Anyway, Chilean Red / Nuts time, and also a spelling tip since I've read so much about this fictional "Saville" bloke on here. How to remember it is that he was truly VILE.
The question now arises. Sunak is bound to be asked whether he agrees with Mirza or the PM at this presser. How does he answer?
Just announce he is resigning from Cabinet and will seek a leadership election at the earliest moment.
Or be Dave Miliband.
Purnell has just walked from Johnson's bunker.
I feel it is too late now for anyone who remains in government, all this time after the Starmer smear, to recover credibility as a PM candidate. An open goal now for Tugendhat, Hunt et al.
Neither of whom the Tory membership will vote for.
A Boris loyalist like Truss would easily beat them once it gets to the membership if Boris was forced out.
As would Sunak if he is still seen as not having betrayed Boris
I wouldn't be surprised to see this one kept away from the membership, and sorted out in parliament.
Only way that happens is if MPs can not only VONC Boris and over 50% of them vote to remove him but then ensure a Hunt and Sunak final 2 which could see Hunt pull out.
If Truss got to the final 2 she would certainly not pull out but make sure it went to the membership as she knows she could then win it with the members and become PM.
Truss hardline with the EU on Art 16 and backing the DUP in removing the Irish Sea border checks was clear red meat to the party base, following her status as a committed Brexiteer now and her lack of enthusiasm for the NI rise (unlike Sunak) and her reluctance to support Covid restrictions
And if the Tory party splits in two, Johnsonians vs the rest, what does your rule book say about that?
Most of the party would go with Johnson, certainly most of the membership and remaining Tory voters. The rest would be lucky to beat the LDs at the next general election
OK.
So, Johnson has just lost a VoNC and is no longer leader of the Conservative Party. Other than Nadine Dorries and JRM, which MP says 'fuck it, let's quit the Conservatives and start a rival party'?
It simply wouldn't happen.
If say MPs picked Remainer, not Borisite Hunt to replace Boris without giving Tory members a vote, I could well see Boris leave and start his own party (as Trump has threatened to do to the GOP in the US).
Boris would take most current Tory voters and members with him (as Trump would also take most of the GOP voters now with him).
However I think members will get a say so that is unlikely and even if they did not MPs would pick Sunak, not Hunt
Why would he do that?
He’s not interested in policy and has no great goal to achieve; he wanted to sit in the big chair, and get his photo on the Downing Street staircase, and he has. He can go off and make some £££ and not have to worry about voters or standards of behaviour ever again.
He wants to win at being PM for longer than Cameron. He'll cling on in every way he can, and then sit on the opposition backbenches causing trouble for his successor, gathering a crowd of acolytes who believe he's the party's only way back to power.
The ultimate irony would be his ending as an independent along with Corbyn.
This is incredibly conflicting for a good centre-leftie like myself.
Dominic Cummings, the man who screwed up schools beyond measure? Resigned/fired and has been knifing Boris ever since.
David Frost, the self-satisfied Mr Brexit? Resigned and knifed Boris on the way out.
Munira Mirza, the cynical author of the "war on woke"? Resigned and knifed Boris today.
Boris Johnson, leader of a generally loathsome government who yet has been the prime mover behind something I particularly care about (Dutch-style safe cycle tracks).
Help me, who am I supposed to be rooting for here?
They are all utter scum. The next Tory PM will be less of a bloated narcissistic liar, but even more objectionable in policy terms. Hurrah!
Make yourself a negroni, keep a glass of hemlock handy, and enjoy the show. There's far more debasing entertainment to come.
This is the sort of zealous partisanship that has destroyed American politics. Mirza and Frost might disagree with you but they are clearly decent people with character. Cummings is an oddball but most of the evidence suggests schools are improving since his reforms. Some people however just seem to have the sort of personality where online bubbles allow them to become utterly tribal and unable to step back and think things through.
The question now arises. Sunak is bound to be asked whether he agrees with Mirza or the PM at this presser. How does he answer?
Just announce he is resigning from Cabinet and will seek a leadership election at the earliest moment.
Or be Dave Miliband.
Purnell has just walked from Johnson's bunker.
I feel it is too late now for anyone who remains in government, all this time after the Starmer smear, to recover credibility as a PM candidate. An open goal now for Tugendhat, Hunt et al.
Neither of whom the Tory membership will vote for.
A Boris loyalist like Truss would easily beat them once it gets to the membership if Boris was forced out.
As would Sunak if he is still seen as not having betrayed Boris
I wouldn't be surprised to see this one kept away from the membership, and sorted out in parliament.
Only way that happens is if MPs can not only VONC Boris and over 50% of them vote to remove him but then ensure a Hunt and Sunak final 2 which could see Hunt pull out.
If Truss got to the final 2 she would certainly not pull out but make sure it went to the membership as she knows she could then win it with the members and become PM.
Truss hardline with the EU on Art 16 and backing the DUP in removing the Irish Sea border checks was clear red meat to the party base, following her status as a committed Brexiteer now and her lack of enthusiasm for the NI rise (unlike Sunak) and her reluctance to support Covid restrictions
And if the Tory party splits in two, Johnsonians vs the rest, what does your rule book say about that?
Most of the party would go with Johnson, certainly most of the membership and remaining Tory voters. The rest would be lucky to beat the LDs at the next general election
OK.
So, Johnson has just lost a VoNC and is no longer leader of the Conservative Party. Other than Nadine Dorries and JRM, which MP says 'fuck it, let's quit the Conservatives and start a rival party'?
It simply wouldn't happen.
If say MPs picked Remainer, not Borisite Hunt to replace Boris without giving Tory members a vote, I could well see Boris leave and start his own party (as Trump has threatened to do to the GOP in the US).
Boris would take most current Tory voters and members with him (as Trump would also take most of the GOP voters now with him).
However I think members will get a say so that is unlikely and even if they did not MPs would pick Sunak, not Hunt
Why would he do that?
He’s not interested in policy and has no great goal to achieve; he wanted to sit in the big chair, and get his photo on the Downing Street staircase, and he has. He can go off and make some £££ and not have to worry about voters or standards of behaviour ever again.
He wants to win at being PM for longer than Cameron. He'll cling on in every way he can, and then sit on the opposition backbenches causing trouble for his successor, gathering a crowd of acolytes who believe he's the party's only way back to power.
I can’t remember being so angry as I was when Boris made his Jimmy Savile smear at PMQs.
I was literally trembling.
At that moment, one of the pillars underneath British democracy buckled.
Im really fucking glad so many have decided, too much.
Lol
The one thing IN YOUR ENTIRE LIFE that has made you angrier than anything else is when the British prime minister made a clumsy jibe at some boring Labour lawyer about a thing that DID happen under his watch but he was likely not responsible for blah blah
That made you ANGRIER THAN ANYTHING ELSE, EVAH???
GET A GRIP, MAN
And I just don’t believe you were “literally, trembling” over there in New York
What an entirely laughable comment, from beginning to end. Have a brandy
Yeh, it made me furious. I don’t get angry very often.
I know you don’t get it, but that’s because you’re a jaded debauchee.
It’s too early for a brandy, by 2 minutes.
But were you “literally, trembling” as you “felt the buckling of one of the pillars of British democracy”???
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
One shouldn't sneer at strong ethical values even if one doesn't share them.
One should always laugh at a clear lie
When should one be really angry then? There's no single cataclysm when something precious in national life dies. I was furious too as it shows a coarsening of political debate which it feels hard to go back from.
In terms of Boris taking Tory voters with him, in a hypothetical scenario, while he still has plenty of support, how many would actually jump ship for Corbyn rather than stick with Starmer for example?
I would guess a Corbyn led party could get 10-15% if it split from Labour, more in inner city and university town constituencies.
Under PR we probably would see both the Tory and Labour parties split, it is only FPTP keeping May and Hunt in the same party as Boris and Rees Mogg and Corbyn and McDonnell in the same party as Starmer and Reeves
It’s worth noting that whatever the question about Britain’s state, Rishi is not the answer.
He’s a fully paid up Treasury stooge who thinks levelling up is a waste of time.
But he’s more impressive than Boris. If I was Keir I’d be a bit concerned.
there isn't any Tory that is going to spend money levelling up - that's the problem. It's going to take a Labour party willing to look at Treasury models and destroy the appalling foundations they are built on.
Unfortunately the people who understand that earn £100,000+ way more than the Treasury fools you currently use the models and don't see the flaws or missing factors.
Hint for anyone reading infrastructure sometimes needs to be built because it solves problems.
Funny how we agree violently on this but (IIRC) disagree equally violently on immigration.
Don't think I've ever commented on immigration that much.
Were I to do so my only comment would be you allow skilled workers into the country (using a sane minimum pay level well above the average wage) and ensure that you don't allow unskilled / low paid workers in.
Sadly we can't use the tricks other European countries could use (native language tests) because everyone speaks English better than you typical English native.
Sorry, must be confusing you with someone else.
We disagree though. I’m largely positive about the so-called unskilled as they tend to work hard and move up the skills ladder.
Of course there are micro-groups that you don’t want, but it’s hard to find a fair blanket rule that excludes them.
Tory activists are the great unknown in all this. Ultimately I think it absurd that MPs shouldn't be responsible for choosing the Prime minister.
Voters are responsible for choosing the PM at general elections (confirmed by the Queen).
No reason party members should not get to choose the PM if their party has a majority in the Commons and the PM is changed midterm. MPs in any case nominate the candidates and in the Tory party select the final 2 the members pick from
Er, you're muddling voters and party members. And voters choose MPs first and foremost. This isn't a presidential system.
I can’t remember being so angry as I was when Boris made his Jimmy Savile smear at PMQs.
I was literally trembling.
At that moment, one of the pillars underneath British democracy buckled.
Im really fucking glad so many have decided, too much.
Lol
The one thing IN YOUR ENTIRE LIFE that has made you angrier than anything else is when the British prime minister made a clumsy jibe at some boring Labour lawyer about a thing that DID happen under his watch but he was likely not responsible for blah blah
That made you ANGRIER THAN ANYTHING ELSE, EVAH???
GET A GRIP, MAN
And I just don’t believe you were “literally, trembling” over there in New York
What an entirely laughable comment, from beginning to end. Have a brandy
Yeh, it made me furious. I don’t get angry very often.
I know you don’t get it, but that’s because you’re a jaded debauchee.
It’s too early for a brandy, by 2 minutes.
But were you “literally, trembling” as you “felt the buckling of one of the pillars of British democracy”???
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
One shouldn't sneer at strong ethical values even if one doesn't share them.
I tried putting
- "SeanT" - "Strong ethical values"
in the same sentence. Something kept going wrong - bit like magnets with poles opposing each other.
- Cases are flat(ish). R is clustered about 1. R remains lower for the older groups - Admissions down - MV beds down - In hospital down - Deaths down
Thanks Malmesbury. I'm glad we're able to give this less attention nowadays - it's an infinitely healthier position to be in. But I for one still enjoy getting your updates - not least from a point of general interest, but also as a marker point in the day.
Thank you - I'm just disappointed that no one has remarked on the picture I use. A great character, built by a great actor - much against type, in a great film.
I had no idea what you were talking about and went and re-looked. Sorry to report, but in my thread it just comes up as a little 5mm/5mm icon and the word 'image'.
Who is it meant to be?
Jumping in - it is a frame from the film "Fail-Safe".
Same year as Dr Strangelove and on the same topic, but somewhat overshadowed by its better known twin.
Suitably apocalyptic (or not, as the case may be).
It’s worth noting that whatever the question about Britain’s state, Rishi is not the answer.
He’s a fully paid up Treasury stooge who thinks levelling up is a waste of time.
But he’s more impressive than Boris. If I was Keir I’d be a bit concerned.
there isn't any Tory that is going to spend money levelling up - that's the problem. It's going to take a Labour party willing to look at Treasury models and destroy the appalling foundations they are built on.
Unfortunately the people who understand that earn £100,000+ way more than the Treasury fools you currently use the models and don't see the flaws or missing factors.
Hint for anyone reading infrastructure sometimes needs to be built because it solves problems.
Funny how we agree violently on this but (IIRC) disagree equally violently on immigration.
Don't think I've ever commented on immigration that much.
Were I to do so my only comment would be you allow skilled workers into the country (using a sane minimum pay level well above the average wage) and ensure that you don't allow unskilled / low paid workers in.
Sadly we can't use the tricks other European countries could use (native language tests) because everyone speaks English better than you typical English native.
It is worth noting that the most successful economies in the world - places like Switzerland and Singapore - have done such a good job upskilling their own citizens, that it is unskilled labour that their economies demand.
It’s easy to watch from afar and criticise the lack of quality among MPs - but there’s an increasingly small number of people willing to put themselves up for such public scrutiny, especially given that most of them can lead equally lucrative and private lives away from the spotlight.
You have to be politically motivated, in which case it's mostly water off a duck's back. I had lots of friendly posts, a moderate amount of abuse, a small amount of obscene abuse and a single death threat - overall it was fine, and the nasty bits were a minor price for the chance to influence national policy in what I felt to be a positive direction. But if it had just been a way of earning a living? Hell no.
The people who get put off - and this is a serious loss - are the "public servant" types, who don't have strong opinions, but would like to help run the country well. The traditional Conservative Party was particularly strong in those, but Labour and LibDems had a good many too - typically from local council backgrounds. If you populate Parliament exclusively with people (like me) who have strong views and want radical change, you turn up the temperature of politics and risk getting characters who hate the other side (unlike me). You need a mixture of passionate reformers and steady public servants. You don't IMO really need anyone who just thinks it's a job like any other.
This is incredibly conflicting for a good centre-leftie like myself.
Dominic Cummings, the man who screwed up schools beyond measure? Resigned/fired and has been knifing Boris ever since.
David Frost, the self-satisfied Mr Brexit? Resigned and knifed Boris on the way out.
Munira Mirza, the cynical author of the "war on woke"? Resigned and knifed Boris today.
Boris Johnson, leader of a generally loathsome government who yet has been the prime mover behind something I particularly care about (Dutch-style safe cycle tracks).
Help me, who am I supposed to be rooting for here?
They are all utter scum. The next Tory PM will be less of a bloated narcissistic liar, but even more objectionable in policy terms. Hurrah!
Make yourself a negroni, keep a glass of hemlock handy, and enjoy the show. There's far more debasing entertainment to come.
This is the sort of zealous partisanship that has destroyed American politics. Mirza and Frost might disagree with you but they are clearly decent people with character. Cummings is an oddball but most of the evidence suggests schools are improving since his reforms. Some people however just seem to have the sort of personality where online bubbles allow them to become utterly tribal and unable to step back and think things through.
This in spades. I have often said I could not bring myself to vote Labour as I don't agree with the basic socialism. But I would never entertain the idea that they are scum or deserve personal abuse. Same goes for Remainers, Greens and Vegetarians. I may have different views but that doesn't mean they are not decent human beings.
The best policy in politics is to work from the position that almost everyone wants things to be better for people but they differ in terms of how best they think that can be done.
My sense at the way this is going is that if it does go to a VONC he's going to lose it. Until today I wasn't at all convinced.
But they still need the 54 letters.
Agreed. I think once gifted the choice, the waverers would rather not risk another year of Boris. He's unlikely to do a TM and resign, no matter what happens, so this could be their one shot. They just need someone else to give them the opportunity.
It’s easy to watch from afar and criticise the lack of quality among MPs - but there’s an increasingly small number of people willing to put themselves up for such public scrutiny, especially given that most of them can lead equally lucrative and private lives away from the spotlight.
You have to be politically motivated, in which case it's mostly water off a duck's back. I had lots of friendly posts, a moderate amount of abuse, a small amount of obscene abuse and a single death threat - overall it was fine, and the nasty bits were a minor price for the chance to influence national policy in what I felt to be a positive direction. But if it had just been a way of earning a living? Hell no.
The people who get put off - and this is a serious loss - are the "public servant" types, who don't have strong opinions, but would like to help run the country well. The traditional Conservative Party was particularly strong in those, but Labour and LibDems had a good many too - typically from local council backgrounds. If you populate Parliament exclusively with people (like me) who have strong views and want radical change, you turn up the temperature of politics and risk getting characters who hate the other side (unlike me). You need a mixture of passionate reformers and steady public servants. You don't IMO really need anyone who just thinks it's a job like any other.
But that was 10+ years ago. Chatting to our former MP - the expectations of constituents are far worse now then they were then -
Conditions if based on behaviour rather than some policy demand, which seems unlikely, just strike me as a very odd way of trying to rein in a leader.
It'd be like reviewing someone in breach of a licensing condition and suggesting a new condition would be that you adhere to the existing conditions - you should already be doing that, a promise to not act terribly is not much of a promise.
It’s easy to watch from afar and criticise the lack of quality among MPs - but there’s an increasingly small number of people willing to put themselves up for such public scrutiny, especially given that most of them can lead equally lucrative and private lives away from the spotlight.
You have to be politically motivated, in which case it's mostly water off a duck's back. I had lots of friendly posts, a moderate amount of abuse, a small amount of obscene abuse and a single death threat - overall it was fine, and the nasty bits were a minor price for the chance to influence national policy in what I felt to be a positive direction. But if it had just been a way of earning a living? Hell no.
The people who get put off - and this is a serious loss - are the "public servant" types, who don't have strong opinions, but would like to help run the country well. The traditional Conservative Party was particularly strong in those, but Labour and LibDems had a good many too - typically from local council backgrounds. If you populate Parliament exclusively with people (like me) who have strong views and want radical change, you turn up the temperature of politics and risk getting characters who hate the other side (unlike me). You need a mixture of passionate reformers and steady public servants. You don't IMO really need anyone who just thinks it's a job like any other.
I've never really understood why anyone in the public eye ever checks their Twitter mentions.
Tory activists are the great unknown in all this. Ultimately I think it absurd that MPs shouldn't be responsible for choosing the Prime minister.
Voters are responsible for choosing the PM at general elections (confirmed by the Queen).
No reason party members should not get to choose the PM if their party has a majority in the Commons and the PM is changed midterm. MPs in any case nominate the candidates and in the Tory party select the final 2 the members pick from
Er, you're muddling voters and party members. And voters choose MPs first and foremost. This isn't a presidential system.
No I am not. Voters get a say at general elections. Party members select the leaders they get to choose from at those general elections (and to elect the PMs too if the party has a majority in Parliament and a new PM is elected midterm).
Most voters vote for the PM and the party.
The number who give a personal vote for their MP is less than 5%
Sunak has had a gilded, trouble-free path to the Cabinet's top table. In his less than seven years as an MP, he's never had to be raw and political - it's all come very easy. He is now going to have to scrap hard - internally and externally. It'll be tough.
It’s easy to watch from afar and criticise the lack of quality among MPs - but there’s an increasingly small number of people willing to put themselves up for such public scrutiny, especially given that most of them can lead equally lucrative and private lives away from the spotlight.
You have to be politically motivated, in which case it's mostly water off a duck's back. I had lots of friendly posts, a moderate amount of abuse, a small amount of obscene abuse and a single death threat - overall it was fine, and the nasty bits were a minor price for the chance to influence national policy in what I felt to be a positive direction. But if it had just been a way of earning a living? Hell no.
The people who get put off - and this is a serious loss - are the "public servant" types, who don't have strong opinions, but would like to help run the country well. The traditional Conservative Party was particularly strong in those, but Labour and LibDems had a good many too - typically from local council backgrounds. If you populate Parliament exclusively with people (like me) who have strong views and want radical change, you turn up the temperature of politics and risk getting characters who hate the other side (unlike me). You need a mixture of passionate reformers and steady public servants. You don't IMO really need anyone who just thinks it's a job like any other.
I've never really understood why anyone in the public eye ever checks their Twitter mentions.
Yes, I get having a twitter account to make announcements, or to follow others, but engaging with others in any way seems like a waste of energy, and to have a good chance of you saying something stupid you will regret.
So if reports are true, No 10 will be recruiting for - Chief of Staff (?) - Director of Comms (?) - Perm Sec for Office of No 10 - Head of Policy Unit Memo to the headhunters - leave this brief well alone
It’s worth noting that whatever the question about Britain’s state, Rishi is not the answer.
He’s a fully paid up Treasury stooge who thinks levelling up is a waste of time.
But he’s more impressive than Boris. If I was Keir I’d be a bit concerned.
there isn't any Tory that is going to spend money levelling up - that's the problem. It's going to take a Labour party willing to look at Treasury models and destroy the appalling foundations they are built on.
Unfortunately the people who understand that earn £100,000+ way more than the Treasury fools you currently use the models and don't see the flaws or missing factors.
Hint for anyone reading infrastructure sometimes needs to be built because it solves problems.
Funny how we agree violently on this but (IIRC) disagree equally violently on immigration.
Don't think I've ever commented on immigration that much.
Were I to do so my only comment would be you allow skilled workers into the country (using a sane minimum pay level well above the average wage) and ensure that you don't allow unskilled / low paid workers in.
Sadly we can't use the tricks other European countries could use (native language tests) because everyone speaks English better than you typical English native.
It is worth noting that the most successful economies in the world - places like Switzerland and Singapore - have done such a good job upskilling their own citizens, that it is unskilled labour that their economies demand.
I read your earlier confessional with some interest, and, of course, great sympathy
What happened to you was awful, and I can now see why a hedonistic, self-aggrandizing old git like me, happy to admit to multiple liaisons with younger women, might wind you up, and I am sorry for that. But there is not much I can do about it, this is me. At least I am honest
I feel no need to defend myself, as I feel I have done nothing wrong, but I will offer this story: I was married for four years to a woman 30+ years younger than me. I have never been happier than during that marriage. She says the same. We only split because of the kids thing, I’ve had mine, she wanted her own. We are now divorced, I miss her every day (tho the pain ebbs). We just made each other laugh, constantly, in a way I have never encountered with anyone else, ever. We never argued. Ever. It was uncanny. It was true love, something which I doubted existed until it happened - very late in life, in my case
But I have paid a price for this with the brutal heartbreak that ensued. Which was worse for me than for her (simply because she is so much younger and more resilient).
And now I trot around the world, drinking too much but enjoying the sunshine, I do not ever want to fall in love like that again (I doubt it is even possible). The pain of loss is too fierce
Thank you for this heartfelt response and I apologise for being so personal. You see where I was coming from (thank you) but that doesn't justify me tarring you with the same brush and I was unacceptably rude. I'm sorry.
I'm sorry too for your heartbreak.
Is it really better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all? From the happiness you mention I guess you will say 'yes'? But that pain sounds horribly raw.
That's a touching exchange between two likeable, very different people. Not every day you see it, but perhaps more on PB than most places.
It’s worth noting that whatever the question about Britain’s state, Rishi is not the answer.
He’s a fully paid up Treasury stooge who thinks levelling up is a waste of time.
But he’s more impressive than Boris. If I was Keir I’d be a bit concerned.
there isn't any Tory that is going to spend money levelling up - that's the problem. It's going to take a Labour party willing to look at Treasury models and destroy the appalling foundations they are built on.
Unfortunately the people who understand that earn £100,000+ way more than the Treasury fools you currently use the models and don't see the flaws or missing factors.
Hint for anyone reading infrastructure sometimes needs to be built because it solves problems.
Funny how we agree violently on this but (IIRC) disagree equally violently on immigration.
Don't think I've ever commented on immigration that much.
Were I to do so my only comment would be you allow skilled workers into the country (using a sane minimum pay level well above the average wage) and ensure that you don't allow unskilled / low paid workers in.
Sadly we can't use the tricks other European countries could use (native language tests) because everyone speaks English better than you typical English native.
It is worth noting that the most successful economies in the world - places like Switzerland and Singapore - have done such a good job upskilling their own citizens, that it is unskilled labour that their economies demand.
Both also have populations of less than 5% and have low tax so long attracted high net worth residents and financial services.
Both are also expensive to live in, so also limiting the attraction for the non high skilled and non high paid
It’s worth noting that whatever the question about Britain’s state, Rishi is not the answer.
He’s a fully paid up Treasury stooge who thinks levelling up is a waste of time.
But he’s more impressive than Boris. If I was Keir I’d be a bit concerned.
Rishi did right by the working man in the private sector over Covid. He is generally well regarded. Also, being as rich as Creases*, he isn't in it for the money. You aren't going to hear about HIM needing party donors to fund his wife's wallpaper choices.
Some will say that he "spaffed money up the wall" by letting too many get money without questions. I suspect his reply will be "The few bad apples could not be allowed to stop the safety net for the many. But they should know this - they will not sleep easy in their beds. Our reach is long, our memory elephantine. I suggest they pay it back, and soon - before, one day, they get the early morning visit...." Which approach will win even more votes.
I know from the doorstep of a significant number of voters who did not vote their usual Tory in 2019 because of Boris, but who will return to the fold if Rishi is PM. As I suspect do many, many MPs on all sides of the House.
It’s easy to watch from afar and criticise the lack of quality among MPs - but there’s an increasingly small number of people willing to put themselves up for such public scrutiny, especially given that most of them can lead equally lucrative and private lives away from the spotlight.
You have to be politically motivated, in which case it's mostly water off a duck's back. I had lots of friendly posts, a moderate amount of abuse, a small amount of obscene abuse and a single death threat - overall it was fine, and the nasty bits were a minor price for the chance to influence national policy in what I felt to be a positive direction. But if it had just been a way of earning a living? Hell no.
The people who get put off - and this is a serious loss - are the "public servant" types, who don't have strong opinions, but would like to help run the country well. The traditional Conservative Party was particularly strong in those, but Labour and LibDems had a good many too - typically from local council backgrounds. If you populate Parliament exclusively with people (like me) who have strong views and want radical change, you turn up the temperature of politics and risk getting characters who hate the other side (unlike me). You need a mixture of passionate reformers and steady public servants. You don't IMO really need anyone who just thinks it's a job like any other.
I think it has got a lot worse since you left parliament, though, not least because of the effect of social media and the general increase in polarisation of politics. The problem is especially bad for women MPs, and even worse for ethnic minority women MPs, but it's bad for all MPs now.
I can’t remember being so angry as I was when Boris made his Jimmy Savile smear at PMQs.
I was literally trembling.
At that moment, one of the pillars underneath British democracy buckled.
Im really fucking glad so many have decided, too much.
I thought it was typical Boris, and shrugged my shoulders.
Perhaps you can help
Who is to blame for Saville not being prosecuted?
Did they apologize?
Were they sacked?
In fairness to whoever was nominally responsible, it wasn't like Rotherham, I don't think: it wasn't as if the evidence was there for all to see. I think most people were genuinely shocked when it all came out. Presumably whoever was DPP at the time felt the same. There have been many failures of public prosecution this century: known baddies not pursued, and innocent people hounded unnecessarily. But as far as I remember Savile was neither of those. I may be misremembering.
It is not at all clear that anyone was to blame. It is bloody difficult to convict people of stuff, largely because of our jolly unimprovable world beating impeccably English jury trial system. Just one example: the first thing West was prosecuted for was raping his own children. That trial collapsed, despite it being crystal clear they he was guilty.
But Cookie’s underlying point is sound
If anything should leave anyone “literally, trembling” with anger, it is the Asian grooming scandal WHICH IS STILL GOING ON
Actually agree with you for once
I read your earlier confessional with some interest, and, of course, great sympathy
What happened to you was awful, and I can now see why a hedonistic, self-aggrandizing old git like me, happy to admit to multiple liaisons with younger women, might wind you up, and I am sorry for that. But there is not much I can do about it, this is me. At least I am honest
I feel no need to defend myself, as I feel I have done nothing wrong, but I will offer this story: I was married for four years to a woman 30+ years younger than me. I have never been happier than during that marriage. She says the same. We only split because of the kids thing, I’ve had mine, she wanted her own. We are now divorced, I miss her every day (tho the pain ebbs). We just made each other laugh, constantly, in a way I have never encountered with anyone else, ever. We never argued. Ever. It was uncanny. It was true love, something which I doubted existed until it happened - very late in life, in my case
But I have paid a price for this with the brutal heartbreak that ensued. Which was worse for me than for her (simply because she is so much younger and more resilient).
And now I trot around the world, drinking too much but enjoying the sunshine, I do not ever want to fall in love like that again (I doubt it is even possible). The pain of loss is too fierce
Thank you for this heartfelt response and I apologise for being so personal. You see where I was coming from (thank you) but that doesn't justify me tarring you with the same brush and I was unacceptably rude. I'm sorry.
I'm sorry too for your heartbreak.
Is it really better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all? From the happiness you mention I guess you will say 'yes'? But that pain sounds horribly raw.
The pain was horrifically raw. The problem with true love (and I believe this is what I encountered and I believe it is rare, so I was “lucky”) is that it always ends.
I came close to suicide several times (it didn’t help that it coincided with lockdowns 2 and 3, my god they were bad). I could tell some horror stories but you get the picture
Yes I am glad I experienced it but no, not again, thanks. I’d quite like to meet someone nice a bit nearer my age now, and have a pleasant little house in the Algarve sun and a flat in London. That’ll do me. I’ve had a magnificently varied and lucky life, I’d quite like to beat @Gardenwalker ‘s actuarial predictions and make it to my mid 70s, relatively intact
I am, by the way, not whitewashing my younger life. I was a selfish amoral wanker as a young man, for much of the time. I got away with it by being funny and occasionally charming, but I wince when I look back,. Ouch.
Agenbite of inwit, as Joyce said
Anyway, I am glad we are on peaceable terms. Please stay for the hit-and-miss cooking tips.
I'd just like to say as a very occasional poster but more regular reader that I understand your pain - in my case I had 20-odd years of true love.
I keep asking myself if I wish I'd never had it. I'm glad I have, but by God I wish it had been with someone else.
I remain hopeful I can have a second chance, and do it right this time (and another 20-odd years should be enough, anyway!)
I can’t remember being so angry as I was when Boris made his Jimmy Savile smear at PMQs.
I was literally trembling.
At that moment, one of the pillars underneath British democracy buckled.
Im really fucking glad so many have decided, too much.
I thought it was typical Boris, and shrugged my shoulders.
Perhaps you can help
Who is to blame for Saville not being prosecuted?
Did they apologize?
Were they sacked?
In fairness to whoever was nominally responsible, it wasn't like Rotherham, I don't think: it wasn't as if the evidence was there for all to see. I think most people were genuinely shocked when it all came out. Presumably whoever was DPP at the time felt the same. There have been many failures of public prosecution this century: known baddies not pursued, and innocent people hounded unnecessarily. But as far as I remember Savile was neither of those. I may be misremembering.
It is not at all clear that anyone was to blame. It is bloody difficult to convict people of stuff, largely because of our jolly unimprovable world beating impeccably English jury trial system. Just one example: the first thing West was prosecuted for was raping his own children. That trial collapsed, despite it being crystal clear they he was guilty.
But Cookie’s underlying point is sound
If anything should leave anyone “literally, trembling” with anger, it is the Asian grooming scandal WHICH IS STILL GOING ON
Actually agree with you for once
I read your earlier confessional with some interest, and, of course, great sympathy
What happened to you was awful, and I can now see why a hedonistic, self-aggrandizing old git like me, happy to admit to multiple liaisons with younger women, might wind you up, and I am sorry for that. But there is not much I can do about it, this is me. At least I am honest
I feel no need to defend myself, as I feel I have done nothing wrong, but I will offer this story: I was married for four years to a woman 30+ years younger than me. I have never been happier than during that marriage. She says the same. We only split because of the kids thing, I’ve had mine, she wanted her own. We are now divorced, I miss her every day (tho the pain ebbs). We just made each other laugh, constantly, in a way I have never encountered with anyone else, ever. We never argued. Ever. It was uncanny. It was true love, something which I doubted existed until it happened - very late in life, in my case
But I have paid a price for this with the brutal heartbreak that ensued. Which was worse for me than for her (simply because she is so much younger and more resilient).
And now I trot around the world, drinking too much but enjoying the sunshine, I do not ever want to fall in love like that again (I doubt it is even possible). The pain of loss is too fierce
Thank you for this heartfelt response and I apologise for being so personal. You see where I was coming from (thank you) but that doesn't justify me tarring you with the same brush and I was unacceptably rude. I'm sorry.
I'm sorry too for your heartbreak.
Is it really better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all? From the happiness you mention I guess you will say 'yes'? But that pain sounds horribly raw.
The pain was horrifically raw. The problem with true love (and I believe this is what I encountered and I believe it is rare, so I was “lucky”) is that it always ends.
I came close to suicide several times (it didn’t help that it coincided with lockdowns 2 and 3, my god they were bad). I could tell some horror stories but you get the picture
Yes I am glad I experienced it but no, not again, thanks. I’d quite like to meet someone nice a bit nearer my age now, and have a pleasant little house in the Algarve sun and a flat in London. That’ll do me. I’ve had a magnificently varied and lucky life, I’d quite like to beat @Gardenwalker ‘s actuarial predictions and make it to my mid 70s, relatively intact
I am, by the way, not whitewashing my younger life. I was a selfish amoral wanker as a young man, for much of the time. I got away with it by being funny and occasionally charming, but I wince when I look back,. Ouch.
Agenbite of inwit, as Joyce said
Anyway, I am glad we are on peaceable terms. Please stay for the hit-and-miss cooking tips.
It’s easy to watch from afar and criticise the lack of quality among MPs - but there’s an increasingly small number of people willing to put themselves up for such public scrutiny, especially given that most of them can lead equally lucrative and private lives away from the spotlight.
You have to be politically motivated, in which case it's mostly water off a duck's back. I had lots of friendly posts, a moderate amount of abuse, a small amount of obscene abuse and a single death threat - overall it was fine, and the nasty bits were a minor price for the chance to influence national policy in what I felt to be a positive direction. But if it had just been a way of earning a living? Hell no.
The people who get put off - and this is a serious loss - are the "public servant" types, who don't have strong opinions, but would like to help run the country well. The traditional Conservative Party was particularly strong in those, but Labour and LibDems had a good many too - typically from local council backgrounds. If you populate Parliament exclusively with people (like me) who have strong views and want radical change, you turn up the temperature of politics and risk getting characters who hate the other side (unlike me). You need a mixture of passionate reformers and steady public servants. You don't IMO really need anyone who just thinks it's a job like any other.
I've never really understood why anyone in the public eye ever checks their Twitter mentions.
What politics needs is a major player to say “I’m not going to do social media”
I understand this will be hard, Twitter especially is where politics is played out, it is the cockpit, but social media is what’s destroying (and I don’t use the word lightly) democracy as we know it. Polarising everything, poisoning everything, turning every debate into a death threat and a rape tweet.
If a British PM said Nope, not doing that, it might just help. Even better, a US President
But this is probably like trying to uninvent gunpowder.
In retrospect, China’s brutal censorship and control of social media does not look like autocratic madness, it looks like sensible governance. Sadly
Alistair Carmichael, Lib Dem home affairs spokesman who triggered the UK stats authority investigation, calls on Boris Johnson to "come before Parliament to apologise for his latest lie and set the record straight.”
Politicians now routinely referring to BoZo as a liar everywhere except on the floor of the house
Hmm. Even Mr Carmichael reprimanding Mr Johnson?? ALASTAIR CARMICHAEL??
It's an interesting law case he was involved in concerning when it's technically legal to fib one's socks, underwear, and tooth fillings off.
It’s easy to watch from afar and criticise the lack of quality among MPs - but there’s an increasingly small number of people willing to put themselves up for such public scrutiny, especially given that most of them can lead equally lucrative and private lives away from the spotlight.
You have to be politically motivated, in which case it's mostly water off a duck's back. I had lots of friendly posts, a moderate amount of abuse, a small amount of obscene abuse and a single death threat - overall it was fine, and the nasty bits were a minor price for the chance to influence national policy in what I felt to be a positive direction. But if it had just been a way of earning a living? Hell no.
The people who get put off - and this is a serious loss - are the "public servant" types, who don't have strong opinions, but would like to help run the country well. The traditional Conservative Party was particularly strong in those, but Labour and LibDems had a good many too - typically from local council backgrounds. If you populate Parliament exclusively with people (like me) who have strong views and want radical change, you turn up the temperature of politics and risk getting characters who hate the other side (unlike me). You need a mixture of passionate reformers and steady public servants. You don't IMO really need anyone who just thinks it's a job like any other.
I've never really understood why anyone in the public eye ever checks their Twitter mentions.
What politics needs is a major player to say “I’m not going to do social media”
I understand this will be hard, Twitter especially is where politics is played out, it is the cockpit, but social media is what’s destroying (and I don’t use the word lightly) democracy as we know it. Polarising everything, poisoning everything, turning every debate into a death threat and a rape tweet.
If a British PM said Nope, not doing that, it might just help. Even better, a US President
But this is probably like trying to uninvent gunpowder.
In retrospect, China’s brutal censorship and control of social media does not look like autocratic madness, it looks like sensible governance. Sadly
Tory activists are the great unknown in all this. Ultimately I think it absurd that MPs shouldn't be responsible for choosing the Prime minister.
Voters are responsible for choosing the PM at general elections (confirmed by the Queen).
No reason party members should not get to choose the PM if their party has a majority in the Commons and the PM is changed midterm. MPs in any case nominate the candidates and in the Tory party select the final 2 the members pick from
Er, you're muddling voters and party members. And voters choose MPs first and foremost. This isn't a presidential system.
No I am not. Voters get a say at general elections. Party members select the leaders they get to choose from at those general elections (and to elect the PMs too if the party has a majority in Parliament and a new PM is elected midterm).
Most voters vote for the PM and the party.
The number who give a personal vote for their MP is less than 5%
Is that true? I suppose it might be. I would vote based on the overall positioning of the party first (whose philosophy do I trust most and therefore which party would I trust to make the right decisions. Unless the leader is utterly hopeless that would be a secondary factor as would the manifesto which is mostly just a marketing exercise. Its all about which party seems to stand closest to the things I believe in. Maybe I am unusual
Tory activists are the great unknown in all this. Ultimately I think it absurd that MPs shouldn't be responsible for choosing the Prime minister.
Voters are responsible for choosing the PM at general elections (confirmed by the Queen).
No reason party members should not get to choose the PM if their party has a majority in the Commons and the PM is changed midterm. MPs in any case nominate the candidates and in the Tory party select the final 2 the members pick from
Er, you're muddling voters and party members. And voters choose MPs first and foremost. This isn't a presidential system.
No I am not. Voters get a say at general elections. Party members select the leaders they get to choose from at those general elections (and to elect the PMs too if the party has a majority in Parliament and a new PM is elected midterm).
Most voters vote for the PM and the party.
The number who give a personal vote for their MP is less than 5%
Now you're muddling general elections and party elections as well.
I'm so done with this cautious not-saying-what-I-mean-ism from MPs. Enough. I want more of the likes of Rayner charging in like an archangel with a fucking sword. I want to hear that Boris is a scumbag, because he is and we know you know it. Sunak, you're too little too late. Off you fuck, son.
I can’t remember being so angry as I was when Boris made his Jimmy Savile smear at PMQs.
I was literally trembling.
At that moment, one of the pillars underneath British democracy buckled.
Im really fucking glad so many have decided, too much.
I thought it was typical Boris, and shrugged my shoulders.
Perhaps you can help
Who is to blame for Saville not being prosecuted?
Did they apologize?
Were they sacked?
Was there sufficient evidence at that time for a prosecution?
I mean, with hindsight, Savile was an evil man who should have spent his entire adult life in a small cell. But was the DPP presented with enough evidence that a conviction looked likely?
And we don't know the answer to that.
My gut - fwiw - is that Starmer would love to have gotten the headlines for successfully locking up a high profile paedophile - especially one who could be characterised as being close to his political opponents. But it may be that the girls involved were not great witnesses (or could be characterised as such), and there was no corroborating evidence.
Should the DPP have forced a prosecution, if conviction looked unlikely? Should he have diverted scarce resources in this way?
In (Captain) hindsight yes
What is wrong with you? Your hatred of Starmer is making you veer off to the far right. Bizarre.
It’s easy to watch from afar and criticise the lack of quality among MPs - but there’s an increasingly small number of people willing to put themselves up for such public scrutiny, especially given that most of them can lead equally lucrative and private lives away from the spotlight.
You have to be politically motivated, in which case it's mostly water off a duck's back. I had lots of friendly posts, a moderate amount of abuse, a small amount of obscene abuse and a single death threat - overall it was fine, and the nasty bits were a minor price for the chance to influence national policy in what I felt to be a positive direction. But if it had just been a way of earning a living? Hell no.
The people who get put off - and this is a serious loss - are the "public servant" types, who don't have strong opinions, but would like to help run the country well. The traditional Conservative Party was particularly strong in those, but Labour and LibDems had a good many too - typically from local council backgrounds. If you populate Parliament exclusively with people (like me) who have strong views and want radical change, you turn up the temperature of politics and risk getting characters who hate the other side (unlike me). You need a mixture of passionate reformers and steady public servants. You don't IMO really need anyone who just thinks it's a job like any other.
I've never really understood why anyone in the public eye ever checks their Twitter mentions.
What politics needs is a major player to say “I’m not going to do social media”
I understand this will be hard, Twitter especially is where politics is played out, it is the cockpit, but social media is what’s destroying (and I don’t use the word lightly) democracy as we know it. Polarising everything, poisoning everything, turning every debate into a death threat and a rape tweet.
If a British PM said Nope, not doing that, it might just help. Even better, a US President
But this is probably like trying to uninvent gunpowder.
In retrospect, China’s brutal censorship and control of social media does not look like autocratic madness, it looks like sensible governance. Sadly
I'm so done with this cautious not-saying-what-I-mean-ism from MPs. Enough. I want more of the likes of Rayner charging in like an archangel with a fucking sword. I want to hear that Boris is a scumbag, because he is and we know you know it. Sunak, you're too little too late. Off you fuck, son.
There we go.
If Boris is replaced by Sunak non Tories like you will be trashing Sunak the very next day
As the air deflates out of the Boris balloon, you can feel the collective mood her lift. A new spirit of unity and camaraderie. Marvellous.
Meanwhile I don’t know what you lot have against Rishi. He’s clearly the business. What a refreshing change it would be to have a Prime Minister that types his own Bloomberg shortcut commands and can confidently explain to laypeople the complexities of the global energy market. If the Tory right wing think he’s a bit too socialist and the Labour left moan about him being too corporate then that sounds time like he sits where the country does. Further, I could turn the tv news on again in the presence of my kids and know they’d be seeing an aspirational figure staring out the screen.
Fascinating answers from him at the end, talking very plainly that he won’t be chancellor for ever (for long?).
It’s easy to watch from afar and criticise the lack of quality among MPs - but there’s an increasingly small number of people willing to put themselves up for such public scrutiny, especially given that most of them can lead equally lucrative and private lives away from the spotlight.
You have to be politically motivated, in which case it's mostly water off a duck's back. I had lots of friendly posts, a moderate amount of abuse, a small amount of obscene abuse and a single death threat - overall it was fine, and the nasty bits were a minor price for the chance to influence national policy in what I felt to be a positive direction. But if it had just been a way of earning a living? Hell no.
The people who get put off - and this is a serious loss - are the "public servant" types, who don't have strong opinions, but would like to help run the country well. The traditional Conservative Party was particularly strong in those, but Labour and LibDems had a good many too - typically from local council backgrounds. If you populate Parliament exclusively with people (like me) who have strong views and want radical change, you turn up the temperature of politics and risk getting characters who hate the other side (unlike me). You need a mixture of passionate reformers and steady public servants. You don't IMO really need anyone who just thinks it's a job like any other.
Do you think your slightly younger self would still want to do it though, in the current era of social media, Twitter-based politics and extreme polarisation of opinion?
Sunak has had a gilded, trouble-free path to the Cabinet's top table. In his less than seven years as an MP, he's never had to be raw and political - it's all come very easy. He is now going to have to scrap hard - internally and externally. It'll be tough.
If he makes it he we’ll be the nicest least tested politician to make it to the top for a very long time. And he may well be swiftly eaten for breakfast. But that’s academic when we are still waiting for our well deserved evening meal.
Workers must not ask for big pay rises to try and stop prices rising out of control, the Bank of England governor has told the BBC.
Andrew Bailey said the Bank raised rates to 0.5% from 0.25% to prevent rising prices becoming “ingrained”.
Asked if the Bank was also implicitly asking workers not to demand big pay rises, he said: “Broadly, yes”, the BBC reports.
Mr Bailey said that while it would be “painful” for workers to accept that prices would rise faster than their wages, he added that some “moderation of wage rises” was needed to prevent inflation becoming entrenched.
“In the sense of saying, we do need to see a moderation of wage rises, now that’s painful. I don’t want to in any sense sugar that, it is painful. But we need to see that in order to get through this problem more quickly.”
It’s worth noting that whatever the question about Britain’s state, Rishi is not the answer.
He’s a fully paid up Treasury stooge who thinks levelling up is a waste of time.
But he’s more impressive than Boris. If I was Keir I’d be a bit concerned.
Rishi did right by the working man in the private sector over Covid. He is generally well regarded. Also, being as rich as Creases*, he isn't in it for the money. You aren't going to hear about HIM needing party donors to fund his wife's wallpaper choices.
Some will say that he "spaffed money up the wall" by letting too many get money without questions. I suspect his reply will be "The few bad apples could not be allowed to stop the safety net for the many. But they should know this - they will not sleep easy in their beds. Our reach is long, our memory elephantine. I suggest they pay it back, and soon - before, one day, they get the early morning visit...." Which approach will win even more votes.
I know from the doorstep of a significant number of voters who did not vote their usual Tory in 2019 because of Boris, but who will return to the fold if Rishi is PM. As I suspect do many, many MPs on all sides of the House.
*referencing the best pun in pb.com history.....
It started as a malapropism; Ash of blessed memory referred to someone as being as rich as creases, because he genuinely thought that was the expression, I corrected him, and someone else suggested it might apply to Huhne. I will always treasure the memory of being in at the start of that.
I can’t remember being so angry as I was when Boris made his Jimmy Savile smear at PMQs.
I was literally trembling.
At that moment, one of the pillars underneath British democracy buckled.
Im really fucking glad so many have decided, too much.
I thought it was typical Boris, and shrugged my shoulders.
Perhaps you can help
Who is to blame for Saville not being prosecuted?
Did they apologize?
Were they sacked?
In fairness to whoever was nominally responsible, it wasn't like Rotherham, I don't think: it wasn't as if the evidence was there for all to see. I think most people were genuinely shocked when it all came out. Presumably whoever was DPP at the time felt the same. There have been many failures of public prosecution this century: known baddies not pursued, and innocent people hounded unnecessarily. But as far as I remember Savile was neither of those. I may be misremembering.
It is not at all clear that anyone was to blame. It is bloody difficult to convict people of stuff, largely because of our jolly unimprovable world beating impeccably English jury trial system. Just one example: the first thing West was prosecuted for was raping his own children. That trial collapsed, despite it being crystal clear they he was guilty.
But Cookie’s underlying point is sound
If anything should leave anyone “literally, trembling” with anger, it is the Asian grooming scandal WHICH IS STILL GOING ON
Actually agree with you for once
I read your earlier confessional with some interest, and, of course, great sympathy
What happened to you was awful, and I can now see why a hedonistic, self-aggrandizing old git like me, happy to admit to multiple liaisons with younger women, might wind you up, and I am sorry for that. But there is not much I can do about it, this is me. At least I am honest
I feel no need to defend myself, as I feel I have done nothing wrong, but I will offer this story: I was married for four years to a woman 30+ years younger than me. I have never been happier than during that marriage. She says the same. We only split because of the kids thing, I’ve had mine, she wanted her own. We are now divorced, I miss her every day (tho the pain ebbs). We just made each other laugh, constantly, in a way I have never encountered with anyone else, ever. We never argued. Ever. It was uncanny. It was true love, something which I doubted existed until it happened - very late in life, in my case
But I have paid a price for this with the brutal heartbreak that ensued. Which was worse for me than for her (simply because she is so much younger and more resilient).
And now I trot around the world, drinking too much but enjoying the sunshine, I do not ever want to fall in love like that again (I doubt it is even possible). The pain of loss is too fierce
Thank you for this heartfelt response and I apologise for being so personal. You see where I was coming from (thank you) but that doesn't justify me tarring you with the same brush and I was unacceptably rude. I'm sorry.
I'm sorry too for your heartbreak.
Is it really better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all? From the happiness you mention I guess you will say 'yes'? But that pain sounds horribly raw.
The pain was horrifically raw. The problem with true love (and I believe this is what I encountered and I believe it is rare, so I was “lucky”) is that it always ends.
I came close to suicide several times (it didn’t help that it coincided with lockdowns 2 and 3, my god they were bad). I could tell some horror stories but you get the picture
Yes I am glad I experienced it but no, not again, thanks. I’d quite like to meet someone nice a bit nearer my age now, and have a pleasant little house in the Algarve sun and a flat in London. That’ll do me. I’ve had a magnificently varied and lucky life, I’d quite like to beat @Gardenwalker ‘s actuarial predictions and make it to my mid 70s, relatively intact
I am, by the way, not whitewashing my younger life. I was a selfish amoral wanker as a young man, for much of the time. I got away with it by being funny and occasionally charming, but I wince when I look back,. Ouch.
Agenbite of inwit, as Joyce said
Anyway, I am glad we are on peaceable terms. Please stay for the hit-and-miss cooking tips.
The people who get put off - and this is a serious loss - are the "public servant" types, who don't have strong opinions, but would like to help run the country well. The traditional Conservative Party was particularly strong in those, but Labour and LibDems had a good many too - typically from local council backgrounds. If you populate Parliament exclusively with people (like me) who have strong views and want radical change, you turn up the temperature of politics and risk getting characters who hate the other side (unlike me). You need a mixture of passionate reformers and steady public servants. You don't IMO really need anyone who just thinks it's a job like any other.
Very astutely observed on the council issue.
Almost every single councillor I have met, whether at district or county level, has been of that "public servant" genre: Green, Labour, LibDem, Conservative. I disagreed with the former county council leader and his deputy on many things but they were always thoughtful, courteous and pragmatic. There are one or two exceptions that come to mind - generally youngish Tories with an eye to the career ladder, the odd LibDem - but very few.
It’s easy to watch from afar and criticise the lack of quality among MPs - but there’s an increasingly small number of people willing to put themselves up for such public scrutiny, especially given that most of them can lead equally lucrative and private lives away from the spotlight.
You have to be politically motivated, in which case it's mostly water off a duck's back. I had lots of friendly posts, a moderate amount of abuse, a small amount of obscene abuse and a single death threat - overall it was fine, and the nasty bits were a minor price for the chance to influence national policy in what I felt to be a positive direction. But if it had just been a way of earning a living? Hell no.
The people who get put off - and this is a serious loss - are the "public servant" types, who don't have strong opinions, but would like to help run the country well. The traditional Conservative Party was particularly strong in those, but Labour and LibDems had a good many too - typically from local council backgrounds. If you populate Parliament exclusively with people (like me) who have strong views and want radical change, you turn up the temperature of politics and risk getting characters who hate the other side (unlike me). You need a mixture of passionate reformers and steady public servants. You don't IMO really need anyone who just thinks it's a job like any other.
I've never really understood why anyone in the public eye ever checks their Twitter mentions.
What politics needs is a major player to say “I’m not going to do social media”
I understand this will be hard, Twitter especially is where politics is played out, it is the cockpit, but social media is what’s destroying (and I don’t use the word lightly) democracy as we know it. Polarising everything, poisoning everything, turning every debate into a death threat and a rape tweet.
If a British PM said Nope, not doing that, it might just help. Even better, a US President
But this is probably like trying to uninvent gunpowder.
In retrospect, China’s brutal censorship and control of social media does not look like autocratic madness, it looks like sensible governance. Sadly
I don’t remember your cheering her very much, at the time.
- Cases are flat(ish). R is clustered about 1. R remains lower for the older groups - Admissions down - MV beds down - In hospital down - Deaths down
Thanks Malmesbury. I'm glad we're able to give this less attention nowadays - it's an infinitely healthier position to be in. But I for one still enjoy getting your updates - not least from a point of general interest, but also as a marker point in the day.
Thank you - I'm just disappointed that no one has remarked on the picture I use. A great character, built by a great actor - much against type, in a great film.
I had no idea what you were talking about and went and re-looked. Sorry to report, but in my thread it just comes up as a little 5mm/5mm icon and the word 'image'.
Who is it meant to be?
Jumping in - it is a frame from the film "Fail-Safe".
Same year as Dr Strangelove and on the same topic, but somewhat overshadowed by its better known twin.
Suitably apocalyptic (or not, as the case may be).
It's a better film than Strangelove.
In particular, the Prof Groeteschele (played by Walter Matthau) is introduced at a Washington cocktail party ( (pictured above). A brilliant strategist - is he simply clear sighted, dispassionate and cynical, mad or evil? Or all three?
The genius of Matthau's performance is that he leaves it entirely to the audience to decide - and the view of the character changes as the plot progress. Much as in the Bedford Incident the characters remain true to themselves, but our understanding of them evolves.
I can’t remember being so angry as I was when Boris made his Jimmy Savile smear at PMQs.
I was literally trembling.
At that moment, one of the pillars underneath British democracy buckled.
Im really fucking glad so many have decided, too much.
I thought it was typical Boris, and shrugged my shoulders.
Perhaps you can help
Who is to blame for Saville not being prosecuted?
Did they apologize?
Were they sacked?
Was there sufficient evidence at that time for a prosecution?
I mean, with hindsight, Savile was an evil man who should have spent his entire adult life in a small cell. But was the DPP presented with enough evidence that a conviction looked likely?
And we don't know the answer to that.
My gut - fwiw - is that Starmer would love to have gotten the headlines for successfully locking up a high profile paedophile - especially one who could be characterised as being close to his political opponents. But it may be that the girls involved were not great witnesses (or could be characterised as such), and there was no corroborating evidence.
Should the DPP have forced a prosecution, if conviction looked unlikely? Should he have diverted scarce resources in this way?
The review commissioned by SKS said yes for three of the four cases.
And, of course, had they gone for it, I think it’s safe to say that the dam would have burst and many more people would have come forward. But then hindsight is 20:20.
- Cases are flat(ish). R is clustered about 1. R remains lower for the older groups - Admissions down - MV beds down - In hospital down - Deaths down
Thanks Malmesbury. I'm glad we're able to give this less attention nowadays - it's an infinitely healthier position to be in. But I for one still enjoy getting your updates - not least from a point of general interest, but also as a marker point in the day.
Thank you - I'm just disappointed that no one has remarked on the picture I use. A great character, built by a great actor - much against type, in a great film.
I had no idea what you were talking about and went and re-looked. Sorry to report, but in my thread it just comes up as a little 5mm/5mm icon and the word 'image'.
Who is it meant to be?
Jumping in - it is a frame from the film "Fail-Safe".
Same year as Dr Strangelove and on the same topic, but somewhat overshadowed by its better known twin.
Suitably apocalyptic (or not, as the case may be).
It's a better film than Strangelove.
In particular, the Prof Groeteschele (played by Walter Matthau) is introduced at a Washington cocktail party ( (pictured above). A brilliant strategist - is he simply clear sighted, dispassionate and cynical, mad or evil? Or all three?
The genius of Matthau's performance is that he leaves it entirely to the audience to decide - and the view of the character changes as the plot progress. Much as in the Bedford Incident the characters remain true to themselves, but our understanding of them evolves.
Hmm, I've got the novel, but haven't read it for decades. Wonder how it compares to the film?
Jack Doyle has resigned as director of communications at No 10. He's told friends he always planned to leave after two years and that his departure is not linked to that of Munira Mirza https://twitter.com/JasonGroves1/status/1489300293661728773
It’s easy to watch from afar and criticise the lack of quality among MPs - but there’s an increasingly small number of people willing to put themselves up for such public scrutiny, especially given that most of them can lead equally lucrative and private lives away from the spotlight.
You have to be politically motivated, in which case it's mostly water off a duck's back. I had lots of friendly posts, a moderate amount of abuse, a small amount of obscene abuse and a single death threat - overall it was fine, and the nasty bits were a minor price for the chance to influence national policy in what I felt to be a positive direction. But if it had just been a way of earning a living? Hell no.
The people who get put off - and this is a serious loss - are the "public servant" types, who don't have strong opinions, but would like to help run the country well. The traditional Conservative Party was particularly strong in those, but Labour and LibDems had a good many too - typically from local council backgrounds. If you populate Parliament exclusively with people (like me) who have strong views and want radical change, you turn up the temperature of politics and risk getting characters who hate the other side (unlike me). You need a mixture of passionate reformers and steady public servants. You don't IMO really need anyone who just thinks it's a job like any other.
I've never really understood why anyone in the public eye ever checks their Twitter mentions.
I was watching a long interview between Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson the other day.
The two men were discussing their sudden rise to fame, Rogan was saying that he learned very quickly to completely ignore online comments, whereas Peterson said he likes to read everything people have to say about him, even the negative things. I think I’d be on Rogan’s side, if I suddenly became that famous.
As the air deflates out of the Boris balloon, you can feel the collective mood her lift. A new spirit of unity and camaraderie. Marvellous.
Meanwhile I don’t know what you lot have against Rishi. He’s clearly the business. What a refreshing change it would be to have a Prime Minister that types his own Bloomberg shortcut commands and can confidently explain to laypeople the complexities of the global energy market. If the Tory right wing think he’s a bit too socialist and the Labour left moan about him being too corporate then that sounds time like he sits where the country does. Further, I could turn the tv news on again in the presence of my kids and know they’d be seeing an aspirational figure staring out the screen.
Fascinating answers from him at the end, talking very plainly that he won’t be chancellor for ever (for long?).
He gave some straight answers when questioned about the help with energy bills, neatly explaining why council tax was a good(ish) way of targetting help.
I'm so done with this cautious not-saying-what-I-mean-ism from MPs. Enough. I want more of the likes of Rayner charging in like an archangel with a fucking sword. I want to hear that Boris is a scumbag, because he is and we know you know it. Sunak, you're too little too late. Off you fuck, son.
There we go.
If Boris is replaced by Sunak non Tories like you will be trashing Sunak the very next day
Anybody will be criticised by someone. I've already said my preference would be Hunt. Sunak's a dud. And he's still better than the scumbag.
Jack Doyle has resigned as director of communications at No 10. He's told friends he always planned to leave after two years and that his departure is not linked to that of Munira Mirza https://twitter.com/JasonGroves1/status/1489300293661728773
Alistair Carmichael, Lib Dem home affairs spokesman who triggered the UK stats authority investigation, calls on Boris Johnson to "come before Parliament to apologise for his latest lie and set the record straight.”
Politicians now routinely referring to BoZo as a liar everywhere except on the floor of the house
Hmm. Even Mr Carmichael reprimanding Mr Johnson?? ALASTAIR CARMICHAEL??
It's an interesting law case he was involved in concerning when it's technically legal to fib one's socks, underwear, and tooth fillings off.
Mr Sunak's chums are taking it in turn to go off and join Brutus and Cassius, sorry Mr Sunak, and stab Mr Johnson in the back with the excuse of the Savile smear. Odd timing but there you are.
I can’t remember being so angry as I was when Boris made his Jimmy Savile smear at PMQs.
I was literally trembling.
At that moment, one of the pillars underneath British democracy buckled.
Im really fucking glad so many have decided, too much.
I thought it was typical Boris, and shrugged my shoulders.
Perhaps you can help
Who is to blame for Saville not being prosecuted?
Did they apologize?
Were they sacked?
Was there sufficient evidence at that time for a prosecution?
I mean, with hindsight, Savile was an evil man who should have spent his entire adult life in a small cell. But was the DPP presented with enough evidence that a conviction looked likely?
And we don't know the answer to that.
My gut - fwiw - is that Starmer would love to have gotten the headlines for successfully locking up a high profile paedophile - especially one who could be characterised as being close to his political opponents. But it may be that the girls involved were not great witnesses (or could be characterised as such), and there was no corroborating evidence.
Should the DPP have forced a prosecution, if conviction looked unlikely? Should he have diverted scarce resources in this way?
In (Captain) hindsight yes
Silly and nasty. He is precluded by his own rules from starting prosecutions where there is not a realistic prospect of conviction
Alistair Carmichael, Lib Dem home affairs spokesman who triggered the UK stats authority investigation, calls on Boris Johnson to "come before Parliament to apologise for his latest lie and set the record straight.”
Politicians now routinely referring to BoZo as a liar everywhere except on the floor of the house
Hmm. Even Mr Carmichael reprimanding Mr Johnson?? ALASTAIR CARMICHAEL??
It's an interesting law case he was involved in concerning when it's technically legal to fib one's socks, underwear, and tooth fillings off.
Boris needs a face-saving exit. The revolver on the mahogany table, with a tumbler of Highland Park
If he’s not careful he will end up like Mussolini or Gadaffi (metaphorically). Not dignified
He needs some excuse to resign that somehow seems principled. What could it be? Long Covid? He’s left it a bit late to suddenly start saying Oh I’m too ill. But what else is there?
He won't leave with dignity. He doesn't do dignity.
I think he needs to be offered a new job.
And I was wondering: could he perhaps take over from Ursula van der Leyen? While traditionally the Commission President has been from an EU member, I doubt there is any legal need for it.
Boris is also used to working in Brussels, and did a good job (unlike UvdL) with vaccines.
It could be sold to EU as potentially resulting - long-term - in the UK rejoining (or at the very least having someone pissing outside the tend). And it could be sold in the UK as having someone in Brussels who understands our needs.
And from BJ's point of view, it would mean that he was the first Brit to be both Prime Minister and President.
I agree with the general thrust of this - I was going to post a few days ago that the way to get him out was offer some sort of cushy sinecure somewhere. I thought making him ambassador to the USA might work (for him and Carrie) or perhaps France. You attract more flies with honey etc.
How about making Boris the UK "Ambassador" to Transnistria?
Good spot for him to keep on giving aid & comfort to Vald. PLUS no doubt Carrie could furnish the "embassy" in her favorite Turkish whorehouse motif . . . and at a fraction of West End prices!
I watched on iPlayer a doc about the Blair and Brown years and was struck by the mutual admiration between them despite the clear antagonism between them at the changeover time.
I cannot wait however, if Rishi replaces Boris, for a repeat documentary in 10 years time as I don’t think there will be much love lost - will be suitably brutal I imagine…..
Mr Sunak's chums are taking it in turn to go off and join Brutus and Cassius, sorry Mr Sunak, and stab Mr Johnson in the back with the excuse of the Savile smear. Odd timing but there you are.
Not really I suspect they wanted to do it today attached to the Energy bungs...
Jack Doyle has resigned as director of communications at No 10. He's told friends he always planned to leave after two years and that his departure is not linked to that of Munira Mirza https://twitter.com/JasonGroves1/status/1489300293661728773
This is like Himmler being spotted in a Daimler fleeing Berlin in April 1945 and saying he is just off to get some sea-air north of Hamburg, and he’s had the holiday in his diary for YONKS
It’s easy to watch from afar and criticise the lack of quality among MPs - but there’s an increasingly small number of people willing to put themselves up for such public scrutiny, especially given that most of them can lead equally lucrative and private lives away from the spotlight.
You have to be politically motivated, in which case it's mostly water off a duck's back. I had lots of friendly posts, a moderate amount of abuse, a small amount of obscene abuse and a single death threat - overall it was fine, and the nasty bits were a minor price for the chance to influence national policy in what I felt to be a positive direction. But if it had just been a way of earning a living? Hell no.
The people who get put off - and this is a serious loss - are the "public servant" types, who don't have strong opinions, but would like to help run the country well. The traditional Conservative Party was particularly strong in those, but Labour and LibDems had a good many too - typically from local council backgrounds. If you populate Parliament exclusively with people (like me) who have strong views and want radical change, you turn up the temperature of politics and risk getting characters who hate the other side (unlike me). You need a mixture of passionate reformers and steady public servants. You don't IMO really need anyone who just thinks it's a job like any other.
I've never really understood why anyone in the public eye ever checks their Twitter mentions.
I was watching a long interview between Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson the other day.
The two men were discussing their sudden rise to fame, Rogan was saying that he learned very quickly to completely ignore online comments, whereas Peterson said he likes to read everything people have to say about him, even the negative things. I think I’d be on Rogan’s side, if I suddenly became that famous.
Joe Rogan reached the apogee of his career on "Talk Radio" where he was moderately amusing . . . because he obviously did NOT write his own scripts.
Since then he's been on extended tour of the sewers inside his head.
I watched on iPlayer a doc about the Blair and Brown years and was struck by the mutual admiration between them despite the clear antagonism between them at the changeover time.
I cannot wait however, if Rishi replaces Boris, for a repeat documentary in 10 years time as I don’t think there will be much love lost - will be suitably brutal I imagine…..
I'm toying with doing a thread on Sunday where I predict if Boris goes soon he will undermine his successor in the way Thatcher did to Major and take the Incredible Sulk title from Ted Heath.
Comments
Under PR we probably would see both the Tory and Labour parties split, it is only FPTP keeping May and Hunt in the same party as Boris and Rees Mogg and Corbyn and McDonnell in the same party as Starmer and Reeves
Come the next election we’ll get a Lab minority, probably
We disagree though. I’m largely positive about the so-called unskilled as they tend to work hard and move up the skills ladder.
Of course there are micro-groups that you don’t want, but it’s hard to find a fair blanket rule that excludes them.
An ally said the suggestion he is about to resign is "baseless". Did not deny setting conditions for future support during meeting with the PM
https://twitter.com/Gabriel_Pogrund/status/1489295239365939201
Mike Fabricate
Same year as Dr Strangelove and on the same topic, but somewhat overshadowed by its better known twin.
Suitably apocalyptic (or not, as the case may be).
https://twitter.com/Mike_Fabricant/status/1489178561944637454
The people who get put off - and this is a serious loss - are the "public servant" types, who don't have strong opinions, but would like to help run the country well. The traditional Conservative Party was particularly strong in those, but Labour and LibDems had a good many too - typically from local council backgrounds. If you populate Parliament exclusively with people (like me) who have strong views and want radical change, you turn up the temperature of politics and risk getting characters who hate the other side (unlike me). You need a mixture of passionate reformers and steady public servants. You don't IMO really need anyone who just thinks it's a job like any other.
The best policy in politics is to work from the position that almost everyone wants things to be better for people but they differ in terms of how best they think that can be done.
Thing is, they’ll never get through the MPs vote, let alone, the Tory members.
It'd be like reviewing someone in breach of a licensing condition and suggesting a new condition would be that you adhere to the existing conditions - you should already be doing that, a promise to not act terribly is not much of a promise.
Most voters vote for the PM and the party.
The number who give a personal vote for their MP is less than 5%
On Jimmy Saville comments: "No one is commenting, at least of all for me about the personal involvement of the leader opposition in the handling of that case"
https://twitter.com/NatashaC/status/1489296860720283654
So if reports are true, No 10 will be recruiting for
- Chief of Staff (?)
- Director of Comms (?)
- Perm Sec for Office of No 10
- Head of Policy Unit
Memo to the headhunters - leave this brief well alone
https://twitter.com/nickfaith82/status/1489295090447052800?s=20&t=eGUeRvVYIzcHj2P1uJ1aQA
Both are also expensive to live in, so also limiting the attraction for the non high skilled and non high paid
Some will say that he "spaffed money up the wall" by letting too many get money without questions. I suspect his reply will be "The few bad apples could not be allowed to stop the safety net for the many. But they should know this - they will not sleep easy in their beds. Our reach is long, our memory elephantine. I suggest they pay it back, and soon - before, one day, they get the early morning visit...." Which approach will win even more votes.
I know from the doorstep of a significant number of voters who did not vote their usual Tory in 2019 because of Boris, but who will return to the fold if Rishi is PM. As I suspect do many, many MPs on all sides of the House.
*referencing the best pun in pb.com history.....
I keep asking myself if I wish I'd never had it. I'm glad I have, but by God I wish it had been with someone else.
I remain hopeful I can have a second chance, and do it right this time (and another 20-odd years should be enough, anyway!)
Thank you for sharing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayenbite_of_Inwyt
I love the way the Middle English maps exactly to the Latinate Remorse of Conscience
It is by the way the 100th anniversary of the publication of Ulysses. Or rather it isn't and I have missed it, it was yesterday.
I understand this will be hard, Twitter especially is where politics is played out, it is the cockpit, but social media is what’s destroying (and I don’t use the word lightly) democracy as we know it. Polarising everything, poisoning everything, turning every debate into a death threat and a rape tweet.
If a British PM said Nope, not doing that, it might just help. Even better, a US President
But this is probably like trying to uninvent gunpowder.
In retrospect, China’s brutal censorship and control of social media does not look like autocratic madness, it looks like sensible governance. Sadly
It's an interesting law case he was involved in concerning when it's technically legal to fib one's socks, underwear, and tooth fillings off.
https://www.abdn.ac.uk/law/blog/how-election-courts-workthe-alistair-carmichael-case--other-trials/
From Hansard
"although he spent most of his time prosecuting journalists and failing to prosecute Jimmy Savile, as far as I can make out"
Fucking liar
It won't be.
Nudge nudge.
Twat.
But only NOW, when they all know it's gone down like a stripper at a funeral. What did they do at the time? Laugh, point and nod vigorously in agreement. Including you, @RishiSunak. https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1489298607106887683/video/1
If Boris is replaced by Sunak non Tories like you will be trashing Sunak the very next day
Rishi is not seen laughing and pointing.
JRM is, but we already knew he’s a vindictive twat.
Meanwhile I don’t know what you lot have against Rishi. He’s clearly the business. What a refreshing change it would be to have a Prime Minister that types his own Bloomberg shortcut commands and can confidently explain to laypeople the complexities of the global energy market. If the Tory right wing think he’s a bit too socialist and the Labour left moan about him being too corporate then that sounds time like he sits where the country does. Further, I could turn the tv news on again in the presence of my kids and know they’d be seeing an aspirational figure staring out the screen.
Fascinating answers from him at the end, talking very plainly that he won’t be chancellor for ever (for long?).
I reckon it will be that guy/gal.
PM tells @andybell5news: “I don't agree with that” when asked about Munira Mirza’s claim the savile comment was “inappropriate.”
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1489299578956439554
Andrew Bailey said the Bank raised rates to 0.5% from 0.25% to prevent rising prices becoming “ingrained”.
Asked if the Bank was also implicitly asking workers not to demand big pay rises, he said: “Broadly, yes”, the BBC reports.
Mr Bailey said that while it would be “painful” for workers to accept that prices would rise faster than their wages, he added that some “moderation of wage rises” was needed to prevent inflation becoming entrenched.
“In the sense of saying, we do need to see a moderation of wage rises, now that’s painful. I don’t want to in any sense sugar that, it is painful. But we need to see that in order to get through this problem more quickly.”
https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2022/feb/03/cost-of-living-crunch-energy-bills-price-cap-uk-interest-rates-bank-of-england-business-live
The median UK salary is about £31,000. The salary of the Governor of the Bank of England is £495,000.
Because it seems that it is indeed working like gangbusters . . . AGAINST Boris and his UK Putinist (aka Tory) Party.
Almost every single councillor I have met, whether at district or county level, has been of that "public servant" genre: Green, Labour, LibDem, Conservative. I disagreed with the former county council leader and his deputy on many things but they were always thoughtful, courteous and pragmatic. There are one or two exceptions that come to mind - generally youngish Tories with an eye to the career ladder, the odd LibDem - but very few.
In particular, the Prof Groeteschele (played by Walter Matthau) is introduced at a Washington cocktail party ( (pictured above). A brilliant strategist - is he simply clear sighted, dispassionate and cynical, mad or evil? Or all three?
The genius of Matthau's performance is that he leaves it entirely to the audience to decide - and the view of the character changes as the plot progress. Much as in the Bedford Incident the characters remain true to themselves, but our understanding of them evolves.
And, of course, had they gone for it, I think it’s safe to say that the dam would have burst and many more people would have come forward. But then hindsight is 20:20.
The problem is that the mainstream media have been hollowed out by social media must increasingly turn to “social media” for “news”.
Not sure how to fix it. It’s lethal for democracy though.
Now very slightly pissed.
Can someone summarise?
https://twitter.com/JasonGroves1/status/1489300293661728773
Sonntagsfrage zur Bundestagswahl • Infratest dimap / ARD: CDU/CSU 27 % | SPD 22 % | GRÜNE 16 % | AfD 12 % | FDP 10 % | DIE LINKE 5 % | Sonstige 8 %
I did not expect the CDU/CSU to begin recovering so quickly.
The two men were discussing their sudden rise to fame, Rogan was saying that he learned very quickly to completely ignore online comments, whereas Peterson said he likes to read everything people have to say about him, even the negative things. I think I’d be on Rogan’s side, if I suddenly became that famous.
I've already said my preference would be Hunt. Sunak's a dud. And he's still better than the scumbag.
Some movement from SPD to Union too as Merz takes a harder line than Scholz on Putin. Also leakage from SPD to Green
https://twitter.com/mikeysmith/status/1489301187988008960
The SPADS have more balls than the cabinet
Good spot for him to keep on giving aid & comfort to Vald. PLUS no doubt Carrie could furnish the "embassy" in her favorite Turkish whorehouse motif . . . and at a fraction of West End prices!
I cannot wait however, if Rishi replaces Boris, for a repeat documentary in 10 years time as I don’t think there will be much love lost - will be suitably brutal I imagine…..
Conservative MPs increasingly asking exactly who is left in Downing St...
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1489301844333576192
https://twitter.com/jasongroves1/status/1489300293661728773
He says he’s left of his own choice and according to his own timing, but there was pressure on him to go over the partygate accusations, though the PM is said to have previously refused his resignation.
https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1489302046973083648
https://twitter.com/jasongroves1/status/1489300293661728773
Since then he's been on extended tour of the sewers inside his head.