|
Post by wakefieldstokie on Oct 18, 2020 12:53:36 GMT
Burnham strikes me as an egotistical, attention seeking bellend, wrapped up in his own importance and enjoying the political grandstanding.
Like Jimmy cranky and the Welsh wassock, they see it as their time in the limelight. Bored of their petty arguments with central office, even if central office aren’t the best!
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Oct 18, 2020 12:56:51 GMT
I think there's two separate discussions here.
1. Is Burnham right to hold out?
2. Why are the Government making it an issue in the first place, when the data doesn't warrant it?
I kind of need a decent answer to question number 2 before I can even consider answering question 1.
There's no chicken and egg situation here. I think that's what The Telegraph piece is alluding to.
Either the government are
1. Playing political games. 2. Just plain wrong. 3. Are actually correct but aren't releasing the data to support this.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Hackett on Oct 18, 2020 13:01:41 GMT
I think there's two separate discussions here. 1. Is Burnham right to hold out? 2. Why are the Government making it an issue in the first place, when the data doesn't warrant it? I kind of need a decent answer to question number 2 before I can even consider answering question 1. There's no chicken and egg situation here. I think that's what The Telegraph piece is alluding to. Either the government are 1. Playing political games. 2. Just plain wrong. 3. Are actually correct but aren't releasing the data to support this. Are the government seeing any data that we aren't at local level?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Oct 18, 2020 13:03:07 GMT
I think there's two separate discussions here. 1. Is Burnham right to hold out? 2. Why are the Government making it an issue in the first place, when the data doesn't warrant it? I kind of need a decent answer to question number 2 before I can even consider answering question 1. There's no chicken and egg situation here. I think that's what The Telegraph piece is alluding to. Either the government are 1. Playing political games. 2. Just plain wrong. 3. Are actually correct but aren't releasing the data to support this. Are the government seeing any data that we aren't at local level? Hence the question Mark.
|
|
|
Post by GrahamHyde on Oct 18, 2020 13:05:26 GMT
Aren't cases coming down in Liverpool, Leeds, Nottingham, Manchester and Bradford?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2020 13:10:44 GMT
No, I think Burnham's position is absolutely that. Any mayor that appears to be attempting to take on Whitty and Vallance will be on a hiding to nothing and he knows that. The Telegraph piece is simply challenging WHY is it that the government are hell bent on pushing Manchester into tier 3? Burnham is playing games. His position is so false. He is only opposed to tier 3 because he wants a better financial package. He wants that so he can show he is the cock of the North. All part of him planning his return to Westminster, leadership of the Labour Party and, ultimately, prime minister. Of course, his commitment to this position is qualified because he has also said he’d be happy with a National Lockdowm. I guess he figured there’s no votes for him in Cornwall and Devon so fuck them. As said previously, he’s a politician. So he’s as trustworthy as the rest of them. Everything is all about creating angles that delivers personal advantage. I don't see how anything he has said is "false" His loyalty is to the people of Greater Manchester. As for his quest to be Labour leader and beyond that's merely supposition on your part. You always seem to want to argue that "all politicians are as untrustworthy as each other" when it's pretty clear that Boris Jonson and his band of merry men and women take it to another level......
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Oct 18, 2020 13:18:00 GMT
This just about sums up this Government's incompetence. They asked (twice) for two weeks to gather evidence to support a policy that they introduced and which threatens to decimate a sector.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Oct 18, 2020 13:20:00 GMT
Burnham is playing games. His position is so false. He is only opposed to tier 3 because he wants a better financial package. He wants that so he can show he is the cock of the North. All part of him planning his return to Westminster, leadership of the Labour Party and, ultimately, prime minister. Of course, his commitment to this position is qualified because he has also said he’d be happy with a National Lockdowm. I guess he figured there’s no votes for him in Cornwall and Devon so fuck them. As said previously, he’s a politician. So he’s as trustworthy as the rest of them. Everything is all about creating angles that delivers personal advantage. He’s just doing his job isn’t he? Everyone in his position I would hope would push for a better deal for their area when it seems like tier 3 is the most likely thing to happen. He’s also creating more time for things to change from a health POV and maybe not go into it. He’s done nothing wrong. He is playing political games. He ain’t concerned with the people of Manchester. He is concerned with Andy Burnham. But, as you say, he is doing his job. Which is CEO of the Andy Burnham Appreciation Society.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Oct 18, 2020 13:27:35 GMT
This just about sums up this Government's incompetence. They asked (twice) for two weeks to gather evidence to support a policy that they introduced and which threatens to decimate a sector. There is no evidence to support the action. He did it, as have so many other leaders including his SNP counterpart in Scotland and his Labour one in Wales, because he, like them, want to be seen as having done something as opposed to nothing. Having decided that schools must stay open (and hospitals come to that) and that work that couldn’t be done from home had to continue the only other area for action was hospitality. The 10 pm curfew was an attempt to avoid shutting them down completely.
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Oct 18, 2020 13:29:49 GMT
He’s just doing his job isn’t he? Everyone in his position I would hope would push for a better deal for their area when it seems like tier 3 is the most likely thing to happen. He’s also creating more time for things to change from a health POV and maybe not go into it. He’s done nothing wrong. He playing political games. He ain’t concerned with the people of Manchester. He is concerned with Andy Burnham. But, as you say, he is doing his job. Which is CEO of the Andy Burnham Appreciation Society. If I lived in Manchester with a pub, a gym or a restaurant, or any other small business I'd be content with his stance. He was elected to represent Manchester and he's doing no different than he did with the transport system. If the people of Manchester don't agree they no what to do. Unless you live in Manchester and think it's bollocks I don't think you can knock him. I haven't seen any evidence of the Mancs being against his view. I hope the authorities in Staffs would do exactly the same if push came to shove.
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Oct 18, 2020 13:50:03 GMT
Burnham strikes me as an egotistical, attention seeking bellend, wrapped up in his own importance and enjoying the political grandstanding. Like Jimmy cranky and the Welsh wassock, they see it as their time in the limelight. Bored of their petty arguments with central office, even if central office aren’t the best! If that's the case how come the Chairman of the 1922 committee who represents a constituency in the region and says MPs, council leaders and mayor are "united" across party lines in resisting tier 3 restrictions. Sir Graham Brady, a senior backbench Conservative and MP for Altrincham and Sale West in Greater Manchester, described the region's Labour and Tory MPs as "pretty united" and said positive tests were "flattening".
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Oct 18, 2020 14:09:08 GMT
I think there's two separate discussions here. 1. Is Burnham right to hold out? 2. Why are the Government making it an issue in the first place, when the data doesn't warrant it? I kind of need a decent answer to question number 2 before I can even consider answering question 1. There's no chicken and egg situation here. I think that's what The Telegraph piece is alluding to. Either the government are 1. Playing political games. 2. Just plain wrong. 3. Are actually correct but aren't releasing the data to support this. Why are regional lockdowns up for discussion and negotiations They are either warranted or they are not
|
|
|
Post by adri2008 on Oct 18, 2020 14:16:00 GMT
I think there's two separate discussions here. 1. Is Burnham right to hold out? 2. Why are the Government making it an issue in the first place, when the data doesn't warrant it? I kind of need a decent answer to question number 2 before I can even consider answering question 1. There's no chicken and egg situation here. I think that's what The Telegraph piece is alluding to. Either the government are 1. Playing political games. 2. Just plain wrong. 3. Are actually correct but aren't releasing the data to support this. Going by the data we have available to us, Burnham is correct to resist. However isn't keeping Manchester in tier 2 the worst case scenario for the hospitality business? I.e they get bugger all help but maximum damage
|
|
|
Post by chad on Oct 18, 2020 14:35:34 GMT
No, I think Burnham's position is absolutely that. Any mayor that appears to be attempting to take on Whitty and Vallance will be on a hiding to nothing and he knows that. The Telegraph piece is simply challenging WHY is it that the government are hell bent on pushing Manchester into tier 3? Burnham is playing games. His position is so false. He is only opposed to tier 3 because he wants a better financial package. He wants that so he can show he is the cock of the North. All part of him planning his return to Westminster, leadership of the Labour Party and, ultimately, prime minister. Of course, his commitment to this position is qualified because he has also said he’d be happy with a National Lockdowm. I guess he figured there’s no votes for him in Cornwall and Devon so fuck them. As said previously, he’s a politician. So he’s as trustworthy as the rest of them. Everything is all about creating angles that delivers personal advantage. All about the his own image, publicity and money. He doesn’t give a jot about the health of people in Manchester.
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Oct 18, 2020 14:40:31 GMT
Burnham is playing games. His position is so false. He is only opposed to tier 3 because he wants a better financial package. He wants that so he can show he is the cock of the North. All part of him planning his return to Westminster, leadership of the Labour Party and, ultimately, prime minister. Of course, his commitment to this position is qualified because he has also said he’d be happy with a National Lockdowm. I guess he figured there’s no votes for him in Cornwall and Devon so fuck them. As said previously, he’s a politician. So he’s as trustworthy as the rest of them. Everything is all about creating angles that delivers personal advantage. All about the his own image, publicity and money. He doesn’t give a jot about the health of people in Manchester. Do you want to back that up?
|
|
|
Post by chad on Oct 18, 2020 14:55:03 GMT
All about the his own image, publicity and money. He doesn’t give a jot about the health of people in Manchester. Do you want to back that up? If he cared about health he would lock down. You can’t care about health and lock down only if the Government give you more money Just another Labour politician trying to make political capital out of a national crisis
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Oct 18, 2020 14:57:32 GMT
I think his position is absolutely bang on. He knows tier 3 won't solve any of the issues other than put more pressure on the hospitality sector. He's also in cahoots with Westminster Labour and is quite happy making mischief. I don't blame him at all for any of it and it's exactly what I would do in his position. If he had led the Labour Party they’d be in power now No mate. He would not have won without endorsing Brexit. Corbyn had momentum literally. It got him a foot in the door. You can level lots at Corbyn. It was his failure to get the party to fully endorse Brexit which lost him the last election. The working class especially up North felt abandoned Now Boris is doing his best to destroy all that good will he had up north.
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Oct 18, 2020 14:58:57 GMT
This just about sums up this Government's incompetence. They asked (twice) for two weeks to gather evidence to support a policy that they introduced and which threatens to decimate a sector. There is no evidence to support the action. He did it, as have so many other leaders including his SNP counterpart in Scotland and his Labour one in Wales, because he, like them, want to be seen as having done something as opposed to nothing. Having decided that schools must stay open (and hospitals come to that) and that work that couldn’t be done from home had to continue the only other area for action was hospitality. The 10 pm curfew was an attempt to avoid shutting them down completely. Completely arbitrary rules or agenda. Only two scenarios here.
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Oct 18, 2020 15:13:36 GMT
Do you want to back that up? If he cared about health he would lock down. You can’t care about health and lock down only if the Government give you more money Just another Labour politician trying to make political capital out of a national crisis So you don't have anything to back it up then, Other than your opinion. So the overwhelming majority of Manchester residents are wrong. The government's own Covid stats are wrong. Probably his most extreme political opponent [Brady] is wrong. Cross party consensus in his constituency is wrong. Okay, whatever.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Hackett on Oct 18, 2020 15:18:40 GMT
Are the government seeing any data that we aren't at local level? Hence the question Mark. Well there must be surely. The government are trying to avoid lockdowns at all costs and defying scientific advice in order to do so. There's clearly data they're seeing from somewhere that's suggesting there is or there is going to be an issue.
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Oct 18, 2020 15:18:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Oct 18, 2020 15:21:04 GMT
|
|
|
Post by greenhoff on Oct 18, 2020 15:24:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by chad on Oct 18, 2020 15:30:30 GMT
If he cared about health he would lock down. You can’t care about health and lock down only if the Government give you more money Just another Labour politician trying to make political capital out of a national crisis So you don't have anything to back it up then, Other than your opinion. So the overwhelming majority of Manchester residents are wrong. The government's own Covid stats are wrong. Probably his most extreme political opponent [Brady] is wrong. Cross party consensus in his constituency is wrong. Okay, whatever. All that But eh Burnham will still go along with it if he gets more financial Compensation. Obviously money makes the virus less contagious
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Oct 18, 2020 15:40:11 GMT
|
|
|
Post by musik on Oct 18, 2020 15:40:48 GMT
I'm really anxious to know:
Is it possible to do a test to see if you've caught the ordinary season flu?
Here in Sweden, I actually don't think so. A vaccine yes. A test no. If you feel it's coming they only direct you to your home to rest, not for a lab test. They don't put resources on that.
This was before Corona hit us. If you'd like to do a flu test (never heard of such a thing here), they will do a test for Corona, I guess. If it's a negative result, then they will just ask you to leave. I would be extremely surprised otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Oct 18, 2020 15:45:47 GMT
I'm really anxious to know: Is it possible to do a test to see if you've caught the ordinary season flu? Here in Sweden, I actually don't think so. A vaccine yes. A test no. If you feel it's coming they only direct you to your home to rest, not for a lab test. They don't put resources on that. This was before Corona hit us. If you'd like to do a flu test (never heard of such a thing here), they will do a test for Corona, I guess. If it's a negative result, then they will just ask you to leave. I would be extremely surprised otherwise. I've never known anyone in the UK be tested for flu but someone shared some stats earlier so perhaps it is possible.
|
|
|
Post by wakefieldstokie on Oct 18, 2020 15:50:22 GMT
Burnham strikes me as an egotistical, attention seeking bellend, wrapped up in his own importance and enjoying the political grandstanding. Like Jimmy cranky and the Welsh wassock, they see it as their time in the limelight. Bored of their petty arguments with central office, even if central office aren’t the best! If that's the case how come the Chairman of the 1922 committee who represents a constituency in the region and says MPs, council leaders and mayor are "united" across party lines in resisting tier 3 restrictions. Sir Graham Brady, a senior backbench Conservative and MP for Altrincham and Sale West in Greater Manchester, described the region's Labour and Tory MPs as "pretty united" and said positive tests were "flattening". Exactly my point they’re loving their 60 seconds of fame, trying to make a name. I’m not saying central government is right but I expect more from the regional heads than pathetic bitchy point scoring posts on social media
|
|
|
Post by Gary Hackett on Oct 18, 2020 15:58:56 GMT
All areas of Staffordshire now have similar case numbers. Last week Newcastle was ahead by some margin but Moorlands and Stoke on Trent have caught up. Blanket Staffordshire tier 2 restrictions coming at the end of the week you'd presume
|
|
|
Post by adri2008 on Oct 18, 2020 15:59:59 GMT
|
|