Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The Queen was right to give Tony Blair a knighthood – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited January 4 in General
imageThe Queen was right to give Tony Blair a knighthood – politicalbetting.com

The anti-Blair knighthood petitioners ignore one huge fact – in its entire history, Labour has only ever won five sustainable working Commons majorities – three of them under Tony Blair.

Read the full story here

«13456712

Comments

  • TimSTimS Posts: 940
    I agree. More interesting that he wasn't offered a peerage (yet).
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 8,917
    Completely agree. I was never a fan of Blair, but as a politician he was/is a colossus. Quite correct that he should have the Knighthood.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 56,564
    Where's TSE's helpful bar chart when you need it?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 35,762
    TimS said:

    I agree. More interesting that he wasn't offered a peerage (yet).

    The peerage has always been on offer if he wants it - so long as he follows the Peers’ rules about disclosure of income and interests.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 99,293
    edited January 4
    RobD said:

    Where's TSE's helpful bar chart when you need it?

    No bar chart available at the moment but I do have this which is on topic.


  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 27,024
    Absolutely correct. I don't particularly like the guy, but he had a massive impact on the country (we can argue whether it was positive or negative, but I don't think it was far to either extreme).

    A deserved knighthood.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,076
    FPT.
    This kind of meal is standard for certain classes. For your average punter it is astronomical.
    That's fine when the economy is doing well and folk can aspire to it. It is what people expect.
    It looks different when heating costs are through the roof and pay isn't keeping up. Looks like troughing and fits with the prevailing narrative I'm afraid.
  • Shouldn't Blair have been given the Order of the Thistle given that he was born and educated in Scotland?
  • Sandpit said:

    TimS said:

    I agree. More interesting that he wasn't offered a peerage (yet).

    The peerage has always been on offer if he wants it - so long as he follows the Peers’ rules about disclosure of income and interests.
    Yup, Margaret Thatcher is the last PM who ends up in the Lords.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 17,529
    Super Tony
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,076
    Blair was a bloody colossus. Can you imagine the young Blair of the 90's as LOTO right now? Would that he were.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 6,926
    On topic: Agreed. One of our greatest ever PMs based on his role in bringing peace to Ireland alone.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 604
    MaxPB said:

    Yes, absolutely agree. He deserves one and it's the right decision, even though it's a bit late. I mean Ed Davey has one and he's done precisely zero to enhance public life.

    Some good stuff on renewables.
  • Right, back at work for the first time in nearly three weeks.

    Today is grim af.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 604
    Grudgingly, I think Farage should probably have one too. For impact.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 46,148
    What the Left moaners seem to miss is that if the Queen had not given him one in the end then that would have been a political act by a constitutional monarch, something her majesty has always been scrupulous to avoid.

    Other PMs get knighted, just routine.

  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 8,917
    Sandpit said:

    TimS said:

    I agree. More interesting that he wasn't offered a peerage (yet).

    The peerage has always been on offer if he wants it - so long as he follows the Peers’ rules about disclosure of income and interests.
    He was once accused of selling them. Perhaps that could be a good wheeze for Johnson? That would buy a few rolls of wallpaper!
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 12,212
    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    malcolmg said:

    MattW said:

    Thanks for the header Mike.

    I thought we'd all agreed that it wasn't a hugely expensive lunch?

    Only to the hooray Tories on here, to any normal person it is a fortune to be swilling at lunch time just to benefit a donor. Another £5 off UC Rishi please , we need better lunches
    Yeah, it's one of those ones where I think it depends on how wealthy you are.
    I've never spent that much per person on a meal and I imagine the same is true for most of the country.
    I think it’s more people who are familiar with London prices vs not
    I lived in London for 5 years. There are Michelin star restaurants that cost less than £140 a head.
    You're a bit out of touch on this one.

    Inclusive of wine? Which ones? Would love to go!

    Realistically in a nice but not upscale restaurant you can get a veggie MWI course for £20, with fish & meat at around £25. Once you add a side dish then you are likely to be a £30+. Add in a starter or main you are probably at £40-45 for food with an additional £2-3 for half a bottle of water. Let’s say £50-60 including a tip.

    That’s before wine and/or dessert.

    Prices may be ludicrous but that’s what they are. And this is not dining at the Ritz or anywhere like that.
    Indeed. I notice that @rkrkrk claims he knows several Michelin starred restaurants in central London where one can dine for less than £140 per head. Can he list them? Note that the price must include three courses and wine, and not be subject to daft special offers like you have to have a fixed menu at 6pm on a Monday night.

    I'm not saying he is wrong but I've lived here for more than two decades and can't think of any that are much below that. I got close in Hakkasan once, but it was still a bust.
  • dixiedean said:

    Blair was a bloody colossus. Can you imagine the young Blair of the 90's as LOTO right now? Would that he were.

    Nah, Boris Johnson would have shredded him for Blair's robust support for leaving the EEC without a deal when Blair was younger.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 12,212
    dixiedean said:

    FPT.
    This kind of meal is standard for certain classes. For your average punter it is astronomical.
    That's fine when the economy is doing well and folk can aspire to it. It is what people expect.
    It looks different when heating costs are through the roof and pay isn't keeping up. Looks like troughing and fits with the prevailing narrative I'm afraid.


    But it wasn't an average day to day dinner, was it? She was entertaining important diplomatic contacts wasn't she? What is she supposed to do instead? Tell then they can't order two g&ts each?
  • TimGeoTimGeo Posts: 18
    I never voted for Blair, but despite his mixed legacy i.e. kicking quite a few contentious issues such as gas storage and pension reform down the road. He was a long serving Prime Minister with many achievements such as modernisation of the labour Party and Good Friday Agreement ( Building on the work of Sir John Major) as well as leading Britain's response to the Loss of Princess Diana and the September 11th Atrocities.

    The failure in Iraq was as much the lack of comprehensive planning and action to follow up from Britain's very successful initial involvement in the fall of Sadam. As all Political Careers end in failure its not surprising its not all positive.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 92,646
    edited January 4
    Indeed, Cameron, Brown and May should join Major and Blair so all our living ex PMs have knighthoods, or Damehoods in May's case.
    Ideally they should also all end up in the House of Lords which was where all ex PMs who left the House of Commons ended up. However since the late Baroness Thatcher no former PMs have gone to the Lords to use their expertise, instead focusing on making money or setting up charitable foundations
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 5,200
    edited January 4
    I do wonder if all this furore might have been another factor in helping the Tories slightly recently. Starmer clearly takes Blair as a partial inspiration, and part of his focus seems to have been to implicitly rehabilitate him as a model of leadership.

    Now, as that gathers steam, with a common sense of the 1990's replaying itself, and Starmer as the Blair figure against sleaze, suddenly the Mail and other Tory papers are trying to explicitly recast him as the outcast and not the mainstream, with the crucial help of some voices on the left.

    My own feelings about Blair are quite complex - I think he's quite a complex figure, for good and ill.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 15,800
    It's about time that knighthoods and damehoods were replaced with a gender-neutral title.

    If someone is a Sir and then self-identifies as female (or goes the whole hog), does their title transition to Dame?

  • HYUFD said:

    Indeed, Cameron, Brown and May should join Major and Blair so all our living ex PMs have knighthoods.

    Ideally they should also all end up in the House of Lords which was where all ex PMs who left the House of Commons ended up. However since the late Baroness Thatcher know former PMs have gone to the Lords to use their expertise, instead focusing on making money or setting up charitable foundations

    Not sure Theresa May is eligible for a knighthood unless she changes her self identity.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 46,148
    Yeh, right...


    Torcuil Crichton
    @Torcuil
    ·
    26m
    "No deal with the SNP going into an election, no deal with the SNP coming out of an election," says
    @Keir_Starmer
    when asked about a coalition with
    @NicolaSturgeon
    .
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 8,917

    dixiedean said:

    FPT.
    This kind of meal is standard for certain classes. For your average punter it is astronomical.
    That's fine when the economy is doing well and folk can aspire to it. It is what people expect.
    It looks different when heating costs are through the roof and pay isn't keeping up. Looks like troughing and fits with the prevailing narrative I'm afraid.


    But it wasn't an average day to day dinner, was it? She was entertaining important diplomatic contacts wasn't she? What is she supposed to do instead? Tell then they can't order two g&ts each?
    "Fancy a Macky D? Or perhaps a greasy spoon? Sorry we are not allowed to showcase our best gastronomy. Far too upper class."
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 92,646

    HYUFD said:

    Indeed, Cameron, Brown and May should join Major and Blair so all our living ex PMs have knighthoods.

    Ideally they should also all end up in the House of Lords which was where all ex PMs who left the House of Commons ended up. However since the late Baroness Thatcher know former PMs have gone to the Lords to use their expertise, instead focusing on making money or setting up charitable foundations

    Not sure Theresa May is eligible for a knighthood unless she changes her self identity.
    She could get a Damehood which is the equivalent for women
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 33,263

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    malcolmg said:

    MattW said:

    Thanks for the header Mike.

    I thought we'd all agreed that it wasn't a hugely expensive lunch?

    Only to the hooray Tories on here, to any normal person it is a fortune to be swilling at lunch time just to benefit a donor. Another £5 off UC Rishi please , we need better lunches
    Yeah, it's one of those ones where I think it depends on how wealthy you are.
    I've never spent that much per person on a meal and I imagine the same is true for most of the country.
    I think it’s more people who are familiar with London prices vs not
    I lived in London for 5 years. There are Michelin star restaurants that cost less than £140 a head.
    You're a bit out of touch on this one.

    Inclusive of wine? Which ones? Would love to go!

    Realistically in a nice but not upscale restaurant you can get a veggie MWI course for £20, with fish & meat at around £25. Once you add a side dish then you are likely to be a £30+. Add in a starter or main you are probably at £40-45 for food with an additional £2-3 for half a bottle of water. Let’s say £50-60 including a tip.

    That’s before wine and/or dessert.

    Prices may be ludicrous but that’s what they are. And this is not dining at the Ritz or anywhere like that.
    Indeed. I notice that @rkrkrk claims he knows several Michelin starred restaurants in central London where one can dine for less than £140 per head. Can he list them? Note that the price must include three courses and wine, and not be subject to daft special offers like you have to have a fixed menu at 6pm on a Monday night.

    I'm not saying he is wrong but I've lived here for more than two decades and can't think of any that are much below that. I got close in Hakkasan once, but it was still a bust.
    Pidgin used to be great value when Elizabeth Allen was there, incredible menu. I think that came in at £120 per person but it was about 5 years ago and prices have clearly gone up since then. Since Elizabeth Allen left they don't have the Michelin star so it's a bit cheaper, still around ~£100 for Michelin style dining so not exactly cheap.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 8,917

    dixiedean said:

    Blair was a bloody colossus. Can you imagine the young Blair of the 90's as LOTO right now? Would that he were.

    Nah, Boris Johnson would have shredded him for Blair's robust support for leaving the EEC without a deal when Blair was younger.
    I would pay money to see Blair debate with Bozo.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 92,646

    dixiedean said:

    Blair was a bloody colossus. Can you imagine the young Blair of the 90's as LOTO right now? Would that he were.

    Nah, Boris Johnson would have shredded him for Blair's robust support for leaving the EEC without a deal when Blair was younger.
    I would pay money to see Blair debate with Bozo.
    Blair and Boris the only living PMs to have won a general election with a majority over 50
  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 334

    Yeh, right...


    Torcuil Crichton
    @Torcuil
    ·
    26m
    "No deal with the SNP going into an election, no deal with the SNP coming out of an election," says
    @Keir_Starmer
    when asked about a coalition with
    @NicolaSturgeon
    .

    Depends on what you mean by a deal....
    No coalition or C&S doesn't rule out more informal arrangements.
  • jonny83jonny83 Posts: 1,090
    edited January 4
    Irrespective of your political stance and some of his policies he was a Political Giant a la Thatcher.

    There has been nobody of his stature in Politics especially as PM since. Hearing him speak during the Pandemic on a number of issues you could see he still had it as a communicator.

    The Knighthood was deserved and without the stain of Iraq it would have happened years ago.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 35,762

    dixiedean said:

    FPT.
    This kind of meal is standard for certain classes. For your average punter it is astronomical.
    That's fine when the economy is doing well and folk can aspire to it. It is what people expect.
    It looks different when heating costs are through the roof and pay isn't keeping up. Looks like troughing and fits with the prevailing narrative I'm afraid.

    But it wasn't an average day to day dinner, was it? She was entertaining important diplomatic contacts wasn't she? What is she supposed to do instead? Tell then they can't order two g&ts each?
    Well quite. It wasn’t the departmental Friday lunch party, it was a meal for a visiting foreign trade delegation. Of course you’re going to look after them.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 8,917

    It's about time that knighthoods and damehoods were replaced with a gender-neutral title.

    If someone is a Sir and then self-identifies as female (or goes the whole hog), does their title transition to Dame?

    Dir? Or perhaps Dair?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 12,212

    dixiedean said:

    FPT.
    This kind of meal is standard for certain classes. For your average punter it is astronomical.
    That's fine when the economy is doing well and folk can aspire to it. It is what people expect.
    It looks different when heating costs are through the roof and pay isn't keeping up. Looks like troughing and fits with the prevailing narrative I'm afraid.


    But it wasn't an average day to day dinner, was it? She was entertaining important diplomatic contacts wasn't she? What is she supposed to do instead? Tell then they can't order two g&ts each?
    "Fancy a Macky D? Or perhaps a greasy spoon? Sorry we are not allowed to showcase our best gastronomy. Far too upper class."
    Well exactly. There is a golden rule when eating out with clients – you have to take them somewhere nice and you never place limits on what they can order. Most make reasonable choices, and actually this doesn't seem outrageous for such a dinner to me.

    Stupid non-story.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 11,277
    edited January 4

    Sandpit said:

    TimS said:

    I agree. More interesting that he wasn't offered a peerage (yet).

    The peerage has always been on offer if he wants it - so long as he follows the Peers’ rules about disclosure of income and interests.
    He was once accused of selling them. Perhaps that could be a good wheeze for Johnson? That would buy a few rolls of wallpaper!
    The Tories are on to the peerages for people who quite by chance have given the party £3 million wheeze.

    The Conservative Party has been accused of guaranteeing peerages to a group of multi-millionaires who have donated more than £3 million to the party.
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/tory-donors-who-pay-3-million-get-seats-in-the-lords/ar-AAQoJTZ
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    He was a former prime minister. Of course he should have a knighthood.

    Frankly I think they should be in the Lords (at least that way we’d get disclosure!) but post Major I think it will be tricky to go back to that, a so knighthood for departing PMs (including Sir Boris) is the right thing.

    More interesting is that it is a Garter.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 8,917
    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Blair was a bloody colossus. Can you imagine the young Blair of the 90's as LOTO right now? Would that he were.

    Nah, Boris Johnson would have shredded him for Blair's robust support for leaving the EEC without a deal when Blair was younger.
    I would pay money to see Blair debate with Bozo.
    Blair and Boris the only living PMs to have won a general election with a majority over 50
    It doesn't make them equal. "Boris" got a bigger majority than Mrs T. Does that make him better? Don't make me guffaw please!
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,076

    dixiedean said:

    FPT.
    This kind of meal is standard for certain classes. For your average punter it is astronomical.
    That's fine when the economy is doing well and folk can aspire to it. It is what people expect.
    It looks different when heating costs are through the roof and pay isn't keeping up. Looks like troughing and fits with the prevailing narrative I'm afraid.


    But it wasn't an average day to day dinner, was it? She was entertaining important diplomatic contacts wasn't she? What is she supposed to do instead? Tell then they can't order two g&ts each?
    Yeah I get that. As I said it is very much standard. The problem is it is all of a piece. It shows up the gulf between the elite and your average folk.
    Which is a consistent running theme since "I can't possibly live on £85k" Paterson.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 6,474
    edited January 4
    Carnyx said:

    - “It is said that a good performance for the Tories in the May local elections is important.”

    Gonna be a bloodbath.

    The local elections 'narrative' depends on what the seats did last time - which was 2018 and a approx. tie between Labour and Conservative nationwide.

    However, it seems to be all London and Birmingham seats up for grabs, so I'd expect Labour to be well ahead on totals, even as that hides a closer tale.

    Spin teams are gonna have to earn their keep overnight.
    How is the Con Expectations Management team going to play it in the weeks leading up to it? I note the SCons are already rolling out the now-classic “we’re going to form a breakaway party”.
    Is it that time of the electoral cycle already?
    I can’t see how rebranding a bunch of the permanently enraged, policy free mediocrities who are the current intake as ‘independent’ will make much difference though I would enjoy the irony. It also ignores that the SCons enjoyed their greatest success in decades with a media friendly leader who managed to triangulate the Orange men with dubious tattoos, centrist Unionists and going along with whatever CCHQ wanted (though the good baroness, not being stupid, realised that that had its natural ceiling and was off to pastures new).
    Of the current crop, Dr Gulhane looks to have the necessary taste for self publicity and greasy pole climbing to replicate Ruthism, though yet to be seen if he has the smarts.
    Interested to see that Dr G had been the doc for Queens Park FC. At least that does not have the overtones of the Queen's XI FC (as IIRC expressed by another erstwhile Scon leadership contender).
    The main problem for Dr Sandesh Gulhane MSP is that he gives every impression of being an intelligent and ambitious man. In other words, a fish out of water within the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party.

    The Scottish Tories school young recruits early to keep their horizons very low. Gulhane missed those classes.

    There will never be a SCon FM pre-independence, and at a pinch the highest office Gulhane could ever achieve would be as a minister serving a SLab or SLD FM. I just don’t see that cutting his mustard.

    The Westminster and European Parliament routes are closed, so I suspect that politics’ loss will be the health services’ gain.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 3,366

    dixiedean said:

    FPT.
    This kind of meal is standard for certain classes. For your average punter it is astronomical.
    That's fine when the economy is doing well and folk can aspire to it. It is what people expect.
    It looks different when heating costs are through the roof and pay isn't keeping up. Looks like troughing and fits with the prevailing narrative I'm afraid.


    But it wasn't an average day to day dinner, was it? She was entertaining important diplomatic contacts wasn't she? What is she supposed to do instead? Tell then they can't order two g&ts each?
    "Fancy a Macky D? Or perhaps a greasy spoon? Sorry we are not allowed to showcase our best gastronomy. Far too upper class."
    Well exactly. There is a golden rule when eating out with clients – you have to take them somewhere nice and you never place limits on what they can order. Most make reasonable choices, and actually this doesn't seem outrageous for such a dinner to me.

    Stupid non-story.
    In parts of the private sector taking potential clients out for this kind of lunch would be seen as corruption.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    malcolmg said:

    MattW said:

    Thanks for the header Mike.

    I thought we'd all agreed that it wasn't a hugely expensive lunch?

    Only to the hooray Tories on here, to any normal person it is a fortune to be swilling at lunch time just to benefit a donor. Another £5 off UC Rishi please , we need better lunches
    Yeah, it's one of those ones where I think it depends on how wealthy you are.
    I've never spent that much per person on a meal and I imagine the same is true for most of the country.
    I think it’s more people who are familiar with London prices vs not
    I lived in London for 5 years. There are Michelin star restaurants that cost less than £140 a head.
    You're a bit out of touch on this one.

    Inclusive of wine? Which ones? Would love to go!

    Realistically in a nice but not upscale restaurant you can get a veggie MWI course for £20, with fish & meat at around £25. Once you add a side dish then you are likely to be a £30+. Add in a starter or main you are probably at £40-45 for food with an additional £2-3 for half a bottle of water. Let’s say £50-60 including a tip.

    That’s before wine and/or dessert.

    Prices may be ludicrous but that’s what they are. And this is not dining at the Ritz or anywhere like that.
    Indeed. I notice that @rkrkrk claims he knows several Michelin starred restaurants in central London where one can dine for less than £140 per head. Can he list them? Note that the price must include three courses and wine, and not be subject to daft special offers like you have to have a fixed menu at 6pm on a Monday night.

    I'm not saying he is wrong but I've lived here for more than two decades and can't think of any that are much below that. I got close in Hakkasan once, but it was still a bust.
    I asked the same question!

    But answer there came none…
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 35,762

    Yeh, right...


    Torcuil Crichton
    @Torcuil
    ·
    26m
    "No deal with the SNP going into an election, no deal with the SNP coming out of an election," says
    @Keir_Starmer
    when asked about a coalition with
    @NicolaSturgeon
    .

    Well that’s a quote he’ll need to find himself repeating every week or two, between now and the next election.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 12,212
    MaxPB said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    malcolmg said:

    MattW said:

    Thanks for the header Mike.

    I thought we'd all agreed that it wasn't a hugely expensive lunch?

    Only to the hooray Tories on here, to any normal person it is a fortune to be swilling at lunch time just to benefit a donor. Another £5 off UC Rishi please , we need better lunches
    Yeah, it's one of those ones where I think it depends on how wealthy you are.
    I've never spent that much per person on a meal and I imagine the same is true for most of the country.
    I think it’s more people who are familiar with London prices vs not
    I lived in London for 5 years. There are Michelin star restaurants that cost less than £140 a head.
    You're a bit out of touch on this one.

    Inclusive of wine? Which ones? Would love to go!

    Realistically in a nice but not upscale restaurant you can get a veggie MWI course for £20, with fish & meat at around £25. Once you add a side dish then you are likely to be a £30+. Add in a starter or main you are probably at £40-45 for food with an additional £2-3 for half a bottle of water. Let’s say £50-60 including a tip.

    That’s before wine and/or dessert.

    Prices may be ludicrous but that’s what they are. And this is not dining at the Ritz or anywhere like that.
    Indeed. I notice that @rkrkrk claims he knows several Michelin starred restaurants in central London where one can dine for less than £140 per head. Can he list them? Note that the price must include three courses and wine, and not be subject to daft special offers like you have to have a fixed menu at 6pm on a Monday night.

    I'm not saying he is wrong but I've lived here for more than two decades and can't think of any that are much below that. I got close in Hakkasan once, but it was still a bust.
    Pidgin used to be great value when Elizabeth Allen was there, incredible menu. I think that came in at £120 per person but it was about 5 years ago and prices have clearly gone up since then. Since Elizabeth Allen left they don't have the Michelin star so it's a bit cheaper, still around ~£100 for Michelin style dining so not exactly cheap.
    I think you can just about squeak it at Hakkasan at lunchtime if you very carefully navigate the menu so you choose only the very cheapest fixed menu options, and the cheapest wine. Sadly, that is not a strategy open to you when entertaining, because telling your guests they can only pick from the cheapest roster is gauche and impolite in the extreme.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    It's about time that knighthoods and damehoods were replaced with a gender-neutral title.

    If someone is a Sir and then self-identifies as female (or goes the whole hog), does their title transition to Dame?

    Add it to the list, but I might suggest it’s not that far up the list
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 92,646
    Sandpit said:

    Yeh, right...


    Torcuil Crichton
    @Torcuil
    ·
    26m
    "No deal with the SNP going into an election, no deal with the SNP coming out of an election," says
    @Keir_Starmer
    when asked about a coalition with
    @NicolaSturgeon
    .

    Well that’s a quote he’ll need to find himself repeating every week or two, between now and the next election.
    Which he would swiftly dump if the Tories have most seats in a hung parliament after the next general election but Labour +SNP are more than Tories+DUP
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 8,917
    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    FPT.
    This kind of meal is standard for certain classes. For your average punter it is astronomical.
    That's fine when the economy is doing well and folk can aspire to it. It is what people expect.
    It looks different when heating costs are through the roof and pay isn't keeping up. Looks like troughing and fits with the prevailing narrative I'm afraid.


    But it wasn't an average day to day dinner, was it? She was entertaining important diplomatic contacts wasn't she? What is she supposed to do instead? Tell then they can't order two g&ts each?
    Yeah I get that. As I said it is very much standard. The problem is it is all of a piece. It shows up the gulf between the elite and your average folk.
    Which is a consistent running theme since "I can't possibly live on £85k" Paterson.
    I suspect that it has just been badly managed from a news management perspective. I am sure there were plenty such dinners when Labour were in power, probably a great deal more. If they had managed it more from a "showcasing the best of British" perspective that might have killed the story. British food, British wine. The royals are good at this stuff.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 12,212
    Farooq said:

    dixiedean said:

    FPT.
    This kind of meal is standard for certain classes. For your average punter it is astronomical.
    That's fine when the economy is doing well and folk can aspire to it. It is what people expect.
    It looks different when heating costs are through the roof and pay isn't keeping up. Looks like troughing and fits with the prevailing narrative I'm afraid.


    But it wasn't an average day to day dinner, was it? She was entertaining important diplomatic contacts wasn't she? What is she supposed to do instead? Tell then they can't order two g&ts each?
    "Fancy a Macky D? Or perhaps a greasy spoon? Sorry we are not allowed to showcase our best gastronomy. Far too upper class."
    Well exactly. There is a golden rule when eating out with clients – you have to take them somewhere nice and you never place limits on what they can order. Most make reasonable choices, and actually this doesn't seem outrageous for such a dinner to me.

    Stupid non-story.
    In parts of the private sector taking potential clients out for this kind of lunch would be seen as corruption.
    Really? Which parts are these exactly? Is client entertaining corruption?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 35,762
    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    Yeh, right...


    Torcuil Crichton
    @Torcuil
    ·
    26m
    "No deal with the SNP going into an election, no deal with the SNP coming out of an election," says
    @Keir_Starmer
    when asked about a coalition with
    @NicolaSturgeon
    .

    Well that’s a quote he’ll need to find himself repeating every week or two, between now and the next election.
    Which he would swiftly dump if the Tories have most seats in a hung parliament after the next general election but Labour +SNP are more than Tories+DUP
    If that’s the situation after the next election, then another will likely be following shortly afterwards - when we can take the opportunity to remind everyone that he said one thing and did another.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 21,801
    MaxPB said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    malcolmg said:

    MattW said:

    Thanks for the header Mike.

    I thought we'd all agreed that it wasn't a hugely expensive lunch?

    Only to the hooray Tories on here, to any normal person it is a fortune to be swilling at lunch time just to benefit a donor. Another £5 off UC Rishi please , we need better lunches
    Yeah, it's one of those ones where I think it depends on how wealthy you are.
    I've never spent that much per person on a meal and I imagine the same is true for most of the country.
    I think it’s more people who are familiar with London prices vs not
    I lived in London for 5 years. There are Michelin star restaurants that cost less than £140 a head.
    You're a bit out of touch on this one.

    Inclusive of wine? Which ones? Would love to go!

    Realistically in a nice but not upscale restaurant you can get a veggie MWI course for £20, with fish & meat at around £25. Once you add a side dish then you are likely to be a £30+. Add in a starter or main you are probably at £40-45 for food with an additional £2-3 for half a bottle of water. Let’s say £50-60 including a tip.

    That’s before wine and/or dessert.

    Prices may be ludicrous but that’s what they are. And this is not dining at the Ritz or anywhere like that.
    Indeed. I notice that @rkrkrk claims he knows several Michelin starred restaurants in central London where one can dine for less than £140 per head. Can he list them? Note that the price must include three courses and wine, and not be subject to daft special offers like you have to have a fixed menu at 6pm on a Monday night.

    I'm not saying he is wrong but I've lived here for more than two decades and can't think of any that are much below that. I got close in Hakkasan once, but it was still a bust.
    Pidgin used to be great value when Elizabeth Allen was there, incredible menu. I think that came in at £120 per person but it was about 5 years ago and prices have clearly gone up since then. Since Elizabeth Allen left they don't have the Michelin star so it's a bit cheaper, still around ~£100 for Michelin style dining so not exactly cheap.
    Chez Bruce? £70 for three courses. But not especially central.... I actually tried to use it for a team meal, a few years back - pointing out that the places in central Central London that were being suggested were substantially more expensive than Chez Bruce + a booked mini-cab each way for everyone back to the office.....

    The sister restaurant, The Glasshouse at Kew is also worth going to....
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 8,917
    Charles said:

    He was a former prime minister. Of course he should have a knighthood.

    Frankly I think they should be in the Lords (at least that way we’d get disclosure!) but post Major I think it will be tricky to go back to that, a so knighthood for departing PMs (including Sir Boris) is the right thing.

    More interesting is that it is a Garter.

    I think that is quite traditional for ex PMs. IIRC Wilson, Callaghan, Thatcher and Major were/are all Garter.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    MaxPB said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    malcolmg said:

    MattW said:

    Thanks for the header Mike.

    I thought we'd all agreed that it wasn't a hugely expensive lunch?

    Only to the hooray Tories on here, to any normal person it is a fortune to be swilling at lunch time just to benefit a donor. Another £5 off UC Rishi please , we need better lunches
    Yeah, it's one of those ones where I think it depends on how wealthy you are.
    I've never spent that much per person on a meal and I imagine the same is true for most of the country.
    I think it’s more people who are familiar with London prices vs not
    I lived in London for 5 years. There are Michelin star restaurants that cost less than £140 a head.
    You're a bit out of touch on this one.

    Inclusive of wine? Which ones? Would love to go!

    Realistically in a nice but not upscale restaurant you can get a veggie MWI course for £20, with fish & meat at around £25. Once you add a side dish then you are likely to be a £30+. Add in a starter or main you are probably at £40-45 for food with an additional £2-3 for half a bottle of water. Let’s say £50-60 including a tip.

    That’s before wine and/or dessert.

    Prices may be ludicrous but that’s what they are. And this is not dining at the Ritz or anywhere like that.
    Indeed. I notice that @rkrkrk claims he knows several Michelin starred restaurants in central London where one can dine for less than £140 per head. Can he list them? Note that the price must include three courses and wine, and not be subject to daft special offers like you have to have a fixed menu at 6pm on a Monday night.

    I'm not saying he is wrong but I've lived here for more than two decades and can't think of any that are much below that. I got close in Hakkasan once, but it was still a bust.
    Pidgin used to be great value when Elizabeth Allen was there, incredible menu. I think that came in at £120 per person but it was about 5 years ago and prices have clearly gone up since then. Since Elizabeth Allen left they don't have the Michelin star so it's a bit cheaper, still around ~£100 for Michelin style dining so not exactly cheap.
    Although the menu approach makes it more challenging for corporate entertainment (rather like Sally Clarke)
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 6,474
    HYUFD said:

    Latest Baxter prediction:

    Lab 308
    Con 247
    SNP 59
    Lib Dem 11

    Labour short 18 seats of majority

    On the Redfield poll last night though the Tories would be back as largest party on the new boundaries.

    Con 283
    Lab 277

    Martin Baxter bases his predictions on a detailed mathematical modelling of 59 individual constituencies, using lots of full-sample Scottish polls as data inputs.

    You predict SCon gains in Gordon and Ayr based on… a one-off Scottish sub-sample.

    Forgive me if I tend towards the Baxter method.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 92,646

    HYUFD said:

    Latest Baxter prediction:

    Lab 308
    Con 247
    SNP 59
    Lib Dem 11

    Labour short 18 seats of majority

    On the Redfield poll last night though the Tories would be back as largest party on the new boundaries.

    Con 283
    Lab 277

    Martin Baxter bases his predictions on a detailed mathematical modelling of 59 individual constituencies, using lots of full-sample Scottish polls as data inputs.

    You predict SCon gains in Gordon and Ayr based on… a one-off Scottish sub-sample.

    Forgive me if I tend towards the Baxter method.
    The Baxter polling takes account of polls before the post no new restrictions swingback to the Tories
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 12,212
    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    FPT.
    This kind of meal is standard for certain classes. For your average punter it is astronomical.
    That's fine when the economy is doing well and folk can aspire to it. It is what people expect.
    It looks different when heating costs are through the roof and pay isn't keeping up. Looks like troughing and fits with the prevailing narrative I'm afraid.


    But it wasn't an average day to day dinner, was it? She was entertaining important diplomatic contacts wasn't she? What is she supposed to do instead? Tell then they can't order two g&ts each?
    Yeah I get that. As I said it is very much standard. The problem is it is all of a piece. It shows up the gulf between the elite and your average folk.
    Which is a consistent running theme since "I can't possibly live on £85k" Paterson.
    It might fit into some sort of hackneyed tabloid narrative, but that doesn't make it valid. The story is a complete storm in a teacup.

    Indeed, it's more of a placid gentle ripple in an espresso cup – to stretch the dining analogy much further than one should.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 46,148

    John Burn-Murdoch
    @jburnmurdoch
    NEW: first thread of 2022 is an Omicron situation

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1478339769646166019
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 12,212

    MaxPB said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    malcolmg said:

    MattW said:

    Thanks for the header Mike.

    I thought we'd all agreed that it wasn't a hugely expensive lunch?

    Only to the hooray Tories on here, to any normal person it is a fortune to be swilling at lunch time just to benefit a donor. Another £5 off UC Rishi please , we need better lunches
    Yeah, it's one of those ones where I think it depends on how wealthy you are.
    I've never spent that much per person on a meal and I imagine the same is true for most of the country.
    I think it’s more people who are familiar with London prices vs not
    I lived in London for 5 years. There are Michelin star restaurants that cost less than £140 a head.
    You're a bit out of touch on this one.

    Inclusive of wine? Which ones? Would love to go!

    Realistically in a nice but not upscale restaurant you can get a veggie MWI course for £20, with fish & meat at around £25. Once you add a side dish then you are likely to be a £30+. Add in a starter or main you are probably at £40-45 for food with an additional £2-3 for half a bottle of water. Let’s say £50-60 including a tip.

    That’s before wine and/or dessert.

    Prices may be ludicrous but that’s what they are. And this is not dining at the Ritz or anywhere like that.
    Indeed. I notice that @rkrkrk claims he knows several Michelin starred restaurants in central London where one can dine for less than £140 per head. Can he list them? Note that the price must include three courses and wine, and not be subject to daft special offers like you have to have a fixed menu at 6pm on a Monday night.

    I'm not saying he is wrong but I've lived here for more than two decades and can't think of any that are much below that. I got close in Hakkasan once, but it was still a bust.
    Pidgin used to be great value when Elizabeth Allen was there, incredible menu. I think that came in at £120 per person but it was about 5 years ago and prices have clearly gone up since then. Since Elizabeth Allen left they don't have the Michelin star so it's a bit cheaper, still around ~£100 for Michelin style dining so not exactly cheap.
    Chez Bruce? £70 for three courses. But not especially central.... I actually tried to use it for a team meal, a few years back - pointing out that the places in central Central London that were being suggested were substantially more expensive than Chez Bruce + a booked mini-cab each way for everyone back to the office.....

    The sister restaurant, The Glasshouse at Kew is also worth going to....
    Not especially central is massive understatement – it's nowhere near central London – it's in Wandsworth!
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,443
    edited January 4

    Carnyx said:

    - “It is said that a good performance for the Tories in the May local elections is important.”

    Gonna be a bloodbath.

    The local elections 'narrative' depends on what the seats did last time - which was 2018 and a approx. tie between Labour and Conservative nationwide.

    However, it seems to be all London and Birmingham seats up for grabs, so I'd expect Labour to be well ahead on totals, even as that hides a closer tale.

    Spin teams are gonna have to earn their keep overnight.
    How is the Con Expectations Management team going to play it in the weeks leading up to it? I note the SCons are already rolling out the now-classic “we’re going to form a breakaway party”.
    Is it that time of the electoral cycle already?
    I can’t see how rebranding a bunch of the permanently enraged, policy free mediocrities who are the current intake as ‘independent’ will make much difference though I would enjoy the irony. It also ignores that the SCons enjoyed their greatest success in decades with a media friendly leader who managed to triangulate the Orange men with dubious tattoos, centrist Unionists and going along with whatever CCHQ wanted (though the good baroness, not being stupid, realised that that had its natural ceiling and was off to pastures new).
    Of the current crop, Dr Gulhane looks to have the necessary taste for self publicity and greasy pole climbing to replicate Ruthism, though yet to be seen if he has the smarts.
    Interested to see that Dr G had been the doc for Queens Park FC. At least that does not have the overtones of the Queen's XI FC (as IIRC expressed by another erstwhile Scon leadership contender).
    The main problem for Dr Sandesh Gulhane MSP is that he gives every impression of being an intelligent and ambitious man. In other words, a fish out of water within the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party.

    The Scottish Tories school young recruits early to keep their horizons very low. Gulhane missed those classes.

    There will never be a SCon FM pre-independence, and at a pinch the highest office Gulhane could ever achieve would be as a minister serving a SLab or SLD FM. I just don’t see that cutting his mustard.

    The Westminster and European Parliament routes are closed, so I suspect that politics’ loss will be the health services’ gain.
    I wonder if the footie medic stuff was part of his planned CV? That's a third ScoTory MSP I can think of who likes to burnish their footie credentials [edit] possibly to keep in with an element of the electorate. Though it's hardly unique to them, given how popular footie is - one thinks of Lord Foulkes for instance.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,408
    Blair: If you accept (as I think I do) that his Iraq debacle was driven by hubris & zealotry not deceit then what you're left with is a towering politician with a broadly positive legacy who not only deserves a knighthood but so obviously deserves it that to argue otherwise is verging on perverse.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,261
    edited January 4
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    malcolmg said:

    MattW said:

    Thanks for the header Mike.

    I thought we'd all agreed that it wasn't a hugely expensive lunch?

    Only to the hooray Tories on here, to any normal person it is a fortune to be swilling at lunch time just to benefit a donor. Another £5 off UC Rishi please , we need better lunches
    Yeah, it's one of those ones where I think it depends on how wealthy you are.
    I've never spent that much per person on a meal and I imagine the same is true for most of the country.
    I think it’s more people who are familiar with London prices vs not
    I lived in London for 5 years. There are Michelin star restaurants that cost less than £140 a head.
    You're a bit out of touch on this one.

    Inclusive of wine? Which ones? Would love to go!

    Realistically in a nice but not upscale restaurant you can get a veggie MWI course for £20, with fish & meat at around £25. Once you add a side dish then you are likely to be a £30+. Add in a starter or main you are probably at £40-45 for food with an additional £2-3 for half a bottle of water. Let’s say £50-60 including a tip.

    That’s before wine and/or dessert.

    Prices may be ludicrous but that’s what they are. And this is not dining at the Ritz or anywhere like that.
    Indeed. I notice that @rkrkrk claims he knows several Michelin starred restaurants in central London where one can dine for less than £140 per head. Can he list them? Note that the price must include three courses and wine, and not be subject to daft special offers like you have to have a fixed menu at 6pm on a Monday night.

    I'm not saying he is wrong but I've lived here for more than two decades and can't think of any that are much below that. I got close in Hakkasan once, but it was still a bust.
    I asked the same question!

    But answer there came none…
    Sorry I put it on the previous thread.
    Here are 12: https://www.cntraveller.com/article/michelin-lunch-deals-london
    There are many more. You can save by googling!

  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 8,917

    Farooq said:

    dixiedean said:

    FPT.
    This kind of meal is standard for certain classes. For your average punter it is astronomical.
    That's fine when the economy is doing well and folk can aspire to it. It is what people expect.
    It looks different when heating costs are through the roof and pay isn't keeping up. Looks like troughing and fits with the prevailing narrative I'm afraid.


    But it wasn't an average day to day dinner, was it? She was entertaining important diplomatic contacts wasn't she? What is she supposed to do instead? Tell then they can't order two g&ts each?
    "Fancy a Macky D? Or perhaps a greasy spoon? Sorry we are not allowed to showcase our best gastronomy. Far too upper class."
    Well exactly. There is a golden rule when eating out with clients – you have to take them somewhere nice and you never place limits on what they can order. Most make reasonable choices, and actually this doesn't seem outrageous for such a dinner to me.

    Stupid non-story.
    In parts of the private sector taking potential clients out for this kind of lunch would be seen as corruption.
    Really? Which parts are these exactly? Is client entertaining corruption?
    It can be under the Bribery Act if not done properly. If it is all declared and transparency applied it should be fine.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 263
    I don’t know what a sensible cost is for a meal entertaining US trade envoys. It was more money than any meal I’ve paid for, but I don’t know any US trade envoys. The most expensive meal I’ve eaten was more expensive due to the inclusion of a tin of caviar that had been given to my mum by, as it happens, some Soviet trade envoys… so maybe trade envoys have expensive tastes…

    But the departmental civil servants presumably *do* know what a reasonable price is and they thought this was too expensive.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 3,366
    edited January 4

    Farooq said:

    dixiedean said:

    FPT.
    This kind of meal is standard for certain classes. For your average punter it is astronomical.
    That's fine when the economy is doing well and folk can aspire to it. It is what people expect.
    It looks different when heating costs are through the roof and pay isn't keeping up. Looks like troughing and fits with the prevailing narrative I'm afraid.


    But it wasn't an average day to day dinner, was it? She was entertaining important diplomatic contacts wasn't she? What is she supposed to do instead? Tell then they can't order two g&ts each?
    "Fancy a Macky D? Or perhaps a greasy spoon? Sorry we are not allowed to showcase our best gastronomy. Far too upper class."
    Well exactly. There is a golden rule when eating out with clients – you have to take them somewhere nice and you never place limits on what they can order. Most make reasonable choices, and actually this doesn't seem outrageous for such a dinner to me.

    Stupid non-story.
    In parts of the private sector taking potential clients out for this kind of lunch would be seen as corruption.
    Really? Which parts are these exactly? Is client entertaining corruption?
    The Bribery Act 2010 is a good place to start.
    Reading some of the comments on here, the impression that some of the people defending this lunch is that
    - this sort of thing is necessary to get a deal done
    - it has to be the best and cheaper alternatives would not "do"
    These attitudes, if used by the person giving or receiving the hospitality, would be tantamount to an admission of guilt. Of course, they're being used by commentators to justify this kind of hospitality, so we can't take it as an admission of guilt on behalf of someone else. But we seemingly have a very different attitude between government and private sector.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 11,277

    MaxPB said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    malcolmg said:

    MattW said:

    Thanks for the header Mike.

    I thought we'd all agreed that it wasn't a hugely expensive lunch?

    Only to the hooray Tories on here, to any normal person it is a fortune to be swilling at lunch time just to benefit a donor. Another £5 off UC Rishi please , we need better lunches
    Yeah, it's one of those ones where I think it depends on how wealthy you are.
    I've never spent that much per person on a meal and I imagine the same is true for most of the country.
    I think it’s more people who are familiar with London prices vs not
    I lived in London for 5 years. There are Michelin star restaurants that cost less than £140 a head.
    You're a bit out of touch on this one.

    Inclusive of wine? Which ones? Would love to go!

    Realistically in a nice but not upscale restaurant you can get a veggie MWI course for £20, with fish & meat at around £25. Once you add a side dish then you are likely to be a £30+. Add in a starter or main you are probably at £40-45 for food with an additional £2-3 for half a bottle of water. Let’s say £50-60 including a tip.

    That’s before wine and/or dessert.

    Prices may be ludicrous but that’s what they are. And this is not dining at the Ritz or anywhere like that.
    Indeed. I notice that @rkrkrk claims he knows several Michelin starred restaurants in central London where one can dine for less than £140 per head. Can he list them? Note that the price must include three courses and wine, and not be subject to daft special offers like you have to have a fixed menu at 6pm on a Monday night.

    I'm not saying he is wrong but I've lived here for more than two decades and can't think of any that are much below that. I got close in Hakkasan once, but it was still a bust.
    Pidgin used to be great value when Elizabeth Allen was there, incredible menu. I think that came in at £120 per person but it was about 5 years ago and prices have clearly gone up since then. Since Elizabeth Allen left they don't have the Michelin star so it's a bit cheaper, still around ~£100 for Michelin style dining so not exactly cheap.
    Chez Bruce? £70 for three courses. But not especially central.... I actually tried to use it for a team meal, a few years back - pointing out that the places in central Central London that were being suggested were substantially more expensive than Chez Bruce + a booked mini-cab each way for everyone back to the office.....

    The sister restaurant, The Glasshouse at Kew is also worth going to....
    Not especially central is massive understatement – it's nowhere near central London – it's in Wandsworth!
    Handy for the American embassy then.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 12,212
    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    malcolmg said:

    MattW said:

    Thanks for the header Mike.

    I thought we'd all agreed that it wasn't a hugely expensive lunch?

    Only to the hooray Tories on here, to any normal person it is a fortune to be swilling at lunch time just to benefit a donor. Another £5 off UC Rishi please , we need better lunches
    Yeah, it's one of those ones where I think it depends on how wealthy you are.
    I've never spent that much per person on a meal and I imagine the same is true for most of the country.
    I think it’s more people who are familiar with London prices vs not
    I lived in London for 5 years. There are Michelin star restaurants that cost less than £140 a head.
    You're a bit out of touch on this one.

    Inclusive of wine? Which ones? Would love to go!

    Realistically in a nice but not upscale restaurant you can get a veggie MWI course for £20, with fish & meat at around £25. Once you add a side dish then you are likely to be a £30+. Add in a starter or main you are probably at £40-45 for food with an additional £2-3 for half a bottle of water. Let’s say £50-60 including a tip.

    That’s before wine and/or dessert.

    Prices may be ludicrous but that’s what they are. And this is not dining at the Ritz or anywhere like that.
    Indeed. I notice that @rkrkrk claims he knows several Michelin starred restaurants in central London where one can dine for less than £140 per head. Can he list them? Note that the price must include three courses and wine, and not be subject to daft special offers like you have to have a fixed menu at 6pm on a Monday night.

    I'm not saying he is wrong but I've lived here for more than two decades and can't think of any that are much below that. I got close in Hakkasan once, but it was still a bust.
    I asked the same question!

    But answer there came none…
    Sorry I put it on the previous thread.
    Here are 12: https://www.cntraveller.com/article/michelin-lunch-deals-london
    There are many more. You can save by googling!

    All fall foul of the restricted menu trap – you can't take clients out for lunch and insist that they only order from the bargain basement menu. See my original criteria!
  • MattWMattW Posts: 11,691

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    malcolmg said:

    MattW said:

    Thanks for the header Mike.

    I thought we'd all agreed that it wasn't a hugely expensive lunch?

    Only to the hooray Tories on here, to any normal person it is a fortune to be swilling at lunch time just to benefit a donor. Another £5 off UC Rishi please , we need better lunches
    Yeah, it's one of those ones where I think it depends on how wealthy you are.
    I've never spent that much per person on a meal and I imagine the same is true for most of the country.
    I think it’s more people who are familiar with London prices vs not
    I lived in London for 5 years. There are Michelin star restaurants that cost less than £140 a head.
    You're a bit out of touch on this one.

    Inclusive of wine? Which ones? Would love to go!

    Realistically in a nice but not upscale restaurant you can get a veggie MWI course for £20, with fish & meat at around £25. Once you add a side dish then you are likely to be a £30+. Add in a starter or main you are probably at £40-45 for food with an additional £2-3 for half a bottle of water. Let’s say £50-60 including a tip.

    That’s before wine and/or dessert.

    Prices may be ludicrous but that’s what they are. And this is not dining at the Ritz or anywhere like that.
    Indeed. I notice that @rkrkrk claims he knows several Michelin starred restaurants in central London where one can dine for less than £140 per head. Can he list them? Note that the price must include three courses and wine, and not be subject to daft special offers like you have to have a fixed menu at 6pm on a Monday night.

    I'm not saying he is wrong but I've lived here for more than two decades and can't think of any that are much below that. I got close in Hakkasan once, but it was still a bust.
    My notepad is to hand ... :smile:
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    malcolmg said:

    MattW said:

    Thanks for the header Mike.

    I thought we'd all agreed that it wasn't a hugely expensive lunch?

    Only to the hooray Tories on here, to any normal person it is a fortune to be swilling at lunch time just to benefit a donor. Another £5 off UC Rishi please , we need better lunches
    Yeah, it's one of those ones where I think it depends on how wealthy you are.
    I've never spent that much per person on a meal and I imagine the same is true for most of the country.
    I think it’s more people who are familiar with London prices vs not
    I lived in London for 5 years. There are Michelin star restaurants that cost less than £140 a head.
    You're a bit out of touch on this one.

    Inclusive of wine? Which ones? Would love to go!

    Realistically in a nice but not upscale restaurant you can get a veggie MWI course for £20, with fish & meat at around £25. Once you add a side dish then you are likely to be a £30+. Add in a starter or main you are probably at £40-45 for food with an additional £2-3 for half a bottle of water. Let’s say £50-60 including a tip.

    That’s before wine and/or dessert.

    Prices may be ludicrous but that’s what they are. And this is not dining at the Ritz or anywhere like that.
    Indeed. I notice that @rkrkrk claims he knows several Michelin starred restaurants in central London where one can dine for less than £140 per head. Can he list them? Note that the price must include three courses and wine, and not be subject to daft special offers like you have to have a fixed menu at 6pm on a Monday night.

    I'm not saying he is wrong but I've lived here for more than two decades and can't think of any that are much below that. I got close in Hakkasan once, but it was still a bust.
    I asked the same question!

    But answer there came none…
    Sorry I put it on the previous thread.
    Here are 12: https://www.cntraveller.com/article/michelin-lunch-deals-london
    There are many more. You can save by googling!

    Lunch not dinner
    Fixed menu
  • Nah, we need to get away from handing out baubles just because you've had a certain job and more than likely earned a fortune doing it. All this "convention" bollocks needs binning.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,261
    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    malcolmg said:

    MattW said:

    Thanks for the header Mike.

    I thought we'd all agreed that it wasn't a hugely expensive lunch?

    Only to the hooray Tories on here, to any normal person it is a fortune to be swilling at lunch time just to benefit a donor. Another £5 off UC Rishi please , we need better lunches
    Yeah, it's one of those ones where I think it depends on how wealthy you are.
    I've never spent that much per person on a meal and I imagine the same is true for most of the country.
    I think it’s more people who are familiar with London prices vs not
    I lived in London for 5 years. There are Michelin star restaurants that cost less than £140 a head.
    You're a bit out of touch on this one.

    Inclusive of wine? Which ones? Would love to go!

    Realistically in a nice but not upscale restaurant you can get a veggie MWI course for £20, with fish & meat at around £25. Once you add a side dish then you are likely to be a £30+. Add in a starter or main you are probably at £40-45 for food with an additional £2-3 for half a bottle of water. Let’s say £50-60 including a tip.

    That’s before wine and/or dessert.

    Prices may be ludicrous but that’s what they are. And this is not dining at the Ritz or anywhere like that.
    Indeed. I notice that @rkrkrk claims he knows several Michelin starred restaurants in central London where one can dine for less than £140 per head. Can he list them? Note that the price must include three courses and wine, and not be subject to daft special offers like you have to have a fixed menu at 6pm on a Monday night.

    I'm not saying he is wrong but I've lived here for more than two decades and can't think of any that are much below that. I got close in Hakkasan once, but it was still a bust.
    I asked the same question!

    But answer there came none…
    Sorry I put it on the previous thread.
    Here are 12: https://www.cntraveller.com/article/michelin-lunch-deals-london
    There are many more. You can save by googling!

    Lunch not dinner
    Fixed menu
    Wasn't Liz Truss out for lunch?
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 5,200
    edited January 4
    On the pressing question of food and lunch, North Korean state media is apparently claiming Kim Jong-il invented Burritos, ten years ago.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10367237/North-Korean-mouthpiece-claims-Kim-Jong-Il-invented-BURRITOS-2011-sales-booming.html
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,076
    As predicted. I see the "nation of skivers" narrative has taken off.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,443

    Nah, we need to get away from handing out baubles just because you've had a certain job and more than likely earned a fortune doing it. All this "convention" bollocks needs binning.

    A prince can mak a belted knight,
    A marquis, duke, an a that;
    But an honest man's abon his might,
    Gude faith, he maunna fa that!
    For a that, an a that,
    Their dignities an a that;
    The pith o sense, an pride o worth,
    Are higher rank than a that.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,053

    Nah, we need to get away from handing out baubles just because you've had a certain job and more than likely earned a fortune doing it. All this "convention" bollocks needs binning.

    You need to have a word with the Palace
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 8,152
    The Royal Navy food budget while at sea is currently £3 per sailor per day.

    Military K9s get more.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 17,529
    As a man of the people, I have never been to a Michelin Star restaurant.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 33,263

    MaxPB said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    malcolmg said:

    MattW said:

    Thanks for the header Mike.

    I thought we'd all agreed that it wasn't a hugely expensive lunch?

    Only to the hooray Tories on here, to any normal person it is a fortune to be swilling at lunch time just to benefit a donor. Another £5 off UC Rishi please , we need better lunches
    Yeah, it's one of those ones where I think it depends on how wealthy you are.
    I've never spent that much per person on a meal and I imagine the same is true for most of the country.
    I think it’s more people who are familiar with London prices vs not
    I lived in London for 5 years. There are Michelin star restaurants that cost less than £140 a head.
    You're a bit out of touch on this one.

    Inclusive of wine? Which ones? Would love to go!

    Realistically in a nice but not upscale restaurant you can get a veggie MWI course for £20, with fish & meat at around £25. Once you add a side dish then you are likely to be a £30+. Add in a starter or main you are probably at £40-45 for food with an additional £2-3 for half a bottle of water. Let’s say £50-60 including a tip.

    That’s before wine and/or dessert.

    Prices may be ludicrous but that’s what they are. And this is not dining at the Ritz or anywhere like that.
    Indeed. I notice that @rkrkrk claims he knows several Michelin starred restaurants in central London where one can dine for less than £140 per head. Can he list them? Note that the price must include three courses and wine, and not be subject to daft special offers like you have to have a fixed menu at 6pm on a Monday night.

    I'm not saying he is wrong but I've lived here for more than two decades and can't think of any that are much below that. I got close in Hakkasan once, but it was still a bust.
    Pidgin used to be great value when Elizabeth Allen was there, incredible menu. I think that came in at £120 per person but it was about 5 years ago and prices have clearly gone up since then. Since Elizabeth Allen left they don't have the Michelin star so it's a bit cheaper, still around ~£100 for Michelin style dining so not exactly cheap.
    Chez Bruce? £70 for three courses. But not especially central.... I actually tried to use it for a team meal, a few years back - pointing out that the places in central Central London that were being suggested were substantially more expensive than Chez Bruce + a booked mini-cab each way for everyone back to the office.....

    The sister restaurant, The Glasshouse at Kew is also worth going to....
    But add in the wine pairings and then how much?
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 3,366

    Nah, we need to get away from handing out baubles just because you've had a certain job and more than likely earned a fortune doing it. All this "convention" bollocks needs binning.

    You need to have a word with the Palace
    You don't refer people to Downing Street or their MP routinely when they have a comment on what should or shouldn't happen, so why do it now? Are we not allowed to question the decisions of the monarch on here?
  • kjhkjh Posts: 4,779
    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Blair was a bloody colossus. Can you imagine the young Blair of the 90's as LOTO right now? Would that he were.

    Nah, Boris Johnson would have shredded him for Blair's robust support for leaving the EEC without a deal when Blair was younger.
    I would pay money to see Blair debate with Bozo.
    Blair and Boris the only living PMs to have won a general election with a majority over 50
    Firstly there are so many different factors and over 20 years that it is impossible to compare. It's meaningless to quote majorities.

    Secondly even if it were possible all it would show is is who was better at winning not who was a better PM.

    I have voted since Wilson and Heath. I put Boris bottom of my list of PMs with only May and Brown coming close.
  • twistedfirestopper3twistedfirestopper3 Posts: 1,048
    edited January 4
    I'v

    Nah, we need to get away from handing out baubles just because you've had a certain job and more than likely earned a fortune doing it. All this "convention" bollocks needs binning.

    You need to have a word with the Palace
    Liz ain't taking my calls. Maybe I need to go to fancy restaurants so I can mingle with the movers and shakers. Or perhaps @Charles can have a word for me?
  • As a man of the people, I have never been to a Michelin Star restaurant.

    Have you ever changed a Michelin tyre ?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 33,263
    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    malcolmg said:

    MattW said:

    Thanks for the header Mike.

    I thought we'd all agreed that it wasn't a hugely expensive lunch?

    Only to the hooray Tories on here, to any normal person it is a fortune to be swilling at lunch time just to benefit a donor. Another £5 off UC Rishi please , we need better lunches
    Yeah, it's one of those ones where I think it depends on how wealthy you are.
    I've never spent that much per person on a meal and I imagine the same is true for most of the country.
    I think it’s more people who are familiar with London prices vs not
    I lived in London for 5 years. There are Michelin star restaurants that cost less than £140 a head.
    You're a bit out of touch on this one.

    Inclusive of wine? Which ones? Would love to go!

    Realistically in a nice but not upscale restaurant you can get a veggie MWI course for £20, with fish & meat at around £25. Once you add a side dish then you are likely to be a £30+. Add in a starter or main you are probably at £40-45 for food with an additional £2-3 for half a bottle of water. Let’s say £50-60 including a tip.

    That’s before wine and/or dessert.

    Prices may be ludicrous but that’s what they are. And this is not dining at the Ritz or anywhere like that.
    Indeed. I notice that @rkrkrk claims he knows several Michelin starred restaurants in central London where one can dine for less than £140 per head. Can he list them? Note that the price must include three courses and wine, and not be subject to daft special offers like you have to have a fixed menu at 6pm on a Monday night.

    I'm not saying he is wrong but I've lived here for more than two decades and can't think of any that are much below that. I got close in Hakkasan once, but it was still a bust.
    I asked the same question!

    But answer there came none…
    Sorry I put it on the previous thread.
    Here are 12: https://www.cntraveller.com/article/michelin-lunch-deals-london
    There are many more. You can save by googling!

    I'm sorry, those are deal pricing, not menu prices. That's like going to Groupon and getting a voucher for a client meal. The idea is ridiculous.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 21,801

    Farooq said:

    dixiedean said:

    FPT.
    This kind of meal is standard for certain classes. For your average punter it is astronomical.
    That's fine when the economy is doing well and folk can aspire to it. It is what people expect.
    It looks different when heating costs are through the roof and pay isn't keeping up. Looks like troughing and fits with the prevailing narrative I'm afraid.


    But it wasn't an average day to day dinner, was it? She was entertaining important diplomatic contacts wasn't she? What is she supposed to do instead? Tell then they can't order two g&ts each?
    "Fancy a Macky D? Or perhaps a greasy spoon? Sorry we are not allowed to showcase our best gastronomy. Far too upper class."
    Well exactly. There is a golden rule when eating out with clients – you have to take them somewhere nice and you never place limits on what they can order. Most make reasonable choices, and actually this doesn't seem outrageous for such a dinner to me.

    Stupid non-story.
    In parts of the private sector taking potential clients out for this kind of lunch would be seen as corruption.
    Really? Which parts are these exactly? Is client entertaining corruption?
    It can be under the Bribery Act if not done properly. If it is all declared and transparency applied it should be fine.
    For some reason, this reminds me of the following -

    When Gordon Brown was PM, there were some problems with equipment etc in Afghanistan. In the style of the clunking first approach, he thought that complaints from the Army should be dealt with by a bit of er.... kicking under the table.

    So a toady backbencher tried to claim that the General in charge of the army was going over the top with the entertainment budget.... except it turned out that the General in question was taking people to the local Ask pizza/pasta chain restaurant (think Pizza Express level), complete with £9.50 bottles of Pinot Grigio...

    The people he was wining and dining there included other heads of armed forces..... Including SACEUR, IIRC
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,076

    Nah, we need to get away from handing out baubles just because you've had a certain job and more than likely earned a fortune doing it. All this "convention" bollocks needs binning.

    Yeah. I'm firmly of the view we should have one honour. For those who have done something truly exceptional, not just done their job.
    On those grounds alone winning a bloody election as Labour leader, let alone three, falls within the "truly exceptional" criterion.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 17,529

    As a man of the people, I have never been to a Michelin Star restaurant.

    Have you ever changed a Michelin tyre ?
    Nah, too expensive.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 14,638
    "Stop obsessing about the Red Wall
    The next election's battleground won't necessarily be the same as 2019
    Anthony Wells"

    https://anthonyjwells.substack.com/p/stop-obsessing-about-the-red-wall
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 17,529
    dixiedean said:

    Nah, we need to get away from handing out baubles just because you've had a certain job and more than likely earned a fortune doing it. All this "convention" bollocks needs binning.

    Yeah. I'm firmly of the view we should have one honour. For those who have done something truly exceptional, not just done their job.
    On those grounds alone winning a bloody election as Labour leader, let alone three, falls within the "truly exceptional" criterion.
    Should Corbyn get one for winning the argument though?
  • As a man of the people, I have never been to a Michelin Star restaurant.

    Wait until you become a partner at your firm.

    Quite a few people thought this was something I would say.

    AA Gill Memorial Prize:

    "London lunches are good, in Glasgow I'd rather eat shavings from a ped egg."


    https://www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/firm-year-2019-best-comment-awards
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,443
    Dura_Ace said:

    The Royal Navy food budget while at sea is currently £3 per sailor per day.

    Military K9s get more.

    Prisoners in England - £2.02. (Cant' find S & W equivalents.)
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 2,435
    Farooq said:

    dixiedean said:

    FPT.
    This kind of meal is standard for certain classes. For your average punter it is astronomical.
    That's fine when the economy is doing well and folk can aspire to it. It is what people expect.
    It looks different when heating costs are through the roof and pay isn't keeping up. Looks like troughing and fits with the prevailing narrative I'm afraid.


    But it wasn't an average day to day dinner, was it? She was entertaining important diplomatic contacts wasn't she? What is she supposed to do instead? Tell then they can't order two g&ts each?
    "Fancy a Macky D? Or perhaps a greasy spoon? Sorry we are not allowed to showcase our best gastronomy. Far too upper class."
    Well exactly. There is a golden rule when eating out with clients – you have to take them somewhere nice and you never place limits on what they can order. Most make reasonable choices, and actually this doesn't seem outrageous for such a dinner to me.

    Stupid non-story.
    In parts of the private sector taking potential clients out for this kind of lunch would be seen as corruption.
    Which parts ? We work with so many companies who have an anti bribery policy then completely ignore it when it comes to corporate at football, nights out, free boilers in their home etc etc.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 17,529
    edited January 4
    Wish Keir would actually come out with some policies, or at least policy themes, rather than vacuous statements like "security, prosperity and respect".
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 17,529

    Farooq said:

    dixiedean said:

    FPT.
    This kind of meal is standard for certain classes. For your average punter it is astronomical.
    That's fine when the economy is doing well and folk can aspire to it. It is what people expect.
    It looks different when heating costs are through the roof and pay isn't keeping up. Looks like troughing and fits with the prevailing narrative I'm afraid.


    But it wasn't an average day to day dinner, was it? She was entertaining important diplomatic contacts wasn't she? What is she supposed to do instead? Tell then they can't order two g&ts each?
    "Fancy a Macky D? Or perhaps a greasy spoon? Sorry we are not allowed to showcase our best gastronomy. Far too upper class."
    Well exactly. There is a golden rule when eating out with clients – you have to take them somewhere nice and you never place limits on what they can order. Most make reasonable choices, and actually this doesn't seem outrageous for such a dinner to me.

    Stupid non-story.
    In parts of the private sector taking potential clients out for this kind of lunch would be seen as corruption.
    Which parts ? We work with so many companies who have an anti bribery policy then completely ignore it when it comes to corporate at football, nights out, free boilers in their home etc etc.
    They probably only have an anti bribery policy because some lawyer has told them they need one.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 11,691
    edited January 4
    There seem to be a well-reviewed few around in the one Michelin star range for around £70 per head.

    I would need to go to all of them before judging :smile: .

    eg
    https://www.squaremeal.co.uk/restaurants/gymkhana_7808
    https://www.squaremeal.co.uk/restaurants/elystan-street_11179

    Haven't lived in London recently enough to guess.

    The high end of my personal dining list was more around just under £100 for two some years ago.

    (Still waiting for Headline @Scott_xP to identify his alleged lie.)
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 263

    Wish Keir would actually come out with some policies, or at least policy themes, rather than vacuous statements like "security, prosperity and respect".

    He’s put three wordstogether. That’s all Johnson’s policies are.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,076
    Andy_JS said:

    "Stop obsessing about the Red Wall
    The next election's battleground won't necessarily be the same as 2019
    Anthony Wells"

    https://anthonyjwells.substack.com/p/stop-obsessing-about-the-red-wall

    Great article thanks for sharing.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,408
    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    dixiedean said:

    FPT.
    This kind of meal is standard for certain classes. For your average punter it is astronomical.
    That's fine when the economy is doing well and folk can aspire to it. It is what people expect.
    It looks different when heating costs are through the roof and pay isn't keeping up. Looks like troughing and fits with the prevailing narrative I'm afraid.


    But it wasn't an average day to day dinner, was it? She was entertaining important diplomatic contacts wasn't she? What is she supposed to do instead? Tell then they can't order two g&ts each?
    "Fancy a Macky D? Or perhaps a greasy spoon? Sorry we are not allowed to showcase our best gastronomy. Far too upper class."
    Well exactly. There is a golden rule when eating out with clients – you have to take them somewhere nice and you never place limits on what they can order. Most make reasonable choices, and actually this doesn't seem outrageous for such a dinner to me.

    Stupid non-story.
    In parts of the private sector taking potential clients out for this kind of lunch would be seen as corruption.
    Really? Which parts are these exactly? Is client entertaining corruption?
    The Bribery Act 2010 is a good place to start.
    Reading some of the comments on here, the impression that some of the people defending this lunch is that
    - this sort of thing is necessary to get a deal done
    - it has to be the best and cheaper alternatives would not "do"
    These attitudes, if used by the person giving or receiving the hospitality, would be tantamount to an admission of guilt. Of course, they're being used by commentators to justify this kind of hospitality, so we can't take it as an admission of guilt on behalf of someone else. But we seemingly have a very different attitude between government and private sector.
    Hospitality on a scale seeping into bribery - holidays, all pm lunches, sports & ents tickets, clubs, I'll stop there but you get the idea - used to be rife in the City but I gather that these days things are rather more circumspect and controlled.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 21,801
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    malcolmg said:

    MattW said:

    Thanks for the header Mike.

    I thought we'd all agreed that it wasn't a hugely expensive lunch?

    Only to the hooray Tories on here, to any normal person it is a fortune to be swilling at lunch time just to benefit a donor. Another £5 off UC Rishi please , we need better lunches
    Yeah, it's one of those ones where I think it depends on how wealthy you are.
    I've never spent that much per person on a meal and I imagine the same is true for most of the country.
    I think it’s more people who are familiar with London prices vs not
    I lived in London for 5 years. There are Michelin star restaurants that cost less than £140 a head.
    You're a bit out of touch on this one.

    Inclusive of wine? Which ones? Would love to go!

    Realistically in a nice but not upscale restaurant you can get a veggie MWI course for £20, with fish & meat at around £25. Once you add a side dish then you are likely to be a £30+. Add in a starter or main you are probably at £40-45 for food with an additional £2-3 for half a bottle of water. Let’s say £50-60 including a tip.

    That’s before wine and/or dessert.

    Prices may be ludicrous but that’s what they are. And this is not dining at the Ritz or anywhere like that.
    Indeed. I notice that @rkrkrk claims he knows several Michelin starred restaurants in central London where one can dine for less than £140 per head. Can he list them? Note that the price must include three courses and wine, and not be subject to daft special offers like you have to have a fixed menu at 6pm on a Monday night.

    I'm not saying he is wrong but I've lived here for more than two decades and can't think of any that are much below that. I got close in Hakkasan once, but it was still a bust.
    Pidgin used to be great value when Elizabeth Allen was there, incredible menu. I think that came in at £120 per person but it was about 5 years ago and prices have clearly gone up since then. Since Elizabeth Allen left they don't have the Michelin star so it's a bit cheaper, still around ~£100 for Michelin style dining so not exactly cheap.
    Chez Bruce? £70 for three courses. But not especially central.... I actually tried to use it for a team meal, a few years back - pointing out that the places in central Central London that were being suggested were substantially more expensive than Chez Bruce + a booked mini-cab each way for everyone back to the office.....

    The sister restaurant, The Glasshouse at Kew is also worth going to....
    But add in the wine pairings and then how much?
    Lunch at either is £55... When I looked at the project lunch it was a bit less (think £45). The budget was £100 a head for the completion of a successful project*. I pointed out that at the time the lunch price + taxi + something like £30 a head would fit in the budget.

    *If anyone thinks that excessive, consider that was the year that one of the directors of the company (and a 25% shareholder) bought a new country house from his dividends.
Sign In or Register to comment.