I think what this innings and that previous one where he thrashed 77 is showing is that Crawley has what it takes to open for England long term. Burns probably doesn't but that's another story.
Crawley can and should be the attacking option, the Trescothick with the range of shots. I think part of the problem has been people in the England set up have been trying to get him to bat in a way that doesn't suit him. As they have with just about every batsman they get hold of (please keep Lammonby and Salt out of their clutches a while longer).
The question is, who should open with him? Burns is probably not the answer. The realistic options would be Hain, Sibley, Hameed, Bracey. Sibley needs runs, as does Hameed (another one who has been chronically mismanaged) but both could anchor the innings while Crawley, a No. 3 (for which in default of other options James Vince is surely worth another go even if only for a year) and Root play shots around them.
Bracey, however, as the only batsman other than Bairstow to score a century on this England tour and as a left hander is probably the one they should at least try for next season. If he is not preferred, and the press hate him (largely I think because he plays for Gloucestershire) then surely Sam Hain is worth a try.
This post has nothing to do with my prediction two years ago that Bracey and Crawley were the long term top order options for England.
I think Zac is a better player than his father: the same eye, but much more athletic. I think he could play for England for another fifteen years.
Since Terry Crawley was in your line of work, I'm sure you're right, but I'm not sure what the relevance of that post is.
What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.
They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.
It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.
Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.
Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.
On reflection, the hatred of Carrie is a bit disturbing. It does have a whiff of misogyny about it. But that shouldn't make her immune from criticism or comment.
Fundamentally, it seems that the problem is that she is a poor political advisor. This can be measured against objective criteria - the decline in opinion poll ratings. Johnson and the tories have been in a sharp decline on this front since the Patterson debacle, which was only 2 months ago, to the point where the crisis is now existential. But there is no corrective action, and things keep getting worse. There cannot be any 'shake up' to arrest the decline in No.10, because Carrie is his wife and he is seemingly unable to curb her power.
It seems like they are just going down together, and there is nothing that we can do but watch the tragedy unfold.
I doubt that Carrie was the least bit interested in Paterson.
Remember that Bozo flew back from the climate conference for a boozy lunch with Charles Moore and others from the Spectator, and they told him to save Paterson.
Really !
What on Earth were they thinking and what was he thinking.
Johnson is someone whose judgement is constantly found to be sorely lacking. Unforced error after unforced error.
Their motivation was undoubtedly personal.
But the political argument put to the PM was probably along the lines of “if there’s a recall petition there’s a risk of a by-election and if there’s an election there’s a small risk you might lose it. Why risk such a wobble to your premiership at such a time?”
But maybe I am being naive, and they just quietly pushed an envelope with photos of some random musician across the table and said “your call…”
That is not right. Boris's main concern was not to save Owen Paterson but to use the OP affair as an excuse to ram through changes that would neuter the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, Kathryn Stone, who might (and might yet) investigate Wallpapergate, that might end Boris's premiership.
One curiosity about the PM is why do even his worst critics, who know he constantly lies, automatically believe him when he says he is skint. I would not at all be surprised if he has comfortable seven figures in the bank but simply enjoys getting other people to pay for him.
Alimony...
His ex is a QC barrister.
How much do you think Boris receives from her every month?
Isn't it the opposite and Boris has to pay a significant amount of his income - for he went up against an angry barrister unprepared.
With a self-imposed, baby shaped deadline to meet, so he had to take what he was given.
One curiosity about the PM is why do even his worst critics, who know he constantly lies, automatically believe him when he says he is skint. I would not at all be surprised if he has comfortable seven figures in the bank but simply enjoys getting other people to pay for him.
Alimony...
His ex is a QC barrister.
How much do you think Boris receives from her every month?
Isn't it the opposite and Boris has to pay a significant amount of his income - for he went up against an angry barrister unprepared.
With a self-imposed, baby shaped deadline to meet, so he had to take what he was given.
I think what this innings and that previous one where he thrashed 77 is showing is that Crawley has what it takes to open for England long term. Burns probably doesn't but that's another story.
Crawley can and should be the attacking option, the Trescothick with the range of shots. I think part of the problem has been people in the England set up have been trying to get him to bat in a way that doesn't suit him. As they have with just about every batsman they get hold of (please keep Lammonby and Salt out of their clutches a while longer).
The question is, who should open with him? Burns is probably not the answer. The realistic options would be Hain, Sibley, Hameed, Bracey. Sibley needs runs, as does Hameed (another one who has been chronically mismanaged) but both could anchor the innings while Crawley, a No. 3 (for which in default of other options James Vince is surely worth another go even if only for a year) and Root play shots around them.
Bracey, however, as the only batsman other than Bairstow to score a century on this England tour and as a left hander is probably the one they should at least try for next season. If he is not preferred, and the press hate him (largely I think because he plays for Gloucestershire) then surely Sam Hain is worth a try.
This post has nothing to do with my prediction two years ago that Bracey and Crawley were the long term top order options for England.
I think Zac is a better player than his father: the same eye, but much more athletic. I think he could play for England for another fifteen years.
Since Terry Crawley was in your line of work, I'm sure you're right, but I'm not sure what the relevance of that post is.
Ah... not John Crawley's son then?
No. No relation.
I knew John Crawley (a little) at University. I played about as many times for Trinity as he did. Albeit never in the same games.
The defences of Sage modelling (including those published in The Spectator) leave many questions unanswered. If the modelling is only ‘illustrative’ and does not predict or forecast, then why are they summarised (and presented to ministers) this way:
‘Without intervention beyond those measures already in place (“Plan B”), modelling indicates a peak of at least 3,000 hospital admissions per day in England.’
And why are scenarios described as being ‘likely’?
Modelling matters. It has consequences. If the summer reopening scenarios were seen as credible, a disastrous lockdown could have been extended. If the autumn scenarios were believed, schools might have remained shut. If just one December cabinet meeting had gone differently we would have faced restrictions that the real world data now tells us would have been completely unnecessary.
The Spectator’s data team has been using new techniques to follow Sage graphs: scanning software that lets us interpolate the hidden values (the figures are, oddly, not released) and an API Covid data feed that lets us compare Sage scenarios to the eventual reality. But it’s surely time for a proper public inquiry to look into how these Sage ‘scenarios’ were put together and presented to policymakers and the public.
Quite.
To defend SAGE for a minute, there is a certain complexity here: their forecasts change peoples' behaviour. If SAGE had forecast zero hospitalisations, then people would have worn masks less often, socialised more, etc. If - on the other hand - they'd predicted three million dead, then people would have never left their homes.
The key thing is how did Whitty etc present these models to Ministers?
- This will happen - This will happen if you don't do anything - This will happen if you put our recommended restrictions in place - This will happen if the public don't do anything
I presume it was the last option.
I also reckon Vallance probably uses the first option in press conferences just to prevent the last option happening, through (benign) scaremongering.
While I'm in the lockdown-sceptic camp, I really dislike this hindsight "omichron was completely fine in the end" attitude.
It's clear that public health messaging got through over Christmas and that had a big impact on reducing cases (even though they went to 250,000!), mainly through people spamming LFTs. Without the scare stories before hand I don't think we'd be in this position.
The only disappointing thing is we didn't push the anti-anti-vaxxer argument harder (particularly in Scotland), filming in hospital wards etc. Baffles me.
Also confused by the lack of effort put into reducing obesity. Every time there is a "no underlying health condition" story, you just wait for the photo and....
We are 21 months into the pandemic. At a very chill half pound per week, you'd have lost over 3 stone over the course of the pandemic.
Oz still just about able to win by more than 200...
Incidentally that is why Burns is not the answer to England's opening problem, and nor is Chris Dent, who has an even better domestic record but exactly the same technical flaw.
Oliver Dowden says the allegations of parties were "totally wrong" he says he was "angered by them" and when the PM responds to the Gray report in the Commons, he will "address the kind of culture that allowed that to happen". https://twitter.com/robpowellnews/status/1482633358194663427
I think what this innings and that previous one where he thrashed 77 is showing is that Crawley has what it takes to open for England long term. Burns probably doesn't but that's another story.
Crawley can and should be the attacking option, the Trescothick with the range of shots. I think part of the problem has been people in the England set up have been trying to get him to bat in a way that doesn't suit him. As they have with just about every batsman they get hold of (please keep Lammonby and Salt out of their clutches a while longer).
The question is, who should open with him? Burns is probably not the answer. The realistic options would be Hain, Sibley, Hameed, Bracey. Sibley needs runs, as does Hameed (another one who has been chronically mismanaged) but both could anchor the innings while Crawley, a No. 3 (for which in default of other options James Vince is surely worth another go even if only for a year) and Root play shots around them.
Bracey, however, as the only batsman other than Bairstow to score a century on this England tour and as a left hander is probably the one they should at least try for next season. If he is not preferred, and the press hate him (largely I think because he plays for Gloucestershire) then surely Sam Hain is worth a try.
This post has nothing to do with my prediction two years ago that Bracey and Crawley were the long term top order options for England.
I think Zac is a better player than his father: the same eye, but much more athletic. I think he could play for England for another fifteen years.
Since Terry Crawley was in your line of work, I'm sure you're right, but I'm not sure what the relevance of that post is.
Ah... not John Crawley's son then?
If it's any consolation up until a few months ago I was also certain he was John Crawley's son.
Think I preferred the soccer casuals when they were, well, casual. Not cheap either, but this sort of ‘gentlemen in love with football’ wank was bound to come at a premium.
Oliver Dowden says the allegations of parties were "totally wrong" he says he was "angered by them" and when the PM responds to the Gray report in the Commons, he will "address the kind of culture that allowed that to happen". https://twitter.com/robpowellnews/status/1482633358194663427
No other premiership has had such a pathetically shabby ending. No finale to his slummy reign would be more appropriate. It has always been highly likely that cavalier and blatant rule-breaking, and then lying about it, would be the undoing of a prime minister with a career history of casual contempt for truth and integrity.
Conservative MPs now profess their shock-horror at the torrent of revelations about booze-ups at Number 10, but few expressed concern about earlier disgraces when it didn’t appear to be costing them support. It was often averred that a substantial chunk of the public enjoyed having a “lovable rogue” at Number 10.
Here we have a scandal that even the great trickster can’t blag his way out of. His attempt to sound contrite didn’t work because it was a non-apology apology so reeking with insincerity that it added insult to the injury felt by the many who have been bereaved by the pandemic. It is hard to say which is the more jaw-dropping. The flagrancy of the rule-breaking. The arrogant stupidity of it. Or the stunning frequency with which the denizens of Number 10 behaved as if laws did not apply to them. On Mr Johnson’s watch, during the most severe pandemic in more than a century and on the eve of the burial of the monarch’s consort, Number 10 was turned into a nightclub.
A growing number of Tory backbenchers think he should go, as do quite a lot of ministers, including some of the cabinet who are professing insincere loyalty oaths. Truth to tell, most Conservative MPs are exercised by this scandal because it makes them fearful of losing power, not because of what it says about the prime minister’s ethical character. They knew who he was. They made him their leader because they thought that winning is all that matters in politics and he looked like a winner. Far too many people in the Tory party chose to ignore his unfitness to be prime minister.
If they had bothered themselves with that question before, they wouldn’t have put him in Number 10 in the first place, nor shrugged so cynically at all the squalor that has ineluctably followed.
Mr. Eabhal, the 'tolerance' of not criticising or trying to get people to change when they're dangerously obese (fat-shaming, indeed) has led to more deaths from this.
And even without COVID-19, being significantly overweight is obviously detrimental to health. We should encourage people to try and get fitter or at least shed stones of fat, for their own sake.
Think I preferred the soccer casuals when they were, well, casual. Not cheap either, but this sort of ‘gentlemen in love with football’ wank was bound to come at a premium.
Driving gloves as well. It’s all a bit Alan Partridge.
Think I preferred the soccer casuals when they were, well, casual. Not cheap either, but this sort of ‘gentlemen in love with football’ wank was bound to come at a premium.
What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.
They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.
It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.
Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.
Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.
‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’
Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.
Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud. However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.
On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry. They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'. Or similar.
Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.
Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.
Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.
Noted. Euan Blair is left alone, of course. Will Johnson die a rich man, I wonder. I know about the probability of well-paid newspaper articles and speaking engagements, but as you say his track record as a money manager isn't good.
Euan Blair was left alone, rightly, as a child of the Prime Minister. Of the spouses, however, Cherie Blair faced worse treatment than Carrie. In particular her wide mouth was an endless source for comedy and cartoons. Sarah Brown was perhaps insulated by personal tragedy but SamCam was hardly ever out of the papers, though rarely criticised. Press treatment of Carrie as informal advisor and confidante is roughly equivalent to Denis Thatcher, without the suggestion she is permanently three sheets to the wind (ironically, in view of partygate).
I think what this innings and that previous one where he thrashed 77 is showing is that Crawley has what it takes to open for England long term. Burns probably doesn't but that's another story.
Crawley can and should be the attacking option, the Trescothick with the range of shots. I think part of the problem has been people in the England set up have been trying to get him to bat in a way that doesn't suit him. As they have with just about every batsman they get hold of (please keep Lammonby and Salt out of their clutches a while longer).
The question is, who should open with him? Burns is probably not the answer. The realistic options would be Hain, Sibley, Hameed, Bracey. Sibley needs runs, as does Hameed (another one who has been chronically mismanaged) but both could anchor the innings while Crawley, a No. 3 (for which in default of other options James Vince is surely worth another go even if only for a year) and Root play shots around them.
Bracey, however, as the only batsman other than Bairstow to score a century on this England tour and as a left hander is probably the one they should at least try for next season. If he is not preferred, and the press hate him (largely I think because he plays for Gloucestershire) then surely Sam Hain is worth a try.
This post has nothing to do with my prediction two years ago that Bracey and Crawley were the long term top order options for England.
I think Zac is a better player than his father: the same eye, but much more athletic. I think he could play for England for another fifteen years.
Since Terry Crawley was in your line of work, I'm sure you're right, but I'm not sure what the relevance of that post is.
Ah... not John Crawley's son then?
If it's any consolation up until a few months ago I was also certain he was John Crawley's son.
Think I preferred the soccer casuals when they were, well, casual. Not cheap either, but this sort of ‘gentlemen in love with football’ wank was bound to come at a premium.
Driving gloves as well. It’s all a bit Alan Partridge.
The original Facebook link defaulted to $ so I suspect it may be a US vision of what soccerball is all about.
Think I preferred the soccer casuals when they were, well, casual. Not cheap either, but this sort of ‘gentlemen in love with football’ wank was bound to come at a premium.
Driving gloves as well. It’s all a bit Alan Partridge.
Conventional shirts defaced by a hideous logo and with a spurious connection to football.
Mr. Eabhal, the 'tolerance' of not criticising or trying to get people to change when they're dangerously obese (fat-shaming, indeed) has led to more deaths from this.
And even without COVID-19, being significantly overweight is obviously detrimental to health. We should encourage people to try and get fitter or at least shed stones of fat, for their own sake.
I wouldn't mind people being obese, smoking etc if we didn't have a public health service. The huge strain it is under, and the massive cost, should be stemmed at source as quickly as possible.
It's not just a moral hazard problem, though. See the US.
What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.
They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.
It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.
Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.
Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.
‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’
Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.
Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud. However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.
On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry. They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'. Or similar.
Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.
Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.
Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.
Noted. Euan Blair is left alone, of course. Will Johnson die a rich man, I wonder. I know about the probability of well-paid newspaper articles and speaking engagements, but as you say his track record as a money manager isn't good.
Euan Blair was left alone, rightly, as a child of the Prime Minister. Of the spouses, however, Cherie Blair faced worse treatment than Carrie. In particular her wide mouth was an endless source for comedy and cartoons. Sarah Brown was perhaps insulated by personal tragedy but SamCam was hardly ever out of the papers, though rarely criticised. Press treatment of Carrie as informal advisor and confidante is roughly equivalent to Denis Thatcher, without the suggestion she is permanently three sheets to the wind (ironically, in view of partygate).
Know what you mean about Cherie Blair's looks. Very unfair and unkind. She, of course, had, and still has, a career independent of her husband. Carrie Johnson is, for some reason which I don't quite understand, treated with kid gloves. Perhaps it's her pregnancies.
Think I preferred the soccer casuals when they were, well, casual. Not cheap either, but this sort of ‘gentlemen in love with football’ wank was bound to come at a premium.
Driving gloves as well. It’s all a bit Alan Partridge.
Conventional shirts defaced by a hideous logo and with a spurious connection to football.
Sounds like a description of this season's NUFC shirt.
What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.
They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.
It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.
Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.
Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.
‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’
Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.
Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud. However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.
On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry. They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'. Or similar.
Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.
Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.
Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.
I'm unconvinced that Carrie is fair game, at least to the extent she seems to be vilified.
Indeed. People consult their spouses on things, that's a given, but is there really evidence she is the powerful puppet master who has her own cabal running the show as seems to get alleged? Most of the testimony as to her influence seems to come back to Cummings, who is somewhat unreliable when he's clearly got a personal vendetta against his old boss.
She's fair game for criticism if Boris is taking her advice on things. But the extent of that criticism seems disproportionate as to her probable influence.
Mr. Sandpit, interesting... Sainz might be worth a shot, for each way (I think Ladbrokes, annoyingly, only has it as a straight win). Heard anything on Hamilton?
Mr. eek, possibly. I'd still be quite surprised if he didn't compete but the odds have shifted.
No-one has heard a squeak from Lewis for about five weeks now.
Maybe he’s awaiting the result of the FIA enquiry into the last race, maybe he’s awaiting confirmation that the new car is going to be competitive, or maybe he’s just training hard and not allowing himself to be distracted by anything.
What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.
They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.
It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.
Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.
Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.
‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’
Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.
Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud. However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.
On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry. They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'. Or similar.
Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.
Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.
Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.
Noted. Euan Blair is left alone, of course. Will Johnson die a rich man, I wonder. I know about the probability of well-paid newspaper articles and speaking engagements, but as you say his track record as a money manager isn't good.
Euan Blair was left alone, rightly, as a child of the Prime Minister. Of the spouses, however, Cherie Blair faced worse treatment than Carrie. In particular her wide mouth was an endless source for comedy and cartoons. Sarah Brown was perhaps insulated by personal tragedy but SamCam was hardly ever out of the papers, though rarely criticised. Press treatment of Carrie as informal advisor and confidante is roughly equivalent to Denis Thatcher, without the suggestion she is permanently three sheets to the wind (ironically, in view of partygate).
Know what you mean about Cherie Blair's looks. Very unfair and unkind. She, of course, had, and still has, a career independent of her husband. Carrie Johnson is, for some reason which I don't quite understand, treated with kid gloves. Perhaps it's her pregnancies.
F1: bit of movement on Ladbrokes, Hamilton out to 2.5, Verstappen in to the same number.
I wonder if this is a reaction to the outside possibility of Hamilton not competing next year.
Russell's also down from around 6 or 6.5 to 5.
Can’t see that myself. Noted that the FIA investigation very handily reveals its findings on the 18th March…Hamilton will be back to prove a point (I hope)
On the first point: yes, but 1) Plan B restrictions were pointless, stupid and damaging (not as pointless, stupid and damaging as those brought in by the Scots and Welsh, but pointless stupid and damaging nonetheless), and 2) Do we believe that avoiding further restrictions in the run-up to Christmas - that very odd day when the nature of the restrictions we would have was leaked to the press, the presser was set up, only for everyone to be marched back down the hill again - was down to Boris? Someone can take credit for that - the Cabinet, or certain people in it, some of the backbenchers, Fraser Nelson perhaps -but I'm not sure Boris can.
Of course Boris will not resign by the end of January. He will also want to get some bounce from ending Covid restrictions at the end of the month
Not even if 54 (or whatever it is) MP's get their letters into Sir Graham's office? Or he's eviscerated by Ms Grey's report?
Boris won't resign. He will force his opponents amongst Tory MPs first to get the 54 letters in and then to get the 51% of Tory MPs + to vote against him in a VONC to remove him.
He knows they probably still don't have the numbers for either yet
What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.
They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.
It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.
Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.
Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.
‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’
Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.
Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud. However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.
On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry. They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'. Or similar.
Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.
Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.
Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.
Noted. Euan Blair is left alone, of course. Will Johnson die a rich man, I wonder. I know about the probability of well-paid newspaper articles and speaking engagements, but as you say his track record as a money manager isn't good.
One curiosity about the PM is why do even his worst critics, who know he constantly lies, automatically believe him when he says he is skint. I would not at all be surprised if he has comfortable seven figures in the bank but simply enjoys getting other people to pay for him.
Its believed because it aligns with the accepted image of him as personally a mess.
I mean, ye gods, he didn't even have any tax dodges set up when running for mayor!
On the first point: yes, but 1) Plan B restrictions were pointless, stupid and damaging (not as pointless, stupid and damaging as those brought in by the Scots and Welsh, but pointless stupid and damaging nonetheless), and 2) Do we believe that avoiding further restrictions in the run-up to Christmas - that very odd day when the nature of the restrictions we would have was leaked to the press, the presser was set up, only for everyone to be marched back down the hill again - was down to Boris? Someone can take credit for that - the Cabinet, or certain people in it, some of the backbenchers, Fraser Nelson perhaps -but I'm not sure Boris can.
That also raises the question of the motives. It certainly wasn't coherently or rationally planned.
What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.
They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.
It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.
Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.
Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.
On reflection, the hatred of Carrie is a bit disturbing. It does have a whiff of misogyny about it. But that shouldn't make her immune from criticism or comment.
Fundamentally, it seems that the problem is that she is a poor political advisor. This can be measured against objective criteria - the decline in opinion poll ratings. Johnson and the tories have been in a sharp decline on this front since the Patterson debacle, which was only 2 months ago, to the point where the crisis is now existential. But there is no corrective action, and things keep getting worse. There cannot be any 'shake up' to arrest the decline in No.10, because Carrie is his wife and he is seemingly unable to curb her power.
It seems like they are just going down together, and there is nothing that we can do but watch the tragedy unfold.
I doubt that Carrie was the least bit interested in Paterson.
Remember that Bozo flew back from the climate conference for a boozy lunch with Charles Moore and others from the Spectator, and they told him to save Paterson.
Really !
What on Earth were they thinking and what was he thinking.
Johnson is someone whose judgement is constantly found to be sorely lacking. Unforced error after unforced error.
Their motivation was undoubtedly personal.
But the political argument put to the PM was probably along the lines of “if there’s a recall petition there’s a risk of a by-election and if there’s an election there’s a small risk you might lose it. Why risk such a wobble to your premiership at such a time?”
But maybe I am being naive, and they just quietly pushed an envelope with photos of some random musician across the table and said “your call…”
That is not right. Boris's main concern was not to save Owen Paterson but to use the OP affair as an excuse to ram through changes that would neuter the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, Kathryn Stone, who might (and might yet) investigate Wallpapergate, that might end Boris's premiership.
In which case he should have let Paterson face the music and then draw on the sympathy the man had due to his wife, and say it all looked unfair this needs looking at.
The urgency of the action which included saving Paterson made the larger goal impossible.
Of course Boris will not resign by the end of January. He will also want to get some bounce from ending Covid restrictions at the end of the month
I am not sure an ending of restrictions benefits him at all under the circumstances. Anything to do with restrictions reminds us he didn't follow them.
Mr. Eabhal, on money, smoking is actually a positive for the NHS as the tax take exceeds the medical costs. Not great for those dying of emphysema and cancer, of course.
Mr. Abode, I think it's unlikely, but not impossible.
Re the modelling on R4 Today yday they had the head of one of the public health bodies on. Justin Webb put the numbers to her and said that the worst case presented was way out and she responded by saying the models gave a range and that the actual outcome corresponded to the best case as though that was justification for the models accuracy.
She was not asked why what actually happened didn't more closely correspond to the central case.
Of course Boris will not resign by the end of January. He will also want to get some bounce from ending Covid restrictions at the end of the month
Not even if 54 (or whatever it is) MP's get their letters into Sir Graham's office? Or he's eviscerated by Ms Grey's report?
Boris won't resign. He will force his opponents amongst Tory MPs first to get the 54 letters in and then to get the 51% of Tory MPs + to vote against him in a VONC to remove him.
He knows they probably still don't have the numbers for either yet
He probably knows they still don't have the numbers for either yet.
Of course Boris will not resign by the end of January. He will also want to get some bounce from ending Covid restrictions at the end of the month
Not even if 54 (or whatever it is) MP's get their letters into Sir Graham's office? Or he's eviscerated by Ms Grey's report?
Boris won't resign. He will force his opponents amongst Tory MPs first to get the 54 letters in and then to get the 51% of Tory MPs + to vote against him in a VONC to remove him.
He knows they probably still don't have the numbers for either yet
The view seems to be that getting the letters is the difficult bit. If they get to the voting stage, he's done.
Mr. Sandpit, interesting... Sainz might be worth a shot, for each way (I think Ladbrokes, annoyingly, only has it as a straight win). Heard anything on Hamilton?
Mr. eek, possibly. I'd still be quite surprised if he didn't compete but the odds have shifted.
No-one has heard a squeak from Lewis for about five weeks now.
Maybe he’s awaiting the result of the FIA enquiry into the last race, maybe he’s awaiting confirmation that the new car is going to be competitive, or maybe he’s just training hard and not allowing himself to be distracted by anything.
He's having a strop by proxy since hes not just waiting hes had his people talk about him possibly not coming back.
It's got justification, but its still no more than melodrama
Mr. Eabhal, on money, smoking is actually a positive for the NHS as the tax take exceeds the medical costs. Not great for those dying of emphysema and cancer, of course.
Mr. Abode, I think it's unlikely, but not impossible.
I also think Merc will have a strong car this year - firing up before Christmas was a prettty strong statement of intent I reckon. I don’t think Ferrari will be as strong as some reckon..
Either way, glad to see we’re building up to the car reveals. Believe Aston Martin first to launch on 10th February
What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.
They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.
It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.
Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.
Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.
On reflection, the hatred of Carrie is a bit disturbing. It does have a whiff of misogyny about it. But that shouldn't make her immune from criticism or comment.
Fundamentally, it seems that the problem is that she is a poor political advisor. This can be measured against objective criteria - the decline in opinion poll ratings. Johnson and the tories have been in a sharp decline on this front since the Patterson debacle, which was only 2 months ago, to the point where the crisis is now existential. But there is no corrective action, and things keep getting worse. There cannot be any 'shake up' to arrest the decline in No.10, because Carrie is his wife and he is seemingly unable to curb her power.
It seems like they are just going down together, and there is nothing that we can do but watch the tragedy unfold.
I doubt that Carrie was the least bit interested in Paterson.
Remember that Bozo flew back from the climate conference for a boozy lunch with Charles Moore and others from the Spectator, and they told him to save Paterson.
Really !
What on Earth were they thinking and what was he thinking.
Johnson is someone whose judgement is constantly found to be sorely lacking. Unforced error after unforced error.
Their motivation was undoubtedly personal.
But the political argument put to the PM was probably along the lines of “if there’s a recall petition there’s a risk of a by-election and if there’s an election there’s a small risk you might lose it. Why risk such a wobble to your premiership at such a time?”
But maybe I am being naive, and they just quietly pushed an envelope with photos of some random musician across the table and said “your call…”
That is not right. Boris's main concern was not to save Owen Paterson but to use the OP affair as an excuse to ram through changes that would neuter the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, Kathryn Stone, who might (and might yet) investigate Wallpapergate, that might end Boris's premiership.
In which case he should have let Paterson face the music and then draw on the sympathy the man had due to his wife, and say it all looked unfair this needs looking at.
The urgency of the action which included saving Paterson made the larger goal impossible.
And it didn't need Charles Moore to tell him that.
Shadow Health Sec Wes Streeting says if he was just thinking about party politics then he'd be calling for Boris Johnson to stay, as that would mean the Tories would be "knocked out" at the next election. But he says it's "in the national interest" for him to go. https://twitter.com/robpowellnews/status/1482639304702705666
Oliver Dowden says the allegations of parties were "totally wrong" he says he was "angered by them" and when the PM responds to the Gray report in the Commons, he will "address the kind of culture that allowed that to happen". https://twitter.com/robpowellnews/status/1482633358194663427
I love a good 'address the culture' dodge. A culture is made up of individuals who still have agency, it's not a magical shield that explains away a breach of a rule. We had a culture of leaving our houses more than once a day yet for a time most people tempered that in a critical moment.
Boris being part of the culture it without knowing or being apart from it but still not knowing is no more than the last gasp political defence 'I'm a fool".
The recent focus on getting rid of prescribed measures for alcohol is starting to make more sense. Number 10 staff were getting frustrated when the Co-op staff just looked bemused at requests for a suitcase of Sauvignon and a carry-on of Malbec.
Shadow Health Sec Wes Streeting says if he was just thinking about party politics then he'd be calling for Boris Johnson to stay, as that would mean the Tories would be "knocked out" at the next election. But he says it's "in the national interest" for him to go. https://twitter.com/robpowellnews/status/1482639304702705666
Tbh on an always keep tight hold of nurse basis, it might be better if Boris stays than if he is replaced by some (early) Osborne-like austerity nut. It is a bit like President Trump stopping the Neocons starting any more wars.
I think there is a large body of people who think Johnson is still in credit for Brexit, the vaccines, and not locking down.
The parties might come to be seen, by the next GE, as part of the overall Covid madness that gripped the country.
Yes it is possible he can hang on till the GE but will need some luck especially with the economy and cost of living. Plus how many more damaging stories are already primed and awaiting release if he recovers slightly......
Of course Boris will not resign by the end of January. He will also want to get some bounce from ending Covid restrictions at the end of the month
Not even if 54 (or whatever it is) MP's get their letters into Sir Graham's office? Or he's eviscerated by Ms Grey's report?
Boris won't resign. He will force his opponents amongst Tory MPs first to get the 54 letters in and then to get the 51% of Tory MPs + to vote against him in a VONC to remove him.
He knows they probably still don't have the numbers for either yet
The view seems to be that getting the letters is the difficult bit. If they get to the voting stage, he's done.
Wasn't for May.
Granted who the hell wanted to take over in that period, but still.
What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.
They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.
It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.
Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.
Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.
‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’
Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.
Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud. However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.
On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry. They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'. Or similar.
Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.
Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.
Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.
I'm unconvinced that Carrie is fair game, at least to the extent she seems to be vilified.
Indeed. People consult their spouses on things, that's a given, but is there really evidence she is the powerful puppet master who has her own cabal running the show as seems to get alleged? Most of the testimony as to her influence seems to come back to Cummings, who is somewhat unreliable when he's clearly got a personal vendetta against his old boss.
She's fair game for criticism if Boris is taking her advice on things. But the extent of that criticism seems disproportionate as to her probable influence.
Kabul air lift seems pretty clear, and an act of great evil.
What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.
They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.
It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.
Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.
Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.
I make of it bitchy catty factions having their fun, if the power hadn’t slipped away now they wouldn’t be able to.
Not sure that is right. I think offices started to ban alcohol and reduce boozy nights out more like 2010 than 2000. Around the millennium the big drinkers in my office might have 2-3 pints most lunchtimes, more on Fridays, and Friday evenings was unlimited paid for booze at the pub, which most people took as a means of starting getting pissed cheaply at least once a month.
It has definitely reduced a lot now, with a quarter of youngsters being teetotal and many of the rest not wanting to make an arse of themselves on social media big factors.
” Our economy is surging commensurately: new figures show we regained our pre-pandemic GDP in November, before the eurozone. The phasing out of furlough payments has not stopped us having, to all intents and purposes, full employment.
“We did not stumble into this happy situation by luck. We got here because ministers made hard decisions in the teeth of resistance from opposition politicians, public health doomsters and panicky journalists. … “ We led the world with our vaccine roll-out – not once, but twice. That in turn was possible because we had left the EU and stayed out of its common procurement scheme.
“At the same time, the PM defied the Eeyores to lift restrictions. When he ended the lockdown in July, epidemiologists called it a dangerous and unethical experiment and the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) predicted that hospital admissions would rise to between 2,000 and 7,000 a day…
“That, in my book, matters vastly more than whether he wandered into his garden while officials were drinking alcohol.”
If Boris Johnson had repeatedly "defied the Eeyores" because his scientific understanding of the pandemic was superior to that of the expert advisers, there might be some point to that.
But if it just reflected a reckless willingness to hope blindly for the best, ignore the best advice available and risk other people's lives for his own political advantage? After all, he tried to do much the same thing in March and December 2020 but was forced to reverse the policy by looming catastrophe. Does the fact that he (and we) got lucky this time make him a second Solomon?
He took risk based decisions….
the new term for not doing something under threat from your backbenchers that you would be risking your job?
The reason that Johnson didn't back restrictions was because he knew they were not tenable in light of the partying that had already emerged.
There were chaotic changes to travel rules, and while no formal ban on hospitality, encouragement for people to cancel and stay away. It wasn't just @Cyclefree Jr that had multiple cancellations. In practice was there much real difference in how busy things were on the other side of borders? And as nothing official, no compensation for those businesses.
There definitely was a difference. In England where the mighty Boris followed the science at all times there was freedom and liberty and definitely not the same lack of people going out for Christmas and New year as in booo sociopath Sturgeon and Drakeford lands.
What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.
They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.
It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.
Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.
Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.
‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’
Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.
Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud. However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.
On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry. They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'. Or similar.
Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.
Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.
Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.
I'm unconvinced that Carrie is fair game, at least to the extent she seems to be vilified.
Indeed. People consult their spouses on things, that's a given, but is there really evidence she is the powerful puppet master who has her own cabal running the show as seems to get alleged? Most of the testimony as to her influence seems to come back to Cummings, who is somewhat unreliable when he's clearly got a personal vendetta against his old boss.
She's fair game for criticism if Boris is taking her advice on things. But the extent of that criticism seems disproportionate as to her probable influence.
Kabul air lift seems pretty clear, and an act of great evil.
Only if you believe the spin that animals took capacity from humans (they didn't) or that they kept soldiers from escorting people (unlikely).
What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.
They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.
It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.
Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.
Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.
On reflection, the hatred of Carrie is a bit disturbing. It does have a whiff of misogyny about it. But that shouldn't make her immune from criticism or comment.
Fundamentally, it seems that the problem is that she is a poor political advisor. This can be measured against objective criteria - the decline in opinion poll ratings. Johnson and the tories have been in a sharp decline on this front since the Patterson debacle, which was only 2 months ago, to the point where the crisis is now existential. But there is no corrective action, and things keep getting worse. There cannot be any 'shake up' to arrest the decline in No.10, because Carrie is his wife and he is seemingly unable to curb her power.
It seems like they are just going down together, and there is nothing that we can do but watch the tragedy unfold.
I doubt that Carrie was the least bit interested in Paterson.
Remember that Bozo flew back from the climate conference for a boozy lunch with Charles Moore and others from the Spectator, and they told him to save Paterson.
Yes - in the end, it is all on his head. However, someone in No.10 should have been advising him. If she was the main advisor and she wasn't interested or involved, then there is a significant failure for which she is at least partly at fault.
There is a delightful irony that perhaps the greatest Tory sycophant should be the person most responsible Johnson's ultimate ignominy. Such a shame Shakespeare isn't still around to pen what could have been his greatest Tragedy (or Comedy). "Baron Moore of Etchingham'.
Ffs bod on sky linking the volcano to climate change. Large volcanic eruptions can actually cool the planet a bit iirc
Yes, large explosive volcanoes can inject sulphate aerosols into the upper atmosphere, where they block out the sun and cool the planet for a year or two. Though sometimes you have a large eruption that has a low sulphur content, so much less of an effect.
The problem with the Hodges article is that he says no coup to remove the "democratically elected PM". But we don't elect the PM. So removing someone who is not elected is not a coup.
But if he does this week, what about your credibility? Surely there is so much uncertainty this weekend, none of us can be so sure what happens next couple of days?
The only thing we can be sure about is wether or not the letters are in tomorrow, the Assailant will still release something to keep up momentum Tuesday evening.
What does nowhere mean anyway, you reckon he is in for 10 years? What is your take on exit date?
What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.
They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.
It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.
Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.
Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.
‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’
Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.
Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud. However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.
On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry. They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'. Or similar.
Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.
Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.
Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.
I'm unconvinced that Carrie is fair game, at least to the extent she seems to be vilified.
Indeed. People consult their spouses on things, that's a given, but is there really evidence she is the powerful puppet master who has her own cabal running the show as seems to get alleged? Most of the testimony as to her influence seems to come back to Cummings, who is somewhat unreliable when he's clearly got a personal vendetta against his old boss.
She's fair game for criticism if Boris is taking her advice on things. But the extent of that criticism seems disproportionate as to her probable influence.
Kabul air lift seems pretty clear, and an act of great evil.
Only if you believe the spin that animals took capacity from humans (they didn't) or that they kept soldiers from escorting people (unlikely).
I am not believing the spin. I have read the evidence given to the FAC. You haven't.
F1: bit of movement on Ladbrokes, Hamilton out to 2.5, Verstappen in to the same number.
I wonder if this is a reaction to the outside possibility of Hamilton not competing next year.
Russell's also down from around 6 or 6.5 to 5.
That changes does seem to imply that Hamilton won't be competing.
It's possible because if the Mercedes isn't a 100% championship winner why bother when you have the titles don't need the money and while the 8th championship is missing 2021 will always have an asterisk beside it.
I'd be surprised if he comes back. Why should he? Go out at the top, go do something else with your life. He'll still be around F1 I am certain of that. But as Vettel and Alonso have shown if you keep driving chasing that next title there is a real risk of growing disappointment.
It has definitely reduced a lot now, with a quarter of youngsters being teetotal and many of the rest not wanting to make an arse of themselves on social media big factors.
I've noticed that increasing numbers of my A-level students view conspicuous alcohol consumption as something done by chavs and degenerate boomers. Tobacco is utterly beyond the pale for them and at least half are vegetarian. There is hope...
Not sure that is right. I think offices started to ban alcohol and reduce boozy nights out more like 2010 than 2000. Around the millennium the big drinkers in my office might have 2-3 pints most lunchtimes, more on Fridays, and Friday evenings was unlimited paid for booze at the pub, which most people took as a means of starting getting pissed cheaply at least once a month.
It has definitely reduced a lot now, with a quarter of youngsters being teetotal and many of the rest not wanting to make an arse of themselves on social media big factors.
In the City and Fleet Street in the 1980s, alcohol flowed freely but all of the many building sites had become no drinking zones (health and safety gone mad).
” Our economy is surging commensurately: new figures show we regained our pre-pandemic GDP in November, before the eurozone. The phasing out of furlough payments has not stopped us having, to all intents and purposes, full employment.
“We did not stumble into this happy situation by luck. We got here because ministers made hard decisions in the teeth of resistance from opposition politicians, public health doomsters and panicky journalists. … “ We led the world with our vaccine roll-out – not once, but twice. That in turn was possible because we had left the EU and stayed out of its common procurement scheme.
“At the same time, the PM defied the Eeyores to lift restrictions. When he ended the lockdown in July, epidemiologists called it a dangerous and unethical experiment and the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) predicted that hospital admissions would rise to between 2,000 and 7,000 a day…
“That, in my book, matters vastly more than whether he wandered into his garden while officials were drinking alcohol.”
If Boris Johnson had repeatedly "defied the Eeyores" because his scientific understanding of the pandemic was superior to that of the expert advisers, there might be some point to that.
But if it just reflected a reckless willingness to hope blindly for the best, ignore the best advice available and risk other people's lives for his own political advantage? After all, he tried to do much the same thing in March and December 2020 but was forced to reverse the policy by looming catastrophe. Does the fact that he (and we) got lucky this time make him a second Solomon?
He took risk based decisions….
the new term for not doing something under threat from your backbenchers that you would be risking your job?
The reason that Johnson didn't back restrictions was because he knew they were not tenable in light of the partying that had already emerged.
There were chaotic changes to travel rules, and while no formal ban on hospitality, encouragement for people to cancel and stay away. It wasn't just @Cyclefree Jr that had multiple cancellations. In practice was there much real difference in how busy things were on the other side of borders? And as nothing official, no compensation for those businesses.
I also note an earlier comment from @Cookie decrying Plan B as unnecessary and the situations in Scotland and Wales, disastrous. Surely that is a false premise if a) the whole point of Plan B was to prevent the NHS from falling under a bus. As it stands the NHS appears to be teetering precariously on the kerbside. Would it have fallen over without Plan B? and b) Omicron was an unknown, so better to be safe than sorry. As it turned out Johnson's "wait and see" gamble worked for him, but the scientific evidence, now ridiculed on here was it could have gone the other way.
As you suggest, the key was planning, certainty and authority from the politicians, and none were present because of circumstances they themselves had inadvertently engineered through their parties.
The key thing is how did Whitty etc present these models to Ministers?
- This will happen - This will happen if you don't do anything - This will happen if you put our recommended restrictions in place - This will happen if the public don't do anything
Another option for your list: - This isn't the most likely outcome, but it might happen with say 5-10% probability (so if the consequences are something you can't live with you'd better act...)
It has definitely reduced a lot now, with a quarter of youngsters being teetotal and many of the rest not wanting to make an arse of themselves on social media big factors.
I've noticed that increasing numbers of my A-level students view conspicuous alcohol consumption as something done by chavs and degenerate boomers. Tobacco is utterly beyond the pale for them and at least half are vegetarian. There is hope...
Of course Boris will not resign by the end of January. He will also want to get some bounce from ending Covid restrictions at the end of the month
Not even if 54 (or whatever it is) MP's get their letters into Sir Graham's office? Or he's eviscerated by Ms Grey's report?
Boris won't resign. He will force his opponents amongst Tory MPs first to get the 54 letters in and then to get the 51% of Tory MPs + to vote against him in a VONC to remove him.
He knows they probably still don't have the numbers for either yet
The view seems to be that getting the letters is the difficult bit. If they get to the voting stage, he's done.
Wasn't for May.
Granted who the hell wanted to take over in that period, but still.
The papers are making that point this morning - getting the letters for May was easier, but getting her defeated in the vote more difficult. The view seems to be - based presumably on conversations with MPs holding the line in public but with a different view in private - that once(/if) Boris gets to a secret vote of MPs, he will lose.
What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.
They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.
It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.
Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.
Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.
‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’
Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.
Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud. However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.
On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry. They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'. Or similar.
Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.
Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.
Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.
I'm unconvinced that Carrie is fair game, at least to the extent she seems to be vilified.
Indeed. People consult their spouses on things, that's a given, but is there really evidence she is the powerful puppet master who has her own cabal running the show as seems to get alleged? Most of the testimony as to her influence seems to come back to Cummings, who is somewhat unreliable when he's clearly got a personal vendetta against his old boss.
She's fair game for criticism if Boris is taking her advice on things. But the extent of that criticism seems disproportionate as to her probable influence.
Kabul air lift seems pretty clear, and an act of great evil.
Only if you believe the spin that animals took capacity from humans (they didn't) or that they kept soldiers from escorting people (unlikely).
I am not believing the spin. I have read the evidence given to the FAC. You haven't.
The Foreign Affairs Committee heard that the whole process was a right mess (with the FS sipping cocktails by a pool somewhere). Evidence that Britain would have rescued more people were it not for the animals is pretty thin. It's not like Rover and Fido were sitting on airline seats.
What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.
They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.
It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.
Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.
Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.
‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’
Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.
Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud. However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.
On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry. They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'. Or similar.
Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.
Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.
Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.
I'm unconvinced that Carrie is fair game, at least to the extent she seems to be vilified.
Indeed. People consult their spouses on things, that's a given, but is there really evidence she is the powerful puppet master who has her own cabal running the show as seems to get alleged? Most of the testimony as to her influence seems to come back to Cummings, who is somewhat unreliable when he's clearly got a personal vendetta against his old boss.
She's fair game for criticism if Boris is taking her advice on things. But the extent of that criticism seems disproportionate as to her probable influence.
Kabul air lift seems pretty clear, and an act of great evil.
It seems destined to perhaps be a historical mystery as to the extent of her true influence. But the circumstantial evidence cannot be ignored. The Kabul Air lift, and the fact that Johnson is unwilling to get any other advisors in - no one seems to want to go near the place. People will just select the narrative that reinforces their political views - if you are on the left/woke, it is almost certainly Boris's fault and criticism of Carrie is evidence of sexism; if you are sympathetic to the tories, then the problem is likely to be with Carrie and not Boris. As I said, it just seems to me like they are acting out a tragedy, going down together.
I wouldn't bother. The return isn't brilliant, and there is a non trivial risk that he will resign in the next couple of weeks, albeit unlikely.
Yes, essentially it requires that Sue Gray's report is absolutely damning (say 6-4 on) and that there is an avalanche of Tory MPs demanding his resignation (say 2-1 on if the report is damning) and that he gives up immediately without a fight (more than 3-1 against, if I read him correctly).
If the question was "by June" then yes. Within two weeks? No.
Not sure that is right. I think offices started to ban alcohol and reduce boozy nights out more like 2010 than 2000. Around the millennium the big drinkers in my office might have 2-3 pints most lunchtimes, more on Fridays, and Friday evenings was unlimited paid for booze at the pub, which most people took as a means of starting getting pissed cheaply at least once a month.
It has definitely reduced a lot now, with a quarter of youngsters being teetotal and many of the rest not wanting to make an arse of themselves on social media big factors.
In the City and Fleet Street in the 1980s, alcohol flowed freely but all of the many building sites had become no drinking zones (health and safety gone mad).
The drinking culture - rife in the early 1980s - disappeared quite suddenly in my public sector workplace in 1988, as best I remember. It all happened quite quickly and was remarkable at the time, particularly as the same thing was happening in lots of workplaces.
It has definitely reduced a lot now, with a quarter of youngsters being teetotal and many of the rest not wanting to make an arse of themselves on social media big factors.
I've noticed that increasing numbers of my A-level students view conspicuous alcohol consumption as something done by chavs and degenerate boomers. Tobacco is utterly beyond the pale for them and at least half are vegetarian. There is hope...
I've never smoked, never drank, and I've been a veggie sine I was 16, over 30 years ago.
Not sure that is right. I think offices started to ban alcohol and reduce boozy nights out more like 2010 than 2000. Around the millennium the big drinkers in my office might have 2-3 pints most lunchtimes, more on Fridays, and Friday evenings was unlimited paid for booze at the pub, which most people took as a means of starting getting pissed cheaply at least once a month.
It has definitely reduced a lot now, with a quarter of youngsters being teetotal and many of the rest not wanting to make an arse of themselves on social media big factors.
Different company ethos, evidently. Drinking at lunch time in 1980 was seen as a sign of a problem.
The problem with the Hodges article is that he says no coup to remove the "democratically elected PM". But we don't elect the PM. So removing someone who is not elected is not a coup.
It is generally accepted I think that while most people do not actually get to vote for a PM, a lot of votes are cast by people in constituencies on the basis they want it to be 'for Boris' or whomever, so while not a presidential system many MPs will succeed or fail on the basis of people seeking to vote 'for' the preferred PM.
None of which has anything to do with removal of said PM by MPs. If you don't command confidence of the House you will be replaced, and you could not command confidence in several ways for several reasons. Unless every PM change without an election is a coup the word is a nonsense.
I wouldn't bother. The return isn't brilliant, and there is a non trivial risk that he will resign in the next couple of weeks, albeit unlikely.
Yes, essentially it requires that Sue Gray's report is absolutely damning (say 6-4 on) and that there is an avalanche of Tory MPs demanding his resignation (say 2-1 on if the report is damning) and that he gives up immediately without a fight (more than 3-1 against, if I read him correctly).
If the question was "by June" then yes. Within two weeks? No.
If you want to back yes the odds aren't much different in the end March market
What to make of the Telegraph Carrie story, replete with photo of scissors legs.
They’ll know it’s not dynamite with the reading public. But one gets the impression that the reading public are not the target. There is one reader this story is targeted at and his name is Boris Johnson.
It’s gloves off stuff. “Unless you exit stage left, we are coming after your personal life and this is a mere amuse bouche to the 12 course tasting menu we have lined up”.
Let us not forget that this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life. To the extent that until very recently his wikipedia entry had to caveat his many children he has.
Quite something for the Boris Bible to take this approach. I am not tempted by TSE’s bet. Far too much uncertainty.
‘this is a man who for all his faults, has always done his best to retain a certain mystery about his family life’
Well, that’s one way of putting it. I’d put that in his faults ledger myself.
Good morning. Early morning sky appears to be thick cloud. However, just perhaps on the political horizon a new dawn IS breaking.
On thread topic I've always thought it noteworthy that, to the best of my knowledge, none of the Johnson children have sought to capitalise on their ancestry. They may, of course, be ashamed of it, but I am surprised that, again to my knowledge, no gentleman (or lady) of the press has asked them ..... been prepared to pay them ..... for "My Dad, Boris Johnson'. Or similar.
Even with many children and ex-wives, and his terrible management of money, each of them will still be expecting him to die as a rich man.
Actually, it’s one of the few things the British press generally do right, is to leave the children of politicians alone, unless they have done something particularly newsworthy.
Carrie is totally fair game though, she’s a political animal in her own right, and is unofficially the PM’s top advisor.
I'm unconvinced that Carrie is fair game, at least to the extent she seems to be vilified.
Indeed. People consult their spouses on things, that's a given, but is there really evidence she is the powerful puppet master who has her own cabal running the show as seems to get alleged? Most of the testimony as to her influence seems to come back to Cummings, who is somewhat unreliable when he's clearly got a personal vendetta against his old boss.
She's fair game for criticism if Boris is taking her advice on things. But the extent of that criticism seems disproportionate as to her probable influence.
Kabul air lift seems pretty clear, and an act of great evil.
Only if you believe the spin that animals took capacity from humans (they didn't) or that they kept soldiers from escorting people (unlikely).
I am not believing the spin. I have read the evidence given to the FAC. You haven't.
The fact that number ten lobbied for the animals pissing off the defence Secretary is definitely damaging, but other parts of that report is going to be very damaging too. The bit about various lists being kept, but in final analysis the overall shambles at this end in London left behind many who should have been higher priority.
Comments
Insert Bexit deal joke here.
Loughton 6th to call for BJ to go. Brexiteer & BJ backer told me last night they not putting in letter (yet) but mood in constituency “very bad”. Whether PM wld have to go? Said 50:50 (& in wks not mths)
https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1482632193495252995
https://twitter.com/timloughton/status/1482463465629495297
I'd just assumed Zac was his son.
Burns goes.
Also confused by the lack of effort put into reducing obesity. Every time there is a "no underlying health condition" story, you just wait for the photo and....
We are 21 months into the pandemic. At a very chill half pound per week, you'd have lost over 3 stone over the course of the pandemic.
Incidentally that is why Burns is not the answer to England's opening problem, and nor is Chris Dent, who has an even better domestic record but exactly the same technical flaw.
https://twitter.com/robpowellnews/status/1482633358194663427
https://tenlegend.com/
Think I preferred the soccer casuals when they were, well, casual. Not cheap either, but this sort of ‘gentlemen in love with football’ wank was bound to come at a premium.
No other premiership has had such a pathetically shabby ending. No finale to his slummy reign would be more appropriate. It has always been highly likely that cavalier and blatant rule-breaking, and then lying about it, would be the undoing of a prime minister with a career history of casual contempt for truth and integrity.
Conservative MPs now profess their shock-horror at the torrent of revelations about booze-ups at Number 10, but few expressed concern about earlier disgraces when it didn’t appear to be costing them support. It was often averred that a substantial chunk of the public enjoyed having a “lovable rogue” at Number 10.
Here we have a scandal that even the great trickster can’t blag his way out of. His attempt to sound contrite didn’t work because it was a non-apology apology so reeking with insincerity that it added insult to the injury felt by the many who have been bereaved by the pandemic. It is hard to say which is the more jaw-dropping. The flagrancy of the rule-breaking. The arrogant stupidity of it. Or the stunning frequency with which the denizens of Number 10 behaved as if laws did not apply to them. On Mr Johnson’s watch, during the most severe pandemic in more than a century and on the eve of the burial of the monarch’s consort, Number 10 was turned into a nightclub.
A growing number of Tory backbenchers think he should go, as do quite a lot of ministers, including some of the cabinet who are professing insincere loyalty oaths. Truth to tell, most Conservative MPs are exercised by this scandal because it makes them fearful of losing power, not because of what it says about the prime minister’s ethical character. They knew who he was. They made him their leader because they thought that winning is all that matters in politics and he looked like a winner. Far too many people in the Tory party chose to ignore his unfitness to be prime minister.
If they had bothered themselves with that question before, they wouldn’t have put him in Number 10 in the first place, nor shrugged so cynically at all the squalor that has ineluctably followed.
- PM made the right call on Omicron & should stay.
- PM will take steps to address the 'culture' that allowed bad behaviour to fester.
Begs the question, who is really responsible for that 'culture'?
Oliver Dowden says that there will need to be a "change in culture" following party revelations but adds the PM is "committed to leading that".
https://twitter.com/robpowellnews/status/1482634183432454146
And even without COVID-19, being significantly overweight is obviously detrimental to health. We should encourage people to try and get fitter or at least shed stones of fat, for their own sake.
It’s hardly Stone Island.
It's not just a moral hazard problem, though. See the US.
Carrie Johnson is, for some reason which I don't quite understand, treated with kid gloves. Perhaps it's her pregnancies.
She's fair game for criticism if Boris is taking her advice on things. But the extent of that criticism seems disproportionate as to her probable influence.
Maybe he’s awaiting the result of the FIA enquiry into the last race, maybe he’s awaiting confirmation that the new car is going to be competitive, or maybe he’s just training hard and not allowing himself to be distracted by anything.
Mrs B = Labour ditto.
Edit: and the media are on balance pro-Tory.
1) Plan B restrictions were pointless, stupid and damaging (not as pointless, stupid and damaging as those brought in by the Scots and Welsh, but pointless stupid and damaging nonetheless), and
2) Do we believe that avoiding further restrictions in the run-up to Christmas - that very odd day when the nature of the restrictions we would have was leaked to the press, the presser was set up, only for everyone to be marched back down the hill again - was down to Boris? Someone can take credit for that - the Cabinet, or certain people in it, some of the backbenchers, Fraser Nelson perhaps -but I'm not sure Boris can.
He knows they probably still don't have the numbers for either yet
I mean, ye gods, he didn't even have any tax dodges set up when running for mayor!
The urgency of the action which included saving Paterson made the larger goal impossible.
Mr. Abode, I think it's unlikely, but not impossible.
She was not asked why what actually happened didn't more closely correspond to the central case.
Fixed it.
https://twitter.com/jillongovt/status/1482637371908792321?s=21
It's got justification, but its still no more than melodrama
Either way, glad to see we’re building up to the car reveals. Believe Aston Martin first to launch on 10th February
https://twitter.com/Aiannucci/status/1482638472695398400
https://twitter.com/nadinedorries/status/1482622722228240387
Shadow Health Sec Wes Streeting says if he was just thinking about party politics then he'd be calling for Boris Johnson to stay, as that would mean the Tories would be "knocked out" at the next election. But he says it's "in the national interest" for him to go.
https://twitter.com/robpowellnews/status/1482639304702705666
The parties might come to be seen, by the next GE, as part of the overall Covid madness that gripped the country.
Boris being part of the culture it without knowing or being apart from it but still not knowing is no more than the last gasp political defence 'I'm a fool".
And that's no defence for a PM.
https://twitter.com/paulhutcheon/status/1482641236460777475
I hate to break it to them but most of the public, and private sectors, banned drinking at work two decades or more ago.
And before Johnson it was very unusual in Downing St.
https://twitter.com/colinrtalbot/status/1482640970105724935?s=20
Granted who the hell wanted to take over in that period, but still.
As I said.
It has definitely reduced a lot now, with a quarter of youngsters being teetotal and many of the rest not wanting to make an arse of themselves on social media big factors.
Definitely. Huzzah for Boris!
The only thing we can be sure about is wether or not the letters are in tomorrow, the Assailant will still release something to keep up momentum Tuesday evening.
What does nowhere mean anyway, you reckon he is in for 10 years? What is your take on exit date?
I also note an earlier comment from @Cookie decrying Plan B as unnecessary and the situations in Scotland and Wales, disastrous. Surely that is a false premise if a) the whole point of Plan B was to prevent the NHS from falling under a bus. As it stands the NHS appears to be teetering precariously on the kerbside. Would it have fallen over without Plan B? and b) Omicron was an unknown, so better to be safe than sorry. As it turned out Johnson's "wait and see" gamble worked for him, but the scientific evidence, now ridiculed on here was it could have gone the other way.
As you suggest, the key was planning, certainty and authority from the politicians, and none were present because of circumstances they themselves had inadvertently engineered through their parties.
Pandemic loneliness: “Just because we’re not in lockdown anymore, doesn’t mean we’re not still lonely”
https://www.stylist.co.uk/health/mental-health/lonely-after-lockdown-pandemic/607273?utm_source=pocket-newtab-global-en-GB
- This isn't the most likely outcome, but it might happen with say 5-10% probability (so if the consequences are something you can't live with you'd better act...)
https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2009/apr/16/gordon-brown-says-sorry-for-email-smears
If the question was "by June" then yes. Within two weeks? No.
The evidence regarding the McBride emails is they were an arm's length away from Brown.
None of which has anything to do with removal of said PM by MPs. If you don't command confidence of the House you will be replaced, and you could not command confidence in several ways for several reasons. Unless every PM change without an election is a coup the word is a nonsense.