Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How steep is Starmer’s mountain?

SystemSystem Posts: 8,258
edited May 18 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How steep is Starmer’s mountain?

Since the last election resulted in a substantial Conservative majority, many have said that Labour has a mountain to climb to win the next one.  The implication is that the result this time significantly influences the result next time.  The results in 2024 are influenced by the results in 2019.  

Read the full story here


«13456

Comments

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 30,905
    Surely 6, 7, 8 are more likely than 7, 8, 9?

    The chances of 7, 8, or 9 are: 17% + 14% + 11% = 42%
    The chances of 6, 7 or 8 are: 14% + 17% + 14% = 45%
  • Gabs3Gabs3 Posts: 799
    Hong Kong kicking off in parliament there:

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 26,150
    Yes, this is interesting. So much of the way in which we approach election results is still influenced by the way they were reported in the early days of television, McKenzie and all. UNS and straight swing is another where, despite very little evidence that it actually works, references to and assumptions based on it crop up all the time.

    I guess it’s part of the human tendency to see patterns even where there aren’t any,
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 21,316
    Foxy said:

    Interesting, and rather counter-intuitive analysis. Thanks Fishing.

    An excellent piece (as was yours over the weekend, which I sadly found little time to comment on).
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 21,316
    edited May 18
    rcs1000 said:

    Surely 6, 7, 8 are more likely than 7, 8, 9?

    The chances of 7, 8, or 9 are: 17% + 14% + 11% = 42%
    The chances of 6, 7 or 8 are: 14% + 17% + 14% = 45%

    Along the same lines, surely both views of Cameron’s two election results are equally convincing ?
  • BannedinnParisBannedinnParis Posts: 766
    "For example, some have praised David Cameron for winning more than a hundred seats from Labour in 2010, while others have criticised him for failing to win an overall majority against a lacklustre Labour government with a poor economic record."

    Naive. Recessions do not harm the chances of governments in following elections in remotely like the way people seem to think they do.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 1,914
    edited May 18
    Reposted from.prev thread ..

    I awoke at 6am. The recent cacophony of birdsong as been drowned out by the usual noise from traffic on the A24. Lockdown is over if anyone is in doubt.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 13,729
    Very interesting analysis. As a football fan I cannot abide pundits at the start of the season saying things like "team x has to make up 20 points on team y". They don't; they all start from 0.

    However, I think politics and football are quite different. Footballers have to remain fit and motivated. It's hard to keep doing it season after season. First past the post means that only two parties can realistically aim to be the largest party - I'm sure the top two parties at UK elections are autocorrelated!

    I think when analyzing the chances of the LOTO becoming PM, we should look at the circumstances at which that has happened in the past:

    1945 - Attlee
    1951 - Churchill
    1964 - Wilson
    1970 - Heath
    1974 - Wilson
    1979 - Thatcher
    1997 - Blair
    2010 - Cameron

    It seems to me that Blair and Cameron took the approach of trying to avoid scaring voters. Thatcher put forward a more radical plan for change. I find it hard to see Starmer following the Blair/Cameron approach, so I think the question is - "will enough English voters want to vote for change in 2024?"

    Thatcher was in the right place at the right time. Economics was a key part of her success even if a lot of people didn't like what she was doing. I don't think economics have been a key part of elections since her time. The dividing lines have changed. Perhaps this crisis will change that and an economic crisis will provide something of an opportunity for Starmer. But if that doesn't happen, I think Starmer is up against it.

    Finally, Scotland is a huge headache for Starmer. Perhaps the fear of the SNP being in government at Westminster will fade over time. I suspect it won't, and the Tories will continue to benefit from SNP's success for as long as Scotland are returning MPs to Westminster.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 3,430
    Interesting piece. Hmmm.

    The test has been applied to a % of the vote, whilst the question and conclusion are couched in terms of a binary result.

    How does that linkage model the relationship between the two?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,167
    O’Leary on R4 claiming 14 day quarantine won’t work but masks do - quoting a study that was conducted in a clinical setting. Doubt he’s made any friends in the government.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 2,602
    edited May 18
    Thanks Fishing! Fascinating, and for me counter-intuitive (cos of FPTP). (I’d be interested to see this analysis on Scottish seats, although I appreciate that it takes a great deal of time and energy.)

    But may I point out one thing you write:

    - “Labour has to overturn forbiddingly huge majorities in Tory seats“

    Yes, that is true. But Starmer’s real problem is that Labour has to overturn forbiddingly huge majorities in Tory seats AND in SNP seats. That is a much harder task, because the two objectives require mutual contradictory strategy and tactics. As the Liberal Democrats discovered to their cost: in the age of the internet you cannot send vastly different messages out to the electorate in different geographical areas, because anybody anywhere can read, and redistribute, your two-facedness.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 26,150
    The 2015 Canadian election (and indeed some of their others) shows that huge shifts in representation can happen under our voting system.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 15,656


    My thought is that if return is made voluntary (and I think compulsion would result in mass truancy) it is the most deprived children who are least likely to return.

    Maybe as simple as poor people feeling that social advancement through education is not on the cards for their children. Interesting though.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 26,150
    edited May 18

    O’Leary on R4 claiming 14 day quarantine won’t work but masks do - quoting a study that was conducted in a clinical setting. Doubt he’s made any friends in the government.

    His argument that the government is making stuff up without any scientific foundation came across well.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 26,150
    Across Europe, government-backed business loan schemes in Germany, France and Switzerland have been quicker to distribute emergency funding during the coronavirus outbreak than those in the UK, where teething problems put the British programme weeks behind mainland rivals.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 28,303
    Is Boris on another holiday, he seems to have disappeared again , I am beginning to think he imagines he is on a zero hours contract.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 1,914
    IanB2 said:

    O’Leary on R4 claiming 14 day quarantine won’t work but masks do - quoting a study that was conducted in a clinical setting. Doubt he’s made any friends in the government.

    His argument that the government is making stuff up without any scientific foundation came across well.
    Of course his assertion yhat masks wirk is bollocks too
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 33,462
    Foxy said:



    My thought is that if return is made voluntary (and I think compulsion would result in mass truancy) it is the most deprived children who are least likely to return.

    Maybe as simple as poor people feeling that social advancement through education is not on the cards for their children. Interesting though.
    For secondary schools its reasonably consistent between Quintile 2 through Quintile 5.

    I think that there are many in Quintile 1 (certainly not all) who simply don't value education. I'd be curious to see a breakdown of truancy or opinions on education in normal circumstances, wouldn't surprise me to see such a relationship.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 13,729
    IanB2 said:

    The 2015 Canadian election (and indeed some of their others) shows that huge shifts in representation can happen under our voting system.

    And I suppose Scotland in 2015 shows that too. But somehow, I don't think this is necessarily to Starmer's advantage.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 2,974

    O’Leary on R4 claiming 14 day quarantine won’t work but masks do - quoting a study that was conducted in a clinical setting. Doubt he’s made any friends in the government.

    You don't happen to know which clinical study?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 33,462

    Thanks Fishing! Fascinating, and for me counter-intuitive (cos of FPTP). (I’d be interested to see this analysis on Scottish seats, although I appreciate that it takes a great deal of time and energy.)

    But may I point out one thing you write:

    - “Labour has to overturn forbiddingly huge majorities in Tory seats“

    Yes, that is true. But Starmer’s real problem is that Labour has to overturn forbiddingly huge majorities in Tory seats AND in SNP seats. That is a much harder task, because the two objectives require mutual contradictory strategy and tactics. As the Liberal Democrats discovered to their cost: in the age of the internet you cannot send vastly different messages out to the electorate in different geographical areas, because anybody anywhere can read, and redistribute, your two-facedness.

    If Starmer wants to be Prime Minister he needs to win Tory seats. If the SNP had won as many seats in 2017 as they had in 2015 its quite possible Corbyn would have been PM.

    To get a stable, healthy, Labour majority requires Tory and SNP seats. But SNP seats are very much secondary.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 2,974
    Great piece, Fishing.

    I know this has little to do with your article but the very fact of Coronavirus between 2019 and 2024 renders all previous correlations null and void anyway, with the sole possible exception of the Second World War. When the populist successful leader was booted out by a thumping Labour landslide.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 28,303
    @CarlottaVance
    Desperate news for Carlotta, it looks like the Scottish Government have hired at least 600 Contract Tracers since Carlotta swore late yesterday that ZERO had been hired. 600 hired on a Sunday night and starting work today seems pretty good going.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 20,990
    IanB2 said:

    O’Leary on R4 claiming 14 day quarantine won’t work but masks do - quoting a study that was conducted in a clinical setting. Doubt he’s made any friends in the government.

    His argument that the government is making stuff up without any scientific foundation came across well.
    The bloke who wont refund his customers is now someone we should listen to ?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,167
    IanB2 said:

    O’Leary on R4 claiming 14 day quarantine won’t work but masks do - quoting a study that was conducted in a clinical setting. Doubt he’s made any friends in the government.

    His argument that the government is making stuff up without any scientific foundation came across well.
    I think “special pleading” would be a better description. He misleadingly quotes a study conducted in a hospital (where staff are trained in mask use and change them every 20 minutes) and passes that off as applicable in the general population. He says he doesn’t know where “14 days” comes from - hasn’t he heard of “incubation period”? Lord knows the governmentS have got plenty wrong on this - but O’Leary was downright irresponsible.

    How do you police the 14 day quarantine? Simple. Random flights go into mandatory quarantine - so you don’t know if you’ll get home or not - and steep fines for those who break self quarantine.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 20,990

    O’Leary on R4 claiming 14 day quarantine won’t work but masks do - quoting a study that was conducted in a clinical setting. Doubt he’s made any friends in the government.

    You don't happen to know which clinical study?
    He was quoting the Mater hospital in Dublin.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,167
    malcolmg said:

    @CarlottaVance
    Desperate news for Carlotta, it looks like the Scottish Government have hired at least 600 Contract Tracers since Carlotta swore late yesterday that ZERO had been hired. 600 hired on a Sunday night and starting work today seems pretty good going.

    Good news! Only 1400 to go! Overnight training is impressive (unlikely?) too!
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 2,974

    O’Leary on R4 claiming 14 day quarantine won’t work but masks do - quoting a study that was conducted in a clinical setting. Doubt he’s made any friends in the government.

    You don't happen to know which clinical study?
    He was quoting the Mater hospital in Dublin.

    Brilliant: thanks.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 33,462
    tlg86 said:

    Very interesting analysis. As a football fan I cannot abide pundits at the start of the season saying things like "team x has to make up 20 points on team y". They don't; they all start from 0.

    However, I think politics and football are quite different. Footballers have to remain fit and motivated. It's hard to keep doing it season after season. First past the post means that only two parties can realistically aim to be the largest party - I'm sure the top two parties at UK elections are autocorrelated!

    I think when analyzing the chances of the LOTO becoming PM, we should look at the circumstances at which that has happened in the past:

    1945 - Attlee
    1951 - Churchill
    1964 - Wilson
    1970 - Heath
    1974 - Wilson
    1979 - Thatcher
    1997 - Blair
    2010 - Cameron

    It seems to me that Blair and Cameron took the approach of trying to avoid scaring voters. Thatcher put forward a more radical plan for change. I find it hard to see Starmer following the Blair/Cameron approach, so I think the question is - "will enough English voters want to vote for change in 2024?"

    Thatcher was in the right place at the right time. Economics was a key part of her success even if a lot of people didn't like what she was doing. I don't think economics have been a key part of elections since her time. The dividing lines have changed. Perhaps this crisis will change that and an economic crisis will provide something of an opportunity for Starmer. But if that doesn't happen, I think Starmer is up against it.

    Finally, Scotland is a huge headache for Starmer. Perhaps the fear of the SNP being in government at Westminster will fade over time. I suspect it won't, and the Tories will continue to benefit from SNP's success for as long as Scotland are returning MPs to Westminster.

    I think economics has been a major issue for the past decade.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 2,974

    IanB2 said:

    O’Leary on R4 claiming 14 day quarantine won’t work but masks do - quoting a study that was conducted in a clinical setting. Doubt he’s made any friends in the government.

    His argument that the government is making stuff up without any scientific foundation came across well.
    I think “special pleading” would be a better description. He misleadingly quotes a study conducted in a hospital (where staff are trained in mask use and change them every 20 minutes) and passes that off as applicable in the general population. He says he doesn’t know where “14 days” comes from - hasn’t he heard of “incubation period”? Lord knows the governmentS have got plenty wrong on this - but O’Leary was downright irresponsible.

    How do you police the 14 day quarantine? Simple. Random flights go into mandatory quarantine - so you don’t know if you’ll get home or not - and steep fines for those who break self quarantine.
    It's important to point out that 'the science is inconclusive' meme trotted out by Pratt Hancock is thoroughly disingenuous.

    There has not been, nor can there ever be, a randomised double blind trial on the preventative efficacy of face masks. So WHO will never confirm the science of it.

    For the rest of the world with an ounce of common sense, it's a no brainer.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 802
    edited May 18

    Thanks Fishing! Fascinating, and for me counter-intuitive (cos of FPTP). (I’d be interested to see this analysis on Scottish seats, although I appreciate that it takes a great deal of time and energy.)

    I don't actually think it would work in Scotland, because of the much more diffuse nature of the results up there since 1918. Without getting too detailed, the DW test relies on a linear and consistent time series over the whole range of the results you're testing. That's why I applied it to the Conservative share of seats. Broadly, their expected share of seats in 2019 is similar to that in 1918. A good result for them in 2019 is 65% of the seats, and a terrible result is 35% of the seats, and that was true in 1918 too. The same would be true for Labour between 1945 and now, but not when it was a minor party, so I didn't use them. On the other hand, this might work for the Liberals until the twenties, but not when they became a minor party.

    Whereas for Scotland, you have the Nationalists dominating since 2015, Labour before that for thirty years, then the Conservaties having majorities if you go further back. There's no single relationship you can apply the DW statistic to, unless you use very small subsamples of general elections (e.g. 2015, 2017 and 2019 for the Nat domniation), and then the results would be pretty worthless. Durbin and Watson didn't even calculate critical values of their statistic for fewer than six observations.


    But may I point out one thing you write:

    - “Labour has to overturn forbiddingly huge majorities in Tory seats“

    Yes, that is true. But Starmer’s real problem is that Labour has to overturn forbiddingly huge majorities in Tory seats AND in SNP seats. That is a much harder task, because the two objectives require mutual contradictory strategy and tactics. As the Liberal Democrats discovered to their cost: in the age of the internet you cannot send vastly different messages out to the electorate in different geographical areas, because anybody anywhere can read, and redistribute, your two-facedness.

    I understand what you're saying, but I'm not sure I agree. Mathematically, because there are so many more English seats than Scottish ones, Labour can win a majority without winning any seats north of the border. But even if it won every seat in Scotland, it would still be far short of a majority in England, unless it picked up some English seats. A large number of Scottish seats would make Sir Keir's task much easier, obviously, but they are not essential.

    I also think that sending vastly different messages to two groups of supporters can work, at least for a while, even in the age of social media, if it's what the two groups are desperate to believe. It's more difficult, of course, but possible. So you had Labour doing better than expected in 2017 by dog-whistling to Remainers in cities and on social media, but pretending it would implement the referendum result in its manifesto and in eurosceptic areas. It didn't work for them in 2019, of course, but I wonder if that's because the Conservatives were more competent this time, rather than Labour being dishonest?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,167
    malcolmg said:

    @CarlottaVance
    Desperate news for Carlotta, it looks like the Scottish Government have hired at least 600 Contract Tracers since Carlotta swore late yesterday that ZERO had been hired. 600 hired on a Sunday night and starting work today seems pretty good going.

    Got a link by the way? This is the most recent I can find - the story I quoted yesterday;

    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/coronavirus-scotland-despite-8500-people-22039844
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,167
    edited May 18

    IanB2 said:

    O’Leary on R4 claiming 14 day quarantine won’t work but masks do - quoting a study that was conducted in a clinical setting. Doubt he’s made any friends in the government.

    His argument that the government is making stuff up without any scientific foundation came across well.
    I think “special pleading” would be a better description. He misleadingly quotes a study conducted in a hospital (where staff are trained in mask use and change them every 20 minutes) and passes that off as applicable in the general population. He says he doesn’t know where “14 days” comes from - hasn’t he heard of “incubation period”? Lord knows the governmentS have got plenty wrong on this - but O’Leary was downright irresponsible.

    How do you police the 14 day quarantine? Simple. Random flights go into mandatory quarantine - so you don’t know if you’ll get home or not - and steep fines for those who break self quarantine.
    It's important to point out that 'the science is inconclusive' meme trotted out by Pratt Hancock is thoroughly disingenuous.

    There has not been, nor can there ever be, a randomised double blind trial on the preventative efficacy of face masks. So WHO will never confirm the science of it.

    For the rest of the world with an ounce of common sense, it's a no brainer.
    The science on incubation period/quarantine is a lot more robust than the science on mask usage in the general population. O’Leary claimed that masks work and quarantine doesn’t.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 15,656

    IanB2 said:

    O’Leary on R4 claiming 14 day quarantine won’t work but masks do - quoting a study that was conducted in a clinical setting. Doubt he’s made any friends in the government.

    His argument that the government is making stuff up without any scientific foundation came across well.
    I think “special pleading” would be a better description. He misleadingly quotes a study conducted in a hospital (where staff are trained in mask use and change them every 20 minutes) and passes that off as applicable in the general population. He says he doesn’t know where “14 days” comes from - hasn’t he heard of “incubation period”? Lord knows the governmentS have got plenty wrong on this - but O’Leary was downright irresponsible.

    How do you police the 14 day quarantine? Simple. Random flights go into mandatory quarantine - so you don’t know if you’ll get home or not - and steep fines for those who break self quarantine.
    Personally, I cannot see the point of 14 day quarantine now. For 10 weeks have most cases have been caught domestically rather than from foreign contacts. Nearly all travellers will be going to lower risk destinations than the UK itself.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 3,430

    malcolmg said:

    @CarlottaVance
    Desperate news for Carlotta, it looks like the Scottish Government have hired at least 600 Contract Tracers since Carlotta swore late yesterday that ZERO had been hired. 600 hired on a Sunday night and starting work today seems pretty good going.

    Good news! Only 1400 to go! Overnight training is impressive (unlikely?) too!
    Yes, but Guernsay has hired both of the contact tracers it needs.

    So it must be an abject failure. :-)
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 2,327

    But Starmer’s real problem is that Labour has to overturn forbiddingly huge majorities in Tory seats AND in SNP seats. That is a much harder task, because the two objectives require mutual contradictory strategy and tactics.

    I am not sure that's true post covid

    The message "more of your friends and family are dead because the Government were incompetent" will play well both sides of the border. Maybe even better in Scotland.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 13,729
    edited May 18
    The comparison with the 2010 election is interesting. It's worth remembering what happened in England in 2005:

    Votes:

    Conservatives - 35.7%
    Labour - 35.5

    Seats:

    Labour - 54.1%
    Conservatives - 36.7%

    Contrast those results with 2019:

    Votes:

    Conservatives - 47.2%
    Labour - 33.9%

    Seats:

    Conservatives - 64.7%
    Labour - 33.6%

    I think Labour were quite fortunate to do as well in 2005 as they did. Back then, FPTP really was working well for them. That isn't the case now.

    To win most seats next time, I think Labour are going to need a serious revival from the Lib Dems. Whilst that's not impossible, the Lib Dems are going to continue to suffer from a lack of press coverage as they are not the third party.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,167
    MattW said:

    malcolmg said:

    @CarlottaVance
    Desperate news for Carlotta, it looks like the Scottish Government have hired at least 600 Contract Tracers since Carlotta swore late yesterday that ZERO had been hired. 600 hired on a Sunday night and starting work today seems pretty good going.

    Good news! Only 1400 to go! Overnight training is impressive (unlikely?) too!
    Yes, but Guernsay has hired both of the contact tracers it needs.

    So it must be an abject failure. :-)
    35 actually - proportionately double the England/Scotland numbers. 17 days no new cases.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 18,502
    Someone posted on the other thread that traffic seems to be increasing again. Looking at Traffic Englands map, there seems to be some sort of disaster, traffic-wise around Huntingdon but that other notorious black-spot, the Dartford Cressing is clear.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 3,430
    edited May 18
    Strange on "priests must wear gloves to deliver communion wafer" in Italy. (R4 Today)

    The mechanism and risk for spreading there will be transfer from person A to person B via the priest's hands. The risk from the priest himself is small relatively because there is only one of him, and multiple people in the congregation.

    The only way to stop transfer risk is either to break the chain where people receive communion - eg by going to mini wafers dispensed with no priestly contact and protestant style individual glasses properly sterilised, or the priest sterilising his gloves between each communicant.

    Hmm. Displacement activity?

    Plus I guess some risk for the priest if infectious people remove their masks at the rail.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,167
    Foxy said:

    IanB2 said:

    O’Leary on R4 claiming 14 day quarantine won’t work but masks do - quoting a study that was conducted in a clinical setting. Doubt he’s made any friends in the government.

    His argument that the government is making stuff up without any scientific foundation came across well.
    I think “special pleading” would be a better description. He misleadingly quotes a study conducted in a hospital (where staff are trained in mask use and change them every 20 minutes) and passes that off as applicable in the general population. He says he doesn’t know where “14 days” comes from - hasn’t he heard of “incubation period”? Lord knows the governmentS have got plenty wrong on this - but O’Leary was downright irresponsible.

    How do you police the 14 day quarantine? Simple. Random flights go into mandatory quarantine - so you don’t know if you’ll get home or not - and steep fines for those who break self quarantine.
    Personally, I cannot see the point of 14 day quarantine now. For 10 weeks have most cases have been caught domestically rather than from foreign contacts. Nearly all travellers will be going to lower risk destinations than the UK itself.
    There may indeed be a good case for quarantine arrivals from the U.K. There is no sign of arrival quarantine being lifted anytime soon in the Far East or Australasia.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 28,123
    edited May 18
    The big unknown or the next election is, what will happen to the Brexit Party vote?

    Most of it seems to have come from Labour. If that is so, it cost them a great many seats - e.g. Blyth Valley, Durham North West, Delyn. So if it goes back, they should have a decent shout of regaining many of them.

    However, another way of looking at it is that in 38 seats, the Brexit Party vote was larger than the Labour majority. So if Nigel Farage had not been a dimwitted egomaniac, the Tories might have picked up Doncaster North, Normanton, Alyn and Deeside, Torfaen, both seats in Newport and all seats in Coventry if Leave voters had coalesced around them. So if that Brexit vote shifted to the Tories, Starmer’s task is even harder.

    Therefore, I am reluctant to make firm predictions about the next election. Starmer could win, or force a draw, but he needs the dice to fall correctly. We could see considerable churn in both votes and seats - I could see Labour gaining Cheltenham (repeat Cheltenham) and falling further in Wales, for example, under his leadership.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 3,430

    MattW said:

    malcolmg said:

    @CarlottaVance
    Desperate news for Carlotta, it looks like the Scottish Government have hired at least 600 Contract Tracers since Carlotta swore late yesterday that ZERO had been hired. 600 hired on a Sunday night and starting work today seems pretty good going.

    Good news! Only 1400 to go! Overnight training is impressive (unlikely?) too!
    Yes, but Guernsay has hired both of the contact tracers it needs.

    So it must be an abject failure. :-)
    35 actually - proportionately double the England/Scotland numbers. 17 days no new cases.
    They've hired some more since the previous figures. Good.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 14,537
    Starmer gives Labour a chance for the first time in 10-15 years. However small, that is progress.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,167
    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    malcolmg said:

    @CarlottaVance
    Desperate news for Carlotta, it looks like the Scottish Government have hired at least 600 Contract Tracers since Carlotta swore late yesterday that ZERO had been hired. 600 hired on a Sunday night and starting work today seems pretty good going.

    Good news! Only 1400 to go! Overnight training is impressive (unlikely?) too!
    Yes, but Guernsay has hired both of the contact tracers it needs.

    So it must be an abject failure. :-)
    35 actually - proportionately double the England/Scotland numbers. 17 days no new cases.
    They've hired some more since the previous figures. Good.
    It’s the same number - announced last week. Now entering month 3 of 14 day self quarantine for all arrivals.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 20,990
    Foxy said:

    IanB2 said:

    O’Leary on R4 claiming 14 day quarantine won’t work but masks do - quoting a study that was conducted in a clinical setting. Doubt he’s made any friends in the government.

    His argument that the government is making stuff up without any scientific foundation came across well.
    I think “special pleading” would be a better description. He misleadingly quotes a study conducted in a hospital (where staff are trained in mask use and change them every 20 minutes) and passes that off as applicable in the general population. He says he doesn’t know where “14 days” comes from - hasn’t he heard of “incubation period”? Lord knows the governmentS have got plenty wrong on this - but O’Leary was downright irresponsible.

    How do you police the 14 day quarantine? Simple. Random flights go into mandatory quarantine - so you don’t know if you’ll get home or not - and steep fines for those who break self quarantine.
    Personally, I cannot see the point of 14 day quarantine now. For 10 weeks have most cases have been caught domestically rather than from foreign contacts. Nearly all travellers will be going to lower risk destinations than the UK itself.
    Spoke with a dentist friend of mine at the weekend , who said the guidelines for dentistry are horrendous.

    Full PPE for all staff
    Because they use air drills they need 30 mins between patients to let wet particles settle
    Plus a full wipe down after 30 mins

    He reckons one patient per hour at best.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 28,303

    malcolmg said:

    @CarlottaVance
    Desperate news for Carlotta, it looks like the Scottish Government have hired at least 600 Contract Tracers since Carlotta swore late yesterday that ZERO had been hired. 600 hired on a Sunday night and starting work today seems pretty good going.

    Good news! Only 1400 to go! Overnight training is impressive (unlikely?) too!
    They likely have more but only need 600 for trials, methinks the Tory fibs yesterday were just a little inaccurate. Good old Carlaw , Miles Briggs and the septic Record as their mouthpiece. Easier to lie than have a policy of their own.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 20,990
    Jonathan said:

    Starmer gives Labour a chance for the first time in 10-15 years. However small, that is progress.

    that rather depends on your perspective :smiley:
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 14,537

    Jonathan said:

    Starmer gives Labour a chance for the first time in 10-15 years. However small, that is progress.

    that rather depends on your perspective :smiley:
    As a democrat, it’s progress. One party states fail.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 20,990
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Starmer gives Labour a chance for the first time in 10-15 years. However small, that is progress.

    that rather depends on your perspective :smiley:
    As a democrat, it’s progress. One party states fail.
    As Blair showed us :smiley:
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 14,537

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Starmer gives Labour a chance for the first time in 10-15 years. However small, that is progress.

    that rather depends on your perspective :smiley:
    As a democrat, it’s progress. One party states fail.
    As Blair showed us :smiley:
    We were better off then than now.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,167
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    @CarlottaVance
    Desperate news for Carlotta, it looks like the Scottish Government have hired at least 600 Contract Tracers since Carlotta swore late yesterday that ZERO had been hired. 600 hired on a Sunday night and starting work today seems pretty good going.

    Good news! Only 1400 to go! Overnight training is impressive (unlikely?) too!
    They likely have more but only need 600 for trials, methinks the Tory fibs yesterday were just a little inaccurate. Good old Carlaw , Miles Briggs and the septic Record as their mouthpiece. Easier to lie than have a policy of their own.
    Link please?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,167
    So it’s not just the Scottish Govt that has “questions to answer” over the Nike cluster:

  • FishingFishing Posts: 802
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Starmer gives Labour a chance for the first time in 10-15 years. However small, that is progress.

    that rather depends on your perspective :smiley:
    As a democrat, it’s progress. One party states fail.
    As Blair showed us :smiley:
    We were better off then than now.
    Because of the glowing economic legacy that the Major government left behind, compared to "There's No Money Left" in 2010.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 6,430

    The mayor of Brazil's largest city, São Paulo, has said its health system could collapse as demand grows for emergency beds to deal with coronavirus cases. Bruno Covas said the city's public hospitals had reached 90% and could run out of space in about two weeks.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-52701524

    Brazil is not a third-world country by any means. A chilling reminder of what can happen when a stupid, ignorant denialist is in control and sticks to his guns.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 20,990

    Angela Merkel having a good crisis as CDU recovers lost ground

    With an election next year and no obvious successor will she run again ?

    https://www.welt.de/debatte/kommentare/plus208029615/Coronakrise-Angela-Merkel-auf-dem-Hoehepunkt-ihrer-Kanzlerschaft.html
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 2,759
    edited May 18
    Thanks Fishing for a good statistical analysis. I know how much work behind the scenes goes into this kind of article, and then it is not trivial to keep the explanation at the level of the readers.

    Two very minor points are, with n=27, this is on the lowish side to get good estimates of auto correlation, which is similar to 2 years & three months of monthly data, but I do realise we often have to put up with small sample sizes. The second is that the GDP example for auto-correlation is not great, because the first thing you do in this type of time series analysis is to subtract out the average. I think a better way to explain it is: if GDP increases this quarter, then there is a higher chance that is will increase next quarter as well, whereas if GDP decreases this quarter, then there is a higher chance that is will decrease next quarter as well.

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 4,230

    Foxy said:

    IanB2 said:

    O’Leary on R4 claiming 14 day quarantine won’t work but masks do - quoting a study that was conducted in a clinical setting. Doubt he’s made any friends in the government.

    His argument that the government is making stuff up without any scientific foundation came across well.
    I think “special pleading” would be a better description. He misleadingly quotes a study conducted in a hospital (where staff are trained in mask use and change them every 20 minutes) and passes that off as applicable in the general population. He says he doesn’t know where “14 days” comes from - hasn’t he heard of “incubation period”? Lord knows the governmentS have got plenty wrong on this - but O’Leary was downright irresponsible.

    How do you police the 14 day quarantine? Simple. Random flights go into mandatory quarantine - so you don’t know if you’ll get home or not - and steep fines for those who break self quarantine.
    Personally, I cannot see the point of 14 day quarantine now. For 10 weeks have most cases have been caught domestically rather than from foreign contacts. Nearly all travellers will be going to lower risk destinations than the UK itself.
    Spoke with a dentist friend of mine at the weekend , who said the guidelines for dentistry are horrendous.

    Full PPE for all staff
    Because they use air drills they need 30 mins between patients to let wet particles settle
    Plus a full wipe down after 30 mins

    He reckons one patient per hour at best.

    I suggest that those guidelines sound sensible, rather than horrendous. Though they will be horrendous in terms of earnings for dental practises.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 5,035
    Listening to reportage of the "big return to work". Government had the rail companies increase services and prepare for more people travelling as instructed - but appears to be very quiet as it was last week. This reluctance to resume normal as instructed will be the government's big problem. The row with teachers was largely irrelevant as polls have made it clear that parents aren't going to send their sprogs in when instructed. And it will be the same with work.

    As a related aside, this TfL bailout is not good for Sadiq Khan's chances of re-election. Yes fares revenue was down 90% and a decent number of drivers were sick/dying. But the reduction in service provision was branded him putting workers at risk and the massive congestion charge increase is branded as him putting workers at risk...
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,167
    R4 King’s College professor says PHE has not broadened its definition of COVID symptoms to include things like loss of smell/taste so there are probably 50,000-75,000 infectious undiagnosed out there. Another win for PHE!
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 14,537
    Fishing said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Starmer gives Labour a chance for the first time in 10-15 years. However small, that is progress.

    that rather depends on your perspective :smiley:
    As a democrat, it’s progress. One party states fail.
    As Blair showed us :smiley:
    We were better off then than now.
    Because of the glowing economic legacy that the Major government left behind, compared to "There's No Money Left" in 2010.
    That old myth. A legacy so glowing, the country rejected the Tories with a 179 Labour majority. Good times.

    Rejoice, life is better under Labour.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 2,974
    Jonathan said:

    Fishing said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Starmer gives Labour a chance for the first time in 10-15 years. However small, that is progress.

    that rather depends on your perspective :smiley:
    As a democrat, it’s progress. One party states fail.
    As Blair showed us :smiley:
    We were better off then than now.
    Because of the glowing economic legacy that the Major government left behind, compared to "There's No Money Left" in 2010.
    That old myth. A legacy so glowing, the country rejected the Tories with a 179 Labour majority. Good times.

    Rejoice, life is better under Labour.
    Black Wednesday killed the Conservatives' competence on the economy for a generation. So, yes, the idea that Major handed over a good economic legacy may have some truth but not in the minds of the people.

    (Ironically the fiasco of leaving the ERM is what propelled us to success)
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,167

    Listening to reportage of the "big return to work". Government had the rail companies increase services and prepare for more people travelling as instructed - but appears to be very quiet as it was last week. This reluctance to resume normal as instructed will be the government's big problem. The row with teachers was largely irrelevant as polls have made it clear that parents aren't going to send their sprogs in when instructed. And it will be the same with work.

    As a related aside, this TfL bailout is not good for Sadiq Khan's chances of re-election. Yes fares revenue was down 90% and a decent number of drivers were sick/dying. But the reduction in service provision was branded him putting workers at risk and the massive congestion charge increase is branded as him putting workers at risk...

    A Tfl friend told me about his PPE - a 50ml bottle of hand sanitiser for 4 weeks.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 16,930
    ydoethur said:

    The big unknown or the next election is, what will happen to the Brexit Party vote?

    Most of it seems to have come from Labour. If that is so, it cost them a great many seats - e.g. Blyth Valley, Durham North West, Delyn. So if it goes back, they should have a decent shout of regaining many of them.

    However, another way of looking at it is that in 38 seats, the Brexit Party vote was larger than the Labour majority. So if Nigel Farage had not been a dimwitted egomaniac, the Tories might have picked up Doncaster North, Normanton, Alyn and Deeside, Torfaen, both seats in Newport and all seats in Coventry if Leave voters had coalesced around them. So if that Brexit vote shifted to the Tories, Starmer’s task is even harder.

    Therefore, I am reluctant to make firm predictions about the next election. Starmer could win, or force a draw, but he needs the dice to fall correctly. We could see considerable churn in both votes and seats - I could see Labour gaining Cheltenham (repeat Cheltenham) and falling further in Wales, for example, under his leadership.

    Where the Brexit vote came from and where it would have gone otherwise is interesting.

    I suspect it varies around the country.

    In some places - Hartlepool and the Yorkshire mining constituencies I think it damaged the Conservatives, in other places it might have damaged Labour.

    I will say that I've never seen such an expansive campaign as what TBP did in South Yorkshire - activists infesting town centres, masses of leaflets and even cars with speakers crawling through residential areas.

    BTW there's no chance Labour will win Cheltenham - they lost their deposit there in 2019:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheltenham_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
  • ChrisChris Posts: 6,430

    R4 King’s College professor says PHE has not broadened its definition of COVID symptoms to include things like loss of smell/taste so there are probably 50,000-75,000 infectious undiagnosed out there. Another win for PHE!

    ?

    On the basis of the ONS survey there will be around 170,000 who would test positive. 20,000-30,000 are actually testing positive per week. So doesn't that mean about 150,000 undiagnosed? How the precise definition of symptoms bears on that doesn't seem likely to be decisive.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 802
    eristdoof said:

    Thanks Fishing for a good statistical analysis. I know how much work behind the scenes goes into this kind of article, and then it is not trivial to keep the explanation at the level of the readers.

    Two very minor points are, with n=27, this is on the lowish side to get good estimates of auto correlation, which is similar to 2 years & three months of monthly data, but I do realise we often have to put up with small sample sizes. The second is that the GDP example for auto-correlation is not great, because the first thing you do in this type of time series analysis is to subtract out the average. I think a better way to explain it is: if GDP increases this quarter, then there is a higher chance that is will increase next quarter as well, whereas if GDP decreases this quarter, then there is a higher chance that is will decrease next quarter as well.

    The point about GDP is right - the first order derivative may be more likely to be autocorrelated under certain assumptions.

    n=27 is on the high side of the DW tables, which run from 6 to 30 - at least they do in my book. The subsamples are certainly very small, which is why I didn't put much emphasis on them. Above 30, the book recommends the use of the normal distribution.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 4,230

    IanB2 said:

    O’Leary on R4 claiming 14 day quarantine won’t work but masks do - quoting a study that was conducted in a clinical setting. Doubt he’s made any friends in the government.

    His argument that the government is making stuff up without any scientific foundation came across well.
    The bloke who wont refund his customers is now someone we should listen to ?
    Has his paper on this issue been peer-reviewed by Piers Morgan?

    What about the one for bringing in standing passengers on airplanes?
  • ChrisChris Posts: 6,430

    Listening to reportage of the "big return to work". Government had the rail companies increase services and prepare for more people travelling as instructed - but appears to be very quiet as it was last week. This reluctance to resume normal as instructed will be the government's big problem. The row with teachers was largely irrelevant as polls have made it clear that parents aren't going to send their sprogs in when instructed. And it will be the same with work.

    Yes. A vocal minority, amplified by the press, has been protesting against the lockdown. I think a more silent minority - perhaps a majority - is not at all keen to come out of the lockdown. I think it's better that way round than the other.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,167
    Chris said:

    R4 King’s College professor says PHE has not broadened its definition of COVID symptoms to include things like loss of smell/taste so there are probably 50,000-75,000 infectious undiagnosed out there. Another win for PHE!

    ?

    On the basis of the ONS survey there will be around 170,000 who would test positive. 20,000-30,000 are actually testing positive per week. So doesn't that mean about 150,000 undiagnosed? How the precise definition of symptoms bears on that doesn't seem likely to be decisive.
    Definition of symptoms drives testing. Cough - tested, Loss of taste/smell - not tested.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 3,430

    Listening to reportage of the "big return to work". Government had the rail companies increase services and prepare for more people travelling as instructed - but appears to be very quiet as it was last week. This reluctance to resume normal as instructed will be the government's big problem. The row with teachers was largely irrelevant as polls have made it clear that parents aren't going to send their sprogs in when instructed. And it will be the same with work.

    As a related aside, this TfL bailout is not good for Sadiq Khan's chances of re-election. Yes fares revenue was down 90% and a decent number of drivers were sick/dying. But the reduction in service provision was branded him putting workers at risk and the massive congestion charge increase is branded as him putting workers at risk...

    A Tfl friend told me about his PPE - a 50ml bottle of hand sanitiser for 4 weeks.
    That's interesting.

    Personally, I live alone and have used a little over a litre of surgical spirit since March 15 ish, going out at most about 3 times a week plus exercise, and carrying a small bottle but mainly a ss-dampened cloth.

    A colleague has used up his previous 20l supply as he has been the safety person for a village voluntary delivery network. He has now rigged up home electrolysis to manufacture a different suitable product.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 59,312
    I think Starmer has a fair chance. The map will look different to the previous time Labour was in power though (2005) - it'll be likely the most urbanised Labour collection of 270+ seats ever.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 6,430

    Chris said:

    R4 King’s College professor says PHE has not broadened its definition of COVID symptoms to include things like loss of smell/taste so there are probably 50,000-75,000 infectious undiagnosed out there. Another win for PHE!

    ?

    On the basis of the ONS survey there will be around 170,000 who would test positive. 20,000-30,000 are actually testing positive per week. So doesn't that mean about 150,000 undiagnosed? How the precise definition of symptoms bears on that doesn't seem likely to be decisive.
    Definition of symptoms drives testing. Cough - tested, Loss of taste/smell - not tested.
    But surely you can see that if only 15-20% of cases are actually being detected through testing, then anything but a huge change to the definition of symptoms will have only a minor effect on the detection rate? That's just basic arithmetic, isn't it?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 4,230
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    @CarlottaVance
    Desperate news for Carlotta, it looks like the Scottish Government have hired at least 600 Contract Tracers since Carlotta swore late yesterday that ZERO had been hired. 600 hired on a Sunday night and starting work today seems pretty good going.

    Good news! Only 1400 to go! Overnight training is impressive (unlikely?) too!
    They likely have more but only need 600 for trials, methinks the Tory fibs yesterday were just a little inaccurate. Good old Carlaw , Miles Briggs and the septic Record as their mouthpiece. Easier to lie than have a policy of their own.
    It would be interesting to get questions asked and answered on the actual flow of the hiring process. i.e.

    - How many in application
    - How many in vetting
    - How many hired
    - How many in training
    - How many trained

    That goes for all jurisdictions in the UK.

    I would suspect that that the above numbers issue is to do with where people are in that flow.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 26,150
    Christ, this Tory minister Dowden comes across as a tit on R4 this am
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 898
    One question I have on the statistics is that the dataset seems relatively small. Is it possible that there is serial autocorrelation, but there aren't enough data points for it to reach statistical significance?

    I guess the question I am asking is whether there are many examples of datasets where in the full data you do see autocorrelation, but in a subset of the size looked at here, there isn't?

    The other thing is that a few general elections ago there was a prediction model touted that combined positive autocorrelation on short timescales (ie for the next election to stick with the devil known) and anti-autocorrelation for longer timescales (ie of a few general elections the power of political folk tales is strong).

    A more complicated model would require more data to find significance, and the combination of the two effects might muddy the waters for the test as you have applied it here.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 4,877
    IanB2 said:

    Christ, this Tory minister Dowden comes across as a tit on R4 this am

    He always looks and sounds to be on the verge of a panic attack.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 20,990
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Starmer gives Labour a chance for the first time in 10-15 years. However small, that is progress.

    that rather depends on your perspective :smiley:
    As a democrat, it’s progress. One party states fail.
    As Blair showed us :smiley:
    We were better off then than now.
    Only because he spent all the money at once.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 14,461
    Seamless how we've gone from "Sweden is trending strongly downward" to "you can't compare Sweden with the rest of the world".
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 6,025
    Interesting analysis and certainly a bit surprising to me. I've been working on the assumption that Lab majority is more unlikely than the odds suggest - but will change my thinking.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 2,221

    Someone posted on the other thread that traffic seems to be increasing again. Looking at Traffic Englands map, there seems to be some sort of disaster, traffic-wise around Huntingdon but that other notorious black-spot, the Dartford Cressing is clear.

    Time for your periodic reminder that the reason the Dartford Crossing is a notorious traffic blackspot is that the last Tory mayor of London (one Alexander Boris DePfefel Johnson) cancelled Labour's plans for a new crossing in the East, leaving no fixed means of crossing the river by vehicle between Blackwall and Dartford. Before spaffing millions of pounds of our money on his useless luvvie white elephant crossing in central London (and yet the good burghers of Brexit land expect him to fix their infrastructure, ha good luck with that).
  • FishingFishing Posts: 802
    edited May 18

    One question I have on the statistics is that the dataset seems relatively small. Is it possible that there is serial autocorrelation, but there aren't enough data points for it to reach statistical significance?

    I guess the question I am asking is whether there are many examples of datasets where in the full data you do see autocorrelation, but in a subset of the size looked at here, there isn't?

    Yes, absolutely. As with all statistical tests, the more data the more robust your conclusions will be. All we can say from my results is that it's likely that there isn't a large degree of serial autocorrelation, though there may be a little, and it's possible, though not likely, that there's a lot.

    As you've probably guessed, I've done more than my fair share of statistical analysis in my career, and most of the conclusions you get from real world data are nuanced.

    It's also worth bearing in mind that there are other tests for serial autocorrelation which could give different results.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 14,537

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Starmer gives Labour a chance for the first time in 10-15 years. However small, that is progress.

    that rather depends on your perspective :smiley:
    As a democrat, it’s progress. One party states fail.
    As Blair showed us :smiley:
    We were better off then than now.
    Only because he spent all the money at once.
    The current government has spent more money than all of them. Global crises have a knack of doing that.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 28,123

    ydoethur said:

    The big unknown or the next election is, what will happen to the Brexit Party vote?

    Most of it seems to have come from Labour. If that is so, it cost them a great many seats - e.g. Blyth Valley, Durham North West, Delyn. So if it goes back, they should have a decent shout of regaining many of them.

    However, another way of looking at it is that in 38 seats, the Brexit Party vote was larger than the Labour majority. So if Nigel Farage had not been a dimwitted egomaniac, the Tories might have picked up Doncaster North, Normanton, Alyn and Deeside, Torfaen, both seats in Newport and all seats in Coventry if Leave voters had coalesced around them. So if that Brexit vote shifted to the Tories, Starmer’s task is even harder.

    Therefore, I am reluctant to make firm predictions about the next election. Starmer could win, or force a draw, but he needs the dice to fall correctly. We could see considerable churn in both votes and seats - I could see Labour gaining Cheltenham (repeat Cheltenham) and falling further in Wales, for example, under his leadership.

    Where the Brexit vote came from and where it would have gone otherwise is interesting.

    I suspect it varies around the country.

    In some places - Hartlepool and the Yorkshire mining constituencies I think it damaged the Conservatives, in other places it might have damaged Labour.

    I will say that I've never seen such an expansive campaign as what TBP did in South Yorkshire - activists infesting town centres, masses of leaflets and even cars with speakers crawling through residential areas.

    BTW there's no chance Labour will win Cheltenham - they lost their deposit there in 2019:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheltenham_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
    I know Cheltenham pretty well, and I disagree. I knew nobody would believe me which is why I put 'repeat Cheltenham'.

    The thing is, it's exactly the sort of seat where a very large chunk of that Liberal Democrat vote would go with the soft left under Starmer (now Labour is not led by a racist nutter) rather than the soft right Davey is positioning the Yellows in. At the same time, much of the Tory vote will have no love for Johnson. I could see a Starmer-led Labour party picking up 10,000 remainers from the Tories who were panicked by Corbyn, and the same number from the LibDems who are unenthused by Davey.

    So yes, Cheltenham is a seat where churn could be very interesting.

    At the same time, I can easily see Labour losing both seats three stops down the railway line in Newport for exactly the same reasons.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 32,966

    Foxy said:

    IanB2 said:

    O’Leary on R4 claiming 14 day quarantine won’t work but masks do - quoting a study that was conducted in a clinical setting. Doubt he’s made any friends in the government.

    His argument that the government is making stuff up without any scientific foundation came across well.
    I think “special pleading” would be a better description. He misleadingly quotes a study conducted in a hospital (where staff are trained in mask use and change them every 20 minutes) and passes that off as applicable in the general population. He says he doesn’t know where “14 days” comes from - hasn’t he heard of “incubation period”? Lord knows the governmentS have got plenty wrong on this - but O’Leary was downright irresponsible.

    How do you police the 14 day quarantine? Simple. Random flights go into mandatory quarantine - so you don’t know if you’ll get home or not - and steep fines for those who break self quarantine.
    Personally, I cannot see the point of 14 day quarantine now. For 10 weeks have most cases have been caught domestically rather than from foreign contacts. Nearly all travellers will be going to lower risk destinations than the UK itself.
    Spoke with a dentist friend of mine at the weekend , who said the guidelines for dentistry are horrendous.

    Full PPE for all staff
    Because they use air drills they need 30 mins between patients to let wet particles settle
    Plus a full wipe down after 30 mins

    He reckons one patient per hour at best.

    I suggest that those guidelines sound sensible, rather than horrendous. Though they will be horrendous in terms of earnings for dental practises.
    But most of their work is a routine check of the mouth, so wont need the air drill.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 30,655
    Interesting and surprising piece. Over time the advantages given to incumbency seem to have increased as the public money that flows to MPs have increased giving them offices in the constituency, full time paid staff working for them on constituency issues and the ability to sustain a campaign team almost indefinitely. This possibly reached a peak in the Blair years with his £10k bung to sitting MPs which the Coalition removed but it is still much more significant than it was in earlier times.

    We also see and recognise a first time incumbency bonus for MPs driven partly by this funding but also harder working MPs aware that they have only just gained the seat and need to consolidate. Many Tory MPs are in that position now with seats in previously alien territory. The incumbency bonus can be looked at another way. Since 1979 (41 years depressingly) there have been 2.5 changes in government (allowing for the Coalition). If Fishing was right surely we would see more changes of government than that?

    Finally the point was made recently by TSE, IIRC, that 1970 was the only election in modern times where a clear majority for one party was replaced by a clear majority for another. Again, if Fishing was right surely this would be happening as often as not.

    I am not qualified to challenge the statistical analysis but the results suggest to me that the Tories with a majority of 80 are pretty much nailed on to win most seats next time out. They may return to minority status, as in the May period, but I do not believe Labour will be the largest party.

  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 5,035
    Dura_Ace said:

    IanB2 said:

    Christ, this Tory minister Dowden comes across as a tit on R4 this am

    He always looks and sounds to be on the verge of a panic attack.
    I remember the dog days of the last Labour government when most of the talent had quit / been shooed away and the Brownites finally seized power and.... ("what do we do now?"). This government is the same - a motley collection of literal nobodies promoted for their fealty rather than their brain cells.

    The hope for Starmer is that the who? he has promoted into the Shadow Cabinet turn out to have some umph about them. Have literally no clue who the new Shadow Home Secretary is or what he represents, but by not being Diane Abbott he is already obviously a huge improvement. And should any of them fail Starmer has the big hitters currently deployed in Select Committees who could be brought back in.

    Contrast a calm and measured shadow cabinet with clear ideas as to how the post Covid post Brexit world could be better vs the dregs of the Tory Party ideologically insisting the huge shower of shit raining down on people's heads is what they voted for/better than Corbyn could actually pull off a win no matter how many seats they need to win.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 20,990
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Starmer gives Labour a chance for the first time in 10-15 years. However small, that is progress.

    that rather depends on your perspective :smiley:
    As a democrat, it’s progress. One party states fail.
    As Blair showed us :smiley:
    We were better off then than now.
    Only because he spent all the money at once.
    The current government has spent more money than all of them. Global crises have a knack of doing that.
    yes, but we weren't in a crisis under Blair and still spent it all.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,167
    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    R4 King’s College professor says PHE has not broadened its definition of COVID symptoms to include things like loss of smell/taste so there are probably 50,000-75,000 infectious undiagnosed out there. Another win for PHE!

    ?

    On the basis of the ONS survey there will be around 170,000 who would test positive. 20,000-30,000 are actually testing positive per week. So doesn't that mean about 150,000 undiagnosed? How the precise definition of symptoms bears on that doesn't seem likely to be decisive.
    Definition of symptoms drives testing. Cough - tested, Loss of taste/smell - not tested.
    But surely you can see that if only 15-20% of cases are actually being detected through testing, then anything but a huge change to the definition of symptoms will have only a minor effect on the detection rate? That's just basic arithmetic, isn't it?
    The bigger point - Cough - self isolate, loss of taste/smell - go to work.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 4,230

    Foxy said:

    IanB2 said:

    O’Leary on R4 claiming 14 day quarantine won’t work but masks do - quoting a study that was conducted in a clinical setting. Doubt he’s made any friends in the government.

    His argument that the government is making stuff up without any scientific foundation came across well.
    I think “special pleading” would be a better description. He misleadingly quotes a study conducted in a hospital (where staff are trained in mask use and change them every 20 minutes) and passes that off as applicable in the general population. He says he doesn’t know where “14 days” comes from - hasn’t he heard of “incubation period”? Lord knows the governmentS have got plenty wrong on this - but O’Leary was downright irresponsible.

    How do you police the 14 day quarantine? Simple. Random flights go into mandatory quarantine - so you don’t know if you’ll get home or not - and steep fines for those who break self quarantine.
    Personally, I cannot see the point of 14 day quarantine now. For 10 weeks have most cases have been caught domestically rather than from foreign contacts. Nearly all travellers will be going to lower risk destinations than the UK itself.
    Spoke with a dentist friend of mine at the weekend , who said the guidelines for dentistry are horrendous.

    Full PPE for all staff
    Because they use air drills they need 30 mins between patients to let wet particles settle
    Plus a full wipe down after 30 mins

    He reckons one patient per hour at best.

    I suggest that those guidelines sound sensible, rather than horrendous. Though they will be horrendous in terms of earnings for dental practises.
    But most of their work is a routine check of the mouth, so wont need the air drill.
    Quite a lot of polishing/plaque removal stuff. Which uses air tools, quite often.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 2,221

    Foxy said:



    My thought is that if return is made voluntary (and I think compulsion would result in mass truancy) it is the most deprived children who are least likely to return.

    Maybe as simple as poor people feeling that social advancement through education is not on the cards for their children. Interesting though.
    For secondary schools its reasonably consistent between Quintile 2 through Quintile 5.

    I think that there are many in Quintile 1 (certainly not all) who simply don't value education. I'd be curious to see a breakdown of truancy or opinions on education in normal circumstances, wouldn't surprise me to see such a relationship.
    It's also possible that people on lower incomes have had more experience of illness and death from Covid-19, since we know that death rates in lower paid manual occupations are higher than for middle class types, and so their greater risk aversion may be more rational than you think.
    I have found the discussion around schooling and the inequalities exacerbated by Covid fascinating. So many Tories here and in the wider debate suddenly so concerned that the poor lack the resources to get a good education. Yet it is their policies that have made that happen. No room to study? The bedroom tax. No money for a laptop? The welfare cap and the third child tax. No broadband? Of course Labour's free broadband policy was a stupid pointless gimmick because everyone has broadband, right?
    Our society lacks resilience to deal with the stresses of this kind of shock, but that has been a deliberate policy choice. Spare us your crocodile tears now, and don't force the rest of our kids into an unsafe rush back to school simply because schools have become the last remaining functioning part of our threadbare welfare state.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 4,230
    MattW said:

    Listening to reportage of the "big return to work". Government had the rail companies increase services and prepare for more people travelling as instructed - but appears to be very quiet as it was last week. This reluctance to resume normal as instructed will be the government's big problem. The row with teachers was largely irrelevant as polls have made it clear that parents aren't going to send their sprogs in when instructed. And it will be the same with work.

    As a related aside, this TfL bailout is not good for Sadiq Khan's chances of re-election. Yes fares revenue was down 90% and a decent number of drivers were sick/dying. But the reduction in service provision was branded him putting workers at risk and the massive congestion charge increase is branded as him putting workers at risk...

    A Tfl friend told me about his PPE - a 50ml bottle of hand sanitiser for 4 weeks.
    That's interesting.

    Personally, I live alone and have used a little over a litre of surgical spirit since March 15 ish, going out at most about 3 times a week plus exercise, and carrying a small bottle but mainly a ss-dampened cloth.

    A colleague has used up his previous 20l supply as he has been the safety person for a village voluntary delivery network. He has now rigged up home electrolysis to manufacture a different suitable product.
    He's manufacturing peroxide in a home made setup? I hope he knows what he is doing. And is doing it in a well ventilated space.....
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 30,655

    Foxy said:



    My thought is that if return is made voluntary (and I think compulsion would result in mass truancy) it is the most deprived children who are least likely to return.

    Maybe as simple as poor people feeling that social advancement through education is not on the cards for their children. Interesting though.
    For secondary schools its reasonably consistent between Quintile 2 through Quintile 5.

    I think that there are many in Quintile 1 (certainly not all) who simply don't value education. I'd be curious to see a breakdown of truancy or opinions on education in normal circumstances, wouldn't surprise me to see such a relationship.
    It's also possible that people on lower incomes have had more experience of illness and death from Covid-19, since we know that death rates in lower paid manual occupations are higher than for middle class types, and so their greater risk aversion may be more rational than you think.
    I have found the discussion around schooling and the inequalities exacerbated by Covid fascinating. So many Tories here and in the wider debate suddenly so concerned that the poor lack the resources to get a good education. Yet it is their policies that have made that happen. No room to study? The bedroom tax. No money for a laptop? The welfare cap and the third child tax. No broadband? Of course Labour's free broadband policy was a stupid pointless gimmick because everyone has broadband, right?
    Our society lacks resilience to deal with the stresses of this kind of shock, but that has been a deliberate policy choice. Spare us your crocodile tears now, and don't force the rest of our kids into an unsafe rush back to school simply because schools have become the last remaining functioning part of our threadbare welfare state.
    Really strong and punchy contribution. Made me think.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,541
    Foxy said:



    My thought is that if return is made voluntary (and I think compulsion would result in mass truancy) it is the most deprived children who are least likely to return.

    Maybe as simple as poor people feeling that social advancement through education is not on the cards for their children. Interesting though.
    I think in general well-off parents prioritise their children' education. Poorer parents prioritise their childrens' safety.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 6,430

    Foxy said:



    My thought is that if return is made voluntary (and I think compulsion would result in mass truancy) it is the most deprived children who are least likely to return.

    Maybe as simple as poor people feeling that social advancement through education is not on the cards for their children. Interesting though.
    For secondary schools its reasonably consistent between Quintile 2 through Quintile 5.

    I think that there are many in Quintile 1 (certainly not all) who simply don't value education. I'd be curious to see a breakdown of truancy or opinions on education in normal circumstances, wouldn't surprise me to see such a relationship.
    It's also possible that people on lower incomes have had more experience of illness and death from Covid-19, since we know that death rates in lower paid manual occupations are higher than for middle class types, and so their greater risk aversion may be more rational than you think.
    I have found the discussion around schooling and the inequalities exacerbated by Covid fascinating. So many Tories here and in the wider debate suddenly so concerned that the poor lack the resources to get a good education. Yet it is their policies that have made that happen. No room to study? The bedroom tax. No money for a laptop? The welfare cap and the third child tax. No broadband? Of course Labour's free broadband policy was a stupid pointless gimmick because everyone has broadband, right?
    Our society lacks resilience to deal with the stresses of this kind of shock, but that has been a deliberate policy choice. Spare us your crocodile tears now, and don't force the rest of our kids into an unsafe rush back to school simply because schools have become the last remaining functioning part of our threadbare welfare state.
    Let's try to view it as a positive thing.

    Like so many Tories suddenly becoming concerned that an interruption to economic growth may cost lives. I just think it's nice that they're concerned about lives, rather than the effect of their investments. That has to be a positive.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 71,989
    edited May 18
    To gain an overall majority Starmer will need to win 124 or more seats, something only 2 party leaders, Attlee in 1945 and Blair in 1997 have achieved.

    It is not impossible but a big ask and essentially requires a Labour landslide
  • MattWMattW Posts: 3,430
    edited May 18

    MattW said:

    Listening to reportage of the "big return to work". Government had the rail companies increase services and prepare for more people travelling as instructed - but appears to be very quiet as it was last week. This reluctance to resume normal as instructed will be the government's big problem. The row with teachers was largely irrelevant as polls have made it clear that parents aren't going to send their sprogs in when instructed. And it will be the same with work.

    As a related aside, this TfL bailout is not good for Sadiq Khan's chances of re-election. Yes fares revenue was down 90% and a decent number of drivers were sick/dying. But the reduction in service provision was branded him putting workers at risk and the massive congestion charge increase is branded as him putting workers at risk...

    A Tfl friend told me about his PPE - a 50ml bottle of hand sanitiser for 4 weeks.
    That's interesting.

    Personally, I live alone and have used a little over a litre of surgical spirit since March 15 ish, going out at most about 3 times a week plus exercise, and carrying a small bottle but mainly a ss-dampened cloth.

    A colleague has used up his previous 20l supply as he has been the safety person for a village voluntary delivery network. He has now rigged up home electrolysis to manufacture a different suitable product.
    He's manufacturing peroxide in a home made setup? I hope he knows what he is doing. And is doing it in a well ventilated space.....
    Absolutely :-), but I believe it is hypochlorous acid not peroxide. You can get alleged generators online for about £20.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,541
    ydoethur said:

    The big unknown or the next election is, what will happen to the Brexit Party vote?

    Most of it seems to have come from Labour. If that is so, it cost them a great many seats - e.g. Blyth Valley, Durham North West, Delyn. So if it goes back, they should have a decent shout of regaining many of them.

    However, another way of looking at it is that in 38 seats, the Brexit Party vote was larger than the Labour majority. So if Nigel Farage had not been a dimwitted egomaniac, the Tories might have picked up Doncaster North, Normanton, Alyn and Deeside, Torfaen, both seats in Newport and all seats in Coventry if Leave voters had coalesced around them. So if that Brexit vote shifted to the Tories, Starmer’s task is even harder.

    Therefore, I am reluctant to make firm predictions about the next election. Starmer could win, or force a draw, but he needs the dice to fall correctly. We could see considerable churn in both votes and seats - I could see Labour gaining Cheltenham (repeat Cheltenham) and falling further in Wales, for example, under his leadership.

    Labour's loss of working class voters in former mining areas and the towns does look like a permanent shift. The huge rightward swing in seats like Don Valley, Rother Valley, Sedgefield, over the course of twenty years looks like a very profound shift in public opinion in those areas.

    Conversely, the Conservatives' loss of better off voters in big cities looks as if it permanent, too, but so far, the trade off has worked to the Conservatives' advantage.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 6,430

    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    R4 King’s College professor says PHE has not broadened its definition of COVID symptoms to include things like loss of smell/taste so there are probably 50,000-75,000 infectious undiagnosed out there. Another win for PHE!

    ?

    On the basis of the ONS survey there will be around 170,000 who would test positive. 20,000-30,000 are actually testing positive per week. So doesn't that mean about 150,000 undiagnosed? How the precise definition of symptoms bears on that doesn't seem likely to be decisive.
    Definition of symptoms drives testing. Cough - tested, Loss of taste/smell - not tested.
    But surely you can see that if only 15-20% of cases are actually being detected through testing, then anything but a huge change to the definition of symptoms will have only a minor effect on the detection rate? That's just basic arithmetic, isn't it?
    The bigger point - Cough - self isolate, loss of taste/smell - go to work.
    Asymptomatic infection - go to work.
Sign In or Register to comment.