about €85 a tonne. The difference has narrowed slightly in recent days, but was reaching about €8-9 a tonne of carbon in the past month, equating to a premium of about 10% being paid by UK companies.

Now, I've noticed before that their environment correspondent seems on shaky ground when handling economic stories. But the figures she uses don't support the "10% extra" headline.

At £1=€1.19, the UK price equals €89.25, which is just 5% more, and I presume within the usual variance to be expected between different trading systems.

[paulnish]

I was interested to read from the tw collective about how difficult it was for the government to give help temporarily and then to take it back.

Quite recently the government took back £100 per month from the poorest members of society ( I know the taper was slightly increased for those in work).

[steamdrivenandy]

Just looking at the headings Mark posted for the three general discussions thread so far. In date order:

Con 36/34/34
Lab 34/40/39
LD 7/10/11
Grn 10/4/5

One could be forgiven for thinking that LD have nicked the Grn support.

The ABT figure has gone 51/54/55 - add SNP and other anti Tory parties you're surely looking at 58/60/62

[Deleted]

Jan 9, 2022 13:07:39 GMT steamdrivenandy said:

One could be forgiven for thinking that LD have nicked the Grn support.

Typically sneaky.

[graham]

Jan 9, 2022 10:53:20 GMT jimjam said:

CB, I should add that I agree with your earlier post that considering where Labour have come from when Keir became leader, they can still be reasonably satisfied.

Also your comments on the 'should be 10-15points ahead' statements which I agree don't necessarily apply in the context of this exceptional parliament.

Under the Callaghan government the Tory lead from Autumn 1977 until the Winter of Discontent at the start of 1979 was generally smaller than this - indeed Autumn 1978 saw some clear Labour leads.

[oldnat]

Jan 9, 2022 13:07:39 GMT steamdrivenandy said:

The ABT figure has gone 51/54/55 - add SNP and other anti Tory parties you're surely looking at 58/60/62

I'm not sure that ABT numbers can be based on whatever happens to be current VI. At different times and under different circumstances, some of those might vote Tory (since some have done so before).

Maybe better to look at the numbers responding to the YG question on likelihood to vote for the 3 main English parties, and specifically those saying they would never vote for party X


docs.cdn.yougov.com/rc41lthx32/P_Main_Political_Tracker_Survey_Rotation6_sr_12.pdf

I've already quoted the Scots numbers [1], but for GB they are - ABT - 38% : ABL 27% : ABLD 28%


[1] Scotland - ABT - 58% : ABL 23% : ABLD 27%

[alec]

steve - "Please don't go off into flights of fancy about " long covid" post viral syndrome as there's no reliable data on whether this exists in any meaningful sense in any different form from that related to similar post viral effects from similar respiratory diseases."

I could agree with most of your post, but this is totally and utterly wrong, on a deep, factual basis.

We have very clear symptomatic evidence of persistent covid affects, and the scale and extent of these is very clearly substantially greater than for other ILIs.

We also have very strong clinical data of changes in blood and brain chemistry that has been related to long covid symptoms and subsequent additional medical conditions.

You are fundamentally wrong on this point, but I don't blame you. There is a determined effort to minimise and explain away long covid, rather than address the facts of what is becoming a serious long term health burden on the NHS and wider economy.

[Deleted]

Jan 9, 2022 10:37:39 GMT somerjohn said:

Colin at 9.55: Good to see you responding in an adult fashion though-rather than the playground hoots from elsewhere.

Colin at 10.07: Does "Don't think anyone is getting excited" count as "alacrity" ?

Which dictionary were you using ?

Maybe two sarky faux-questions constitute "adult fashion" in Colin-world.

So you equate my question to crossbat11 with this from him ? :-

@"By the way, there is a very good post from Turk at the end of the previous thread, a vintage "Letter from America" if you like, that I urge everyone to have a look at before it fades, like a lost and forlorn voice, into the thin air."

and CB11's penchant for describing Turk as "Turkey" ?



 

[steve]

Does anyone want to tell Turk that he's posting in the last thread.

Don't all speak at once!

[steve]

alec


"While patients suffer a range of symptoms, the most commonly reported are fatigue and breathing problems. Some also experience damage to their organs and in the PHOSP study, one in 10 had clinically relevant cognitive impairment, often called “brain fog”.

"Many symptoms resemble those in other post-viral diseases, including from coronaviruses."

Doesn't make it not real but it does mean it's not unique

[steamdrivenandy]

Maybe we should have a UKPR2.1 Seriously boring and UKPR2.3 Entertainingly flippant, with UKPR2.2 A middling mixture. I suspect 2.2 would be crowded and the other two empty.

[Deleted]

Jan 9, 2022 13:55:04 GMT steve said:

Does anyone want to tell Turk that he's posting in the last thread.

Don't all speak at once!

So how/where  would you respond to a post on the last thread ?

[steamdrivenandy]

Jan 9, 2022 14:03:14 GMT colin said:

Jan 9, 2022 13:55:04 GMT steve said:

Does anyone want to tell Turk that he's posting in the last thread.

Don't all speak at once!

So how/where  would you respond to a post on the last thread ?

Cut and paste onto the latest thread seems to work.

You know what they say 'never go back'.

[Deleted]

Jan 9, 2022 14:10:49 GMT steamdrivenandy said:

Jan 9, 2022 14:03:14 GMT colin said:

So how/where  would you respond to a post on the last thread ?

Cut and paste onto the latest thread seems to work.

You know what they say 'never go back'.

That was AW's "rule".-which did tend to stop long discussions for a while.

But Turk was answering a post from Tancred at the end of the last thread. He responded there-as I would have done.

Still-he provided an opening for another UKPR2.3 

[shevii]

colin

Article in the Sunday Times (maybe just Times being quoted late) from Tim Shipman about optimism in Labour circles but "no cash".

I think you get the paper so have you any details as someone on twitter quoted "an advisor" in the article saying

"There would be some advantages to declaring bankruptcy"- wanted to see if this had been taken out of context???

And before you say get your own paper- no :-)

[jib]

Jan 9, 2022 13:48:21 GMT alec said:

steve - "Please don't go off into flights of fancy about " long covid" post viral syndrome as there's no reliable data on whether this exists in any meaningful sense in any different form from that related to similar post viral effects from similar respiratory diseases."

I could agree with most of your post, but this is totally and utterly wrong, on a deep, factual basis.

We have very clear symptomatic evidence of persistent covid affects, and the scale and extent of these is very clearly substantially greater than for other ILIs.

We also have very strong clinical data of changes in blood and brain chemistry that has been related to long covid symptoms and subsequent additional medical conditions.

You are fundamentally wrong on this point, but I don't blame you. There is a determined effort to minimise and explain away long covid, rather than address the facts of what is becoming a serious long term health burden on the NHS and wider economy.

Alec, this is a very valid point.

I suspect a lot of long COVID sufferers will be put in the same category as those suffering from ME.

The possible long term effects on heart function and possible dementia for the recovered is also deeply worrying.

We saw the long term impacts on individuas who recovered from SARS-1, this version seems equally debilitating for some.

Politicaly - a long term cost for the NHS treating these individuals, and personal cost to career and families.

[paulnish]

@crofty

When your notice is up, perhaps Rosie and Daisy can take over? I do believe they have done it before?!

They would have to start at one star, but one star is great.

Two stars means a visit to Hastings to hear from Danny about how he had covid in 2019.

Three stars involves a zoom meeting with Turk, sitting on his tractor in the vast American countryside, while he reads the latest press release from Conservative central office.

Four stars involves another visit, this time to Scotland. All potential four starers have to watch as Oldnat salutes the saltier as it flys proudly over Oldnat Towers.

Five stars and above is beyond ma ken!!!!

[Deleted]

Jan 9, 2022 14:02:27 GMT steamdrivenandy said:

Maybe we should have a UKPR2.1 Seriously boring and UKPR2.3 Entertainingly flippant, with UKPR2.2 A middling mixture. I suspect 2.2 would be crowded and the other two empty.

That comes over as annoyingly flippant Andy. However, if it’s a serious possibility can we also have a fourth category?

”Playground hooters” would provide an excellent area for Mr Batty to self-isolate.

[Deleted]

Jan 9, 2022 14:42:25 GMT paulnish said:

@crofty

When your notice is up, perhaps Rosie and Daisy can take over? I do believe they have done it before?!

Sadly they retired with hurt feelings after a couple of disagreeable poster found it amusing to suggest they had rabies, some time ago.

I explained to them that it was right wing “humour” but they weren’t impressed.

However, I may decide to work a year’s notice, instead of a week - just to keep the Battmeister in check.

[paulnish]

Jan 9, 2022 10:35:45 GMT steamdrivenandy said:

Mmmm

Energy - we're currently paying about £1,200 per year and our tariff runs to September '22, providing our supplier stays in business.

I've just been on the Which? Switch site and I can go on variable and pay the equivalent of an extra £300 a year 'til the cap gets reviewed, or a one year fix at an extra £1,300 or so, or a two year fix at £1,800 a year more than now. Presumably those fixes are the suppliers hoping to, at least, cover their costs, which means their current pricing will be pessimistic, discouraging long term commitments. If we allowed for that it looks as if our cost increase will be around £1,000 in the next year and an additional £500 next year.

I can't imagine how low income households will manage with rises like that, plus general inflation, plus taxation increases. Something has to give.

Can I say that I like your posts - you are a good man - you quite rightly draw attention to the problems that low income families will face.

But could I add that for many families the budget is how can we survive until our next payment. How can we pay the bills this month and feed the children?

[Deleted]

Paul

......and pay back what we’ve had to borrow.

[steamdrivenandy]

Jan 9, 2022 15:07:35 GMT @crofty said:

Jan 9, 2022 14:42:25 GMT paulnish said:

@crofty

When your notice is up, perhaps Rosie and Daisy can take over? I do believe they have done it before?!

Sadly they retired with hurt feelings after a couple of disagreeable poster found it amusing to suggest they had rabies, some time ago.

I explained to them that it was right wing “humour” but they weren’t impressed.

However, I may decide to work a year’s notice, instead of a week - just to keep the Battmeister in check.

Take care Batty's on retreat preparing mentally for tomorrow's debacle. 

[robert]

Has everyone who wants to, made their predictions for 12 months time and @mark are you locking that thread so there's no possibility of surreptitious alterations, mid year?

[leftieliberal]

Jan 9, 2022 13:07:39 GMT steamdrivenandy said:

Just looking at the headings Mark posted for the three general discussions thread so far. In date order:

Con 36/34/34
Lab 34/40/39
LD 7/10/11
Grn 10/4/5

One could be forgiven for thinking that LD have nicked the Grn support.

The ABT figure has gone 51/54/55 - add SNP and other anti Tory parties you're surely looking at 58/60/62

SDA: The three polls were (respectively) YouGov, Survation, and Opinium, so I call "House effects". YouGov's latest poll (20/12/21) has the Greens on 8%, within their MOE. 

[alec]

steve - "Incidentally the graph you have provided is fundamentally flawed around mid December about 50% -70% of hospital admissions would have been from delta variant , some still will be , not 100% omicron"

Yes, I think that is a perfectly valid observation. But it doesn't alter the central point: it's intellectually lazy and counter factual to claim covid is going to naturally evolve to be milder: Delta was much more sever than the original variant, Omicron less so, but still significantly worse.

To jib as well, and commenting more generally: I just don't think we have the right mindset to adequately deal with covid at peresent. We are displaying the classic human failing of letting optimism trump facts. I don't absolve the science community from this either, but as a society we have normalized very substantial health impacts and accepted high numbers of deaths as 'normal'. We have fallen into a mistaken assumption that a deadly virus will behave itself and become less deadly, just to suit us, and we have placed a very high level of faith indeed that 'something will turn up' in the world of medical science that will solve all our problems.

A lot of advances have been made, but the virus is keeping one step ahead. Even though covid is a relatively stable pathogen, because we have allowed such a high rate of infection, it is evolving faster than we can handle. I'm already reading speculation based on the experience of flu vaccines that we are starting to witness antigenic sin in relation to repeat covid vaccines at short intervals, but despite this risk we insist on ever more rapid cycles of vaccine boosters as variants emerge.

In the west in particular, we are getting the response wrong, ignoring the fundamentals in a misguided belief that optimism and ongoing suffering will make everything ok.

[Deleted]

Jan 9, 2022 14:27:56 GMT shevii said:

colin

Article in the Sunday Times (maybe just Times being quoted late) from Tim Shipman about optimism in Labour circles but "no cash".

I think you get the paper so have you any details as someone on twitter quoted "an advisor" in the article saying

"There would be some advantages to declaring bankruptcy"- wanted to see if this had been taken out of context???

And before you say get your own paper- no :-)

This is the section in question shevii :-

"Phase three — now under way, according to his team — is for Labour to start to look a credible alternative to the Conservatives. Even Starmer’s internal critics say the recent shift in the polls has bolstered McSweeney’s credibility.

The large fly in the ointment, sources inside and outside Starmer’s inner circle say, is that the party is on the verge of bankruptcy and fearful of court cases brought by former employees who claim discrimination during Corbyn’s tenure. “That’s true,” a source close to Starmer said. Another adviser said: “There would be some advantages to declaring bankruptcy. You could start a new organisation with a new membership. But if you did that, the Tories would just run ads saying: ‘You ran your own party into the ground — you can’t be trusted with public money.’”

One suggestion is that the membership has fallen to just over 400,000. “The figures I’ve seen suggest we’ve lost well over 100,000 members, and most of those were the people who knocked on doors. That’s also millions of pounds no longer coming in,” a source said.

t is also claimed that some shadow ministers were moved in the reshuffle in November precisely so HQ could demand fewer aides. The media monitoring unit set up by Alastair Campbell as Tony Blair’s spin doctor has been scrapped.

Starmer’s aides insist they will have a good story to tell about new donors switching from the Tories and Liberal Democrats but have not released names. Others admit the leader is “not a good fundraiser” because he finds it difficult to ask for donations."

Hope that helps.

I must say it was the other part of the article which interested me -selected quotes :-

"The strategy outlined to the shadow cabinet by McSweeney and Deborah Mattinson — Gordon Brown’s former pollster, who wrote a book about the red wall and is now head of strategy — calls for a heavy focus on seats with a “blue-collar history”. They represent 70 of the 200 likely battleground seats, and the Tories hold a third of them — the fabled red wall that collapsed in 2019.

Labour already controls the vast majority of urban seats. There is far less focus on more than 50 seats in the commuter belt and another 50 in shire areas, where Labour holds fewer than one in ten. Similarly, insiders say the focus is on recruiting switchers who voted for the Tories and the Brexit Party in 2019, rather than targeting the one in six Labour voters from 2019 who now say they would vote Green or Lib Dem or don’t know.

McSweeney has told frontbenchers that there are not enough of these voters in the seats that matter. By contrast, the roughly 1.5 million former Labour voters who backed the Tories but might switch back have been labelled “hero voters” by Mattinson.

“We’re told all our messaging needs to be geared towards those blue-collar seats and voters,” a shadow cabinet source said. “This is where a lot of the PLP [parliamentary Labour Party] have reservations and think we are missing a trick by not going aggressively after the commuter belt and shire areas where we made big inroads in 1997.”

This reluctance to invest tight resources in non-core seats was seen at the recent North Shropshire by-election, where Labour left the field clear for the Lib Dems to take the seat from the Tories. The same approach to rural areas was evident when Luke Pollard, an environment spokesman who had done well in getting the National Farmers’ Union on side, was moved in the reshuffle. When the decision was questioned, a member of Starmer’s top team said: “The last time I looked there weren’t any farms in Gedling” — a Nottinghamshire red wall seat seized by the Tories in 2019.

“It’s like the Biden strategy of relentless focus on Michigan and Wisconsin and not caring about Texas because it’s not what we need to win,” the veteran added. “But we came out of 2017 thinking we might win Hastings, and next time I’m not even sure we are going to be trying there.”

A Labour strategist disputed this interpretation: “The voters we are interested in targeting are the same kinds of people in Harlow, Southampton and Worthing as they are in red wall seats.”


So the Lab to Green/LD drift which has been commented on here seems to be a price worth paying for those "hero voters".

It was a very interesting piece and a change to read Shipman having a look at Labour.

[alec]

This is precisely what I'm talking about - www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/09/nadhim-zahawi-denies-there-is-plan-to-end-free-lateral-flow-covid-tests

The idea that if a pathogen is endemic rather than pandemic means it's nicer is barking. Smallpox was endemic once.

But we've tried this already. Throughout the autumn the UK had 150 people dying a day while many other similar countries had far better outcomes, because our government is happy to tolerate very high case loads and everything that goes with that. The answer is to make testing difficult, cut isolation, and pretend everything is fine.

I can't be certain, but I currently expect the UK's wave to be prolonged and subside relatively slowly, while we see far more rapid falls in many other countries, and then, when the next variant hits, we'll cycle through the same world beating acceleration and slow tail, because that's what happens when you don't target suppression. Each time the NHS workers will be thrown under the bus and the financial bill will get worse.

[Deleted]

Jan 9, 2022 10:09:46 GMT colin said:

ST front page headlines the "end of lateral flow tests as country told to live with covid"

Another sign of Sunak staring at that £370 bn Covid bill and shouting "stop" !

Times [1] gives the impression the decision is imminent and total rather than a discussion of options with timing yet to be agreed. Imperial Report 16 covered the selective use of testing to those settings where it would have most impact[2]

The 'when' certainly doesn't sound imminent and I'd be suspicious that we're back to leaks and press 'trial balloons' (to test/scotch those rumours)?

'COVID-19: 'Absolutely' no plans to scale back free lateral flow tests, Zahawi says'

news.sky.com/story/covid-19-pm-warned-it-would-be-wrongheaded-to-remove-free-lateral-flow-tests-as-parents-urged-to-book-jabs-for-children-12512097

PS Related to your reply on 'help' for Energy then if BoE intend to stop the Magic Money Tree then tough decisions are coming. If we want to continue with allowing everyone to test whenever they want then £6bn-ish per annum has to be found (or not spent) elsewhere. Reeves might have the luxury of opposition and not having to say where the money comes from but if no/limited new taxes are coming and given austerity is toxic then something has to give! Testing has arguably helped avoid lockdown (see 'others') in the present/past and could be ramped up quickly in the future if required but with vaccines, treatments and milder variants then we move from pandemic to endemic and need to finally start treating Covid like the flu (ie regular boosters for those that need them, testing where it makes a big difference, new/near normal for everyone else)

[1] paywall for some but the full article shows the title of the piece is somewhat misleading: www.thetimes.co.uk/article/end-of-free-lateral-flow-tests-as-country-told-to-live-with-covid-3bpz8lnqf

[2] www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-analysis/covid-19/report-16-testing/

[jimjam]

Colin - thanks for the ST cut and paste.

Re ''One suggestion is that the membership has fallen to just over 400,000. “The figures I’ve seen suggest we’ve lost well over 100,000 members, and most of those were the people who knocked on doors. That’s also millions of pounds no longer coming in,” a source said.''

The 400 000 may be correct, although my CLP has lost 10% or so, but the ones lost are not door knockers even leaflet posters etc.

In fact those who do the work are more engaged as for most of them their hearts weren't really in it in 2019 (17 different).

[Deleted]

On Covid, just very briefly.

The Twitter that alec put in his comment is almost certainly flawed in terms of methodology, but one cannot go further than that without guessing.

As to pandemic and endemic - I mention it only because of the very correct reference by alec to smallpox - I was asked to review the methodology of a model developed by some academics and submitted to a journal (it is a particular type of de Morgan maths in combination with some Bayesian statistics, and someone remembered something that I wrote long time ago, hence the request). It is not a medical paper. While there were some questionable elements in the model, the outcome could (!) be right that Covid could be the second pandemic/endemic that the humankind eliminated completely. But it is a model only. In the meantime we need the social rules that helped us so far (in spite of the breaches).