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?
I dropped into Windsor for lunch yesterday. Very nice pizza
On topic, of course Tony Blair should get his knighthood, the same as previous PMs have all been eventually honoured (or offered it). The fact he has had to wait I presume is the equivalent of some time out on the naughty step. Perhaps until now he turned it down, but I doubt it, I think Liz might have said make that horrid man wait.
If Tone had to wait 14 years, Boris could be waiting 40.
I believe the issue was the Duke of Edinburgh - the timing does seem to point to him being the blocker.
That makes sense.
I can't imagine the DofE could've given two shits about any of that.
I imagine it's they were aware of what the reaction would be. Or that the Queen is still bitter about Britannia.
I believe Keir Starmer. If the Tories are not able to form a Government (ie they have fewer than, say, 305-10 seats), then Starmer will become PM. He needs no deals with the SNP in particular (he might certainly reach some sort of accommodation with the LibDems).
Are the Nats really going to vote with the opposition Tories to bring down his new administration and risk a second immediate election (the FTPA will have been repealed by then) at which they will be pilloried? I don't think so.
The nearest equivalent is February 1974, when it was the Conservatives, terrified of another election, who abstained and let Harold Wilson form a minority administration.
I imagine that is what will happen again. So Starmer governs for several months - no deals with anyone - and goes to the country a few months later to secure a majority. Which he will likely obtain.
Which sort of Lab policies do you think the SNP might oppose? Lovely, progressive cuddly owls for everyone, or gulags for scroungers and red, white & blue flag waving to show Johnny EU that SKS is as tough as BJ.
Dunno. You're a Nat - you tell us. All I'm saying is that Starmer will not need to do any deals with the SNP (contrary to the view by several here that he will be compelled to reach an accommodation which might include a second independence referendum).
If we end up with a hung parliament but with Tories having most seats but not enough for a majority even with the DUP, then Starmer would likely end up PM.
However he would find it near impossible to get any legislation on English domestic legislation through as there may still be a majority of Tory MPs in England and the SNP would abstain if Starmer did not give them indyref2 + devomax.
Hardly
Labour loses an English Domestic legislation vote - new election with Labour now having a message to convince SNP voters to vote Labour....
Why SNP voters? They wouldn't dream of interfering in English domestic legislation. No skin off their nose.
This election was created by the SNP not supporting something - vote Labour or look forward to continual elections.
The entire point of the October 74 election was to get a Labour Majority. This would be an almost identical election.
more bollox
And your reasons for calling it bollox? Oh you don't have any because you've pickled your brain.
Well smartarse , yet another clown who likes to insult through their ignorance. I have forgotten more than your tiny brain will ever know for sure. Since you wrote the bollox and have no clue , I can presume you have little brain to pickle, and prefer just to write bollox. The SNP voted against as Labour had ratted on their promise of a referendum and the SNP had said they would not have that and so gave Labour their just desserts. I happened to know that but any less than intelligent person could have easily checked the facts before they ignorantly posted rubbish and then had the temerity to question someone who knew the answer. You are far from as smart as you think you are sunshine and your use of old Scottish tropes says plenty about you, inferiority complex.
I believe Keir Starmer. If the Tories are not able to form a Government (ie they have fewer than, say, 305-10 seats), then Starmer will become PM. He needs no deals with the SNP in particular (he might certainly reach some sort of accommodation with the LibDems).
Are the Nats really going to vote with the opposition Tories to bring down his new administration and risk a second immediate election (the FTPA will have been repealed by then) at which they will be pilloried? I don't think so.
The nearest equivalent is February 1974, when it was the Conservatives, terrified of another election, who abstained and let Harold Wilson form a minority administration.
I imagine that is what will happen again. So Starmer governs for several months - no deals with anyone - and goes to the country a few months later to secure a majority. Which he will likely obtain.
Which sort of Lab policies do you think the SNP might oppose? Lovely, progressive cuddly owls for everyone, or gulags for scroungers and red, white & blue flag waving to show Johnny EU that SKS is as tough as BJ.
Dunno. You're a Nat - you tell us. All I'm saying is that Starmer will not need to do any deals with the SNP (contrary to the view by several here that he will be compelled to reach an accommodation which might include a second independence referendum).
If we end up with a hung parliament but with Tories having most seats but not enough for a majority even with the DUP, then Starmer would likely end up PM.
However he would find it near impossible to get any legislation on English domestic legislation through as there may still be a majority of Tory MPs in England and the SNP would abstain if Starmer did not give them indyref2 + devomax.
Hardly
Labour loses an English Domestic legislation vote - new election with Labour now having a message to convince SNP voters to vote Labour....
Why SNP voters? They wouldn't dream of interfering in English domestic legislation. No skin off their nose.
This election was created by the SNP not supporting something - vote Labour or look forward to continual elections.
The entire point of the October 74 election was to get a Labour Majority. This would be an almost identical election.
more bollox
And your reasons for calling it bollox? Oh you don't have any because you've pickled your brain.
Well, the SNP improved their vote dramatically in October 1974. No sign of SNP to Labour switchers then.
On topic, of course Tony Blair should get his knighthood, the same as previous PMs have all been eventually honoured (or offered it). The fact he has had to wait I presume is the equivalent of some time out on the naughty step. Perhaps until now he turned it down, but I doubt it, I think Liz might have said make that horrid man wait.
If Tone had to wait 14 years, Boris could be waiting 40.
I believe the issue was the Duke of Edinburgh - the timing does seem to point to him being the blocker.
That makes sense.
I always said that we missed a trick there - HRH hires the PM. In modern style, DoE should have done the *exit* interviews for Prime Ministers.....
"Philip, we want to you express yourself on this one. Say what you really think."
The thought of that awaiting them might have improved performance, no end....
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
The Ivy is now like Pattiserie Valerie. They have diluted the sh&t out of an original and stuck it everywhere. No idea if the food is any good. Or whether the relocated "original" is still special.
The original hasn't been relocated AFAIK – last time I visited it was still on West Street, WC2, where it has always been?
I like the Ivy diaspora (within London) for entertaining as they have a full-strength vegetarian menu (rather than a few choices) and 99% of the time at least one of my clients is veggie.
Yes sorry my mistake. It has been super tarted-up that said, a lot of chrome ISTR when I last passed it.
.... only after he has answered the question, "Have you ever seen what happens when a bomb is dropped on a primary school?". Or, "have you seen a grenade go off and kill a civilian?"
Boris is a bad PM, but he is a way, way more honest PM than Tony Blair.
Because Boris (like many politicians) is a liar, but he lies about the little things, like money and sex and parties.
Someone who takes his country to war under false pretences is not an acceptable person, whether he won 3 elections or not.
This is no need to weigh the rights and wrongs of Blair. What Blair did was quite simply very, very wrong.
Meanwhile. Number 10 ruling out abolition of VAT on fuel and an end to environmental levies. Martyn Lewis was apocalyptic about the cost of living on WATO.
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
The Ivy is now like Pattiserie Valerie. They have diluted the sh&t out of an original and stuck it everywhere. No idea if the food is any good. Or whether the relocated "original" is still special.
The original hasn't been relocated AFAIK – last time I visited it was still on West Street, WC2, where it has always been?
I like the Ivy diaspora (within London) for entertaining as they have a full-strength vegetarian menu (rather than a few choices) and 99% of the time at least one of my clients is veggie.
Yes sorry my mistake. It has been super tarted-up that said, a lot of chrome ISTR when I last passed it.
I think they have refurbished it but I didn't find it at all de trop – really enjoyed it actually.
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
Were you not embarrassed to let him pay whether rich or not.
On topic, of course Tony Blair should get his knighthood, the same as previous PMs have all been eventually honoured (or offered it). The fact he has had to wait I presume is the equivalent of some time out on the naughty step. Perhaps until now he turned it down, but I doubt it, I think Liz might have said make that horrid man wait.
If Tone had to wait 14 years, Boris could be waiting 40.
I believe the issue was the Duke of Edinburgh - the timing does seem to point to him being the blocker.
That makes sense.
I always said that we missed a trick there - HRH hires the PM. In modern style, DoE should have done the *exit* interviews for Prime Ministers.....
"Philip, we want to you express yourself on this one. Say what you really think."
The thought of that awaiting them might have improved performance, no end....
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
The Ivy is now like Pattiserie Valerie. They have diluted the sh&t out of an original and stuck it everywhere. No idea if the food is any good. Or whether the relocated "original" is still special.
Ivy Asia is good value for what you get, can easily do it for £40-50 per person without wine eat well, a half decent bottle of wine and two people can have dinner for under £130, given the setting and the food quality it's a good date spot or under 10 year anniversary dinner.
On topic, of course Tony Blair should get his knighthood, the same as previous PMs have all been eventually honoured (or offered it). The fact he has had to wait I presume is the equivalent of some time out on the naughty step. Perhaps until now he turned it down, but I doubt it, I think Liz might have said make that horrid man wait.
If Tone had to wait 14 years, Boris could be waiting 40.
I believe the issue was the Duke of Edinburgh - the timing does seem to point to him being the blocker.
That makes sense.
I can't imagine the DofE could've given two shits about any of that.
I imagine it's they were aware of what the reaction would be. Or that the Queen is still bitter about Britannia.
I don't know, I can see over the years Liz saying how pissed off she is with him and DofE said well f##k that little shit, make him wait...and with his death, perhaps Liz thought time to give it to him.
I believe Keir Starmer. If the Tories are not able to form a Government (ie they have fewer than, say, 305-10 seats), then Starmer will become PM. He needs no deals with the SNP in particular (he might certainly reach some sort of accommodation with the LibDems).
Are the Nats really going to vote with the opposition Tories to bring down his new administration and risk a second immediate election (the FTPA will have been repealed by then) at which they will be pilloried? I don't think so.
The nearest equivalent is February 1974, when it was the Conservatives, terrified of another election, who abstained and let Harold Wilson form a minority administration.
I imagine that is what will happen again. So Starmer governs for several months - no deals with anyone - and goes to the country a few months later to secure a majority. Which he will likely obtain.
Which sort of Lab policies do you think the SNP might oppose? Lovely, progressive cuddly owls for everyone, or gulags for scroungers and red, white & blue flag waving to show Johnny EU that SKS is as tough as BJ.
Dunno. You're a Nat - you tell us. All I'm saying is that Starmer will not need to do any deals with the SNP (contrary to the view by several here that he will be compelled to reach an accommodation which might include a second independence referendum).
Given 'Starmer in Sturgeon's handbag' will be part of the Tory GE campaign it's hard to know when it's rolled out on here by a Tory supporter whether they believe it or not. Fwiw I agree with you. I think Labour would govern as a minority without C&S rather than do a deal with the SNP involving SindyRef2. But I also reckon there's more chance of a SindyRef2 in this parliament than most seem to think. The betting has it at about a 1 in 4 chance and I concur with this. To listen to many on here the odds ought to be well into double digits.
With Delta still around and a lot of unvaxxed, could be a troubling winter there
Not could be. Is.
A colleague of my wife's sent a photo as she was leaving work* of a gurney in the corridor with curtains around it and an oxygen cylinder next to it. She labelled the photo "Next available bed". This was two weeks ago. Things have only got a lot worse since then.
"Hitler was the most successful German leader ever."
Discuss.
Hmmm. Hitler -
1) Killed Hitler 2) Implemented policies that resulted in the complete destruction of Fascism in Germany. And most of the rest of the world.
3) successfully shifted the focus of the next generation of Germans' energy from militarism to economic performance, thus making Germany the powerhouse and political leader of Europe. {he was clearly playing the long game, sacrificing his personal image for the good of the German people 50 years hence)
Bit like Japan. Tojo was a genius?
I'm trying to remember the AltHistory story where some people form the future end up in the 1940s - "So you are saying that Germany and Japan are now pacifists? And the Jews have built the new Sparta?"
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
The Ivy is now like Pattiserie Valerie. They have diluted the sh&t out of an original and stuck it everywhere. No idea if the food is any good. Or whether the relocated "original" is still special.
The original hasn't been relocated AFAIK – last time I visited it was still on West Street, WC2, where it has always been?
I like the Ivy diaspora (within London) for entertaining as they have a full-strength vegetarian menu (rather than a few choices) and 99% of the time at least one of my clients is veggie.
Yes sorry my mistake. It has been super tarted-up that said, a lot of chrome ISTR when I last passed it.
I think they have refurbished it but I didn't find it at all de trop – really enjoyed it actually.
I went to the Club there not so long ago (although jeez would have been pre-pandemic) and that was v nice.
The Ivy stays in my mind because when I was very young we went as a family and I recall to this moment my mother being aghast at being offered water instead of something alcoholic by the waiter.
I believe Keir Starmer. If the Tories are not able to form a Government (ie they have fewer than, say, 305-10 seats), then Starmer will become PM. He needs no deals with the SNP in particular (he might certainly reach some sort of accommodation with the LibDems).
Are the Nats really going to vote with the opposition Tories to bring down his new administration and risk a second immediate election (the FTPA will have been repealed by then) at which they will be pilloried? I don't think so.
The nearest equivalent is February 1974, when it was the Conservatives, terrified of another election, who abstained and let Harold Wilson form a minority administration.
I imagine that is what will happen again. So Starmer governs for several months - no deals with anyone - and goes to the country a few months later to secure a majority. Which he will likely obtain.
Which sort of Lab policies do you think the SNP might oppose? Lovely, progressive cuddly owls for everyone, or gulags for scroungers and red, white & blue flag waving to show Johnny EU that SKS is as tough as BJ.
Dunno. You're a Nat - you tell us. All I'm saying is that Starmer will not need to do any deals with the SNP (contrary to the view by several here that he will be compelled to reach an accommodation which might include a second independence referendum).
If we end up with a hung parliament but with Tories having most seats but not enough for a majority even with the DUP but still more MPs than Labour + LDs + Green, then Starmer would likely end up PM.
However he would find it near impossible to get any legislation on English domestic legislation through as there may still be a majority of Tory MPs in England and the SNP would abstain if Starmer did not give them indyref2 + devomax.
Once you have your ministers in place, you can do quite a lot without needing to pass new laws, though.
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
The Ivy is now like Pattiserie Valerie. They have diluted the sh&t out of an original and stuck it everywhere. No idea if the food is any good. Or whether the relocated "original" is still special.
Ivy Asia is good value for what you get, can easily do it for £40-50 per person without wine eat well, a half decent bottle of wine and two people can have dinner for under £130, given the setting and the food quality it's a good date spot or under 10 year anniversary dinner.
Intrigued by the under 10 year criteria. Should the 11th year be more or less expensive? Or just a different vibe?
I'm sure it can be done for £50-70 per head without wine by going for a lunch sitting and specifically picking cheaper menu items but that's not what happens at client meetings. Let's be realistic about how those operate.
According to Harderns, it is £77 per head, based on:
"On a three course dinner, half a bottle of wine, coffee, cover charge, service and VAT.
On topic, of course Tony Blair should get his knighthood, the same as previous PMs have all been eventually honoured (or offered it). The fact he has had to wait I presume is the equivalent of some time out on the naughty step. Perhaps until now he turned it down, but I doubt it, I think Liz might have said make that horrid man wait.
If Tone had to wait 14 years, Boris could be waiting 40.
I believe the issue was the Duke of Edinburgh - the timing does seem to point to him being the blocker.
That makes sense.
I can't imagine the DofE could've given two shits about any of that.
I imagine it's they were aware of what the reaction would be. Or that the Queen is still bitter about Britannia.
I imagine it's more to do with the establishment's resentment at any successful Labour politician, and came more from the various vile faceless flunkies in the "Royal household" than from the family itself.
For my two pennth, the best meal I have ever had was at a restaurant that doesn't even have a michelin star. It wasn't cheap, but it certainly isn't the most expensive meal I have had.
OT: Of course Blair deserves the knighthood - the fact that it sticks in so many left/liberal gullets is just an added bonus!
Speaking from the left, it doesn't stick in my gullet at all. And I'm pretty confident I speak for most of us, who are entirely relaxed about Tony's belated recognition.
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
Were you not embarrassed to let him pay whether rich or not.
Why would one be embarrassed. This is not something one would spend one's own money on, and the mega rich person in this instance seems to enjoy dispensing his/her largesse.
I have nothing against the rich spending their money. It is far better than the alternative.
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
The Ivy is now like Pattiserie Valerie. They have diluted the sh&t out of an original and stuck it everywhere. No idea if the food is any good. Or whether the relocated "original" is still special.
I like the Ivy Brasserie chain - good mid market place for a business lunch
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
The Ivy is now like Pattiserie Valerie. They have diluted the sh&t out of an original and stuck it everywhere. No idea if the food is any good. Or whether the relocated "original" is still special.
Ivy Asia is good value for what you get, can easily do it for £40-50 per person without wine eat well, a half decent bottle of wine and two people can have dinner for under £130, given the setting and the food quality it's a good date spot or under 10 year anniversary dinner.
Intrigued by the under 10 year criteria. Should the 11th year be more or less expensive? Or just a different vibe?
I think 10 years plus would need a bit more thought than a dinner out at Ivy Asia. It's a nice, though fairly low effort, evening.
I believe Keir Starmer. If the Tories are not able to form a Government (ie they have fewer than, say, 305-10 seats), then Starmer will become PM. He needs no deals with the SNP in particular (he might certainly reach some sort of accommodation with the LibDems).
Are the Nats really going to vote with the opposition Tories to bring down his new administration and risk a second immediate election (the FTPA will have been repealed by then) at which they will be pilloried? I don't think so.
The nearest equivalent is February 1974, when it was the Conservatives, terrified of another election, who abstained and let Harold Wilson form a minority administration.
I imagine that is what will happen again. So Starmer governs for several months - no deals with anyone - and goes to the country a few months later to secure a majority. Which he will likely obtain.
Which sort of Lab policies do you think the SNP might oppose? Lovely, progressive cuddly owls for everyone, or gulags for scroungers and red, white & blue flag waving to show Johnny EU that SKS is as tough as BJ.
Dunno. You're a Nat - you tell us. All I'm saying is that Starmer will not need to do any deals with the SNP (contrary to the view by several here that he will be compelled to reach an accommodation which might include a second independence referendum).
If we end up with a hung parliament but with Tories having most seats but not enough for a majority even with the DUP but still more MPs than Labour + LDs + Green, then Starmer would likely end up PM.
However he would find it near impossible to get any legislation on English domestic legislation through as there may still be a majority of Tory MPs in England and the SNP would abstain if Starmer did not give them indyref2 + devomax.
The 1974 experience showed the minority Labour government did suffer a number of Commons defeats and doubtless the same would happen again. But their opinion poll ratings soared and everyone knew that another election would happen very soon.
Starmer's problem, as it was for Wilson, would be if a second election did not give Labour a solid majority. But my guess is that this would be more like 64-66, not Feb-October 1974.
I would not be so sure, if the Tories had a majority in England but there was no Tory majority UK wide, as was the case in 1964 and February 1974 then there would be little change in Scotland. Why would SNP voters care as Carnyx correctly states, if Starmer cannot get votes on English laws through given they have an SNP FM and UK Labour PM anyway but Starmer refuses to give them indyref2?
The most Starmer could hope for is to make enough gains for a majority in England too, which as you correctly state Wilson finally got in 1966.
It's all speculation and a long way off but if Labour goes into a second election with a hefty opinion lead, then they will make gains in Scotland as well as England and Wales. The Tories of course will be in total disarray whoever is their new Leader. Result Starmer overall majority of at least 50 and definitely no second Scottish referendum. Anyway, you heard it here first.
I apologize for turning pb.com into the fancy restaurant review session. My bad.
Up here in the Red Wall we could have a discussion about whether the drive thru KFC or Maccy D's is better and where best to launch your packaging out of the car window.
I'm sure there's a decent eatery somewhere but who would risk the town centre to find it?
I apologize for turning pb.com into the fancy restaurant review session. My bad.
The biggest bill I have ever paid in a restaurant was just in November there, for my grand-daughter's 21st. There were 14 of us, and the bill including drinks came to £400. I paid half of that, with the grandparents "on the other side" paying the other half.
For my two pennth, the best meal I have ever had was at a restaurant that doesn't even have a michelin star. It wasn't cheap, but it certainly isn't the most expensive meal I have had.
It's not so very surprising - the best is very often those on the way up, trying their best to succeed.
One of the best meals I ever had was in "Rosemary Lane", situated in a fighting pub that had lost its license (they took over the last few years of the lease), on a rough road with a view of the DLR.
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?
I dropped into Windsor for lunch yesterday. Very nice pizza
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
The Ivy is now like Pattiserie Valerie. They have diluted the sh&t out of an original and stuck it everywhere. No idea if the food is any good. Or whether the relocated "original" is still special.
I like the Ivy Brasserie chain - good mid market place for a business lunch
Well I haven't been to any of them so will take your word for it but often these things don't end well as (cf Jamie Oliver) not enough attention is paid to the food and drink part.
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
The Ivy is now like Pattiserie Valerie. They have diluted the sh&t out of an original and stuck it everywhere. No idea if the food is any good. Or whether the relocated "original" is still special.
I was there recently-ish, and the original still has some weird vibe that makes it unique. Or at least that is my perception. It is hard to disentangle personal associations and memories. You'd have to send an Ivy virgin there - who is at the same time an experienced restaurant goer - to get a true opinion.
The food is reliably good but not amazing, yet that was always the case.
And I rather like the spin-offs - for this same reason. The food is reliably good. It won't blow you away, but it will be good. Great places for dates
I apologize for turning pb.com into the fancy restaurant review session. My bad.
The biggest bill I have ever paid in a restaurant was just in November there, for my grand-daughter's 21st. There were 14 of us, and the bill including drinks came to £400. I paid half of that, with the grandparents "on the other side" paying the other half.
£400 for 14 people with drinks, where did you go, the Hungry Horse?
I believe Keir Starmer. If the Tories are not able to form a Government (ie they have fewer than, say, 305-10 seats), then Starmer will become PM. He needs no deals with the SNP in particular (he might certainly reach some sort of accommodation with the LibDems).
Are the Nats really going to vote with the opposition Tories to bring down his new administration and risk a second immediate election (the FTPA will have been repealed by then) at which they will be pilloried? I don't think so.
The nearest equivalent is February 1974, when it was the Conservatives, terrified of another election, who abstained and let Harold Wilson form a minority administration.
I imagine that is what will happen again. So Starmer governs for several months - no deals with anyone - and goes to the country a few months later to secure a majority. Which he will likely obtain.
Which sort of Lab policies do you think the SNP might oppose? Lovely, progressive cuddly owls for everyone, or gulags for scroungers and red, white & blue flag waving to show Johnny EU that SKS is as tough as BJ.
Dunno. You're a Nat - you tell us. All I'm saying is that Starmer will not need to do any deals with the SNP (contrary to the view by several here that he will be compelled to reach an accommodation which might include a second independence referendum).
If we end up with a hung parliament but with Tories having most seats but not enough for a majority even with the DUP, then Starmer would likely end up PM.
However he would find it near impossible to get any legislation on English domestic legislation through as there may still be a majority of Tory MPs in England and the SNP would abstain if Starmer did not give them indyref2 + devomax.
Hardly
Labour loses an English Domestic legislation vote - new election with Labour now having a message to convince SNP voters to vote Labour....
Why SNP voters? They wouldn't dream of interfering in English domestic legislation. No skin off their nose.
This election was created by the SNP not supporting something - vote Labour or look forward to continual elections.
The entire point of the October 74 election was to get a Labour Majority. This would be an almost identical election.
more bollox
And your reasons for calling it bollox? Oh you don't have any because you've pickled your brain.
Well smartarse , yet another clown who likes to insult through their ignorance. I have forgotten more than your tiny brain will ever know for sure. Since you wrote the bollox and have no clue , I can presume you have little brain to pickle, and prefer just to write bollox. The SNP voted against as Labour had ratted on their promise of a referendum and the SNP had said they would not have that and so gave Labour their just desserts. I happened to know that but any less than intelligent person could have easily checked the facts before they ignorantly posted rubbish and then had the temerity to question someone who knew the answer. You are far from as smart as you think you are sunshine and your use of old Scottish tropes says plenty about you, inferiority complex.
Sorry but what was you actual point within the diatribe of insults that merely emphasis how bad you are at creating an argument.
Where does your idea of a referendum appear from - the entire point in all posts so far is that 1 wasn't offered - as Labour once they have x amounts of seats can rule without explicit SNP support because the SNP can hardly vote with the Tories can they?
+ there is zero chance of a Scottish referendum being included within a Labour Manifesto so I can't see where your "promise" is coming from in the first place.
As I said diatribe full of insults containing an ill informed thought that has no basis within the thesis being discussed
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
The Ivy is now like Pattiserie Valerie. They have diluted the sh&t out of an original and stuck it everywhere. No idea if the food is any good. Or whether the relocated "original" is still special.
I like the Ivy Brasserie chain - good mid market place for a business lunch
Well I haven't been to any of them so will take your word for it but often these things don't end well as (cf Jamie Oliver) not enough attention is paid to the food and drink part.
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
The Ivy is now like Pattiserie Valerie. They have diluted the sh&t out of an original and stuck it everywhere. No idea if the food is any good. Or whether the relocated "original" is still special.
I was there recently-ish, and the original still has some weird vibe that makes it unique. Or at least that is my perception. It is hard to disentangle personal associations and memories. You'd have to send an Ivy virgin there - who is at the same time an experienced restaurant goer - to get a true opinion.
The food is reliably good but not amazing, yet that was always the case.
And I rather like the spin-offs - for this same reason. The food is reliably good. It won't blow you away, but it will be good. Great places for dates
Yes, that last sentence is how I'd class most of the Ivy chain, reliably decent, reasonably good value for what you get and good date nights.
"Hitler was the most successful German leader ever."
Discuss.
Hmmm. Hitler -
1) Killed Hitler 2) Implemented policies that resulted in the complete destruction of Fascism in Germany. And most of the rest of the world.
3) successfully shifted the focus of the next generation of Germans' energy from militarism to economic performance, thus making Germany the powerhouse and political leader of Europe. {he was clearly playing the long game, sacrificing his personal image for the good of the German people 50 years hence)
Bit like Japan. Tojo was a genius?
I'm trying to remember the AltHistory story where some people form the future end up in the 1940s - "So you are saying that Germany and Japan are now pacifists? And the Jews have built the new Sparta?"
Yep, there's always the element of "we'll see" to any historical judgment.
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
The Ivy is now like Pattiserie Valerie. They have diluted the sh&t out of an original and stuck it everywhere. No idea if the food is any good. Or whether the relocated "original" is still special.
Ivy Asia is good value for what you get, can easily do it for £40-50 per person without wine eat well, a half decent bottle of wine and two people can have dinner for under £130, given the setting and the food quality it's a good date spot or under 10 year anniversary dinner.
Intrigued by the under 10 year criteria. Should the 11th year be more or less expensive? Or just a different vibe?
I think 10 years plus would need a bit more thought than a dinner out at Ivy Asia. It's a nice, though fairly low effort, evening.
I suspect in reality more years passing tends to less effort rather than more, except on the big round numbers.
I believe Keir Starmer. If the Tories are not able to form a Government (ie they have fewer than, say, 305-10 seats), then Starmer will become PM. He needs no deals with the SNP in particular (he might certainly reach some sort of accommodation with the LibDems).
Are the Nats really going to vote with the opposition Tories to bring down his new administration and risk a second immediate election (the FTPA will have been repealed by then) at which they will be pilloried? I don't think so.
The nearest equivalent is February 1974, when it was the Conservatives, terrified of another election, who abstained and let Harold Wilson form a minority administration.
I imagine that is what will happen again. So Starmer governs for several months - no deals with anyone - and goes to the country a few months later to secure a majority. Which he will likely obtain.
Which sort of Lab policies do you think the SNP might oppose? Lovely, progressive cuddly owls for everyone, or gulags for scroungers and red, white & blue flag waving to show Johnny EU that SKS is as tough as BJ.
Dunno. You're a Nat - you tell us. All I'm saying is that Starmer will not need to do any deals with the SNP (contrary to the view by several here that he will be compelled to reach an accommodation which might include a second independence referendum).
If we end up with a hung parliament but with Tories having most seats but not enough for a majority even with the DUP, then Starmer would likely end up PM.
However he would find it near impossible to get any legislation on English domestic legislation through as there may still be a majority of Tory MPs in England and the SNP would abstain if Starmer did not give them indyref2 + devomax.
Hardly
Labour loses an English Domestic legislation vote - new election with Labour now having a message to convince SNP voters to vote Labour....
Why SNP voters? They wouldn't dream of interfering in English domestic legislation. No skin off their nose.
This election was created by the SNP not supporting something - vote Labour or look forward to continual elections.
The entire point of the October 74 election was to get a Labour Majority. This would be an almost identical election.
more bollox
And your reasons for calling it bollox? Oh you don't have any because you've pickled your brain.
Well smartarse , yet another clown who likes to insult through their ignorance. I have forgotten more than your tiny brain will ever know for sure. Since you wrote the bollox and have no clue , I can presume you have little brain to pickle, and prefer just to write bollox. The SNP voted against as Labour had ratted on their promise of a referendum and the SNP had said they would not have that and so gave Labour their just desserts. I happened to know that but any less than intelligent person could have easily checked the facts before they ignorantly posted rubbish and then had the temerity to question someone who knew the answer. You are far from as smart as you think you are sunshine and your use of old Scottish tropes says plenty about you, inferiority complex.
Your insulting rants work best when they are short. Two or three lines involving "turnip", "stupid clueless pinhead", "ignorant Tory vegetable scum" etc. Then end. After three sentences of this, the eyes glaze over and the reader moves on to the next comment
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
The Ivy is now like Pattiserie Valerie. They have diluted the sh&t out of an original and stuck it everywhere. No idea if the food is any good. Or whether the relocated "original" is still special.
Ivy Asia is good value for what you get, can easily do it for £40-50 per person without wine eat well, a half decent bottle of wine and two people can have dinner for under £130, given the setting and the food quality it's a good date spot or under 10 year anniversary dinner.
Intrigued by the under 10 year criteria. Should the 11th year be more or less expensive? Or just a different vibe?
I think 10 years plus would need a bit more thought than a dinner out at Ivy Asia. It's a nice, though fairly low effort, evening.
Alexa, suggest a PR stunt for my restaurant....."Plug in a phone charger about halfway into a wall outlet, then touch a penny to the exposed prongs"....Alexa suggest a different PR stunt....
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
The Ivy is now like Pattiserie Valerie. They have diluted the sh&t out of an original and stuck it everywhere. No idea if the food is any good. Or whether the relocated "original" is still special.
I like the Ivy Brasserie chain - good mid market place for a business lunch
Well I haven't been to any of them so will take your word for it but often these things don't end well as (cf Jamie Oliver) not enough attention is paid to the food and drink part.
I’d actually compare it to Bread Street Kitchen. Jamie’s was a step too close to ASK
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
Were you not embarrassed to let him pay whether rich or not.
Absolutely not. He did all the ordering, including the Cristal champagne, it was clear from the off that he was gonna stand the bill. And he is insanely rich
Most stressful meal (to put onto expenses as well) was the time I had to meet up with a client, and the only available slot in his calendar was 8pm onwards, so he said he'd take me to a nice restaurant and we could have a meal on it.
All the senior bods at work told me, pay for it, pay for it all.
The restaurant he took me to?
Stringfellows, who knew the lapdancing club also had a restaurant attached, the meal and drinks were reasonable (£400 all in but most of that was drinks), the thing that terrified me and wasn't sure if I might get sacked.
The heavenly money you buy at the front door which you give to the ladies for a (private) lap dance, that came to over £2,000.
Alexa, suggest a PR stunt for my restaurant....."Plug in a phone charger about halfway into a wall outlet, then touch a penny to the exposed prongs"....Alexa suggest a different PR stunt....
I'm not that cynical. Mistakes happen, how you deal with it (by taking it on the head, rather than penalising the staff involved) is what was way more important.
I believe Keir Starmer. If the Tories are not able to form a Government (ie they have fewer than, say, 305-10 seats), then Starmer will become PM. He needs no deals with the SNP in particular (he might certainly reach some sort of accommodation with the LibDems).
Are the Nats really going to vote with the opposition Tories to bring down his new administration and risk a second immediate election (the FTPA will have been repealed by then) at which they will be pilloried? I don't think so.
The nearest equivalent is February 1974, when it was the Conservatives, terrified of another election, who abstained and let Harold Wilson form a minority administration.
I imagine that is what will happen again. So Starmer governs for several months - no deals with anyone - and goes to the country a few months later to secure a majority. Which he will likely obtain.
Which sort of Lab policies do you think the SNP might oppose? Lovely, progressive cuddly owls for everyone, or gulags for scroungers and red, white & blue flag waving to show Johnny EU that SKS is as tough as BJ.
Dunno. You're a Nat - you tell us. All I'm saying is that Starmer will not need to do any deals with the SNP (contrary to the view by several here that he will be compelled to reach an accommodation which might include a second independence referendum).
If we end up with a hung parliament but with Tories having most seats but not enough for a majority even with the DUP, then Starmer would likely end up PM.
However he would find it near impossible to get any legislation on English domestic legislation through as there may still be a majority of Tory MPs in England and the SNP would abstain if Starmer did not give them indyref2 + devomax.
Hardly
Labour loses an English Domestic legislation vote - new election with Labour now having a message to convince SNP voters to vote Labour....
Why SNP voters? They wouldn't dream of interfering in English domestic legislation. No skin off their nose.
This election was created by the SNP not supporting something - vote Labour or look forward to continual elections.
The entire point of the October 74 election was to get a Labour Majority. This would be an almost identical election.
What's the point? As the SNP voters comprise about 5% of the electorate, it's what happens elsewhere that counts. And you did say "domestic policy".
We have at least achieved something on PB today namely that far from being a weakly-executed chain seeking to monetise a popular or established brand (eg. Patisserie Valerie, Jamie Oliver) Ivy restaurants throughout the country are in fact a welcome addition to the High Street dining scene and good for dates and anniversaries (up to and including 10th wedding anniversaries).
And are therefore unlikely to go the way of other such attempts (eg. Patisserie Valerie, Jamie Oliver).
I believe Keir Starmer. If the Tories are not able to form a Government (ie they have fewer than, say, 305-10 seats), then Starmer will become PM. He needs no deals with the SNP in particular (he might certainly reach some sort of accommodation with the LibDems).
Are the Nats really going to vote with the opposition Tories to bring down his new administration and risk a second immediate election (the FTPA will have been repealed by then) at which they will be pilloried? I don't think so.
The nearest equivalent is February 1974, when it was the Conservatives, terrified of another election, who abstained and let Harold Wilson form a minority administration.
I imagine that is what will happen again. So Starmer governs for several months - no deals with anyone - and goes to the country a few months later to secure a majority. Which he will likely obtain.
Which sort of Lab policies do you think the SNP might oppose? Lovely, progressive cuddly owls for everyone, or gulags for scroungers and red, white & blue flag waving to show Johnny EU that SKS is as tough as BJ.
Dunno. You're a Nat - you tell us. All I'm saying is that Starmer will not need to do any deals with the SNP (contrary to the view by several here that he will be compelled to reach an accommodation which might include a second independence referendum).
If we end up with a hung parliament but with Tories having most seats but not enough for a majority even with the DUP, then Starmer would likely end up PM.
However he would find it near impossible to get any legislation on English domestic legislation through as there may still be a majority of Tory MPs in England and the SNP would abstain if Starmer did not give them indyref2 + devomax.
Hardly
Labour loses an English Domestic legislation vote - new election with Labour now having a message to convince SNP voters to vote Labour....
Why SNP voters? They wouldn't dream of interfering in English domestic legislation. No skin off their nose.
This election was created by the SNP not supporting something - vote Labour or look forward to continual elections.
The entire point of the October 74 election was to get a Labour Majority. This would be an almost identical election.
more bollox
And your reasons for calling it bollox? Oh you don't have any because you've pickled your brain.
Well smartarse , yet another clown who likes to insult through their ignorance. I have forgotten more than your tiny brain will ever know for sure. Since you wrote the bollox and have no clue , I can presume you have little brain to pickle, and prefer just to write bollox. The SNP voted against as Labour had ratted on their promise of a referendum and the SNP had said they would not have that and so gave Labour their just desserts. I happened to know that but any less than intelligent person could have easily checked the facts before they ignorantly posted rubbish and then had the temerity to question someone who knew the answer. You are far from as smart as you think you are sunshine and your use of old Scottish tropes says plenty about you, inferiority complex.
Your insulting rants work best when they are short. Two or three lines involving "turnip", "stupid clueless pinhead", "ignorant Tory vegetable scum" etc. Then end. After three sentences of this, the eyes glaze over and the reader moves on to the next comment
Just some helpful advice for the future
Good advice. Perhaps you should heed it yourself before you embark on some of your lengthier diatribes?
Most stressful meal (to put onto expenses as well) was the time I had to meet up with a client, and the only available slot in his calendar was 8pm onwards, so he said he'd take me to a nice restaurant and we could have a meal on it.
All the senior bods at work told me, pay for it, pay for it all.
The restaurant he took me to?
Stringfellows, who knew the lapdancing club also had a restaurant attached, the meal and drinks were reasonable (£400 all in but most of that was drinks), the thing that terrified me and wasn't sure if I might get sacked.
The heavenly money you buy at the front door which you give to the ladies for a (private) lap dance, that came to over £2,000.
Wasn't sure how to put that on expenses.
Only time I went to Stringfellow was as a guest of a friend (Rev Goatboy for those who know the other PB).
There wasn't a bill because well it was the Rev and we were with Pete but the stories.....
The Viking fish and chip shop on Milton Road, Cambridge. Always does good fish 'n chips; not much queuing, and you don't get wannabe posh w@nkers or politicos in there.
The waitressing service when we unwrap at home is second to none ...
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
The Ivy is now like Pattiserie Valerie. They have diluted the sh&t out of an original and stuck it everywhere. No idea if the food is any good. Or whether the relocated "original" is still special.
Ivy Asia is good value for what you get, can easily do it for £40-50 per person without wine eat well, a half decent bottle of wine and two people can have dinner for under £130, given the setting and the food quality it's a good date spot or under 10 year anniversary dinner.
Intrigued by the under 10 year criteria. Should the 11th year be more or less expensive? Or just a different vibe?
I think 10 years plus would need a bit more thought than a dinner out at Ivy Asia. It's a nice, though fairly low effort, evening.
I suspect in reality more years passing tends to less effort rather than more, except on the big round numbers.
Maybe, I've only been married for 3 years, so couldn't say, my experience is that for the first anniversary we went on a nice holiday to the Seychelles, for the next two we've just had nice dinners such as those suggested today. I'd like to think both of us would put more effort in as time goes on, maybe a fool's hope!
World number one Novak Djokovic will defend his Australian Open title later this month after receiving a medical exemption from having a Covid-19 vaccination.
I bet if he wasn't world number one that might have been a different decision.
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
The Ivy is now like Pattiserie Valerie. They have diluted the sh&t out of an original and stuck it everywhere. No idea if the food is any good. Or whether the relocated "original" is still special.
Ivy Asia is good value for what you get, can easily do it for £40-50 per person without wine eat well, a half decent bottle of wine and two people can have dinner for under £130, given the setting and the food quality it's a good date spot or under 10 year anniversary dinner.
Intrigued by the under 10 year criteria. Should the 11th year be more or less expensive? Or just a different vibe?
World number one Novak Djokovic will defend his Australian Open title later this month after receiving a medical exemption from having a Covid-19 vaccination.
I bet if he wasn't world number one that might have been a different decision.
The perfect example of one rule for elites and another for everyone else.
I believe Keir Starmer. If the Tories are not able to form a Government (ie they have fewer than, say, 305-10 seats), then Starmer will become PM. He needs no deals with the SNP in particular (he might certainly reach some sort of accommodation with the LibDems).
Are the Nats really going to vote with the opposition Tories to bring down his new administration and risk a second immediate election (the FTPA will have been repealed by then) at which they will be pilloried? I don't think so.
The nearest equivalent is February 1974, when it was the Conservatives, terrified of another election, who abstained and let Harold Wilson form a minority administration.
I imagine that is what will happen again. So Starmer governs for several months - no deals with anyone - and goes to the country a few months later to secure a majority. Which he will likely obtain.
Which sort of Lab policies do you think the SNP might oppose? Lovely, progressive cuddly owls for everyone, or gulags for scroungers and red, white & blue flag waving to show Johnny EU that SKS is as tough as BJ.
Dunno. You're a Nat - you tell us. All I'm saying is that Starmer will not need to do any deals with the SNP (contrary to the view by several here that he will be compelled to reach an accommodation which might include a second independence referendum).
If we end up with a hung parliament but with Tories having most seats but not enough for a majority even with the DUP, then Starmer would likely end up PM.
However he would find it near impossible to get any legislation on English domestic legislation through as there may still be a majority of Tory MPs in England and the SNP would abstain if Starmer did not give them indyref2 + devomax.
Hardly
Labour loses an English Domestic legislation vote - new election with Labour now having a message to convince SNP voters to vote Labour....
Why SNP voters? They wouldn't dream of interfering in English domestic legislation. No skin off their nose.
This election was created by the SNP not supporting something - vote Labour or look forward to continual elections.
The entire point of the October 74 election was to get a Labour Majority. This would be an almost identical election.
more bollox
And your reasons for calling it bollox? Oh you don't have any because you've pickled your brain.
Well smartarse , yet another clown who likes to insult through their ignorance. I have forgotten more than your tiny brain will ever know for sure. Since you wrote the bollox and have no clue , I can presume you have little brain to pickle, and prefer just to write bollox. The SNP voted against as Labour had ratted on their promise of a referendum and the SNP had said they would not have that and so gave Labour their just desserts. I happened to know that but any less than intelligent person could have easily checked the facts before they ignorantly posted rubbish and then had the temerity to question someone who knew the answer. You are far from as smart as you think you are sunshine and your use of old Scottish tropes says plenty about you, inferiority complex.
Your insulting rants work best when they are short. Two or three lines involving "turnip", "stupid clueless pinhead", "ignorant Tory vegetable scum" etc. Then end. After three sentences of this, the eyes glaze over and the reader moves on to the next comment
Just some helpful advice for the future
Good advice. Perhaps you should heed it yourself before you embark on some of your lengthier diatribes?
I disagree. Leon's insulting rants are much better when they're ~three paragraphs long, and he's allowed some space to build up some narrative flair. Malcolm is indeed much better short and pithy.
We have at least achieved something on PB today namely that far from being a weakly-executed chain seeking to monetise a popular or established brand (eg. Patisserie Valerie, Jamie Oliver) Ivy restaurants throughout the country are in fact a welcome addition to the High Street dining scene and good for dates and anniversaries (up to and including 10th wedding anniversaries).
And are therefore unlikely to go the way of other such attempts (eg. Patisserie Valerie, Jamie Oliver).
Wasn't Patisserie Valerie issue more to do with some errh "interesting accounting"?
World number one Novak Djokovic will defend his Australian Open title later this month after receiving a medical exemption from having a Covid-19 vaccination.
I bet if he wasn't world number one that might have been a different decision.
?????? There's no way on God's green earth he's "medically exempt".
I believe Keir Starmer. If the Tories are not able to form a Government (ie they have fewer than, say, 305-10 seats), then Starmer will become PM. He needs no deals with the SNP in particular (he might certainly reach some sort of accommodation with the LibDems).
Are the Nats really going to vote with the opposition Tories to bring down his new administration and risk a second immediate election (the FTPA will have been repealed by then) at which they will be pilloried? I don't think so.
The nearest equivalent is February 1974, when it was the Conservatives, terrified of another election, who abstained and let Harold Wilson form a minority administration.
I imagine that is what will happen again. So Starmer governs for several months - no deals with anyone - and goes to the country a few months later to secure a majority. Which he will likely obtain.
Which sort of Lab policies do you think the SNP might oppose? Lovely, progressive cuddly owls for everyone, or gulags for scroungers and red, white & blue flag waving to show Johnny EU that SKS is as tough as BJ.
Dunno. You're a Nat - you tell us. All I'm saying is that Starmer will not need to do any deals with the SNP (contrary to the view by several here that he will be compelled to reach an accommodation which might include a second independence referendum).
If we end up with a hung parliament but with Tories having most seats but not enough for a majority even with the DUP, then Starmer would likely end up PM.
However he would find it near impossible to get any legislation on English domestic legislation through as there may still be a majority of Tory MPs in England and the SNP would abstain if Starmer did not give them indyref2 + devomax.
Hardly
Labour loses an English Domestic legislation vote - new election with Labour now having a message to convince SNP voters to vote Labour....
Why SNP voters? They wouldn't dream of interfering in English domestic legislation. No skin off their nose.
This election was created by the SNP not supporting something - vote Labour or look forward to continual elections.
The entire point of the October 74 election was to get a Labour Majority. This would be an almost identical election.
What's the point? As the SNP voters comprise about 5% of the electorate, it's what happens elsewhere that counts. And you did say "domestic policy".
Point is that he has no clue what he is talking about.
World number one Novak Djokovic will defend his Australian Open title later this month after receiving a medical exemption from having a Covid-19 vaccination.
I bet if he wasn't world number one that might have been a different decision.
?????? There's no way on God's green earth he's "medically exempt".
Well, the one loophole is he has just recovered from COVID, but that's amazing timing (and his social media doesn't give any suggestion he has). Other than you have to have a pretty serious underlying medical condition, which seems somewhat unlikely for a elite sports star.
Most stressful meal (to put onto expenses as well) was the time I had to meet up with a client, and the only available slot in his calendar was 8pm onwards, so he said he'd take me to a nice restaurant and we could have a meal on it.
All the senior bods at work told me, pay for it, pay for it all.
The restaurant he took me to?
Stringfellows, who knew the lapdancing club also had a restaurant attached, the meal and drinks were reasonable (£400 all in but most of that was drinks), the thing that terrified me and wasn't sure if I might get sacked.
The heavenly money you buy at the front door which you give to the ladies for a (private) lap dance, that came to over £2,000.
Wasn't sure how to put that on expenses.
I have never been (and hate strip clubs) but I’m reliably informed that the food at Stringfellows is actually very good? Or at least it used to be?
We have at least achieved something on PB today namely that far from being a weakly-executed chain seeking to monetise a popular or established brand (eg. Patisserie Valerie, Jamie Oliver) Ivy restaurants throughout the country are in fact a welcome addition to the High Street dining scene and good for dates and anniversaries (up to and including 10th wedding anniversaries).
And are therefore unlikely to go the way of other such attempts (eg. Patisserie Valerie, Jamie Oliver).
Wasn't Patisserie Valerie issue more to do with some errh "interesting accounting"?
We have at least achieved something on PB today namely that far from being a weakly-executed chain seeking to monetise a popular or established brand (eg. Patisserie Valerie, Jamie Oliver) Ivy restaurants throughout the country are in fact a welcome addition to the High Street dining scene and good for dates and anniversaries (up to and including 10th wedding anniversaries).
And are therefore unlikely to go the way of other such attempts (eg. Patisserie Valerie, Jamie Oliver).
No guarantee of that, if they dilute the food quality and keep prices the same they'll fail the same as Jamie Oliver did. That's the underlying issue, the failures served crap food for high prices (relative to the quality). The Ivy spin offs, as yet, don't do that, the food is reliably decent, the locations are great, the restaurants themselves have a good vibe and the service is solid, plus easy to do for 2 under £100 without a bottle of wine.
Most stressful meal (to put onto expenses as well) was the time I had to meet up with a client, and the only available slot in his calendar was 8pm onwards, so he said he'd take me to a nice restaurant and we could have a meal on it.
All the senior bods at work told me, pay for it, pay for it all.
The restaurant he took me to?
Stringfellows, who knew the lapdancing club also had a restaurant attached, the meal and drinks were reasonable (£400 all in but most of that was drinks), the thing that terrified me and wasn't sure if I might get sacked.
The heavenly money you buy at the front door which you give to the ladies for a (private) lap dance, that came to over £2,000.
Wasn't sure how to put that on expenses.
I have never been (and hate strip clubs) but I’m reliably informed that the food at Stringfellows is actually very good? Or at least it used to be?
At Suntory (sadly no longer with us) on St.James's you could pay £150 for prawn tempura.
Not that I ever did, mind. I was taken there, though and bonkers isn't the word for the prices and this was a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, TB yes of course he should have (had ages ago) a knighthood and probably more than that.
What on earth did they do? Take you down in a Roller to Essex to choose your prawn before it was seined?
A Russian (v rich, you know the profile type) friend said let's go. To me and a friend. We gulped because it had a reputation for being fiendishly expensive. The menu bore this out. Cheapest set menu which was six pieces of sushi = £87. My friend, thinking oh god, ordered that. I ordered the next one up - some sushi IIRC and some tempura = £147. Expensive but I thought sod it I'll never come here again. No way were these full meals just the very cheapest two things on the menu. My Russian friend ordered food at around £500 and very kindly shared it with us. There was then a tense wait as the bill arrived at which point the Russian friend paused, smiled, and then said - here I'll settle it.
Mega rich friend of mine took me to Kaspar’s at the Savoy for a Xmas lunch about four/five years ago
He dropped £1000+. On lunch. For 2
And the thing is, apart from the oysters and caviar (which are quite hard to get wrong, you just have to serve them) it wasn’t very good. Totally unmemorable
We then jumped in his chauffeured and armoured Bentley, went to the Ivy, where he dropped another £3k buying everyone champagne and martinis and the like
Unfortunately (for me) he’s now completely sober
The Ivy is now like Pattiserie Valerie. They have diluted the sh&t out of an original and stuck it everywhere. No idea if the food is any good. Or whether the relocated "original" is still special.
Ivy Asia is good value for what you get, can easily do it for £40-50 per person without wine eat well, a half decent bottle of wine and two people can have dinner for under £130, given the setting and the food quality it's a good date spot or under 10 year anniversary dinner.
Intrigued by the under 10 year criteria. Should the 11th year be more or less expensive? Or just a different vibe?
I think 10 years plus would need a bit more thought than a dinner out at Ivy Asia. It's a nice, though fairly low effort, evening.
I suspect in reality more years passing tends to less effort rather than more, except on the big round numbers.
Maybe, I've only been married for 3 years, so couldn't say, my experience is that for the first anniversary we went on a nice holiday to the Seychelles, for the next two we've just had nice dinners such as those suggested today. I'd like to think both of us would put more effort in as time goes on, maybe a fool's hope!
It's my 20th wedding anniversary this year. I normally put almost zero effort into celebrating it - but this was also true at the start of the marriage. Perhaps I'll try to raise my game this year...
We have at least achieved something on PB today namely that far from being a weakly-executed chain seeking to monetise a popular or established brand (eg. Patisserie Valerie, Jamie Oliver) Ivy restaurants throughout the country are in fact a welcome addition to the High Street dining scene and good for dates and anniversaries (up to and including 10th wedding anniversaries).
And are therefore unlikely to go the way of other such attempts (eg. Patisserie Valerie, Jamie Oliver).
No guarantee of that, if they dilute the food quality and keep prices the same they'll fail the same as Jamie Oliver did. That's the underlying issue, the failures served crap food for high prices (relative to the quality). The Ivy spin offs, as yet, don't do that, the food is reliably decent, the locations are great, the restaurants themselves have a good vibe and the service is solid, plus easy to do for 2 under £100 without a bottle of wine.
Yes the peril of many such places. But in the meantime (as in the heyday of Uber) it sounds like a good thing.
I believe Keir Starmer. If the Tories are not able to form a Government (ie they have fewer than, say, 305-10 seats), then Starmer will become PM. He needs no deals with the SNP in particular (he might certainly reach some sort of accommodation with the LibDems).
Are the Nats really going to vote with the opposition Tories to bring down his new administration and risk a second immediate election (the FTPA will have been repealed by then) at which they will be pilloried? I don't think so.
The nearest equivalent is February 1974, when it was the Conservatives, terrified of another election, who abstained and let Harold Wilson form a minority administration.
I imagine that is what will happen again. So Starmer governs for several months - no deals with anyone - and goes to the country a few months later to secure a majority. Which he will likely obtain.
Which sort of Lab policies do you think the SNP might oppose? Lovely, progressive cuddly owls for everyone, or gulags for scroungers and red, white & blue flag waving to show Johnny EU that SKS is as tough as BJ.
Dunno. You're a Nat - you tell us. All I'm saying is that Starmer will not need to do any deals with the SNP (contrary to the view by several here that he will be compelled to reach an accommodation which might include a second independence referendum).
If we end up with a hung parliament but with Tories having most seats but not enough for a majority even with the DUP, then Starmer would likely end up PM.
However he would find it near impossible to get any legislation on English domestic legislation through as there may still be a majority of Tory MPs in England and the SNP would abstain if Starmer did not give them indyref2 + devomax.
Hardly
Labour loses an English Domestic legislation vote - new election with Labour now having a message to convince SNP voters to vote Labour....
Why SNP voters? They wouldn't dream of interfering in English domestic legislation. No skin off their nose.
This election was created by the SNP not supporting something - vote Labour or look forward to continual elections.
The entire point of the October 74 election was to get a Labour Majority. This would be an almost identical election.
more bollox
And your reasons for calling it bollox? Oh you don't have any because you've pickled your brain.
Well smartarse , yet another clown who likes to insult through their ignorance. I have forgotten more than your tiny brain will ever know for sure. Since you wrote the bollox and have no clue , I can presume you have little brain to pickle, and prefer just to write bollox. The SNP voted against as Labour had ratted on their promise of a referendum and the SNP had said they would not have that and so gave Labour their just desserts. I happened to know that but any less than intelligent person could have easily checked the facts before they ignorantly posted rubbish and then had the temerity to question someone who knew the answer. You are far from as smart as you think you are sunshine and your use of old Scottish tropes says plenty about you, inferiority complex.
Your insulting rants work best when they are short. Two or three lines involving "turnip", "stupid clueless pinhead", "ignorant Tory vegetable scum" etc. Then end. After three sentences of this, the eyes glaze over and the reader moves on to the next comment
Just some helpful advice for the future
It was not meant to be an insulting rant , it was some advice, hence the length. I would not insult a turnip by associating it with him. He posted bollocks and then used the sad trope of the drunken Scot. I was merely pointing out he was a sad git. It was a personal post not for others consumption as such.
I believe Keir Starmer. If the Tories are not able to form a Government (ie they have fewer than, say, 305-10 seats), then Starmer will become PM. He needs no deals with the SNP in particular (he might certainly reach some sort of accommodation with the LibDems).
Are the Nats really going to vote with the opposition Tories to bring down his new administration and risk a second immediate election (the FTPA will have been repealed by then) at which they will be pilloried? I don't think so.
The nearest equivalent is February 1974, when it was the Conservatives, terrified of another election, who abstained and let Harold Wilson form a minority administration.
I imagine that is what will happen again. So Starmer governs for several months - no deals with anyone - and goes to the country a few months later to secure a majority. Which he will likely obtain.
Which sort of Lab policies do you think the SNP might oppose? Lovely, progressive cuddly owls for everyone, or gulags for scroungers and red, white & blue flag waving to show Johnny EU that SKS is as tough as BJ.
Dunno. You're a Nat - you tell us. All I'm saying is that Starmer will not need to do any deals with the SNP (contrary to the view by several here that he will be compelled to reach an accommodation which might include a second independence referendum).
If we end up with a hung parliament but with Tories having most seats but not enough for a majority even with the DUP, then Starmer would likely end up PM.
However he would find it near impossible to get any legislation on English domestic legislation through as there may still be a majority of Tory MPs in England and the SNP would abstain if Starmer did not give them indyref2 + devomax.
Hardly
Labour loses an English Domestic legislation vote - new election with Labour now having a message to convince SNP voters to vote Labour....
Why SNP voters? They wouldn't dream of interfering in English domestic legislation. No skin off their nose.
This election was created by the SNP not supporting something - vote Labour or look forward to continual elections.
The entire point of the October 74 election was to get a Labour Majority. This would be an almost identical election.
What's the point? As the SNP voters comprise about 5% of the electorate, it's what happens elsewhere that counts. And you did say "domestic policy".
Point is that he has no clue what he is talking about.
There is also the point that if MPs for Scottish constituencies are going to be ignored *just for being MPs for Scottish constituencies* that will not go down well in Scotland. Ditto their voters. It's bad enough for the Tories to play that card, but if Labour do as well ...
Edit: and that would impinge on any second SKS attempt to become PM.
I apologize for turning pb.com into the fancy restaurant review session. My bad.
The biggest bill I have ever paid in a restaurant was just in November there, for my grand-daughter's 21st. There were 14 of us, and the bill including drinks came to £400. I paid half of that, with the grandparents "on the other side" paying the other half.
£400 for 14 people with drinks, where did you go, the Hungry Horse?
The Parkville in Blantyre. £12 to £15 for mains. I had the venison meatballs - delicious. 4 drivers drinking soft drinks kept the drinks bill down.
I believe Keir Starmer. If the Tories are not able to form a Government (ie they have fewer than, say, 305-10 seats), then Starmer will become PM. He needs no deals with the SNP in particular (he might certainly reach some sort of accommodation with the LibDems).
Are the Nats really going to vote with the opposition Tories to bring down his new administration and risk a second immediate election (the FTPA will have been repealed by then) at which they will be pilloried? I don't think so.
The nearest equivalent is February 1974, when it was the Conservatives, terrified of another election, who abstained and let Harold Wilson form a minority administration.
I imagine that is what will happen again. So Starmer governs for several months - no deals with anyone - and goes to the country a few months later to secure a majority. Which he will likely obtain.
Which sort of Lab policies do you think the SNP might oppose? Lovely, progressive cuddly owls for everyone, or gulags for scroungers and red, white & blue flag waving to show Johnny EU that SKS is as tough as BJ.
Dunno. You're a Nat - you tell us. All I'm saying is that Starmer will not need to do any deals with the SNP (contrary to the view by several here that he will be compelled to reach an accommodation which might include a second independence referendum).
If we end up with a hung parliament but with Tories having most seats but not enough for a majority even with the DUP, then Starmer would likely end up PM.
However he would find it near impossible to get any legislation on English domestic legislation through as there may still be a majority of Tory MPs in England and the SNP would abstain if Starmer did not give them indyref2 + devomax.
Hardly
Labour loses an English Domestic legislation vote - new election with Labour now having a message to convince SNP voters to vote Labour....
Why SNP voters? They wouldn't dream of interfering in English domestic legislation. No skin off their nose.
This election was created by the SNP not supporting something - vote Labour or look forward to continual elections.
The entire point of the October 74 election was to get a Labour Majority. This would be an almost identical election.
more bollox
And your reasons for calling it bollox? Oh you don't have any because you've pickled your brain.
Well smartarse , yet another clown who likes to insult through their ignorance. I have forgotten more than your tiny brain will ever know for sure. Since you wrote the bollox and have no clue , I can presume you have little brain to pickle, and prefer just to write bollox. The SNP voted against as Labour had ratted on their promise of a referendum and the SNP had said they would not have that and so gave Labour their just desserts. I happened to know that but any less than intelligent person could have easily checked the facts before they ignorantly posted rubbish and then had the temerity to question someone who knew the answer. You are far from as smart as you think you are sunshine and your use of old Scottish tropes says plenty about you, inferiority complex.
Sorry but what was you actual point within the diatribe of insults that merely emphasis how bad you are at creating an argument.
Where does your idea of a referendum appear from - the entire point in all posts so far is that 1 wasn't offered - as Labour once they have x amounts of seats can rule without explicit SNP support because the SNP can hardly vote with the Tories can they?
+ there is zero chance of a Scottish referendum being included within a Labour Manifesto so I can't see where your "promise" is coming from in the first place.
As I said diatribe full of insults containing an ill informed thought that has no basis within the thesis being discussed
Says the clown who accuses me of being a drunkard. They had promised they would hold a referendum and then stated categorically that they would not, is that not clear enough for you. Slightly better than your " they voted against something or other" pish. Jog on now and give me peace , and make it a very long one. Just in case you are really addled, you were commenting on the 70's Doh and I responded on same, to then totally get your panties in a bunch and start waffling about future elections tends to support my point that you are a Fcukwit of the first order. Resume your very long jog.
I believe Keir Starmer. If the Tories are not able to form a Government (ie they have fewer than, say, 305-10 seats), then Starmer will become PM. He needs no deals with the SNP in particular (he might certainly reach some sort of accommodation with the LibDems).
Are the Nats really going to vote with the opposition Tories to bring down his new administration and risk a second immediate election (the FTPA will have been repealed by then) at which they will be pilloried? I don't think so.
The nearest equivalent is February 1974, when it was the Conservatives, terrified of another election, who abstained and let Harold Wilson form a minority administration.
I imagine that is what will happen again. So Starmer governs for several months - no deals with anyone - and goes to the country a few months later to secure a majority. Which he will likely obtain.
Which sort of Lab policies do you think the SNP might oppose? Lovely, progressive cuddly owls for everyone, or gulags for scroungers and red, white & blue flag waving to show Johnny EU that SKS is as tough as BJ.
Dunno. You're a Nat - you tell us. All I'm saying is that Starmer will not need to do any deals with the SNP (contrary to the view by several here that he will be compelled to reach an accommodation which might include a second independence referendum).
If we end up with a hung parliament but with Tories having most seats but not enough for a majority even with the DUP but still more MPs than Labour + LDs + Green, then Starmer would likely end up PM.
However he would find it near impossible to get any legislation on English domestic legislation through as there may still be a majority of Tory MPs in England and the SNP would abstain if Starmer did not give them indyref2 + devomax.
The 1974 experience showed the minority Labour government did suffer a number of Commons defeats and doubtless the same would happen again. But their opinion poll ratings soared and everyone knew that another election would happen very soon.
Starmer's problem, as it was for Wilson, would be if a second election did not give Labour a solid majority. But my guess is that this would be more like 64-66, not Feb-October 1974.
I would not be so sure, if the Tories had a majority in England but there was no Tory majority UK wide, as was the case in 1964 and February 1974 then there would be little change in Scotland. Why would SNP voters care as Carnyx correctly states, if Starmer cannot get votes on English laws through given they have an SNP FM and UK Labour PM anyway but Starmer refuses to give them indyref2?
The most Starmer could hope for is to make enough gains for a majority in England too, which as you correctly state Wilson finally got in 1966.
It's all speculation and a long way off but if Labour goes into a second election with a hefty opinion lead, then they will make gains in Scotland as well as England and Wales. The Tories of course will be in total disarray whoever is their new Leader. Result Starmer overall majority of at least 50 and definitely no second Scottish referendum. Anyway, you heard it here first.
Scotland may highlight the perils of uniform swing. National polls show Labour gain seats in Scotland. At the same time those polls show a very strong SNP. So if Labour are to make gains its either SNP voters going Labour tactically or they're taking from the Tories - who the same polls show will lose seats to the SNP...
For my two pennth, the best meal I have ever had was at a restaurant that doesn't even have a michelin star. It wasn't cheap, but it certainly isn't the most expensive meal I have had.
Most of my best meals have been at non-Michelin places
Random top ten (I could choose eighty more)
Eating at Marco Pierre White's very first place, in south London (forget where) - before he had a star, wow
A crab and asparagus dish in a restaurant made from a garage outside Chiang Mai, Thailand
A beef massaman curry on a beach in Ko Tao, also Thailand
Eating at the first Barrafina off the Strand
Osyters and foie gras and gingerbread in some brilliant old school brasserie in Nantes, France
Dinner by Heston (that has a star or two)
A steak at G W Bush's favourite steak restaurant in Austin Texas
Another steak at Cabana Las Lilas in Buenos Aires
Tiny gnocchi in a private restaurant on a private vineyard on the island of Pantelleria, Italy
Some sardines, recently, in a scruffy cafe above a fish market in Sagres, Portugal
How much of this is about company, location, mood, weather, post-coital bliss - rather than food? At least half of it
You can pay hundreds of pounds for very ordinary meals in London and hardly anything for highly-rated restaurants in unfashionable parts of the country. It depends whether people are bothered by visiting those unfashionable places.
I apologize for turning pb.com into the fancy restaurant review session. My bad.
The biggest bill I have ever paid in a restaurant was just in November there, for my grand-daughter's 21st. There were 14 of us, and the bill including drinks came to £400. I paid half of that, with the grandparents "on the other side" paying the other half.
£400 for 14 people with drinks, where did you go, the Hungry Horse?
The Parkville in Blantyre. £12 to £15 for mains. I had the venison meatballs - delicious. 4 drivers drinking soft drinks kept the drinks bill down.
No doubt some folk on here have this mental image -
There's no doubt Blair was very successful and an election winning machine who destroyed the Tories for a decade.
If electoral success is the criteria for a Knighthood then by all means give him one but I trust when the time comes OGH will also support a Knighthood for "Sir" Boris Johnson (London Mayor twice, won the the EU referendum for LEAVE and gave the Tories their biggest majority in a general election since 1987) ?
I believe Keir Starmer. If the Tories are not able to form a Government (ie they have fewer than, say, 305-10 seats), then Starmer will become PM. He needs no deals with the SNP in particular (he might certainly reach some sort of accommodation with the LibDems).
Are the Nats really going to vote with the opposition Tories to bring down his new administration and risk a second immediate election (the FTPA will have been repealed by then) at which they will be pilloried? I don't think so.
The nearest equivalent is February 1974, when it was the Conservatives, terrified of another election, who abstained and let Harold Wilson form a minority administration.
I imagine that is what will happen again. So Starmer governs for several months - no deals with anyone - and goes to the country a few months later to secure a majority. Which he will likely obtain.
Which sort of Lab policies do you think the SNP might oppose? Lovely, progressive cuddly owls for everyone, or gulags for scroungers and red, white & blue flag waving to show Johnny EU that SKS is as tough as BJ.
Dunno. You're a Nat - you tell us. All I'm saying is that Starmer will not need to do any deals with the SNP (contrary to the view by several here that he will be compelled to reach an accommodation which might include a second independence referendum).
If we end up with a hung parliament but with Tories having most seats but not enough for a majority even with the DUP, then Starmer would likely end up PM.
However he would find it near impossible to get any legislation on English domestic legislation through as there may still be a majority of Tory MPs in England and the SNP would abstain if Starmer did not give them indyref2 + devomax.
Hardly
Labour loses an English Domestic legislation vote - new election with Labour now having a message to convince SNP voters to vote Labour....
Why SNP voters? They wouldn't dream of interfering in English domestic legislation. No skin off their nose.
This election was created by the SNP not supporting something - vote Labour or look forward to continual elections.
The entire point of the October 74 election was to get a Labour Majority. This would be an almost identical election.
more bollox
And your reasons for calling it bollox? Oh you don't have any because you've pickled your brain.
Well smartarse , yet another clown who likes to insult through their ignorance. I have forgotten more than your tiny brain will ever know for sure. Since you wrote the bollox and have no clue , I can presume you have little brain to pickle, and prefer just to write bollox. The SNP voted against as Labour had ratted on their promise of a referendum and the SNP had said they would not have that and so gave Labour their just desserts. I happened to know that but any less than intelligent person could have easily checked the facts before they ignorantly posted rubbish and then had the temerity to question someone who knew the answer. You are far from as smart as you think you are sunshine and your use of old Scottish tropes says plenty about you, inferiority complex.
Sorry but what was you actual point within the diatribe of insults that merely emphasis how bad you are at creating an argument.
Where does your idea of a referendum appear from - the entire point in all posts so far is that 1 wasn't offered - as Labour once they have x amounts of seats can rule without explicit SNP support because the SNP can hardly vote with the Tories can they?
+ there is zero chance of a Scottish referendum being included within a Labour Manifesto so I can't see where your "promise" is coming from in the first place.
As I said diatribe full of insults containing an ill informed thought that has no basis within the thesis being discussed
Says the clown who accuses me of being a drunkard. They had promised they would hold a referendum and then stated categorically that they would not, is that not clear enough for you. Slightly better than your " they voted against something or other" pish. Jog on now and give me peace , and make it a very long one.
When did they promise a referendum and under what leader?
When SKS offers you one then you have a valid argument until then it's another of your pipe dreams.
As for calling you a drunkard, when else do people resort to insults before 10pm at night on a web forum...
The only person who does it on this site is you and being frank you exhibit a lot of habits of a drunk...
'We can’t vaccinate the planet every six months', says JCVI chief Fourth Covid jabs should not be offered until there is more evidence, the head of Britain's vaccine body has said - as he warned that giving boosters to people every six months was “not sustainable”.
6 monthly jabs may or may not be the right thing, but his remit is not "THE PLANET". It's the UK. Once again heading outside their remit.
Comments
I imagine it's they were aware of what the reaction would be. Or that the Queen is still bitter about Britannia.
The SNP voted against as Labour had ratted on their promise of a referendum and the SNP had said they would not have that and so gave Labour their just desserts.
I happened to know that but any less than intelligent person could have easily checked the facts before they ignorantly posted rubbish and then had the temerity to question someone who knew the answer.
You are far from as smart as you think you are sunshine and your use of old Scottish tropes says plenty about you, inferiority complex.
"Philip, we want to you express yourself on this one. Say what you really think."
The thought of that awaiting them might have improved performance, no end....
Blair should be given his bloody knighthood ...
.... only after he has answered the question, "Have you ever seen what happens when a bomb is dropped on a primary school?". Or, "have you seen a grenade go off and kill a civilian?"
Boris is a bad PM, but he is a way, way more honest PM than Tony Blair.
Because Boris (like many politicians) is a liar, but he lies about the little things, like money and sex and parties.
Someone who takes his country to war under false pretences is not an acceptable person, whether he won 3 elections or not.
This is no need to weigh the rights and wrongs of Blair. What Blair did was quite simply very, very wrong.
Martyn Lewis was apocalyptic about the cost of living on WATO.
Does anyone even bother watching these things any more?
A colleague of my wife's sent a photo as she was leaving work* of a gurney in the corridor with curtains around it and an oxygen cylinder next to it. She labelled the photo "Next available bed". This was two weeks ago. Things have only got a lot worse since then.
*small rural town hospital in Pennsylvania
https://www.theice.com/products/910/UK-Natural-Gas-Futures/data
This energy crisis ain’t going away. April is gonna be brutal.
I'm trying to remember the AltHistory story where some people form the future end up in the 1940s - "So you are saying that Germany and Japan are now pacifists? And the Jews have built the new Sparta?"
The Ivy stays in my mind because when I was very young we went as a family and I recall to this moment my mother being aghast at being offered water instead of something alcoholic by the waiter.
"On a three course dinner, half a bottle of wine, coffee, cover charge, service and VAT.
https://www.hardens.com/az/restaurants/london/w1/gymkhana.htm
Max has expensive tastes
The falls will be brutal, I reckon.
It has always been a high-end luxury lifestyle, fashion and food blog ... with only a minor sideline in politicalbetting.
I have nothing against the rich spending their money. It is far better than the alternative.
I'm sure there's a decent eatery somewhere but who would risk the town centre to find it?
There were 14 of us, and the bill including drinks came to £400.
I paid half of that, with the grandparents "on the other side" paying the other half.
One of the best meals I ever had was in "Rosemary Lane", situated in a fighting pub that had lost its license (they took over the last few years of the lease), on a rough road with a view of the DLR.
The food is reliably good but not amazing, yet that was always the case.
And I rather like the spin-offs - for this same reason. The food is reliably good. It won't blow you away, but it will be good. Great places for dates
Where does your idea of a referendum appear from - the entire point in all posts so far is that 1 wasn't offered - as Labour once they have x amounts of seats can rule without explicit SNP support because the SNP can hardly vote with the Tories can they?
+ there is zero chance of a Scottish referendum being included within a Labour Manifesto so I can't see where your "promise" is coming from in the first place.
As I said diatribe full of insults containing an ill informed thought that has no basis within the thesis being discussed
Diner accidentally gets £4,500 bottle of wine in Manchester restaurant
Hawksmoor steakhouse tweets ‘chin up!’ to staff who served it, adding: ‘mistakes happen’
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/may/16/diner-accidentally-gets-4500-bottle-of-wine-in-manchester-restaurant
Just some helpful advice for the future
All the senior bods at work told me, pay for it, pay for it all.
The restaurant he took me to?
Stringfellows, who knew the lapdancing club also had a restaurant attached, the meal and drinks were reasonable (£400 all in but most of that was drinks), the thing that terrified me and wasn't sure if I might get sacked.
The heavenly money you buy at the front door which you give to the ladies for a (private) lap dance, that came to over £2,000.
Wasn't sure how to put that on expenses.
And you did say "domestic policy".
And are therefore unlikely to go the way of other such attempts (eg. Patisserie Valerie, Jamie Oliver).
There wasn't a bill because well it was the Rev and we were with Pete but the stories.....
The waitressing service when we unwrap at home is second to none ...
I bet if he wasn't world number one that might have been a different decision.
Series 2 is indeed being made; it seems he has been dealt with in the equipment by a moo-cow.
https://www.joe.co.uk/entertainment/jeremy-clarkson-suffers-smashed-testicles-after-cow-attack-309483
I was merely pointing out he was a sad git. It was a personal post not for others consumption as such.
Edit: and that would impinge on any second SKS attempt to become PM.
Just in case you are really addled, you were commenting on the 70's Doh and I responded on same, to then totally get your panties in a bunch and start waffling about future elections tends to support my point that you are a Fcukwit of the first order. Resume your very long jog.
Random top ten (I could choose eighty more)
Eating at Marco Pierre White's very first place, in south London (forget where) - before he had a star, wow
A crab and asparagus dish in a restaurant made from a garage outside Chiang Mai, Thailand
A beef massaman curry on a beach in Ko Tao, also Thailand
Eating at the first Barrafina off the Strand
Osyters and foie gras and gingerbread in some brilliant old school brasserie in Nantes, France
Dinner by Heston (that has a star or two)
A steak at G W Bush's favourite steak restaurant in Austin Texas
Another steak at Cabana Las Lilas in Buenos Aires
Tiny gnocchi in a private restaurant on a private vineyard on the island of Pantelleria, Italy
Some sardines, recently, in a scruffy cafe above a fish market in Sagres, Portugal
How much of this is about company, location, mood, weather, post-coital bliss - rather than food? At least half of it
https://twitter.com/avt_im/status/1478366549136318465?s=20
https://www.cinemaparadiso.co.uk/rentals/rab-c-nesbitt-series-6-27715.html/gallery
If electoral success is the criteria for a Knighthood then by all means give him one but I trust when the time comes OGH will also support a Knighthood for "Sir" Boris Johnson (London Mayor twice, won the the EU referendum for LEAVE and gave the Tories their biggest majority in a general election since 1987) ?
When SKS offers you one then you have a valid argument until then it's another of your pipe dreams.
As for calling you a drunkard, when else do people resort to insults before 10pm at night on a web forum...
The only person who does it on this site is you and being frank you exhibit a lot of habits of a drunk...
Fourth Covid jabs should not be offered until there is more evidence, the head of Britain's vaccine body has said - as he warned that giving boosters to people every six months was “not sustainable”.
6 monthly jabs may or may not be the right thing, but his remit is not "THE PLANET". It's the UK. Once again heading outside their remit.