2 big stories
The relaxation of the UK’s lockdown continues, albeit somewhat falteringly. Yes, you’ll probably be able to go into a pub soon, but your kids may not be back at school until September. And that’s partly because politicians are increasingly ignoring scientists, as Rishi Sunak quite openly acknowledged. He is, I think, right to do so – advisors advise, politicians decide. If only many of us had more faith in the quality of those politicians who form our current government…
Caution is probably the watchword though, as many, if not most, people are still uncomfortable with crowded places, and are quite happy to return to normality at their own pace, regardless of what the Government would like them to do. With the World Health Organisation urging caution too, who are the public to trust?
Joe Biden is, it seems, homing in on his choice of running mate. There’s seemingly little doubt that it will be a woman, but race is becoming a factor too. Here’s the Washington Post take on the frontrunners.
2 social media posts
The scandal over Robert Jenrick’s involvement in a major planning application is a slow-burning one, but if the Daily Mail is angry, it can’t look good. Iain Roberts explains why…
This is a major political scandal that needs full investigation. But more than that, it taints the whole planning system, giving ammunition to all those who believe any planning decision they dislike must be result of a brown envelope. https://t.co/T8aOg3jq1D
— Iain Roberts (@slowbikeiain) June 14, 2020
Interested in the geopolitical issues surrounding Covid-19? The Paddy Ashdown Forum invites you to a discussion…
Crises spawn emergency measures. Emergency measures tend to linger long after the threat has passed. Join our eminent speakers @cheng_christine and Paul Reynolds who discuss the geopolitical issues around COVID-19. https://t.co/EhB4aSNHl4 @merleneemerson @GFCunningham pic.twitter.com/l4jOViJc7x
— The Paddy Ashdown Forum (@PaddyForum) June 11, 2020
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
#interrail2025: Day 6 - turning for home... but how?
Two Lib Dem gains in council by-elections
Lochee Park - free family fun day #dundeewestend
Labour failing on social care reform
Photo gallery
Raven (1977) - by the writers of Children of the Stones
Learning from the Zen masters
David Evans
Jenny Barnes
John Waller
Stephen Harte
Michael BG
5 Comments
Thank you for all your important contributions.
Is pit efficient to consider advisors and politicians in a binary fashion?
When a policy is evidently based on scientific research, might it be the case that the advisors are responsible for the policy and the politicians and civil servants for its implementation?
To what extent might our current politicians be mis-using scientists to present a facade of objectivity?
I have a small business and should want to re-open, and I do, but not until it is safe. Not safe as deemed by Johnson and co, on the ever shifting sands Of their own tests. Safe safe. Scientists say if we reduce the 2m rule to 1m It will increase infection risk by 10x. Seems sensible to me – if you had to stand next to a guy with plague would you prefer him 1m or 2m away from you?
Sunak have the game away, that extra 1m means fewer pubs reopening … so money is being out before lives. How many more lives does this bungling foolish government want on its account?
Governments have to govern in the interests of all the people and that inevitably means having to balance different (and sometimes conflicting) interests and priorities. To do that they need to look at the problems facing them from a number of different perspectives and that means having to consult expertise from a range of disciplines. As far as Covid 19 and the lockdown is concerned, epidemiology experts are only going to view the problem from an epidemiological viewpoint but experts in fields such as economics, education and mental health etc are going to see the lockdown’s effects from other perspectives. Government needs to consult all of those experts and then decide on what they judge best for society as a whole, balancing all the different risks and concerns. What seems like the safest option from one perspective is going to be the most risky one from another one and only elected ministers can decide, on the basis of the different experts’ advice, what risks are most worth taking.
This planning business with Jenrick ,who, amazingly,the Mail is moaning about.Is it not CORRUPTION with brown envelopes passing over the table? If it was another country the Tories and their big business buddies would be shouting about corruption.the way deals are managed. Or is this the way a Johnson Govnt works?
Re arrogance and corruption of the latest govnt and its supporters. It has now been accepted that Cummings and his home DID NOT HAVE PLANNING CONSENT. Who would have guessed!