Jump to content

Creative Midfielder

Members
  • Content Count

    3,344
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Creative Midfielder last won the day on July 10 2019

Creative Midfielder had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

635 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I would love to know where you've picked up that idea from because I can honestly say that I've never heard anyone in the UK suggest any such thing. Nor have I ever heard of even an opinion poll on the subject so I suspect that by 'many' you actually mean you and a couple of mates. @TheGunnShow is spot on, the problem is our system (and the US system but that isn't our problem, that's their problem and they're welcome to it). This isn't a new problem. its very a very long standing problem but it's come into the spotlight because of the very poor performance of our system and country through the crises of the last decade; the total failure of austerity economics, the shambles of Brexit and now the shockingly incompetent and deadly response to Covid 19 - it would be easy, and in many ways entirely reasonable to blame all these catstrophes on the Tory party but ultimately they are all the product of our dysfunctional 'system' - that is the real culprit.
  2. If you actually believe fairy tales like that then you really haven't been paying attention
  3. I don't think I have departed from the facts at all, of course local Councils produced their plans and in many cases they actively offered to implement the necessary track and trace systems in their area - as I posted months ago track and trace (albeit it for different infections) has been a standard process operated by local council public health departments for many years. I don't know how many made that offer but I know for a fact that my local council (large northern city) did and I believe several of the neighbouring councils did as well. Trouble is at the time the government wasn't interested, there were no resources or cash made available to councils for this and then evenually, as we now know, the government awarded these massive contracts to private companies without the expertise and seemingly without any decent system specification of what was required - as you say yourself the data is locked inside some mickey mouse central system and not interfaced into the NHS systems, the council Public Health systems, and they don't even seem to be very good at contacting the individuals involved - I must admit that I've always assumed that this was simply the usual incompetence of the government but as time has gone I tend agree with you that it seems more and more as though the control freaks in Westminister simply don't want to share the data. Maybe things are starting to change but I see little evidence of it to date. Hopefully you are right and that it will be a case of better late than never because all the ingredients for a resurgence of the infection in England appear to be in place.
  4. It certainly has, and its been a spectacular failure, not just on health grounds, but even more so on financial grounds - the government has spent billions with private companies who have absolutely no experience or track (no pun intended ) record in this area for reasons about which we can only speculate - although they seem pretty obvious as they follow a well established pattern for this government. Whatever the reasons, the result has been a hugely expensive shambles of a system which is performing so badly than in a number of the worst (highest infection rate) areas local councils are now creating their own teams to try and plug the gaps - which is of course is precisely the way the system should have built in the first place and would have been if the control freaks in Westminister had for once overcome their obsession with centralising everything and listened to advice from the experts. They could even have broken the habit of a lifetime, overcome their arrogance and taken a look at what was working well elsewhere - e.g. Germany if they wanted an example close to home. We don't have a world beating system no matter how many times the idiot Johnson says so, we have another home grown, self inflicted injury.
  5. Don't agree Pukki that has been a shadow of his former self - clearly he has been well off his best form but as @Il Pirata has said, it's all about the supply. Pukki has been feeding off scraps for half a season and it shows. Hopefully next season we will see much more of Vrancic and perhaps Emi, if he is still here, will also find his form - if so, I'm pretty confident Pukki will tuck a fair share of his chances away.
  6. Yes indeed, although I would say everything else except the complete failure to stock up on PPE which should have started in February and since the whole government response was apparently predicated on stopping the 'NHS being overwhelmed' you've have thought that it was a pretty obvious thing to have discussed and implemented right at the very start - perhaps at one of the five early COBRA meetings that Johnson couldn't be bothered to attend??
  7. Good luck with that one, Purple - I take your point but I think we all know that some actual basic facts, and/or reasoned arguments, are all water off a duck's back to Jools & RTB.
  8. I don't doubt it, they'll stop at nothing to do us down......
  9. Great link, but I'm afraid I wasn't able to follow your advice about not laughing at the Brexiteers... I guess having a somewhat morbid sense of humour is a prerequisite nowadays for keeping one's sanity in our dystopian country. Three quotes in there I particularly enjoyed: Chris Grey, a professor in Organization Studies at Royal Holloway university - “So in 2016, despite having no detail on what Brexit meant, people knew exactly what they were voting for. But in 2019, despite having a detailed Withdrawal Agreement, MPs didn’t know what they were voting for.” Slough For Europe pointed out one of the greatest ironies: “Quite remarkable. Not only did IDS [Iain Duncan Smith] vote for this bill despite appearing now to have not read it. He also voted in favour of accelerating the process of the bill through parliament.” And of course; John Ritchie saw the humour in the situation, writing: “In which Iain confirms that he is even thicker than you thought.” Mind you that last one gave me a bit of a nasty turn when the thought suddenly occured to me that perhaps Ian Dunkin Donut and our very own @SwindonCanary might actually be same person.............who'd have thought
  10. Well we'd know exactly wouldn't we, if only the government and our intelligence services hadn't decided to ignore Russian interference into this country's affairs - and then tried to conceal the fact.
  11. Bit surreal re-reading some of these old posts - like this one which seemed entirely reasonable at the time: Now of course we know that it was the Russians that paid the money and made the choice for us.....
  12. No, I can't - too long ago to remember I'm afraid and frankly I've never had much interest in our totally archaic and ludicrous system of peerages. But Johnson seems to have managed to take it to new levels of stupidity and cronyism, and it seems that our Head of State is happy to oblige him (again). Just the latest example of what a sick joke our 'democracy' has become
  13. Exactly - time for a written constitution and an elected Head of State. Thirty or forty years ago I would have been rather lukewarm about the first and dead against the second but how wrong I was!
  14. Your first sentence is obviously true but that doesn't mean that she always has to blindly accept it. I don't know if it is still the case nowadays but it certainly used to happen that the honours list was quite carefully vetted by the Queen and her advisers before approval, and that occassionally past PMs were made aware that someone on the list was not considered suitable and removed. In any case convention is a guide not an unbreakable rule, otherwise the Queen's role as Head of State would be utterly meaningless other than for ceremonial purposes. But the role is not meaningless - she is ultimately the guardian of our 'democracy' and the constitution (that we don't have). Although this latest failure is less serious than agreeing to prorogue Parliament on the basis of Johnson fatuous pretexts (and I'm being exceptionally polite about him there) it is still extremely unfortunate and brings both herself and the country into disrepute.
×
×
  • Create New...