On a serious note, Case was appointed at the time Cummings was leaking to the press he wanted a weak and ineffective head of the CS so he could dominate it and drive through a major reform agenda with his, ummmm, interesting recruits (the racists and the failures).
He even considered Christopher Wormald, whom I have corresponded with and who is in my judgement not functionally literate.
But equally, looking at the current civil service and seeing how much dross there is in it, I don't think shuffling the leadership is going to make much difference.
I used to take the piss out of Simon Case at university.
Astonishing that rowing obsessed teenager would become head of the Civil Service, I would have thought there was more chance of me becoming head of the Max Verstappen fan club.
What teenager is obsessed with rowing?
The President of the Cambridge Lightweight Rowing Team.
Are they divided on initiation between those who can and those who can't take their drink?
Allison Pearson @AllisonPearson · 22h We need a full list of attendees at all Downing Street parties. To be made public. All of them to be fined in line with what happened to students across the country. One student was fined for walking in a small group on a beach.
Not sure about making them public but I agree each and everyone should be fined
One question I have is this: who formally is in charge of staff at No 10? There will be political advisors appointed by the PM. But the rest will be permanent civil servants, no? Reporting to whom?
I do not seek to excuse the PM's responsibility but surely there are serious questions to be asked about the behaviour of those in charge of the civil servants.
Why did no-one try and stop these regular drinking sessions? Or remind them of the lockdown requirements? Or seek to take disciplinary action? Who authorised the payment for the fridge etc etc?
I appreciate that the hypocrisy is what grates but there also seems to be a failure of management and leadership and, yes, hypocrisy, too within parts of the civil service. It is not enough to clear out one or two politicians. Parts of the civil service do not appear to be fit for purpose either.
So the PM is responsible for regulating the civil service, but is that the same as being responsible for the behaviour of civil servants
PS The point aboiut the Crichel Down affair was that the Minister himself had done absolutely nothing wrong. It was his middle level staff that had caused a scandal (over the compulsory takeover of some farmland in Dorset). But he resigned as a matter of the most fundamental principle, that he was indeed responsible for his Department and its staff.
Lord Carrington who resigned over the Falklands was a junior Minister in that department and offered his resignation. It was not accepted.
I wrote this on my work blog about him and taking responsibility when he died.
Another great article written in your trademark style - thanks for the link.
Thank you.
This section is so very applicable -
"Though absolved of personal blame by the Franks Report, he explained his decision to resign thus: “It did not seem to me a time for self-justification and certainly not to cling to office. I think the country is more important than oneself.” In his autobiography he wrote: “The nation feels that there has been a disgrace. Someone must have been to blame. The disgrace must be purged. The person to purge it should be the minister in charge. That was me.”
Those 7 sentences admirably summarise what it means to be in charge and to take responsibility when something goes wrong on your watch.
(It would not be far-fetched to say that the nation might well feel that aspects of [public life] have in recent years been “a disgrace” which ought to be purged.)"
On a serious note, Case was appointed at the time Cummings was leaking to the press he wanted a weak and ineffective head of the CS so he could dominate it and drive through a major reform agenda with his, ummmm, interesting recruits (the racists and the failures).
He even considered Christopher Wormald, whom I have corresponded with and who is in my judgement not functionally literate.
But equally, looking at the current civil service and seeing how much dross there is in it, I don't think shuffling the leadership is going to make much difference.
I used to take the piss out of Simon Case at university.
Astonishing that rowing obsessed teenager would become head of the Civil Service, I would have thought there was more chance of me becoming head of the Max Verstappen fan club.
What teenager is obsessed with rowing?
I spent 80% of uni thinking about or going up mountains.
Nowadays it's about 70% walking, 10% PB, 20% trying to work out why my code doesn't work.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Two types in the Cabinet:
1. Those who want the job eg Rishi - well aware that the person who wields the knife doesn’t get the job;
2. Those who know they would be out under another PM eg Mogg
Thatcher wielded the knife and got the job.
Heath was no longer PM though, had just lost a general election and refused to go
Boris is undoubtedly unfit to be PM, but Tories agitating for him to go need to reflect on whether he is still the best leader they have.
Is there any reason to expect a successor to command as much deference in the party? Major did not have the respect of his peers or rivals.
Somehow I expect neither Sunak nor Truss will be able to command the party in the same way as Boris. It could be majoresque.
I would not be surprised if there were not leadership rumours before 2024. Boris should go, but the grass may not be greener.
What? WTAF?
That was then. This is now.
Never mind that the deference was never there, they went along with him because he was electable. You seriously think he commands anyone or anything any more?
He is still there. He has the cabinet out in support. So I guess the answer, within the Tory party, is yes. At least for now.
The bottom line is Big Dog is a big beast and a unique political operator. Malign IMO, but undeniably different. Whoever succeeds him will have far less room for manoeuvre. It might well feel much like May or Major. They could be in for a very rough ride.
He is toast
I said this around the New Year when others were detecting green shoots of recovery in the polls. He can't reset. He is what he is. Even if he could, there is so much more already there but not yet come out. Trust me on this.
On a serious note, Case was appointed at the time Cummings was leaking to the press he wanted a weak and ineffective head of the CS so he could dominate it and drive through a major reform agenda with his, ummmm, interesting recruits (the racists and the failures).
He even considered Christopher Wormald, whom I have corresponded with and who is in my judgement not functionally literate.
But equally, looking at the current civil service and seeing how much dross there is in it, I don't think shuffling the leadership is going to make much difference.
I used to take the piss out of Simon Case at university.
Astonishing that rowing obsessed teenager would become head of the Civil Service, I would have thought there was more chance of me becoming head of the Max Verstappen fan club.
He is surprisingly youthful to have gotten to the top job at the civil service. You don't want buggin's turn, but I'm surprised nonetheless.
Not surprising at all given it was Johnson who hired him.
Boris is undoubtedly unfit to be PM, but Tories agitating for him to go need to reflect on whether he is still the best leader they have.
Is there any reason to expect a successor to command as much deference in the party? Major did not have the respect of his peers or rivals.
Somehow I expect neither Sunak nor Truss will be able to command the party in the same way as Boris. It could be majoresque.
I would not be surprised if there were not leadership rumours before 2024. Boris should go, but the grass may not be greener.
What? WTAF?
That was then. This is now.
Never mind that the deference was never there, they went along with him because he was electable. You seriously think he commands anyone or anything any more?
He is still there. He has the cabinet out in support. So I guess the answer, within the Tory party, is yes. At least for now.
The bottom line is Big Dog is a big beast and a unique political operator. Malign IMO, but undeniably different. Whoever succeeds him will have far less room for manoeuvre. It might well feel much like May or Major. They could be in for a very rough ride.
He is toast
I said this around the New Year when others were detecting green shoots of recovery in the polls. He can't reset. He is what he is. Even if he could, there is so much more already there but not yet come out. Trust me on this.
I will be v surprised if there isn't a load more revelations to come in tomorrow's Sunday papers.
Simon Case (of wine) is head of the Civil Service - appointed by Boris. There are over 450,000 civil servants though. Only about 2% of them actually work in Whitehall, and a relatively small number of those in Downing Street. I've argued before that the Downing Street CS has become increasingly politicised, and the days of Sir Humphrey are over. This government has accelerated that politicisation more than any previously.
I guess, as a former civil servant, I'm arguing against the tarring of all civil servants, or even the Civil Service, with the same brush. The vast majority work with dispassionate integrity, serving governments of whatever stripe without fear or favour. And, in the section I worked in, there was no drinking culture at all. Many of us sometimes went to the pub for a few after work, but office drinking was as rare as Boris being honest.
Julia Hartley-Brewer @JuliaHB1 · 3h It's not about the parties...
If No10 thought it was vital for us all to be locked down, businesses closed, schools shut & unable to see our families, WHY DID THEY THINK IT WAS SAFE FOR THEM TO HAVE PARTIES?
Because they knew it WAS safe.
Yet they locked all of US down anyway.
As has been pointed out before, this annoys both extremes. Some like JHB think that it proves the measures were too severe, and those who think the government endangered lives/the NHS.
Plus those in the middle who would like to see some competence, hard work and integrity from those running the country.
Julia Hartley-Brewer @JuliaHB1 · 3h It's not about the parties...
If No10 thought it was vital for us all to be locked down, businesses closed, schools shut & unable to see our families, WHY DID THEY THINK IT WAS SAFE FOR THEM TO HAVE PARTIES?
Because they knew it WAS safe.
Yet they locked all of US down anyway.
As has been pointed out before, this annoys both extremes. Some like JHB think that it proves the measures were too severe, and those who think the government endangered lives/the NHS.
Sorry it is a photo of text so you'll have to click it. Meant to be a story of heroic virtue (NHS nurse refuses pleading husband access to dying wife on No 10 party day) instead reads like the Milgram experiment and leaves you thinking how the fck did we do that to ourselves? And we did it with SKS cheering to the rafters.
Allison Pearson @AllisonPearson · 22h We need a full list of attendees at all Downing Street parties. To be made public. All of them to be fined in line with what happened to students across the country. One student was fined for walking in a small group on a beach.
Not sure about making them public but I agree each and everyone should be fined
If they aren't fined then it's corruption imho. Pure and simple.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Two types in the Cabinet:
1. Those who want the job eg Rishi - well aware that the person who wields the knife doesn’t get the job;
2. Those who know they would be out under another PM eg Mogg
3. Inconsequentials. A reasonable proportion of the cabinet where no-one would notice what they did or did not do, many would say I didnt know they were in the cabinet... (Sharma, Trevelyan, Coffey, Eustice, Lewis, Jack, Hart, Dowden, and those also attending, which is all JRM does, Clarke, Spencer, Malthouse, Adams, Donelan).
Boris is undoubtedly unfit to be PM, but Tories agitating for him to go need to reflect on whether he is still the best leader they have.
Is there any reason to expect a successor to command as much deference in the party? Major did not have the respect of his peers or rivals.
Somehow I expect neither Sunak nor Truss will be able to command the party in the same way as Boris. It could be majoresque.
I would not be surprised if there were not leadership rumours before 2024. Boris should go, but the grass may not be greener.
What? WTAF?
That was then. This is now.
Never mind that the deference was never there, they went along with him because he was electable. You seriously think he commands anyone or anything any more?
He is still there. He has the cabinet out in support. So I guess the answer, within the Tory party, is yes. At least for now.
The bottom line is Big Dog is a big beast and a unique political operator. Malign IMO, but undeniably different. Whoever succeeds him will have far less room for manoeuvre. It might well feel much like May or Major. They could be in for a very rough ride.
He is toast
I said this around the New Year when others were detecting green shoots of recovery in the polls. He can't reset. He is what he is. Even if he could, there is so much more already there but not yet come out. Trust me on this.
Yeah. And it actually doesn't matter if there is no more to come out really. Because he will create something else to be ashamed of. Why? Because he's Boris Johnson.
As Boris has found out , having petty or puritanical rules in the workplace is not a good idea as somebody will break then at some point and usually the top brass even if they just get into a unplanned scenario. Then what do you do , sack yourself or your main man/woman? Of course not but then you are just a fking hypocrite . So bosses everywhere treat staff with the respect adults deserve and dont go all puritanical and petty
BoZo's problem is not a puritanical workplace.
His problem is he imposed puritanical rules on the whole country, except his own house.
And then he is just a fking hypocrite
There's another aspect.
Downing Street gives the impression of being full of thick poshos who alternate between hammering social media and hammering alcohol.
Without anyone ever doing any actual work.
I suspect Boris's "I didn't realise it was a social meeting" doesn't do him any good here.
Because anyone who has done some actual work is very aware of the difference between working and a social meeting.
Surely no-one thinks he thinks it was a work meeting? He is simply saying it as the equivalent of taking the fifth, to avoid admitting to a criminal offence.
To be fair, if your "work" consists of just talking to people, the distinction probably isn't so clear-cut. Especially if the work of the people you talk to also just consists of talking to people. The kind of thing that most people would consider work probably takes place at several removes from the people concerned.
Yes. At a certain level the distinction between work and not-work dissolves away. People talk about golf at work and they talk about work on the golf course, for example. Maybe they shouldn't, but that's the 'culture'.
At the other end of the scale, I visited the Google UK offices pre-pandemic and was amazed by the standard of comfort, even for other ranks. Free, hot nourishing food was available 24/7 and a well-stocked drinks cabinet was, apparently, unlocked on Friday evenings. Clearly the plan was to induce young people to stay in the office instead of going home at night, and clearly many of them were perfectly happy with that arrangement.
Maybe the civil service would function better if it was more like Google?
Yes, a friend works for Google in the US and reports the same culture. He thinks it's great. He's a bit of a nerd, though - he admits wryly that his wife had to introduce him to coffee (up to his marriage he'd always just popped a caffeine pill - why bother with the water, eh?).
When offered water at the table my customary reply is 'no thanks, I'm 90% water already'.
Boris is undoubtedly unfit to be PM, but Tories agitating for him to go need to reflect on whether he is still the best leader they have.
Is there any reason to expect a successor to command as much deference in the party? Major did not have the respect of his peers or rivals.
Somehow I expect neither Sunak nor Truss will be able to command the party in the same way as Boris. It could be majoresque.
I would not be surprised if there were not leadership rumours before 2024. Boris should go, but the grass may not be greener.
What? WTAF?
That was then. This is now.
Never mind that the deference was never there, they went along with him because he was electable. You seriously think he commands anyone or anything any more?
He is still there. He has the cabinet out in support. So I guess the answer, within the Tory party, is yes. At least for now.
The bottom line is Big Dog is a big beast and a unique political operator. Malign IMO, but undeniably different. Whoever succeeds him will have far less room for manoeuvre. It might well feel much like May or Major. They could be in for a very rough ride.
He is toast
I said this around the New Year when others were detecting green shoots of recovery in the polls. He can't reset. He is what he is. Even if he could, there is so much more already there but not yet come out. Trust me on this.
I will be v surprised if there isn't a load more revelations to come in tomorrow's Sunday papers.
And wallpaper isn't over, and FAC has yet to report on Kabul and Air Nut Nut. And unknown unknowns, without a doubt.
Allison Pearson @AllisonPearson · 22h We need a full list of attendees at all Downing Street parties. To be made public. All of them to be fined in line with what happened to students across the country. One student was fined for walking in a small group on a beach.
Not sure about making them public but I agree each and everyone should be fined
A lot of the people who have been fined were named because the case ended up in court. But we can keep it simple
£1,000 fine for every offence or they can go to court, be named and try to justify the party to avoid the fine.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
You could apply the same for those in Labour who worked and stayed in the shadow cabinet under anti-Semite Jeremy Corbyn.
Like Kier Starmer...
It’s really quite extraordinary how degree-educated PB Shrewdies are still unable to master the basics of correctly spelling the names of the Loto, Dloto and Owen Paterson.
Interesting thought, from the betting perspective:
Theo Bertram @theobertram · Jan 13 If the Cabinet spend the week ahead saying the public must wait for Sue Gray, the next Conservative leader will come from outside the Cabinet.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Two types in the Cabinet:
1. Those who want the job eg Rishi - well aware that the person who wields the knife doesn’t get the job;
2. Those who know they would be out under another PM eg Mogg
3. Inconsequentials. A reasonable proportion of the cabinet where no-one would notice what they did or did not do, many would say I didnt know they were in the cabinet... (Sharma, Trevelyan, Coffey, Eustice, Lewis, Jack, Hart, Dowden, and those also attending, which is all JRM does, Clarke, Spencer, Malthouse, Adams, Donelan).
I look at those names and I think, surely those are all cricketers?
Julia Hartley-Brewer @JuliaHB1 · 3h It's not about the parties...
If No10 thought it was vital for us all to be locked down, businesses closed, schools shut & unable to see our families, WHY DID THEY THINK IT WAS SAFE FOR THEM TO HAVE PARTIES?
Because they knew it WAS safe.
Yet they locked all of US down anyway.
As has been pointed out before, this annoys both extremes. Some like JHB think that it proves the measures were too severe, and those who think the government endangered lives/the NHS.
Sorry it is a photo of text so you'll have to click it. Meant to be a story of heroic virtue (NHS nurse refuses pleading husband access to dying wife on No 10 party day) instead reads like the Milgram experiment and leaves you thinking how the fck did we do that to ourselves? And we did it with SKS cheering to the rafters.
You see, that gets my back up. Not being able to visit sick/dying relatives or being with your partner when she’s giving birth are obviously much bigger sacrifices than not being able to meet friends, even outside. But there was probably a much stronger case for those restrictions given the settings.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Two types in the Cabinet:
1. Those who want the job eg Rishi - well aware that the person who wields the knife doesn’t get the job;
2. Those who know they would be out under another PM eg Mogg
3. Inconsequentials. A reasonable proportion of the cabinet where no-one would notice what they did or did not do, many would say I didnt know they were in the cabinet... (Sharma, Trevelyan, Coffey, Eustice, Lewis, Jack, Hart, Dowden, and those also attending, which is all JRM does, Clarke, Spencer, Malthouse, Adams, Donelan).
I do wonder if Rees-Mogg's recent rudeness toward his colleagues in Wales and Scotland, and insistence only the Secretaries of State matter, comes from deep insecurity - a man so obsessed with status and title must be acutely aware that despite inaccurate reporting he is NOT a Cabinet Minister, he merely 'attends Cabinet'.
He's the peon who has to organise business of actual ministers. Not without influence, but ultimately a servant of the others despite the title of Leader.
Q, any insight into betting opportunity for the next San Marinese general election? (Have already got Liechtenstein covered!)
Slightly more seriously, your article is interesting (as per usual) and informative (ditto). My own view has always been, that when the Koreas reunify, it will be sudden and surprising. Akin to the last major national reunification - Germany.
So putting a few bucks (or bob if you prefer) on One Korea by 2024 is like buying a lottery ticket at the gas station next time you fill 'er up. Less likely than getting crushed to death by a falling piano (or is it, you tell me!) But with a HUGE payoff IF it does happen.
Not at 2/1 !
Though I agree that reunification within a decade or so isn’t extremely unlikely. Terror regimes can fall very rapidly given the right precipitating event, and reunification in those circumstances would be very much on the agenda.
Not that Xi’s China would like it.
If China was vaguely subtle about it, re-unification could be massively to their advantage.
Lend the unified Korea the hundreds of billions to rebuild the North, at low interest. Or none. One one condition - no foreign troops or bases in Korea.
This would gratify Korean nationalists, and make the unified Korea a friendly country to China. Plus would play well internationally.
Because of size, a unified Korea can never be a threat to China anyway. Kicking the US out of the South would be a big win for the Chinese policy of pushing the US out of South East Asia..
Xi isn't smart enough to do that - I think he would try and use money etc to make the unified Korea a vassal state.
A reunified Korea would be a real concern for paranoid China. The prospects for economic growth in the resource rich north would be huge, and Korea could well become a larger economy than the UK. The one thing the two Koreas have in common is a fierce streak of independence. They wouldn't be a vassal of either China or the US.
AIUI, the Koreans have quite a long history of being abused by both their 'big neighbours'.... Japan as well as China. The Japanese had a mixed record as Imperial Power.
Mixed ? Notoriously malign would be nearer the mark. The historical relationship with China is the more complicated one.
There's also the question of what would happen with N Korea's nukes.
On a serious note, Case was appointed at the time Cummings was leaking to the press he wanted a weak and ineffective head of the CS so he could dominate it and drive through a major reform agenda with his, ummmm, interesting recruits (the racists and the failures).
He even considered Christopher Wormald, whom I have corresponded with and who is in my judgement not functionally literate.
But equally, looking at the current civil service and seeing how much dross there is in it, I don't think shuffling the leadership is going to make much difference.
I used to take the piss out of Simon Case at university.
Astonishing that rowing obsessed teenager would become head of the Civil Service, I would have thought there was more chance of me becoming head of the Max Verstappen fan club.
What teenager is obsessed with rowing?
The President of the Cambridge Lightweight Rowing Team.
There are heavyweights at Cambridge?
Yup, place is chock full of them, hence the success in Nobel laureates, especially compared to the other place.
Zzzz.
We are a mere step away from the Fen Poly / Cowley Tech humble bragging.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Two types in the Cabinet:
1. Those who want the job eg Rishi - well aware that the person who wields the knife doesn’t get the job;
2. Those who know they would be out under another PM eg Mogg
3. Inconsequentials. A reasonable proportion of the cabinet where no-one would notice what they did or did not do, many would say I didnt know they were in the cabinet... (Sharma, Trevelyan, Coffey, Eustice, Lewis, Jack, Hart, Dowden, and those also attending, which is all JRM does, Clarke, Spencer, Malthouse, Adams, Donelan).
I do wonder if Rees-Mogg's recent rudeness toward his colleagues in Wales and Scotland, and insistence only the Secretaries of State matter, comes from deep insecurity - a man so obsessed with status and title must be acutely aware that despite inaccurate reporting he is NOT a Cabinet Minister, he merely 'attends Cabinet'.
He's the peon who has to organise business of actual ministers. Not without influence, but ultimately a servant of the others despite the title of Leader.
Or it could just be that the affected mannered politeness and unfeasibly posh voice are just an affected disguise for a not very bright thoroughly nasty piece of work?
I’m currently re-watching the crown with my mum who hasn’t seen it. I can’t wait to hear Queen Mary say “they were drinking champagne?!” when she learns of the Mountbattens toasting to the monarch having their name.
I wonder if QE2 had a similar reaction to the revelations this week.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
You could apply the same for those in Labour who worked and stayed in the shadow cabinet under anti-Semite Jeremy Corbyn.
Like Kier Starmer...
It’s really quite extraordinary how degree-educated PB Shrewdies are still unable to master the basics of correctly spelling the names of the Loto, Dloto and Owen Paterson.
I like to make up catchy little mnemonics to make sure I get it right every time
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Two types in the Cabinet:
1. Those who want the job eg Rishi - well aware that the person who wields the knife doesn’t get the job;
2. Those who know they would be out under another PM eg Mogg
Thatcher wielded the knife and got the job.
Heath was no longer PM though, had just lost a general election and refused to go
I guess Heath was seen as a mercy killing whereas with Thatcher it was matricide.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Two types in the Cabinet:
1. Those who want the job eg Rishi - well aware that the person who wields the knife doesn’t get the job;
2. Those who know they would be out under another PM eg Mogg
3. Inconsequentials. A reasonable proportion of the cabinet where no-one would notice what they did or did not do, many would say I didnt know they were in the cabinet... (Sharma, Trevelyan, Coffey, Eustice, Lewis, Jack, Hart, Dowden, and those also attending, which is all JRM does, Clarke, Spencer, Malthouse, Adams, Donelan).
I do wonder if Rees-Mogg's recent rudeness toward his colleagues in Wales and Scotland, and insistence only the Secretaries of State matter, comes from deep insecurity - a man so obsessed with status and title must be acutely aware that despite inaccurate reporting he is NOT a Cabinet Minister, he merely 'attends Cabinet'.
He's the peon who has to organise business of actual ministers. Not without influence, but ultimately a servant of the others despite the title of Leader.
Or it could just be that the affected mannered politeness and unfeasibly posh voice are just a mask for a not very bright thoroughly nasty piece of work?
I don't think our explanations are mutually exclusive of one another.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
You could apply the same for those in Labour who worked and stayed in the shadow cabinet under anti-Semite Jeremy Corbyn.
Like Kier Starmer...
It’s really quite extraordinary how degree-educated PB Shrewdies are still unable to master the basics of correctly spelling the names of the Loto, Dloto and Owen Paterson.
I like to make up catchy little mnemonics to make sure I get it right every time
Kier Is Exactly Right
Sue Grey No A!
Long to RaynOveRus
HTH!
So you keep telling us. It was mildly amusing the first time.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Two types in the Cabinet:
1. Those who want the job eg Rishi - well aware that the person who wields the knife doesn’t get the job;
2. Those who know they would be out under another PM eg Mogg
3. Inconsequentials. A reasonable proportion of the cabinet where no-one would notice what they did or did not do, many would say I didnt know they were in the cabinet... (Sharma, Trevelyan, Coffey, Eustice, Lewis, Jack, Hart, Dowden, and those also attending, which is all JRM does, Clarke, Spencer, Malthouse, Adams, Donelan).
I do wonder if Rees-Mogg's recent rudeness toward his colleagues in Wales and Scotland, and insistence only the Secretaries of State matter, comes from deep insecurity - a man so obsessed with status and title must be acutely aware that despite inaccurate reporting he is NOT a Cabinet Minister, he merely 'attends Cabinet'.
He's the peon who has to organise business of actual ministers. Not without influence, but ultimately a servant of the others despite the title of Leader.
Or it might just be, in the circumstances, that "lightweight" was a disparaging reference to their capacity for drink ?
On a serious note, Case was appointed at the time Cummings was leaking to the press he wanted a weak and ineffective head of the CS so he could dominate it and drive through a major reform agenda with his, ummmm, interesting recruits (the racists and the failures).
He even considered Christopher Wormald, whom I have corresponded with and who is in my judgement not functionally literate.
But equally, looking at the current civil service and seeing how much dross there is in it, I don't think shuffling the leadership is going to make much difference.
I used to take the piss out of Simon Case at university.
Astonishing that rowing obsessed teenager would become head of the Civil Service, I would have thought there was more chance of me becoming head of the Max Verstappen fan club.
What teenager is obsessed with rowing?
The President of the Cambridge Lightweight Rowing Team.
There are heavyweights at Cambridge?
Yup, place is chock full of them, hence the success in Nobel laureates, especially compared to the other place.
Zzzz.
We are a mere step away from the Fen Poly / Cowley Tech humble bragging.
Someone make it stop before it starts.
Indeed. You would think we might have heard enough from Oxbridge and its born to rule mentality lately. The country is a shambles. Led by them.
Boris is undoubtedly unfit to be PM, but Tories agitating for him to go need to reflect on whether he is still the best leader they have.
Is there any reason to expect a successor to command as much deference in the party? Major did not have the respect of his peers or rivals.
Somehow I expect neither Sunak nor Truss will be able to command the party in the same way as Boris. It could be majoresque.
I would not be surprised if there were not leadership rumours before 2024. Boris should go, but the grass may not be greener.
What? WTAF?
That was then. This is now.
Never mind that the deference was never there, they went along with him because he was electable. You seriously think he commands anyone or anything any more?
He is still there. He has the cabinet out in support. So I guess the answer, within the Tory party, is yes. At least for now.
The bottom line is Big Dog is a big beast and a unique political operator. Malign IMO, but undeniably different. Whoever succeeds him will have far less room for manoeuvre. It might well feel much like May or Major. They could be in for a very rough ride.
He is toast
I said this around the New Year when others were detecting green shoots of recovery in the polls. He can't reset. He is what he is. Even if he could, there is so much more already there but not yet come out. Trust me on this.
I am not arguing with you. He is probably toast. In my view he was never fit to be PM.
However, my point is that whilst him leaving may solve the current crisis, it will cause new problems- some lying dormant.
His hitherto political unchallenged status within the party, will not be available to his successor. That will be difficult. Would Sunak set aside his ambition to work for Truss or Steve Baker, or vice versa? I doubt it. They’re all too close to one another.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Two types in the Cabinet:
1. Those who want the job eg Rishi - well aware that the person who wields the knife doesn’t get the job;
2. Those who know they would be out under another PM eg Mogg
3. Inconsequentials. A reasonable proportion of the cabinet where no-one would notice what they did or did not do, many would say I didnt know they were in the cabinet... (Sharma, Trevelyan, Coffey, Eustice, Lewis, Jack, Hart, Dowden, and those also attending, which is all JRM does, Clarke, Spencer, Malthouse, Adams, Donelan).
I do wonder if Rees-Mogg's recent rudeness toward his colleagues in Wales and Scotland, and insistence only the Secretaries of State matter, comes from deep insecurity - a man so obsessed with status and title must be acutely aware that despite inaccurate reporting he is NOT a Cabinet Minister, he merely 'attends Cabinet'.
He's the peon who has to organise business of actual ministers. Not without influence, but ultimately a servant of the others despite the title of Leader.
Or it could just be that the affected mannered politeness and unfeasibly posh voice are just an affected disguise for a not very bright thoroughly nasty piece of work?
JRM is bright - but he's thoroughly nasty and arrogant with it.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
You could apply the same for those in Labour who worked and stayed in the shadow cabinet under anti-Semite Jeremy Corbyn.
Like Kier Starmer...
It’s really quite extraordinary how degree-educated PB Shrewdies are still unable to master the basics of correctly spelling the names of the Loto, Dloto and Owen Paterson.
I like to make up catchy little mnemonics to make sure I get it right every time
Kier Is Exactly Right
Sue Grey No A!
Long to RaynOveRus
HTH!
So you keep telling us. It was mildly amusing the first time.
It is also useful and effective, provided you remember which are antimnemonics and which not.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Two types in the Cabinet:
1. Those who want the job eg Rishi - well aware that the person who wields the knife doesn’t get the job;
2. Those who know they would be out under another PM eg Mogg
3. Inconsequentials. A reasonable proportion of the cabinet where no-one would notice what they did or did not do, many would say I didnt know they were in the cabinet... (Sharma, Trevelyan, Coffey, Eustice, Lewis, Jack, Hart, Dowden, and those also attending, which is all JRM does, Clarke, Spencer, Malthouse, Adams, Donelan).
I do wonder if Rees-Mogg's recent rudeness toward his colleagues in Wales and Scotland, and insistence only the Secretaries of State matter, comes from deep insecurity - a man so obsessed with status and title must be acutely aware that despite inaccurate reporting he is NOT a Cabinet Minister, he merely 'attends Cabinet'.
He's the peon who has to organise business of actual ministers. Not without influence, but ultimately a servant of the others despite the title of Leader.
Mr R-M's exaltation of the SoSfS and SoSfW over the party leaders (and those actual persons' actual party leaders, too) in Scotland and Wales does speak to a wish to stress the status of those attending cabinet.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Two types in the Cabinet:
1. Those who want the job eg Rishi - well aware that the person who wields the knife doesn’t get the job;
2. Those who know they would be out under another PM eg Mogg
3. Inconsequentials. A reasonable proportion of the cabinet where no-one would notice what they did or did not do, many would say I didnt know they were in the cabinet... (Sharma, Trevelyan, Coffey, Eustice, Lewis, Jack, Hart, Dowden, and those also attending, which is all JRM does, Clarke, Spencer, Malthouse, Adams, Donelan).
I do wonder if Rees-Mogg's recent rudeness toward his colleagues in Wales and Scotland, and insistence only the Secretaries of State matter, comes from deep insecurity - a man so obsessed with status and title must be acutely aware that despite inaccurate reporting he is NOT a Cabinet Minister, he merely 'attends Cabinet'.
He's the peon who has to organise business of actual ministers. Not without influence, but ultimately a servant of the others despite the title of Leader.
Or it could just be that the affected mannered politeness and unfeasibly posh voice are just an affected disguise for a not very bright thoroughly nasty piece of work?
JRM is bright - but he's thoroughly nasty and arrogant with it.
He may be academically bright. But, as extensively discussed there is more to it than that.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Two types in the Cabinet:
1. Those who want the job eg Rishi - well aware that the person who wields the knife doesn’t get the job;
2. Those who know they would be out under another PM eg Mogg
3. Inconsequentials. A reasonable proportion of the cabinet where no-one would notice what they did or did not do, many would say I didnt know they were in the cabinet... (Sharma, Trevelyan, Coffey, Eustice, Lewis, Jack, Hart, Dowden, and those also attending, which is all JRM does, Clarke, Spencer, Malthouse, Adams, Donelan).
I do wonder if Rees-Mogg's recent rudeness toward his colleagues in Wales and Scotland, and insistence only the Secretaries of State matter, comes from deep insecurity - a man so obsessed with status and title must be acutely aware that despite inaccurate reporting he is NOT a Cabinet Minister, he merely 'attends Cabinet'.
He's the peon who has to organise business of actual ministers. Not without influence, but ultimately a servant of the others despite the title of Leader.
Mr R-M's exaltation of the SoSfS and SoSfW over the party leaders (and those actual persons' actual party leaders, too) in Scotland and Wales does speak to a wish to stress the status of those attending cabinet.
The butler can often be even more snobby and precious around status than the master. I should think JRM would know that and recognise his own reaction.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Two types in the Cabinet:
1. Those who want the job eg Rishi - well aware that the person who wields the knife doesn’t get the job;
2. Those who know they would be out under another PM eg Mogg
3. Inconsequentials. A reasonable proportion of the cabinet where no-one would notice what they did or did not do, many would say I didnt know they were in the cabinet... (Sharma, Trevelyan, Coffey, Eustice, Lewis, Jack, Hart, Dowden, and those also attending, which is all JRM does, Clarke, Spencer, Malthouse, Adams, Donelan).
I do wonder if Rees-Mogg's recent rudeness toward his colleagues in Wales and Scotland, and insistence only the Secretaries of State matter, comes from deep insecurity - a man so obsessed with status and title must be acutely aware that despite inaccurate reporting he is NOT a Cabinet Minister, he merely 'attends Cabinet'.
He's the peon who has to organise business of actual ministers. Not without influence, but ultimately a servant of the others despite the title of Leader.
Mr R-M's exaltation of the SoSfS and SoSfW over the party leaders (and those actual persons' actual party leaders, too) in Scotland and Wales does speak to a wish to stress the status of those attending cabinet.
Boris is undoubtedly unfit to be PM, but Tories agitating for him to go need to reflect on whether he is still the best leader they have.
Is there any reason to expect a successor to command as much deference in the party? Major did not have the respect of his peers or rivals.
Somehow I expect neither Sunak nor Truss will be able to command the party in the same way as Boris. It could be majoresque.
I would not be surprised if there were not leadership rumours before 2024. Boris should go, but the grass may not be greener.
What? WTAF?
That was then. This is now.
Never mind that the deference was never there, they went along with him because he was electable. You seriously think he commands anyone or anything any more?
He is still there. He has the cabinet out in support. So I guess the answer, within the Tory party, is yes. At least for now.
The bottom line is Big Dog is a big beast and a unique political operator. Malign IMO, but undeniably different. Whoever succeeds him will have far less room for manoeuvre. It might well feel much like May or Major. They could be in for a very rough ride.
He is toast
I said this around the New Year when others were detecting green shoots of recovery in the polls. He can't reset. He is what he is. Even if he could, there is so much more already there but not yet come out. Trust me on this.
I am not arguing with you. He is probably toast. In my view he was never fit to be PM.
However, my point is that whilst him leaving may solve the current crisis, it will cause new problems- some lying dormant.
His hitherto political unchallenged status within the party, will not be available to his successor. That will be difficult. Would Sunak set aside his ambition to work for Truss or Steve Baker, or vice versa? I doubt it. They’re all too close to one another.
Yes there are no good outcomes and a lot of dreadful ones - Truss or Baker are emigration level disasters. The tories' realistic goal should now be limiting GE 24 to lab most seats vs lab maj.
A -52 favourability rating with yougov is pretty terrible but it is worth bearing in mind that aside from a brief period at the start of the covid crisis Johnson has never been in positive territory since becoming PM. He was a vehicle for getting Brexit done, stopping Corbyn and managing the pandemic. What's left?
Interesting thought, from the betting perspective:
Theo Bertram @theobertram · Jan 13 If the Cabinet spend the week ahead saying the public must wait for Sue Gray, the next Conservative leader will come from outside the Cabinet.
I think for that argument to have merit the contenders from outside the cabinet would be already calling for his head. Aiui none of the plausibles outside cabinet have demanded a resignation yet.
I see that the reporting on this story is sticking to the general convention that pretty much any MP becomes 'senior' when quoted in the press, even when they are anonymously quoted. Except for Bridgen it seems
Boris Johnson must "lead or step aside", senior Tory and former minister Tobias Ellwood has told the BBC...
The government has urged people to reserve judgement until senior civil servant Sue Gray's inquiry is finished.
But Andrew Bridgen, Conservative MP for North West Leicestershire, said: "I don't need to see what Sue Gray says to know that for me Boris Johnson has lost the moral authority to lead the country.
Another former ministerr told the BBC: "Johnson is toast... if you were the chief whip looking at him you'd say he's not fit to do any other jobs in government, you wouldn't make him a junior minister, he doesn't work hard enough."
And a senior Tory MP said "there is a lot of scepticism around that there is anyone ready to take the reins. That buys Boris time. But he shouldn't confuse that with another chance..."
One senior backbench Conservative MP told the BBC they received more than 200 angry emails about the parties, with only five messages in support of the prime minister.
Simon Case (of wine) is head of the Civil Service - appointed by Boris. There are over 450,000 civil servants though. Only about 2% of them actually work in Whitehall, and a relatively small number of those in Downing Street. I've argued before that the Downing Street CS has become increasingly politicised, and the days of Sir Humphrey are over. This government has accelerated that politicisation more than any previously.
I guess, as a former civil servant, I'm arguing against the tarring of all civil servants, or even the Civil Service, with the same brush. The vast majority work with dispassionate integrity, serving governments of whatever stripe without fear or favour. And, in the section I worked in, there was no drinking culture at all. Many of us sometimes went to the pub for a few after work, but office drinking was as rare as Boris being honest.
A rare point of agreement, Al. I'd hope you extend that same courtesy to those of us in banking who have been tarred with the same brush as those few who destroyed the banking system in 2008 like Fred Goodwin.
I see that the reporting on this story is sticking to the general convention that pretty much any MP becomes 'senior' when quoted in the press, even when they are anonymously quoted. Except for Bridgen it seems
Boris Johnson must "lead or step aside", senior Tory and former minister Tobias Ellwood has told the BBC...
The government has urged people to reserve judgement until senior civil servant Sue Gray's inquiry is finished.
But Andrew Bridgen, Conservative MP for North West Leicestershire, said: "I don't need to see what Sue Gray says to know that for me Boris Johnson has lost the moral authority to lead the country.
Another former ministerr told the BBC: "Johnson is toast... if you were the chief whip looking at him you'd say he's not fit to do any other jobs in government, you wouldn't make him a junior minister, he doesn't work hard enough."
And a senior Tory MP said "there is a lot of scepticism around that there is anyone ready to take the reins. That buys Boris time. But he shouldn't confuse that with another chance..."
One senior backbench Conservative MP told the BBC they received more than 200 angry emails about the parties, with only five messages in support of the prime minister.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Two types in the Cabinet:
1. Those who want the job eg Rishi - well aware that the person who wields the knife doesn’t get the job;
2. Those who know they would be out under another PM eg Mogg
3. Inconsequentials. A reasonable proportion of the cabinet where no-one would notice what they did or did not do, many would say I didnt know they were in the cabinet... (Sharma, Trevelyan, Coffey, Eustice, Lewis, Jack, Hart, Dowden, and those also attending, which is all JRM does, Clarke, Spencer, Malthouse, Adams, Donelan).
I do wonder if Rees-Mogg's recent rudeness toward his colleagues in Wales and Scotland, and insistence only the Secretaries of State matter, comes from deep insecurity - a man so obsessed with status and title must be acutely aware that despite inaccurate reporting he is NOT a Cabinet Minister, he merely 'attends Cabinet'.
He's the peon who has to organise business of actual ministers. Not without influence, but ultimately a servant of the others despite the title of Leader.
Mr R-M's exaltation of the SoSfS and SoSfW over the party leaders (and those actual persons' actual party leaders, too) in Scotland and Wales does speak to a wish to stress the status of those attending cabinet.
The butler can often be even more snobby and precious around status than the master. I should think JRM would know that and recognise his own reaction.
True. The Remains of the Day is currently available on BBC iPlayer for anyone who can bear to see it spelt out in excruciating detail.
Interesting thought, from the betting perspective:
Theo Bertram @theobertram · Jan 13 If the Cabinet spend the week ahead saying the public must wait for Sue Gray, the next Conservative leader will come from outside the Cabinet.
I think for that argument to have merit the contenders from outside the cabinet would be already calling for his head. Aiui none of the plausibles outside cabinet have demanded a resignation yet.
Bear in mind they don't necessarily know more than we do at this stage. I think it is about evens that someone makes a move next week after tomorrow's papers.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
You could apply the same for those in Labour who worked and stayed in the shadow cabinet under anti-Semite Jeremy Corbyn.
Like Kier Starmer...
It’s really quite extraordinary how degree-educated PB Shrewdies are still unable to master the basics of correctly spelling the names of the Loto, Dloto and Owen Paterson.
In my defence, it's because I've long known about the civil engineering group, Kier.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
You could apply the same for those in Labour who worked and stayed in the shadow cabinet under anti-Semite Jeremy Corbyn.
Like Kier Starmer...
It’s really quite extraordinary how degree-educated PB Shrewdies are still unable to master the basics of correctly spelling the names of the Loto, Dloto and Owen Paterson.
In my defence, it's because I've long known about the civil engineering group, Kier.
And obv we don't know what @Anabobazina is called IRL. My surname, like many, has 3 or 4 equally likely homophones, so being misspelled is a way of life
One question I have is this: who formally is in charge of staff at No 10? There will be political advisors appointed by the PM. But the rest will be permanent civil servants, no? Reporting to whom?
I do not seek to excuse the PM's responsibility but surely there are serious questions to be asked about the behaviour of those in charge of the civil servants.
Why did no-one try and stop these regular drinking sessions? Or remind them of the lockdown requirements? Or seek to take disciplinary action? Who authorised the payment for the fridge etc etc?
I appreciate that the hypocrisy is what grates but there also seems to be a failure of management and leadership and, yes, hypocrisy, too within parts of the civil service. It is not enough to clear out one or two politicians. Parts of the civil service do not appear to be fit for purpose either.
So the PM is responsible for regulating the civil service, but is that the same as being responsible for the behaviour of civil servants
Crichel Down affair refers. Or it would do if ministers were still honourable.
I remember studying that in Constitutional law 40 odd years ago. And then there was the example of Carrington just before the exam! Seems so quaint now although it was always a bit silly in some respects.
Simon Case (of wine) is head of the Civil Service - appointed by Boris. There are over 450,000 civil servants though. Only about 2% of them actually work in Whitehall, and a relatively small number of those in Downing Street. I've argued before that the Downing Street CS has become increasingly politicised, and the days of Sir Humphrey are over. This government has accelerated that politicisation more than any previously.
I guess, as a former civil servant, I'm arguing against the tarring of all civil servants, or even the Civil Service, with the same brush. The vast majority work with dispassionate integrity, serving governments of whatever stripe without fear or favour. And, in the section I worked in, there was no drinking culture at all. Many of us sometimes went to the pub for a few after work, but office drinking was as rare as Boris being honest.
A rare point of agreement, Al. I'd hope you extend that same courtesy to those of us in banking who have been tarred with the same brush as those few who destroyed the banking system in 2008 like Fred Goodwin.
Steady on. Fairness to bankers?? Whatever next? A good word for a lawyer?
Interesting thought, from the betting perspective:
Theo Bertram @theobertram · Jan 13 If the Cabinet spend the week ahead saying the public must wait for Sue Gray, the next Conservative leader will come from outside the Cabinet.
I think for that argument to have merit the contenders from outside the cabinet would be already calling for his head. Aiui none of the plausibles outside cabinet have demanded a resignation yet.
They are all saying “ the public must wait for Sue Gray” 😆
Simon Case (of wine) is head of the Civil Service - appointed by Boris. There are over 450,000 civil servants though. Only about 2% of them actually work in Whitehall, and a relatively small number of those in Downing Street. I've argued before that the Downing Street CS has become increasingly politicised, and the days of Sir Humphrey are over. This government has accelerated that politicisation more than any previously.
I guess, as a former civil servant, I'm arguing against the tarring of all civil servants, or even the Civil Service, with the same brush. The vast majority work with dispassionate integrity, serving governments of whatever stripe without fear or favour. And, in the section I worked in, there was no drinking culture at all. Many of us sometimes went to the pub for a few after work, but office drinking was as rare as Boris being honest.
A rare point of agreement, Al. I'd hope you extend that same courtesy to those of us in banking who have been tarred with the same brush as those few who destroyed the banking system in 2008 like Fred Goodwin.
My impression of Mogg, like many (but not all) of those Eton types are quite rough under the veneer. Get them riled and it all comes out.
He used to seem polite, but there's been too many instances where he might well be civilbut very disrespectful and rude for it to be correct to call him polite. Now he just puts me in mind of Lady Catherine de Bourgh - unthinkingly and egregiously rude, but imagining herself to be very classy and civilised.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
We have too many problems in the quality of our policing, and the mismanagement of our justice system (including trimming it counter productively) to be adding more powers and laws.
Simon Case (of wine) is head of the Civil Service - appointed by Boris. There are over 450,000 civil servants though. Only about 2% of them actually work in Whitehall, and a relatively small number of those in Downing Street. I've argued before that the Downing Street CS has become increasingly politicised, and the days of Sir Humphrey are over. This government has accelerated that politicisation more than any previously.
I guess, as a former civil servant, I'm arguing against the tarring of all civil servants, or even the Civil Service, with the same brush. The vast majority work with dispassionate integrity, serving governments of whatever stripe without fear or favour. And, in the section I worked in, there was no drinking culture at all. Many of us sometimes went to the pub for a few after work, but office drinking was as rare as Boris being honest.
A rare point of agreement, Al. I'd hope you extend that same courtesy to those of us in banking who have been tarred with the same brush as those few who destroyed the banking system in 2008 like Fred Goodwin.
Never happening.
For starters the industry needs to rebrand, for along as the name rhymes with wankers the abuse is here to stay.
We need to rebrand as Financial Services, cannot get rhyming slang out of that.
Lovely morning on Holy Island despite pretty much everything being closed due to awkward tide times. Now to Newcastle to watch the toon hopefully get 3 points…
Lovely morning on Holy Island despite pretty much everything being closed due to awkward tide times. Now to Newcastle to watch the toon hopefully get 3 points…
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Not just the cabinet? There’s what 160 on payroll
You can only pay 109 of them. But prolly about right if you include PPS
The Ministerial and Other Salaries Act 1975 (as amended) limits the number of ministerial salaries that can be paid at any one time to 109 (including the Lord Chancellor)4 , although unpaid Ministers may be appointed. There is also a limit of 95 on the number of Members of the House of Commons who can be ministers at any one time.5
This does not include Parliamentary Private Secretaries.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Not just the cabinet? There’s what 160 on payroll
The very junior figures will be replaced by allies of a new leader bestowing rewards, and won't get credit for jumping early, so no incentive to go. They can justify it as they are truly serving the minister, who is a good sort (same way many back their local MP but not a leader). The top ones have too much to lose if Boris goes and only when the writing is truly on the wall will they jump. So it is the middle ranks being the canaries perhaps.
Lovely morning on Holy Island despite pretty much everything being closed due to awkward tide times. Now to Newcastle to watch the toon hopefully get 3 points…
Simon Case (of wine) is head of the Civil Service - appointed by Boris. There are over 450,000 civil servants though. Only about 2% of them actually work in Whitehall, and a relatively small number of those in Downing Street. I've argued before that the Downing Street CS has become increasingly politicised, and the days of Sir Humphrey are over. This government has accelerated that politicisation more than any previously.
I guess, as a former civil servant, I'm arguing against the tarring of all civil servants, or even the Civil Service, with the same brush. The vast majority work with dispassionate integrity, serving governments of whatever stripe without fear or favour. And, in the section I worked in, there was no drinking culture at all. Many of us sometimes went to the pub for a few after work, but office drinking was as rare as Boris being honest.
A rare point of agreement, Al. I'd hope you extend that same courtesy to those of us in banking who have been tarred with the same brush as those few who destroyed the banking system in 2008 like Fred Goodwin.
Never happening.
For starters the industry needs to rebrand, for along as the name rhymes with wankers the abuse is here to stay.
We need to rebrand as Financial Services, cannot get rhyming slang out of that.
Is there a drinking culture? More like Wine-ancial services, amiright?
Damn, it is harder. Never fear, the abuse will be managed.
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Not just the cabinet? There’s what 160 on payroll
You can only pay 109 of them. But prolly about right if you include PPS
The Ministerial and Other Salaries Act 1975 (as amended) limits the number of ministerial salaries that can be paid at any one time to 109 (including the Lord Chancellor)4 , although unpaid Ministers may be appointed. There is also a limit of 95 on the number of Members of the House of Commons who can be ministers at any one time.5
This does not include Parliamentary Private Secretaries.
and all their spads? It’s like that “as I was going to St Ives”
Simon Case (of wine) is head of the Civil Service - appointed by Boris. There are over 450,000 civil servants though. Only about 2% of them actually work in Whitehall, and a relatively small number of those in Downing Street. I've argued before that the Downing Street CS has become increasingly politicised, and the days of Sir Humphrey are over. This government has accelerated that politicisation more than any previously.
I guess, as a former civil servant, I'm arguing against the tarring of all civil servants, or even the Civil Service, with the same brush. The vast majority work with dispassionate integrity, serving governments of whatever stripe without fear or favour. And, in the section I worked in, there was no drinking culture at all. Many of us sometimes went to the pub for a few after work, but office drinking was as rare as Boris being honest.
A rare point of agreement, Al. I'd hope you extend that same courtesy to those of us in banking who have been tarred with the same brush as those few who destroyed the banking system in 2008 like Fred Goodwin.
Never happening.
For starters the industry needs to rebrand, for along as the name rhymes with wankers the abuse is here to stay.
We need to rebrand as Financial Services, cannot get rhyming slang out of that.
Is there a drinking culture? More like Wine-ancial services, amiright?
Damn, it is harder. Never fear, the abuse will be managed.
There's a bit of a drinking culture but that's mostly when you're entertaining or celebrating some good results/performance.
It always amuses people I spend a lot on alcohol for entertaining or team building exercises despite being teetotal.
Lovely morning on Holy Island despite pretty much everything being closed due to awkward tide times. Now to Newcastle to watch the toon hopefully get 3 points…
Lovely morning on Holy Island despite pretty much everything being closed due to awkward tide times. Now to Newcastle to watch the toon hopefully get 3 points…
Simon Case (of wine) is head of the Civil Service - appointed by Boris. There are over 450,000 civil servants though. Only about 2% of them actually work in Whitehall, and a relatively small number of those in Downing Street. I've argued before that the Downing Street CS has become increasingly politicised, and the days of Sir Humphrey are over. This government has accelerated that politicisation more than any previously.
I guess, as a former civil servant, I'm arguing against the tarring of all civil servants, or even the Civil Service, with the same brush. The vast majority work with dispassionate integrity, serving governments of whatever stripe without fear or favour. And, in the section I worked in, there was no drinking culture at all. Many of us sometimes went to the pub for a few after work, but office drinking was as rare as Boris being honest.
A rare point of agreement, Al. I'd hope you extend that same courtesy to those of us in banking who have been tarred with the same brush as those few who destroyed the banking system in 2008 like Fred Goodwin.
Never happening.
For starters the industry needs to rebrand, for along as the name rhymes with wankers the abuse is here to stay.
We need to rebrand as Financial Services, cannot get rhyming slang out of that.
Who will think of the poor wankers associated with those dreadful b**ker types?
Isn't it rather odd that not a single member of the Cabinet thinks that Johnson's behaviour is sufficiently bad that they can't serve under him? Do none of them have an ounce of self respect or respect for the dignity of ministerial office? Not a shred of decency between them. Shocking, really.
Not just the cabinet? There’s what 160 on payroll
The very junior figures will be replaced by allies of a new leader bestowing rewards, and won't get credit for jumping early, so no incentive to go. They can justify it as they are truly serving the minister, who is a good sort (same way many back their local MP but not a leader). The top ones have too much to lose if Boris goes and only when the writing is truly on the wall will they jump. So it is the middle ranks being the canaries perhaps.
As someone pointed out Tugendhat moved up to 4th favourite yesterday, praps someone knows he has a plan
Boris is undoubtedly unfit to be PM, but Tories agitating for him to go need to reflect on whether he is still the best leader they have.
Is there any reason to expect a successor to command as much deference in the party? Major did not have the respect of his peers or rivals.
Somehow I expect neither Sunak nor Truss will be able to command the party in the same way as Boris. It could be majoresque.
I would not be surprised if there were not leadership rumours before 2024. Boris should go, but the grass may not be greener.
What? WTAF?
That was then. This is now.
Never mind that the deference was never there, they went along with him because he was electable. You seriously think he commands anyone or anything any more?
Lynton Crosby is on the case now.
All restrictions lifted by the end of January. Junior and Senior Civil Servants publicly defesnestrated and Big Dog is saved.
Julia Hartley-Brewer @JuliaHB1 · 3h It's not about the parties...
If No10 thought it was vital for us all to be locked down, businesses closed, schools shut & unable to see our families, WHY DID THEY THINK IT WAS SAFE FOR THEM TO HAVE PARTIES?
Because they knew it WAS safe.
Yet they locked all of US down anyway.
As has been pointed out before, this annoys both extremes. Some like JHB think that it proves the measures were too severe, and those who think the government endangered lives/the NHS.
Sorry it is a photo of text so you'll have to click it. Meant to be a story of heroic virtue (NHS nurse refuses pleading husband access to dying wife on No 10 party day) instead reads like the Milgram experiment and leaves you thinking how the fck did we do that to ourselves? And we did it with SKS cheering to the rafters.
Chilling isn't it, "For the greater good of everyone else". And the nurse thinks she has the moral high ground by the overly officious applications of "laws" which were only meant to be guidelines and therefore leaving no room for common sense.
Julia Hartley-Brewer @JuliaHB1 · 3h It's not about the parties...
If No10 thought it was vital for us all to be locked down, businesses closed, schools shut & unable to see our families, WHY DID THEY THINK IT WAS SAFE FOR THEM TO HAVE PARTIES?
Because they knew it WAS safe.
Yet they locked all of US down anyway.
As has been pointed out before, this annoys both extremes. Some like JHB think that it proves the measures were too severe, and those who think the government endangered lives/the NHS.
Sorry it is a photo of text so you'll have to click it. Meant to be a story of heroic virtue (NHS nurse refuses pleading husband access to dying wife on No 10 party day) instead reads like the Milgram experiment and leaves you thinking how the fck did we do that to ourselves? And we did it with SKS cheering to the rafters.
Chilling isn't it, "For the greater good of everyone else". And the nurse thinks she has the moral high ground by the overly officious applications of "laws" which were only meant to be guidelines and therefore leaving no room for common sense.
I am also amazed that we did not pick up on the staggering spike in deaths in May 2020 at the time. It seems like half the country snuffed it and we didn't even notice.
Boris is undoubtedly unfit to be PM, but Tories agitating for him to go need to reflect on whether he is still the best leader they have.
Is there any reason to expect a successor to command as much deference in the party? Major did not have the respect of his peers or rivals.
Somehow I expect neither Sunak nor Truss will be able to command the party in the same way as Boris. It could be majoresque.
I would not be surprised if there were not leadership rumours before 2024. Boris should go, but the grass may not be greener.
What? WTAF?
That was then. This is now.
Never mind that the deference was never there, they went along with him because he was electable. You seriously think he commands anyone or anything any more?
Lynton Crosby is on the case now.
All restrictions lifted by the end of January. Junior and Senior Civil Servants publicly defesnestrated and Big Dog is saved.
I predict much use of "he needs better people around him".
Well, I'm off to John Lewis which, despite everything, does seem still to work more or less competently.
Your application as interior design adviser to Downing Street has been rejected. Thank you showing an interest in this position and good luck with your search for other positions.
Well, I'm off to John Lewis which, despite everything, does seem still to work more or less competently.
Your application as interior design adviser to Downing Street has been rejected. Thank you showing an interest in this position and good luck with your search for other positions.
Well, I'm off to John Lewis which, despite everything, does seem still to work more or less competently.
Your application as interior design adviser to Downing Street has been rejected. Thank you showing an interest in this position and good luck with your search for other positions.
Say hello to SKS if you bump into him.
Pretty unlikely unless he's up in Aberdeenshire today. Am I missing something?
Boris is undoubtedly unfit to be PM, but Tories agitating for him to go need to reflect on whether he is still the best leader they have.
Is there any reason to expect a successor to command as much deference in the party? Major did not have the respect of his peers or rivals.
Somehow I expect neither Sunak nor Truss will be able to command the party in the same way as Boris. It could be majoresque.
I would not be surprised if there were not leadership rumours before 2024. Boris should go, but the grass may not be greener.
What? WTAF?
That was then. This is now.
Never mind that the deference was never there, they went along with him because he was electable. You seriously think he commands anyone or anything any more?
He is still there. He has the cabinet out in support. So I guess the answer, within the Tory party, is yes. At least for now.
The bottom line is Big Dog is a big beast and a unique political operator. Malign IMO, but undeniably different. Whoever succeeds him will have far less room for manoeuvre. It might well feel much like May or Major. They could be in for a very rough ride.
He is toast
I said this around the New Year when others were detecting green shoots of recovery in the polls. He can't reset. He is what he is. Even if he could, there is so much more already there but not yet come out. Trust me on this.
I will be v surprised if there isn't a load more revelations to come in tomorrow's Sunday papers.
There are already rumours about parties actually in Johnson’s flat, rather than in the office or in the garden.
So much for “I wandered out and found, to my surprise, all my staff having a work gathering”
It is noticeable that the Tories are desperately trying to keep the focus on the parties - where Gray might or might not give them a way out - rather than on the quite obvious string of lies that we, and Parliament, have been told by the PM - which is inarguably a resigning matter, period.
Well, I'm off to John Lewis which, despite everything, does seem still to work more or less competently.
Your application as interior design adviser to Downing Street has been rejected. Thank you showing an interest in this position and good luck with your search for other positions.
Say hello to SKS if you bump into him.
Pretty unlikely unless he's up in Aberdeenshire today. Am I missing something?
Lovely morning on Holy Island despite pretty much everything being closed due to awkward tide times. Now to Newcastle to watch the toon hopefully get 3 points…
Julia Hartley-Brewer @JuliaHB1 · 3h It's not about the parties...
If No10 thought it was vital for us all to be locked down, businesses closed, schools shut & unable to see our families, WHY DID THEY THINK IT WAS SAFE FOR THEM TO HAVE PARTIES?
Because they knew it WAS safe.
Yet they locked all of US down anyway.
As has been pointed out before, this annoys both extremes. Some like JHB think that it proves the measures were too severe, and those who think the government endangered lives/the NHS.
Sorry it is a photo of text so you'll have to click it. Meant to be a story of heroic virtue (NHS nurse refuses pleading husband access to dying wife on No 10 party day) instead reads like the Milgram experiment and leaves you thinking how the fck did we do that to ourselves? And we did it with SKS cheering to the rafters.
Chilling isn't it, "For the greater good of everyone else". And the nurse thinks she has the moral high ground by the overly officious applications of "laws" which were only meant to be guidelines and therefore leaving no room for common sense.
For a start, that tweet risks snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. The replies below it are pretty damning not just of the nurse but Labour’s attitudes to lockdown. All it has gone and done is reminded people that, under Labour, the restrictions would have been more severe and there would have been far more “Jenny’s”.
Secondly, and this I think shows more of a fundamental issue for Labour, who thought it would be good politics to send that tweet? It should a complete lack of understanding of how people are likely to react. It was like the Labour leaders who thought that comparing David Cameron to Gene Hunt was a fantastic idea.
David (Lord) Frost’s resignation as Johnson’s Brexit minister is a highly significant telltale of the way the wind is blowing among the Brexiteers and former members of the ERG (the so-called European Research Group) . Liz Truss has been wooing them assiduously and it’s rumoured that should she become prime minister Frost wants to serve as her foreign secretary. I suspect Jacob Rees-Mogg would develop an ambition to be her chancellor.
Boris is undoubtedly unfit to be PM, but Tories agitating for him to go need to reflect on whether he is still the best leader they have.
Is there any reason to expect a successor to command as much deference in the party? Major did not have the respect of his peers or rivals.
Somehow I expect neither Sunak nor Truss will be able to command the party in the same way as Boris. It could be majoresque.
I would not be surprised if there were not leadership rumours before 2024. Boris should go, but the grass may not be greener.
What? WTAF?
That was then. This is now.
Never mind that the deference was never there, they went along with him because he was electable. You seriously think he commands anyone or anything any more?
He is still there. He has the cabinet out in support. So I guess the answer, within the Tory party, is yes. At least for now.
The bottom line is Big Dog is a big beast and a unique political operator. Malign IMO, but undeniably different. Whoever succeeds him will have far less room for manoeuvre. It might well feel much like May or Major. They could be in for a very rough ride.
He is toast
I said this around the New Year when others were detecting green shoots of recovery in the polls. He can't reset. He is what he is. Even if he could, there is so much more already there but not yet come out. Trust me on this.
I will be v surprised if there isn't a load more revelations to come in tomorrow's Sunday papers.
There are already rumours about parties actually in Johnson’s flat, rather than in the office or in the garden.
So much for “I wandered out and found, to my surprise, all my staff having a work gathering”
It is noticeable that the Tories are desperately trying to keep the focus on the parties - where Gray might or might not give them a way out - rather than on the quite obvious string of lies that we, and Parliament, have been told by the PM - which is inarguably a resigning matter, period.
Yep, the proliferation of 'parties' might help him. It risks things sliding into "they're all at it" territory. The lying is imo where it's at, plus the cowardice, these 2 things demonstrated together and perfectly with the nausea-inducing "I was so angry when I found out about it" from him following the Stratton video leak.
I don't quite follow the official explaination for why this is returning, but temporarily. MPs will be able to be elected to the Northern Ireland Assembly but keep their Westminster seats, BBC News NI has learned
But the return of the dual mandate will only last until the next Westminster election due in 2024.
It will bring Northern Ireland into line with the rest of the UK.
The move will allow DUP leader Sir Jeffrey Donaldson to stand for election to the assembly in May while retaining his seat at Westminster
Boris is undoubtedly unfit to be PM, but Tories agitating for him to go need to reflect on whether he is still the best leader they have.
Is there any reason to expect a successor to command as much deference in the party? Major did not have the respect of his peers or rivals.
Somehow I expect neither Sunak nor Truss will be able to command the party in the same way as Boris. It could be majoresque.
I would not be surprised if there were not leadership rumours before 2024. Boris should go, but the grass may not be greener.
What? WTAF?
That was then. This is now.
Never mind that the deference was never there, they went along with him because he was electable. You seriously think he commands anyone or anything any more?
Lynton Crosby is on the case now.
All restrictions lifted by the end of January. Junior and Senior Civil Servants publicly defesnestrated and Big Dog is saved.
I predict much use of "he needs better people around him".
Just laid an exit by 31 March at 3.7.
Senior Tories are now batting for a May-June exit. Almost everyone else wants him out now.
Thus the almost free money appears to be on Johnson going in 2022. The only way you lose is if senior Tories keep him on until May and somehow the Tory councillors dodge their already scripted role of going down to electoral slaughter.
David (Lord) Frost’s resignation as Johnson’s Brexit minister is a highly significant telltale of the way the wind is blowing among the Brexiteers and former members of the ERG (the so-called European Research Group) . Liz Truss has been wooing them assiduously and it’s rumoured that should she become prime minister Frost wants to serve as her foreign secretary. I suspect Jacob Rees-Mogg would develop an ambition to be her chancellor.
Comments
This section is so very applicable -
"Though absolved of personal blame by the Franks Report, he explained his decision to resign thus: “It did not seem to me a time for self-justification and certainly not to cling to office. I think the country is more important than oneself.” In his autobiography he wrote: “The nation feels that there has been a disgrace. Someone must have been to blame. The disgrace must be purged. The person to purge it should be the minister in charge. That was me.”
Those 7 sentences admirably summarise what it means to be in charge and to take responsibility when something goes wrong on your watch.
(It would not be far-fetched to say that the nation might well feel that aspects of [public life] have in recent years been “a disgrace” which ought to be purged.)"
Nowadays it's about 70% walking, 10% PB, 20% trying to work out why my code doesn't work.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/could-this-legal-loophole-save-boris-johnson-
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2022/jan/15/energy-bills-flat-dwellers-face-massive-rise-despite-price-cap
I said this around the New Year when others were detecting green shoots of recovery in the polls. He can't reset. He is what he is. Even if he could, there is so much more already there but not yet come out. Trust me on this.
There are over 450,000 civil servants though. Only about 2% of them actually work in Whitehall, and a relatively small number of those in Downing Street. I've argued before that the Downing Street CS has become increasingly politicised, and the days of Sir Humphrey are over. This government has accelerated that politicisation more than any previously.
I guess, as a former civil servant, I'm arguing against the tarring of all civil servants, or even the Civil Service, with the same brush. The vast majority work with dispassionate integrity, serving governments of whatever stripe without fear or favour. And, in the section I worked in, there was no drinking culture at all. Many of us sometimes went to the pub for a few after work, but office drinking was as rare as Boris being honest.
https://twitter.com/UKLabour/status/1481679941456515079
Sorry it is a photo of text so you'll have to click it. Meant to be a story of heroic virtue (NHS nurse refuses pleading husband access to dying wife on No 10 party day) instead reads like the Milgram experiment and leaves you thinking how the fck did we do that to ourselves? And we did it with SKS cheering to the rafters.
Because he will create something else to be ashamed of.
Why?
Because he's Boris Johnson.
£1,000 fine for every offence or they can go to court, be named and try to justify the party to avoid the fine.
Theo Bertram
@theobertram
·
Jan 13
If the Cabinet spend the week ahead saying the public must wait for Sue Gray, the next Conservative leader will come from outside the Cabinet.
He's the peon who has to organise business of actual ministers. Not without influence, but ultimately a servant of the others despite the title of Leader.
Notoriously malign would be nearer the mark.
The historical relationship with China is the more complicated one.
There's also the question of what would happen with N Korea's nukes.
We are a mere step away from the Fen Poly / Cowley Tech humble bragging.
Someone make it stop before it starts.
I wonder if QE2 had a similar reaction to the revelations this week.
Kier Is Exactly Right
Sue Grey
No A!
Long to RaynOveRus
HTH!
What would Boris be?
The country is a shambles. Led by them.
However, my point is that whilst him leaving may solve the current crisis, it will cause new problems- some lying dormant.
His hitherto political unchallenged status within the party, will not be available to his successor. That will be difficult. Would Sunak set aside his ambition to work for Truss or Steve Baker, or vice versa? I doubt it. They’re all too close to one another.
And the second two are new.
But, as extensively discussed there is more to it than that.
Complicit ?
Boris Johnson must "lead or step aside", senior Tory and former minister Tobias Ellwood has told the BBC...
The government has urged people to reserve judgement until senior civil servant Sue Gray's inquiry is finished.
But Andrew Bridgen, Conservative MP for North West Leicestershire, said: "I don't need to see what Sue Gray says to know that for me Boris Johnson has lost the moral authority to lead the country.
Another former ministerr told the BBC: "Johnson is toast... if you were the chief whip looking at him you'd say he's not fit to do any other jobs in government, you wouldn't make him a junior minister, he doesn't work hard enough."
And a senior Tory MP said "there is a lot of scepticism around that there is anyone ready to take the reins. That buys Boris time. But he shouldn't confuse that with another chance..."
One senior backbench Conservative MP told the BBC they received more than 200 angry emails about the parties, with only five messages in support of the prime minister.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60005134
Ellwood is a Committee Chair so that passes muster I suppose.
Have you looked at Bridgen's bio on wiki? WTF are people like this purporting to govern us?
https://www.kier.co.uk/
The bill could spell the end of policing by consent – and force police leaders to decide whether to use draconian powers on peaceful protesters"
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/as-a-former-officer-im-horrified-by-england-and-waless-police-bill/
For starters the industry needs to rebrand, for along as the name rhymes with wankers the abuse is here to stay.
We need to rebrand as Financial Services, cannot get rhyming slang out of that.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/15/corbevax-covid-vaccine-texas-scientists
https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/commons-information-office/m06.pdf
The Ministerial and Other Salaries Act 1975 (as amended) limits the number of
ministerial salaries that can be paid at any one time to 109 (including the Lord
Chancellor)4
, although unpaid Ministers may be appointed. There is also a limit of 95
on the number of Members of the House of Commons who can be ministers at any
one time.5
This does not include Parliamentary Private Secretaries.
https://holyislandcrossingtimes.northumberland.gov.uk/
Damn, it is harder. Never fear, the abuse will be managed.
It always amuses people I spend a lot on alcohol for entertaining or team building exercises despite being teetotal.
All restrictions lifted by the end of January. Junior and Senior Civil Servants publicly defesnestrated and Big Dog is saved.
https://www.google.com/search?q=https://www.ft.com/content/d246f8b4-80ef-498f-b9f1-7779acc5efd7
Just laid an exit by 31 March at 3.7.
So much for “I wandered out and found, to my surprise, all my staff having a work gathering”
It is noticeable that the Tories are desperately trying to keep the focus on the parties - where Gray might or might not give them a way out - rather than on the quite obvious string of lies that we, and Parliament, have been told by the PM - which is inarguably a resigning matter, period.
But not pre-lagershed...
Secondly, and this I think shows more of a fundamental issue for Labour, who thought it would be good politics to send that tweet? It should a complete lack of understanding of how people are likely to react. It was like the Labour leaders who thought that comparing David Cameron to Gene Hunt was a fantastic idea.
David (Lord) Frost’s resignation as Johnson’s Brexit minister is a highly significant telltale of the way the wind is blowing among the Brexiteers and former members of the ERG (the so-called European Research Group) . Liz Truss has been wooing them assiduously and it’s rumoured that should she become prime minister Frost wants to serve as her foreign secretary. I suspect Jacob Rees-Mogg would develop an ambition to be her chancellor.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-right-will-decide-when-johnsons-time-is-up-zwfv02njr
MPs will be able to be elected to the Northern Ireland Assembly but keep their Westminster seats, BBC News NI has learned
But the return of the dual mandate will only last until the next Westminster election due in 2024.
It will bring Northern Ireland into line with the rest of the UK.
The move will allow DUP leader Sir Jeffrey Donaldson to stand for election to the assembly in May while retaining his seat at Westminster
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-60000812
Thus the almost free money appears to be on Johnson going in 2022. The only way you lose is if senior Tories keep him on until May and somehow the Tory councillors dodge their already scripted role of going down to electoral slaughter.
(Government of all the sh*ts)