Search results

That's a different debate. But you said: ...... putting The Guardian in the same bracket as The Telegraph and The Times who are owned by highly political billionaire owners who set the political agenda for their paper. If you are saying that Bill Gates gets favourable coverage - that looks...

Google is your friend.

#pleasebekind

That's a stretch to put The Guardian in the same ownership category as The Times and Telegraph. I think Gates gets involved in specific Guardian related projects - but he won't impact editorial policy. Even if he wanted to.

Point of order. Austerity was a political choice. There was nothing inevitable about it.

WUM.

As you appreciate that is not the point I was making. If we didn't sign up because we had no faith in the scheme then they should have said - it that makes more sense than talking about missing emails. It reassures us that they know what they are doing.

If our government could be honest with us it would help. Tell us they made a decision not to join because they do not believe the EU scheme will generate anything we can use - if that was the case. Saying we did not join because we missed the email ........... makes us look pathetic.

I think I know the answer to this. Holding the government to account is what I do. Sniping and finger wagging is what you do.

#pleasebekind

All well. And the same to you and yours. Say Hi to N.

I think we can expect more of a duty of care and leadership. The tail should not wag the dog.

You don't seem to have a very high opinion of your fellow citizens. The people going out are just people who have made their own judgements based on the information they have been given. I am not sure people realise how bad it can get - I am not sure I quite believe it. If you are not receiving...

I have not said that. You seem to think that more than me. Especially if you think the message has been clear enough - what are the other options? I think we need a clear and sustained message. Advertising works. People make their own judgements but we all want the facts and the thinking behind...

You think. Well that's a clear message then.

I am trying not to do that. I can't stand Johnson - he is a liar and a fraud, only interested in himself, and his whole persona is an act. And I think we have a very poor set of politicians at the moment - almost across the board. But I am trying to set that to one side. I follow politics and...

The message is unclear and seemingly confined to a daily press conference. Where are the tv and radio adverts, billboards etc. With a clear sustained message.

I hope you are right and that it wasn't a political decision. But it was odd that the government spokesmen (be it Johnson, Hancock or whoever) stressed the science bit where expert opinion had been so ignored on other matters. It just looked odd and "convenient" in that it made us stand out and...

My initial half-arsed layman thought was well maybe that makes sense. But worried that being the outlier (as we now know it) was actually a political decision. I hope that turns out not to be the case. But we need to know. Because we need to be able to trust what we are being asked.

There is an obvious answer as to why we are not testing.