Sorry but I beg to differ @raisingirl, most of the mechanics of the very successful programme were organised by the army.
And didn't Baroness Dido Harding make a wonderful job of spending £38,000,000,000.00 on the " world beating " test and trace" sytem, when the original budget was £200,000,000. World beating in the sense it was the most money spent on something which didn't actually work
He combed his hair when he applied for the Tory leader job. He keeps the cheeky chappie look to appeal to the proles who want a change from Labour.. He's posh and amusing . What's not to trust? Much like Bliar tried to do the glottal stop to get down with the masses.
I'd bet that he'd not be able to have such a mess on his head in many jobs, Public or Private Sector. Imagine a bank manager or a head teacher having hair like that? It's just laziness
It's deliberate. He's been caught more than once, pausing off stage to mess his hair up. I assume he thinks we think it's appealing in some way.
Sorry but I beg to differ @raisingirl, most of the mechanics of the very successful programme were organised by the army.
I was under the impression that the procurement of the vaccines (as opposed to the delivery of them) was organised by a vaccine task force, which, understanding how pharma works, invested in the development and thereby negotiated the preferential deals that so upset the EU, who didn't move quickly enough or take the risks that the UK did. It could have gone badly wrong had the vaccines not been successful, and the EU, being concerned not to waste public funds, (perfectly reasonable position) didn't take the chance. In which case we'd all have been yelling about those billions wasted as well. But as it turned out, it was the right decision. Might have been luck, might have been calculation, I've no idea. The army and the NHS have put in the graft, but without the supplies, they'd have had nothing to do.
And didn't Baroness Dido Harding make a wonderful job of spending £38,000,000,000.00 on the " world beating " test and trace" sytem, when the original budget was £200,000,000. World beating in the sense it was the most money spent on something which didn't actually work
And still doesn't. I'm not defending all of them, by any means. Just saying that it occasionally works out. More often - much more often - it doesn't.
I have worked enough in the private sector with the public sector to know both have their strengths and weaknesses
Gardening on the edge of Exmoor, in Devon
“It's still magic even if you know how it's done.”
Sorry @raisingirl, I was really referring to to the organisation of the programme. You are right about the procurement process, which you rightly point out was also brilliant. Apologies.
How can you lie there and think of England When you don't even know who's in the team
They all bring outside training, skills, experience and knowledge. However with time I reckon that becomes dated and they become institutionalised politicians.
Personally I prefer to have MPs and ministers who are highly capable of the rule they're elected into and we get the knowledge from experts through the civil service system. Being a former GP doesn't mean you understand all medical arguments. Plus medical matters doesn't just involve medical knowledge. It isn't about setting pandemic rules for the best medical outcome using medical knowledge. You've got so much more to consider such as likelihood of the general public to follow the advice, economic matters, organisational matters and a load of other topics and fields of expertise.
Insisting each minister has a relevant expertise such as Medical for health minister or rail/ haulage experience for the minister running DoT Ignores the other relevant topics. Nobody has all the knowledge needed to decide on policy so they have to rely on information.
The real skill is analytical skills and critical thinking. Having watched QT over the years I think the drive for party mouthpieces and less of the independently thinking politician has been clear. They're trained in soundbite politics every one of them. I'm not sure they've been any good for a political generation or two. We're in a vacuum with all the needed ability sucked out of our politics. That's not down to one government. Its across the system and society.
If you consider boris the problem you need to look at the opposition too. UK governance is like a coin. If one side is dodgy the other is likely to be too. If the coin always falls on. One face it's as much the problem of the big downwatds face as the one showing on top. One side heavy means the other side is light. The best governments have a good opposition I reckon.
This is really a RTBC. Got a very quick reply from the ESCC team responsible for flooding/watercourses. They had a version of the Land Registry map that shows the boundaries for the whole area (not sure where it's from as it includes out buildings only erected in the past few years - so seems like a mishmash of Google Earth (other mapping software from space is available)) and some auto overlay of recorded mapped boundaries. Our Land Registry map with the deeds only showed our boundaries.
It turns out that the house at the end of my plot (the one I was concerned about should the tree have a problem) is the owner - their boundary line is my back garden boundary (and ditto for all the other houses bordering the stream), so they own the tree. I had wrongly assumed that their boundary was like mine an on their side of the stream - making the stream and its banks some form of no-man's land. But our boundaries this side of the stream seem to be shared boundaries with their plot - so the stream runs through their land.
I'll pop round and have a chat with them to see if they're aware.
Boris is the problem now, because he's our useless PM NOW. Suggesting the problem lies in a pretty useless opposition is merely deflection. This lot have been in power for a decade. They , and the electorate, can't blame anyone else.
I don't know much about him. He is not by any means discounted but a little more information would be helpful. We already have a bunch of comedians but good comedians can only be an improvement. @Hostafan1
To me, the terms 'good' and/or 'comedian' should never be used in the same sentence as 'Frankie Boyle'.
I don't know much about him. He is not by any means discounted but a little more information would be helpful. We already have a bunch of comedians but good comedians can only be an improvement. @Hostafan1
To me, the terms 'good' and/or 'comedian' should never be used in the same sentence as 'Frankie Boyle'.
Posts
World beating in the sense it was the most money spent on something which didn't actually work
He keeps the cheeky chappie look to appeal to the proles who want a change from Labour.. He's posh and amusing . What's not to trust? Much like Bliar tried to do the glottal stop to get down with the masses.
I was under the impression that the procurement of the vaccines (as opposed to the delivery of them) was organised by a vaccine task force, which, understanding how pharma works, invested in the development and thereby negotiated the preferential deals that so upset the EU, who didn't move quickly enough or take the risks that the UK did. It could have gone badly wrong had the vaccines not been successful, and the EU, being concerned not to waste public funds, (perfectly reasonable position) didn't take the chance. In which case we'd all have been yelling about those billions wasted as well. But as it turned out, it was the right decision. Might have been luck, might have been calculation, I've no idea. The army and the NHS have put in the graft, but without the supplies, they'd have had nothing to do.
And still doesn't. I'm not defending all of them, by any means. Just saying that it occasionally works out. More often - much more often - it doesn't.
I have worked enough in the private sector with the public sector to know both have their strengths and weaknesses
“It's still magic even if you know how it's done.”
You are right about the procurement process, which you rightly point out was also brilliant.
Apologies.
When you don't even know who's in the team
S.Yorkshire/Derbyshire border
Personally I prefer to have MPs and ministers who are highly capable of the rule they're elected into and we get the knowledge from experts through the civil service system. Being a former GP doesn't mean you understand all medical arguments. Plus medical matters doesn't just involve medical knowledge. It isn't about setting pandemic rules for the best medical outcome using medical knowledge. You've got so much more to consider such as likelihood of the general public to follow the advice, economic matters, organisational matters and a load of other topics and fields of expertise.
Insisting each minister has a relevant expertise such as Medical for health minister or rail/ haulage experience for the minister running DoT Ignores the other relevant topics. Nobody has all the knowledge needed to decide on policy so they have to rely on information.
The real skill is analytical skills and critical thinking. Having watched QT over the years I think the drive for party mouthpieces and less of the independently thinking politician has been clear. They're trained in soundbite politics every one of them. I'm not sure they've been any good for a political generation or two. We're in a vacuum with all the needed ability sucked out of our politics. That's not down to one government. Its across the system and society.
If you consider boris the problem you need to look at the opposition too. UK governance is like a coin. If one side is dodgy the other is likely to be too. If the coin always falls on. One face it's as much the problem of the big
downwatds face as the one showing on top. One side heavy means the other side is light. The best governments have a good opposition I reckon.
Suggesting the problem lies in a pretty useless opposition is merely deflection.
This lot have been in power for a decade. They , and the electorate, can't blame anyone else.
To me, the terms 'good' and/or 'comedian' should never be used in the same sentence as 'Frankie Boyle'.