sluggerotoole--2020-05-14--The Governor of the Bank of England and Tory back benchers join Boris Johnson to reject the A-word –

The Governor of the Bank of England and Tory back benchers join Boris Johnson to reject the A-word – Austerity

Andrew Bailey , Governor of the Bank of England Because of Covid 19 , “ the UK is facing a mega recession ” warns the Institute of Fiscal Studies .
It ’ s hardly a surprise to learn more every day about the dire state of yet another part of the economy .
GDP is forecast to slump by 25-30 per cent this quarter , and millions of jobs could be destroyed – with no guarantees about the recovery .
Official figures yesterday showed a 5.8 per cent fall in March alone – even though the lockdown was only fully @ @ @ @ @ @ @ month .
The government ’ s Office for Budget Responsibility watchdog is due to update its own grim estimates later .
The IFS said it expects ‘ the recession to end all recessions .
As governments deliberately ran down the economy in response to the plague , what they do now to start firing it up again is more important than ever .
In response to a leaked Treasury report recommending tax rises and spending cuts , the pro Tory Times and Daily Telegraph have united to warn the Government off returning to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possible that the paper was leaked to provoke such a response .
If so , it worked .
The opponents of austerity have a friend in court .
The new Governor of the independent Bank of England Andrew Bailey has told ITV ‘ s Robert Peston that the Bank is prepared to buy the billions of debt for repayment well into the great blue yonder .
Bailey reckons the UK can get away with avoiding massive and immediate debt repayments .
The effect on the value of the pound would be limited as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which desperately needs to revive international trade , is the same boat .
Bailey told Peston that one of the main purposes of the Bank buying £200bn of government debt – and probably more over the course of the Covid-19 crisis – is to “ spread the cost of this thing to society ” and help the government avoid a return to austerity .
Peston asked Bailey if the government would have to return to austerity and make spending cuts because of the hundreds of billions of debts being accumulated by the Treasury @ @ @ @ @ @ @ harm to our prosperity of the coronavirus epidemic .
“ We can help to spread , over time , the cost of this thing to society , and that to me is important .
We have choices there and we need to exercise those choices ” .
It is very unusual for a central bank governor like Bailey to disclose that it is purchasing the debts of the government to – in effect – bail out the government in a borrowing and spending crisis .
Boris Johnson has been warned by senior Conservatives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impact of the coronavirus crisis if he raises taxes or cuts spending .
An internal Treasury document said that the pandemic would cost the exchequer almost £300 billion this year and could require income-tax rises , a two-year public pay freeze and an end to the triple lock on state pensions .
One cabinet minister said that such an approach risked jeopardising growth and suggested that the additional borrowing should instead be treated like a wartime debt and repaid over decades .
“ It is completely the wrong approach ; it would entrench @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ We should be looking at policies that open up the economy — we will need fiscal stimulus .
Taxes need to be lower rather than higher.
” The Treasury document set out a proposed “ policy package ” of tax rises and spending cuts and forecasts that Britain would have a £337 billion budget deficit this year , against £55 billion in the March budget .
It suggested that tax rises and spending cuts that would raise up to £30 billion may be needed to help to fund the increased level @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the economy contracted by the fastest rate on record in March , with forecasters suggesting that GDP could fall by up to 30 per cent in the second quarter .
Paul Johnson , head of the Institute for Fiscal Studies , warned that Britain was facing a “ mega-recession ” .
Ambrose Evans Pritchard of the Daily Telegraph has gone ultra Keynesian There is a special place in Purgatory for Her Majesty ’ s Treasury .
It came close to subversion during the Brexit drama .
Its Covid-19 blueprint for fiscal retrenchment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ policy package ’ leaked to the Telegraph – hopefully for the purpose of discrediting it – is a sure-fire formula for structural damage and an economic depression .
“ It is crazy .
We should be cutting taxes to support the economy as we slowly come out of this , ” said one prominent central banker .
“ The idea that we need significant spending cuts or tax rises is completely wrong .
The debt will take care of itself.
” Everybody has been hit by the same economic shock and everybody @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US is majestically splashing €4 trillion of fiscal stimulus – current and planned – and the Federal Reserve is mopping up T-bills and up junk bonds on the open market .
Have the bond vigilantes recoiled at this insolent heresy ?
Has the dollar crashed ?
Of course not .
“ Austerity destroys productive capacity .
It lowers future growth and lowers the future tax-take , so it ’ s counterproductive for public finances .
You need to grow your way out of debt , ” said Carsten Jung from the Institute for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that when you have plenty of slack – a big ‘ output gap ’ – the fiscal multiplier on public investment and infrastructure is extremely high .
The borrowing pays for itself by turbo-charging GDP .
It is an accelerant .
It lowers the debt ratio over time ( ceteris paribus ) .
Recent scholarship suggests that the multiplier is even higher than previously supposed – often nearer 3.0 – in a becalmed global economy .
The Treasury got this wrong .
It continues to get it wrong .
The Covid-19 shock @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The ‘ costs ’ are partly a statistical illusion .
Fiscal money is flowing from part of the economy to another part but it is not being destroyed .
Nothing is destroyed as long as firms and households are kept whole .
Some argue that once we go much beyond eight weeks of closure the damage starts to metastasise .
We are nearing that threshold .
It explains the immense pressure to reopen the economy and damn the torpedoes .
This is understandable but let us not lose our heads .
All it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is to restore the trend path of nominal GDP and let organic growth do its magic .
Nothing else is needed .
The whole notion that we can not afford to overcome this crisis without draconian consolidation is dangerous bun

Andrew Bailey, Governor of the Bank of England
Because of Covid 19,“ the UK is facing a mega recession” warns the Institute of Fiscal Studies. It’s hardly a surprise to learn more every day about the dire state of yet another part of the economy.
GDP is forecast to slump by 25-30 per cent this quarter, and millions of jobs could be destroyed – with no guarantees about the recovery.
Official figures yesterday showed a 5.8 per cent fall in March alone – even though the lockdown was only fully in force for a week of that month.
The government’s Office for Budget Responsibility watchdog is due to update its own grim estimates later. The IFS said it expects ‘the recession to end all recessions.
As governments deliberately ran down the economy in response to the plague, what they do now to start firing it up again is more important than ever. In response to a leaked Treasury report recommending tax rises and spending cuts, the pro Tory Times and Daily Telegraph have united to warn the Government off returning to austerity. It’s more than possible that the paper was leaked to provoke such a response. If so, it worked.
The opponents of austerity have a friend in court. The new Governor of the independent Bank of England Andrew Bailey has told ITV ‘s Robert Peston that the Bank is prepared to buy the billions of debt for repayment well into the great blue yonder. Bailey reckons the UK can get away with avoiding massive and immediate debt repayments. The effect on the value of the pound would be limited as most of the rest of the world which desperately needs to revive international trade, is the same boat.
Bailey told Peston that one of the main purposes of the Bank buying £200bn of government debt – and probably more over the course of the Covid-19 crisis – is to “spread the cost of this thing to society” and help the government avoid a return to austerity.
Peston asked Bailey if the government would have to return to austerity and make spending cuts because of the hundreds of billions of debts being accumulated by the Treasury through its many schemes to limit the harm to our prosperity of the coronavirus epidemic.
“We can help to spread, over time, the cost of this thing to society, and that to me is important. We have choices there and we need to exercise those choices”.
It is very unusual for a central bank governor like Bailey to disclose that it is purchasing the debts of the government to – in effect – bail out the government in a borrowing and spending crisis.
From the Times lead
Boris Johnson has been warned by senior Conservatives that he risks “entrenching” the impact of the coronavirus crisis if he raises taxes or cuts spending.
An internal Treasury document said that the pandemic would cost the exchequer almost £300 billion this year and could require income-tax rises, a two-year public pay freeze and an end to the triple lock on state pensions.
One cabinet minister said that such an approach risked jeopardising growth and suggested that the additional borrowing should instead be treated like a wartime debt and repaid over decades. “It is completely the wrong approach; it would entrench the downturn,” the minister said. “We should be looking at policies that open up the economy — we will need fiscal stimulus. Taxes need to be lower rather than higher.”
The Treasury document set out a proposed “policy package” of tax rises and spending cuts and forecasts that Britain would have a £337 billion budget deficit this year, against £55 billion in the March budget. It suggested that tax rises and spending cuts that would raise up to £30 billion may be needed to help to fund the increased level of debt.
Official figures showed yesterday that the economy contracted by the fastest rate on record in March, with forecasters suggesting that GDP could fall by up to 30 per cent in the second quarter. Paul Johnson, head of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, warned that Britain was facing a “mega-recession”.
Ambrose Evans Pritchard of the Daily Telegraph has gone ultra Keynesian
There is a special place in Purgatory for Her Majesty’s Treasury. It came close to subversion during the Brexit drama. Its Covid-19 blueprint for fiscal retrenchment borders on macroeconomic insanity. The 10-page ‘policy package’ leaked to the Telegraph – hopefully for the purpose of discrediting it – is a sure-fire formula for structural damage and an economic depression.
“It is crazy. We should be cutting taxes to support the economy as we slowly come out of this,” said one prominent central banker. “The idea that we need significant spending cuts or tax rises is completely wrong. The debt will take care of itself.”
Everybody has been hit by the same economic shock and everybody is throwing away the rule-book. The US is majestically splashing €4 trillion of fiscal stimulus – current and planned – and the Federal Reserve is mopping up T-bills and up junk bonds on the open market. Have the bond vigilantes recoiled at this insolent heresy? Has the dollar crashed? Of course not.
“Austerity destroys productive capacity. It lowers future growth and lowers the future tax-take, so it’s counterproductive for public finances. You need to grow your way out of debt,” said Carsten Jung from the Institute for Public Policy Research.
The key point is that when you have plenty of slack – a big ‘output gap’ – the fiscal multiplier on public investment and infrastructure is extremely high. The borrowing pays for itself by turbo-charging GDP. It is an accelerant. It lowers the debt ratio over time (ceteris paribus).
Recent scholarship suggests that the multiplier is even higher than previously supposed – often nearer 3.0 – in a becalmed global economy. The Treasury got this wrong. It continues to get it wrong.
The Covid-19 shock is a strange sort of recession. The ‘costs’ are partly a statistical illusion. Fiscal money is flowing from part of the economy to another part but it is not being destroyed. Nothing is destroyed as long as firms and households are kept whole.
Some argue that once we go much beyond eight weeks of closure the damage starts to metastasise. We are nearing that threshold. It explains the immense pressure to reopen the economy and damn the torpedoes. This is understandable but let us not lose our heads.
All it takes to whittle down the debt ratio is to restore the trend path of nominal GDP and let organic growth do its magic. Nothing else is needed. The whole notion that we cannot afford to overcome this crisis without draconian consolidation is dangerous bun


sluggerotoole--2020-05-14--Culture Unconfined Day #4: By god, do we need new and gifted storytellers…?

These days people ask what ’ s the point of theatre , in ways they never did before radio , tv and cinema ?
It may not be its point exactly , but what defines theatre is : one , it ’ s live and two , its magic arises from complicity with an audience of real humans .
The third theatre in Culture Unconfined is by the Makey Uppers , not be confused with high falutin ’ notions of post-truth or rather low brow-ly , fake noos .
Two women and a recasting of thousands of fairy tale characters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s not live .
So you do miss something .
In this production , the connection with the audience is more than half the value of the experience .
It ’ s not just playful , it ’ s also angry but light enough to put a humourous edge to stuff we tend not to talk about .
Look out for the interrogation of the old woman who stuffed Hansel and Grettel into an oven , that breaks into a decidedly Derry accented rap , “ I never thought I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s not what I ’ m about , but really can you blame me because they ate my f***in house ” .
It doesn ’ t plumb psychological depths , but what it does do is more valuable : playing with a story material ( folk tales ) that goes back hundreds and maybe even thousands of years .
Making it up and subverting it with wit as all gifted storytellers should .
And by god , do we need new and gifted storytellers ?
Nice one , Gemma and Sorcha .
Belfast @ @ @ @ @ @ @ films in its archives .
Maradona : Kicking the Habit was produced for Channel Four back in 2000 , and is a fascinating insight into a man coming to terms with his addictions and a heart attack .
Lockdown has given back time to listen to music that demands and attention .
If you can get the time listen to Donegal scion Jamie Kenny certainly knows how to knock big tunes out of a big fiddle ( the double bass ) .
Fryba ’ s “ Suite in the Olden Style ” is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Molloy and poet Martin Dyar as they discuss their ground-breaking song cycle Buaine na Gaoithe , a suite for soprano , harp , and flute .
You will need to book it on Eventbrite , here .
4 pm To be Frank Carson , Dan Gordon explores the story of his own one-man show dedicated to the Belfast on the comic ’ s life .
“ Capturing the man was like trying to nail jelly to the ceiling , ” he says at one point .
An epic journey for Dan , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been making their name in their adopted home Liverpool , as well as the UK ’ s thriving jazz scene at the moment .
All of them are former students of University of Liverpool .
“ Handsel and Grettel ’ s house @ Charlotte ’ s B ’ day ” by pedroreyna is licensed under CC BY

These days people ask what’s the point of theatre, in ways they never did before radio, tv and cinema? It may not be its point exactly, but what defines theatre is: one, it’s live and two, its magic arises from complicity with an audience of real humans.
The third theatre in Culture Unconfined is by the Makey Uppers, not be confused with high falutin’ notions of post-truth or rather low brow-ly, fake noos. Two women and a recasting of thousands of fairy tale characters like you’ve never heard them.
It’s not live. So you do miss something. In this production, the connection with the audience is more than half the value of the experience. It’s not just playful, it’s also angry but light enough to put a humourous edge to stuff we tend not to talk about.
Look out for the interrogation of the old woman who stuffed Hansel and Grettel into an oven, that breaks into a decidedly Derry accented rap, “I never thought I’d do it because it’s not what I’m about, but really can you blame me because they ate my f***in house”.
It doesn’t plumb psychological depths, but what it does do is more valuable: playing with a story material (folk tales) that goes back hundreds and maybe even thousands of years. Making it up and subverting it with wit as all gifted storytellers should.
And by god, do we need new and gifted storytellers? Nice one, Gemma and Sorcha.
Belfast based film company Doubleband has about 80 films in its archives. Maradona: Kicking the Habit was produced for Channel Four back in 2000, and is a fascinating insight into a man coming to terms with his addictions and a heart attack.
Lockdown has given back time to listen to music that demands and attention. If you can get the time listen to Donegal scion Jamie Kenny certainly knows how to knock big tunes out of a big fiddle (the double bass). Fryba’s “Suite in the Olden Style” is superb.
Today
1 pm LIVE Composer Ryan Molloy and poet Martin Dyar as they discuss their ground-breaking song cycle Buaine na Gaoithe, a suite for soprano, harp, and flute. You will need to book it on Eventbrite, here.
4 pm To be Frank Carson, Dan Gordon explores the story of his own one-man show dedicated to the Belfast on the comic’s life. “Capturing the man was like trying to nail jelly to the ceiling,” he says at one point. An epic journey for Dan, and fantastic tv.
7 pm Green Tangerines have been making their name in their adopted home Liverpool, as well as the UK’s thriving jazz scene at the moment. All of them are former students of University of Liverpool.
“Handsel and Grettel’s house @Charlotte’s B’day” by pedroreyna is licensed under CC BY


sluggerotoole--2020-05-14--Unionist Parties: Good or Bad for Unionism?

If we reduce unionism to a simple definition of “ maintaining the link between Northern Ireland and Great Britain ” then it becomes problematic distinguishing the actions of unionist parties and the overall unionist method .
As a supporter of the Alliance party I come across this often , I choose to define my political ideology as liberal because I think that Liberalism is a universal ideology which should be applied to the laws of the UK or of Ireland .
To me the constitutional position is almost secondary to what my primary goal is ; to use public and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of my fellow citizens .
Before we had the GFA and Stormont , unionist discourse was within a UK wide lens because the only centre of power was in the house of commons .
This allowed a “ broad church ” official unionist party to electorally flourish without the headache of accountability due to the closure of Stormont and direct rule .
When we finally got the GFA and our new institutions there was the usual rancour and chest beating between the usual hard-line crowd .
The centre of power saw a shift @ @ @ @ @ @ @ able to quickly pick apart the decaying old Ulster Unionist Party .
What many forgot to query about the DUP , more specifically its voters , was what they actually believed ?
It has been well documented that ‘ the big man ’ Ian Paisley Senior was a right-wing populist , he said openly in the 1970s that if the link was broken with Britain then he could only accept an independent Ulster – irrespective of how this would even work .
There are good guides of public opinion such as the NI @ @ @ @ @ @ @ long running gay marriage debate poll after poll found that there was cross-community support for liberalisation .
Yet the lazier narrative was that unionists all supported a socially conservative policy and that all nationalists supported a socially liberal one .
It is not only unfair to characterise Unionist voters like this , but it is factually incorrect .
The reason I use the term ‘ methodology ’ when describing NI unionism is because I think that in the minds of many it is simply procedural .
For most of us the idea of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some flag waving , rule Britannia singing orange-fest , rather it is simply a maintenance in the socio-legal link with Great Britain .
This matters from an accountability standpoint because many unionist leaders , particularly in the DUP , still shy away from debating issues of domestic importance to NI and instead fixate of scrambling a narrative that maintenance the union means maintaining the status quo .
They are allowed to do this because we do not distinguish them ( unionist parties ) from support for the union , Ian Clarke puts this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how unrepresentative the unionist movement has become .
We see examples of this in such mild things as Christopher Stalford scoffing at the notion that organisations such as Invest NI disproportionately target Belfast over Derry with grants , marketing and promotion .
This doesn ’ t need to be “ unionist vs nationalist issue , ” both cities can thrive with a link to Britain or both can suffer – that is now wholly within the gift of Stormont and pretending it isn ’ t just lets them off the hook .
Photo @ @ @ @ @ @ @

If we reduce unionism to a simple definition of “maintaining the link between Northern Ireland and Great Britain” then it becomes problematic distinguishing the actions of unionist parties and the overall unionist method.
As a supporter of the Alliance party I come across this often, I choose to define my political ideology as liberal because I think that Liberalism is a universal ideology which should be applied to the laws of the UK or of Ireland. To me the constitutional position is almost secondary to what my primary goal is; to use public and private power to increase the individual freedom of my fellow citizens.
Before we had the GFA and Stormont, unionist discourse was within a UK wide lens because the only centre of power was in the house of commons. This allowed a “broad church” official unionist party to electorally flourish without the headache of accountability due to the closure of Stormont and direct rule.
When we finally got the GFA and our new institutions there was the usual rancour and chest beating between the usual hard-line crowd. The centre of power saw a shift back to Belfast and the DUP was able to quickly pick apart the decaying old Ulster Unionist Party.
What many forgot to query about the DUP, more specifically its voters, was what they actually believed? It has been well documented that ‘the big man’ Ian Paisley Senior was a right-wing populist, he said openly in the 1970s that if the link was broken with Britain then he could only accept an independent Ulster – irrespective of how this would even work.
There are good guides of public opinion such as the NI life and times survey. During our long running gay marriage debate poll after poll found that there was cross-community support for liberalisation. Yet the lazier narrative was that unionists all supported a socially conservative policy and that all nationalists supported a socially liberal one.
It is not only unfair to characterise Unionist voters like this, but it is factually incorrect. The reason I use the term ‘methodology’ when describing NI unionism is because I think that in the minds of many it is simply procedural. For most of us the idea of ‘supporting the union’ is not some flag waving, rule Britannia singing orange-fest, rather it is simply a maintenance in the socio-legal link with Great Britain.
This matters from an accountability standpoint because many unionist leaders, particularly in the DUP, still shy away from debating issues of domestic importance to NI and instead fixate of scrambling a narrative that maintenance the union means maintaining the status quo. They are allowed to do this because we do not distinguish them (unionist parties) from support for the union, Ian Clarke puts this more expertly in his slugger pieces on how unrepresentative the unionist movement has become.
We see examples of this in such mild things as Christopher Stalford scoffing at the notion that organisations such as Invest NI disproportionately target Belfast over Derry with grants, marketing and promotion. This doesn’t need to be “unionist vs nationalist issue,” both cities can thrive with a link to Britain or both can suffer – that is now wholly within the gift of Stormont and pretending it isn’t just lets them off the hook.
Photo by www_slon_pics is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA


sluggerotoole--2020-05-15--Victory for the de Souzas and for Irish citizens’ immigration rights: a battle that should never hav

Victory for the de Souzas and for Irish citizens’ immigration rights: a battle that should never have needed to be fought

Yet another example of ignorance of Northern Ireland affairs in different parts of the UK government .
Derry born Emma de Souza has won her three year battle to allow her American husband Jake to live with her , an Irish citizen in Northern Ireland , without having to renounce her birthright as a British citizen which she doesn ’ t want to exercise .
She wants to bring him in under EU therefore Irish not UK immigration laws .
Her victory is a triumph of principle over expediency .
It recognises what the Home Office immigration people notorious for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( or far more likely were at first simply not aware of the implications for NI as usual ) – that the GFA allows NI natives to be British Irish or both .
Asserting this required three years of campaigning , pressure from the Irish government and several court hearings at great expense which whether you like the ruling or not , should have been sorted out within government at the start .
No great issue of principle was involved on the British side .
They will have said to themselves in terms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bothered with this .
Let ’ s leave it to the courts to decide or it might even go away “ instead of which it ended up at Brexit summits between Leo Varakar and Theresa May , the former long serving Home Secretary in charge of immigration , who was reportedly sympathetic to the de Souza cause .
As the Guardian ’ s Lisa O ’ Carroll reports..
The change in law will have wide-reaching implications and enable all citizens in Northern Ireland the right to have a non-EU or non-EEA country spouse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go through the Home Office ’ s onerous and costly immigration system .
It means that British citizens in Northern Ireland will automatically have more rights than their counterparts in England , Wales and Scotland , who will still have to spend thousands of pounds going through the strict immigration route for non-EU or non-EEA spouses with no guarantee of success .
However it is only a temporary boon as any third country national who wishes to apply for settled status will only have until June 2021 to do so .
This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ While this is satisfying , it has not given legal effect to the Good Friday Agreement right to be Irish .
Ireland updated its immigration laws to bring them into line in 1998 but the British did not , ” said de Souza .
“ It is still an uphill battle.
” The new immigration rules for Northern Ireland people gives them as British or Irish citizens or both more immigration rights than GB born British citizens as the Law Centre NI explains in the Committee for the Administration for Justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saves them time and money for particular British visa applications .
There is one snag : the new rules are time limited .
Once introduced , they should obviously be made permanent .
From 24 August 2020 eligible family members of ‘ relevant ’ people from Northern Ireland will be able to apply for UK immigration status under the EU Settlement Scheme .
The changes mean people in Northern Ireland and their family members will enjoy the same rights as people in the Republic of Ireland .
Law Centre NI immigration solicitor , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impact of these changes can not be overstated .
Currently , family members of people from Northern Ireland have to meet financial and English language requirements , which often result in prolonged separation from their UK sponsor .
Many also struggle with the cost for a family visa .
“ The application process under the EU Settlement Scheme is also more flexible , allowing people to count years they have already spent in the UK , and allows for a longer continuous absence .
“ The changes will essentially put ‘ relevant ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ members on a par with Irish citizens from the Republic of Ireland , as was the case prior to a 2011 Supreme Court judgement .
“ The definition of a ‘ relevant ’ person has been drafted to strictly reflect the terms of the Good Friday Agreement .
“ The definition of a ‘ relevant ’ person has been drafted to strictly reflect the terms of the Good Friday Agreement .
Therefore , the benefits of the changes are contingent on the sponsor having been born in Northern Ireland , meaning that anyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or overseas will be excluded .
This is likely to raise issues of proportionality and discrimination between UK citizens.
” The Law Centre solicitor added : “ If your sponsor is a person from Northern Ireland , you may be eligible to apply under the EU Settlement Scheme , even if you are currently here in another immigration category .
Please note that , although the status is likely to be retained for life , applications must be submitted by 30 June 2021 .
Please contact the Law Centre NI immigration advice line @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you are impacted by this change in the law .

Yet another example of ignorance of Northern Ireland affairs in different parts of the UK government. Derry born Emma de Souza has won her three year battle to allow her American husband Jake to live with her, an Irish citizen in Northern Ireland, without having to renounce her birthright as a British citizen which she doesn’t want to exercise. She wants to bring him in under EU therefore Irish not UK immigration laws. Her victory is a triumph of principle over expediency. It recognises what the Home Office immigration people notorious for their tunnel vision appeared to deny; (or far more likely were at first simply not aware of the implications for NI as usual) – that the GFA allows NI natives to be British Irish or both.
Asserting this required three years of campaigning, pressure from the Irish government and several court hearings at great expense which whether you like the ruling or not, should have been sorted out within government at the start. No great issue of principle was involved on the British side. They will have said to themselves in terms. “we can’t be bothered with this. Let’s leave it to the courts to decide or it might even go away “ instead of which it ended up at Brexit summits between Leo Varakar and Theresa May, the former long serving Home Secretary in charge of immigration, who was reportedly sympathetic to the de Souza cause. As the Guardian’s Lisa O’ Carroll reports..
The change in law will have wide-reaching implications and enable all citizens in Northern Ireland the right to have a non-EU or non-EEA country spouse remain in the UK without having to go through the Home Office’s onerous and costly immigration system.
It means that British citizens in Northern Ireland will automatically have more rights than their counterparts in England, Wales and Scotland, who will still have to spend thousands of pounds going through the strict immigration route for non-EU or non-EEA spouses with no guarantee of success.
However it is only a temporary boon as any third country national who wishes to apply for settled status will only have until June 2021 to do so. This is the date the EU settlement scheme closes.
“While this is satisfying, it has not given legal effect to the Good Friday Agreement right to be Irish. Ireland updated its immigration laws to bring them into line in 1998 but the British did not,” said de Souza. “It is still an uphill battle.”
The new immigration rules for Northern Ireland people gives them as British or Irish citizens or both more immigration rights than GB born British citizens as the Law Centre NI explains in the Committee for the Administration for Justice ( CAJ) website. It notably saves them time and money for particular British visa applications. There is one snag: the new rules are time limited. Once introduced, they should obviously be made permanent.
From 24 August 2020 eligible family members of ‘relevant’ people from Northern Ireland will be able to apply for UK immigration status under the EU Settlement Scheme. The changes mean people in Northern Ireland and their family members will enjoy the same rights as people in the Republic of Ireland.
Law Centre NI immigration solicitor, Ashleigh Garcia, said: “The impact of these changes cannot be overstated. Currently, family members of people from Northern Ireland have to meet financial and English language requirements, which often result in prolonged separation from their UK sponsor. Many also struggle with the cost for a family visa.
“The application process under the EU Settlement Scheme is also more flexible, allowing people to count years they have already spent in the UK, and allows for a longer continuous absence.
“The changes will essentially put ‘relevant’ citizens of Northern Ireland and their family members on a par with Irish citizens from the Republic of Ireland, as was the case prior to a 2011 Supreme Court judgement.
“The definition of a ‘relevant’ person has been drafted to strictly reflect the terms of the Good Friday Agreement.
“The definition of a ‘relevant’ person has been drafted to strictly reflect the terms of the Good Friday Agreement. Therefore, the benefits of the changes are contingent on the sponsor having been born in Northern Ireland, meaning that anyone born in other parts of the UK or overseas will be excluded. This is likely to raise issues of proportionality and discrimination between UK citizens.”
The Law Centre solicitor added: “If your sponsor is a person from Northern Ireland, you may be eligible to apply under the EU Settlement Scheme, even if you are currently here in another immigration category. Please note that, although the status is likely to be retained for life, applications must be submitted by 30 June 2021. Please contact the Law Centre NI immigration advice line on (028) 9024 4401 if you are impacted by this change in the law.


sluggerotoole--2020-05-15--Culture Unconfined Day #5: “Talk to the dead as you would to the living”

By turning inward towards its own many and varied resources and outwards to its various networks the Institute of Irish Studies ’ Culture Unconfined Festival has shown just what latent social value such institutions can bring to bear when even common sense is scarce .
When Professor Pete Shirlow flagged it up the week before last , I committed myself on a personal level to watching , listening , and experiencing everything .
At just three to four events a day , it was hardly the most onerous project I ’ ve ever involved myself in .
It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of what ’ s left in the non-Covid news cycle , like the UK Supreme Court confirming what Gerry Adams has been telling anyone daft enough to listen , that there is now no official evidence that he was ever in the IRA .
The poet Shelley argued it is not the politicians , the journalists , or even the academics ( bless them ) but the poets who are “ the unacknowledged legislators of the world “ .
If ever there was a time for a generative review of that proposition , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrote that “ the tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living.
” By which he meant , I think , the source and motivation for our present actions and decisions like deep in the experience of our traumatised past .
Buaine na Gaoithe ( Dinneen defines buaine as ‘ the power of lasting ‘ ) , the collaborative piece discussed yesterday by Pomeroy born composer Ryan Molloy and poet Martin Dyar with Professor Frank Shovlin , touched on this theme ( I think ) , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The man who shot the Great War is another stunning Doubleband documentary uncovering the story of the Belfast soldier who took his camera to war in 1915 and how his experiences were to have a dramatic and unexpected outcome many years later .
1 pm .
Loris and the Lion A duo from Liverpool , navigating life together accompanied by : fairytales ; folktales ; lifetales ; a piano ; a clarinet ; a harmonium ; a guitar ; too many effects pedals ; sometimes a tenor recorder ; some spooky sounding homemade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 4 pm .
I must wash down the banister , Rita Anne Higgins left school at 14 , now she ’ s a member of Aosdana .
Her Sunny Side Plucked : New and Selected Poems received a Poetry Book Society Recommendation .
Her poems are a response to the Covid crisis written as her awareness of its impacts grow .
7 pm .
Nuala Honan was awarded the South Australian Music Industry Award for Most Outstanding Female Vocalist before moving to England ( aged just 19 ) to be closer to her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an adventurous music scene .
Photo by ahmed adly is licensed under CC0

By turning inward towards its own many and varied resources and outwards to its various networks the Institute of Irish Studies’ Culture Unconfined Festival has shown just what latent social value such institutions can bring to bear when even common sense is scarce.
When Professor Pete Shirlow flagged it up the week before last, I committed myself on a personal level to watching, listening, and experiencing everything. At just three to four events a day, it was hardly the most onerous project I’ve ever involved myself in.
It’s been a holiday from the bothersome trivia of what’s left in the non-Covid news cycle, like the UK Supreme Court confirming what Gerry Adams has been telling anyone daft enough to listen, that there is now no official evidence that he was ever in the IRA.
The poet Shelley argued it is not the politicians, the journalists, or even the academics (bless them) but the poets who are “the unacknowledged legislators of the world“. If ever there was a time for a generative review of that proposition, it’s now.
Marx once wrote that “the tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living.” By which he meant, I think, the source and motivation for our present actions and decisions like deep in the experience of our traumatised past.
Buaine na Gaoithe (Dinneen defines buaine as ‘the power of lasting‘), the collaborative piece discussed yesterday by Pomeroy born composer Ryan Molloy and poet Martin Dyar with Professor Frank Shovlin, touched on this theme (I think), in the lines:
‘Talk to the dead as you would to the living. Address the living as if they were the dead.’ Delving into Culture Unconfined’s deliberately non-linear set has been liberating. Much of the last eighteen years has comprised of listening to folk who think they know what’s going on at a time when it is crystal clear that most of us know we don’t. Despite (or maybe because of it) a groundbreaking peace agreement more than twenty years ago many of us have held on to the grudges and traumas of our younger days (they seemed so immense and insurmountable at the time, why would not?). But in many cases that means we continue to cling to ideas that performed poorly during the Troubles because changing them (or letting them bend to a world that, in any case, is moving on without us) means admitting – if only to ourselves – that we were wrong. As Heaney said, “the straight road has been lost sight of”. Of course, it’s not a local condition. In a world where the US president implores citizens to drink bleach, all cops are demons and the dead go unremembered and unspoken with, confusion is everywhere. We forget that all lasting movements and institutions start in the human imagination. Greek democracy was not a democracy until the rise of theatre, first with tragedy to forewarn the powerful of the consequences of the frailness of their decisions, then comedy. The tentativeness you find in artists and poets goes along with a willingness to admit failure and frustrations which is part of a commitment to the “not knowing” principle (something they share with scientists). It’s the driving curiosity of their life’s mission. It should act as a reminder to the rest of us of what we don’t know, not to depress us, but to ensure we redouble our efforts to find out more from those who might give us a clueful response. As someone once said, “the human voice is unmistakably genuine”. As for the rest of the last day, there’s more tremendous content ahead. Do jump into the whole thing?
11 am. The man who shot the Great War is another stunning Doubleband documentary uncovering the story of the Belfast soldier who took his camera to war in 1915 and how his experiences were to have a dramatic and unexpected outcome many years later.
1 pm. Loris and the Lion A duo from Liverpool, navigating life together accompanied by: fairytales; folktales; lifetales; a piano; a clarinet; a harmonium; a guitar; too many effects pedals; sometimes a tenor recorder; some spooky sounding homemade bells. Their Instagram is here.
4 pm. I must wash down the banister, Rita Anne Higgins left school at 14, now she’s a member of Aosdana. Her Sunny Side Plucked: New and Selected Poems received a Poetry Book Society Recommendation. Her poems are a response to the Covid crisis written as her awareness of its impacts grow.
7 pm. Nuala Honan was awarded the South Australian Music Industry Award for Most Outstanding Female Vocalist before moving to England (aged just 19) to be closer to her family’s Irish musical heritage and an adventurous music scene.
Photo by ahmed adly is licensed under CC0


sluggerotoole--2020-05-15--Video: Discussion with Mark Hackett and Wesley Johnston about the proposals for the York Street Inte

Video: Discussion with Mark Hackett and Wesley Johnston about the proposals for the York Street Interchange…

In our first Slugger podcast we talk with Architect and Urban Designer Mark Hackett about his alternative proposal for the York Street Interchange project in Belfast .
Roads expert Wesley Johnston gives his view on Mark ’ s ideas .
We also have a general discussion about the road network after Covid-19 .
As Mark did a presentation to explain his ideas we have released this one as a video , but future episodes will likely to be audio .
The idea for the York St Interchange was first proposed over 50 years ago as part of the Belfast Urban @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plans have been around since 2006 .
The project is like Belfast rush hour traffic – very stop-start .
It was hoped to go-ahead two years ago but there was a legal challenge from one of the companies who did not win the tender for the work .
100,000 cars use the interchange every day , so it is probably the most crucial section of our entire road network .
The cost of the project is put at £165 million , and like most infrastructure projects this cost will likely rise .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is likely to be tight the future of the project is in doubt .
Luckily we have clever chaps like Mark Hackett around .
Mark has put on his thinking cap and came up with a solution that is not only dramatically cheaper than the proposed project but also one that can be done in a shorter timescale and with less disruption to current traffic flow .
Mark ’ s plan also takes into account the urban environment of the project .
As well as improving the traffic flow his plan also regenerates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ access to North Belfast .
The concerns of residents were not given more thought back in the 1960s when the road scheme practically destroyed the historic neighbourhoods of Sailortown and Little Italy .
And it seems the views of current residents are not getting being taken on board much either .
Before watching our video it is worth watching this short video from the Ashton Centre that gives you a good background to the issues .
To make it easier to view the plans you can download Mark ’ s presentation here .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ proposal it could be 2030 before it is build , if at all .
With more people working from home , as well as future technological advances like autonomous vehicles we have to question if such large projects are a good use of public funds ?
Mark ’ s suggestions seem a more pragmatic and realistic option .
Have a watch and let me know what you think in the comments .
You can turn on subtitles on the video by clicking the CC icon .
I am looking for guests for future @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do let me know .
The Slugger Podcast is sponsored by : Queen ’ s University .
Researchers at Queen ’ s are at the heart of supporting global efforts to understand the Coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) .
To discover more about their research please visit http : //www.qub.ac.uk/coronavirus

In our first Slugger podcast we talk with Architect and Urban Designer Mark Hackett about his alternative proposal for the York Street Interchange project in Belfast. Roads expert Wesley Johnston gives his view on Mark’s ideas. We also have a general discussion about the road network after Covid-19.
As Mark did a presentation to explain his ideas we have released this one as a video, but future episodes will likely to be audio.
The idea for the York St Interchange was first proposed over 50 years ago as part of the Belfast Urban Motorway in 1967, and the current plans have been around since 2006. The project is like Belfast rush hour traffic – very stop-start. It was hoped to go-ahead two years ago but there was a legal challenge from one of the companies who did not win the tender for the work. 100,000 cars use the interchange every day, so it is probably the most crucial section of our entire road network.
The cost of the project is put at £165 million, and like most infrastructure projects this cost will likely rise. In a post Covid-19 World where public money is likely to be tight the future of the project is in doubt. Luckily we have clever chaps like Mark Hackett around. Mark has put on his thinking cap and came up with a solution that is not only dramatically cheaper than the proposed project but also one that can be done in a shorter timescale and with less disruption to current traffic flow.
Mark’s plan also takes into account the urban environment of the project. As well as improving the traffic flow his plan also regenerates the area around York St and improving access to North Belfast. The concerns of residents were not given more thought back in the 1960s when the road scheme practically destroyed the historic neighbourhoods of Sailortown and Little Italy. And it seems the views of current residents are not getting being taken on board much either. Before watching our video it is worth watching this short video from the Ashton Centre that gives you a good background to the issues.
To make it easier to view the plans you can download Mark’s presentation here.
Even if you fully support the main proposal it could be 2030 before it is build, if at all. With more people working from home, as well as future technological advances like autonomous vehicles we have to question if such large projects are a good use of public funds? Mark’s suggestions seem a more pragmatic and realistic option.
Have a watch and let me know what you think in the comments. You can turn on subtitles on the video by clicking the CC icon.
I am looking for guests for future podcasts so if you have any suggestions do let me know.
The Slugger Podcast is sponsored by: Queen’s University.
Researchers at Queen’s are at the heart of supporting global efforts to understand the Coronavirus (COVID-19). To discover more about their research please visit http://www.qub.ac.uk/coronavirus


sluggerotoole--2020-05-15--Queen’s to host virtual conference on sensing divisions in human societies…

The School of History , Anthropology , Philosophy and Politics , and the Senator George J. Mitchell Institute for Global Peace , Security and Justice at Queen ’ s University will host a virtual conference exploring human divisions in society on 21-22 May .
This free conference aims to investigate the nature of troubling and persistent divisions in human societies that often keep societies from producing stable governance .
Some societies which will be explored are Northern Ireland , Australia , Austria , Cyprus , Greece , India and Nigeria to name but a few .
In these places , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ connects people on one side of these divides , while separating them from those on the outside .
Split into five different panels , the conference will explore the themes of : The conference has been organised by Dr Maruška Svašek , Reader in Anthropology at the School of History , Anthropology , Philosophy and Politics at Queen ’ s ; and John Connelly , Professor in History at the Department of History , University of California at Berkeley .
Tickets are free .
To register please visit Eventbrite .
Photo by @ @ @ @ @ @

The School of History, Anthropology, Philosophy and Politics, and the Senator George J. Mitchell Institute for Global Peace, Security and Justice at Queen’s University will host a virtual conference exploring human divisions in society on 21-22 May.
This free conference aims to investigate the nature of troubling and persistent divisions in human societies that often keep societies from producing stable governance.
Some societies which will be explored are Northern Ireland, Australia, Austria, Cyprus, Greece, India and Nigeria to name but a few. In these places, a special kind of ‘affective relatedness’ connects people on one side of these divides, while separating them from those on the outside.
Split into five different panels, the conference will explore the themes of:
Sensing the State
Sound and Resistance
Authenticity as Sensorial Politics and Experience
Place, Memory and the Senses
Sensing (Across) Borders.
Guest speakers include:
Professor John Connelly, University of California at Berkeley
Dickson Ajisafe, Queen’s University Belfast
Seun Bamidele, Chrisland University, Nigeria
Dr Prashant Khattri, University of Allahabad, India
Dr Milena Komarova and Dr Katy Hayward, Queen’s University Belfast
The conference has been organised by Dr Maruška Svašek, Reader in Anthropology at the School of History, Anthropology, Philosophy and Politics at Queen’s; and John Connelly, Professor in History at the Department of History, University of California at Berkeley.
Tickets are free. To register please visit Eventbrite.
Photo by scholty1970 is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA


sluggerotoole--2020-05-16--Behind the alarmist noises, the UK and the EU have  the basis of a deal. It will be criminal if they

Behind the alarmist noises, the UK and the EU have  the basis of a deal. It will be criminal if they fail

David Frost and Michel Barnier standing together ( just about ) Lurking not far behind Covid is the self inflicted crisis over the next stage of Brexit .
To many including me , the prospect of a border at the Irish Sea is as revolting as a physical border on the island of Ireland .
It ’ s no consolation that there ’ s a disconnect between the political rhetoric and what ’ s actually happening on the ground .
The government has privately conceded there will be post-Brexit checks on goods crossing the Irish Sea , months after Boris @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trade barriers .
In a letter to the executive office in Stormont the government confirmed there would be border control posts in three ports , Belfast , Warrenpoint and Larne .
After the latest round of UK –EU talks in Brussels on the next steps after withdrawal including the Irish/NI protocol , both sides complained of lack of progress .
The June deadline for agreeing an extension of the talks looms .
No Deal is threatened .
( UK chief negotiator David ) Frost said… he found it “ hard to understand why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which makes it more difficult to reach a mutually beneficial agreement .
In order to facilitate those discussions , we intend to make public all the UK draft legal texts during next week so that the EU ’ s member states and interested observers can see our approach in detail… The UK will continue to work hard to find an agreement , for as long as there is a constructive process in being , and continues to believe that this is possible.
” ( Michel ) Barnier.. accused the UK of trying to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ single market , dismissing the government ’ s claims that it is seeking a typical free-trade agreement .
“ Every time we meet they say they would be happy to have a Canada-style agreement , but at the same time … they ask for far more from us than is available under the Canadian model , ” Barnier said , citing the UK ’ s desire for “ virtually full freedom of movement ” for short visits , maintenance of “ existing arrangements ” on electricity interconnection , as well as “ broad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to enable British lawyers , accountants and auditors to work in the EU .
“ We are not going to bargain away our European values to the benefit of the British economy , ” Barnier said .
“ Economic and trading fair play is not for sale .
It is not ‘ a nice to have ’ , it is ‘ a must have ’ .
” The “ ideological ” difference between an EU approach and the UK ’ s while culturally profound , is entirely familiar to both sides .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ half a century .
It lies in the fact that the EU finally relies on the legal formualae of the EU treaties adjudicated by the European Court of Justice and administered by a law making Commission in the absence of a EU-wide “ demos ” or democracy ; whereas the British approach is governed by the political pragmatism that gets by without a similarly codified constitution ( although this is looking shaky under pressure from devolution increased by Brexit differences ) .
Its many critics like Philip Stephens below argue that this British @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ago .
On the other side , the Brexiteers look to the EUs ’ chronic division and feeble handling of the Covid crisis for evidence of the organisation ’ s political , economic and moral bankruptcy .
Each side may be calculating on the other ’ s underlying strains and tensions to achieve concessions .
But in a brilliant analysis , Jill Rutter of the Institute for Government , suggests that two sides are not as far apart as their current position implies .
A deal will require one or both parties to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ apart than they look or than the rhetoric or accompanying commentaries seem to imply .
First , both are looking at a relatively distant relationship .
The UK has decided it wants to sit on the bottom step of the Barnier staircase .
Indeed much of its mandate is a demand for an “ unspecial relationship ” – it fillets the EU ’ s recent FTAs and asks to be treated pretty much like any other Canadian/Japanese or South Korean .
Both sides do of course recognise that the UK and the EU @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different from the one with a country thousands of miles , not a few kilometres away , and one with a land border which needs to stay open .
The UK wants , for instance , agreements on continued cooperation on police and justice which is not part of those normal trade negotiations .
It explicitly says that road haulage arrangements need to recognise geographic proximity – and makes a bid for “ operating flexibilities ” in the name of the environmental benefits efficiency can bring .
It wants to go much further @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on recognising professional qualifications : if progress is not made on ways of easing cross-border service provision there will have to be some sort of special deal for the island of Ireland : services was the big omission from the protocol agreed last year .
The EU sees the UK ’ s proximity as an argument for its notorious level playing field provisions to guarantee a rogue UK does not put downward pressure on European standards .
Michael Gove pointed out that the EU did not try to impose those on the US @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though the volumes of trade are similar but also pointed up areas where the UK is already well above EU minima .
Objectively the two sides are miles apart on this .
But the EU ’ s demands are more modest than their rhetoric .
On environment and social protection , the EU has asked the UK not to row back from the position at the end of transition – and then added some language about maintaining “ corresponding high standards over time ” .
There is a reference to “ appropriate and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to “ international standards ” .
There should be a landing point on judging each sides standards on their substantive merits .
On tax , the UK does not seem to be far from offering what the EU is looking for .
That leaves state aid as the outstanding LPF battleground : the EU wants the UK to apply EU rules forever : the UK simply offers notification and consultation .
The UK seems to have set the offer low – to give scope to move up .
But ( apart from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already committed on this through the NI protocol ) this seems a prime area where the EU has other means of protection through simple trade defence if it thinks the UK is subsidising an industry unfairly .
Fish may be the battle of the summer .
There is huge scope here for both sides to cut their noses off to spite their faces : both in terms of scuppering the wider deal but also in ensuring a lose-lose both for their fishers and for their fish consumers .
But this is the ultimate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and where we end up will show which is likely to come out on top .
The other big gulf is on the form of the agreement .
The EU wants to avoid a Swiss style arrangement with multiple treaties and a governance gap – and sees an overarching association agreement as a means of fending off demands for the same treatment from other third countries who have so-called MFN clauses in their existing agreements .
The UK wants a set of independent agreements each with their own dispute resolution processes to ensure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transgressions under one heading by action on another where it may be more vulnerable .
The EU also wants the ECJ to stay the ultimate interpreter of EU law .
That will be the EU ’ s reddest line – but one where there are workarounds .
Even the EU accepts the ECJ will not be the final arbiter in disputes under the future agreement .
EU voices are already denouncing the UK deal as cherry picking .
But it is picking from an already established fruit bowl and is miles away from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The UK accepts there will be checks , friction and formalities , even as it seeks ways of reducing them ( though bizarrely it is only now asking for business views on the economic impact of their proposals – a case of lighting the blue touchpaper and standing well back ) .
Whether we end up with a deal or not depends on two things .
First : is the EU prepared to take a bet that , for all its rhetoric , a “ sovereign ” post-Brexit UK won ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been used to living with for the last 47 years – and if it does , the EU has the means to defend itself ?
Second , in the absence of the parliamentary pressure which forced no deal off the table last year , is the government prepared to take some domestic political hits to avoid leaving the EU on what it now dubs “ Australia-style terms ” – but which is really the more familiar trading with our largest partner on WTO terms In practical terms where might we go from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get a system up and running which cuts costs , delays and bureaucracy to a minimum .
The first principle is that of partnership .
Border management is complicated .
The challenge will not only be in the hands of UK Border Force .
A wide spectrum of actors will be involved : police , customs , policy specialists , data analysts , market surveillance authorities , veterinarians , freight hauliers , ferry operators… And that ’ s before you even begin to consider the diverse array of those ( from massive supermarkets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new procedures to implement just in order to keep buying from and selling to the same people as before .
The second principle is that of cross-border cooperation .
There is plenty of evidence to show that you don ’ t need to be in a political union to have good border management .
What you do need , however , is a good bilateral or multilateral agreement and a level of confidence and trust between the parties .
The third principle is that of preparation .
UK Border Force will have overall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inspections on the GB/NI routes , in tandem with a range of experts from other agencies .
These checks will be conducted under policy guidance on behalf of all the relevant agencies , including HMRC and DEFRA ( or DAERA in the case of Northern Ireland ) .
UK Border Force already has officers deployed in Belfast and Liverpool ports ; but so far they have been preoccupied solely on extra-EU traffic .
Intra-UK goods traffic is ( perhaps ironically ) a rather unfamiliar subject for scrutiny .
We don ’ t have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ box , crate and lorry .
Future checks and searches have to be based on intelligence , not mere suspicion .
And intelligence is refined information .
There is already a wealth of data and technology across the supply chains that is not currently visible or accessible to the government .
This is even more reason for government and industry to work together to facilitate compliant trade and traffic routes , whilst simultaneously ensuring compliance .
But this needs to begin soon .
A more detailed plan comes from Sam Lowe of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , well worth reading in detail .
He has his principles too .
Determining whether goods are at risk of onward transport to the EU While ultimately the change being inflicted upon Northern Ireland is a mess of the UK ’ s making , the EU does have a role to play in ensuring that the Protocol is sustainable in practice , and does not further destabilise the region .
Some of the suggestions made in this piece will be palatable to the EU , and some will not .
But on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end of the bargain , there is a mutual interest in finding practical solutions that all parties can live with .
The fiercely anti-Brexit FT Commentator Philip Stephens concludes… Britain ’ s strategy so far has been to convince the EU that it is ready to step over the no-deal cliff-edge .
Some ministers say this will force Brussels to make a better offer .
Others do not care : the shock of no deal , they say , will be lost in the wreckage of Covid-19 .
Either way , there will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ British exceptionalism has run its course .
The coming years will demand nothing so much as a long , unremitting slog to rebuild the economy after the ravages of the pandemic and the collateral damage promised by Brexit .
The pro Brexit optimists have yet the counter this analysis .

David Frost and Michel Barnier standing together ( just about)
Lurking not far behind Covid is the self inflicted crisis over the next stage of Brexit. To many including me, the prospect of a border at the Irish Sea is as revolting as a physical border on the island of Ireland. It’s no consolation that there’s a disconnect between the political rhetoric and what’s actually happening on the ground.
The government has privately conceded there will be post-Brexit checks on goods crossing the Irish Sea, months after Boris Johnson insisted there would be no such trade barriers. In a letter to the executive office in Stormont the government confirmed there would be border control posts in three ports, Belfast, Warrenpoint and Larne.
After the latest round of UK –EU talks in Brussels on the next steps after withdrawal including the Irish/NI protocol, both sides complained of lack of progress. The June deadline for agreeing an extension of the talks looms. No Deal is threatened.
(UK chief negotiator David) Frost said… he found it “hard to understand why the EU insists on an ideological approach which makes it more difficult to reach a mutually beneficial agreement. In order to facilitate those discussions, we intend to make public all the UK draft legal texts during next week so that the EU’s member states and interested observers can see our approach in detail… The UK will continue to work hard to find an agreement, for as long as there is a constructive process in being, and continues to believe that this is possible.”
( Michel) Barnier.. accused the UK of trying to pick and choose parts of the EU single market, dismissing the government’s claims that it is seeking a typical free-trade agreement.
“Every time we meet they say they would be happy to have a Canada-style agreement, but at the same time … they ask for far more from us than is available under the Canadian model,” Barnier said, citing the UK’s desire for “virtually full freedom of movement” for short visits, maintenance of “existing arrangements” on electricity interconnection, as well as “broad and widespread” recognition of professional qualifications to enable British lawyers, accountants and auditors to work in the EU.
“We are not going to bargain away our European values to the benefit of the British economy,” Barnier said. “Economic and trading fair play is not for sale. It is not ‘a nice to have’, it is ‘a must have’.”
The “ideological” difference between an EU approach and the UK’s while culturally profound, is entirely familiar to both sides. They’ve been living with it for half a century. It lies in the fact that the EU finally relies on the legal formualae of the EU treaties adjudicated by the European Court of Justice and administered by a law making Commission in the absence of a EU-wide “demos” or democracy; whereas the British approach is governed by the political pragmatism that gets by without a similarly codified constitution (although this is looking shaky under pressure from devolution increased by Brexit differences). Its many critics like Philip Stephens below argue that this British ” exceptionalism ” ran it course long ago. On the other side, the Brexiteers look to the EUs’ chronic division and feeble handling of the Covid crisis for evidence of the organisation’s political, economic and moral bankruptcy. Each side may be calculating on the other’s underlying strains and tensions to achieve concessions.
But in a brilliant analysis, Jill Rutter of , UK in a Changing Europe suggests that two sides are not as far apart as their current position implies.
A deal will require one or both parties to move. But they are less far apart than they look or than the rhetoric or accompanying commentaries seem to imply.
First, both are looking at a relatively distant relationship. The UK has decided it wants to sit on the bottom step of the Barnier staircase. Indeed much of its mandate is a demand for an “unspecial relationship” – it fillets the EU’s recent FTAs and asks to be treated pretty much like any other Canadian/Japanese or South Korean.
Both sides do of course recognise that the UK and the EU will inevitably have a relationship that is different from the one with a country thousands of miles, not a few kilometres away, and one with a land border which needs to stay open. The UK wants, for instance, agreements on continued cooperation on police and justice which is not part of those normal trade negotiations.
It explicitly says that road haulage arrangements need to recognise geographic proximity – and makes a bid for “operating flexibilities” in the name of the environmental benefits efficiency can bring.
It wants to go much further than the EU has ever done before on recognising professional qualifications: if progress is not made on ways of easing cross-border service provision there will have to be some sort of special deal for the island of Ireland: services was the big omission from the protocol agreed last year.
The EU sees the UK’s proximity as an argument for its notorious level playing field provisions to guarantee a rogue UK does not put downward pressure on European standards. Michael Gove pointed out that the EU did not try to impose those on the US in the failed TTIP negotiations, even though the volumes of trade are similar but also pointed up areas where the UK is already well above EU minima.
Objectively the two sides are miles apart on this. But the EU’s demands are more modest than their rhetoric. On environment and social protection, the EU has asked the UK not to row back from the position at the end of transition – and then added some language about maintaining “corresponding high standards over time”.
There is a reference to “appropriate and relevant” Union standards – but also to “international standards”. There should be a landing point on judging each sides standards on their substantive merits. On tax, the UK does not seem to be far from offering what the EU is looking for.
That leaves state aid as the outstanding LPF battleground: the EU wants the UK to apply EU rules forever: the UK simply offers notification and consultation. The UK seems to have set the offer low – to give scope to move up. But (apart from the issue of how much the UK has already committed on this through the NI protocol) this seems a prime area where the EU has other means of protection through simple trade defence if it thinks the UK is subsidising an industry unfairly.
Fish may be the battle of the summer. There is huge scope here for both sides to cut their noses off to spite their faces: both in terms of scuppering the wider deal but also in ensuring a lose-lose both for their fishers and for their fish consumers. But this is the ultimate identity symbolism versus economic rationality debate – and where we end up will show which is likely to come out on top.
The other big gulf is on the form of the agreement. The EU wants to avoid a Swiss style arrangement with multiple treaties and a governance gap – and sees an overarching association agreement as a means of fending off demands for the same treatment from other third countries who have so-called MFN clauses in their existing agreements.
The UK wants a set of independent agreements each with their own dispute resolution processes to ensure that the EU cannot punish UK transgressions under one heading by action on another where it may be more vulnerable.
The EU also wants the ECJ to stay the ultimate interpreter of EU law. That will be the EU’s reddest line – but one where there are workarounds. Even the EU accepts the ECJ will not be the final arbiter in disputes under the future agreement.
EU voices are already denouncing the UK deal as cherry picking. But it is picking from an already established fruit bowl and is miles away from anything the UK wanted under Theresa May.
The UK accepts there will be checks, friction and formalities, even as it seeks ways of reducing them (though bizarrely it is only now asking for business views on the economic impact of their proposals – a case of lighting the blue touchpaper and standing well back).
Whether we end up with a deal or not depends on two things.
First: is the EU prepared to take a bet that, for all its rhetoric, a “sovereign” post-Brexit UK won’t look hugely different from the one it has been used to living with for the last 47 years – and if it does, the EU has the means to defend itself?
(Answer, of course, lots)
Second, in the absence of the parliamentary pressure which forced no deal off the table last year, is the government prepared to take some domestic political hits to avoid leaving the EU on what it now dubs “Australia-style terms” – but which is really the more familiar trading with our largest partner on WTO terms
In practical terms where might we go from here? The big urgent aim is get a system up and running which cuts costs, delays and bureaucracy to a minimum.
QUB’s Katy Hayward and Tony Smith prescribe “principles”
The first principle is that of partnership. Border management is complicated. The challenge will not only be in the hands of UK Border Force. A wide spectrum of actors will be involved: police, customs, policy specialists, data analysts, market surveillance authorities, veterinarians, freight hauliers, ferry operators… And that’s before you even begin to consider the diverse array of those (from massive supermarkets to small farmers) who will have new procedures to implement just in order to keep buying from and selling to the same people as before.
The second principle is that of cross-border cooperation. There is plenty of evidence to show that you don’t need to be in a political union to have good border management. What you do need, however, is a good bilateral or multilateral agreement and a level of confidence and trust between the parties.
The third principle is that of preparation. UK Border Force will have overall responsibility for conducting any regulatory checks and inspections on the GB/NI routes, in tandem with a range of experts from other agencies. These checks will be conducted under policy guidance on behalf of all the relevant agencies, including HMRC and DEFRA (or DAERA in the case of Northern Ireland). UK Border Force already has officers deployed in Belfast and Liverpool ports; but so far they have been preoccupied solely on extra-EU traffic. Intra-UK goods traffic is (perhaps ironically) a rather unfamiliar subject for scrutiny.
We don’t have to do customs checks by opening every box, crate and lorry. Future checks and searches have to be based on intelligence, not mere suspicion. And intelligence is refined information. There is already a wealth of data and technology across the supply chains that is not currently visible or accessible to the government. This is even more reason for government and industry to work together to facilitate compliant trade and traffic routes, whilst simultaneously ensuring compliance. But this needs to begin soon.
A more detailed plan comes from Sam Lowe of the think tank the Centre for European Reform, well worth reading in detail. He has his principles too.
Determining whether goods are at risk of onward transport to the EU
Reducing checks and bureaucracy
While ultimately the change being inflicted upon Northern Ireland is a mess of the UK’s making, the EU does have a role to play in ensuring that the Protocol is sustainable in practice, and does not further destabilise the region. Some of the suggestions made in this piece will be palatable to the EU, and some will not. But on the condition the UK is also upholding its end of the bargain, there is a mutual interest in finding practical solutions that all parties can live with.
The fiercely anti-Brexit FT Commentator Philip Stephens concludes…
Britain’s strategy so far has been to convince the EU that it is ready to step over the no-deal cliff-edge. Some ministers say this will force Brussels to make a better offer. Others do not care: the shock of no deal, they say, will be lost in the wreckage of Covid-19. Either way, there will be nothing heroic about the outcome. British exceptionalism has run its course. The coming years will demand nothing so much as a long, unremitting slog to rebuild the economy after the ravages of the pandemic and the collateral damage promised by Brexit.
The pro Brexit optimists have yet the counter this analysis.


sluggerotoole--2020-05-16--Why good talk radio output helps our discourse.

I wanted to take some time give a different view on the media and in particular the BBC output locally .
Now before you say , yes I appear on the airwaves arguing the bit out on a particular issue .
But i am genuinely a supporter of public service broadcasting and don ’ t begrudge the licence fee paying for the type of programmes that we just otherwise wouldn ’ t see .
But the past six years has also given me experience of seeing how Ormeau Avenue operates from a distant view and what why I believe the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ talk radio , but I am not an obsessive listener to radio .
I look on Twitter first thing in the morning and if I see something I like , I will tune in .
Even though i am not a regular listener to Nolan or his programmes , I do see value in some of the things that he does .
Love him or loathe him , he has helped in uncovering some of the biggest political stories in Northern Ireland politics .
Remember that Jonathan Bell interview that helped bring RHI @ @ @ @ @ @ @ distinct tone that appeals to a section of the society in Northern Ireland , it ’ s not my cup of tea all the time , but it does reach a section of our society who want that type of programme .
We have a lot of talk radio on air , but not all are created equally or try to simply do the same thing .
Anyone who has appeared on Nolan and Talkback will know this and attest to this fact that they are two different shows in both the tone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rightly so .
Why do we need shows like Talkback ?
They don ’ t just provide another 90 minute talking shop on top of what went just over an hour before .
If you look at the contributors who feature on Good Morning Ulster and Nolan , they seldom appear at 12pm on Talkback .
During the COVID-19 epidemic , there has been segments with experts who know the virus taking calls from the public .
This might sound trivial to people who obsessively watch the news , but for others this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Not everyone is on Twitter or Facebook and for some people , this is how they can learn what to to do and have anxieties dealt with by experts .
As for the commentators who appear , they do get to voice their opinions but also have scrutiny placed upon them .
Numerous shows we have witnessed commentators falls apart , who can not justify their arguments with any factual standing .
Whilst commentators have risen up the ranks on this show ( people like Mick , Chris and Sarah from this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keep the pace and fallen off the map .
The BBC quite often will touch base with this site and try to get some newer voices form here on to the airwaves .
This sifting process is critical for our local discourse .
Can you hear too much of some people ?
Sure .
But on this site we can be as guilty of that as anyone .
Slugger TV has a regular stable of commentators .
Why ?
Because we want quality contributions from people who can deal with the information in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to produce that programme once a month not 5 times per week .
In system of local governance , the public don ’ t always get a look in and are able to question politician and key civic leaders .
Phone in programmes at their best make that possible .
Some similar voices phone in but the opportunity is there for others to get in and make their voice heard .
Quality contributions can come in and it isn ’ t always just from the Bangor area as Ian was arguing .
Also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the first words you hear from William Crawley is something along the lines of “ new callers will get to the head of queue.
” Phone in programmes such as Talkback are necessary to avoid a static in the commentariat and also provide an important accountability factor that simply would not exist otherwise .
You might not like the views from callers , but those views and people exist in Northern Ireland and they should be allowed to critique and comment on our society as much as anyone else .
The BBC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a wider debate about the media necessary in Northern Ireland that needs to go beyond just the BBC and how the broadest base of voices are heard in our society .
How that happens I am not sure but we shouldn ’ t close down the avenues of talking are the way to go .

I wanted to take some time give a different view on the media and in particular the BBC output locally. Now before you say, yes I appear on the airwaves arguing the bit out on a particular issue. But i am genuinely a supporter of public service broadcasting and don’t begrudge the licence fee paying for the type of programmes that we just otherwise wouldn’t see. But the past six years has also given me experience of seeing how Ormeau Avenue operates from a distant view and what why I believe the output serves us well.
I enjoy talk radio, but I am not an obsessive listener to radio. I look on Twitter first thing in the morning and if I see something I like, I will tune in. Even though i am not a regular listener to Nolan or his programmes, I do see value in some of the things that he does. Love him or loathe him, he has helped in uncovering some of the biggest political stories in Northern Ireland politics. Remember that Jonathan Bell interview that helped bring RHI to another level? Nolan has a distinct tone that appeals to a section of the society in Northern Ireland, it’s not my cup of tea all the time, but it does reach a section of our society who want that type of programme.
We have a lot of talk radio on air, but not all are created equally or try to simply do the same thing. Anyone who has appeared on Nolan and Talkback will know this and attest to this fact that they are two different shows in both the tone and the way debates are handled and rightly so.
Why do we need shows like Talkback? They don’t just provide another 90 minute talking shop on top of what went just over an hour before. If you look at the contributors who feature on Good Morning Ulster and Nolan, they seldom appear at 12pm on Talkback. During the COVID-19 epidemic, there has been segments with experts who know the virus taking calls from the public. This might sound trivial to people who obsessively watch the news, but for others this is their chance to find out information. Not everyone is on Twitter or Facebook and for some people, this is how they can learn what to to do and have anxieties dealt with by experts.
As for the commentators who appear, they do get to voice their opinions but also have scrutiny placed upon them. Numerous shows we have witnessed commentators falls apart, who cannot justify their arguments with any factual standing. Whilst commentators have risen up the ranks on this show (people like Mick, Chris and Sarah from this parish have) others have struggled to keep the pace and fallen off the map. The BBC quite often will touch base with this site and try to get some newer voices form here on to the airwaves.
This sifting process is critical for our local discourse. Can you hear too much of some people? Sure. But on this site we can be as guilty of that as anyone. Slugger TV has a regular stable of commentators. Why? Because we want quality contributions from people who can deal with the information in front of them and we only have to produce that programme once a month not 5 times per week.
In system of local governance, the public don’t always get a look in and are able to question politician and key civic leaders. Phone in programmes at their best make that possible. Some similar voices phone in but the opportunity is there for others to get in and make their voice heard. Quality contributions can come in and it isn’t always just from the Bangor area as Ian was arguing. Also if you listen in to Talkback one of the first words you hear from William Crawley is something along the lines of “new callers will get to the head of queue.”
Phone in programmes such as Talkback are necessary to avoid a static in the commentariat and also provide an important accountability factor that simply would not exist otherwise. You might not like the views from callers, but those views and people exist in Northern Ireland and they should be allowed to critique and comment on our society as much as anyone else.
The BBC is not beyond criticism. But there is a wider debate about the media necessary in Northern Ireland that needs to go beyond just the BBC and how the broadest base of voices are heard in our society. How that happens I am not sure but we shouldn’t close down the avenues of talking are the way to go.


sluggerotoole--2020-05-16--Who could disagree with the UK lockdown?

With the lockdown accepted almost as an article of faith it seems reckless in the extreme to even suggest it could be wrong .
Apostates are hunted down all over social media and ridiculed , punished and belittled with methods designed by the Church of Scientology and inspired by the Congregation on the Doctrine of the Faith or maybe their FaceBook accounts are just deleted .
Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro received righteous contempt for their foolish suggestions that we could ride-out the tsunami of viral particles washing over the nations of the World killing so many in its wake @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , are from a crackpot cult out on the far right that sees profit and power as the only virtues .
Boris was , many suspected , an acolyte at least for a while with his egregious handshaking and flippant rhetoric but then that Pauline Conversion as he emerged from a few nights in ICU .
Boris delivered the lockdown but his faith , it seems , was short-lived as now he plans to open up England socially and commercially and in doing so is upsetting leaders of the devolved administrations and risking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ true acolyte of lockdown , “ unnecessary deaths ” .
Because of this and lockdown fatigue the four UK regions are struggling to maintain a consensus on , and control of , lockdown as more and more leave home to join three hours queues at reopened Kentucky Fried Chicken outlets .
So daily publication of deaths , still at a higher than comfortable level , it is hoped will keep us all on board ; staying at home , protecting the NHS , saving lives and forgetting the economy .
Some weeks ago @ @ @ @ @ @ @ UK were 13,000 and in Sweden were 2,000 , Swedish epidemiologist Johan Giesecke , gave an interview in which he shared his views on the rights and wrongs of national policies to deal with Covid-19 .
His short pithy view is that there is no such thing as right and wrong when it comes to dealing with a new viral pandemic such as SARS-CoV-2 .
Johan ’ s views are important because he officially advises Anders Tugnell , the Swedish state epidemiologist , and unofficially he advises the WHO ; and they both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a dispassionate and statistical kind of way , more or less certain that the UK and other European lockdowns were wrong in that they were too extreme .
His advice has steered Sweden on a very different course through this pandemic and he feels he is right and his challenge to those who disagree is to wait until April 2021 and looking back at this time see what really happened .
His view is that deaths in Sweden will be no different from the UK and other European countries .
His view @ @ @ @ @ @ @ novel virus will be roughly the same whether or not a country took an extreme approach to lockdown or a more casual approach .
The problem is that once you lock-down there is no easy way to open up again without getting more transmission and more deaths .
The UK lockdown was based almost exclusively on Professor Neil Fergusons ’ s Imperial College report to SAGE that used models based on lots of unknowns .
That paper suggested that without doing anything 510,000 people would die in the UK and 14,000 in N. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as currently applies in Sweden that would be 250,000 or 7,000 and with a complete lockdown we might get away with 20,000 UK deaths .
The Imperial College paper was not peer reviewed that is , it was taken at face value and this is rare given the impact it had on informing , and ultimately defining , public health policy .
Johan Geiseche is clear in his view that this new coronovirus is acting like a flu ; most suffer a trivial condition to which they become immune and he predicts that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ population has been infected and by the summer this will be up to 66 % where the much hated term “ herd immunity ” will begin to protect the population .
UK epidemiologists strongly disagree with this estimating perhaps 5 % of the UK population have been infected at this stage and we have no idea if immunity is protective .
As we head towards a possible 45,000 UK deaths in this wave of the infection the UK has certainly flattened the curve which was primarily to stop the NHS being swamped .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the lockdown predictions in the Imperial College paper were only valid for the first week or so as NHS ICU capacity was by then scaled up .
I certainly hope that Johan is wrong and that for all our efforts and the social and financial pain suffered we will get many less premature deaths than if we had a less rigorous lockdown as they are having in Sweden .
Only time will tell but Johan Geisceshe is one of the few people who has earned the right to disagree with the UK lockdown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CC BY-NC-SA

With the lockdown accepted almost as an article of faith it seems reckless in the extreme to even suggest it could be wrong. Apostates are hunted down all over social media and ridiculed, punished and belittled with methods designed by the Church of Scientology and inspired by the Congregation on the Doctrine of the Faith or maybe their FaceBook accounts are just deleted.
Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro received righteous contempt for their foolish suggestions that we could ride-out the tsunami of viral particles washing over the nations of the World killing so many in its wake. Such people, we assure ourselves, are from a crackpot cult out on the far right that sees profit and power as the only virtues. Boris was, many suspected, an acolyte at least for a while with his egregious handshaking and flippant rhetoric but then that Pauline Conversion as he emerged from a few nights in ICU.
Boris delivered the lockdown but his faith, it seems, was short-lived as now he plans to open up England socially and commercially and in doing so is upsetting leaders of the devolved administrations and risking, according to Nicola Sturgeon, a true acolyte of lockdown, “unnecessary deaths”.
Because of this and lockdown fatigue the four UK regions are struggling to maintain a consensus on, and control of, lockdown as more and more leave home to join three hours queues at reopened Kentucky Fried Chicken outlets. So daily publication of deaths, still at a higher than comfortable level, it is hoped will keep us all on board; staying at home, protecting the NHS, saving lives and forgetting the economy.
Some weeks ago, back when the deaths in the UK were 13,000 and in Sweden were 2,000, Swedish epidemiologist Johan Giesecke, gave an interview in which he shared his views on the rights and wrongs of national policies to deal with Covid-19. His short pithy view is that there is no such thing as right and wrong when it comes to dealing with a new viral pandemic such as SARS-CoV-2.
Johan’s views are important because he officially advises Anders Tugnell, the Swedish state epidemiologist, and unofficially he advises the WHO; and they both listen to him.
Johan is, in a dispassionate and statistical kind of way, more or less certain that the UK and other European lockdowns were wrong in that they were too extreme. His advice has steered Sweden on a very different course through this pandemic and he feels he is right and his challenge to those who disagree is to wait until April 2021 and looking back at this time see what really happened. His view is that deaths in Sweden will be no different from the UK and other European countries. His view is that national deaths due to this novel virus will be roughly the same whether or not a country took an extreme approach to lockdown or a more casual approach. The problem is that once you lock-down there is no easy way to open up again without getting more transmission and more deaths.
The UK lockdown was based almost exclusively on Professor Neil Fergusons’s Imperial College report to SAGE that used models based on lots of unknowns. That paper suggested that without doing anything 510,000 people would die in the UK and 14,000 in N. Ireland. With a minor lockdown such as currently applies in Sweden that would be 250,000 or 7,000 and with a complete lockdown we might get away with 20,000 UK deaths. The Imperial College paper was not peer reviewed that is, it was taken at face value and this is rare given the impact it had on informing, and ultimately defining, public health policy.
Johan Geiseche is clear in his view that this new coronovirus is acting like a flu; most suffer a trivial condition to which they become immune and he predicts that currently some 33% of the UK population has been infected and by the summer this will be up to 66% where the much hated term “herd immunity” will begin to protect the population. UK epidemiologists strongly disagree with this estimating perhaps 5% of the UK population have been infected at this stage and we have no idea if immunity is protective.
As we head towards a possible 45,000 UK deaths in this wave of the infection the UK has certainly flattened the curve which was primarily to stop the NHS being swamped. NHS capacity was increased as needed so the lockdown predictions in the Imperial College paper were only valid for the first week or so as NHS ICU capacity was by then scaled up.
I certainly hope that Johan is wrong and that for all our efforts and the social and financial pain suffered we will get many less premature deaths than if we had a less rigorous lockdown as they are having in Sweden. Only time will tell but Johan Geisceshe is one of the few people who has earned the right to disagree with the UK lockdown.
Photo by PabitraKaity is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA