Forum Topic

I'm not promoting anything but responding to you I'm also responding to the parts I agree with. That is not being part of or promoting such. I don't follow or support them, just read what they are saying and cherry-picked parts I agree with. Any further lockdowns need to have more details attached and not just what the science says or wants. Otherwise going on that basis we would be in further lockdown until next year and then where do we sit. Imagine being in further lockdown till the end of the year and then suddenly something happens and we need to stay in lockdown for a further 6 months. Where possible we need a middle compromise. That is why the government is looking into that middle ground to ease lockdown but protecting people. You have to have a figure in mind,the flu has a figure we eccept.CRG Say in short, "easing of lockdown restrictions to begin once all over-70s and frontline healthcare workers are vaccinated"I agree, but not entirely, I think that once all 50-55ish and over are vaccinated we should really start to open up the economy more. Not when all have been vaccinated or the above quote. That is where I think the government is now looking, that middle ground. But some scientists do not want this to happen so one has to have an opposing opinion with a view to opening up otherwise we might as well all give up and let the scientists run the economy. That can't happen so those in the government following the science need to have a third opinion put to them at times. One has to come to that day when you lead and follow rather than just following. And the future needs more thoughts and answers before locking down. The idea you can sit in a small enclose mini cab with masks but cant sit as one person in a open hairdressers with a mask and visor is the classic example of no thought process.

Julian Pavey ● 2079d

The government and Johnson got lucky this time. There was significant risk in rushing through both the approval of the vaccines and the dash to purchase massive volumes of somewhat unproven drugs with no onus on the manufacturer to take responsibility for any problems if they arose. But this decision was not that hard for this government and definitely not that hard for this PM. First, his back was against the wall. His handling of the pandemic has been poor and widely critcized - rightly so. He mis-judged almost every message since this time last year, mis-timed lockdown decisions, ignored other actions and oversaw the placing of very doubtful contracts. He deeply needed a success.Second, he and his government find dubious and risky decisions easy. Taken ownership of problems or actions or messages is alien to him. Blatantly lying or simply stating things that are clearly false is in fact his principle mode of operating. So making a vaccine decision that could have gone wrong was no doubt seen as little risk to this government.So, I must emphasise, the UK roll out has been and continues to be successful. Not giving the vaccine roll out to the private sector was a decision worthy of praise. (I imagine that there were ministers pushing for their mate's company to take on this task. That company has a great track record in unsolicited marketing mailings so it perfect for vaccine deployment, no?) But the right decision was made and the aggressive roll out is to be applauded. But Johnson making one good decision (as it turned out) does not mean he has performed well during this pandemic. And it definitely does not excuse the lies we are now seeing about PPE shortages last year.

Alan Clark ● 2068d

..Anyway -  and apropos the advanced level of forum ad hominem attack that merges, Trumpian style, into an insult in which the culprit simply makes things up...So there I was, taking a casual Sunday morning  stroll around the forum, when suddenly I saw my surname.  In one of those clottish out-of-date re-writes of the sub-heading – in which the dishonourable poster Steve Taylor writes..  “Kerr and Greenborough the has been right wingers”..Mister Taylor, if someone other than you had written that fabricated nonsense, I might well have taken offence.  But since it was you (and thus only to be expected)  I'd rather take a moment to put the record straight (as if that matters in this dump).You don't know me and never will.  So whatever gutter you got the “has been” from it must have been the same sort of vermin-ridden hole where “never-beens” like yourself go for your entertainment.  Never mind.  If that's your style.But as for “right-winger”.  No, I'm not.  Neither am I a Tory.  Or a left winger.  Furthermore, my politics have nothing whatsoever to do with you.  Concerning your thread.    The current brand of gob-shite Tory right-wingers are currently insinuating that covid is now a “disease of the poor” - and that the country can (and should) get straight back to work, leaving the unfortunate to die off in their own time.That's about as odious as politics can get.  Right on the fascist border.  Up there with Trump and Co.  Bang next-door to the place where you went to harvest your own insult...Thank goodness that, on this particular subject, it would seem the current Government isn't listening...

Stuart Kerr ● 2067d