sluggerotoole--2020-10-07--Covid has unleashed a vast global economic experiment, #CargoOfBricks…

In today ’ s Cargo of Bricks , we take our first look at how the southern economy is coping with the shocks to the labour market in particular .
With my guest Dan O ’ Brien , chief economist at the IIEA in Dublin we cover… • It is absolutely impossible to read too far into the success or failure of what amounts to ‘ the biggest social policy or political experiment in decades ’ .
Government is able to hold to it ’ s massive intervention in the labour market for now , but in 6 to 9 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ • We are far from understanding the effectiveness of different countries approaches to fighting the Covid crisis , but there are no golden bullets .
Some think the Fortress New Zealand approach works but their economic contraction in the second quarter was similar to Italy ’ s and Belgium ’ s .
• If there is a sliver of good news from an Irish point of view it is that world trade did not contract by as much as expected .
The Republic ’ s substantial pharmaceutical industry ensured that they were the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the first half of 2020 .
The real issue comes with the fact that the young and those on lowest pay are the ones most likely to be hit the worst .
The significant jump in income inequality will do nothing to address the growing anger in society .
The risk of ill-health makes it feel like we ’ re going back to earlier times .
Have we overreacted ?
Only time will tell .
With each country trying its own separate approaches we have a massive global experiment in ‘ disciplined pluralism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But as Dan says , ‘ it ’ s far too early to tell ’ or to draw any concrete inferences .
If you would like to get involved in # TheReset with Ulster Bank either as an individual or as part of an organisation , please do get in touch by emailing us at [ email protected ] with an idea for inclusion in a range of articles or events over September and October .
In the meantime , you can catch up on Cargo of Bricks and In Conversation and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Spotify , or wherever you get your quality podcasts .

In today’s Cargo of Bricks, we take our first look at how the southern economy is coping with the shocks to the labour market in particular. With my guest Dan O’Brien, chief economist at the IIEA in Dublin we cover…
Powered by RedCircle
It is absolutely impossible to read too far into the success or failure of what amounts to ‘the biggest social policy or political experiment in decades’. Government is able to hold to it’s massive intervention in the labour market for now, but in 6 to 9 months it could get ‘hairy’
We are far from understanding the effectiveness of different countries approaches to fighting the Covid crisis, but there are no golden bullets. Some think the Fortress New Zealand approach works but their economic contraction in the second quarter was similar to Italy’s and Belgium’s.
If there is a sliver of good news from an Irish point of view it is that world trade did not contract by as much as expected. The Republic’s substantial pharmaceutical industry ensured that they were the only European country to increase exports in the first half of 2020.
The real issue comes with the fact that the young and those on lowest pay are the ones most likely to be hit the worst. The significant jump in income inequality will do nothing to address the growing anger in society. The risk of ill-health makes it feel like we’re going back to earlier times.
Have we overreacted? Only time will tell. With each country trying its own separate approaches we have a massive global experiment in ‘disciplined pluralism’ there will be much to learn. But as Dan says, ‘it’s far too early to tell’ or to draw any concrete inferences.
If you would like to get involved in #TheReset with Ulster Bank either as an individual or as part of an organisation, please do get in touch by emailing us at [email protected] with an idea for inclusion in a range of articles or events over September and October.
In the meantime, you can catch up on Cargo of Bricks and In Conversation and subscribe on Apple Podcasts | Google Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your quality podcasts.


sluggerotoole--2020-10-08--On the doctrine of inevitability

On the doctrine of inevitability

The News Letter had an interesting article a short while back , reporting remarks by Alex Easton in respect of a border poll and the Irish reunification debate .
It is not clear in which context he made his comments , but the headline is that he speculates that nationalists will “ inevitably ” lose a border poll , and recites a few other well-known tropes .
I am not a nationalist , but I feel that his comments reflect beliefs prevalent within unionism around how people like me will vote if or when the big day comes , so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time addressing them .
The first thing to talk about is the word “ inevitable ” .
Politicians of all shades here seem to feel that history and events are on their side , without ever stopping to consider that both sides can not be right on this at the same time .
Unionist politicians argue that their position is safe because , no matter what , middle class people of an ostensibly nationalist background will vote for the union to protect the block grant and their public sector job .
On the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have argued for many decades that the eventual collapse of the northern state is inevitable on the basis that it is an artificial , unsustainable entity ( whatever that means ) and because of ongoing demographic change .
Recently , they have taken to arguing that the brexit process will hasten this collapse .
This inevitability doctrine lies beneath the hastily-assembled policy veneer that tribally-oriented politicians here wrap up their constitutional ideology in .
It carries with it a significant implication , which is that there is no need to make any compromises @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do any other work to create or maintain their desired position .
This is why Unionism , despite being holed well below the waterline at 43 % of the vote , believes it is taking no risks by dragging the majority of Northern Ireland ’ s citizens out of the EU , guessing – or perhaps , more accurately , gambling – that those who do not vote for Unionist parties will back staying in the UK union over the option to stay in the EU via reunification .
For similar reasons , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its own toxicity , particularly in terms of its historic association with the Provisional IRA , or its unwillingness to show flexibility on a range of issues , such as the matter of how Irishmen who served the RIC/RUC or British Army should be commemorated , or what should be done with the statue of Nazi collaborator Séan Russell in Dublin .
The second aspect here is the rather flimsy list of benefits that Alex seems to think will turn the trick whenever the border poll arrives .
First in the list is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Fire Brigade charges a fee to attend a private residence in the event of a fire .
This is , of course , true , although Alex chose to omit that there are provisions for those who can not afford the fee , and that the cost of this fee is generally covered by home insurance , which most people would quite reasonably be expected to have in place to cover the damage .
He chose not to explain in any great detail why “ stick with the union because we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fire brigade when your house catches fire ” might be the kind of compelling message that turns wavering border poll voters .
I ’ m not sure that it is .
The other three points relate to healthcare .
Specifically , free prescriptions , free ambulances and free GP access .
In some ways , Alex is onto something with this line of argument , because “ free ” access to healthcare is something that resonates with people here .
In an Irish Times article a few weeks ago , Colum Eastwood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a major source of difficulty for the pro-reunification camp .
There is real , and legitimate , fear around what could happen to “ free ” healthcare in the event of reunification .
But I think that if Alex thinks that this seals the deal , he may have another think coming , especially if people begin to question the system that operates here .
This is a system which is riven with inequality and is falling apart .
For whatever reason , it has proven impervious to political efforts to improve it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact of life for the best part of a decade now .
At present , there is a two year wait for elective surgery .
I have heard , anecdotally , of lengthy delays to see oncologists and diabetes specialists .
Alex touts free ambulances , but more than once I ’ ve seen stories in the papers about ambulance coverage being spotty , with high rates of sickness/stress-related absenteeism , and even stories where politicians have had to intervene to get an ambulance out to someone in need .
That ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ E wards have had to sound the alarm over overloading during recent winters .
He also talks of free GP care in an environment where , depending on your postcode , you could be waiting weeks to see your doctor .
Counter-intuitively , the system that prevails in Northern Ireland actually accomplishes the opposite of what it sets out to achieve in terms of equality .
By design , not accident , it effectively subsidises the private sector , as NHS-trained clinicians are allowed to do private work , and use NHS facilities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in facilities that are either operated by the private sector to earn public revenue , or are operated as charities which pay no tax on their receipts .
These arrangements are not some Tory perversion of the system , but are aspects that were built in by the Labour government of the 1940s , who had to bribe doctors with generous arrangements to take part .
Pushing people into private care and extending waiting lists serves to preserve the illusion of healthcare which is free at the point of delivery .
The irony @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people who have enough money to afford private insurance or to come up with the money for the fees , who get the benefit of fast-tracked access .
Others are reduced to taking out loans or remortgaging their homes , and when those options are not available they are left to suffer .
I am struggling to understand how the system in Ireland could be much worse than this .
The poorest third of the population in Ireland receive free healthcare .
The next third up from that receive free GP access , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see the GP .
Having to pay £50 to see a GP is a pain compared with it being free , but provided charges are not being levied on those who are on lower incomes or are chronically sick , elderly or otherwise vulnerable , I really don ’ t see it as being a big ask .
Hospital charges and other fees are capped , with the promise of further enhancements to come .
Don ’ t get me wrong .
I am not trying to trivialise the fact that healthcare costs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think people should receive healthcare quickly , and on the basis of need , not ability to pay .
Nobody should ever face having to make a decision between spending money on their health versus other necessities ; nobody should ever face losing their home .
It is abhorrent to me that there are lengthy waiting lists and that people are having to scrape together money to pay for private procedures .
But I think we need to have an honest conversation with ourselves about what we need to do to solve this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have the answers , but I strongly believe that the healthcare debate in this country is hamstrung by a kind of cultural and ideological exceptionalism , rather like gun control in the US .
Addressing this and giving the politicians the flexibility they need to make the really tough calls would be a good place to start .
Returning to Alex ’ s attempted defence of the Union .
If the best Unionism can do to sell it is to promise that the state will pay for the fire brigade when your house @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will pay for a pain-relieving operation after making you wait two years , it can be assured that there is nothing at all inevitable about how people in Northern Ireland ’ s unaligned centre ground are going to vote .
If Unionism wants to save the union , it better get to work on coming up with some tangible benefits that target swing voters , and fast .

The News Letter had an interesting article a short while back, reporting remarks by Alex Easton in respect of a border poll and the Irish reunification debate. It is not clear in which context he made his comments, but the headline is that he speculates that nationalists will “inevitably” lose a border poll, and recites a few other well-known tropes. I am not a nationalist, but I feel that his comments reflect beliefs prevalent within unionism around how people like me will vote if or when the big day comes, so I thought it worth spending a little time addressing them.
The first thing to talk about is the word “inevitable”. Politicians of all shades here seem to feel that history and events are on their side, without ever stopping to consider that both sides cannot be right on this at the same time. Unionist politicians argue that their position is safe because, no matter what, middle class people of an ostensibly nationalist background will vote for the union to protect the block grant and their public sector job. On the other hand, nationalist politicians and activists have argued for many decades that the eventual collapse of the northern state is inevitable on the basis that it is an artificial, unsustainable entity (whatever that means) and because of ongoing demographic change. Recently, they have taken to arguing that the brexit process will hasten this collapse.
This inevitability doctrine lies beneath the hastily-assembled policy veneer that tribally-oriented politicians here wrap up their constitutional ideology in. It carries with it a significant implication, which is that there is no need to make any compromises, face any uncomfortable choices, or do any other work to create or maintain their desired position.
This is why Unionism, despite being holed well below the waterline at 43% of the vote, believes it is taking no risks by dragging the majority of Northern Ireland’s citizens out of the EU, guessing – or perhaps, more accurately, gambling – that those who do not vote for Unionist parties will back staying in the UK union over the option to stay in the EU via reunification. For similar reasons, Sinn Féin makes no effort to address its own toxicity, particularly in terms of its historic association with the Provisional IRA, or its unwillingness to show flexibility on a range of issues, such as the matter of how Irishmen who served the RIC/RUC or British Army should be commemorated, or what should be done with the statue of Nazi collaborator Séan Russell in Dublin.
The second aspect here is the rather flimsy list of benefits that Alex seems to think will turn the trick whenever the border poll arrives.
First in the list is the claim that, in Ireland, the Fire Brigade charges a fee to attend a private residence in the event of a fire. This is, of course, true, although Alex chose to omit that there are provisions for those who cannot afford the fee, and that the cost of this fee is generally covered by home insurance, which most people would quite reasonably be expected to have in place to cover the damage. He chose not to explain in any great detail why “stick with the union because we’ll use your taxes to pay for the fire brigade when your house catches fire” might be the kind of compelling message that turns wavering border poll voters. I’m not sure that it is.
The other three points relate to healthcare. Specifically, free prescriptions, free ambulances and free GP access. In some ways, Alex is onto something with this line of argument, because “free” access to healthcare is something that resonates with people here. In an Irish Times article a few weeks ago, Colum Eastwood alluded to the fact that this was a major source of difficulty for the pro-reunification camp. There is real, and legitimate, fear around what could happen to “free” healthcare in the event of reunification.
But I think that if Alex thinks that this seals the deal, he may have another think coming, especially if people begin to question the system that operates here. This is a system which is riven with inequality and is falling apart. For whatever reason, it has proven impervious to political efforts to improve it.
Lengthy waiting lists have been a fact of life for the best part of a decade now. At present, there is a two year wait for elective surgery. I have heard, anecdotally, of lengthy delays to see oncologists and diabetes specialists. Alex touts free ambulances, but more than once I’ve seen stories in the papers about ambulance coverage being spotty, with high rates of sickness/stress-related absenteeism, and even stories where politicians have had to intervene to get an ambulance out to someone in need. That’s setting aside the fact that A&E wards have had to sound the alarm over overloading during recent winters. He also talks of free GP care in an environment where, depending on your postcode, you could be waiting weeks to see your doctor.
Counter-intuitively, the system that prevails in Northern Ireland actually accomplishes the opposite of what it sets out to achieve in terms of equality. By design, not accident, it effectively subsidises the private sector, as NHS-trained clinicians are allowed to do private work, and use NHS facilities and staff to arrange such work, in facilities that are either operated by the private sector to earn public revenue, or are operated as charities which pay no tax on their receipts. These arrangements are not some Tory perversion of the system, but are aspects that were built in by the Labour government of the 1940s, who had to bribe doctors with generous arrangements to take part. Pushing people into private care and extending waiting lists serves to preserve the illusion of healthcare which is free at the point of delivery. The irony is that this works perfectly well for people who have enough money to afford private insurance or to come up with the money for the fees, who get the benefit of fast-tracked access. Others are reduced to taking out loans or remortgaging their homes, and when those options are not available they are left to suffer.
I am struggling to understand how the system in Ireland could be much worse than this. The poorest third of the population in Ireland receive free healthcare. The next third up from that receive free GP access, so only one-third has to pay to see the GP. Having to pay £50 to see a GP is a pain compared with it being free, but provided charges are not being levied on those who are on lower incomes or are chronically sick, elderly or otherwise vulnerable, I really don’t see it as being a big ask. Hospital charges and other fees are capped, with the promise of further enhancements to come.
Don’t get me wrong. I am not trying to trivialise the fact that healthcare costs can deepen poverty and inequality. I think people should receive healthcare quickly, and on the basis of need, not ability to pay. Nobody should ever face having to make a decision between spending money on their health versus other necessities; nobody should ever face losing their home. It is abhorrent to me that there are lengthy waiting lists and that people are having to scrape together money to pay for private procedures. But I think we need to have an honest conversation with ourselves about what we need to do to solve this. I don’t pretend to have the answers, but I strongly believe that the healthcare debate in this country is hamstrung by a kind of cultural and ideological exceptionalism, rather like gun control in the US. Addressing this and giving the politicians the flexibility they need to make the really tough calls would be a good place to start.
Returning to Alex’s attempted defence of the Union. If the best Unionism can do to sell it is to promise that the state will pay for the fire brigade when your house burns down, or that the state will pay for a pain-relieving operation after making you wait two years, it can be assured that there is nothing at all inevitable about how people in Northern Ireland’s unaligned centre ground are going to vote. If Unionism wants to save the union, it better get to work on coming up with some tangible benefits that target swing voters, and fast.


sluggerotoole--2020-10-08--The Future of Retail – #TheReset…

The Future of Retail – #TheReset…

There was an unsettling sense of déjà vu when the latest restrictions on households meeting were announced .
After a summer when it , slowly , felt as if Northern Ireland was reopening it was an unpleasant reminder coronavirus is still present and not yet beaten .
The feeling of the world closing down a little bit is something we are all adjusting to again .
However , things are not the same as March .
We have all learnt a lot more about how to live with the virus – both organisations and people .
The retail industry demonstrates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the start of the national lockdown most shops were closed to help prevent the spread of the virus – whilst those who remained open had to bring in new measures to keep workers and customers safe .
The last few months have seen all of our lives change immensely in response to coronavirus .
Everyone has adapted to new rules and restrictions and ways of living ; which has hugely impacted on how and where we shop .
The data is clear .
Retailers and consumers flocked online , with sales peaking at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lockdown was an extreme situation , but it appears to have had a lasting legacy .
Many customers are less willing , or less able , to come out and shop .
That ’ s driven an enormous shift in the way retailers operate .
Two-fifths of non-food shopping is now done online .
The biggest percentage rise has been in grocery , with supermarkets doubling their capacity for home delivery over the last few months .
That ’ s terribly convenient for those who would rather have the weekly groceries arrive on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are unable to come into shops , because they are shielding or vulnerable , it can be a lifeline .
But this is not a process begun by Covid , rather the pandemic has just accelerated this change which had been underway since the last recession in 2008 .
Let ’ s be very clear about this , retail is going to contract more .
Retailers have been reducing shop space and shop numbers .
And whilst it ’ s horrible to see retail job losses , those roles which remain – and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are likely to be higher skilled and more engaging .
For the future of the high street , we need our cities and towns to be seen as destinations .
We need to get people to spend their time as well as their money and that means not complaining that there are too many shops but looking at why other sectors that need to be represented are not there .
There must be a good mix of retail , office space , hospitality and leisure and a public realm that means those spaces @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accessible and inviting .
And we must also not be afraid to look outside the norm for NI .
We have been adverse to build communities in our town and city centres but the NIRC has been a strong advocate for Living Over The Shops schemes , but that takes ambition , proper planning and capital grants to ease that transition .
It is clear we need to start planning now for the future of our high streets and that means a joined-up approach across industries and the various levels of Government .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ well .
On 6 August , the NI Executive announced that it was instituting a High Streets Task Force to help the fight back from Covid 19 .
Here we are 8 weeks later and there have been no meetings and not even a terms of reference .
That is not good enough .
We also need : • Both the NI and UK Governments to take steps to reignite consumer confidence and entice shoppers back to the High Street .
• This should include a plan for the safe return of office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ short-term economic stimulus ( through targeted tax cuts or cash payments ) , and practical transport solutions which could include temporarily abolishing town centre parking charges particularly in the run up to festive trading .
• A more coherent and less piecemeal approach to public policy towards town centres .
Policies like costly business rates and restrictive and costly parking hamper efforts to revitalise town centres .
• A Town Centres Fund on a sustained basis , including permitting Business Improvement Districts to access it .
• An early commitment from the NI @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taper to prevent 100 % re-instatement of retail business rates in April 2021 .
• It ’ s worth noting the pre-existing issues affecting the industry remain challenging .
Similarly , having seen the impact of the first lockdown on retailers , if there is a second wave in the crucial Christmas trading period then that could be catastrophic for the industry .
Right now , things are tough for retailers , but this industry is resourceful and resilient .
Shopping is changing , but the industry will remain an essential part of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we have a key role to play in the economic recovery .
But to do that we need support and some bold decisions from our Executive .
If you would like to get involved in # TheReset with Ulster Bank either as an individual or as part of an organisation , please do get in touch by emailing us at [ email protected ] with an idea for inclusion in a range of articles or events throughout September and October .

Aodhán Connolly, Director, Northern Ireland Retail Consortium
There was an unsettling sense of déjà vu when the latest restrictions on households meeting were announced. After a summer when it, slowly, felt as if Northern Ireland was reopening it was an unpleasant reminder coronavirus is still present and not yet beaten. The feeling of the world closing down a little bit is something we are all adjusting to again.
However, things are not the same as March. We have all learnt a lot more about how to live with the virus – both organisations and people. The retail industry demonstrates this as well as any. At the start of the national lockdown most shops were closed to help prevent the spread of the virus – whilst those who remained open had to bring in new measures to keep workers and customers safe.
The last few months have seen all of our lives change immensely in response to coronavirus. Everyone has adapted to new rules and restrictions and ways of living; which has hugely impacted on how and where we shop. The data is clear. Retailers and consumers flocked online, with sales peaking at over 65 percent.
Obviously, the lockdown was an extreme situation, but it appears to have had a lasting legacy. Many customers are less willing, or less able, to come out and shop. That’s driven an enormous shift in the way retailers operate. Two-fifths of non-food shopping is now done online. The biggest percentage rise has been in grocery, with supermarkets doubling their capacity for home delivery over the last few months. That’s terribly convenient for those who would rather have the weekly groceries arrive on a Saturday morning. For people who are unable to come into shops, because they are shielding or vulnerable, it can be a lifeline.
But this is not a process begun by Covid, rather the pandemic has just accelerated this change which had been underway since the last recession in 2008. Let’s be very clear about this, retail is going to contract more. Retailers have been reducing shop space and shop numbers. And whilst it’s horrible to see retail job losses, those roles which remain – and the retail jobs of the future – are likely to be higher skilled and more engaging.
For the future of the high street, we need our cities and towns to be seen as destinations. We need to get people to spend their time as well as their money and that means not complaining that there are too many shops but looking at why other sectors that need to be represented are not there. There must be a good mix of retail, office space, hospitality and leisure and a public realm that means those spaces are warm, friendly, safe, accessible and inviting. And we must also not be afraid to look outside the norm for NI. We have been adverse to build communities in our town and city centres but the NIRC has been a strong advocate for Living Over The Shops schemes, but that takes ambition, proper planning and capital grants to ease that transition.
It is clear we need to start planning now for the future of our high streets and that means a joined-up approach across industries and the various levels of Government. Not only planning, but delivering as well. On 6 August, the NI Executive announced that it was instituting a High Streets Task Force to help the fight back from Covid 19. Here we are 8 weeks later and there have been no meetings and not even a terms of reference. That is not good enough.
We also need:
• Both the NI and UK Governments to take steps to reignite consumer confidence and entice shoppers back to the High Street.
• This should include a plan for the safe return of office workers, students, and tourists, short-term economic stimulus (through targeted tax cuts or cash payments), and practical transport solutions which could include temporarily abolishing town centre parking charges particularly in the run up to festive trading.
• A more coherent and less piecemeal approach to public policy towards town centres. Policies like costly business rates and restrictive and costly parking hamper efforts to revitalise town centres.
• A Town Centres Fund on a sustained basis, including permitting Business Improvement Districts to access it.
• An early commitment from the NI Government to bring forward a relief or taper to prevent 100% re-instatement of retail business rates in April 2021.
• It’s worth noting the pre-existing issues affecting the industry remain challenging. Similarly, having seen the impact of the first lockdown on retailers, if there is a second wave in the crucial Christmas trading period then that could be catastrophic for the industry.
Right now, things are tough for retailers, but this industry is resourceful and resilient. Shopping is changing, but the industry will remain an essential part of Northern Ireland’s economy, and we have a key role to play in the economic recovery. But to do that we need support and some bold decisions from our Executive.
If you would like to get involved in #TheReset with Ulster Bank either as an individual or as part of an organisation, please do get in touch by emailing us at [email protected] with an idea for inclusion in a range of articles or events throughout September and October.


sluggerotoole--2020-10-09--#SluggerTV – The future of Belfast City Centre #TheReset

We will have all noticed how quiet the city centre has been over recent months .
Bars , cafes and retailers having to operate with reduced capacity .
As the potential of a second circuit breaker looms , we thought it would be an opportune moment to discuss the future of the city centre and how it is coping with the COVID 19 pandemic .
To go through this big issue we had , Glyn Roberts ( Retail NI ) , Suzanne Wylie ( chief executive of Belfast City Council ) and Colin Neill ( Hospitality Ulster ) .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 19 on the city but also some of the wider projects coming over the horizon such as the city deal which could help us find a way of getting out of recession and perhaps mitigate the harsher impacts of the current economic situation .
This episode was recorded in Belfast ’ s Accidental Theatre and was edited by Alan Meban .
If you would like to get involved in # TheReset with Ulster Bank either as an individual or as part of an organisation , please do get in touch by emailing us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ idea for inclusion in a range of articles or events throughout September and October .

We will have all noticed how quiet the city centre has been over recent months. Bars, cafes and retailers having to operate with reduced capacity. As the potential of a second circuit breaker looms, we thought it would be an opportune moment to discuss the future of the city centre and how it is coping with the COVID 19 pandemic. To go through this big issue we had, Glyn Roberts (Retail NI), Suzanne Wylie (chief executive of Belfast City Council) and Colin Neill (Hospitality Ulster).
We looked at the broad impact of COVID 19 on the city but also some of the wider projects coming over the horizon such as the city deal which could help us find a way of getting out of recession and perhaps mitigate the harsher impacts of the current economic situation.
This episode was recorded in Belfast’s Accidental Theatre and was edited by Alan Meban.
If you would like to get involved in #TheReset with Ulster Bank either as an individual or as part of an organisation, please do get in touch by emailing us at [email protected] with an idea for inclusion in a range of articles or events throughout September and October.


sluggerotoole--2020-10-09--Time for the UK and the EU, with Dublin’s new government’s encouragement, to agree a #Brexit deal

In Ireland and the EU post Brexit , former senior Irish diplomat , advocate for IREXIT and member of the Irish Talks Team at Stormont in 1998 , Dr Ray Bassett , cites the ‘ weaponizing ’ of the border as pivotal to producing an ideological tug – o ’ –war throughout Brexit .
Politics took priority over trade talks which could have resolved the issue of the border at an earlier stage .
Other issues took precedence and the political geography of Ireland proved useful leverage .
Also critical of political leadership in the United Kingdom , the book @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , narrowed talks into the corrosive constitutional territory .
Lauded as protecting the Good Friday Agreement and preventing a ‘ hard border ’ it delivered a downward spiral ‘ contrary to the terms ‘ of the Agreement .
The Withdrawal Agreement and the NI Protocol resulted .
This could not have been done without the compliance of the government in Dublin .
Yet , when deemed expedient , as Covid-19 figures rose in the North West , Gardai placed controls on roads between neighbouring counties in Northern Ireland and County Donegal and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hastily arranged protests .
Seeing no cause for alarm , Guy Verhofstaad , Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi remained silent .
There were no repetitions of promises that Nationalists would not be ‘ left behind.
’ It has not gone unnoticed .
Political unionism has responded predictably .
Less evident is the attitude within the politically unaligned pro-Union constituency , many of whom voted to remain in the EU , viewed Brexit as contrary to their worldview and hoped for a second referendum .
Nationalists , Republicans and others conclude that this is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Irish reunification .
Certainly , this is discussed but does not mean that people like what they see on offer .
In addition , former remainers , sharing the analysis of well-respected RTE EU Correspondent Tony Connelly , that ‘ EU ideological intransigence ’ has led to ‘ tension between ideology and trade , ’ are less prone to look back .
Accepting the will of the majority within the United Kingdom and mirroring the approach of Labour Leader Keir Starmer MP , they channel energy into facing the challenges which lie ahead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an inclusive Northern Ireland , a fair society and prosperous economy .
Believing that the negotiations should first and foremost have been about facilitating trade and securing other issues of mutual benefit , they see in the stance of the EU , begun in its careless and dismissive attitude to the principle of consent , a pattern which threatens to deliver , in the words of Simon Coveney TD , “ an enormous failure of politics and diplomacy.
” It is not the only shift .
Pro-Union voters who aspire to a reconciled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Alliance party , are beginning to view the party as positioning , through its decision-making in Councils , the Assembly and the House of Commons , where it can no longer be seen as ‘ neutral ’ on the Union .
This does not reflect a hardening of opinion for there will no great rush back to traditional unionist political parties but rather a limit to the tolerance of political leadership which seems to be inherently conflictual and intent on talking past each other .
The United Kingdom is not immune @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Withdrawal Agreement in the Internal Market Bill are a tactical ploy , it must have been understood that it would push politics to the extreme and widen the gap .
The EU walked quickly into it to increase the complexity of an already complex process .
Would it not have been better from for all sides to lean towards the centre and filter decision-making through a desire for an agreement ?
The interests of the Republic of Ireland have been an important consideration before and since Brexit .
For a time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a favourable direction .
If , however , as Bassett himself suggests there was too “ emotional an attachment to Anglo-Phobia ” and Dublin tied itself “ into a straitjacket “ over the handling of Brexit , it can only have got tighter with a change of leadership in London and the possibility of a No Deal growing stronger .
Is it time for a re-think ?
Recent articles in the Irish Times regarding the economic consequences for the Irish Road Haulage industry and trade of any disruption to the land bridge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Travel Convention , nostalgia for Ireland ’ s special bond with its nearest neighbour and the need for a new framework in UK-Irish relations point , do they not , to a need for Ireland to lobby for an end to the current race to the bottom that a No Deal would deliver ?
If Northern Ireland was deemed a special case , then by implication , the same applies to the Republic of Ireland .
This should sharpen focus on the need to get the last 10 % of a deal which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , signed off .
The complexity of the remaining issues can not be easily dismissed but if approached in a spirit of reasonable compromise as opposed to a stand-off , are they insurmountable ?
The opportunity to stop Brexit has gone and there is going to be a divergence in different areas .
These will present challenges for all so there is little to be achieved by jettisoning responsibility to find agreement .
The United Kingdom and the EU have both proved capable of flexibility in negotiations and application of regulations .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to urge that they do so again .
The EU paid scant attention to the views of the politics of pro-Unionism first time around and many find the Withdrawal Agreement and the NI Protocol an unwelcome imposition .
Agreeing a deal would remove some of its more contentious clauses and avoid any splintering of developing North-South goodwill .
As both areas face problems posed by Covid and begin to explore possibilities for greater collaboration , let ’ s hope the UK and the EU , with Dublin ’ s new Martin led government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agree .
“ Eleven O ’ Clock ” by Mark Morgan Trinidad B is licensed under CC BY

In Ireland and the EU post Brexit, former senior Irish diplomat, advocate for IREXIT and member of the Irish Talks Team at Stormont in 1998, Dr Ray Bassett, cites the ‘weaponizing’ of the border as pivotal to producing an ideological tug – o’–war throughout Brexit. Politics took priority over trade talks which could have resolved the issue of the border at an earlier stage. Other issues took precedence and the political geography of Ireland proved useful leverage.
Also critical of political leadership in the United Kingdom, the book explains how the strategy, as foreseen, narrowed talks into the corrosive constitutional territory. Lauded as protecting the Good Friday Agreement and preventing a ‘hard border’ it delivered a downward spiral ‘contrary to the terms ‘of the Agreement. The Withdrawal Agreement and the NI Protocol resulted.
This could not have been done without the compliance of the government in Dublin. Yet, when deemed expedient, as Covid-19 figures rose in the North West, Gardai placed controls on roads between neighbouring counties in Northern Ireland and County Donegal and the border became harder.
There were no hastily arranged protests. Seeing no cause for alarm, Guy Verhofstaad, Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi remained silent. There were no repetitions of promises that Nationalists would not be ‘left behind.’ It has not gone unnoticed.
Political unionism has responded predictably. Less evident is the attitude within the politically unaligned pro-Union constituency, many of whom voted to remain in the EU, viewed Brexit as contrary to their worldview and hoped for a second referendum.
Nationalists, Republicans and others conclude that this is a group now more likely to consider Irish reunification. Certainly, this is discussed but does not mean that people like what they see on offer. In addition, former remainers, sharing the analysis of well-respected RTE EU Correspondent Tony Connelly, that ‘EU ideological intransigence’ has led to ‘tension between ideology and trade,’ are less prone to look back.
Accepting the will of the majority within the United Kingdom and mirroring the approach of Labour Leader Keir Starmer MP, they channel energy into facing the challenges which lie ahead, protecting rights and building, in an inclusive Northern Ireland, a fair society and prosperous economy.
Believing that the negotiations should first and foremost have been about facilitating trade and securing other issues of mutual benefit, they see in the stance of the EU, begun in its careless and dismissive attitude to the principle of consent, a pattern which threatens to deliver, in the words of Simon Coveney TD, “an enormous failure of politics and diplomacy.”
It is not the only shift. Pro-Union voters who aspire to a reconciled and shared Northern Ireland and lent votes to the Alliance party, are beginning to view the party as positioning, through its decision-making in Councils, the Assembly and the House of Commons, where it can no longer be seen as ‘neutral’ on the Union.
This does not reflect a hardening of opinion for there will no great rush back to traditional unionist political parties but rather a limit to the tolerance of political leadership which seems to be inherently conflictual and intent on talking past each other. The United Kingdom is not immune.
Whether or not the proposed changes to the Withdrawal Agreement in the Internal Market Bill are a tactical ploy, it must have been understood that it would push politics to the extreme and widen the gap.
The EU walked quickly into it to increase the complexity of an already complex process. Would it not have been better from for all sides to lean towards the centre and filter decision-making through a desire for an agreement?
The interests of the Republic of Ireland have been an important consideration before and since Brexit. For a time, it seemed the winds were blowing in a favourable direction. If, however, as Bassett himself suggests there was too “emotional an attachment to Anglo-Phobia” and Dublin tied itself “into a straitjacket “over the handling of Brexit, it can only have got tighter with a change of leadership in London and the possibility of a No Deal growing stronger. Is it time for a re-think?
Recent articles in the Irish Times regarding the economic consequences for the Irish Road Haulage industry and trade of any disruption to the land bridge, coupled with proposals for a Common Travel Convention, nostalgia for Ireland’s special bond with its nearest neighbour and the need for a new framework in UK-Irish relations point, do they not, to a need for Ireland to lobby for an end to the current race to the bottom that a No Deal would deliver?
If Northern Ireland was deemed a special case, then by implication, the same applies to the Republic of Ireland. This should sharpen focus on the need to get the last 10% of a deal which we are told is 90% agreed, signed off. The complexity of the remaining issues cannot be easily dismissed but if approached in a spirit of reasonable compromise as opposed to a stand-off, are they insurmountable?
The opportunity to stop Brexit has gone and there is going to be a divergence in different areas. These will present challenges for all so there is little to be achieved by jettisoning responsibility to find agreement. The United Kingdom and the EU have both proved capable of flexibility in negotiations and application of regulations. The government in Dublin is in a position to urge that they do so again.
The EU paid scant attention to the views of the politics of pro-Unionism first time around and many find the Withdrawal Agreement and the NI Protocol an unwelcome imposition. Agreeing a deal would remove some of its more contentious clauses and avoid any splintering of developing North-South goodwill.
As both areas face problems posed by Covid and begin to explore possibilities for greater collaboration, let’s hope the UK and the EU, with Dublin’s new Martin led government encouragement, to find a way to agree.
“Eleven O’Clock” by Mark Morgan Trinidad B is licensed under CC BY


sluggerotoole--2020-10-10--A celebration of oats on World Porridge Day…

Over the years I have developed an increasingly deeper relationship with porridge .
When I was younger it was a quick bowl of Readybrek fired into the microwave .
As I have grown older I have refined my recipe so much that I suspect the O ’ Neill household is now home to one of the most elaborate porridge feasts on these islands .
Many people think porridge is hard to make or takes too long .
Nothing could be further from the truth .
It can be a simple and nutritious breakfast for all .
It is dramatically more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cereal , most of which should be in the confectionery aisle , they are so packed with sugar and other refined ingredients .
Porridge is also fantastic value , you can pick up a packet from only 50p .
So here , dear reader is my current recipe for porridge .
First , you need good oats .
I prefer jumbo oats because they provide a better flavour and slow-release energy .
For loyal sons of Ulster , there are White ’ s Oats – milled in Armagh since 1841 .
For those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Flahavans – milled in Waterford for over 200 years .
I mostly go with Flahavans Organic Jumbo Oats , but in the spirit out cross-community flexibility , I tend to go with whatever one is on offer .
The next step in the proceeding is to steep the oats overnight as the jumbo oats cook quicker the next morning .
It is a personal choice if you want to make them with water or milk .
I was always a milkman until I tried the water method last month and was surprised that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If you use water remember to add a pinch of salt , as salt acts as a flavour enhancer .
A simple guide is to use 2 parts water or milk to 1 part porridge .
The porridge in the round containers comes with a handy scoop to measure it out .
A normal portion for one person would be 2 scoops of porridge and 4 scoops of milk or water – then just double for each extra person , or halve the portion size for kids .
The next morning I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where you have your next decision – microwave or pot .
I was always a microwave man assuming it was quicker but I have recently converted to the wonder of just doing it on the hob in a pan .
The hob takes no longer and gives you a creamier result .
The secret is to continually stir it in the pot with a wooden spoon .
The cooking process will take less than 5 mins .
I turn the hob on full until the porridge starts to bubble then I turn the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it thickens .
Once the porridge is ready your next decision is what toppings to add – if any .
I like a lot of toppings .
I start with some sliced banana , then I add some berries such as strawberries/raspberries and blueberries .
I use the frozen berries from Lidl as they are a quarter of the price of fresh ones and fresh ones can be very tasteless this time of year .
I have tried most of the supermarket frozen berries and Lidl are the best , just put some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defrost in the fridge .
After the berries , I then add a scoop of crunchy peanut butter for a bit of protein and texture .
On top of the peanut butter , I add a small blob of GU Chocolate spread – this is basically a fancy Nutella but with less sugar and none of that pesky palm oil .
The final step is to add a splash of double cream to the ensemble .
This is an important addition if you are making the porridge with water as it adds creaminess @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are a bit tart you could also add a splash of maple syrup .
I know all this might sound rather over-elaborate but it all takes less than 10 minutes .
My 5-year son loves his porridge and horses it all into him .
He gets the full works just like daddy ’ porridge , a much healthier start to the day than sugary processed cereals .
The photo accompanying this post was this morning ’ s porridge – feast your eyes on the glory .
Why not give porridge a go for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Day was founded by Mary ’ s Meals .
They are a charity who feed more than 1.6 million children in 19 countries around the world every school day .
You can feed a child for a year with a donation of only £15 .
Find out more and give a donation here… This post was not sponsored by Mary ’ s Meals .
I actually do just really like porridge , and I am happy to plug charities who do good work .

Over the years I have developed an increasingly deeper relationship with porridge. When I was younger it was a quick bowl of Readybrek fired into the microwave. As I have grown older I have refined my recipe so much that I suspect the O’Neill household is now home to one of the most elaborate porridge feasts on these islands.
Many people think porridge is hard to make or takes too long. Nothing could be further from the truth. It can be a simple and nutritious breakfast for all. It is dramatically more healthy than the normal breakfast abomination of cereal, most of which should be in the confectionery aisle, they are so packed with sugar and other refined ingredients. Porridge is also fantastic value, you can pick up a packet from only 50p.
So here, dear reader is my current recipe for porridge.
First, you need good oats. I prefer jumbo oats because they provide a better flavour and slow-release energy. For loyal sons of Ulster, there are White’s Oats – milled in Armagh since 1841. For those who aspire towards unity, there are Flahavans – milled in Waterford for over 200 years. I mostly go with Flahavans Organic Jumbo Oats, but in the spirit out cross-community flexibility, I tend to go with whatever one is on offer.
The next step in the proceeding is to steep the oats overnight as the jumbo oats cook quicker the next morning. It is a personal choice if you want to make them with water or milk. I was always a milkman until I tried the water method last month and was surprised that it was actually quite good with water. If you use water remember to add a pinch of salt, as salt acts as a flavour enhancer. A simple guide is to use 2 parts water or milk to 1 part porridge. The porridge in the round containers comes with a handy scoop to measure it out. A normal portion for one person would be 2 scoops of porridge and 4 scoops of milk or water – then just double for each extra person, or halve the portion size for kids.
The next morning I take out the porridge and here is where you have your next decision – microwave or pot. I was always a microwave man assuming it was quicker but I have recently converted to the wonder of just doing it on the hob in a pan. The hob takes no longer and gives you a creamier result. The secret is to continually stir it in the pot with a wooden spoon. The cooking process will take less than 5 mins. I turn the hob on full until the porridge starts to bubble then I turn the hob off completely but keep stirring until it thickens.
Once the porridge is ready your next decision is what toppings to add – if any. I like a lot of toppings. I start with some sliced banana, then I add some berries such as strawberries/raspberries and blueberries. I use the frozen berries from Lidl as they are a quarter of the price of fresh ones and fresh ones can be very tasteless this time of year. I have tried most of the supermarket frozen berries and Lidl are the best, just put some in a bowl the night before to defrost in the fridge.
After the berries, I then add a scoop of crunchy peanut butter for a bit of protein and texture. On top of the peanut butter, I add a small blob of GU Chocolate spread – this is basically a fancy Nutella but with less sugar and none of that pesky palm oil.
The final step is to add a splash of double cream to the ensemble. This is an important addition if you are making the porridge with water as it adds creaminess to the mix. If your berries are a bit tart you could also add a splash of maple syrup.
I know all this might sound rather over-elaborate but it all takes less than 10 minutes. My 5-year son loves his porridge and horses it all into him. He gets the full works just like daddy’ porridge, a much healthier start to the day than sugary processed cereals.
The photo accompanying this post was this morning’s porridge – feast your eyes on the glory. Why not give porridge a go for tomorrow’s breakfast?
World Porridge Day was founded by Mary’s Meals. They are a charity who feed more than 1.6 million children in 19 countries around the world every school day. You can feed a child for a year with a donation of only £15. Find out more and give a donation here…
This post was not sponsored by Mary’s Meals. I actually do just really like porridge, and I am happy to plug charities who do good work.


sluggerotoole--2020-10-10--Vice Presidential Debate 2020: Pence v Harris…

The Vice Presidential Debate 2020 was a welcome return to debating normality from the insults and shouting of the Presidential debate between Trump and Biden in the previous week .
Both Mike Pence and Kamala Harris were respectful towards each other and kept the debate focused on policy , where many key differences between them were explored .
I thought both candidates were actually better than their respective presidential running mates , making them worthy successors to Trump or Biden should either have to unexpectedly step down at any point in their presidential term if elected .
This debate had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I have broken down below : Pence attempted to defend the Trump Administration ’ s handling of the coronavirus pandemic , though Harris was very critical of the fact that currently over 210,000 Americans have died from the virus that over 7 million Americans have thus far contracted .
She believes the Trump Administration was too lax in its attitude and response to the pandemic .
Pence rebutted these allegations by asserting that Trump had “ put the health of America first ” by suspending travel from China early in the pandemic and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to combat the coronavirus was started in the beginning stages of the pandemic as well .
Pence claims there will be “ tens of millions of doses of a vaccine ” before the end of 2020 .
Pence believes a Biden Administration would overspend , overtax and overregulate , which he argues would cause job losses .
Harris clarified that Biden “ will not raise taxes on anybody who makes less than $ 400,000 a year ” and that spending will be focused to improve America ’ s infrastructure and to invest in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Harris also confirmed that Biden “ will not end fracking.
” Pence is sceptical on the causes of climate change , and claims the US ’ s “ air and land are cleaner than any time ever recorded ” and that its “ water is among the cleanest in the world.
” Pence does not believe multilateral global action is needed on climate change ( Paris Agreement ) , claiming the US “ has reduced CO2 [ emissions ] more than the countries that are still in the Paris Climate Accord ” and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through innovation… through natural gas and fracking.
” Harris acknowledges the damage climate change is doing to the world , and commits that Biden will listen to the science on it , calling climate change an “ existential threat to us as human beings.
” Harris committed a Biden Administration towards the US achieving “ net-zero [ carbon ] emissions by 2050 ” and for the US to be “ carbon-neutral by 2035.
” Pence blames China for the global outbreak of the coronavirus and claims China and the WHO ( World Health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the American people ” in regards to providing information on the coronavirus .
Pence claims China had “ been taking advantage of America for decades ” and that Trump has been “ standing up to China ” since he became President .
Harris disputes this , claiming the Trump Administration ’ s “ perspective and approach to China has resulted in the loss of American lives , American jobs and America ’ s standing [ on the world stage ] .
” Pence claims Trump has built strong relations with Israel during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ order to move “ the American embassy to Jerusalem , the capital of the state of Israel.
” Pence also claims Trump has managed to get NATO to contribute more to common defence “ than ever before ” and that Trump was successful in defeating ISIS in the Middle East .
Harris however disputed Trump ’ s record , claiming he has “ betrayed our friends and embraced dictators around the world ” when he took “ the word of Vladimir Putin over the word of the American intelligence community ” on Russia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ affairs .
Harris also claims that Trump has made the world less safe when he “ walked away from agreements ” such as the Iran nuclear deal , in taking a unilateral , isolationist approach to US foreign policy .
Pence confirmed his trust in the American justice system and believes that law enforcement is not implicitly biased against minorities .
Pence said there is “ no excuse ” for “ rioting and looting ” , and that he “ will always stand with law enforcement and we ’ ll do what we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s response to riots ] .
” Pence also believes media coverage is unfair towards the Trump Administration ’ s handling of race relations in the US , claiming that the Trump Administration has repeatedly condemned far-right extremism .
Harris disagreed , claiming Trump is reluctant on condemning far-right extremism and that his Administration is biased against minorities , citing previous comments Trump made on Mexicans .
Harris would like to see reform of policing in the US and of the US criminal justice system , committing to ban certain manoeuvres used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a national registry for police officers who break the law.
” “ Kamala Harris ” by Gage Skidmore is licensed under CC BY-SA

The Vice Presidential Debate 2020 was a welcome return to debating normality from the insults and shouting of the Presidential debate between Trump and Biden in the previous week. Both Mike Pence and Kamala Harris were respectful towards each other and kept the debate focused on policy, where many key differences between them were explored. I thought both candidates were actually better than their respective presidential running mates, making them worthy successors to Trump or Biden should either have to unexpectedly step down at any point in their presidential term if elected. This debate had plenty of policy to digest, which I have broken down below:
Coronavirus Pandemic
Pence attempted to defend the Trump Administration’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic, though Harris was very critical of the fact that currently over 210,000 Americans have died from the virus that over 7 million Americans have thus far contracted. She believes the Trump Administration was too lax in its attitude and response to the pandemic.
Pence rebutted these allegations by asserting that Trump had “put the health of America first” by suspending travel from China early in the pandemic and claimed that developmental work on medical products to combat the coronavirus was started in the beginning stages of the pandemic as well. Pence claims there will be “tens of millions of doses of a vaccine” before the end of 2020.
Economy
Pence believes a Biden Administration would overspend, overtax and overregulate, which he argues would cause job losses. Harris clarified that Biden “will not raise taxes on anybody who makes less than $400,000 a year” and that spending will be focused to improve America’s infrastructure and to invest in “clean energy and renewable energy.” Harris also confirmed that Biden “will not end fracking.”
Climate Change
Pence is sceptical on the causes of climate change, and claims the US’s “air and land are cleaner than any time ever recorded” and that its “water is among the cleanest in the world.” Pence does not believe multilateral global action is needed on climate change (Paris Agreement), claiming the US “has reduced CO2 [emissions] more than the countries that are still in the Paris Climate Accord” and that the US has “done it through innovation… through natural gas and fracking.”
Harris acknowledges the damage climate change is doing to the world, and commits that Biden will listen to the science on it, calling climate change an “existential threat to us as human beings.” Harris committed a Biden Administration towards the US achieving “net-zero [carbon] emissions by 2050” and for the US to be “carbon-neutral by 2035.”
US’s Relationship with China
Pence blames China for the global outbreak of the coronavirus and claims China and the WHO (World Health Organisation) “did not play straight with the American people” in regards to providing information on the coronavirus. Pence claims China had “been taking advantage of America for decades” and that Trump has been “standing up to China” since he became President. Harris disputes this, claiming the Trump Administration’s “perspective and approach to China has resulted in the loss of American lives, American jobs and America’s standing [on the world stage].”
American Leadership in 2020
Pence claims Trump has built strong relations with Israel during his presidency, citing Trump’s order to move “the American embassy to Jerusalem, the capital of the state of Israel.” Pence also claims Trump has managed to get NATO to contribute more to common defence “than ever before” and that Trump was successful in defeating ISIS in the Middle East.
Harris however disputed Trump’s record, claiming he has “betrayed our friends and embraced dictators around the world” when he took “the word of Vladimir Putin over the word of the American intelligence community” on Russia’s alleged interference in US political affairs. Harris also claims that Trump has made the world less safe when he “walked away from agreements” such as the Iran nuclear deal, in taking a unilateral, isolationist approach to US foreign policy.
Race Relations
Pence confirmed his trust in the American justice system and believes that law enforcement is not implicitly biased against minorities. Pence said there is “no excuse” for “rioting and looting”, and that he “will always stand with law enforcement and we’ll do what we’ve done [the Trump Administration’s response to riots].” Pence also believes media coverage is unfair towards the Trump Administration’s handling of race relations in the US, claiming that the Trump Administration has repeatedly condemned far-right extremism.
Harris disagreed, claiming Trump is reluctant on condemning far-right extremism and that his Administration is biased against minorities, citing previous comments Trump made on Mexicans. Harris would like to see reform of policing in the US and of the US criminal justice system, committing to ban certain manoeuvres used by law enforcement and to create “a national registry for police officers who break the law.”
“Kamala Harris” by Gage Skidmore is licensed under CC BY-SA


sluggerotoole--2020-10-10--Power sharing is coming to England to spread the burden of responsibility for managing Covid. It wil

Power sharing is coming to England to spread the burden of responsibility for managing Covid. It will affect how the whole UK is governed

Painfully and suddenly all in a rush , under pressure of the Covid pandemic we ’ re witnessing the development of power sharing throughout England that has wider implications for the whole UK .
The pandemic will stretch well into next year .
The infection rate is about to equal or exceed last March ’ s .
The strains imposed on government and by government are tightening .
From having a rate of infection per 100,000 people of 11.4 in the week up to August 15 , well below the EU average of 20.5 and the US rate of 110.7 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rate has now exceeded both the EU and US totals .
It stands at 133.7 , higher than the US rate of 96.9 and the EU rate of 77.2 .
You can do your local maths , as Boris almost said .
Ironically there is little disagreement over the principle of lockdown and that a balance must be struck between the risk of infection and the survival of the economy .
Another national lockdown is not to be contemplated , at least not for now .
What ’ s new is that all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and refined .
This requires a huge shift of mindset over how the UK is run .
As we now know , politics and not epidemiology alone is heavily in play .
The prize is the compliance of the public with whatever is decided , to prevent the pandemic running out of control .
The framework will be set in Whitehall , while implementation or a great part if it will be decided locally – starting almost immediately .
The ripple effects will take in the whole UK .
From Sky News .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ three different lockdown tiers next week , with millions of people facing tougher restrictions as the government tries to get a handle on rising coronavirus cases and hospital admissions… Pubs , restaurants and leisure facilities are expected to be closed in parts of the North put into the strictest tier , according to two sources who have seen blueprints of the current plans .
We ’ ve seen how Scotland Wales and Northern Ireland have differed from England , noticeably over timing and other important detail but basically less so than it might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The devolved know that whatever they decide the UK government picks up most of the tab and the blame for failure .
The political editor of the Spectator James Forsyth has contributed a masterly analysis .
Because it was being done under public health regulations , the rules in the four parts of the UK differed : at one stage , returnees from Portugal had to quarantine if they flew into Cardiff , the rules in the four parts of the UK differed : at one stage , returnees from Portugal had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but but not London City Airport .
For those with a political interest in the disaggregation of the United Kingdom , these tensions also serve a political purpose .
‘ The SNP are seizing the opportunity to make a very clear and distinctive point about borders , ’ warns one cabinet minister .
For all these reasons , the Prime Minister is keen to keep as much as much of as much of a UK-wide approach going as possible .
Officials from Scotland , Wales and Northern Ireland are now all invited @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Covid Operations committee and there ’ ll be a summit with them to discuss winter preparedness .
One other area of tension is the Welsh government ’ s desire to refuse entry to people from Covid hotspots such as Manchester or Liverpool .
Johnson has rejected the idea , but if the Welsh continue pushing , the UK government might feel obliged to let them have their way .
One of those involved in government discussions on the matter tells me that there is concern about what continuing to reject this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told that in Whitehall there ’ s ‘ real fear about what such a move would do to the nationalist movement in Wales and Scotland ’ .
So the UK is pulled all directions A frequent Westminster complaint is that the devolved administrations don ’ t have to balance health and the economy in the way that the UK government does because almost all taxes are collected ( and money borrowed ) nationally .
One of those intimately involved in the UK Covid response laments that the devolveds ‘ have a particular interest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t pay the bills ’ .
This is going to become a particularly acute problem as the furlough scheme comes to an end .
There is going to have to be some support put in place for those businesses , and their employees , that are closed again in any local lockdowns .
The risk is that Sturgeon takes a much more precautionary approach , shutting far more places , and then has firms and their workers sending in requests to the Treasury for help .
Arlene Foster , the Northern Ireland First @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problem .
In discussions , she has suggested that the four nations agree on a threshold of cases per 100,000 at which UK support would kick in .
This wouldn ’ t stop the devolved administrations from applying more stringent restrictions , but it would mean that if they did , it wouldn ’ t be the Treasury who would end up picking the bill .
Meanwhile ( Andy ) Burnham , ( mayor of Greater Manchester ) is arguing for more financial support for northerners facing restrictions — absence of such support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ double whammy .
‘ We are being levelled down , not up , ’ he complained recently .
‘ This can ’ t continue , because if it does it will make the recovery so much harder in Greater Manchester.
’ The voice of the North is getting louder.. We do not agree nor do we accept financial package ... .
[ We are ] Asking our MPs across the north to bring about situation next week where parliament can express its view on whether this package … is fair .
If this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out a legal challenge .
It ’ s that serious .
Dan Jarvis , the Labour MP and Sheffield mayor , described the government response as a “ top-down overly centralised approach that has not been as effective as it has been ” .
He said “ frustrations bubbled over this week ” when the government briefed journalists but did not consult local political leaders .
“ We are part of the solution and need to be involved at an early point in the government decision-making process.
” He said he agrees with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t go nearly far enough ” and said large portions of business community would be “ struggling to survive ” .
Steve Rotheram , the mayor of the Liverpool metro region , said the government would announce on Monday that the city will go into tier 3 lockdown on Wednesday .
Most journalists will understand our incredulity and dismay at having to have a press conference .
Our priority has … we will support measures no matter how politically difficult they might be to support our residents .
At Westminster Conservative MPs well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in arms , as the FT reports Mr Johnson ’ s allies despair at the state of the test and trace system , which lost almost 16,000 cases this month because they exceeded the maximum file size that could be loaded into a central system .
Infected people then unknowingly spread the disease .
Dozens of MPs in Mr Johnson ’ s Conservative party are opposing new restrictions .
They argue that existing rules to stop social mixing are not working and there is little evidence to support new lockdowns .
Some argue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while the rest of the country should be allowed to get on with life .
Graham Brady , who represents rank-and-file Tory MPs , said this week : “ These rules are a massive intrusion into the liberty and private lives of the whole British people , and they ’ re having a devastating economic effect as well.
” But a wise voice expelled from the Tory party warns them to be careful what they wish for – David Gauke , former Remainer and Justice secretary writing in Conservative Home .. if the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ matter whether pubs have to close at 10pm , 11pm or 12pm .
People will not want to go to the pub or restaurant , cinema , shop or office .
Most of the economic damage caused by a virus is driven by people voluntarily changing their behaviour .
Second , if Conservative MPs are worried about the economy and business-damaging policies that will damage the UK ’ s capacity to create wealth , some of them might want to have a think about what they have been doing for the past four @ @ @ @ @ @ @ relationship with the European Union .
They might also consider that , when it comes to the long term health of the UK economy , ensuring that the UK has a sensible deal in place before the end of the transitional period would be a better focus for their energies .
Is there a more rational approach to coping with Covid than a sophisticated form of trial and error ?
Yes , according to the former cabinet secretary from later Blair to early Cameron Gus O ’ Donnell ; it was ready and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deaths to precipitous falls in GDP and wellbeing , the UK has unequivocally failed compared to its peer countries .
One glaring issue is that the government has no framework for dealing with trade-offs , so we lurch from one policy to the next depending on whether the chancellor or the health secretary has won the argument of the day .
Such a framework should be the cornerstone of government strategy .
If implemented properly , it would allow for more effective decentralisation , which has been key to the success of countries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crisis .
To this end , here are four recommendations for the government to turn around its lacklustre performance .
First , create a framework to assess the trade-offs of different policies .
Policy should be calibrated so that the R-rate is minimised with the lowest social and economic cost .
The government has prioritised limiting caseload and lives lost , but we have performed badly on both metrics .
Policy outcomes show we have placed far greater value on individual lives saved than the NHS would under its well-established metric of “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be one thing if the government ’ s priorities were consistently applied , but they are not , partly because lockdowns are only tenable short-term .
To better deal with unavoidable trade-offs , a wellbeing approach could work , which would aggregate the costs and benefits of different policies based on how they affect individual wellbeing .
It is a model that appears to be working well in countries like New Zealand .
Research shows that happier people are more likely to conform with physical distancing and other rules .
Taking a wellbeing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policies that people can live with , without severe drops in life satisfaction , until the pandemic has passed .
Second , government should give clear , honest statements to the public so they can judge the risks better for themselves .
The “ stay home , protect the NHS , save lives ” campaign was a victim of its own success and brought very high conformity to the spring lockdown .
In contrast , people don ’ t know what “ stay alert ” means in practice , so it has to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that lead to confusion and resentment .
Instead , a principles-based framework would explain succinctly what the highest risks are and give people greater discretion to apply them based on their individual risk profile and situation ( eg young or old , healthy or not ) .
For example , prolonged periods of time inside with people from multiple households is higher risk ; shorter interactions outside are lower risk .
Enhancing understanding beyond soundbites becomes more crucial as the weather gets colder and the pandemic prolongs .
Some life events can not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ understand what the risks of certain actions to themselves and others are .
Third , listen to a greater range of scientific viewpoints and create effective mechanisms to adjudicate between them .
Scientific expertise is a British asset but it has been ineffectively harnessed .
Politicians have said they are “ following the science ” .
This phrase doesn ’ t mean much because good science is about disagreement and doubt .
In fact , the government has followed medical rather than the broader human sciences .
This is a mistake because this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people ’ s behaviours .
Incorporating behavioural science would have avoided some crucial policy errors , for example ministers blaming young people and issuing a litany of confusing rules .
Government should now prioritise getting the best behavioural scientists to work together with health experts to determine which behaviours need to change to control the pandemic and how best to change them .
Government should also use the common framework to help it assess between a broad range of scientific viewpoints .
Finally , we should learn from other countries ’ success with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been well served by their decentralised models , in areas from test and trace to hospital management .
Decentralisation doesn ’ t always work , but the UK should keep only the most advantageous aspects of centralisation , such as the NHS ’ s ability to generate and share health data quickly and effectively .
The overriding message of this crisis is that centralised control is rarely that effective .
The tensions between Westminster and Holyrood mean that decentralisation has become a byword for political discord .
But if the government were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , decentralisation could enhance co-operation between different institutions and centres of power .
It would also allow us to harness data from civil society , which has been essential in fostering wellbeing but on which the government lacks in-depth knowledge .
It is clear that the government needs a coherent strategy because it ’ s beholden to rhetoric over substance , overpromising with talk of moonshots rather than speaking frankly about the inevitable trade-offs we face in the coming months .
Who said civil servants were no good ?

Painfully and suddenly all in a rush, under pressure of the Covid pandemic we’re witnessing the development of power sharing throughout England that has wider implications for the whole UK. The pandemic will stretch well into next year. The infection rate is about to equal or exceed last March’s. The strains imposed on government and by government are tightening.
From having a rate of infection per 100,000 people of 11.4 in the week up to August 15, well below the EU average of 20.5 and the US rate of 110.7, the UK’s positive case rate has now exceeded both the EU and US totals. It stands at 133.7, higher than the US rate of 96.9 and the EU rate of 77.2.
You can do your local maths, as Boris almost said. Ironically there is little disagreement over the principle of lockdown and that a balance must be struck between the risk of infection and the survival of the economy. Another national lockdown is not to be contemplated, at least not for now.
What’s new is that all solutions now are to be locally endorsed and refined. This requires a huge shift of mindset over how the UK is run. As we now know, politics and not epidemiology alone is heavily in play. The prize is the compliance of the public with whatever is decided, to prevent the pandemic running out of control. The framework will be set in Whitehall, while implementation or a great part if it will be decided locally – starting almost immediately. The ripple effects will take in the whole UK.
From Sky News. England is expected to be carved into three different lockdown tiers next week, with millions of people facing tougher restrictions as the government tries to get a handle on rising coronavirus cases and hospital admissions… Pubs, restaurants and leisure facilities are expected to be closed in parts of the North put into the strictest tier, according to two sources who have seen blueprints of the current plans.
We’ve seen how Scotland Wales and Northern Ireland have differed from England, noticeably over timing and other important detail but basically less so than it might have appeared. The politics is slippery. The devolved know that whatever they decide the UK government picks up most of the tab and the blame for failure.
The political editor of the Spectator James Forsyth has contributed a masterly analysis.
Because it was being done under public health regulations, the rules in the four parts of the UK differed: at one stage, returnees from Portugal had to quarantine if they flew into Cardiff, the rules in the four parts of the UK differed: at one stage, returnees from Portugal had to quarantine if they flew into Cardiff, but but not London City Airport. For those with a political interest in the disaggregation of the United Kingdom, these tensions also serve a political purpose. ‘The SNP are seizing the opportunity to make a very clear and distinctive point about borders,’ warns one cabinet minister.
For all these reasons, the Prime Minister is keen to keep as much as much of as much of a UK-wide approach going as possible. Officials from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are now all invited to a weekly meeting of the cabinet’s Covid Operations committee and there’ll be a summit with them to discuss winter preparedness.
One other area of tension is the Welsh government’s desire to refuse entry to people from Covid hotspots such as Manchester or Liverpool. Johnson has rejected the idea, but if the Welsh continue pushing, the UK government might feel obliged to let them have their way. One of those involved in government discussions on the matter tells me that there is concern about what continuing to reject this request might mean. I’m told that in Whitehall there’s ‘real fear about what such a move would do to the nationalist movement in Wales and Scotland’. So the UK is pulled all directions
A frequent Westminster complaint is that the devolved administrations don’t have to balance health and the economy in the way that the UK government does because almost all taxes are collected (and money borrowed) nationally. One of those intimately involved in the UK Covid response laments that the devolveds ‘have a particular interest in locking down as they don’t pay the bills’. This is going to become a particularly acute problem as the furlough scheme comes to an end. There is going to have to be some support put in place for those businesses, and their employees, that are closed again in any local lockdowns. The risk is that Sturgeon takes a much more precautionary approach, shutting far more places, and then has firms and their workers sending in requests to the Treasury for help.
Arlene Foster, the Northern Ireland First Minister, has a solution to this problem. In discussions, she has suggested that the four nations agree on a threshold of cases per 100,000 at which UK support would kick in. This wouldn’t stop the devolved administrations from applying more stringent restrictions, but it would mean that if they did, it wouldn’t be the Treasury who would end up picking the bill. Meanwhile (Andy) Burnham, (mayor of Greater Manchester) is arguing for more financial support for northerners facing restrictions — absence of such support, he says, will be a double whammy. ‘We are being levelled down, not up,’ he complained recently. ‘This can’t continue, because if it does it will make the recovery so much harder in Greater Manchester.’
The voice of the North is getting louder..
We do not agree nor do we accept financial package.... [We are] Asking our MPs across the north to bring about situation next week where parliament can express its view on whether this package … is fair. If this fails, I wouldn’t rule out a legal challenge. It’s that serious.
Dan Jarvis, the Labour MP and Sheffield mayor, described the government response as a “top-down overly centralised approach that has not been as effective as it has been”.
He said “frustrations bubbled over this week” when the government briefed journalists but did not consult local political leaders. “We are part of the solution and need to be involved at an early point in the government decision-making process.”
He said he agrees with others that economic packages “won’t go nearly far enough” and said large portions of business community would be “struggling to survive”.
Steve Rotheram, the mayor of the Liverpool metro region, said the government would announce on Monday that the city will go into tier 3 lockdown on Wednesday.
Most journalists will understand our incredulity and dismay at having to have a press conference. Our priority has … we will support measures no matter how politically difficult they might be to support our residents.
At Westminster Conservative MPs well south of the red wall are up in arms, as the FT reports
Mr Johnson’s allies despair at the state of the test and trace system, which lost almost 16,000 cases this month because they exceeded the maximum file size that could be loaded into a central system. Infected people then unknowingly spread the disease. Dozens of MPs in Mr Johnson’s Conservative party are opposing new restrictions. They argue that existing rules to stop social mixing are not working and there is little evidence to support new lockdowns. Some argue that the vulnerable should be shielded, while the rest of the country should be allowed to get on with life. Graham Brady, who represents rank-and-file Tory MPs, said this week: “These rules are a massive intrusion into the liberty and private lives of the whole British people, and they’re having a devastating economic effect as well.”
But a wise voice expelled from the Tory party warns them to be careful what they wish for – David Gauke, former Remainer and Justice secretary writing in Conservative Home
.. if the virus takes hold, it will not matter whether pubs have to close at 10pm, 11pm or 12pm. People will not want to go to the pub or restaurant, cinema, shop or office. Most of the economic damage caused by a virus is driven by people voluntarily changing their behaviour.
Second, if Conservative MPs are worried about the economy and business-damaging policies that will damage the UK’s capacity to create wealth, some of them might want to have a think about what they have been doing for the past four or more years in terms of our relationship with the European Union. They might also consider that, when it comes to the long term health of the UK economy, ensuring that the UK has a sensible deal in place before the end of the transitional period would be a better focus for their energies.
Is there a more rational approach to coping with Covid than a sophisticated form of trial and error? Yes, according to the former cabinet secretary from later Blair to early Cameron Gus O’ Donnell ; it was ready and available all the time.
From excess deaths to precipitous falls in GDP and wellbeing, the UK has unequivocally failed compared to its peer countries. One glaring issue is that the government has no framework for dealing with trade-offs, so we lurch from one policy to the next depending on whether the chancellor or the health secretary has won the argument of the day.
Such a framework should be the cornerstone of government strategy. If implemented properly, it would allow for more effective decentralisation, which has been key to the success of countries like South Korea and Germany in this crisis. To this end, here are four recommendations for the government to turn around its lacklustre performance.
First, create a framework to assess the trade-offs of different policies. Policy should be calibrated so that the R-rate is minimised with the lowest social and economic cost. The government has prioritised limiting caseload and lives lost, but we have performed badly on both metrics. Policy outcomes show we have placed far greater value on individual lives saved than the NHS would under its well-established metric of “Quality-Adjusted Life Years”. It would be one thing if the government’s priorities were consistently applied, but they are not, partly because lockdowns are only tenable short-term.
To better deal with unavoidable trade-offs, a wellbeing approach could work, which would aggregate the costs and benefits of different policies based on how they affect individual wellbeing. It is a model that appears to be working well in countries like New Zealand. Research shows that happier people are more likely to conform with physical distancing and other rules. Taking a wellbeing approach should also bring a set of policies that people can live with, without severe drops in life satisfaction, until the pandemic has passed.
Second, government should give clear, honest statements to the public so they can judge the risks better for themselves. The “stay home, protect the NHS, save lives” campaign was a victim of its own success and brought very high conformity to the spring lockdown. In contrast, people don’t know what “stay alert” means in practice, so it has to be supplemented with myriad new top-down rules that lead to confusion and resentment.
Instead, a principles-based framework would explain succinctly what the highest risks are and give people greater discretion to apply them based on their individual risk profile and situation (eg young or old, healthy or not). For example, prolonged periods of time inside with people from multiple households is higher risk; shorter interactions outside are lower risk.
Enhancing understanding beyond soundbites becomes more crucial as the weather gets colder and the pandemic prolongs. Some life events cannot be delayed indefinitely so people need to understand what the risks of certain actions to themselves and others are.
Third, listen to a greater range of scientific viewpoints and create effective mechanisms to adjudicate between them. Scientific expertise is a British asset but it has been ineffectively harnessed. Politicians have said they are “following the science”. This phrase doesn’t mean much because good science is about disagreement and doubt. In fact, the government has followed medical rather than the broader human sciences. This is a mistake because this pandemic can only be contained through changing people’s behaviours.
Incorporating behavioural science would have avoided some crucial policy errors, for example ministers blaming young people and issuing a litany of confusing rules. Government should now prioritise getting the best behavioural scientists to work together with health experts to determine which behaviours need to change to control the pandemic and how best to change them. Government should also use the common framework to help it assess between a broad range of scientific viewpoints.
Finally, we should learn from other countries’ success with decentralised systems. South Korea and Germany have been well served by their decentralised models, in areas from test and trace to hospital management. Decentralisation doesn’t always work, but the UK should keep only the most advantageous aspects of centralisation, such as the NHS’s ability to generate and share health data quickly and effectively. The overriding message of this crisis is that centralised control is rarely that effective.
The tensions between Westminster and Holyrood mean that decentralisation has become a byword for political discord. But if the government were working strategically and with a common framework, decentralisation could enhance co-operation between different institutions and centres of power. It would also allow us to harness data from civil society, which has been essential in fostering wellbeing but on which the government lacks in-depth knowledge.
It is clear that the government needs a coherent strategy because it’s beholden to rhetoric over substance, overpromising with talk of moonshots rather than speaking frankly about the inevitable trade-offs we face in the coming months.
Who said civil servants were no good?


sluggerotoole--2020-10-11--Church as ‘doing life with all kinds of people’: Review of ‘On the Brühl’

On the Brühl , a documentary short profiling the work of Carrickfergus native Rev Barry Sloan in the German city of Chemnitz , has won the best short film documentary at the 2020 Burbank International Film Festival .
The film is framed by images of far-right anti-immigrant protests in Chemnitz in 2018 .
Between the scenes of police in riot gear , On the Brühl juxtaposes those violent events with the warm , welcoming community-based meeting hub , ‘ Inspire ’ , that Sloan helped establish in the city in 2014 .
Described by Sloan as ‘ a living room @ @ @ @ @ @ @ open to people of all faiths and none , and all ethnic and national backgrounds .
It is presented as a gentle and quiet witness against the division that has rocked Chemnitz in recent years .
Sloan comes across as a thoughtful and compassionate pastor – with the endearing quality of being able to poke fun at himself : he says those visiting Inspire ‘ get to hang out with some really cool Christians ’ , before dissolving into laughter .
Inspire is located on the Brühl Boulevard .
Before the fall of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been a buzzing thoroughfare in this east German city .
But it experienced hard times in the decades after unification .
The film ’ s contemporary images of the Brühl depict a regenerated part of the city , with Inspire at its very heart .
You can watch the film , which is 15 minutes long , here : Watching the film with my sociologist of religion hat on , Inspire reminds me of other faith communities in what has been called the ‘ Emerging Church Movement ( ECM ) ’ .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has eschewed conventional church services for creating fellowship in unconventional ( Christian ) venues like pubs and cafés .
Indeed , Inspire features a regular whiskey-tasting event that echoes other ‘ pub churches ’ .
In the film , Sloan , a Methodist minister , reflects on how Inspire has stretched his own conceptions of ‘ what mission is , what ministry is , even what church is ’ .
Sloan describes Inspire ’ s Monday music night for singer-songwriters as an act of worship .
But this perspective is not forced on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unobtrusively at the bar .
Some of those who were interviewed for the film confess that they are not Christians , but they have found a place to belong in Inspire .
One man simply states : ‘ We are a real community now ’ .
What On the Brühl ultimately illustrates is that church does not necessarily have to take place inside a church building .
Rather , Sloan ’ s final words in the film could be understood as a redefinition of church in the divided city of Chemnitz : ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing life with all kinds of people ’ .

On the Brühl, a documentary short profiling the work of Carrickfergus native Rev Barry Sloan in the German city of Chemnitz, has won the best short film documentary at the 2020 Burbank International Film Festival.
The film is framed by images of far-right anti-immigrant protests in Chemnitz in 2018. Between the scenes of police in riot gear, On the Brühl juxtaposes those violent events with the warm, welcoming community-based meeting hub, ‘Inspire’, that Sloan helped establish in the city in 2014.
Described by Sloan as ‘a living room on the Brühl’, Inspire is open to people of all faiths and none, and all ethnic and national backgrounds. It is presented as a gentle and quiet witness against the division that has rocked Chemnitz in recent years.
Sloan comes across as a thoughtful and compassionate pastor – with the endearing quality of being able to poke fun at himself: he says those visiting Inspire ‘get to hang out with some really cool Christians’, before dissolving into laughter.
Inspire is located on the Brühl Boulevard. Before the fall of the Berlin Wall, the Brühl had been a buzzing thoroughfare in this east German city. But it experienced hard times in the decades after unification.
The film’s contemporary images of the Brühl depict a regenerated part of the city, with Inspire at its very heart.
You can watch the film, which is 15 minutes long, here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etk4xS9c9F4&fbclid=IwAR3GmPchm61TeBdLJ3vAiBRucaGqe3ZyIeI-fFwgn2oWaqNx6ZTBbtsRpzU&app=desktop
Watching the film with my sociologist of religion hat on, Inspire reminds me of other faith communities in what has been called the ‘Emerging Church Movement (ECM)’. In some of its manifestations, the ECM has eschewed conventional church services for creating fellowship in unconventional (Christian) venues like pubs and cafés. Indeed, Inspire features a regular whiskey-tasting event that echoes other ‘pub churches’.
(I have co-written a book on the ECM. The ECM is more prominent in the United States than Europe, and encompasses a diverse range of theologies and approaches.)
In the film, Sloan, a Methodist minister, reflects on how Inspire has stretched his own conceptions of ‘what mission is, what ministry is, even what church is’.
Sloan describes Inspire’s Monday music night for singer-songwriters as an act of worship. But this perspective is not forced on those who attend. Eucharist is offered unobtrusively at the bar. Some of those who were interviewed for the film confess that they are not Christians, but they have found a place to belong in Inspire. One man simply states: ‘We are a real community now’.
What On the Brühl ultimately illustrates is that church does not necessarily have to take place inside a church building. Rather, Sloan’s final words in the film could be understood as a redefinition of church in the divided city of Chemnitz: ‘building bridges, breaking down walls, doing life with all kinds of people’.