Sajid Javid and the Tories are complaining not enough people have been coming forward for booster shots.
But there's an incredibly good reason for it: the system doesn't allow it.
The rule is you have to be at least 190 days past your second dose. 190 days ago was 1 May...
To clarify the above graph further...
Of the 20,289,126 people over 50 in England who've already had 2 doses of the vaccine, almost half (9,880,189) were given their second dose too recently for the booster booking system to allow them to book that extra shot.
Of course, that's only the data for England. And there will be people outside the over-50s category who are also eligible for a booster because of an underlying health issue.
But the fact remains that the vast majority of eligible people have had it. The rest are forced to wait.
NOTE
The data underpinning the graph came from a dataset available for download from the Coronavirus Dashboard.
1. Always refer to Brexit as "Tory Brexit" (every single Labour MP and peer, every time it comes up).
2. Be much more vocally critical of Tory Brexit. Not Brexit. Tory Brexit.
3. Clearer improvements to the deal.
4. Big bold electoral pacts.
5. PR.
Yes, Labour voted Tory Brexit through.
So what? As we have seen countless times when it comes to the Tories, political stances change.
"We're not trying to rejoin the EU but we want to reverse the damage being caused by Tory Brexit."
Seems pretty straightforward.
And in response to the inevitable next question:
"We believe in honouring the result of the referendum. That's why, when Boris Johnson assured the country he had an oven-ready Tory Brexit, we decided to give him a fair chance to try to implement it. He has demonstrably failed."
"I never realised we were going to incur all these costs. We were told it was going to be free trade."
Comment from fisherman who regrets voting Leave can be read two ways. Free = frictionless, but also = no cost. Some people may have thought the latter? theguardian.com/business/2021/…
If your instant reaction is "how can anyone be so foolish!" take a deep breath and a step back, stop, and REALLY think about it.
What would "free trade" sound like to someone immersed in their work/life and with no interest in politics (shock news: most people don't care much)?
The fact that you're reading this thread at all means you're in the minority of people who do care.
But that creates the "don't think of a pink elephant" problem: because it's obvious to you, it's impossible to see how it couldn't be equally obvious to others.
Here's the website for the Festival of Brexit (aka £120 million taxpayer cash spaff). It's been rebranded 'Unboxed' in the vain hope people will forget its origin.
WARNING: If you scroll too quickly down the page, you'll need a sick bag. Startling strobe! unboxed2022.uk
How can anyone think that spending £120 million so that the 52% who already ruined all our lives can lord it over the 48% represents money well spent?
What Labour should say to the Tories about Brexit:
"You told us you had an oven-ready deal. We chose to respect the referendum result by letting you try to implement it. Subsequent events have shown that it was a rotting mess. It is time to reverse the damage you've inflicted."
That instantly defangs the "But you voted for it too..." accusation.
They can lean hard on a sense of fair play:
"Given the large Tory majority and the original outcome of the referendum, it seemed prudent to let you implement a deal that you assured the public was oven-ready."
"But now that it has become clear beyond any doubt that what the British people were promised was not what they got, we feel compelled to step in."
Calling all French-speakers... Is my translation accurate?
NOTE: This is the paragraph from a longer letter that has been causing so much trouble over the last few hours, with many journalists claiming France wants to "damage" the UK.
(Original above, my translation below.)
More context, if you're coming on this story fresh...
Politico's reputation crumbles with stunts like this. If you speak French, you'll see there's been a deliberate mistranslation of what the letter said, in order to stir the pot on Brexit.
(If it's not deliberate then it's incompetent. Most news media took their cues from it.)