Big day tomorrow.  The EHRC report into institutional antisemitism within Corbyn's Labour Party gets published at long last.

It will undoubtedly represent a low point for the party.  Starmer has a massive job restoring credibility and trust, but has done well in the early stages (regular bouts of uproar and outrage from the Corbynites has been a fairly reliable indicator of this).  They've also spent the week getting their pre-emptive denials in place (e.g. Karie Murphy in the Guardian, Chris Williamson grifting for additional funds for his legal campaign).

Looking forward to further whataboutery from the likes of Owen Jones, Bastani, Sarkar, etc when the details get published.  Starmer is due to make a press conference at 11am.  I see little prospect that the report content will be anything other than scathing with regard to the conduct of those at the heart of the situation.  Assuming so, then he needs to commence the processes to disassociate them from the party going forward (e.g. removal of whip for MPs, disciplinary processes to expel for others, etc).

Quite the morning so far.  The report appears to be more damning than many expected, Corbyn issued a statement pretty much denying it's content and has now been suspended and had the Labour whip removed.

Starmer wasting little time, to his credit.

Fair play to Starmer. He’s going to appeal to a lot of moderate, sane people.

The nut job cult that worships Corbyn is in meltdown on Twitter.

"He obviously never thinks about strengthening Labour and his position in Manchester when he does it. "

Do you not think Burnham will win in a landslide in the Manchester mayoral elections next year?

Must be very possible after the last 72 hours, no?


meanwhile whither the Tory Red Wall from last December? Minus quite a few bricks in the next election perhaps....

Yes because Manchester is historically a Labour city.

The antics of the last few days and the “I’m standing up for working people” line against a Tory Government is an easy win.

The flip side of the last 10 days delay caused by both sides mean more ordinary older people will end up in critical care and dying. That seems to get forgotten.

The news report I saw said that Burnham had asked for £95M, was offered £60M and then countered with £65M which was refused.

I'd imagine he's just a political tit head making the most of his opportunity to get in front of the cameras.

To the people of Manchester he's a legend. I'm not saying he's perfect but he sure does stick up for the working class. He's the leader that Labour could have had and if that have had happened I would have put money on him winning the election.

He's also well respected in Liverpool - he was born in the Old Roan area and his speech in the House of Commons on the Hillsborough 96 was superb.

He's also battled for those like me who lost their pensions when the Tories changed the pension age.

We all need an Andy Burnham sticking up for the ordinary people, long may he continue.

Well to anyone who's never heard of him he's coming across as a tit head  

Good to hear that he's actually most likely decent.

If he really is a good person and genuinely has the good of the people at the forefront of his agenda let's hope his moment in front of the cameras gets him where he needs to be he wouldn't be a politician.

FYP

Burnham loves playing to the crowd and the electorate.

He obviously never thinks about strengthening Labour and his position in Manchester when he does it.

Just listened to Dan Jarvis. Much, much more reasonable and measured.

Seems like a political own goal to offer 60m in negotiations and then only give 22m when the negotiations breakdown. This is a bad look.

...
It appears they have climbed down, Johnson has just announced £60m in Parliament.

It wasn't £22m instead of the £60m (according to the BBC yesterday).

The £22m was always being provided as part of 'everyones' funding for the epidemic control - it's for things like testing and track and trace.

The government specifically said the £60m was never off the table - that's additional funding for the economic aspect.

EDIT: this is the article https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54622293
"Health Secretary Matt Hancock later told the House of Commons that a £60m offer previously made to local leaders remained "on the table"."
and
"The £22m mentioned by Mr Johnson - which is for expenses such as local enforcement and test and trace - is separate to the £60m that Mr Hancock spoke of."

cover what I wrote

Exactly. It was never off the table.

Interesting that Dan Jarvis has been pragmatic and done a sensible deal.

Same in Liverpool and Lancashire areas.

It takes two to tango in every walk of life but it’s all the Governments fault that both sides got stubborn in Greater Manchester.

Greater Manchester will be placed under stricter coronavirus controls after talks between the Government and civic leaders concluded without an agreement

Does the absence of an agreement (all over +/-£5m apparently on a £60m payment) make any difference to compliance with the measures or not?

Seems to me that both the Government and Burnham are playing political games whilst intensive care units start to get filled. This could have been sorted a week ago.

Not a surprise that the bigger the ego’s the more they both dig their heels in.

No one comes out of this with any credit.

And if Manchester now get less than £60m Burnham will look a bit of a pillock.

See I don't get this point of view. This isn't a game that the govt/Burnham have won or lost. It's about supporting people. Give them the fucking money.

If businesses are forced to close, or people can't afford to put food on the table, etc, etc, then I hardly think the govt can respond "well we'd have given you the money but Burnham wanted more so we decided to give you less instead. Blame him."

Actually no. That's exactly what is going to happen isn't it?

There is a balance to be struck in everything that happens, particularly when the Government have made payments to other councils/area’s.

“Give them the fucking money” is emotive nonsense.

And unfortunately if you don’t believe politicians (on all sides) have a personal and political agenda/ego then you are very naive.

Greater Manchester will be placed under stricter coronavirus controls after talks between the Government and civic leaders concluded without an agreement

Does the absence of an agreement (all over +/-£5m apparently on a £60m payment) make any difference to compliance with the measures or not?

Seems to me that both the Government and Burnham are playing political games whilst intensive care units start to get filled. This could have been sorted a week ago.

Not a surprise that the bigger the ego’s the more they both dig their heels in.

No one comes out of this with any credit.

And if Manchester now get less than £60m Burnham will look a bit of a pillock.

It’s the old trick of reporting the worst possible case scenario to create headlines routine.

The problem is any Government has to consider lots of issues - not just the Covid outbreak in the overall decision making process.

If the only objective is to manage the virus then they should have followed the advice but that of course is only one part of the jigsaw.

To say the Government are ignoring SAGE advice is way too simplistic.

We all know this. The balance is extremely hard to strike.

The SAGE report says :


"All these interventions listed above have associated costs in terms of health and
wellbeing and many interventions will affect the poorest members of society to a
greater extent. Measures will be needed urgently to mitigate these effects and to
achieve equity and social justice."

So taking the SAGE advice in isolation isnt really sensible when Government have to balance the financial effects, mental health impacts, other health issues this creates etc.

No idea what the answer is, other than a successful vaccine.

I was going to ask the same question to Doobs. Ten’s of thousands of deaths in the young ? Really ?

Interesting to watch Trump’s return to the White House.

As being reported, he was clearly trying to get his breath whilst stood outside.

The obsession with image and votes might just cost him dearly.

Thank you for the thoughts.

I really can’t complain.

Perversely I had none of the classic symptoms just what I thought was a cold (thick head and runny nose, no real cough, no temperature and no loss of taste/smell).

My wife suddenly lost her taste/smell and dragged us to a walk in test centre. Given how many colds are around, if I’m honest I wouldn’t have got tested.

I’ve felt very tired since, still got cold symptoms but developed a bit of a chesty cough and loss of taste in last 48 hours. Nothing that feels overly concerning yet. Fingers crossed.

Worse thing is being cold or letting the dog out on the back garden and getting a blast of cold air. Otherwise keeping warm and having hot drinks taking paracetamol or the odd lemsip to clear my head.

I’m 54, wife 44 and daughter 14. Effects and recovery for us do seem to tally with younger people recovering more quickly with less symptoms.

Isolation until Saturday. Had a message from NHS saying after then we can go out even if you still have a cough.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UvFhIFzaac&feature=youtu.be

This is an interesting take on Covid.

Always good to look at issues from different perspectives.

I’m not saying he’s right on everything but the point about a tinderbox effect due to much lower death rates in the previous winter isn’t something I’d thought about before.

Apologies if this has been discussed previously.

He really does compare 1800s mortality with 2020...

The tinderbox is nonsense, the comparitor should be a normal flu season, and not a really bad flu season.   There weren't much lower deaths last year, there had been significantly higher flu deaths on average than in the previous 5.  The flu deaths were so high that people were speculating that the mortality improvement trend since the war had started reversing.  I am sure all the excess deaths due to "austerity" were documented on the politics thread.  On that thread I have previously pointed out we had 3 bad flu seasons that corresponded to the excess "austerity" deaths so the excess deaths weren't all austerity.   So any tinderbox was actually going to be low on fuel after 3 bad flu seasons in the last 6 or so years (as it is now).

Sweden did have a lockdown, just a voluntary one, and not a compulsory one.   Economoc activity slowed significantly, people didn't travel, people worked from home. 

Got to 8 minutes.  Got stuff to do

I did say it was an alternative view.

Perhaps the most important overall point is how we decide what the risks are and how we manage them.

I was told this weekend (from a Doctor but might be nonsense) that in Sheffield hospitals (which must cover a population base of over 1 million people) since this started, only 8 people under  age 75 with the no underlying health conditions have died.

We live in a world where risks getting distorted. What about the cancer, stroke, heart attack patients ? Is prioritising Covid over treating cancer patients really right or reasonable ?

BTW, my wife, daughter and I all tested positive for Covid last week. Wife and daughter fine. I’ve struggled compared to them but I’ll take not getting any worse and feeling like shit for next 7 days :-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UvFhIFzaac&feature=youtu.be

This is an interesting take on Covid.

Always good to look at issues from different perspectives.

I’m not saying he’s right on everything but the point about a tinderbox effect due to much lower death rates in the previous winter isn’t something I’d thought about before.

Apologies if this has been discussed previously.

France gets added to the quarantine list for 4am Saturday

The great race to the ports begins, tents will be collapsed in the dark as  000’s of of families with open ferry / tunnel tickets race to be over the channel in time. Like the Beaujolais run but less posh

Nigel Farage will be there finding an angle to get himself on tv.

Interesting to watch people on holiday moaning about the Government decision.

They act too slowly and get criticised.

They act too quickly and get criticised.

Everyone knows we are in the middle of a global pandemic - if people choose to go abroad then accept the risks in the current climate or don’t go.

They will want compensation next ffs.

Awful news. RIP Mel. Lovely lady.