British Politics

[Len Cnut]

On 11/20/2020 at 5:56 PM, spunko12345 said:

I honestly dont get why people find her attractive. 

She's quite stocky and she's got a jawline like David Coulthard.

She looks a bit like a drag queen to me actually.

She went to school like literally a 2 minute walk from where I'm sitting now.

[MillionsOfSpiders]

 

[bucketfoot]

So, Labour abstain from tonight's big vote in the Commons, on the most important issue of recent times, choosing to sit on their hands and not take any responsibility for anything. What exactly is the point of Labour nowadays? As a party and as an opposition they are worthless and Brylcreem Man has shown himself to be far from the new messiah.

Completely spineless. Plonker.

[DieselDaisy]

42 minutes ago, bucketfoot said:

So, Labour abstain from tonight's big vote in the Commons, on the most important issue of recent times, choosing to sit on their hands and not take any responsibility for anything. What exactly is the point of Labour nowadays? As a party and as an opposition they are worthless and Brylcreem Man has shown himself to be far from the new messiah.

Completely spineless. Plonker.

Starmer's whole policy during this has been, ''we disagree with the government but are going to either vote with them or abstain''. 

[bucketfoot]

23 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Starmer's whole policy during this has been, ''we disagree with the government but are going to either vote with them or abstain''. 

He's on course to pull off the amazing feat of being slimier than Blair and Chuka combined.

[DieselDaisy]

[bucketfoot]

It is a very nice fence on which Mr. Brylcreem chooses to park his posterior, to be fair.

[Dazey]

[DieselDaisy]

9 hours ago, Dazey said:

Just think. We too could have waited until January for a vaccine if only we had remained in that absurd organisation. 

[SoulMonster]

5 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Just think. We too could have waited until January for a vaccine if only we had remained in that absurd organisation. 

Having one organization in Europe approving drugs for all European countries, makes a lot more sense than each country doing it individually. Firstly, it is cheaper to have one approval agency than a myriad. Why have dozens of organizations doing the exact same thing, when one could suffice? Secondly, it is easier to establish a more professional approval agency when countries can contribute to one centralized agency than having to built up their own which requires quite a lot of competence and skill.

There's been a long process of harmonizing the various regulatory bodies (like EMA in Europe and FDA in the US) so that when one agency has approved a drug, the other can more quickly approve it, too.  Again, this is born out of the realization that if a drug is safe and efficient for Europeans it will be for Americans, too. The direction has been towards a situation where if FDA approved a drug, EMA could quickly approve it, too. Standing outside of all of this, like the US is doing, makes little sense to me. 

One might argue that at the very least it can result in a more agile process as seen here with a vaccine against Covid-19. The counter-argument is of course that it has been too hasty and that speed is not necessarily a virtue when it comes to drug evaluation.

[Dazey]

1 hour ago, DieselDaisy said:

Just think. We too could have waited until January for a vaccine if only we had remained in that absurd organisation. 

Well that's bollocks but Brexiters gonna Brexiter. 

Quote

Coronavirus: Regulator rejects Matt Hancock’s claim that UK got vaccine first because of Brexit

Britain’s medicines regulator has contradicted claims by health secretary Matt Hancock that the UK got the first coronavirus vaccine faster because of Brexit.

Speaking shortly after the announcement that the Pfizer/BioNTec jab had been cleared for use by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), Mr Hancock said that the authorisation process was faster than in the EU because Britain was no longer a member.

But asked if this was the case, MHRA chief executive June Raine said the process was undertaken under the terms of European law, which remains in force until the completion of the Brexit transition at the end of 2020.

The discrepancy emerged as Germany’s ambassador to the UK hit out at ministers’ claims that authorisation of the vaccine developed by a German company was a win for Britain.

“Why is it so difficult to recognise this important step forward as a great international effort and success?” tweeted Andreas Michaelis. “I really don't think this is a national story. In spite of the German company BioNTech having made a crucial contribution, this is European and transatlantic.”

Speaking to Times Radio, Mr Hancock identified two reasons why the UK was the first country in the world to have a clinically authorised vaccine.

“Firstly, because the MRHA has done a great job of working with the company to look at that data as it’s come through and do things in parallel, rather than one after the other as they normally would, that’s the first reason,” he said.

“The second reason is because, whilst until earlier this year we were in the European Medicines Agency (EMA), because of Brexit we’ve been able to make a decision to do this based on the UK regulator, a world-class regulator, and not go at the pace of the Europeans, who are moving a little bit more slowly.

“We do all the same safety checks and the same processes, but we have been able to speed up how they’re done because of Brexit.”

But when she was asked at a 10 Downing Street press conference whether Brexit had made any difference to the speed at which the MHRA was able to work, Dr Raine stressed the fact that the regulator is still working under the terms of EU law.

“We have been able to authorise the supply of this vaccine using provisions under European law which exist until 1 January,” she said.

“Our speed, or our progress, has been totally dependent on the availability of data in our rolling review and the rigorous assessment and independent advice we have received.

“So I hope that clarifies the point about the European relationship.” 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/coronavirus-vaccine-matt-hancock-mhra-brexit-b1765005.html

 

 

[spunko12345]

3 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

Just think. We too could have waited until January for a vaccine if only we had remained in that absurd organisation. 

BJ was asked directly whether that was the case at the number 10 press conference and after huffing and puffing for a bit admitted that it was bollocks.

[DieselDaisy]

2 hours ago, Dazey said:

Well that's bollocks but Brexiters gonna Brexiter. 

 

 

 

17 minutes ago, spunko12345 said:

BJ was asked directly whether that was the case at the number 10 press conference and after huffing and puffing for a bit admitted that it was bollocks.

Ask yourself why the EU states won't receive it until January? 

Quote

The European Medicines Agency said it planned to give an opinion on the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine at a meeting on December 29. However, EU member states will still take several days to individually approve the regulator’s decision, meaning that distribution of the vaccine is unlikely until early January.

https://www.ft.com/content/21f16d65-803d-4b2f-818a-5a1b7c712481

The above neatly demonstrates how a supranational approach is immediately at a disadvantage from the approach excised by an individual country.

Although true, member states are not bound by this - so that theoretically, Britain could have pushed through Pfizer irrespective of withdrawal from the EU - it seems EU member states are broadly following this coordinated approach, except perhaps Hungary who are thinking of using Russian vaccines. 

[DieselDaisy]

PS

When did spunko become a remoaner-in-crime? Being sovereign means we will be exporting less sheep.

(He cannot drink alcohol in a pub bless him because Harold Bishop banned it.)

[spunko12345]

38 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

PS

When did spunko become a remoaner-in-crime? Being sovereign means we will be exporting less sheep.

(He cannot drink alcohol in a pub bless him because Harold Bishop banned it.)

Its absurd isn't it. Pubs not being allowed to sell alcahol and having to shut at 6pm as of tomorrow. Most boozers around here have just said fuck it and have closed anyway as there's no point. Someone on Twitter said it best, going to a pub and not having a beer is like going to a prostitute for a cuddle.

[DieselDaisy]

2 hours ago, spunko12345 said:

Its absurd isn't it. Pubs not being allowed to sell alcahol and having to shut at 6pm as of tomorrow. Most boozers around here have just said fuck it and have closed anyway as there's no point. Someone on Twitter said it best, going to a pub and not having a beer is like going to a prostitute for a cuddle.

At least the English have permitted alcohol as permissible with consumption of scotch egg. 

[Dazey]

16 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

At least the English have permitted alcohol as permissible with consumption of scotch egg. 

Gotta say that the earlier control measures such as checking in and wotnot to go to the pub really didn't bother me. When they brought in that substantial meal bollocks it was a bit shit though. Didn't stop me going for a pint but didn't make it much fun. Spoons in Altrincham had a three drink limit and that was it. Always felt a bit shifty every time I got told I couldn't have any more after ordering my 4th Stella.

[soon]

Whining about access to Stellas? Stellas? 

[DieselDaisy]

2 hours ago, Dazey said:

Gotta say that the earlier control measures such as checking in and wotnot to go to the pub really didn't bother me. When they brought in that substantial meal bollocks it was a bit shit though. Didn't stop me going for a pint but didn't make it much fun. Spoons in Altrincham had a three drink limit and that was it. Always felt a bit shifty every time I got told I couldn't have any more after ordering my 4th Stella.

How would you feel living in Wales and having to order a ''pint of your best'' Prohibition Brew?

PS

Isn't (the reason you feel shifty buying Stella) because your wife is sitting there with two black eyes.

(Too low?).

Edited December 3, 2020 by DieselDaisy
Dreary -theirs for theres. And I'm supposed to be a proof reader? Evidentially not a good one.

[DieselDaisy]

Perfect for these times,

[Dazey]

56 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

(Too low?).

Never!  

[bucketfoot]

[DieselDaisy]

Long way for Boris to go for some scran, Brussels, and having to eat it whilst enduring a three hour argument on Euro politics with Ursula von Trapp. 

[AtariLegend]

 

Edited December 10, 2020 by AtariLegend

[SoulMonster]

Bojo prepares the Brits for a no-deal Brexit. What a disgrace.