Perhaps the most striking thing about @wesstreeting performance on Today (and he's had lots of plaudits) is he did a better job than most Cabinet ministers of explaining the balanced approach of Plan B. Which is the first step towards the public thinking: Lab hv a govt in waiting
Plan B is do not work in your office but go to your office christmas party.
Plan B is your must wear a mask in Next but you can stand at the bar in a crowded pub without one on.
And thats a balanced approach?
I play football with a bunch of similar middle-aged chaps. Most of us will know be working from home and will have to wear masks in many places. However, after our weekly game we will still be able to go to the pub mask-less and drink in an enclosed space with no restrictions.
I personally think that with everyone being jabbed we have to now get on with living and can't impose restrictions every time there is a new variant. If you are going to introduce restrictions though then these ones seem very inconsistent from someone living under them. The only consistency is that they are trying to do something but with the least impact on the economy. I can't see that this measures will make any difference.
Of the 4795 currently in hospital 4004 are on General Wards and 662 are receiving oxygen. This indicates that the vast majority of these patients are not in hospital for Covid despite Omicron running wild in SA.
The headline of this Sky News report looks terrible but if you read the text it is extremely positive.
Reviewing Sean's usual drunken scare-mongering overnight, he is clearly prejudging things.
We know that the likely end state for this virus is that it evolves to the point where it is less threatening and becomes part of the background of contagious viruses that people catch now and again, almost entirely harmlessly for almost all people but potentially still threatening for some of those already vulnerable.
It is entirely possible that this new variant turns out to be a step in that direction.
I think that is to misunderstand what is happening, which is that vast numbers of people now have some degree of immunity against the virus - whether from prior infection or vaccination - and while the virus can mutate to evade this immunity sufficiently to cause reinfection, it would take much more mutation to evade immunity to cause serious illness.
Omnicron might be more deadly in those without immunity, but the size of that population is rapidly diminishing. Given the extent of asymptomatic infection from previous variants, it would be pretty hard for us to identify populations without immunity to measure it's fatality rate.
We won't fully understand what's happening until after it has happened.
But we know that virus variants that are more transmissable and less serious have an advantage over their predecessors - the transmissable point is obvious; the advantage in being less serious is partly so your victims survive to pass it on, but mostly because a virus that makes you less noticeably ill lets you carry on your normal life and others more willing to interact with you, so it gets spread more quickly than one where you're laid up in bed suffering from highly visible symptoms.
So evolution tells us how this will very likely end; the question is how we get there, and the biggest risk (albeit likely temporary) is if a variation arises that significantly evades any resistance from the vaccines. Various experts have already said that the nature of coronaviruses makes this unlikely.
Evolution isn't that simple. And we know for Covid that the key problem has been presymptomatic spread - clearly if the majority of onward transmission occurs before symptoms develop then it doesn't affect the evolution of the virus if those symptoms are fatal.
It's quite a crucial difference. If we convince ourselves that the virus is inherently less fatal, then it reduces the pressure to vaccinate as quickly as possible. If we conclude that the observed reduction in fatality is due to the higher levels of population immunity faced by the Omicron wave compared to the earlier waves, then it creates a greater incentive to vaccinate more quickly.
David Gauke @DavidGauke · 54m . @wesstreeting struck exactly the right tone on @BBCr4today . Has to be said that Labour coming across as grown-up and responsible on tackling omicron.
===
Exactly the kind of response that winds the left up about Streeting.
Perhaps the most striking thing about @wesstreeting performance on Today (and he's had lots of plaudits) is he did a better job than most Cabinet ministers of explaining the balanced approach of Plan B. Which is the first step towards the public thinking: Lab hv a govt in waiting
Plan B is do not work in your office but go to your office christmas party.
Plan B is your must wear a mask in Next but you can stand at the bar in a crowded pub without one on.
And thats a balanced approach?
I mean I don't necessarily agree with all this but it does make sense. You don't shut the whole economy you pick and choose. Arbitrarily. It is all aimed at reducing the spread. Will it? Who knows - it doesn't seem to in Europe but I get the aim.
I get the aim, but you are much closer to other people in a pub than you are in a shop. Plan B will make absolutely no difference. I was in a hotel in Wales in October, you had to wear a mask in the corridors but not in the bar area or the dining area, so whilst walking to the bar with friends you all wore masks but as soon as you got there the masks came off.
Why I am not (yet) concerned about Omicron and neither should you in two charts
World cases and deaths. Previous case waves have been followed by death waves lagged by 2 weeks. The current case wave started on October 18th. There is no resultant death wave. Unless the data is reallllllllllly lagged the death wave "should" have started at the begining of November. It hasn't.
Indeed. Which is pretty much exactly what the South Africans have been saying. Similarly, the Batswana.
While this is encouraging, we shouldn't forget that most of the world is seeing waves of Delta, not omicron (at least yet).
Morning everyone. It seems my ban has been lifted, but it seems isam's hasn't yet. If he was banned for defending me then I feel bad about that.
Thank you for nice comments people made yesterday following my banning. I certainly was never expecting to be banned and I'm glad its been lifted but I hope it is for @isam ASAP too.
Welcome back. The bad news for everyone is that I wasn't going to post on here again if they didn't reinstate you. So they've got you back, yay. But that means you've still got me, boo.
Great to have you both back. I look forward to insulting the pair of you presently.
The irony is that Johnson is basically going to go "for being in possession of an offensive wife".
Every single one of the stupid disasters which are ushering him out the door go straight back to Princess Nut Nut. Wallpaper - Carrie Afghan animal taxis - Carrie Parties - Carrie (at least one with her present).
He's had people giving him sound advice (Cummings for all he's a disreputable nutter was right about a lot of stuff - I'm fairly sure it's him we have to thank for Kate Bingham doing the vaccine procurement)
Definitely found Dom's alt account.
One the other hand, Dom really isn't a Prole (one of the fatal things about that thing in the Downing St garden was hearing how posh he is).
On the other other hand, he probably really thinks he is a Prole, because he's less posh than (say) JRM.
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh · 1h The correct response by @BBCr4today , inviting a Labour shadow cabinet minister onto the prime 810 slot after govt refused to put up a minister. And @wesstreeting creates news by confirming Labour will vote for the new Plan B on Covid
There's a first time for everything, I guess. But how likely is that?
It is complex but he does not seem to have recovered fully from covid, he presents himself as a shambles which he is, and now he has a baby in the family
The sheer torrent of attacks coming from across the spectrum has to be draining his mental health, and of course he may see the inevitable coming and decides for the sake of his family and his well being he leaves before he is pushed
He has never left a job as a result of being pushed. If he wants it he stays. No matter what.
The most revealing sound on @BBCr4today this morning was the sound of the pause - the sound of Tory MPs calculating whether they should defend or distance themselves from @BorisJohnson
I asked Foreign Secretary @trussliz whether she had a Christmas Party last year. She paused then said no as she & her team were busy working
I asked the Vice Chair of the Tory 1922 Committee @Nus_Ghani whether the PM would have to “pay a price” if he knew about Xmas parties inside No 10. She paused & said she’d agreed to be interviewed about something else. She then added “let’s see what the investigation finds out”
Morning everyone. It seems my ban has been lifted, but it seems isam's hasn't yet. If he was banned for defending me then I feel bad about that.
Thank you for nice comments people made yesterday following my banning. I certainly was never expecting to be banned and I'm glad its been lifted but I hope it is for @isam ASAP too.
Welcome back. The bad news for everyone is that I wasn't going to post on here again if they didn't reinstate you. So they've got you back, yay. But that means you've still got me, boo.
Great to have you both back. I look forward to insulting the pair of you presently.
Wes Streeting who is only 38 looks like a future leader and PM
Wes's handicap is that he's audibly from London. And being from London seems to be toxic in political leaders at the moment. That Londoners don't count and are out of touch with "real people" seems to be the one thing everyone on in the country outside the capital can safely unite on. No doubt the Tories would go one further and claim he's from Islington.
Morning everyone. It seems my ban has been lifted, but it seems isam's hasn't yet. If he was banned for defending me then I feel bad about that.
Thank you for nice comments people made yesterday following my banning. I certainly was never expecting to be banned and I'm glad its been lifted but I hope it is for @isam ASAP too.
Welcome back. The bad news for everyone is that I wasn't going to post on here again if they didn't reinstate you. So they've got you back, yay. But that means you've still got me, boo.
Can I just say, you've only been on PB a short time, but you have rapidly become part of the furniture. Happy that you won't need to recuse yourself!
I see weirdo and bully John Bercow was on GMB sticking the boot in to Boris this morning... If people like Bercow start appearing regularly to stick the boot in that could give Boris a bit of a repreieve with a lot of Con 2019 voters.
If it all starts looking like an orchestrated attack by the Forces Of Remainistan a lot of Con 2019 voters will hold their nose and start to rally round...
I see weirdo and bully John Bercow was on GMB sticking the boot in to Boris this morning... If people like Bercow start appearing regularly to stick the boot in that could give Boris a bit of a repreieve with a lot of Con 2019 voters.
If it all starts looking like an orchestrated attack by the Forces Of Remainistan a lot of Con 2019 voters will hold their nose and start to rally round...
Note 59% of Leavers still backed the Tories with Yougov last night, even if the Tories were miles behind Labour and only 1% ahead of the LDs with Remainers. Plus slightly more 2019 Tories had gone ReformUK than Labour
Perhaps the most striking thing about @wesstreeting performance on Today (and he's had lots of plaudits) is he did a better job than most Cabinet ministers of explaining the balanced approach of Plan B. Which is the first step towards the public thinking: Lab hv a govt in waiting
Plan B is do not work in your office but go to your office christmas party.
Plan B is your must wear a mask in Next but you can stand at the bar in a crowded pub without one on.
And thats a balanced approach?
I mean I don't necessarily agree with all this but it does make sense. You don't shut the whole economy you pick and choose. Arbitrarily. It is all aimed at reducing the spread. Will it? Who knows - it doesn't seem to in Europe but I get the aim.
I get the aim, but you are much closer to other people in a pub than you are in a shop. Plan B will make absolutely no difference. I was in a hotel in Wales in October, you had to wear a mask in the corridors but not in the bar area or the dining area, so whilst walking to the bar with friends you all wore masks but as soon as you got there the masks came off.
We have something similar at the uni. Masks in all corridors but able to meet colleagues in offices without.
I am not sure if my view is shared, but when you go and do something and come back an hour later you are not sure if the Prime Minister is still in office
The change since the Paterson idiotic decision has sent an earthquake through politics and in such a short time
Perhaps the most striking thing about @wesstreeting performance on Today (and he's had lots of plaudits) is he did a better job than most Cabinet ministers of explaining the balanced approach of Plan B. Which is the first step towards the public thinking: Lab hv a govt in waiting
Plan B is do not work in your office but go to your office christmas party.
Plan B is your must wear a mask in Next but you can stand at the bar in a crowded pub without one on.
And thats a balanced approach?
I mean I don't necessarily agree with all this but it does make sense. You don't shut the whole economy you pick and choose. Arbitrarily. It is all aimed at reducing the spread. Will it? Who knows - it doesn't seem to in Europe but I get the aim.
I get the aim, but you are much closer to other people in a pub than you are in a shop. Plan B will make absolutely no difference. I was in a hotel in Wales in October, you had to wear a mask in the corridors but not in the bar area or the dining area, so whilst walking to the bar with friends you all wore masks but as soon as you got there the masks came off.
Oh yes it's all theatre just that there is method in the madness.
They presumably deemed that the effect on people's mental health (which finally is now part of the conversation, even the Scottish woman and Wes acknowledged it) is less to shop in a mask than to be in a hospitality venue in one. Plus you might still go to Tesco's if you have to wear a mask but might give the pub a miss so it works for the economy also.
- Angela Rayner has written to Independent Adviser on Ministers’ Interests, Lord Geidt, outlining inconsistencies between his report on 28th May 2021, and Electoral Commission’s findings
With regards to Boris and Geidtgate. In response to a question by SKS he told the house on 28th April this year that he paid for the Downing Street refurb personally.
That isn't an error. That's a lie. He knew that was not true. And openly lied about it.
I'm losing track. Is that two or three clear cut breaches of the ministerial code we can prove over the same issue?
If Geidt quits saying he has been misled then this could be over quickly. No Prime Minister can survive endless "Did you Lie Prime Minister" questions when the answer is so clearly yes, repeatedly, to cover up vast sums of dark money being spent on wallpaper so NutNut and Tory staffers could have illegal parties.
And then we have DomCum doing his "ask me anything" show at lunchtime. Who knows what he will spew out. And the problem for the Tories isn't that you can dismiss him, can't be trusted over Barnard Castle because he always has proof...
What a ridiculous thing to be brought down on. It’s not as if he even owns the sodding flat. Hopefully he’ll be out of there soon.
The irony is that Johnson is basically going to go "for being in possession of an offensive wife".
Every single one of the stupid disasters which are ushering him out the door go straight back to Princess Nut Nut. Wallpaper - Carrie Afghan animal taxis - Carrie Parties - Carrie (at least one with her present).
I wouldn't be shocked if the current lockdown lite was her brainwave too, to try and move the media story on. I think this may well be what finishes him - Tory MPs whose patience was wearing thin anyway aren't seeing the funny side of his nuking the country to change some bad headlines.
She's done a lot of damage in other areas too - much of the economic self-harm in the name of greenery is her agenda too. Tory MPs know that too.
Had he not listened to Carrie, Boris might have been far less self distructive over the last couple of years, and actually been quite a good prime minister - it's all gone wrong for him since he decided to prioritise the desires of one of the nastiest bit of work to ever get near power.
He's had people giving him sound advice (Cummings for all he's a disreputable nutter was right about a lot of stuff - I'm fairly sure it's him we have to thank for Kate Bingham doing the vaccine procurement), but he sided with Carrie every time.
The inevitable divorce proceedings once they are out of no10 should provide some light entertainment anyway...
Woman-blaming. Edit: Even if you yourself don't intend that, it reads very easily as that and will upset half the population so is not a good argument in politics. And in any case, every single case, he only had to say no. He's the PM. She isn't.
I had a bit to do with lobbying over the Afghan pet rescue operation (I'm an animal welfare campaigner, so it's what I do), and have good reason to think that Carrie wasn't involved in that particular decision. In general I agree with Carnyx - it's pathetic for loyalists to defend the PM on the basis that "he's a great guy really, so it must be his wife that persuaded him". If you want to be supportive, fine, defend him directly, as I did with Corbyn.
It's simply the latest variant on the well known historical phenomenon of blaming the Tsar's advisers.
Russians used to write to Stalin about their imprisoned relatives thinking, 'if only the man at the top knew what was going on....'.
Incidentally I read your charity's mag for the first time in literally years this week; going back well over a decade (indeed probably over two) it used to contain so many photos of and horror stories about tortured animals that I've always routinely thrown the envelopes away unopened. Nowadays it seems really well designed and written and focused on the campaigning and action rather than obsessing over what most supporters will already understand is the problem.
Thinking back to Wednesday... I don't usually watch PMQs but I did watch the replay this week to see Sunak's reactions (not as interesting as some made out). But something struck me. The apology Boris made whilst leaning over the dispatch box has really stuck in my head. It almost felt like he was apologising to Starmer. Is it normal for a minister to apologise like that before a question time? It seems like a risky time to do it, and it didn't pay off.
Wes Streeting who is only 38 looks like a future leader and PM
Don’t know much about him. If that’s the case, I hope he gets a bit of time to season rather than being thrust into the leadership role too soon and burning out before his time.
Whatever one might think of his time as Foreign Sec, William Hague is a great example of someone who got given the job far too early but would have been been a more reliable pair of hands than anything we’ve had since 2016. Arguably since 2010 now I think about it.
When I think of William Hague, I think of two people: one, the man who took on an impossible job in 1997 and handled it poorly/reasonably (depending on viewpoint). Then I see the Hague of 2010 onwards, who generally seemed a bit more of a senior beast.
So he changed. The question is: how much of that change was due to his punishing experience as leader? There's a good chance that Hague getting the leadership later, say in 2005, would have made similar mistakes to those he made in 1997.
What mistakes did he make? He was in an utterly impossible position facing first-term Blair 1997-2001. You need to remember that the Tories were facing an apparently existential crisis which lasted beyond 2001. I remember it looking like a potential meltdown even in 2005 when the Tories were faced with the LibDems' decapitation strategy which could have removed a whole swathe of frontbenchers. (In the event they only got the Shadow Education Secretary, removed by Tim Farron. Forgotten his name, but also called Tim, I think.)
I actually agree with much of that, but I also think it's untrue to say he did not make mistakes. For one thing, I'd argue his media handling was terrible (although arguably against a rather pro-Blair media).
I actually rate Hague fairly highly; he played a terrible hand reasonably well. The Conservative Party could have been destroyed under him, but he steadied the ship somewhat.
Wes Streeting who is only 38 looks like a future leader and PM
Wes's handicap is that he's audibly from London. And being from London seems to be toxic in political leaders at the moment. That Londoners don't count and are out of touch with "real people" seems to be the one thing everyone on in the country outside the capital can safely unite on. No doubt the Tories would go one further and claim he's from Islington.
I'm not sure that being audibly from London is as much of a handicap as 'sounding posh'. Look at, or rather listen to, Priti Patel. She 'sounds' OK in Witham, accent-wise. Lots of missing G's hereabouts.
Morning everyone. It seems my ban has been lifted, but it seems isam's hasn't yet. If he was banned for defending me then I feel bad about that.
Thank you for nice comments people made yesterday following my banning. I certainly was never expecting to be banned and I'm glad its been lifted but I hope it is for @isam ASAP too.
Welcome back. The bad news for everyone is that I wasn't going to post on here again if they didn't reinstate you. So they've got you back, yay. But that means you've still got me, boo.
Can I just say, you've only been on PB a short time, but you have rapidly become part of the furniture. Happy that you won't need to recuse yourself!
The smelly beanbag, covered in dog hair, is part of the furniture though
Wes Streeting who is only 38 looks like a future leader and PM
Wes's handicap is that he's audibly from London. And being from London seems to be toxic in political leaders at the moment. That Londoners don't count and are out of touch with "real people" seems to be the one thing everyone on in the country outside the capital can safely unite on. No doubt the Tories would go one further and claim he's from Islington.
I think he'd be OK on that particular aspect, grew up in a council flat in Stepney; represents Ilford North. It's London but it's not "Islington".
I am not sure if my view is shared, but when you go and do something and come back an hour later you are not sure if the Prime Minister is still in office
The change since the Paterson idiotic decision has sent an earthquake through politics and in such a short time
And so easily avoidable. It's all piled up so quickly the PM can't dig himself out. He needs help, and I'm not sure where it's going to come from.
I am not sure if my view is shared, but when you go and do something and come back an hour later you are not sure if the Prime Minister is still in office
The change since the Paterson idiotic decision has sent an earthquake through politics and in such a short time
And so easily avoidable. It's all piled up so quickly the PM can't dig himself out. He needs help, and I'm not sure where it's going to come from.
David Gauke @DavidGauke · 54m . @wesstreeting struck exactly the right tone on @BBCr4today . Has to be said that Labour coming across as grown-up and responsible on tackling omicron.
===
Exactly the kind of response that winds the left up about Streeting.
Oh, there's no doubt that the left hate Streeting. I remember that clearly when we were on the council together.
His answers to the question about the by-election were interesting; you could really hear the pull-and-push between his Labour Party tribalism, having spent almost his entire life within it, and his centrist views and awareness of how defeating the Tories is more important than left-wing purism.
I am not sure if my view is shared, but when you go and do something and come back an hour later you are not sure if the Prime Minister is still in office
The change since the Paterson idiotic decision has sent an earthquake through politics and in such a short time
And so easily avoidable. It's all piled up so quickly the PM can't dig himself out. He needs help, and I'm not sure where it's going to come from.
I have no idea how he turns this around, and for his own mental health and his young families, he would be best to resign at a time of his choosing then be forced out either by his transgressions or his colleagues
Thanks Cyclefree for another superb piece. I always read them even if I do not always comment.
May I ask the PB Brains Trust for clarification in respect of two related questions?
First, Mrs PtP was born in the UK of Canadian parents. The family moved back to Canada when she was eight and she was educated there until she was sixteen. Thereafter she resided at various times in the USA and France, but mostly in the UK where she now lives with me. (Lucky girl, eh?) She has dual citizenship, Canada/UK - and a passport from both countries. Is she affected by this damn legislation?
Secondly, Brexit caused me to encourage both my children to avail themselves of the Irish passport to which they are entitled by virtue of their grandmother's country of origin. Again, could they now be deprived of UK citizenship?
I know it is vanishly unlikely that any of these would be victimised by the Home Office but the mere fact that in theory they could is a sorry indictment of where our politicians (both sides of the House) have led us.
Wes Streeting who is only 38 looks like a future leader and PM
Wes's handicap is that he's audibly from London. And being from London seems to be toxic in political leaders at the moment. That Londoners don't count and are out of touch with "real people" seems to be the one thing everyone on in the country outside the capital can safely unite on. No doubt the Tories would go one further and claim he's from Islington.
As I recall, he grew up in Tower Hamlets. So close, in one sense, if not the other.
Wes Streeting who is only 38 looks like a future leader and PM
Wes's handicap is that he's audibly from London. And being from London seems to be toxic in political leaders at the moment. That Londoners don't count and are out of touch with "real people" seems to be the one thing everyone on in the country outside the capital can safely unite on. No doubt the Tories would go one further and claim he's from Islington.
Yes, you see that sort of moronic prejudice on PB. @SandyRentool is a prime example of it.
Thinking back to Wednesday... I don't usually watch PMQs but I did watch the replay this week to see Sunak's reactions (not as interesting as some made out). But something struck me. The apology Boris made whilst leaning over the dispatch box has really stuck in my head. It almost felt like he was apologising to Starmer. Is it normal for a minister to apologise like that before a question time? It seems like a risky time to do it, and it didn't pay off.
Making a statement like that before PMQs is certainly unusual (technically I think he was 'answering' the first formal question about his engagements - which in the old days used to be read out - since formally almost all the questions being asked are supplementaries, I believe). He was avoiding having to apologise right after Starmer's first question - which very likely would have asked him to do so.
Thanks Cyclefree for another superb piece. I always read them even if I do not always comment.
May I ask the PB Brains Trust for clarification in respect of two related questions?
First, Mrs PtP was born in the UK of Canadian parents. The family moved back to Canada when she was eight and she was educated there until she was sixteen. Thereafter she resided at various times in the USA and France, but mostly in the UK where she now lives with me. (Lucky girl, eh?) She has dual citizenship, Canada/UK - and a passport from both countries. Is she affected by this damn legislation?
Secondly, Brexit caused me to encourage both my children to avail themselves of the Irish passport to which they are entitled by virtue of their grandmother's country of origin. Again, could they now be deprived of UK citizenship?
I know it is vanishly unlikely that any of these would be victimised by the Home Office but the mere fact that in theory they could is a sorry indictment of where our politicians (both sides of the House) have led us.
I thank you all in advance for your assistance.
I think that they could be so victimised under the *existing* law. The argument that the Home Office (just) won over Begum, was that her Bangladeshi citizenship was inherent. Even though she didn't actually have the passport.
If she'd had formal paperwork from Bangladesh declaring her a citizen and a passport, there would have been no case....
David Gauke @DavidGauke · 54m . @wesstreeting struck exactly the right tone on @BBCr4today . Has to be said that Labour coming across as grown-up and responsible on tackling omicron.
===
Exactly the kind of response that winds the left up about Streeting.
Oh, there's no doubt that the left hate Streeting. I remember that clearly when we were on the council together.
His answers to the question about the by-election were interesting; you could really hear the pull-and-push between his Labour Party tribalism, having spent almost his entire life within it, and his centrist views and awareness of how defeating the Tories is more important than left-wing purism.
He is in a good position, isn't he?
If the Corbyn era had one valuable outcome it was that it demonstrated beyond dispute that Labour cannot win from the left; it has to win from the centre.
I am not sure if my view is shared, but when you go and do something and come back an hour later you are not sure if the Prime Minister is still in office
The change since the Paterson idiotic decision has sent an earthquake through politics and in such a short time
The whole Boris thing is curious.
The three things that have so damaged him will seem though the lens of history pretty inconsequential.
1) Cummings 2) Paterson 3) Party-Gate
The first two decisions look like misplaced loyalty (more conventional PMs would have thrown both under a bus) and the latter one is, no doubt, owing to people taking their lead from BJ's obvious personal lack of time for the personal Covid stuff (masks, distancing, etc). So he's certainly culpable.
But what about the three big things that he, and no-one else could have delivered.
1) Brexit 2) Covid vaccine programme 3) Levelling - up Agenda (alright not delivered, but understood and articulated).
The same Boris. This time generating outcomes which are also directly linked to his unique persona.
I understand the fury of those who consider him a fraud/liar. He sort of is. But then all memorable PMs put on a show. The "unflappable" Macmillan, Tony and his estuarine drawl, even the Iron Lady.
With regards to Boris and Geidtgate. In response to a question by SKS he told the house on 28th April this year that he paid for the Downing Street refurb personally.
That isn't an error. That's a lie. He knew that was not true. And openly lied about it.
I'm losing track. Is that two or three clear cut breaches of the ministerial code we can prove over the same issue?
If Geidt quits saying he has been misled then this could be over quickly. No Prime Minister can survive endless "Did you Lie Prime Minister" questions when the answer is so clearly yes, repeatedly, to cover up vast sums of dark money being spent on wallpaper so NutNut and Tory staffers could have illegal parties.
And then we have DomCum doing his "ask me anything" show at lunchtime. Who knows what he will spew out. And the problem for the Tories isn't that you can dismiss him, can't be trusted over Barnard Castle because he always has proof...
What a ridiculous thing to be brought down on. It’s not as if he even owns the sodding flat. Hopefully he’ll be out of there soon.
The irony is that Johnson is basically going to go "for being in possession of an offensive wife".
Every single one of the stupid disasters which are ushering him out the door go straight back to Princess Nut Nut. Wallpaper - Carrie Afghan animal taxis - Carrie Parties - Carrie (at least one with her present).
I wouldn't be shocked if the current lockdown lite was her brainwave too, to try and move the media story on. I think this may well be what finishes him - Tory MPs whose patience was wearing thin anyway aren't seeing the funny side of his nuking the country to change some bad headlines.
She's done a lot of damage in other areas too - much of the economic self-harm in the name of greenery is her agenda too. Tory MPs know that too.
Had he not listened to Carrie, Boris might have been far less self distructive over the last couple of years, and actually been quite a good prime minister - it's all gone wrong for him since he decided to prioritise the desires of one of the nastiest bit of work to ever get near power.
He's had people giving him sound advice (Cummings for all he's a disreputable nutter was right about a lot of stuff - I'm fairly sure it's him we have to thank for Kate Bingham doing the vaccine procurement), but he sided with Carrie every time.
The inevitable divorce proceedings once they are out of no10 should provide some light entertainment anyway...
Woman-blaming. Edit: Even if you yourself don't intend that, it reads very easily as that and will upset half the population so is not a good argument in politics. And in any case, every single case, he only had to say no. He's the PM. She isn't.
I had a bit to do with lobbying over the Afghan pet rescue operation (I'm an animal welfare campaigner, so it's what I do), and have good reason to think that Carrie wasn't involved in that particular decision. In general I agree with Carnyx - it's pathetic for loyalists to defend the PM on the basis that "he's a great guy really, so it must be his wife that persuaded him". If you want to be supportive, fine, defend him directly, as I did with Corbyn.
It's simply the latest variant on the well known historical phenomenon of blaming the Tsar's advisers.
Russians used to write to Stalin about their imprisoned relatives thinking, 'if only the man at the top knew what was going on....'.
Incidentally I read your charity's mag for the first time in literally years this week; going back well over a decade (indeed probably over two) it used to contain so many photos of and horror stories about tortured animals that I've always routinely thrown the envelopes away unopened. Nowadays it seems really well designed and written and focused on the campaigning and action rather than obsessing over what most supporters will already understand is the problem.
My Russian friends tell me the Putinist types say that. My Chinese friends say that there is an equivalent for Xi, as well. "If only the big boss knew"....
Thanks Cyclefree for another superb piece. I always read them even if I do not always comment.
May I ask the PB Brains Trust for clarification in respect of two related questions?
First, Mrs PtP was born in the UK of Canadian parents. The family moved back to Canada when she was eight and she was educated there until she was sixteen. Thereafter she resided at various times in the USA and France, but mostly in the UK where she now lives with me. (Lucky girl, eh?) She has dual citizenship, Canada/UK - and a passport from both countries. Is she affected by this damn legislation?
Secondly, Brexit caused me to encourage both my children to avail themselves of the Irish passport to which they are entitled by virtue of their grandmother's country of origin. Again, could they now be deprived of UK citizenship?
I know it is vanishly unlikely that any of these would be victimised by the Home Office but the mere fact that in theory they could is a sorry indictment of where our politicians (both sides of the House) have led us.
I thank you all in advance for your assistance.
You're right that the present government would be pretty unlikely to use/misuse this to attack your family directly. But you only need to look downthread to see that the kind of language that comes along with less tolerant approaches is commonplace ("Remainistan"). Sadly, your political views might put you the line of fire from a small number of people. If one of those people were Home Sec, and if you were important enough in amongst the 16 million people who voted remain, it's just possible.
You should file it under "never going to happen" because you probably aren't visible and important enough. But it would be far, far better to file it under "never going to happen" because they literally don't have the powers.
With regards to Boris and Geidtgate. In response to a question by SKS he told the house on 28th April this year that he paid for the Downing Street refurb personally.
That isn't an error. That's a lie. He knew that was not true. And openly lied about it.
I'm losing track. Is that two or three clear cut breaches of the ministerial code we can prove over the same issue?
If Geidt quits saying he has been misled then this could be over quickly. No Prime Minister can survive endless "Did you Lie Prime Minister" questions when the answer is so clearly yes, repeatedly, to cover up vast sums of dark money being spent on wallpaper so NutNut and Tory staffers could have illegal parties.
And then we have DomCum doing his "ask me anything" show at lunchtime. Who knows what he will spew out. And the problem for the Tories isn't that you can dismiss him, can't be trusted over Barnard Castle because he always has proof...
What a ridiculous thing to be brought down on. It’s not as if he even owns the sodding flat. Hopefully he’ll be out of there soon.
The irony is that Johnson is basically going to go "for being in possession of an offensive wife".
Every single one of the stupid disasters which are ushering him out the door go straight back to Princess Nut Nut. Wallpaper - Carrie Afghan animal taxis - Carrie Parties - Carrie (at least one with her present).
I wouldn't be shocked if the current lockdown lite was her brainwave too, to try and move the media story on. I think this may well be what finishes him - Tory MPs whose patience was wearing thin anyway aren't seeing the funny side of his nuking the country to change some bad headlines.
She's done a lot of damage in other areas too - much of the economic self-harm in the name of greenery is her agenda too. Tory MPs know that too.
Had he not listened to Carrie, Boris might have been far less self distructive over the last couple of years, and actually been quite a good prime minister - it's all gone wrong for him since he decided to prioritise the desires of one of the nastiest bit of work to ever get near power.
He's had people giving him sound advice (Cummings for all he's a disreputable nutter was right about a lot of stuff - I'm fairly sure it's him we have to thank for Kate Bingham doing the vaccine procurement), but he sided with Carrie every time.
The inevitable divorce proceedings once they are out of no10 should provide some light entertainment anyway...
Woman-blaming. Edit: Even if you yourself don't intend that, it reads very easily as that and will upset half the population so is not a good argument in politics. And in any case, every single case, he only had to say no. He's the PM. She isn't.
It is possible, even in this day and age, that a woman can be at fault. This isn't misogyny - I would have said the same about Philip May had I thought he was the cause of May's useless tenure.
Boris's main fault is that he's weak and tends to bear the impression of whoever sat on him last. That didn't necessarily mean disaster - when he came to power I rather hoped he would have someone sane sit on him and get him to do sensible stuff, but it seems instead he mostly listened to Carrie Antoinette.
David Gauke @DavidGauke · 54m . @wesstreeting struck exactly the right tone on @BBCr4today . Has to be said that Labour coming across as grown-up and responsible on tackling omicron.
===
Exactly the kind of response that winds the left up about Streeting.
Oh, there's no doubt that the left hate Streeting. I remember that clearly when we were on the council together.
His answers to the question about the by-election were interesting; you could really hear the pull-and-push between his Labour Party tribalism, having spent almost his entire life within it, and his centrist views and awareness of how defeating the Tories is more important than left-wing purism.
He is in a good position, isn't he?
If the Corbyn era had one valuable outcome it was that it demonstrated beyond dispute that Labour cannot win from the left; it has to win from the centre.
Like it or loathe it, it's a fact.
I think there are a fair few on the left who wouldn't accept that it has been so demonstrated, even on here.
Mr. NorthWales, I have refrained from betting on it.
Mr. Prole, I'd add that people said the PM was being led around by Cummings before he went, so it's just swapping one person doing the PM's thinking for another. I fail to see why one criticism is fine and the other should be frowned upon. The fault remains the PM's for not having a functioning brain and having to subcontract out his thinking.
I am not sure if my view is shared, but when you go and do something and come back an hour later you are not sure if the Prime Minister is still in office
The change since the Paterson idiotic decision has sent an earthquake through politics and in such a short time
The whole Boris thing is curious.
The three things that have so damaged him will seem though the lens of history pretty inconsequential.
1) Cummings 2) Paterson 3) Party-Gate
The first two decisions look like misplaced loyalty (more conventional PMs would have thrown both under a bus) and the latter one is, no doubt, owing to people taking their lead from BJ's obvious personal lack of time for the personal Covid stuff (masks, distancing, etc). So he's certainly culpable.
But what about the three big things that he, and no-one else could have delivered.
1) Brexit 2) Covid vaccine programme 3) Levelling - up Agenda (alright not delivered, but understood and articulated).
The same Boris. This time generating outcomes which are also directly linked to his unique persona.
I understand the fury of those who consider him a fraud/liar. He sort of is. But then all memorable PMs put on a show. The "unflappable" Macmillan, Tony and his estuarine drawl, even the Iron Lady.
Your 2 and 3 are absurd. Johnson had to be told to keep his fingers off the vaccination programme, and allow it to be delivered by the experts, without the political meddling that had wrecked the PPE procurement. Thus it was delivered by someone else, and there's nothing about it tied uniquely to him. Ditto levelling up, which is not delivered but also not articulated or planned.
And being a fraud and liar is not a show, but his essence.
Lib Dems now favourite (1.83) on Betfair in North Shropshire.
Tories to come third might be a good bet if anyone is offering it.
If Yougov is correct and the Tories are still on 59% with Leavers and the LDs are on just 2% with Leavers, then the Tories won't come third in North Shropshire. Given Shropshire was 57% Leave they might even hold it as Labour take more of the anti Tory vote in this strongly Leave seat than expected
Wes Streeting who is only 38 looks like a future leader and PM
Wes's handicap is that he's audibly from London. And being from London seems to be toxic in political leaders at the moment. That Londoners don't count and are out of touch with "real people" seems to be the one thing everyone on in the country outside the capital can safely unite on. No doubt the Tories would go one further and claim he's from Islington.
As I recall, he grew up in Tower Hamlets. So close, in one sense, if not the other.
Are we now to measure Labour MPs by the distance of their birthplace to N1? Probably some of the sad anti-London nutters on here think we should.
I see weirdo and bully John Bercow was on GMB sticking the boot in to Boris this morning... If people like Bercow start appearing regularly to stick the boot in that could give Boris a bit of a repreieve with a lot of Con 2019 voters.
If it all starts looking like an orchestrated attack by the Forces Of Remainistan a lot of Con 2019 voters will hold their nose and start to rally round...
All politics is relative. The Tories have lost my GE vote support for now (I don't usually vote Tory in local elections) but if it were Boris v Jezza I would still vote for Boris, if it were Boris v Rejoin, ditto, Boris v Left Wing Labour ditto, Boris v Scottish separatism ditto. All through gritted teeth of course.
I think Boris is now on the way out, it is when not if, (unless more Black Swans come along), but my view that there is a nearly 50% chance of the next government being Tory, and nearly 50% of it being a rainbow alliance remains for now.
To lose the Sun, Telegraph and Mail in a few days looks like carelessness rather then misfortune.
BTW the Speccie network of Boris (ex editor), Stratton (wife of Forsyth), Cummings (husband of Mary Wakefield) is starting to look a bit odd.
Wes Streeting who is only 38 looks like a future leader and PM
Wes's handicap is that he's audibly from London. And being from London seems to be toxic in political leaders at the moment. That Londoners don't count and are out of touch with "real people" seems to be the one thing everyone on in the country outside the capital can safely unite on. No doubt the Tories would go one further and claim he's from Islington.
Yes, you see that sort of moronic prejudice on PB. @SandyRentool is a prime example of it.
It's a fairly common prejudice around the world - people from the Capital are rich, out of touch arseholes who oppress the Honest Folk in the rest of the country.
You should hear what the rest of France says about Paris - far harsher.
Lib Dems now favourite (1.83) on Betfair in North Shropshire.
Tories to come third might be a good bet if anyone is offering it.
If Yougov is correct and the Tories are still on 59% with Leavers and the LDs are on just 2% with Leavers, then the Tories won't come third in North Shropshire. Given Shropshire was 57% Leave they might even hold it
Did you multiply 0.59 by 0.57, just to see what the answer is, before making that post?
Wes Streeting who is only 38 looks like a future leader and PM
Wes's handicap is that he's audibly from London. And being from London seems to be toxic in political leaders at the moment. That Londoners don't count and are out of touch with "real people" seems to be the one thing everyone on in the country outside the capital can safely unite on. No doubt the Tories would go one further and claim he's from Islington.
He sounds like a spiv from central casting in 1940s London selling dodgy nylons on the black market.
Wes Streeting who is only 38 looks like a future leader and PM
Wes's handicap is that he's audibly from London. And being from London seems to be toxic in political leaders at the moment. That Londoners don't count and are out of touch with "real people" seems to be the one thing everyone on in the country outside the capital can safely unite on. No doubt the Tories would go one further and claim he's from Islington.
Yes, you see that sort of moronic prejudice on PB. @SandyRentool is a prime example of it.
It's a fairly common prejudice around the world - people from the Capital are rich, out of touch arseholes who oppress the Honest Folk in the rest of the country.
You should hear what the rest of France says about Paris - far harsher.
Thanks Cyclefree for another superb piece. I always read them even if I do not always comment.
May I ask the PB Brains Trust for clarification in respect of two related questions?
First, Mrs PtP was born in the UK of Canadian parents. The family moved back to Canada when she was eight and she was educated there until she was sixteen. Thereafter she resided at various times in the USA and France, but mostly in the UK where she now lives with me. (Lucky girl, eh?) She has dual citizenship, Canada/UK - and a passport from both countries. Is she affected by this damn legislation?
Secondly, Brexit caused me to encourage both my children to avail themselves of the Irish passport to which they are entitled by virtue of their grandmother's country of origin. Again, could they now be deprived of UK citizenship?
I know it is vanishly unlikely that any of these would be victimised by the Home Office but the mere fact that in theory they could is a sorry indictment of where our politicians (both sides of the House) have led us.
I thank you all in advance for your assistance.
The quick answer is "Yes - they could be stripped of British citizenship.
But let us take this to the next level. Under this legislation, the Home Secretary could, in theory, remove British Citizenship from everyone in Northern Ireland.
It would be a novel solution to the Article 16 and NI Protocol problem....
I see weirdo and bully John Bercow was on GMB sticking the boot in to Boris this morning... If people like Bercow start appearing regularly to stick the boot in that could give Boris a bit of a repreieve with a lot of Con 2019 voters.
If it all starts looking like an orchestrated attack by the Forces Of Remainistan a lot of Con 2019 voters will hold their nose and start to rally round...
An argument that may have held water at the start if the year. We are way way past "ignore the evidence of your eyes and ears because they are a remainer"
Perhaps the most striking thing about @wesstreeting performance on Today (and he's had lots of plaudits) is he did a better job than most Cabinet ministers of explaining the balanced approach of Plan B. Which is the first step towards the public thinking: Lab hv a govt in waiting
Plan B is do not work in your office but go to your office christmas party.
Plan B is your must wear a mask in Next but you can stand at the bar in a crowded pub without one on.
And thats a balanced approach?
You are of course being rather selective yourself. Public transport and shopping are two things a lot of people simply can't avoid. Requiring masks there goes a little way to mitigate risks they can't avoid - unlike the local pub. Agreee with it or not, there is a rationale for it.
Vaxports, in the short period of time the current rules are supposed to be in effect, are pretty nonsensical, I'd agree.
I am not sure if my view is shared, but when you go and do something and come back an hour later you are not sure if the Prime Minister is still in office
The change since the Paterson idiotic decision has sent an earthquake through politics and in such a short time
The whole Boris thing is curious.
The three things that have so damaged him will seem though the lens of history pretty inconsequential.
1) Cummings 2) Paterson 3) Party-Gate
The first two decisions look like misplaced loyalty (more conventional PMs would have thrown both under a bus) and the latter one is, no doubt, owing to people taking their lead from BJ's obvious personal lack of time for the personal Covid stuff (masks, distancing, etc). So he's certainly culpable.
But what about the three big things that he, and no-one else could have delivered.
1) Brexit 2) Covid vaccine programme 3) Levelling - up Agenda (alright not delivered, but understood and articulated).
The same Boris. This time generating outcomes which are also directly linked to his unique persona.
I understand the fury of those who consider him a fraud/liar. He sort of is. But then all memorable PMs put on a show. The "unflappable" Macmillan, Tony and his estuarine drawl, even the Iron Lady.
Almost 50% of people were against Brexit, with a higher proportion in the 'chattering classes'. If they (we? me certainly) see what we consider Boris the Destroyer getting his comeuppance, why then we'll drink to that. It's not obvious that responsibility for the success of the vaccine and the vaccination programme can be attributed to the government; it also seems that the govt is now intervening and there are complaints.
Lib Dems now favourite (1.83) on Betfair in North Shropshire.
I expect it to be a landslide for them
The big risk is splitting the anti Tory vote.
Labour need to somehow give the Liberals the nod – but it is a against party policy to voucher for the Liberals. This is the one question that Streeting struggled with on the Today programme this morning.
With regards to Boris and Geidtgate. In response to a question by SKS he told the house on 28th April this year that he paid for the Downing Street refurb personally.
That isn't an error. That's a lie. He knew that was not true. And openly lied about it.
I'm losing track. Is that two or three clear cut breaches of the ministerial code we can prove over the same issue?
If Geidt quits saying he has been misled then this could be over quickly. No Prime Minister can survive endless "Did you Lie Prime Minister" questions when the answer is so clearly yes, repeatedly, to cover up vast sums of dark money being spent on wallpaper so NutNut and Tory staffers could have illegal parties.
And then we have DomCum doing his "ask me anything" show at lunchtime. Who knows what he will spew out. And the problem for the Tories isn't that you can dismiss him, can't be trusted over Barnard Castle because he always has proof...
What a ridiculous thing to be brought down on. It’s not as if he even owns the sodding flat. Hopefully he’ll be out of there soon.
The irony is that Johnson is basically going to go "for being in possession of an offensive wife".
Every single one of the stupid disasters which are ushering him out the door go straight back to Princess Nut Nut. Wallpaper - Carrie Afghan animal taxis - Carrie Parties - Carrie (at least one with her present).
I wouldn't be shocked if the current lockdown lite was her brainwave too, to try and move the media story on. I think this may well be what finishes him - Tory MPs whose patience was wearing thin anyway aren't seeing the funny side of his nuking the country to change some bad headlines.
She's done a lot of damage in other areas too - much of the economic self-harm in the name of greenery is her agenda too. Tory MPs know that too.
Had he not listened to Carrie, Boris might have been far less self distructive over the last couple of years, and actually been quite a good prime minister - it's all gone wrong for him since he decided to prioritise the desires of one of the nastiest bit of work to ever get near power.
He's had people giving him sound advice (Cummings for all he's a disreputable nutter was right about a lot of stuff - I'm fairly sure it's him we have to thank for Kate Bingham doing the vaccine procurement), but he sided with Carrie every time.
The inevitable divorce proceedings once they are out of no10 should provide some light entertainment anyway...
Woman-blaming. Edit: Even if you yourself don't intend that, it reads very easily as that and will upset half the population so is not a good argument in politics. And in any case, every single case, he only had to say no. He's the PM. She isn't.
I had a bit to do with lobbying over the Afghan pet rescue operation (I'm an animal welfare campaigner, so it's what I do), and have good reason to think that Carrie wasn't involved in that particular decision. In general I agree with Carnyx - it's pathetic for loyalists to defend the PM on the basis that "he's a great guy really, so it must be his wife that persuaded him". If you want to be supportive, fine, defend him directly, as I did with Corbyn.
It's simply the latest variant on the well known historical phenomenon of blaming the Tsar's advisers.
Russians used to write to Stalin about their imprisoned relatives thinking, 'if only the man at the top knew what was going on....'.
Incidentally I read your charity's mag for the first time in literally years this week; going back well over a decade (indeed probably over two) it used to contain so many photos of and horror stories about tortured animals that I've always routinely thrown the envelopes away unopened. Nowadays it seems really well designed and written and focused on the campaigning and action rather than obsessing over what most supporters will already understand is the problem.
My Russian friends tell me the Putinist types say that. My Chinese friends say that there is an equivalent for Xi, as well. "If only the big boss knew"....
There seems to be a human need to believe in a wise leader. Probably stems from the father image, and plays directly into religious belief.
Wes Streeting who is only 38 looks like a future leader and PM
Wes's handicap is that he's audibly from London. And being from London seems to be toxic in political leaders at the moment. That Londoners don't count and are out of touch with "real people" seems to be the one thing everyone on in the country outside the capital can safely unite on. No doubt the Tories would go one further and claim he's from Islington.
Yes, you see that sort of moronic prejudice on PB. @SandyRentool is a prime example of it.
It's a fairly common prejudice around the world - people from the Capital are rich, out of touch arseholes who oppress the Honest Folk in the rest of the country.
You should hear what the rest of France says about Paris - far harsher.
I see weirdo and bully John Bercow was on GMB sticking the boot in to Boris this morning... If people like Bercow start appearing regularly to stick the boot in that could give Boris a bit of a repreieve with a lot of Con 2019 voters.
If it all starts looking like an orchestrated attack by the Forces Of Remainistan a lot of Con 2019 voters will hold their nose and start to rally round...
The attacks can definitely go too far and people feel sorry for the victim, a bit like the Gordon Brown handwriting nonsense.
In regard to Wes Streeting it is pretty easy to sound good when in opposition, thats why I have not rated SKS over the past couple of years. I remember during the Blair years Ming Campbell was on Newsnight all the time sounding statesmenlike and sensible. He became leader of the Lib Dems and was hopeless.
With regards to Boris and Geidtgate. In response to a question by SKS he told the house on 28th April this year that he paid for the Downing Street refurb personally.
That isn't an error. That's a lie. He knew that was not true. And openly lied about it.
I'm losing track. Is that two or three clear cut breaches of the ministerial code we can prove over the same issue?
If Geidt quits saying he has been misled then this could be over quickly. No Prime Minister can survive endless "Did you Lie Prime Minister" questions when the answer is so clearly yes, repeatedly, to cover up vast sums of dark money being spent on wallpaper so NutNut and Tory staffers could have illegal parties.
And then we have DomCum doing his "ask me anything" show at lunchtime. Who knows what he will spew out. And the problem for the Tories isn't that you can dismiss him, can't be trusted over Barnard Castle because he always has proof...
What a ridiculous thing to be brought down on. It’s not as if he even owns the sodding flat. Hopefully he’ll be out of there soon.
The irony is that Johnson is basically going to go "for being in possession of an offensive wife".
Every single one of the stupid disasters which are ushering him out the door go straight back to Princess Nut Nut. Wallpaper - Carrie Afghan animal taxis - Carrie Parties - Carrie (at least one with her present).
I wouldn't be shocked if the current lockdown lite was her brainwave too, to try and move the media story on. I think this may well be what finishes him - Tory MPs whose patience was wearing thin anyway aren't seeing the funny side of his nuking the country to change some bad headlines.
She's done a lot of damage in other areas too - much of the economic self-harm in the name of greenery is her agenda too. Tory MPs know that too.
Had he not listened to Carrie, Boris might have been far less self distructive over the last couple of years, and actually been quite a good prime minister - it's all gone wrong for him since he decided to prioritise the desires of one of the nastiest bit of work to ever get near power.
He's had people giving him sound advice (Cummings for all he's a disreputable nutter was right about a lot of stuff - I'm fairly sure it's him we have to thank for Kate Bingham doing the vaccine procurement), but he sided with Carrie every time.
The inevitable divorce proceedings once they are out of no10 should provide some light entertainment anyway...
Woman-blaming. Edit: Even if you yourself don't intend that, it reads very easily as that and will upset half the population so is not a good argument in politics. And in any case, every single case, he only had to say no. He's the PM. She isn't.
It is possible, even in this day and age, that a woman can be at fault. This isn't misogyny - I would have said the same about Philip May had I thought he was the cause of May's useless tenure.
Boris's main fault is that he's weak and tends to bear the impression of whoever sat on him last. That didn't necessarily mean disaster - when he came to power I rather hoped he would have someone sane sit on him and get him to do sensible stuff, but it seems instead he mostly listened to Carrie Antoinette.
You are aware that the original Maire Antoinette blaming thing was largely horse manure? Or maybe not.
The monarchists used her as an excuse "Stupid Austrian" and the revolutionaries use the whole 'Aristocratic Extremist Foreigner making the weak King attack the people" thing as propaganda.
I am not sure if my view is shared, but when you go and do something and come back an hour later you are not sure if the Prime Minister is still in office
The change since the Paterson idiotic decision has sent an earthquake through politics and in such a short time
The whole Boris thing is curious.
The three things that have so damaged him will seem though the lens of history pretty inconsequential.
1) Cummings 2) Paterson 3) Party-Gate
The first two decisions look like misplaced loyalty (more conventional PMs would have thrown both under a bus) and the latter one is, no doubt, owing to people taking their lead from BJ's obvious personal lack of time for the personal Covid stuff (masks, distancing, etc). So he's certainly culpable.
But what about the three big things that he, and no-one else could have delivered.
1) Brexit 2) Covid vaccine programme 3) Levelling - up Agenda (alright not delivered, but understood and articulated).
The same Boris. This time generating outcomes which are also directly linked to his unique persona.
I understand the fury of those who consider him a fraud/liar. He sort of is. But then all memorable PMs put on a show. The "unflappable" Macmillan, Tony and his estuarine drawl, even the Iron Lady.
Your 2 and 3 are absurd. Johnson had to be told to keep his fingers off the vaccination programme, and allow it to be delivered by the experts, without the political meddling that had wrecked the PPE procurement. Thus it was delivered by someone else, and there's nothing about it tied uniquely to him. Ditto levelling up, which is not delivered but also not articulated or planned.
And being a fraud and liar is not a show, but his essence.
2 is not absurd, that he entrusted it to an expert is to his credit. If he'd done nothing and had "kept his fingers off" it would have gone through either the EU procurement process or the normal NHS procurement processes and been much delayed as it was all across Europe. He changed the procedure and the buck stops there.
The Opposition and opposition media like the Grauniad put the boot into both him and Kate Bingham for what was being done here until it became clear that what happened here was a big success - had it been a disaster you wouldn't be so quick to distance Boris from it.
It does you no favour not to give credit where credit's due.
Lib Dems now favourite (1.83) on Betfair in North Shropshire.
I expect it to be a landslide for them
From 10% in 2019? Where is the landslide coming from? Big Brexit area - for many there the LDs are regarded as the worst of the worst.
Tactical voting and Tories not turning out sure - a LD win is not inconceivable given the narrative of the past few days - but no landslide surely.
I'm still on the Conservatives to win, and I might follow in with more money since the odds are even better. I'll admit to feeling a little wobbly about my bet, but the majority is huge. I think everyone knows now that a LD win is possibly the end of Boris, and that might up the stakes somewhat. The by-election effect is, I think, based on the fact that it's a free hit. But this is now about changing the government, and so I think there's a more general election feel to it. In a GE today, this would be safe safe safe.
The irony is that Johnson is basically going to go "for being in possession of an offensive wife".
Every single one of the stupid disasters which are ushering him out the door go straight back to Princess Nut Nut. Wallpaper - Carrie Afghan animal taxis - Carrie Parties - Carrie (at least one with her present).
He's had people giving him sound advice (Cummings for all he's a disreputable nutter was right about a lot of stuff - I'm fairly sure it's him we have to thank for Kate Bingham doing the vaccine procurement)
Definitely found Dom's alt account.
One the other hand, Dom really isn't a Prole (one of the fatal things about that thing in the Downing St garden was hearing how posh he is).
On the other other hand, he probably really thinks he is a Prole, because he's less posh than (say) JRM.
He's a scruffy git in a way that even Boris can't get near.
Perhaps the most striking thing about @wesstreeting performance on Today (and he's had lots of plaudits) is he did a better job than most Cabinet ministers of explaining the balanced approach of Plan B. Which is the first step towards the public thinking: Lab hv a govt in waiting
Plan B is do not work in your office but go to your office christmas party.
Plan B is your must wear a mask in Next but you can stand at the bar in a crowded pub without one on.
And thats a balanced approach?
You are of course being rather selective yourself. Public transport and shopping are two things a lot of people simply can't avoid. Requiring masks there goes a little way to mitigate risks they can't avoid - unlike the local pub. Agreee with it or not, there is a rationale for it.
Vaxports, in the short period of time the current rules are supposed to be in effect, are pretty nonsensical, I'd agree.
I see that but why then are fashion stores included in the mask mandate – I mean they are hardly 'essential' – I dare say most PBers manage to avoid them from one year to the next!
David Gauke @DavidGauke · 54m . @wesstreeting struck exactly the right tone on @BBCr4today . Has to be said that Labour coming across as grown-up and responsible on tackling omicron.
===
Exactly the kind of response that winds the left up about Streeting.
Oh, there's no doubt that the left hate Streeting. I remember that clearly when we were on the council together.
His answers to the question about the by-election were interesting; you could really hear the pull-and-push between his Labour Party tribalism, having spent almost his entire life within it, and his centrist views and awareness of how defeating the Tories is more important than left-wing purism.
Streeting vs Harper as future leaders would be an interesting combination.
Absolute egregious sexism to blame Carrie for Bozza's failures.
That he is an incompetent fool is down to him and him alone.
Nothing to do with his wife FFS.
Depends *which* failures we're talking about. Her friends having a party in her flat / her friend staying for Christmas is her fault. And if - as seems to be the suggestion - she has been the prime mover behind various oustings of people / puppies from Kabul then that is her fault as well.
I understand your point though. Throwing Stratton under the bus for her heartfelt grief at the mess whilst all the men involved get to keep their jobs absolutely stinks.
With regards to Boris and Geidtgate. In response to a question by SKS he told the house on 28th April this year that he paid for the Downing Street refurb personally.
That isn't an error. That's a lie. He knew that was not true. And openly lied about it.
I'm losing track. Is that two or three clear cut breaches of the ministerial code we can prove over the same issue?
If Geidt quits saying he has been misled then this could be over quickly. No Prime Minister can survive endless "Did you Lie Prime Minister" questions when the answer is so clearly yes, repeatedly, to cover up vast sums of dark money being spent on wallpaper so NutNut and Tory staffers could have illegal parties.
And then we have DomCum doing his "ask me anything" show at lunchtime. Who knows what he will spew out. And the problem for the Tories isn't that you can dismiss him, can't be trusted over Barnard Castle because he always has proof...
What a ridiculous thing to be brought down on. It’s not as if he even owns the sodding flat. Hopefully he’ll be out of there soon.
The irony is that Johnson is basically going to go "for being in possession of an offensive wife".
Every single one of the stupid disasters which are ushering him out the door go straight back to Princess Nut Nut. Wallpaper - Carrie Afghan animal taxis - Carrie Parties - Carrie (at least one with her present).
I wouldn't be shocked if the current lockdown lite was her brainwave too, to try and move the media story on. I think this may well be what finishes him - Tory MPs whose patience was wearing thin anyway aren't seeing the funny side of his nuking the country to change some bad headlines.
She's done a lot of damage in other areas too - much of the economic self-harm in the name of greenery is her agenda too. Tory MPs know that too.
Had he not listened to Carrie, Boris might have been far less self distructive over the last couple of years, and actually been quite a good prime minister - it's all gone wrong for him since he decided to prioritise the desires of one of the nastiest bit of work to ever get near power.
He's had people giving him sound advice (Cummings for all he's a disreputable nutter was right about a lot of stuff - I'm fairly sure it's him we have to thank for Kate Bingham doing the vaccine procurement), but he sided with Carrie every time.
The inevitable divorce proceedings once they are out of no10 should provide some light entertainment anyway...
Woman-blaming. Edit: Even if you yourself don't intend that, it reads very easily as that and will upset half the population so is not a good argument in politics. And in any case, every single case, he only had to say no. He's the PM. She isn't.
I had a bit to do with lobbying over the Afghan pet rescue operation (I'm an animal welfare campaigner, so it's what I do), and have good reason to think that Carrie wasn't involved in that particular decision. In general I agree with Carnyx - it's pathetic for loyalists to defend the PM on the basis that "he's a great guy really, so it must be his wife that persuaded him". If you want to be supportive, fine, defend him directly, as I did with Corbyn.
It's simply the latest variant on the well known historical phenomenon of blaming the Tsar's advisers.
Russians used to write to Stalin about their imprisoned relatives thinking, 'if only the man at the top knew what was going on....'.
Incidentally I read your charity's mag for the first time in literally years this week; going back well over a decade (indeed probably over two) it used to contain so many photos of and horror stories about tortured animals that I've always routinely thrown the envelopes away unopened. Nowadays it seems really well designed and written and focused on the campaigning and action rather than obsessing over what most supporters will already understand is the problem.
My Russian friends tell me the Putinist types say that. My Chinese friends say that there is an equivalent for Xi, as well. "If only the big boss knew"....
There seems to be a human need to believe in a wise leader. Probably stems from the father image, and plays directly into religious belief.
More that "At least the guy at the top is good, noble and intelligent. Just badly advised. So there is hope."
Wes Streeting who is only 38 looks like a future leader and PM
Wes's handicap is that he's audibly from London. And being from London seems to be toxic in political leaders at the moment. That Londoners don't count and are out of touch with "real people" seems to be the one thing everyone on in the country outside the capital can safely unite on. No doubt the Tories would go one further and claim he's from Islington.
I think he'd be OK on that particular aspect, grew up in a council flat in Stepney; represents Ilford North. It's London but it's not "Islington".
Yes, his real weakness is lack of experience of the working world outside lobbying and politics. Which could play into a similar "out of touch" narrative, but not derived from the geography.
Just dropped in to congratulate @Cyclefree on one of the best thread headers on this site for a very long time.
I am ashamed, as a Liberal Democrat supporter, that the party of which I was once a member and activist was complicit in this erosion of individual rights, the removal of appropriate scrutiny and accountability and another step in this country's growing centralisation.
If the LDs want a USP at the next election, rolling back the State and returning power both to locally elected and accountable authorities as well as Parliament but, more important, to the individual citizen would be a good start.
Thanks again for a profoundly uncomfortable start to the day.
Thanks Cyclefree for another superb piece. I always read them even if I do not always comment.
May I ask the PB Brains Trust for clarification in respect of two related questions?
First, Mrs PtP was born in the UK of Canadian parents. The family moved back to Canada when she was eight and she was educated there until she was sixteen. Thereafter she resided at various times in the USA and France, but mostly in the UK where she now lives with me. (Lucky girl, eh?) She has dual citizenship, Canada/UK - and a passport from both countries. Is she affected by this damn legislation?
Secondly, Brexit caused me to encourage both my children to avail themselves of the Irish passport to which they are entitled by virtue of their grandmother's country of origin. Again, could they now be deprived of UK citizenship?
I know it is vanishly unlikely that any of these would be victimised by the Home Office but the mere fact that in theory they could is a sorry indictment of where our politicians (both sides of the House) have led us.
I thank you all in advance for your assistance.
The quick answer is "Yes - they could be stripped of British citizenship.
But let us take this to the next level. Under this legislation, the Home Secretary could, in theory, remove British Citizenship from everyone in Northern Ireland.
It would be a novel solution to the Article 16 and NI Protocol problem....
Anyone born post 1983 whose parents are not British citizens can now lose their British passport if the Home Secretary doesn’t like you
David Gauke @DavidGauke · 54m . @wesstreeting struck exactly the right tone on @BBCr4today . Has to be said that Labour coming across as grown-up and responsible on tackling omicron.
===
Exactly the kind of response that winds the left up about Streeting.
Oh, there's no doubt that the left hate Streeting. I remember that clearly when we were on the council together.
His answers to the question about the by-election were interesting; you could really hear the pull-and-push between his Labour Party tribalism, having spent almost his entire life within it, and his centrist views and awareness of how defeating the Tories is more important than left-wing purism.
Streeting vs Harper as future leaders would be an interesting combination.
With regards to Boris and Geidtgate. In response to a question by SKS he told the house on 28th April this year that he paid for the Downing Street refurb personally.
That isn't an error. That's a lie. He knew that was not true. And openly lied about it.
I'm losing track. Is that two or three clear cut breaches of the ministerial code we can prove over the same issue?
If Geidt quits saying he has been misled then this could be over quickly. No Prime Minister can survive endless "Did you Lie Prime Minister" questions when the answer is so clearly yes, repeatedly, to cover up vast sums of dark money being spent on wallpaper so NutNut and Tory staffers could have illegal parties.
And then we have DomCum doing his "ask me anything" show at lunchtime. Who knows what he will spew out. And the problem for the Tories isn't that you can dismiss him, can't be trusted over Barnard Castle because he always has proof...
What a ridiculous thing to be brought down on. It’s not as if he even owns the sodding flat. Hopefully he’ll be out of there soon.
The irony is that Johnson is basically going to go "for being in possession of an offensive wife".
Every single one of the stupid disasters which are ushering him out the door go straight back to Princess Nut Nut. Wallpaper - Carrie Afghan animal taxis - Carrie Parties - Carrie (at least one with her present).
I wouldn't be shocked if the current lockdown lite was her brainwave too, to try and move the media story on. I think this may well be what finishes him - Tory MPs whose patience was wearing thin anyway aren't seeing the funny side of his nuking the country to change some bad headlines.
She's done a lot of damage in other areas too - much of the economic self-harm in the name of greenery is her agenda too. Tory MPs know that too.
Had he not listened to Carrie, Boris might have been far less self distructive over the last couple of years, and actually been quite a good prime minister - it's all gone wrong for him since he decided to prioritise the desires of one of the nastiest bit of work to ever get near power.
He's had people giving him sound advice (Cummings for all he's a disreputable nutter was right about a lot of stuff - I'm fairly sure it's him we have to thank for Kate Bingham doing the vaccine procurement), but he sided with Carrie every time.
The inevitable divorce proceedings once they are out of no10 should provide some light entertainment anyway...
Woman-blaming. Edit: Even if you yourself don't intend that, it reads very easily as that and will upset half the population so is not a good argument in politics. And in any case, every single case, he only had to say no. He's the PM. She isn't.
I had a bit to do with lobbying over the Afghan pet rescue operation (I'm an animal welfare campaigner, so it's what I do), and have good reason to think that Carrie wasn't involved in that particular decision. In general I agree with Carnyx - it's pathetic for loyalists to defend the PM on the basis that "he's a great guy really, so it must be his wife that persuaded him". If you want to be supportive, fine, defend him directly, as I did with Corbyn.
It's simply the latest variant on the well known historical phenomenon of blaming the Tsar's advisers.
Russians used to write to Stalin about their imprisoned relatives thinking, 'if only the man at the top knew what was going on....'.
Incidentally I read your charity's mag for the first time in literally years this week; going back well over a decade (indeed probably over two) it used to contain so many photos of and horror stories about tortured animals that I've always routinely thrown the envelopes away unopened. Nowadays it seems really well designed and written and focused on the campaigning and action rather than obsessing over what most supporters will already understand is the problem.
My Russian friends tell me the Putinist types say that. My Chinese friends say that there is an equivalent for Xi, as well. "If only the big boss knew"....
There seems to be a human need to believe in a wise leader. Probably stems from the father image, and plays directly into religious belief.
More that "At least the guy at the top is good, noble and intelligent. Just badly advised. So there is hope."
The great strength of democracy is that you don't need to sit around waiting for the great man to find better advisers. You can kick the bastard out yourselves.
Thanks Cyclefree for another superb piece. I always read them even if I do not always comment.
May I ask the PB Brains Trust for clarification in respect of two related questions?
First, Mrs PtP was born in the UK of Canadian parents. The family moved back to Canada when she was eight and she was educated there until she was sixteen. Thereafter she resided at various times in the USA and France, but mostly in the UK where she now lives with me. (Lucky girl, eh?) She has dual citizenship, Canada/UK - and a passport from both countries. Is she affected by this damn legislation?
Secondly, Brexit caused me to encourage both my children to avail themselves of the Irish passport to which they are entitled by virtue of their grandmother's country of origin. Again, could they now be deprived of UK citizenship?
I know it is vanishly unlikely that any of these would be victimised by the Home Office but the mere fact that in theory they could is a sorry indictment of where our politicians (both sides of the House) have led us.
I thank you all in advance for your assistance.
The quick answer is "Yes - they could be stripped of British citizenship.
But let us take this to the next level. Under this legislation, the Home Secretary could, in theory, remove British Citizenship from everyone in Northern Ireland.
It would be a novel solution to the Article 16 and NI Protocol problem....
Anyone born post 1983 whose parents are not British citizens can now lose their British passport if the Home Secretary doesn’t like you
Is it not that both parents have to be British citizens? (etc).
I am not sure if my view is shared, but when you go and do something and come back an hour later you are not sure if the Prime Minister is still in office
The change since the Paterson idiotic decision has sent an earthquake through politics and in such a short time
And so easily avoidable. It's all piled up so quickly the PM can't dig himself out. He needs help, and I'm not sure where it's going to come from.
Come back Dom, all is forgiven?
It's unlikely Dom will return to his crypt until Johnson family friends and sycophants have been well and trully dispatched.
In the immortal words of Leon ' Ask not for whom the bell tolls Mr Johnson. It tolls for thee.....'
Absolute egregious sexism to blame Carrie for Bozza's failures.
That he is an incompetent fool is down to him and him alone.
Nothing to do with his wife FFS.
Depends *which* failures we're talking about. Her friends having a party in her flat / her friend staying for Christmas is her fault. And if - as seems to be the suggestion - she has been the prime mover behind various oustings of people / puppies from Kabul then that is her fault as well.
I understand your point though. Throwing Stratton under the bus for her heartfelt grief at the mess whilst all the men involved get to keep their jobs absolutely stinks.
And is typical Boris - sacrifice Anyone and everyone to protect himself even if it only gives him 30 more seconds
David Gauke @DavidGauke · 54m . @wesstreeting struck exactly the right tone on @BBCr4today . Has to be said that Labour coming across as grown-up and responsible on tackling omicron.
===
Exactly the kind of response that winds the left up about Streeting.
Oh, there's no doubt that the left hate Streeting. I remember that clearly when we were on the council together.
His answers to the question about the by-election were interesting; you could really hear the pull-and-push between his Labour Party tribalism, having spent almost his entire life within it, and his centrist views and awareness of how defeating the Tories is more important than left-wing purism.
That bit of the interview was piffle. If the two major parties are going to insist on retaining FPTP, it's insulting the intelligence of the voters to say that Labour have to fight for every vote in every seat as a matter of principle (which is what I think he was arguing just before I turned the radio off), since that principle renders the votes of a large slug of the elecorate useless.
Thanks Cyclefree for another superb piece. I always read them even if I do not always comment.
May I ask the PB Brains Trust for clarification in respect of two related questions?
First, Mrs PtP was born in the UK of Canadian parents. The family moved back to Canada when she was eight and she was educated there until she was sixteen. Thereafter she resided at various times in the USA and France, but mostly in the UK where she now lives with me. (Lucky girl, eh?) She has dual citizenship, Canada/UK - and a passport from both countries. Is she affected by this damn legislation?
Secondly, Brexit caused me to encourage both my children to avail themselves of the Irish passport to which they are entitled by virtue of their grandmother's country of origin. Again, could they now be deprived of UK citizenship?
I know it is vanishly unlikely that any of these would be victimised by the Home Office but the mere fact that in theory they could is a sorry indictment of where our politicians (both sides of the House) have led us.
I am not sure if my view is shared, but when you go and do something and come back an hour later you are not sure if the Prime Minister is still in office
The change since the Paterson idiotic decision has sent an earthquake through politics and in such a short time
The whole Boris thing is curious.
The three things that have so damaged him will seem though the lens of history pretty inconsequential.
1) Cummings 2) Paterson 3) Party-Gate
The first two decisions look like misplaced loyalty (more conventional PMs would have thrown both under a bus) and the latter one is, no doubt, owing to people taking their lead from BJ's obvious personal lack of time for the personal Covid stuff (masks, distancing, etc). So he's certainly culpable.
But what about the three big things that he, and no-one else could have delivered.
1) Brexit 2) Covid vaccine programme 3) Levelling - up Agenda (alright not delivered, but understood and articulated).
The same Boris. This time generating outcomes which are also directly linked to his unique persona.
I understand the fury of those who consider him a fraud/liar. He sort of is. But then all memorable PMs put on a show. The "unflappable" Macmillan, Tony and his estuarine drawl, even the Iron Lady.
Almost 50% of people were against Brexit, with a higher proportion in the 'chattering classes'. If they (we? me certainly) see what we consider Boris the Destroyer getting his comeuppance, why then we'll drink to that. It's not obvious that responsibility for the success of the vaccine and the vaccination programme can be attributed to the government; it also seems that the govt is now intervening and there are complaints.
I think the vaccination program being directly driven by thankfully competent people was a vital part of its success.
By contrast in the initial weeks where the NHS was in charge of the booster vaccinations there seemed to be no urgency from it.
Thanks Cyclefree for another superb piece. I always read them even if I do not always comment.
May I ask the PB Brains Trust for clarification in respect of two related questions?
First, Mrs PtP was born in the UK of Canadian parents. The family moved back to Canada when she was eight and she was educated there until she was sixteen. Thereafter she resided at various times in the USA and France, but mostly in the UK where she now lives with me. (Lucky girl, eh?) She has dual citizenship, Canada/UK - and a passport from both countries. Is she affected by this damn legislation?
Secondly, Brexit caused me to encourage both my children to avail themselves of the Irish passport to which they are entitled by virtue of their grandmother's country of origin. Again, could they now be deprived of UK citizenship?
I know it is vanishly unlikely that any of these would be victimised by the Home Office but the mere fact that in theory they could is a sorry indictment of where our politicians (both sides of the House) have led us.
I thank you all in advance for your assistance.
The quick answer is "Yes - they could be stripped of British citizenship.
But let us take this to the next level. Under this legislation, the Home Secretary could, in theory, remove British Citizenship from everyone in Northern Ireland.
It would be a novel solution to the Article 16 and NI Protocol problem....
Anyone born post 1983 whose parents are not British citizens can now lose their British passport if the Home Secretary doesn’t like you
Is it not that both parents have to be British citizens? (etc).
I was being careful because it’s probably you are only a citizen only if both your parents only have British citizenship (no possible claim at all to any other citizenship).
Perhaps the most striking thing about @wesstreeting performance on Today (and he's had lots of plaudits) is he did a better job than most Cabinet ministers of explaining the balanced approach of Plan B. Which is the first step towards the public thinking: Lab hv a govt in waiting
Plan B is do not work in your office but go to your office christmas party.
Plan B is your must wear a mask in Next but you can stand at the bar in a crowded pub without one on.
And thats a balanced approach?
You are of course being rather selective yourself. Public transport and shopping are two things a lot of people simply can't avoid. Requiring masks there goes a little way to mitigate risks they can't avoid - unlike the local pub. Agreee with it or not, there is a rationale for it.
Vaxports, in the short period of time the current rules are supposed to be in effect, are pretty nonsensical, I'd agree.
The opposite, facemasks will likely do little to stop the spread of Covid, certainly cloth ones. If vaxports for nightclubs and large events encourage more of the unvacinnated who want to go out to get vaccinated and get their boosters that will be far more effective at reducing hospitalisations
With regards to Boris and Geidtgate. In response to a question by SKS he told the house on 28th April this year that he paid for the Downing Street refurb personally.
That isn't an error. That's a lie. He knew that was not true. And openly lied about it.
I'm losing track. Is that two or three clear cut breaches of the ministerial code we can prove over the same issue?
If Geidt quits saying he has been misled then this could be over quickly. No Prime Minister can survive endless "Did you Lie Prime Minister" questions when the answer is so clearly yes, repeatedly, to cover up vast sums of dark money being spent on wallpaper so NutNut and Tory staffers could have illegal parties.
And then we have DomCum doing his "ask me anything" show at lunchtime. Who knows what he will spew out. And the problem for the Tories isn't that you can dismiss him, can't be trusted over Barnard Castle because he always has proof...
What a ridiculous thing to be brought down on. It’s not as if he even owns the sodding flat. Hopefully he’ll be out of there soon.
The irony is that Johnson is basically going to go "for being in possession of an offensive wife".
Every single one of the stupid disasters which are ushering him out the door go straight back to Princess Nut Nut. Wallpaper - Carrie Afghan animal taxis - Carrie Parties - Carrie (at least one with her present).
I wouldn't be shocked if the current lockdown lite was her brainwave too, to try and move the media story on. I think this may well be what finishes him - Tory MPs whose patience was wearing thin anyway aren't seeing the funny side of his nuking the country to change some bad headlines.
She's done a lot of damage in other areas too - much of the economic self-harm in the name of greenery is her agenda too. Tory MPs know that too.
Had he not listened to Carrie, Boris might have been far less self distructive over the last couple of years, and actually been quite a good prime minister - it's all gone wrong for him since he decided to prioritise the desires of one of the nastiest bit of work to ever get near power.
He's had people giving him sound advice (Cummings for all he's a disreputable nutter was right about a lot of stuff - I'm fairly sure it's him we have to thank for Kate Bingham doing the vaccine procurement), but he sided with Carrie every time.
The inevitable divorce proceedings once they are out of no10 should provide some light entertainment anyway...
Woman-blaming. Edit: Even if you yourself don't intend that, it reads very easily as that and will upset half the population so is not a good argument in politics. And in any case, every single case, he only had to say no. He's the PM. She isn't.
It is possible, even in this day and age, that a woman can be at fault. This isn't misogyny - I would have said the same about Philip May had I thought he was the cause of May's useless tenure.
Boris's main fault is that he's weak and tends to bear the impression of whoever sat on him last. That didn't necessarily mean disaster - when he came to power I rather hoped he would have someone sane sit on him and get him to do sensible stuff, but it seems instead he mostly listened to Carrie Antoinette.
OK, spouse-blaming. Fair enough. But Mr J is still responsible for the decisions.
And in his particular context woman-blaming is a serious worry. We've already had the "dumped blonde woman in tears in front garden of London house carrying the blame" thing once already. It's a particularly toxic image for Mr J for very obvious reasons. So toxic I can't imagine what he was thinking.
'Sit on him' slightly unfortunate (but unintended, one assumes) in the circs, btw ...
With regards to Boris and Geidtgate. In response to a question by SKS he told the house on 28th April this year that he paid for the Downing Street refurb personally.
That isn't an error. That's a lie. He knew that was not true. And openly lied about it.
I'm losing track. Is that two or three clear cut breaches of the ministerial code we can prove over the same issue?
If Geidt quits saying he has been misled then this could be over quickly. No Prime Minister can survive endless "Did you Lie Prime Minister" questions when the answer is so clearly yes, repeatedly, to cover up vast sums of dark money being spent on wallpaper so NutNut and Tory staffers could have illegal parties.
And then we have DomCum doing his "ask me anything" show at lunchtime. Who knows what he will spew out. And the problem for the Tories isn't that you can dismiss him, can't be trusted over Barnard Castle because he always has proof...
What a ridiculous thing to be brought down on. It’s not as if he even owns the sodding flat. Hopefully he’ll be out of there soon.
The irony is that Johnson is basically going to go "for being in possession of an offensive wife".
Every single one of the stupid disasters which are ushering him out the door go straight back to Princess Nut Nut. Wallpaper - Carrie Afghan animal taxis - Carrie Parties - Carrie (at least one with her present).
I wouldn't be shocked if the current lockdown lite was her brainwave too, to try and move the media story on. I think this may well be what finishes him - Tory MPs whose patience was wearing thin anyway aren't seeing the funny side of his nuking the country to change some bad headlines.
She's done a lot of damage in other areas too - much of the economic self-harm in the name of greenery is her agenda too. Tory MPs know that too.
Had he not listened to Carrie, Boris might have been far less self distructive over the last couple of years, and actually been quite a good prime minister - it's all gone wrong for him since he decided to prioritise the desires of one of the nastiest bit of work to ever get near power.
He's had people giving him sound advice (Cummings for all he's a disreputable nutter was right about a lot of stuff - I'm fairly sure it's him we have to thank for Kate Bingham doing the vaccine procurement), but he sided with Carrie every time.
The inevitable divorce proceedings once they are out of no10 should provide some light entertainment anyway...
Woman-blaming. Edit: Even if you yourself don't intend that, it reads very easily as that and will upset half the population so is not a good argument in politics. And in any case, every single case, he only had to say no. He's the PM. She isn't.
I had a bit to do with lobbying over the Afghan pet rescue operation (I'm an animal welfare campaigner, so it's what I do), and have good reason to think that Carrie wasn't involved in that particular decision. In general I agree with Carnyx - it's pathetic for loyalists to defend the PM on the basis that "he's a great guy really, so it must be his wife that persuaded him". If you want to be supportive, fine, defend him directly, as I did with Corbyn.
It's simply the latest variant on the well known historical phenomenon of blaming the Tsar's advisers.
Russians used to write to Stalin about their imprisoned relatives thinking, 'if only the man at the top knew what was going on....'.
Incidentally I read your charity's mag for the first time in literally years this week; going back well over a decade (indeed probably over two) it used to contain so many photos of and horror stories about tortured animals that I've always routinely thrown the envelopes away unopened. Nowadays it seems really well designed and written and focused on the campaigning and action rather than obsessing over what most supporters will already understand is the problem.
My Russian friends tell me the Putinist types say that. My Chinese friends say that there is an equivalent for Xi, as well. "If only the big boss knew"....
There seems to be a human need to believe in a wise leader. Probably stems from the father image, and plays directly into religious belief.
I think a lot of people can't get their head around how many people there are. How can you reconcile your own importance to yourself with the idea that you are just one of a hundred million people? If one percent of one percent of one percent of people write to the tsar in a given day, he won't get through all the letters. And the human brain isn't really wired to fully grasp that you know someone well but they don't know you at all. It's not natural. So you see all sorts of weird behaviour, like celeb stalkers, people camped out to see royals trundle past, angry twitter idiots demanding a response, etc.
I am not sure if my view is shared, but when you go and do something and come back an hour later you are not sure if the Prime Minister is still in office
The change since the Paterson idiotic decision has sent an earthquake through politics and in such a short time
The whole Boris thing is curious.
The three things that have so damaged him will seem though the lens of history pretty inconsequential.
1) Cummings 2) Paterson 3) Party-Gate
The first two decisions look like misplaced loyalty (more conventional PMs would have thrown both under a bus) and the latter one is, no doubt, owing to people taking their lead from BJ's obvious personal lack of time for the personal Covid stuff (masks, distancing, etc). So he's certainly culpable.
But what about the three big things that he, and no-one else could have delivered.
1) Brexit 2) Covid vaccine programme 3) Levelling - up Agenda (alright not delivered, but understood and articulated).
The same Boris. This time generating outcomes which are also directly linked to his unique persona.
I understand the fury of those who consider him a fraud/liar. He sort of is. But then all memorable PMs put on a show. The "unflappable" Macmillan, Tony and his estuarine drawl, even the Iron Lady.
Your 2 and 3 are absurd. Johnson had to be told to keep his fingers off the vaccination programme, and allow it to be delivered by the experts, without the political meddling that had wrecked the PPE procurement. Thus it was delivered by someone else, and there's nothing about it tied uniquely to him. Ditto levelling up, which is not delivered but also not articulated or planned.
And being a fraud and liar is not a show, but his essence.
2 is not absurd, that he entrusted it to an expert is to his credit. If he'd done nothing and had "kept his fingers off" it would have gone through either the EU procurement process or the normal NHS procurement processes and been much delayed as it was all across Europe. He changed the procedure and the buck stops there.
The Opposition and opposition media like the Grauniad put the boot into both him and Kate Bingham for what was being done here until it became clear that what happened here was a big success - had it been a disaster you wouldn't be so quick to distance Boris from it.
It does you no favour not to give credit where credit's due.
Bingham certainly deserves a lot of credit.
The PPE procurement had been a shambles and a disaster - and probably will come to be seen as a disgrace - and had descended into a scramble-in-panic by Tory ministers and MPs to phone their mates in business (and a fair few who weren't) to get them to bid for contracts; aside from the potential corruption we landed with a load of stuff that was unusable and some that never appeared.
So the PM was read the riot act by some of the key people in SAGE. That he was in no position to tell them to sod off deserves a smidgin of credit, I guess, but that's as far as it goes. Since his tendency is to bear the imprint of whoever sat on him the latest, it was really a silver lining to one of his principal weaknesses.
One for RCS100, just because I know he likes to compare Bremen's vaccination rate with the lowest rates in Germany.
Bremen officially has just 2.5% adults (18+) unvaccinated. Surrounding Lower Saxony has 14.9% adults unvaccinated.
I'm just not buying it. There isn't that much difference between tiny Bremen and surrounding Lower Saxony. Bremen is more urban, and has more immigrants. Maybe they made more effort to reach people to get them vaccinated, but not enough to make that big a difference.
Then look at the numbers for 12-17 year olds. Bremen has vaccinated 57.7% and Lower Saxony 62.4%. It doesn't make any sense that Bremen would have quite a lot more adults vaccinated and yet fewer teenagers vaccinated.
Then look at the incidence rates, death rates and hospitalisation rates. All a bit worse in Bremen than in surrounding Lower Saxony. If there were really 6 times as many unvaccinated adults per capita in Lower Saxony you would expect to see it show up at some point in these stats.
Bremen's 97.5% adults with at least one shot isn't right. The real figure is no doubt much closer to Lower Saxony's.
Comments
I personally think that with everyone being jabbed we have to now get on with living and can't impose restrictions every time there is a new variant. If you are going to introduce restrictions though then these ones seem very inconsistent from someone living under them. The only consistency is that they are trying to do something but with the least impact on the economy. I can't see that this measures will make any difference.
It's quite a crucial difference. If we convince ourselves that the virus is inherently less fatal, then it reduces the pressure to vaccinate as quickly as possible. If we conclude that the observed reduction in fatality is due to the higher levels of population immunity faced by the Omicron wave compared to the earlier waves, then it creates a greater incentive to vaccinate more quickly.
@DavidGauke
·
54m
.
@wesstreeting
struck exactly the right tone on
@BBCr4today
. Has to be said that Labour coming across as grown-up and responsible on tackling omicron.
===
Exactly the kind of response that winds the left up about Streeting.
On the other other hand, he probably really thinks he is a Prole, because he's less posh than (say) JRM.
@paulwaugh
·
1h
The correct response by
@BBCr4today
, inviting a Labour shadow cabinet minister onto the prime 810 slot after govt refused to put up a minister.
And
@wesstreeting
creates news by confirming Labour will vote for the new Plan B on Covid
I asked Foreign Secretary @trussliz whether she had a Christmas Party last year. She paused then said no as she & her team were busy working
I asked the Vice Chair of the Tory 1922 Committee @Nus_Ghani whether the PM would have to “pay a price” if he knew about Xmas parties inside No 10. She paused & said she’d agreed to be interviewed about something else. She then added “let’s see what the investigation finds out”
https://twitter.com/bbcnickrobinson/status/1469237752826900484
If it all starts looking like an orchestrated attack by the Forces Of Remainistan a lot of Con 2019 voters will hold their nose and start to rally round...
The change since the Paterson idiotic decision has sent an earthquake through politics and in such a short time
RinkaGeronimo...They presumably deemed that the effect on people's mental health (which finally is now part of the conversation, even the Scottish woman and Wes acknowledged it) is less to shop in a mask than to be in a hospitality venue in one. Plus you might still go to Tesco's if you have to wear a mask but might give the pub a miss so it works for the economy also.
Is what they are probably thinking.
- wouldn't be surprising if Geidt either quits or re-opens his inquiry as early as today
- https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1469239494054498304
Russians used to write to Stalin about their imprisoned relatives thinking, 'if only the man at the top knew what was going on....'.
Incidentally I read your charity's mag for the first time in literally years this week; going back well over a decade (indeed probably over two) it used to contain so many photos of and horror stories about tortured animals that I've always routinely thrown the envelopes away unopened. Nowadays it seems really well designed and written and focused on the campaigning and action rather than obsessing over what most supporters will already understand is the problem.
Is it normal for a minister to apologise like that before a question time? It seems like a risky time to do it, and it didn't pay off.
I actually rate Hague fairly highly; he played a terrible hand reasonably well. The Conservative Party could have been destroyed under him, but he steadied the ship somewhat.
His answers to the question about the by-election were interesting; you could really hear the pull-and-push between his Labour Party tribalism, having spent almost his entire life within it, and his centrist views and awareness of how defeating the Tories is more important than left-wing purism.
May I ask the PB Brains Trust for clarification in respect of two related questions?
First, Mrs PtP was born in the UK of Canadian parents. The family moved back to Canada when she was eight and she was educated there until she was sixteen. Thereafter she resided at various times in the USA and France, but mostly in the UK where she now lives with me. (Lucky girl, eh?) She has dual citizenship, Canada/UK - and a passport from both countries. Is she affected by this damn legislation?
Secondly, Brexit caused me to encourage both my children to avail themselves of the Irish passport to which they are entitled by virtue of their grandmother's country of origin. Again, could they now be deprived of UK citizenship?
I know it is vanishly unlikely that any of these would be victimised by the Home Office but the mere fact that in theory they could is a sorry indictment of where our politicians (both sides of the House) have led us.
I thank you all in advance for your assistance.
He read history at Cambridge, albeit at a JCL college.
If she'd had formal paperwork from Bangladesh declaring her a citizen and a passport, there would have been no case....
That he is an incompetent fool is down to him and him alone.
Nothing to do with his wife FFS.
If the Corbyn era had one valuable outcome it was that it demonstrated beyond dispute that Labour cannot win from the left; it has to win from the centre.
Like it or loathe it, it's a fact.
The three things that have so damaged him will seem though the lens of history pretty inconsequential.
1) Cummings
2) Paterson
3) Party-Gate
The first two decisions look like misplaced loyalty (more conventional PMs would have thrown both under a bus) and the latter one is, no doubt, owing to people taking their lead from BJ's obvious personal lack of time for the personal Covid stuff (masks, distancing, etc). So he's certainly culpable.
But what about the three big things that he, and no-one else could have delivered.
1) Brexit
2) Covid vaccine programme
3) Levelling - up Agenda (alright not delivered, but understood and articulated).
The same Boris. This time generating outcomes which are also directly linked to his unique persona.
I understand the fury of those who consider him a fraud/liar. He sort of is. But then all memorable PMs put on a show. The "unflappable" Macmillan, Tony and his estuarine drawl, even the Iron Lady.
Sadly, your political views might put you the line of fire from a small number of people. If one of those people were Home Sec, and if you were important enough in amongst the 16 million people who voted remain, it's just possible.
You should file it under "never going to happen" because you probably aren't visible and important enough. But it would be far, far better to file it under "never going to happen" because they literally don't have the powers.
Boris's main fault is that he's weak and tends to bear the impression of whoever sat on him last. That didn't necessarily mean disaster - when he came to power I rather hoped he would have someone sane sit on him and get him to do sensible stuff, but it seems instead he mostly listened to Carrie Antoinette.
Was masterful in ensuring that Labour isn't the fun killer party – backs Christmas parties and says people need to enjoy themselves.
Fair play to him.
Mr. Prole, I'd add that people said the PM was being led around by Cummings before he went, so it's just swapping one person doing the PM's thinking for another. I fail to see why one criticism is fine and the other should be frowned upon. The fault remains the PM's for not having a functioning brain and having to subcontract out his thinking.
And being a fraud and liar is not a show, but his essence.
Tactical voting and Tories not turning out sure - a LD win is not inconceivable given the narrative of the past few days - but no landslide surely.
I think Boris is now on the way out, it is when not if, (unless more Black Swans come along), but my view that there is a nearly 50% chance of the next government being Tory, and nearly 50% of it being a rainbow alliance remains for now.
To lose the Sun, Telegraph and Mail in a few days looks like carelessness rather then misfortune.
BTW the Speccie network of Boris (ex editor), Stratton (wife of Forsyth), Cummings (husband of Mary Wakefield) is starting to look a bit odd.
You should hear what the rest of France says about Paris - far harsher.
Or the rest of Peru vs Lima.
But let us take this to the next level. Under this legislation, the Home Secretary could, in theory, remove British Citizenship from everyone in Northern Ireland.
It would be a novel solution to the Article 16 and NI Protocol problem....
Public transport and shopping are two things a lot of people simply can't avoid. Requiring masks there goes a little way to mitigate risks they can't avoid - unlike the local pub.
Agreee with it or not, there is a rationale for it.
Vaxports, in the short period of time the current rules are supposed to be in effect, are pretty nonsensical, I'd agree.
It's not obvious that responsibility for the success of the vaccine and the vaccination programme can be attributed to the government; it also seems that the govt is now intervening and there are complaints.
Labour need to somehow give the Liberals the nod – but it is a against party policy to voucher for the Liberals. This is the one question that Streeting struggled with on the Today programme this morning.
In regard to Wes Streeting it is pretty easy to sound good when in opposition, thats why I have not rated SKS over the past couple of years. I remember during the Blair years Ming Campbell was on Newsnight all the time sounding statesmenlike and sensible. He became leader of the Lib Dems and was hopeless.
The monarchists used her as an excuse "Stupid Austrian" and the revolutionaries use the whole 'Aristocratic Extremist Foreigner making the weak King attack the people" thing as propaganda.
The Opposition and opposition media like the Grauniad put the boot into both him and Kate Bingham for what was being done here until it became clear that what happened here was a big success - had it been a disaster you wouldn't be so quick to distance Boris from it.
It does you no favour not to give credit where credit's due.
I understand your point though. Throwing Stratton under the bus for her heartfelt grief at the mess whilst all the men involved get to keep their jobs absolutely stinks.
Just dropped in to congratulate @Cyclefree on one of the best thread headers on this site for a very long time.
I am ashamed, as a Liberal Democrat supporter, that the party of which I was once a member and activist was complicit in this erosion of individual rights, the removal of appropriate scrutiny and accountability and another step in this country's growing centralisation.
If the LDs want a USP at the next election, rolling back the State and returning power both to locally elected and accountable authorities as well as Parliament but, more important, to the individual citizen would be a good start.
Thanks again for a profoundly uncomfortable start to the day.
In the immortal words of Leon ' Ask not for whom the bell tolls Mr Johnson. It tolls for thee.....'
If the two major parties are going to insist on retaining FPTP, it's insulting the intelligence of the voters to say that Labour have to fight for every vote in every seat as a matter of principle (which is what I think he was arguing just before I turned the radio off), since that principle renders the votes of a large slug of the elecorate useless.
By contrast in the initial weeks where the NHS was in charge of the booster vaccinations there seemed to be no urgency from it.
I would vote for them on this occasion if I had a vote
C'mon mods, loosen up, season of goodwill 'n all.
And in his particular context woman-blaming is a serious worry. We've already had the "dumped blonde woman in tears in front garden of London house carrying the blame" thing once already. It's a particularly toxic image for Mr J for very obvious reasons. So toxic I can't imagine what he was thinking.
'Sit on him' slightly unfortunate (but unintended, one assumes) in the circs, btw ...
The PPE procurement had been a shambles and a disaster - and probably will come to be seen as a disgrace - and had descended into a scramble-in-panic by Tory ministers and MPs to phone their mates in business (and a fair few who weren't) to get them to bid for contracts; aside from the potential corruption we landed with a load of stuff that was unusable and some that never appeared.
So the PM was read the riot act by some of the key people in SAGE. That he was in no position to tell them to sod off deserves a smidgin of credit, I guess, but that's as far as it goes. Since his tendency is to bear the imprint of whoever sat on him the latest, it was really a silver lining to one of his principal weaknesses.
Bremen officially has just 2.5% adults (18+) unvaccinated.
Surrounding Lower Saxony has 14.9% adults unvaccinated.
I'm just not buying it. There isn't that much difference between tiny Bremen and surrounding Lower Saxony. Bremen is more urban, and has more immigrants. Maybe they made more effort to reach people to get them vaccinated, but not enough to make that big a difference.
Then look at the numbers for 12-17 year olds. Bremen has vaccinated 57.7% and Lower Saxony 62.4%. It doesn't make any sense that Bremen would have quite a lot more adults vaccinated and yet fewer teenagers vaccinated.
Then look at the incidence rates, death rates and hospitalisation rates. All a bit worse in Bremen than in surrounding Lower Saxony. If there were really 6 times as many unvaccinated adults per capita in Lower Saxony you would expect to see it show up at some point in these stats.
Bremen's 97.5% adults with at least one shot isn't right. The real figure is no doubt much closer to Lower Saxony's.
source:
https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Daten/Impfquoten-Tab.html