+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
nothing to do with me
Considering that when they ordered they didn't know which would work or when the ones that did would come on stream I think you'd have to agree they did pretty well to plan that way.
Or do you think they should have just ordered 128 million from 1 supplier and hoped for the best?
The EU was panicking about not getting a vaccine that it hadn't even authorised. Thats preparation and planning for you. lol
You carry on banging your anti-EU head lol. No one has claimed they have done well as far as I can see. UK's decision to buy everything in sight definitely a good one from a getting people vaccinated point of view. Just asking - will there be a price to pay down the line? We don't know yet.
I've only just seen this.
I didn't really want this thread to descend into the usual Tory/Labour and Leaver/Remainer garbage
However I recognise that these thread have a life of their own and often go down different tracks.
Therefore I will say to you Sludge that the two main parties are both broad churches
Just because two people are Tories ( or in my case a tory voter as I am not a tory activist just as many who voteLabour are just Labour voters not necessarily fully fledged socialists) doesn't mean that they agree on everything)
Talking a load of round objects there Sludge
I know it is hard for you to understand but it is not just the noble socialists who can have grown up discussions
I could only have a grown up conversation with a left wing Conservative like Ken Clarke, massively pro Europe, pro NHS and totally against Iain Duncan Smiths assault on the welfare state which will over the next few years make people realise why the tories are seen as the nasty party . I could never ever vote for or prop up a party that has caused so much pain for vulnerable people . People are free to chose to vote for whoever they wish but if I was having to apply for state benefits the last thing I would be doing is voting tory . I am staggered that some people do . But there you go .
Roger Bootle is the founder of Capital Economics He is also currently its chairman.
In May 2020 he said
"All along, the costs and delays to be incurred by business once we have fully left the EU were grossly exaggerated – even if we leave without a trade deal and trade with the EU under WTO terms. Most of our non-EU trade, including with our largest single trading partner, the US, is currently done on WTO terms."
Note the words in bold.
He also said in June 2020
"Turning to Brexit, Mr Bootle argued it was unsurprising that the transition negotiations have gone badly – this will not be for economic reasons, but rather because of political considerations on the EU side. He said the EU tends to do deals at the last minute. Mr Bootle said there was no risk if the UK left the single market and customs union on WTO terms. He argued that whatever difficulties there would be, these would now be easier to absorb because volume of trade will be much lower thanks to Coronavirus. Mr Bootle maintained that the case for exiting transition on time remains very strong."
So from his comments in bold he couldn't see any problems with no deal so presumably didn't see any with the deal we got.
You obviously didn't follow the work of the chairman of the company Sludge. To be fair, I will note that he is a known Eurosceptic
Oh no , its far far worse now
Those unable to work under the tories and needing extra help under what was previously a long term benefit , disability living allowance , now have to fill in stressful , anxiety proving forms and in most cases are called in to invasive interviews not with doctors , but by quickly trained civvies working for private firms like atos and capita ......peoples lives decided by someone working for a company whose reward from the government is reducing those on benefits that they clearly need . If you are saying it was worse under labour , who are far from perfect , you are not telling the truth . Disability living allowance once granted was awarded for terms like ten years then reviewed . Now PIP , if people are lucky enough to pass the stringent tests is typically given for 3 years then , even if you have a disability of health condition that clearly isn't going to get better , sod that the DWP send vulnerable and unwell people another form . I used to advise and help many people with benefits and still signpost people to the right places . This govermentvare a disgrace .
I agree with you on much of PIP. MY wife got the full mobility on the basis of the interview but only 10 of the 12 points for care which was a joke. I pointed out several errors the reviewer had made and got an extra two points so she got the necessary 12 for the full amount.
However, she should have got at least another 8 points on matters that the council and care agency care plans both stressed, we pointed out in the interview and the Governments own guidance for Interviewers said they should award points for!!
BUT.
Labour opened the door to this first when they started to use private firms to do the interview for the random assessments for DLA. I did my wife's last DLA application in 2008. She wasn't picked for a face to face assessment but from what I read at the time there were very similar comments from those who suffered them as there are for the PIP assessments now.
Then Labour brought in ESA in 2008 for new claimants and the need for everyone to be assessed. I again read similar comments as for the PIP assessments..
This opened the door for the Conservatives to revamp DLA as PIP when they came in.
This is not to say that the Conservatives do not bear a lot of the responsibility for the over bureaucratic and unfair PIP
But Labour also share the blame for introducing private companies to do the assessments and then introducing near universal instead of random testing into the benefits system for the disabled
This opened the door for the Conservatives to do the PIP revamp in their early years
It certainly wasn't perfect under labour but assessments under labour were on the whole cumbersome and tiresome but the amount of face to face interviews for esa and pip now is staggering . The tories have kept changing the forms making the hoops smaller and smaller and whilst previously people with complex needs could send letters of support from consultants giving their expert view , people are now not asked to send these in . Which clearly means there is an agenda . Its all very well simplifying the benefits system but putting vulnerable people through such stress is a disgrace . The tories have had 11 years now to listen to welfare advice services and award longer benefit entitlement but many people go through the trauma of renewing their forms , getting interviewed , having to appeal , eventually winning then 18 months later another form comes through the post . People with MS , Muscular Dystrophy , Arthritis , Fibromyalgia etc dont get better Iain Duncan Smith , complete idiot . I think I might have advised you before but pm if you need any links , several places in South wales and nationally help people out like your wife and yourself who should be entitled to Severe Disablement Allowance , PIP and carers allowance and if your wife has complex care needs attendance allowance as well.
PIP and Attendance Allowance are overlapping benefits so wouldn't be able to get both.
Severe Disablement Allowance has been replaced with Employment and Support Allowance (ESA).
People can still send in evidence with the claim form even though they're told this isn't needed. Just make sure the evidence is relevant and focused to the activities that are being assessed and not general comment about having a condition.
Assessment of health conditions doesn't need to be stressful if a) there weren't so many scary stories about it and b) these scary stories weren't based on some truth.
I wonder how many people wait until appeal stage in order to get advice at how to effectively describe the impact of their condition? Should it be so tricky that people need advice? Ideally not.
The DWP bases the amount you get on your application, and the length of your award on the likelihood of your condition changing. Of course, that might not always end up with a fair decision in reality.
The assessments are done by health professionals rather than civies. Not always people who specialise in the health condition that person has.
However, people who are awarded the highest level of support under PIP – and where their needs are expected to stay the same or increase – will receive an ongoing award of PIP with a light touch review every 10 years.
What's all this got to do with the EU vaccine row?
.
I can tell you from experience that, that doesn't happen. I've had to support people to appeal a decision after losing their PIP claim despite having progressive disabilities.
The fact that so many appeals are won by applicants show that the model doesn't work and needs to be overhauled now. It's actually coating the DWP more money than it's saving.
I've done over 50 appeals in the last few years that all went to tribunal... Literally all over the decisions were overturned.
The PIP form states do not send in letters from consultants , it may lead to you being asked in for a face to face assessment
I helped someone over the phone with one two weeks ago
Its incredibly stressful for many many people
I phoned up the DWP line for someone
57 minutes
a lot of people applying for the modern benefits are very vulnerable , they don't get advice and support from welfare agencies, disability advice centres . Often the information the DWP bases the information on is provided by a person who is under great stress . No wonder they make mistakes .
Its no good an occupational therapist who works with disabled kids interviewing someone with manic depression
If someone has manic depression , which is a lifelong chronic decision why are people with this condition being given 3 year awards ?
If you think people with MS , Bipolar, etc are all getting long term PIP awards then I am going to have to disagree with you
There is no point in telling slduge that.
The truth as I see it from his posts is that he wants it to be a shitstorm just to prove himself right. He has convinced himself of it and is determined that it will be so.
Which implies to me that he doesn't actually give a ashit about the country doing well, he wants it to fail so he can tell everyone he was right.
Having made the mistake of helping this thread off track by a good discussion with Sludge about DLA/PIP, I will try not to do the same again. I will therefore not discuss Leave voters or Remain voters or pigs in a trough or gammon and concentrate on replying to your last sentence
There may have been little or nothing for leave supporter to get their teeth into (in the last month possibly correct, in the last 4 years questionable but that's another thread, let's not get side tracked again! )
But this comedy of errors was a Doozie and has turned into the gift that kept giving.
First the EU as I pointed out at the start seemed to suggest that Astra Zeneca should fulfill the contract with them at the expense of us giving them some of our vaccines so that the UK Astra Zeneca contract won't be fulfilled on time even though we signed ours three months before the EU finally got round to signing one!!
Then the Germans suddenly seem to find that the Astra Zeneca vaccine won't be effective on under 65's and say they won't give it to them, followed Macron sneering that it will have very little effect on the over 65's
Now, I suppose there is still a chance that they may be right, but several eminent scientists in this country and our regulatory authority disagree with them, and perhaps more important Europe's own medical regulatory authority also seems to think they are wrong.
Then comes the real killer. They threaten to invoke a part of the Northern Ireland protocol, section 16 (which I suspect was probably there in times of dire emergency), which restrict the free movement of medical vaccines and therefore go against the Belfast agreement which not long ago the EU seemed to regard as sacrosanct.
Worse than this they don't even appear to have consulted their own member state who are directly involved. Ireland would have been particularly affected if it had got to the stage where the UK decided to take reprisals and invoked section 16 themselves on some other goods.
Even worse they then seem to try to ay it was a "bureaucratic mistake" when such a decision should surely be taken at the very highest level of the commission i.e by Ursula Von der Leyen and then only I would have though after consultation with all member states and certainly with Ireland.
Vindictive, bungling, bullying ,spiteful, inefficient, arrogant are all words with are apt here
I'm sure I have missed somethings they said as well bul
t let's not overegg the pudding
Finally by even suggesting that section 16 can be invoked at the drop of a hat, apparently without much discussion, they have may have made it easier for Britain to use or threaten to use it at some time in the future.