In message <sugbia$8di$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:58:33 on Tue, 15 Feb
2022, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>On 15/02/2022 13:26, Recliner wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:58:17 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <ghsm0h18g29odfkd9970hmlvdobkmb8v6k@4ax.com>, at 09:29:23
>>>on
>>> Tue, 15 Feb 2022, Ken <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
>>>> On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:15:51 +0000, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uplo
>>>>> ads/attachment_data/file/1054054/senior-officials-150k-updated.csv/prev
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The press routinely ignore the fact that ministers who are MPs get
>>>> their £80k MP's pay in addition to their minister's salary.
>>>
>>> And now we have the question whether Boris's new chief of staff will get
>>> that 140k salary on top of 82k as MP and 67k as a minister.

>> I wonder if BoJo is running out of paid cabinet minister slots to
>>dish out? For example, Mogg's invented non-job surely
>> doesn't get a minister's salary? [Not that Mogg needs the income]
>
>It's a cabinet position so I'm sure he does get a minister's salary.
>Jobs for the mates.
>
>His function seems to be to remove the EU laws and regulations which
>protect UK residents from the excesses of their governments. Expect
>environmental regulations to be heavily cut back.

Finally, some visibility of the "Great Repeal Bill", which was an
immediate post-referendum promise.

Not that I welcome it, but one has to track the timeline.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7793/
--
Roland Perry

On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 14:07:36 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <0can0h1jtjt39q8n65c84agr4niva65vel@4ax.com>, at 13:26:16 on
>Tue, 15 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:58:17 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>In message <ghsm0h18g29odfkd9970hmlvdobkmb8v6k@4ax.com>, at 09:29:23 on
>>>Tue, 15 Feb 2022, Ken <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
>>>>On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:15:51 +0000, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uplo
>>>>>ads/attachment_data/file/1054054/senior-officials-150k-updated.csv/prev
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>The press routinely ignore the fact that ministers who are MPs get
>>>>their £80k MP's pay in addition to their minister's salary.
>>>
>>>And now we have the question whether Boris's new chief of staff will get
>>>that 140k salary on top of 82k as MP and 67k as a minister.
>>
>>I wonder if BoJo is running out of paid cabinet minister slots to dish
>>out?
>
>The rumour is he's running out of SPADs prepared to do things like be
>Chief of Staff.
>
>>For example, Mogg's invented non-job surely
>>doesn't get a minister's salary? [Not that Mogg needs the income]
>
>Why wouldn't it: "Minister of State for Brexit Opportunities and
>Government Efficiency".

Boris has quite a few unpaid ministers, as he has more ministers than the maximum of 109 (as did his Tory predecessors).
The main reason for Mogg's new job is to keep him inside the tent and loyally defending Boris, rather than have him
sniping from the backbenches at the lack of hardcore Brexity stuff in Boris's legislative agenda.

On 15/02/2022 09:55, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:

> I note that the official title for Christopher Whitty is Chief Medical
> Officer for England.  That is what the government should be using at
> their press conferences.
A quick search would suggest that is indeed what they have been calling
him - or close variants like "(England)".

Presumably people outside England would not be watching anyway; surely
people in the relevant areas must know that devolution is a thing by now?

--
Arthur Figgis

On 15/02/2022 14:00, Sam Wilson wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:58:17 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <ghsm0h18g29odfkd9970hmlvdobkmb8v6k@4ax.com>, at 09:29:23 on
>>> Tue, 15 Feb 2022, Ken <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
>>>> On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:15:51 +0000, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uplo
>>>>> ads/attachment_data/file/1054054/senior-officials-150k-updated.csv/prev
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The press routinely ignore the fact that ministers who are MPs get
>>>> their £80k MP's pay in addition to their minister's salary.
>>>
>>> And now we have the question whether Boris's new chief of staff will get
>>> that 140k salary on top of 82k as MP and 67k as a minister.
>>
>> I wonder if BoJo is running out of paid cabinet minister slots to dish
>> out? For example, Mogg's invented non-job surely
>> doesn't get a minister's salary? [Not that Mogg needs the income]
>
> If he got a salary he’d have to pay tax on it.

Rees-Mogg presumably knows about paying tax on income, as is explained
every time someone who knows about tax law finally cracks and responds
to all the "thing which isn't a corporation and isn't in the UK doesn't
pay UK corporation tax!!!" memes targeting him.

--
Arthur Figgis

On 15/02/2022 18:19, Arthur Figgis wrote:
> On 15/02/2022 09:55, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>
>> I note that the official title for Christopher Whitty is Chief Medical
>> Officer for England.  That is what the government should be using at
>> their press conferences.
> A quick search would suggest that is indeed what they have been calling
> him - or close variants like "(England)".
>
> Presumably people outside England would not be watching anyway; surely
> people in the relevant areas must know that devolution is a thing by now?

Yes, but the English-based media often fail to make clear whether an
announcement applies to England, England-and-Wales or the whole UK.

On 15/02/2022 11:44, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
> Chief Medical Officer.

Big deal!

I can't be bothered looking but I bet there are recordings of people
from the Edinburgh government referring to their local CMO as just
"Chief Medical Officer"

On 15/02/2022 13:26, Recliner wrote:
> I wonder if BoJo is running out of paid cabinet minister slots to dish out? For example, Mogg's invented non-job surely
> doesn't get a minister's salary? [Not that Mogg needs the income]

What about the Shadow Cabinet members who get paid for not even doing
anything?

On 15/02/2022 19:34, MB wrote:
> On 15/02/2022 13:26, Recliner wrote:
>> I wonder if BoJo is running out of paid cabinet minister slots to dish
>> out?  For example, Mogg's invented non-job surely
>> doesn't get a minister's salary?  [Not that Mogg needs the income]
>
> What about the Shadow Cabinet members who get paid for not even doing
> anything?
>
>

They are doing quite a lot. A shadow minister has to keep abreast of the
current situation in the department he is shadowing, including getting
much the same briefings from the civil service and so on. After all
he/she could be called upon to do the job at 3 weeks notice.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 15/02/2022 18:19, Arthur Figgis wrote:
> On 15/02/2022 09:55, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>
>> I note that the official title for Christopher Whitty is Chief Medical
>> Officer for England.  That is what the government should be using at
>> their press conferences.
> A quick search would suggest that is indeed what they have been calling
> him - or close variants like "(England)".
>
> Presumably people outside England would not be watching anyway; surely
> people in the relevant areas must know that devolution is a thing by now?
>
I don't watch the TV news so I didn't see them. However they were
broadcast on the national news and I've had to explain to others on
several occasions they apply only to England which was never made clear.

In message <sugv8s$fji$2@dont-email.me>, at 19:34:54 on Tue, 15 Feb
2022, MB <MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>On 15/02/2022 13:26, Recliner wrote:
>> I wonder if BoJo is running out of paid cabinet minister slots to
>>dish out? For example, Mogg's invented non-job surely
>> doesn't get a minister's salary? [Not that Mogg needs the income]
>
>What about the Shadow Cabinet members who get paid for not even doing
>anything?

They aren't doing "nothing", it's pretty hard work.
--
Roland Perry

On 15/02/2022 19:22, Certes wrote:
> On 15/02/2022 18:19, Arthur Figgis wrote:
>> On 15/02/2022 09:55, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>
>>> I note that the official title for Christopher Whitty is Chief
>>> Medical Officer for England.  That is what the government should be
>>> using at their press conferences.
>> A quick search would suggest that is indeed what they have been
>> calling him - or close variants like "(England)".
>>
>> Presumably people outside England would not be watching anyway; surely
>> people in the relevant areas must know that devolution is a thing by now?
>
> Yes, but the English-based media often fail to make clear whether an
> announcement applies to England, England-and-Wales or the whole UK.

If people in England are travelling elsewhere, they will presumably
check the local situation.

It seems some people in the devolved areas want things both ways; their
own rules/government/media, but also for England-only-things to cover
them as well. Does every announcement about Wales-only matters stress
that it doesn't include, say, London?

--
Arthur Figgis

On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 18:19:45 +0000, Arthur Figgis
<afiggis@example.invalid> wrote:

>On 15/02/2022 09:55, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>
>> I note that the official title for Christopher Whitty is Chief Medical
>> Officer for England.  That is what the government should be using at
>> their press conferences.
>A quick search would suggest that is indeed what they have been calling
>him - or close variants like "(England)".
>
>Presumably people outside England would not be watching anyway; surely
>people in the relevant areas must know that devolution is a thing by now?
>
A lot of the trouble is people from outwith the relevant areas who
aren't aware of either devolution or the matters (e.g. the law) which
were retained at the Union. These occasionally lead to e.g. fairly
fundamental errors by scriptwriters of some television programmes.

On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 18:19:45 +0000, Arthur Figgis wrote:
> Presumably people outside England would not be watching anyway; surely
> people in the relevant areas must know that devolution is a thing by
> now?

People in the relevant areas will be aware that devolution exists, but
probably not exactly what is and isn't devolved. It can be quite
surprising what is and isn't included, and it's not always obvious what
power is being used.
For example, immigration and border control is not devolved, so the
Scottish Government can't stop you travelling internationally - unless
they use their devolved powers over public health to impose a travel
restriction. So when the UK Government announces a restriction on travel
outside the UK, are they using Border Control powers for the UK or Public
Health powers for England only? If they don't state which, it's not
surprising people are confused.

Mike

Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid> wrote:
> On 15/02/2022 19:22, Certes wrote:
>> On 15/02/2022 18:19, Arthur Figgis wrote:
>>> On 15/02/2022 09:55, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>>
>>>> I note that the official title for Christopher Whitty is Chief
>>>> Medical Officer for England.  That is what the government should be
>>>> using at their press conferences.
>>> A quick search would suggest that is indeed what they have been
>>> calling him - or close variants like "(England)".
>>>
>>> Presumably people outside England would not be watching anyway; surely
>>> people in the relevant areas must know that devolution is a thing by now?
>>
>> Yes, but the English-based media often fail to make clear whether an
>> announcement applies to England, England-and-Wales or the whole UK.
>
> If people in England are travelling elsewhere, they will presumably
> check the local situation.

Oh, you are a card!

> It seems some people in the devolved areas want things both ways; their
> own rules/government/media, but also for England-only-things to cover
> them as well. Does every announcement about Wales-only matters stress
> that it doesn't include, say, London?

I’m sure not, but the English information tends to get broadcast nationwide
whereas the announcements in the devolved areas tend to be limited to their
own areas.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On 17/02/2022 10:48, Sam Wilson wrote:
> I’m sure not, but the English information tends to get broadcast nationwide
> whereas the announcements in the devolved areas tend to be limited to their
> own areas.

Would you expect announcements from your local parish council to be on
the national news?

All these regions have local news bulletins to cover any announcements.

Wouldn't it all have been so much simpler if there had just been
national rules and measures rather than local politicians playing
politics trying to be ahead or behind the national announcements.

On 17/02/2022 11:59, MB wrote:
> On 17/02/2022 10:48, Sam Wilson wrote:
>> I’m sure not, but the English information tends to get broadcast
>> nationwide
>> whereas the announcements in the devolved areas tend to be limited to
>> their
>> own areas.
>
> Would you expect announcements from your local parish council to be on
> the national news?
>
> All these regions have local news bulletins to cover any announcements.
>
> Wouldn't it all have been so much simpler if there had just been
> national rules and measures rather than local politicians playing
> politics trying to be ahead or behind the national announcements.
>
>
Using your logic HMG's covid press conferences should have reported
during the English regions opt outs.

MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 17/02/2022 10:48, Sam Wilson wrote:
>> I’m sure not, but the English information tends to get broadcast nationwide
>> whereas the announcements in the devolved areas tend to be limited to their
>> own areas.
>
> Would you expect announcements from your local parish council to be on
> the national news?
>
> All these regions have local news bulletins to cover any announcements.

<https://youtu.be/ZhL57cjN8xY>

> Wouldn't it all have been so much simpler if there had just been
> national rules and measures rather than local politicians playing
> politics trying to be ahead or behind the national announcements.

Yes, why don’t those regional johnnies understand that they’d so much
better off if we looked after them instead of trying to go it on their own.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

<martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
> On 17/02/2022 11:59, MB wrote:
>> On 17/02/2022 10:48, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>> I’m sure not, but the English information tends to get broadcast
>>> nationwide
>>> whereas the announcements in the devolved areas tend to be limited to
>>> their
>>> own areas.
>>
>> Would you expect announcements from your local parish council to be on
>> the national news?
>>
>> All these regions have local news bulletins to cover any announcements.
>>
>> Wouldn't it all have been so much simpler if there had just been
>> national rules and measures rather than local politicians playing
>> politics trying to be ahead or behind the national announcements.
>>
>>
> Using your logic HMG's covid press conferences should have reported
> during the English regions opt outs.
>

Wales and Scotland have their very own TV channels, though for the viewing
figures the locals don’t seem to like them that much.

On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 11:59:39 +0000, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:

>On 17/02/2022 10:48, Sam Wilson wrote:
>> I’m sure not, but the English information tends to get broadcast nationwide
>> whereas the announcements in the devolved areas tend to be limited to their
>> own areas.
>
>Would you expect announcements from your local parish council to be on
>the national news?
>
That is almost what you get fairly often in ITV/BBC "national" news
with reports of relatively minor stuff in London.

>All these regions have local news bulletins to cover any announcements.
>
As does London.

>Wouldn't it all have been so much simpler if there had just been
>national rules and measures rather than local politicians playing
>politics trying to be ahead or behind the national announcements.
>

On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 08:34:30 -0000 (UTC), Mike Humphrey
<mail@michaelhumphrey.me.uk> wrote:

>On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 18:19:45 +0000, Arthur Figgis wrote:
>> Presumably people outside England would not be watching anyway; surely
>> people in the relevant areas must know that devolution is a thing by
>> now?
>
>People in the relevant areas will be aware that devolution exists, but
>probably not exactly what is and isn't devolved. It can be quite
>surprising what is and isn't included, and it's not always obvious what
>power is being used.
>For example, immigration and border control is not devolved, so the
>Scottish Government can't stop you travelling internationally - unless
>they use their devolved powers over public health to impose a travel
>restriction. So when the UK Government announces a restriction on travel
>outside the UK, are they using Border Control powers for the UK or Public
>Health powers for England only? If they don't state which, it's not
>surprising people are confused.
>
Consequent to travel restrictions being applied at local authority
level, international travellers can't be stopped travelling
internationally but they can be restricted from freely leaving ports
and airports (which are greatly within "reserved" matters) as they
will have crossed a LA boundary. The same applies between countries
within the UK as the internal international borders are all coincident
with local authority borders. The people who seem to find this hardest
to understand are those who claim "there is no border" near/at Gretna,
Coldstream, Chester FC, Offa's Dyke etc. etc. but otherwise have no
trouble recognising e.g. county boundaries.

On 17/02/2022 18:00, Tweed wrote:
> Wales and Scotland have their very own TV channels, though for the viewing
> figures the locals don’t seem to like them that much.

Nothing new about that, many years ago when I was at university, a
friend used to get very annoyed at missing network programmes because of
the Welsh programme. He wrote to the BBC to ask for some viewing
figures but they claim not to have any. So he went into W H Smith and
asked how many copies the Wales edition of the Radio Times were sold and
how many copies of the North West edition. Very few of the Wales
edition were sold!

On 18/02/2022 09:10, MB wrote:
> On 17/02/2022 18:00, Tweed wrote:
>> Wales and Scotland have their very own TV channels, though for the
>> viewing
>> figures the locals don’t seem to like them that much.
>
> Nothing new about that, many years ago when I was at university, a
> friend used to get very annoyed at missing network programmes because of
> the Welsh programme.  He wrote to the BBC to ask for some viewing
> figures but they claim not to have any.  So he went into W H Smith and
> asked how many copies the Wales edition of the Radio Times were sold and
> how many copies of the North West edition.  Very few of the Wales
> edition were sold!
>
>

Not surprising in Middlesborough…

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 18/02/2022 02:47, Charles Ellson wrote:
> That is almost what you get fairly often in ITV/BBC "national" news
> with reports of relatively minor stuff in London.
>
> As does London.
>

It has to be remembered that about twice as many people live in London
than Scotland.

Scottish news and media tend to be dominated by Edinburgh and Glasgow,
they are just as Edinburgh-centric and Glasgow-centric as some claim are
the national news and media.

The best putdown I ever heard was the late night programme on Radio 2
which had some coverage of the "arts". There was someone gushing about
the Edinburgh Festival, the presenter pointed out that there were more
concerts in London on a west Tuesday night in February than at the
Edinburgh Festival! I am no fan of London (not been there for many
years) but it really shut up the person being interviewed!

In message <suo03a$5np$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:31:56 on Fri, 18 Feb
2022, MB <MB@nospam.net> remarked:

>The best putdown I ever heard was the late night programme on Radio 2
>which had some coverage of the "arts". There was someone gushing about
>the Edinburgh Festival, the presenter pointed out that there were more
>concerts in London on a west Tuesday night in February than at the
>Edinburgh Festival! I am no fan of London (not been there for many
>years) but it really shut up the person being interviewed!

Talking of which, I heard a fragment of a story on the radio yesterday
where they were suggesting the Fringe had become "too big to manage", by
which they seemed to mean "too big to avoid managing".
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <suo03a$5np$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:31:56 on Fri, 18 Feb
> 2022, MB <MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>
>> The best putdown I ever heard was the late night programme on Radio 2
>> which had some coverage of the "arts". There was someone gushing about
>> the Edinburgh Festival, the presenter pointed out that there were more
>> concerts in London on a west Tuesday night in February than at the
>> Edinburgh Festival! I am no fan of London (not been there for many
>> years) but it really shut up the person being interviewed!
>
> Talking of which, I heard a fragment of a story on the radio yesterday
> where they were suggesting the Fringe had become "too big to manage", by
> which they seemed to mean "too big to avoid managing".

There’s been a lot of local debate about whether the whole
Festival/Fringe/Free Fringe thing has become too big in general. To manage
the effect on the city you’d have to put in very stringent access control
to the whole area. That’s already been a major source of discontent around
the Hogmanay and winter events.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply