‘Specific’ health problems.
The UK Politics & Brexit Thread
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 12,859
- Location
- North Oxfordshire
- Car
- His - Denim Blue A220 AMG Line Premium / Hers - Obsidian Black R172 SLK55
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 12,859
- Location
- North Oxfordshire
- Car
- His - Denim Blue A220 AMG Line Premium / Hers - Obsidian Black R172 SLK55
And returning to the matter of everyone's favourite Pound-Shop Napoleon, Le Monde reports that:
Full article (in French) here:
www.lemonde.fr
One way of looking at it is that it demonstrates breathtaking arrogance, but on further analysis besting many of the so-called coronavirus "experts" whose pronouncements we have had to suffer over the last 12+ months probably represents a lower bar than at first it appears.
Full article (in French) here:
Comment l’entourage d’Emmanuel Macron met en scène un président qui serait devenu épidémiologiste
Selon ses proches, le chef de l’Etat a acquis une maîtrise des travaux épidémiologiques, au point de ne plus forcément suivre les conseils des scientifiques. Mais au risque, aussi, d’être la cible de critiques, alors que la situation sanitaire se dégrade fortement.
www.lemonde.fr
very perceptive:
We expect the Johnson administration to make similar moves in other areas where the EU is notably slower, for example in high-tech investments that are inconsistent with the EU's over-reaching data protection legislation. This is why the economic effects of an event like Brexit are likely to be very different from those static economic predictions - that take no account of innovation.
plus more wisdom on the export ban article further down:
The blanket export ban is off the table - despite of what you may read in some reports this morning. The purpose of the discussion is deflection - an art mastered by the rulers of the EU. It constitutes another way of not solving the problem.
We agree with Werner Mussler’s assessment in FAZ this morning, according to which the EU’s vaccine fiasco reflects the underlying reality of Europe's dysfunctional state. The EU could not have done what Israel and the UK did. Israel handed all health data to the manufacturers. That’s not possible in the data-protection-obsessed EU. The UK put a venture capitalist in charge of the operation.
Inexperience plays a role. But the biggest problem in the procurement delays is the constant need in the EU to co-ordinate between all members. Policy co-ordination works in situation that are purely symmetric - of which there are not many. Vaccination is surely not in that category.
According to Macron’s aides, he is so bright and has read so much that he is now France's top authority on coronavirus, and can do without experts
absolutely mind bogglingly mad .. little man with oversized head
I pity France and the good people of France
absolutely mind bogglingly mad .. little man with oversized head
I pity France and the good people of France
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2017
- Messages
- 810
- Car
- C220
The expression one eyed was invented for this bulls##t.
Meanwhile, Berlin hospitals have paused AZ vaccines to women under 55 ...
and Canada also has paused ...
but luckily no one else seems to be following blindly like they previously did
and Canada also has paused ...
but luckily no one else seems to be following blindly like they previously did
European Commission is playing silly buggers again ..
Brussels tries to freeze UK out of quantum and space projects
'You can’t just put the UK and Switzerland in the same box as China and Iran', says EU diplomat
By James Crisp, EUROPE EDITOR
30 March 2021 • 5:10pm
Brussels has moved to freeze British companies and researchers out of major quantum and space research projects, amid fears they could pass on trade secrets to non-EU powers.
The UK negotiated associate membership of the flagship Horizon Europe research programme after Brexit but the European Commission only wants EU members to be able to participate in the sensitive sectors.
The commission said the move, which also affects Israel and Switzerland, was necessary because of the sector’s “global strategic importance”. Quantum involves superfast computers and has uses in security and defence.
The Telegraph understands that Brussels is anxious that intellectual property in the sensitive and highly competitive sector could be passed to rival countries and companies.
An EU diplomat said: “You can’t just put the UK and Switzerland in the same box as China and Iran”.
Even if the age of the quantum computer has arrived, we should not expect to see one in our living rooms and at our desks any time soon. There are the obvious reasons: machines such as the one unveiled by Google in 2019 cost millions of dollars to put together, are difficult to program and take up huge amounts of energy to run.
But quantum computers are also unlikely to be the everyday problem solvers that today’s “classical” machines are. Although they promise seismic leaps in computing power, experts believe that the properties of quantum computers mean they will be best suited to addressing specific types of tasks that take advantage of their quantum nature.
The most promising is the ability to accurately simulate properties of the real world, in a way that can supercharge scientific research.
As early as 1929, the English physicist Paul Dirac declared that the fundamental laws of chemistry and physics are well understood, we just lack the ability to compute them. But because at the smallest level, particles and atoms behave in the irregular manner of quantum mechanics, we need a computer that exhibits similar properties to adequately simulate these processes.
Quantum simulation, in theory, would allow scientists to model the world and carry out experiments in many areas that currently involve trial-and-error style research. According to Dave Bacon, a Google software engineer, those include better understanding how plants photosynthesise, which could lead to vastly more efficient solar panels.
A better understanding of chemistry could dramatically improve the performance of today’s battery technology, leading to long-range cars and reducing pressure on the resources needed to manufacture them. Or inorganic chemicals such as ammonia, the production of which currently leaks nitrates into the earth, could be made much more efficiently.
More immediately, the number-crunching power of quantum computers also has potentially serious implications for cyber security. The widely used RSA encryption system, used to secure messages and internet browsing, is practically impervious to cracking from today’s classical computers, but a quantum system could make short work of it.
Quantum computers themselves are likely to present a solution. Because they are capable of generating truly random numbers, as well as dealing with much larger ones, quantum computers will allow for far more complex encryption systems.
Most member states are against excluding Britain from the partnerships between universities and companies, which the commission proposal said was needed to “safeguard the Union’s strategic assets, interests, autonomy, or security”.
The countries raising concerns include Germany, Italy, Belgium, Spain, Ireland, Poland, the Netherlands and the Baltic states.
Commission officials were said to be impervious to protests from some member states, which highlighted the need to continue partnering with traditional, trusted allies at a recent meeting to discuss the plans. A further meeting is scheduled for April 19.
European universities were also appalled by the decision.
“The latest proposal by the European Commission to exclude longstanding and trustful partner countries like Switzerland, Israel and the United Kingdom from parts of the research programme is not in the interest of Europe’s research community nor the wider society and could be damaging for the international co-operation,” the Eurotech Universities Alliance wrote in an open letter.
“The commission is pulling the rug from underneath fruitful collaborations that need to stay on the carpet,” the diplomat added.
The hard line position is understood to come from Thierry Breton, the French Internal Market Commissioner.
Brussels is pursuing an initiative called “strategic autonomy”, a push designed to bolster the bloc’s ability to defend itself from competition from the US and China.
Britain is one of more than a dozen fee-paying non-EU countries that expected to be involved thanks to their associate membership of the seven-year Horizon Europe programme, which is expected to begin issuing grants in the coming months.
EU labs and universities also risk losing existing partners. There are up to 20 quantum projects in Israel involving the EU.
Brussels tries to freeze UK out of quantum and space projects
'You can’t just put the UK and Switzerland in the same box as China and Iran', says EU diplomat
By James Crisp, EUROPE EDITOR
30 March 2021 • 5:10pm
Brussels has moved to freeze British companies and researchers out of major quantum and space research projects, amid fears they could pass on trade secrets to non-EU powers.
The UK negotiated associate membership of the flagship Horizon Europe research programme after Brexit but the European Commission only wants EU members to be able to participate in the sensitive sectors.
The commission said the move, which also affects Israel and Switzerland, was necessary because of the sector’s “global strategic importance”. Quantum involves superfast computers and has uses in security and defence.
The Telegraph understands that Brussels is anxious that intellectual property in the sensitive and highly competitive sector could be passed to rival countries and companies.
An EU diplomat said: “You can’t just put the UK and Switzerland in the same box as China and Iran”.
Even if the age of the quantum computer has arrived, we should not expect to see one in our living rooms and at our desks any time soon. There are the obvious reasons: machines such as the one unveiled by Google in 2019 cost millions of dollars to put together, are difficult to program and take up huge amounts of energy to run.
But quantum computers are also unlikely to be the everyday problem solvers that today’s “classical” machines are. Although they promise seismic leaps in computing power, experts believe that the properties of quantum computers mean they will be best suited to addressing specific types of tasks that take advantage of their quantum nature.
The most promising is the ability to accurately simulate properties of the real world, in a way that can supercharge scientific research.
As early as 1929, the English physicist Paul Dirac declared that the fundamental laws of chemistry and physics are well understood, we just lack the ability to compute them. But because at the smallest level, particles and atoms behave in the irregular manner of quantum mechanics, we need a computer that exhibits similar properties to adequately simulate these processes.
Quantum simulation, in theory, would allow scientists to model the world and carry out experiments in many areas that currently involve trial-and-error style research. According to Dave Bacon, a Google software engineer, those include better understanding how plants photosynthesise, which could lead to vastly more efficient solar panels.
A better understanding of chemistry could dramatically improve the performance of today’s battery technology, leading to long-range cars and reducing pressure on the resources needed to manufacture them. Or inorganic chemicals such as ammonia, the production of which currently leaks nitrates into the earth, could be made much more efficiently.
More immediately, the number-crunching power of quantum computers also has potentially serious implications for cyber security. The widely used RSA encryption system, used to secure messages and internet browsing, is practically impervious to cracking from today’s classical computers, but a quantum system could make short work of it.
Quantum computers themselves are likely to present a solution. Because they are capable of generating truly random numbers, as well as dealing with much larger ones, quantum computers will allow for far more complex encryption systems.
Most member states are against excluding Britain from the partnerships between universities and companies, which the commission proposal said was needed to “safeguard the Union’s strategic assets, interests, autonomy, or security”.
The countries raising concerns include Germany, Italy, Belgium, Spain, Ireland, Poland, the Netherlands and the Baltic states.
Commission officials were said to be impervious to protests from some member states, which highlighted the need to continue partnering with traditional, trusted allies at a recent meeting to discuss the plans. A further meeting is scheduled for April 19.
European universities were also appalled by the decision.
“The latest proposal by the European Commission to exclude longstanding and trustful partner countries like Switzerland, Israel and the United Kingdom from parts of the research programme is not in the interest of Europe’s research community nor the wider society and could be damaging for the international co-operation,” the Eurotech Universities Alliance wrote in an open letter.
“The commission is pulling the rug from underneath fruitful collaborations that need to stay on the carpet,” the diplomat added.
The hard line position is understood to come from Thierry Breton, the French Internal Market Commissioner.
Brussels is pursuing an initiative called “strategic autonomy”, a push designed to bolster the bloc’s ability to defend itself from competition from the US and China.
Britain is one of more than a dozen fee-paying non-EU countries that expected to be involved thanks to their associate membership of the seven-year Horizon Europe programme, which is expected to begin issuing grants in the coming months.
EU labs and universities also risk losing existing partners. There are up to 20 quantum projects in Israel involving the EU.
Does the French media do sarcasm? When I read the quote in st13phil’s post #20,003 I assumed the paper was being flippant at Macron and his team’s expense. But my French isn’t good enough to judge that from the actual article in the link.
Has Idi Amin been re-incarnated ?And returning to the matter of everyone's favourite Pound-Shop Napoleon, Le Monde reports that:
One way of looking at it is that it demonstrates breathtaking arrogance, but on further analysis besting many of the so-called coronavirus "experts" whose pronouncements we have had to suffer over the last 12+ months probably represents a lower bar than at first it appears.
Full article (in French) here:
Comment l’entourage d’Emmanuel Macron met en scène un président qui serait devenu épidémiologiste
Selon ses proches, le chef de l’Etat a acquis une maîtrise des travaux épidémiologiques, au point de ne plus forcément suivre les conseils des scientifiques. Mais au risque, aussi, d’être la cible de critiques, alors que la situation sanitaire se dégrade fortement.
rf065
MB Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2007
- Messages
- 5,241
- Location
- Grossbritannien
- Car
- SLC300 - C250d Estate 4 Matic & Z900rs
Read the McCrone report from the 1970's and work out how much Scotland is owed by the rest of the UK and then you might realise why this info was buried for the next 30 odd years, and who has actually been bailing out who. Just mentioning!
Ah, I now realise ... Idi Amin was truly The Last King of Scotland.
But, is that a positive recommendation?
Just mentioning.
rf065
MB Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2007
- Messages
- 5,241
- Location
- Grossbritannien
- Car
- SLC300 - C250d Estate 4 Matic & Z900rs
You're an idiot, that's my last contribution to this closed shop of ignorant bigots.
It is actually a fair point that if Scotland had been independent from the 1970s and retained Scottish oil and gas revenues, it would have been able to earn a large annual sum from taxes and royalties, shared across only a small population. Something like £1tn has been earned from the UK North Sea, maybe the majority of which was from Scottish production. Scotland’s entire GDP over the last 50 years may be only a few £tns. Norway could be a parallel...
Well I just read (following your recommendation) the McCrone report. It’s quite interesting, though clearly of its time. I don’t know how different (if at all) the socio-economic situation in West Central Scotland is now in comparison with similar areas in England or how effective things like the Barnett (?) formula have been at redressing the balance/issues outlined in the report. So, FWIW I appreciate the reference and a chance to discuss/better understand the issues.
Whilst there may well be a case for Scottish independence, I am unconvinced that the SNP is recent years have done their best for the people of Scotland, and remain unimpressed by the current ‘posturing’ leadership and apparent lack of transparency. I would love to hear of some positive examples to the contrary.
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 2,370
- Location
- Land of the Long White Cloud.
- Car
- Sold .. E350 CDI Sport Saloon 265. Mini JCW. Current
You forgot just mentioning.
Humour bypass is never a good look so, yes, best left to the adults.
From The Spectator
How Nicola Sturgeon lost the leaders’ debate
31 March 2021, 12:26pm
I’m not sure anyone won the first leaders debate of the Holyrood election but Nicola Sturgeon definitely lost it. The SNP leader spent more than an hour on the defensive, first from voters, who joined via Zoom to harangue her for prioritising a second independence referendum during a pandemic, and then by the opposition leaders, who tore into her record on health and education.
She has been running Scotland, either solo or in tandem with Alex Salmond, for 14 years now and there is the slimmest chance the public is starting to notice she's not very good at it.
Sturgeon handled neither the interrogations from the audience nor those from her opponents with anything like her customary self-assurance. When one voter, Selwyn, objected to her having put a referendum Bill through Holyrood in recent weeks, she tried to argue the point with him, saying the draft legislation had been published but not yet passed.
Challenged to shelve independence until after the Covid recovery, Sturgeon recalled how she had been told the same in the wake of the global financial crash. The leader of the SNP could hardly be expected to concede that there are crises to which independence is not the answer, but going out of her way to suggest that Scotland could or should have left the UK while the world economy was bungee-jumping without a rope is an odd way to reassure middle-ground voters.
What might cause her more difficulty over the next few weeks is her evident lack of an answer to the question I posed on Monday: if Sturgeon is so concerned about poverty, as her election positioning suggests, why has it taken her 14 years to get round to doing something about it? The question came up in the debate in various forms, not least her pledge to give every school pupil in Scotland a laptop or tablet.
Asked why she had waited until five weeks before polling day to unveil this policy, rather than the start of the pandemic, she suggested that the original focus was those pupils most in need. Were all the other pupils not in need? Are they still not in need? If so, why are they getting an iPad? Wouldn't a real social democrat focus resources on those most in need instead of handing out Chromebooks to the offspring of accountants and orthodontists? This is what happens when your every policy is designed with bagging votes for independence in mind.
Anas Sarwar confirmed that Scottish Labour members made the right choice when they selected him as leader last month. He was calm, measured and empathetic. He shared the story of a woman named Mary, diagnosed with tertiary cancer who has been told she'll have to go to England for treatment because the Scottish NHS is only operating on first occurrences of cancer during the pandemic. In his strongest moment of the debate, Sarwar said:
'That is what should be getting us exercised in this debate today. That is what we should be obsessing about... These are the things that matter to people across the country. They don't care about the badges or the name calling. They care about having services that work for them.'
This is exactly what I had in mind when I made the case for him to be Scottish Labour leader: 'He knows what gets headlines, what tugs heart-strings, what makes Sturgeon squirm.' Last night, he did all three.
There is still room for improvement. He is too eager to please and too eager to agree and, if he's not careful, his attempts to glide above the fray might start to look sophistic – even aloof. Even in centre-left politics, the hopey, changey stuff only carries you so far. At some point, you need dividing lines, especially against an opponent like Nicola Sturgeon. She didn't go on the attack quickly enough last night. She won't make that mistake again.
Lorna Slater is one of several dozen leaders of the Scottish Greens and the debate will have been the first time most Scots were exposed to the Canadian-born engineer. She benefits from a smooth, blended accent (75 per cent Edinburgh, 25 per cent Alberta) that made everything she said sound sweetly reasonable, even when it was prelapsarian druidical mush about sinking the entire North Sea energy sector so we could all live in yurts.
Greens are the most backward-looking mob in politics but are gushed over as 'progressives'. Socialists want to undo the 1980s and conservatives the1960s but greens want to uninvent the industrial revolution and get spoken about as though they were only slightly impatient Lib Dems.
Speaking of Lib Dems, Willie Rennie is not your average one of those. He doesn't believe in apologising for being a liberal, nor is he a simp for Nicola Sturgeon in the way that so many London liberals are. He proved again last night that he can both oppose the SNP and make a positive case for a more compassionate Scotland. 'I've seen a window into the next five years in the last few weeks,' he remarked. 'Arguments over the constitution, strategy about independence, arguments between Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond which have been poisonous and unpleasant.' Instead, the focus should be on improving mental health, beginning with the 1,500 youngsters waiting more than a year for treatment.
Sturgeon was the worst performer by some distance but she had lively competition in the form of Douglas Ross, the Scottish Conservative leader. No matter the question, he referendum-ed the answer. In Friends, David Schwimmer's character acquired the nickname 'Red Ross' for his propensity to become irrationally angry and scarlet-cheeked at the most minor annoyance. Referendum Ross is much the same: he can't modulate his indignation and so reacts to the mere suggestion of a second indyref as though it is a proposal to catapult Princess Anne into a piranha tank.
Referendum Ross is what happens when you frog-march an inexperienced MP into the leadership of a political party at a moment of crisis. The man himself is perfectly charming in person and his life doesn't revolve around politics. This should make him come across better than he does, but something happens when he gets in front of a camera. They say TV adds ten pounds but in Douglas Ross's case it sheds every last ounce of likability. This was especially so during a question about personal abuse in politics. Sarwar alluded to the bigotry he has faced and something somewhere in Ross’s mind advised him to suggest ‘it all goes back to the distraction of a referendum’.
There was a telling moment when a transwoman talked about her 14-month wait for a gender identity clinic and asked the leaders how they would improve services for trans people. Almost everyone on the stage was a #TransWomenAreWomen ideologue but here was a trans rights issue that called for more than a hashtag and the half-frightened recitation of dogma. Those of us who believe people are defined by sex rather than gender are accused of being 'trans-exclusionary' but ostentatiously using someone's preferred pronouns while failing to fund and deliver their services is hardly trans-inclusionary.
Who knows whether these debates have any impact but anyone tuning in last night will have seen Sarwar and Rennie give a decent accounting of themselves, Ross bang on about a referendum he doesn't want to happen, and an uncanny sight: Nicola Sturgeon on the wrong side of public opinion.
How Nicola Sturgeon lost the leaders’ debate
31 March 2021, 12:26pm
I’m not sure anyone won the first leaders debate of the Holyrood election but Nicola Sturgeon definitely lost it. The SNP leader spent more than an hour on the defensive, first from voters, who joined via Zoom to harangue her for prioritising a second independence referendum during a pandemic, and then by the opposition leaders, who tore into her record on health and education.
She has been running Scotland, either solo or in tandem with Alex Salmond, for 14 years now and there is the slimmest chance the public is starting to notice she's not very good at it.
Sturgeon handled neither the interrogations from the audience nor those from her opponents with anything like her customary self-assurance. When one voter, Selwyn, objected to her having put a referendum Bill through Holyrood in recent weeks, she tried to argue the point with him, saying the draft legislation had been published but not yet passed.
Challenged to shelve independence until after the Covid recovery, Sturgeon recalled how she had been told the same in the wake of the global financial crash. The leader of the SNP could hardly be expected to concede that there are crises to which independence is not the answer, but going out of her way to suggest that Scotland could or should have left the UK while the world economy was bungee-jumping without a rope is an odd way to reassure middle-ground voters.
What might cause her more difficulty over the next few weeks is her evident lack of an answer to the question I posed on Monday: if Sturgeon is so concerned about poverty, as her election positioning suggests, why has it taken her 14 years to get round to doing something about it? The question came up in the debate in various forms, not least her pledge to give every school pupil in Scotland a laptop or tablet.
Asked why she had waited until five weeks before polling day to unveil this policy, rather than the start of the pandemic, she suggested that the original focus was those pupils most in need. Were all the other pupils not in need? Are they still not in need? If so, why are they getting an iPad? Wouldn't a real social democrat focus resources on those most in need instead of handing out Chromebooks to the offspring of accountants and orthodontists? This is what happens when your every policy is designed with bagging votes for independence in mind.
Anas Sarwar confirmed that Scottish Labour members made the right choice when they selected him as leader last month. He was calm, measured and empathetic. He shared the story of a woman named Mary, diagnosed with tertiary cancer who has been told she'll have to go to England for treatment because the Scottish NHS is only operating on first occurrences of cancer during the pandemic. In his strongest moment of the debate, Sarwar said:
'That is what should be getting us exercised in this debate today. That is what we should be obsessing about... These are the things that matter to people across the country. They don't care about the badges or the name calling. They care about having services that work for them.'
This is exactly what I had in mind when I made the case for him to be Scottish Labour leader: 'He knows what gets headlines, what tugs heart-strings, what makes Sturgeon squirm.' Last night, he did all three.
There is still room for improvement. He is too eager to please and too eager to agree and, if he's not careful, his attempts to glide above the fray might start to look sophistic – even aloof. Even in centre-left politics, the hopey, changey stuff only carries you so far. At some point, you need dividing lines, especially against an opponent like Nicola Sturgeon. She didn't go on the attack quickly enough last night. She won't make that mistake again.
Lorna Slater is one of several dozen leaders of the Scottish Greens and the debate will have been the first time most Scots were exposed to the Canadian-born engineer. She benefits from a smooth, blended accent (75 per cent Edinburgh, 25 per cent Alberta) that made everything she said sound sweetly reasonable, even when it was prelapsarian druidical mush about sinking the entire North Sea energy sector so we could all live in yurts.
Greens are the most backward-looking mob in politics but are gushed over as 'progressives'. Socialists want to undo the 1980s and conservatives the1960s but greens want to uninvent the industrial revolution and get spoken about as though they were only slightly impatient Lib Dems.
Speaking of Lib Dems, Willie Rennie is not your average one of those. He doesn't believe in apologising for being a liberal, nor is he a simp for Nicola Sturgeon in the way that so many London liberals are. He proved again last night that he can both oppose the SNP and make a positive case for a more compassionate Scotland. 'I've seen a window into the next five years in the last few weeks,' he remarked. 'Arguments over the constitution, strategy about independence, arguments between Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond which have been poisonous and unpleasant.' Instead, the focus should be on improving mental health, beginning with the 1,500 youngsters waiting more than a year for treatment.
Sturgeon was the worst performer by some distance but she had lively competition in the form of Douglas Ross, the Scottish Conservative leader. No matter the question, he referendum-ed the answer. In Friends, David Schwimmer's character acquired the nickname 'Red Ross' for his propensity to become irrationally angry and scarlet-cheeked at the most minor annoyance. Referendum Ross is much the same: he can't modulate his indignation and so reacts to the mere suggestion of a second indyref as though it is a proposal to catapult Princess Anne into a piranha tank.
Referendum Ross is what happens when you frog-march an inexperienced MP into the leadership of a political party at a moment of crisis. The man himself is perfectly charming in person and his life doesn't revolve around politics. This should make him come across better than he does, but something happens when he gets in front of a camera. They say TV adds ten pounds but in Douglas Ross's case it sheds every last ounce of likability. This was especially so during a question about personal abuse in politics. Sarwar alluded to the bigotry he has faced and something somewhere in Ross’s mind advised him to suggest ‘it all goes back to the distraction of a referendum’.
There was a telling moment when a transwoman talked about her 14-month wait for a gender identity clinic and asked the leaders how they would improve services for trans people. Almost everyone on the stage was a #TransWomenAreWomen ideologue but here was a trans rights issue that called for more than a hashtag and the half-frightened recitation of dogma. Those of us who believe people are defined by sex rather than gender are accused of being 'trans-exclusionary' but ostentatiously using someone's preferred pronouns while failing to fund and deliver their services is hardly trans-inclusionary.
Who knows whether these debates have any impact but anyone tuning in last night will have seen Sarwar and Rennie give a decent accounting of themselves, Ross bang on about a referendum he doesn't want to happen, and an uncanny sight: Nicola Sturgeon on the wrong side of public opinion.
Nearly 60.000 cases reported today !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
