Just watched ITV News. Peston pointed out that as people have been fined for attending that party, it was by definition illegal. So whomever it was on here earlier dancing on a pinhead about things being legal just received a little prick.
A work meeting that turned into a party after the pm left, may be one way you are wrong. At least that will be the weasel words the met use.
...so it was it his stunt double that was at the party in the picture?
There's no party in the picture.
Unless you think what Starmer was at was a party. 🤷♂️
I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.
You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you. Ruth Davidson on Channel 4 News does not.
The challenge for the Met is that other people have been fined for being at this party. So it was a party and was illegal. And the "I was at home" defence doesn't work either - especially as we know that Bonzo was the organiser - as hosting a party at home was also illegal.
We know why the Met fined the attendees but not the organiser...
Link that he organised it and also that he was not working
Quite right Big G, we must take the PM at his word, he is after all an honourable gentleman, and there are too few of those in public life in these barbaric times.
Keir on the other hand has questions to answer and should probably be horsewhipped regardless.
I was reporting what they said on the news. Something that my friend Big_G uses as defence all the time. Hacks have been told by people who know that the PM organised the leaving piss-up for Cain. Its a leaving do. Its not work. Has anyone claimed it was work...?
You simply do not have evidence Boris organised it, and the BBC did suggest he popped in during work for 10 minutes to toast a leaving colleague
Analysis box by Helen Catt, political correspondent
There have always been two big questions at the heart of 'Partygate': Did the prime minister himself break the law and has he been completely candid about what he knew about law-breaking in Downing Street?
Responding to these latest pictures, No 10 is pretty bullish.
It says that the police would have seen these photos and didn't fine him.
On the second point though, things may get a little trickier for Boris Johnson.
These pictures show him at an event for which somebody else was fined so can his insistence that he thought all the rules had been followed hold?
And there are two big audiences which really matter: MPs and the public.
There will be huge scrutiny of exactly what the prime minister said to Parliament about this and whether or not it was misleading.
The outcome of that could have a very swift impact on his prime ministerial future.
Beyond that though, pictures like these pose a potentially longer-term issue.
While there will be plenty of people who won't be bothered by them, the risk is that others will be and more may lose trust in Boris Johnson.
Just watched ITV News. Peston pointed out that as people have been fined for attending that party, it was by definition illegal. So whomever it was on here earlier dancing on a pinhead about things being legal just received a little prick.
A work meeting that turned into a party after the pm left, may be one way you are wrong. At least that will be the weasel words the met use.
...so it was it his stunt double that was at the party in the picture?
There's no party in the picture.
Unless you think what Starmer was at was a party. 🤷♂️
I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.
You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you. Ruth Davidson on Channel 4 News does not.
The challenge for the Met is that other people have been fined for being at this party. So it was a party and was illegal. And the "I was at home" defence doesn't work either - especially as we know that Bonzo was the organiser - as hosting a party at home was also illegal.
We know why the Met fined the attendees but not the organiser...
Link that he organised it and also that he was not working
Quite right Big G, we must take the PM at his word, he is after all an honourable gentleman, and there are too few of those in public life in these barbaric times.
Keir on the other hand has questions to answer and should probably be horsewhipped regardless.
It is others who are accusing him of organising the gathering when there is no evidence he did
We do not use 'lynch mobs' in this country and I have no axe to grind for Boris as I really do not care whether he stays or goes
You were a one man lynch mob about Keir, though. Day after day you assured us he had questions to answer.
He still has - nothing has changed other than if he can prove he was working he should avoid a FPN
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.
Almost every residential area in the world is generally low rise. For very good reason, people prefer low rise by and large.
For the small minority who want high rise, good luck to them, they should be able to get it. For everyone else, they should be able to get what they want too.
Most New Yorkers live in Long Island not Manhattan for a reason.
Is it because Long Island is 1,401 square miles in size while Manhattan is 22 square miles?
(It is also worth remembering that 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day.)
Precisely my point. Long Island has the space so people have spread out to live there, as they'd rather use the space than go up into the sky as GW proposes.
Approximately as many people commute into Manhattan every day as the entire population of Manhattan (including children and pensioners) who live there. So it seems reasonable to believe that even most workers in Manhattan have chosen not to live there.
Surely "have chosen" need to be caveated by "cannot afford to"?
The price per square foot in Manhattan is off the charts - perhaps $2,500/square foot (and that's just for apartments; for brownstones it's probably going to be even higher), while in Queen's, prices are going to be dramatically less. And if you head out to Riverhead, I reckon you can get a place for no more than $300/square foot.
"Good" London is £2k per square foot now. And most of "Fairly Good" London has broken the £1k mark.
I'm deep in this atm as a prospective buyer. The market is very hot.
I would be very nervous about jumping into London residential right now, given the rapidly slowing economy. (And I speak as an owner!)
Yes, I'm thinking of pressing pause and revisiting at a later point. There's some silliness afoot. A 20% drop is imo likelier than a 10% rise from here.
You'll miss Hampstead.
Yes, I know.
When I should die, think only this of me, That there's some corner of a foreign field. That is forever the Hampstead crepe van.
I lived in Hampstead for ten years. In that time, I visited the crepe van exactly zero times.
The queues always put me off.
Also, a crepe is a crepe…. is a crepe
Nice but not life-changing
This is true of all Hampstead. It lacks really impressive restaurants, which is odd, given the wealth of the area (this is also true of Camden & Primrose Hill, tho Camden has the market which now has fantastic street food)
In similarly wealthy parts of west or central London, or the trendy bits of the East like Shoreditch and Spitalifields, the restaurants are excellent. Maybe this is all the fault of people like @Kinabalu - affluent lefties who are self-confessed philistines about food
I refer the honorable Gentleman to the answer I gave two moments ago - Jin Kichi.
Currently closed until August for refurbishment according to the website.
Guess it will have to be Côte, after all.
What's embarrassing about Hampstead is that Côte is always heaving. Because there's nowhere else.
Côte is simply average. The food is acceptable. The prices merely high rather than utterly egregious.
That it is permanently full is a stain on NW3.
Why wouldn't the business model of somewhere like the Fat Duck apply in Hampstead? I guess no places to stay, but Hampstead is far more interesting otherwise.
There clearly is at least one good reason, but I don't see it. (Simple cost of space?)
I think the problem is that the profits a Côte will achieve will be enormous - high turnover, high margins, low staff costs. It means they can beat out Joe (or Heston) when bidding for the few available spaces.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.
Almost every residential area in the world is generally low rise. For very good reason, people prefer low rise by and large.
For the small minority who want high rise, good luck to them, they should be able to get it. For everyone else, they should be able to get what they want too.
Most New Yorkers live in Long Island not Manhattan for a reason.
Is it because Long Island is 1,401 square miles in size while Manhattan is 22 square miles?
(It is also worth remembering that 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day.)
Precisely my point. Long Island has the space so people have spread out to live there, as they'd rather use the space than go up into the sky as GW proposes.
Approximately as many people commute into Manhattan every day as the entire population of Manhattan (including children and pensioners) who live there. So it seems reasonable to believe that even most workers in Manhattan have chosen not to live there.
Surely "have chosen" need to be caveated by "cannot afford to"?
The price per square foot in Manhattan is off the charts - perhaps $2,500/square foot (and that's just for apartments; for brownstones it's probably going to be even higher), while in Queen's, prices are going to be dramatically less. And if you head out to Riverhead, I reckon you can get a place for no more than $300/square foot.
"Good" London is £2k per square foot now. And most of "Fairly Good" London has broken the £1k mark.
I'm deep in this atm as a prospective buyer. The market is very hot.
I would be very nervous about jumping into London residential right now, given the rapidly slowing economy. (And I speak as an owner!)
Yes, I'm thinking of pressing pause and revisiting at a later point. There's some silliness afoot. A 20% drop is imo likelier than a 10% rise from here.
You'll miss Hampstead.
Yes, I know.
When I should die, think only this of me, That there's some corner of a foreign field. That is forever the Hampstead crepe van.
I lived in Hampstead for ten years. In that time, I visited the crepe van exactly zero times.
The queues always put me off.
Also, a crepe is a crepe…. is a crepe
Nice but not life-changing
This is true of all Hampstead. It lacks really impressive restaurants, which is odd, given the wealth of the area (this is also true of Camden & Primrose Hill, tho Camden has the market which now has fantastic street food)
In similarly wealthy parts of west or central London, or the trendy bits of the East like Shoreditch and Spitalifields, the restaurants are excellent. Maybe this is all the fault of people like @Kinabalu - affluent lefties who are self-confessed philistines about food
I refer the honorable Gentleman to the answer I gave two moments ago - Jin Kichi.
Currently closed until August for refurbishment according to the website.
Guess it will have to be Côte, after all.
What's embarrassing about Hampstead is that Côte is always heaving. Because there's nowhere else.
Côte is simply average. The food is acceptable. The prices merely high rather than utterly egregious.
That it is permanently full is a stain on NW3.
I have zero tolerance for Côte. The food is blah. The whole thing is ersatz.
The cheese is Reblochon FFS!
Cote is somewhere I would go and eat, at a pinch, in a provincial British city. Reading or Sunderland or Portsmouth or Edinburgh
Hampstead?? Why aren’t there 12 great restaurants and gastropubs? Houses cost £5m FFS, and people really live there, it’s not some buy to let zombieland. Quite peculiar
Edinburgh is good for food. I presume that was put in there deliberately to rile the Scot Nat contingent.
Sunderland is the worst city I’ve ever visited, food-wise. Literally the worst.
I went to college in Oldham. A town which has a succession of state-named chicken shacks.
Pippa Crerar @PippaCrerar · 32m Tory MP Roger Gale tells Times Radio PM should quit over "damning" new pics.
"It's absolutely clear there was a party, that he attended it, that he was raising a toast to glass one of his colleagues. Therefore, he misled us from the despatch box. Honorably there is one answer".
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.
Almost every residential area in the world is generally low rise. For very good reason, people prefer low rise by and large.
For the small minority who want high rise, good luck to them, they should be able to get it. For everyone else, they should be able to get what they want too.
Most New Yorkers live in Long Island not Manhattan for a reason.
Is it because Long Island is 1,401 square miles in size while Manhattan is 22 square miles?
(It is also worth remembering that 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day.)
Precisely my point. Long Island has the space so people have spread out to live there, as they'd rather use the space than go up into the sky as GW proposes.
Approximately as many people commute into Manhattan every day as the entire population of Manhattan (including children and pensioners) who live there. So it seems reasonable to believe that even most workers in Manhattan have chosen not to live there.
Surely "have chosen" need to be caveated by "cannot afford to"?
The price per square foot in Manhattan is off the charts - perhaps $2,500/square foot (and that's just for apartments; for brownstones it's probably going to be even higher), while in Queen's, prices are going to be dramatically less. And if you head out to Riverhead, I reckon you can get a place for no more than $300/square foot.
"Good" London is £2k per square foot now. And most of "Fairly Good" London has broken the £1k mark.
I'm deep in this atm as a prospective buyer. The market is very hot.
I would be very nervous about jumping into London residential right now, given the rapidly slowing economy. (And I speak as an owner!)
Yes, I'm thinking of pressing pause and revisiting at a later point. There's some silliness afoot. A 20% drop is imo likelier than a 10% rise from here.
You'll miss Hampstead.
Yes, I know.
When I should die, think only this of me, That there's some corner of a foreign field. That is forever the Hampstead crepe van.
I lived in Hampstead for ten years. In that time, I visited the crepe van exactly zero times.
The queues always put me off.
Also, a crepe is a crepe…. is a crepe
Nice but not life-changing
This is true of all Hampstead. It lacks really impressive restaurants, which is odd, given the wealth of the area (this is also true of Camden & Primrose Hill, tho Camden has the market which now has fantastic street food)
In similarly wealthy parts of west or central London, or the trendy bits of the East like Shoreditch and Spitalifields, the restaurants are excellent. Maybe this is all the fault of people like @Kinabalu - affluent lefties who are self-confessed philistines about food
I refer the honorable Gentleman to the answer I gave two moments ago - Jin Kichi.
Yes, I’ve been there! Good fun, but a bit tiny and crowded
It’s still an unimpressive display for a burb as phenomenally wealthy and “sophisticated” as NW3
Oh, I agree.
It is embarrassing.
And there's no real excuse for it. But it's not that uncommon. St John's Wood - number of good restaurants... zero. Richmond/Kew... one. Primrose Hill... zero.
My apartment on Shaftesbury Avenue has a dozen excellent restaurants within a five minute walk.
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.
Almost every residential area in the world is generally low rise. For very good reason, people prefer low rise by and large.
For the small minority who want high rise, good luck to them, they should be able to get it. For everyone else, they should be able to get what they want too.
Most New Yorkers live in Long Island not Manhattan for a reason.
Is it because Long Island is 1,401 square miles in size while Manhattan is 22 square miles?
(It is also worth remembering that 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day.)
Precisely my point. Long Island has the space so people have spread out to live there, as they'd rather use the space than go up into the sky as GW proposes.
Approximately as many people commute into Manhattan every day as the entire population of Manhattan (including children and pensioners) who live there. So it seems reasonable to believe that even most workers in Manhattan have chosen not to live there.
Surely "have chosen" need to be caveated by "cannot afford to"?
The price per square foot in Manhattan is off the charts - perhaps $2,500/square foot (and that's just for apartments; for brownstones it's probably going to be even higher), while in Queen's, prices are going to be dramatically less. And if you head out to Riverhead, I reckon you can get a place for no more than $300/square foot.
"Good" London is £2k per square foot now. And most of "Fairly Good" London has broken the £1k mark.
I'm deep in this atm as a prospective buyer. The market is very hot.
I would be very nervous about jumping into London residential right now, given the rapidly slowing economy. (And I speak as an owner!)
Yes, I'm thinking of pressing pause and revisiting at a later point. There's some silliness afoot. A 20% drop is imo likelier than a 10% rise from here.
You'll miss Hampstead.
Yes, I know.
When I should die, think only this of me, That there's some corner of a foreign field. That is forever the Hampstead crepe van.
I lived in Hampstead for ten years. In that time, I visited the crepe van exactly zero times.
The queues always put me off.
Also, a crepe is a crepe…. is a crepe
Nice but not life-changing
This is true of all Hampstead. It lacks really impressive restaurants, which is odd, given the wealth of the area (this is also true of Camden & Primrose Hill, tho Camden has the market which now has fantastic street food)
In similarly wealthy parts of west or central London, or the trendy bits of the East like Shoreditch and Spitalifields, the restaurants are excellent. Maybe this is all the fault of people like @Kinabalu - affluent lefties who are self-confessed philistines about food
I refer the honorable Gentleman to the answer I gave two moments ago - Jin Kichi.
Currently closed until August for refurbishment according to the website.
Guess it will have to be Côte, after all.
What's embarrassing about Hampstead is that Côte is always heaving. Because there's nowhere else.
Côte is simply average. The food is acceptable. The prices merely high rather than utterly egregious.
That it is permanently full is a stain on NW3.
I have zero tolerance for Côte. The food is blah. The whole thing is ersatz.
The cheese is Reblochon FFS!
Cote is somewhere I would go and eat, at a pinch, in a provincial British city. Reading or Sunderland or Portsmouth or Edinburgh
Hampstead?? Why aren’t there 12 great restaurants and gastropubs? Houses cost £5m FFS, and people really live there, it’s not some buy to let zombieland. Quite peculiar
Edinburgh is good for food. I presume that was put in there deliberately to rile the Scot Nat contingent.
Sunderland is the worst city I’ve ever visited, food-wise. Literally the worst.
You’re half right. i did put it in to provoke Nats, tho it is also true, to an extent. I’ve never eaten well in Edinburgh - to me it has been like Hampstead. Wealthy, beautiful, full of tourists, not great food. Not terrible just not great
Sunderland is interesting. Could you not find decent ethnic food? They are usually the saviour of British cities. Wherever you are, you can generally get decent Indian, and probably Chinese and Thai as well. This is no small thing. It means you can eat well almost anywhere in the UK, it just won’t be “British” food
There's a really excellent Indian in South End Green (which is sort of Hampstead).
Analysis box by Helen Catt, political correspondent
There have always been two big questions at the heart of 'Partygate': Did the prime minister himself break the law and has he been completely candid about what he knew about law-breaking in Downing Street?
Responding to these latest pictures, No 10 is pretty bullish.
It says that the police would have seen these photos and didn't fine him.
On the second point though, things may get a little trickier for Boris Johnson.
These pictures show him at an event for which somebody else was fined so can his insistence that he thought all the rules had been followed hold?
And there are two big audiences which really matter: MPs and the public.
There will be huge scrutiny of exactly what the prime minister said to Parliament about this and whether or not it was misleading.
The outcome of that could have a very swift impact on his prime ministerial future.
Beyond that though, pictures like these pose a potentially longer-term issue.
While there will be plenty of people who won't be bothered by them, the risk is that others will be and more may lose trust in Boris Johnson.
I think everyone who ever was foolish enough to ever have trust in Boris Johnson, and could lose it has done so. There are dozens on here. Then there are those who never will.
Pippa Crerar @PippaCrerar · 32m Tory MP Roger Gale tells Times Radio PM should quit over "damning" new pics.
"It's absolutely clear there was a party, that he attended it, that he was raising a toast to glass one of his colleagues. Therefore, he misled us from the despatch box. Honorably there is one answer".
Are the number of fatal dog attacks increasing? Seems like a regular BBC News story.
I was out running a few days ago and got jumped at by someone's dog: "he's just friendly". Well I don't fucking know that, and now I'm covered in mud you knob.
Not a dog person so don't appreciate the attention at all.
Dogs are khunts
What "pet" dogs are for, other than the production of dogshit, is a total mystery to me. And yes fatalities do seem to be on the up.
I wouldn't be quite that negative, but unfortunately it seems that quite a lot of the worst owners (with, naturally, the worst dogs) like to allow them to wander loose and make a nuisance of themselves or worse. And, inevitably, if the animal decides to bother you then it is always your fault, not theirs.
Nowadays, when I'm running out of town on the local tracks and footpaths I always go with a group. A member of my club went out on her own and had the misfortune to encounter a negligent dog walker with a disturbed animal, and suffered quite nasty bites for her trouble. If I had anything at all to do with it then I'd push for legislation to force owners of pet dogs to keep them on leads in public at all times, so if the things do decide to be aggressive you can be reasonably confident of getting away from them.
Why so tolerant, if that happened to someone you know?
You are right about "disturbed" animals though. There is a massive scam going on where there's a thriving and highly profitable second hand dog market, only buying a used dog is rebadged as "re-homing" a "rescue" dog for a "re-homing fee". The reality is, the dog has been dumped because it is dangerous/shitty/uncontrollable and badly in need of a bullet, but the suckers buying the things think they are acquiring Really Lovely People status as part of the deal.
I'm simply not prepared to advocate the mass extermination of pet dogs because some of them are bloody horrible, that's all.
Nor would I go so far as to assume that animals that end up in shelters are all awful. Many dogs become separated from the owners because the owner can no longer afford to keep them, isn't capable or perhaps isn't allowed to keep them (common with older people forced to go into care homes,) or has died. Where I would agree with you is that all these soppy charities that promise never to put a healthy dog down are very irresponsible. Some dogs are dumped because they're dangerous and unmanageable, and need to be destroyed before they have the chance to cause serious harm.
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.
Almost every residential area in the world is generally low rise. For very good reason, people prefer low rise by and large.
For the small minority who want high rise, good luck to them, they should be able to get it. For everyone else, they should be able to get what they want too.
Most New Yorkers live in Long Island not Manhattan for a reason.
Is it because Long Island is 1,401 square miles in size while Manhattan is 22 square miles?
(It is also worth remembering that 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day.)
Precisely my point. Long Island has the space so people have spread out to live there, as they'd rather use the space than go up into the sky as GW proposes.
Approximately as many people commute into Manhattan every day as the entire population of Manhattan (including children and pensioners) who live there. So it seems reasonable to believe that even most workers in Manhattan have chosen not to live there.
Surely "have chosen" need to be caveated by "cannot afford to"?
The price per square foot in Manhattan is off the charts - perhaps $2,500/square foot (and that's just for apartments; for brownstones it's probably going to be even higher), while in Queen's, prices are going to be dramatically less. And if you head out to Riverhead, I reckon you can get a place for no more than $300/square foot.
"Good" London is £2k per square foot now. And most of "Fairly Good" London has broken the £1k mark.
I'm deep in this atm as a prospective buyer. The market is very hot.
I would be very nervous about jumping into London residential right now, given the rapidly slowing economy. (And I speak as an owner!)
Yes, I'm thinking of pressing pause and revisiting at a later point. There's some silliness afoot. A 20% drop is imo likelier than a 10% rise from here.
You'll miss Hampstead.
Yes, I know.
When I should die, think only this of me, That there's some corner of a foreign field. That is forever the Hampstead crepe van.
I lived in Hampstead for ten years. In that time, I visited the crepe van exactly zero times.
The queues always put me off.
Also, a crepe is a crepe…. is a crepe
Nice but not life-changing
This is true of all Hampstead. It lacks really impressive restaurants, which is odd, given the wealth of the area (this is also true of Camden & Primrose Hill, tho Camden has the market which now has fantastic street food)
In similarly wealthy parts of west or central London, or the trendy bits of the East like Shoreditch and Spitalifields, the restaurants are excellent. Maybe this is all the fault of people like @Kinabalu - affluent lefties who are self-confessed philistines about food
I refer the honorable Gentleman to the answer I gave two moments ago - Jin Kichi.
Currently closed until August for refurbishment according to the website.
Guess it will have to be Côte, after all.
What's embarrassing about Hampstead is that Côte is always heaving. Because there's nowhere else.
Côte is simply average. The food is acceptable. The prices merely high rather than utterly egregious.
That it is permanently full is a stain on NW3.
I have zero tolerance for Côte. The food is blah. The whole thing is ersatz.
The cheese is Reblochon FFS!
Cote is somewhere I would go and eat, at a pinch, in a provincial British city. Reading or Sunderland or Portsmouth or Edinburgh
Hampstead?? Why aren’t there 12 great restaurants and gastropubs? Houses cost £5m FFS, and people really live there, it’s not some buy to let zombieland. Quite peculiar
Edinburgh is good for food. I presume that was put in there deliberately to rile the Scot Nat contingent.
Sunderland is the worst city I’ve ever visited, food-wise. Literally the worst.
I went to college in Oldham. A town which has a succession of state-named chicken shacks.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Not really but then who knows with conservative mps
Just watched ITV News. Peston pointed out that as people have been fined for attending that party, it was by definition illegal. So whomever it was on here earlier dancing on a pinhead about things being legal just received a little prick.
A work meeting that turned into a party after the pm left, may be one way you are wrong. At least that will be the weasel words the met use.
...so it was it his stunt double that was at the party in the picture?
There's no party in the picture.
Unless you think what Starmer was at was a party. 🤷♂️
I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.
You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you. Ruth Davidson on Channel 4 News does not.
The challenge for the Met is that other people have been fined for being at this party. So it was a party and was illegal. And the "I was at home" defence doesn't work either - especially as we know that Bonzo was the organiser - as hosting a party at home was also illegal.
We know why the Met fined the attendees but not the organiser...
Link that he organised it and also that he was not working
Quite right Big G, we must take the PM at his word, he is after all an honourable gentleman, and there are too few of those in public life in these barbaric times.
Keir on the other hand has questions to answer and should probably be horsewhipped regardless.
I was reporting what they said on the news. Something that my friend Big_G uses as defence all the time. Hacks have been told by people who know that the PM organised the leaving piss-up for Cain. Its a leaving do. Its not work. Has anyone claimed it was work...?
You simply do not have evidence Boris organised it, and the BBC did suggest he popped in during work for 10 minutes to toast a leaving colleague
I do not. The reporters who reported it do.
When you post what has been reported you stand by it. I am applying your methodology to what has been reported here.
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.
Almost every residential area in the world is generally low rise. For very good reason, people prefer low rise by and large.
For the small minority who want high rise, good luck to them, they should be able to get it. For everyone else, they should be able to get what they want too.
Most New Yorkers live in Long Island not Manhattan for a reason.
Is it because Long Island is 1,401 square miles in size while Manhattan is 22 square miles?
(It is also worth remembering that 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day.)
Precisely my point. Long Island has the space so people have spread out to live there, as they'd rather use the space than go up into the sky as GW proposes.
Approximately as many people commute into Manhattan every day as the entire population of Manhattan (including children and pensioners) who live there. So it seems reasonable to believe that even most workers in Manhattan have chosen not to live there.
Surely "have chosen" need to be caveated by "cannot afford to"?
The price per square foot in Manhattan is off the charts - perhaps $2,500/square foot (and that's just for apartments; for brownstones it's probably going to be even higher), while in Queen's, prices are going to be dramatically less. And if you head out to Riverhead, I reckon you can get a place for no more than $300/square foot.
"Good" London is £2k per square foot now. And most of "Fairly Good" London has broken the £1k mark.
I'm deep in this atm as a prospective buyer. The market is very hot.
I would be very nervous about jumping into London residential right now, given the rapidly slowing economy. (And I speak as an owner!)
Yes, I'm thinking of pressing pause and revisiting at a later point. There's some silliness afoot. A 20% drop is imo likelier than a 10% rise from here.
You'll miss Hampstead.
Yes, I know.
When I should die, think only this of me, That there's some corner of a foreign field. That is forever the Hampstead crepe van.
I lived in Hampstead for ten years. In that time, I visited the crepe van exactly zero times.
The queues always put me off.
Also, a crepe is a crepe…. is a crepe
Nice but not life-changing
This is true of all Hampstead. It lacks really impressive restaurants, which is odd, given the wealth of the area (this is also true of Camden & Primrose Hill, tho Camden has the market which now has fantastic street food)
In similarly wealthy parts of west or central London, or the trendy bits of the East like Shoreditch and Spitalifields, the restaurants are excellent. Maybe this is all the fault of people like @Kinabalu - affluent lefties who are self-confessed philistines about food
I refer the honorable Gentleman to the answer I gave two moments ago - Jin Kichi.
Currently closed until August for refurbishment according to the website.
Guess it will have to be Côte, after all.
What's embarrassing about Hampstead is that Côte is always heaving. Because there's nowhere else.
Côte is simply average. The food is acceptable. The prices merely high rather than utterly egregious.
That it is permanently full is a stain on NW3.
I have zero tolerance for Côte. The food is blah. The whole thing is ersatz.
The cheese is Reblochon FFS!
Cote is somewhere I would go and eat, at a pinch, in a provincial British city. Reading or Sunderland or Portsmouth or Edinburgh
Hampstead?? Why aren’t there 12 great restaurants and gastropubs? Houses cost £5m FFS, and people really live there, it’s not some buy to let zombieland. Quite peculiar
Edinburgh is good for food. I presume that was put in there deliberately to rile the Scot Nat contingent.
Sunderland is the worst city I’ve ever visited, food-wise. Literally the worst.
You’re half right. i did put it in to provoke Nats, tho it is also true, to an extent. I’ve never eaten well in Edinburgh - to me it has been like Hampstead. Wealthy, beautiful, full of tourists, not great food. Not terrible just not great
Sunderland is interesting. Could you not find decent ethnic food? They are usually the saviour of British cities. Wherever you are, you can generally get decent Indian, and probably Chinese and Thai as well. This is no small thing. It means you can eat well almost anywhere in the UK, it just won’t be “British” food
There's a really excellent Indian in South End Green (which is sort of Hampstead).
The Stag is pretty good for artery-clogging fare, or was.
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.
Almost every residential area in the world is generally low rise. For very good reason, people prefer low rise by and large.
For the small minority who want high rise, good luck to them, they should be able to get it. For everyone else, they should be able to get what they want too.
Most New Yorkers live in Long Island not Manhattan for a reason.
Is it because Long Island is 1,401 square miles in size while Manhattan is 22 square miles?
(It is also worth remembering that 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day.)
Precisely my point. Long Island has the space so people have spread out to live there, as they'd rather use the space than go up into the sky as GW proposes.
Approximately as many people commute into Manhattan every day as the entire population of Manhattan (including children and pensioners) who live there. So it seems reasonable to believe that even most workers in Manhattan have chosen not to live there.
Surely "have chosen" need to be caveated by "cannot afford to"?
The price per square foot in Manhattan is off the charts - perhaps $2,500/square foot (and that's just for apartments; for brownstones it's probably going to be even higher), while in Queen's, prices are going to be dramatically less. And if you head out to Riverhead, I reckon you can get a place for no more than $300/square foot.
"Good" London is £2k per square foot now. And most of "Fairly Good" London has broken the £1k mark.
I'm deep in this atm as a prospective buyer. The market is very hot.
I would be very nervous about jumping into London residential right now, given the rapidly slowing economy. (And I speak as an owner!)
Yes, I'm thinking of pressing pause and revisiting at a later point. There's some silliness afoot. A 20% drop is imo likelier than a 10% rise from here.
You'll miss Hampstead.
Yes, I know.
When I should die, think only this of me, That there's some corner of a foreign field. That is forever the Hampstead crepe van.
I lived in Hampstead for ten years. In that time, I visited the crepe van exactly zero times.
The queues always put me off.
Also, a crepe is a crepe…. is a crepe
Nice but not life-changing
This is true of all Hampstead. It lacks really impressive restaurants, which is odd, given the wealth of the area (this is also true of Camden & Primrose Hill, tho Camden has the market which now has fantastic street food)
In similarly wealthy parts of west or central London, or the trendy bits of the East like Shoreditch and Spitalifields, the restaurants are excellent. Maybe this is all the fault of people like @Kinabalu - affluent lefties who are self-confessed philistines about food
I refer the honorable Gentleman to the answer I gave two moments ago - Jin Kichi.
Currently closed until August for refurbishment according to the website.
Guess it will have to be Côte, after all.
What's embarrassing about Hampstead is that Côte is always heaving. Because there's nowhere else.
Côte is simply average. The food is acceptable. The prices merely high rather than utterly egregious.
That it is permanently full is a stain on NW3.
I have zero tolerance for Côte. The food is blah. The whole thing is ersatz.
The cheese is Reblochon FFS!
Cote is somewhere I would go and eat, at a pinch, in a provincial British city. Reading or Sunderland or Portsmouth or Edinburgh
Hampstead?? Why aren’t there 12 great restaurants and gastropubs? Houses cost £5m FFS, and people really live there, it’s not some buy to let zombieland. Quite peculiar
Edinburgh is good for food. I presume that was put in there deliberately to rile the Scot Nat contingent.
Sunderland is the worst city I’ve ever visited, food-wise. Literally the worst.
I went to college in Oldham. A town which has a succession of state-named chicken shacks.
Pippa Crerar @PippaCrerar · 32m Tory MP Roger Gale tells Times Radio PM should quit over "damning" new pics.
"It's absolutely clear there was a party, that he attended it, that he was raising a toast to glass one of his colleagues. Therefore, he misled us from the despatch box. Honorably there is one answer".
Just watched ITV News. Peston pointed out that as people have been fined for attending that party, it was by definition illegal. So whomever it was on here earlier dancing on a pinhead about things being legal just received a little prick.
A work meeting that turned into a party after the pm left, may be one way you are wrong. At least that will be the weasel words the met use.
...so it was it his stunt double that was at the party in the picture?
There's no party in the picture.
Unless you think what Starmer was at was a party. 🤷♂️
I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.
You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you. Ruth Davidson on Channel 4 News does not.
The challenge for the Met is that other people have been fined for being at this party. So it was a party and was illegal. And the "I was at home" defence doesn't work either - especially as we know that Bonzo was the organiser - as hosting a party at home was also illegal.
We know why the Met fined the attendees but not the organiser...
Link that he organised it and also that he was not working
Quite right Big G, we must take the PM at his word, he is after all an honourable gentleman, and there are too few of those in public life in these barbaric times.
Keir on the other hand has questions to answer and should probably be horsewhipped regardless.
I was reporting what they said on the news. Something that my friend Big_G uses as defence all the time. Hacks have been told by people who know that the PM organised the leaving piss-up for Cain. Its a leaving do. Its not work. Has anyone claimed it was work...?
You simply do not have evidence Boris organised it, and the BBC did suggest he popped in during work for 10 minutes to toast a leaving colleague
I do not. The reporters who reported it do.
When you post what has been reported you stand by it. I am applying your methodology to what has been reported here.
Big G’s methodology is to breathlessly relay news favourable to Boris while repeating that he of course wants him to go.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
I think I am less offended by Johnson's behaviour than the Met. Police intervening and then taking virtually no action against Johnson and no action against Case. Either by cock-up or conspiracy their action saved Johnson.
Those who cooperated with Gray were banged to rights, those who didn't got off scott free. On what did the Met. spend their £460,000?
You are still posting this defamatory crap about the police, but I am not aware you answered my question. Do you have evidence the police saw todays photos? Downing Street merely say the police had access to them, whilst the police silent.
Secondly, I am not calling you out as a liar when you posted this “ I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.” but I am asking you to share with us your evidence they had booze together after work, by how many people they were over what was clearly stated in the rules, and there was no social distancing at all as required.
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.
Almost every residential area in the world is generally low rise. For very good reason, people prefer low rise by and large.
For the small minority who want high rise, good luck to them, they should be able to get it. For everyone else, they should be able to get what they want too.
Most New Yorkers live in Long Island not Manhattan for a reason.
Is it because Long Island is 1,401 square miles in size while Manhattan is 22 square miles?
(It is also worth remembering that 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day.)
Precisely my point. Long Island has the space so people have spread out to live there, as they'd rather use the space than go up into the sky as GW proposes.
Approximately as many people commute into Manhattan every day as the entire population of Manhattan (including children and pensioners) who live there. So it seems reasonable to believe that even most workers in Manhattan have chosen not to live there.
Surely "have chosen" need to be caveated by "cannot afford to"?
The price per square foot in Manhattan is off the charts - perhaps $2,500/square foot (and that's just for apartments; for brownstones it's probably going to be even higher), while in Queen's, prices are going to be dramatically less. And if you head out to Riverhead, I reckon you can get a place for no more than $300/square foot.
"Good" London is £2k per square foot now. And most of "Fairly Good" London has broken the £1k mark.
I'm deep in this atm as a prospective buyer. The market is very hot.
I would be very nervous about jumping into London residential right now, given the rapidly slowing economy. (And I speak as an owner!)
Yes, I'm thinking of pressing pause and revisiting at a later point. There's some silliness afoot. A 20% drop is imo likelier than a 10% rise from here.
You'll miss Hampstead.
Yes, I know.
When I should die, think only this of me, That there's some corner of a foreign field. That is forever the Hampstead crepe van.
I lived in Hampstead for ten years. In that time, I visited the crepe van exactly zero times.
The queues always put me off.
Also, a crepe is a crepe…. is a crepe
Nice but not life-changing
This is true of all Hampstead. It lacks really impressive restaurants, which is odd, given the wealth of the area (this is also true of Camden & Primrose Hill, tho Camden has the market which now has fantastic street food)
In similarly wealthy parts of west or central London, or the trendy bits of the East like Shoreditch and Spitalifields, the restaurants are excellent. Maybe this is all the fault of people like @Kinabalu - affluent lefties who are self-confessed philistines about food
I refer the honorable Gentleman to the answer I gave two moments ago - Jin Kichi.
Currently closed until August for refurbishment according to the website.
Guess it will have to be Côte, after all.
What's embarrassing about Hampstead is that Côte is always heaving. Because there's nowhere else.
Côte is simply average. The food is acceptable. The prices merely high rather than utterly egregious.
That it is permanently full is a stain on NW3.
I have zero tolerance for Côte. The food is blah. The whole thing is ersatz.
The cheese is Reblochon FFS!
Cote is somewhere I would go and eat, at a pinch, in a provincial British city. Reading or Sunderland or Portsmouth or Edinburgh
Hampstead?? Why aren’t there 12 great restaurants and gastropubs? Houses cost £5m FFS, and people really live there, it’s not some buy to let zombieland. Quite peculiar
Edinburgh is good for food. I presume that was put in there deliberately to rile the Scot Nat contingent.
Sunderland is the worst city I’ve ever visited, food-wise. Literally the worst.
I went to college in Oldham. A town which has a succession of state-named chicken shacks.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
I think I am less offended by Johnson's behaviour than the Met. Police intervening and then taking virtually no action against Johnson and no action against Case. Either by cock-up or conspiracy their action saved Johnson.
Those who cooperated with Gray were banged to rights, those who didn't got off scott free. On what did the Met. spend their £460,000?
You are still posting this defamatory crap about the police, but I am not aware you answered my question. Do you have evidence the police saw todays photos? Downing Street merely say the police had access to them, whilst the police silent.
Secondly, I am not calling you out as a liar when you posted this “ I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.” but I am asking you to share with us your evidence they had booze together after work, by how many people they were over what was clearly stated in the rules, and there was no social distancing at all as required.
"Defamatory Crap" my arse. The establishment looks after itself, always has done.
Adam Wagner @AdamWagner1 Replying to @MatthewStadlen and @PippaCrerar It wouldn't matter that he was in his home in November 2020. That loophole was closed on 31 May 2020
Just watched ITV News. Peston pointed out that as people have been fined for attending that party, it was by definition illegal. So whomever it was on here earlier dancing on a pinhead about things being legal just received a little prick.
A work meeting that turned into a party after the pm left, may be one way you are wrong. At least that will be the weasel words the met use.
...so it was it his stunt double that was at the party in the picture?
There's no party in the picture.
Unless you think what Starmer was at was a party. 🤷♂️
I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.
You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you. Ruth Davidson on Channel 4 News does not.
The challenge for the Met is that other people have been fined for being at this party. So it was a party and was illegal. And the "I was at home" defence doesn't work either - especially as we know that Bonzo was the organiser - as hosting a party at home was also illegal.
We know why the Met fined the attendees but not the organiser...
Link that he organised it and also that he was not working
Quite right Big G, we must take the PM at his word, he is after all an honourable gentleman, and there are too few of those in public life in these barbaric times.
Keir on the other hand has questions to answer and should probably be horsewhipped regardless.
I was reporting what they said on the news. Something that my friend Big_G uses as defence all the time. Hacks have been told by people who know that the PM organised the leaving piss-up for Cain. Its a leaving do. Its not work. Has anyone claimed it was work...?
You simply do not have evidence Boris organised it, and the BBC did suggest he popped in during work for 10 minutes to toast a leaving colleague
I do not. The reporters who reported it do.
When you post what has been reported you stand by it. I am applying your methodology to what has been reported here.
Big G’s methodology is to breathlessly relay news favourable to Boris while repeating that he of course wants him to go.
Cakery.
Not at all
I do try to be honest and fair and most certainly not tribal
I genuinely do not care if Boris stays or goes but his mps should
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
He caught Covid, and isn't known as Shagger for no reason. What are the odds he gets Monkeypox?
Pippa Crerar @PippaCrerar · 32m Tory MP Roger Gale tells Times Radio PM should quit over "damning" new pics.
"It's absolutely clear there was a party, that he attended it, that he was raising a toast to glass one of his colleagues. Therefore, he misled us from the despatch box. Honorably there is one answer".
The next 10 days are critical for conservative mps as their actions or otherwise will most certainly have a bearing on GE24
They should bear in mind that the photo will be on every Lab leaflet in 2024.
Nah, everyone is sick of talking about covid. Far better for Labour leaflets to establish a policy direction. Everyone knows Johnson is a liar with a drink in his hand, no one will need reminding.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
You mean you're not really Peter Mannion MP? Christ, that's a disappointing revelation.
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.
Almost every residential area in the world is generally low rise. For very good reason, people prefer low rise by and large.
For the small minority who want high rise, good luck to them, they should be able to get it. For everyone else, they should be able to get what they want too.
Most New Yorkers live in Long Island not Manhattan for a reason.
Is it because Long Island is 1,401 square miles in size while Manhattan is 22 square miles?
(It is also worth remembering that 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day.)
Precisely my point. Long Island has the space so people have spread out to live there, as they'd rather use the space than go up into the sky as GW proposes.
Approximately as many people commute into Manhattan every day as the entire population of Manhattan (including children and pensioners) who live there. So it seems reasonable to believe that even most workers in Manhattan have chosen not to live there.
Surely "have chosen" need to be caveated by "cannot afford to"?
The price per square foot in Manhattan is off the charts - perhaps $2,500/square foot (and that's just for apartments; for brownstones it's probably going to be even higher), while in Queen's, prices are going to be dramatically less. And if you head out to Riverhead, I reckon you can get a place for no more than $300/square foot.
"Good" London is £2k per square foot now. And most of "Fairly Good" London has broken the £1k mark.
I'm deep in this atm as a prospective buyer. The market is very hot.
I would be very nervous about jumping into London residential right now, given the rapidly slowing economy. (And I speak as an owner!)
Yes, I'm thinking of pressing pause and revisiting at a later point. There's some silliness afoot. A 20% drop is imo likelier than a 10% rise from here.
You'll miss Hampstead.
Yes, I know.
When I should die, think only this of me, That there's some corner of a foreign field. That is forever the Hampstead crepe van.
I lived in Hampstead for ten years. In that time, I visited the crepe van exactly zero times.
The queues always put me off.
Also, a crepe is a crepe…. is a crepe
Nice but not life-changing
This is true of all Hampstead. It lacks really impressive restaurants, which is odd, given the wealth of the area (this is also true of Camden & Primrose Hill, tho Camden has the market which now has fantastic street food)
In similarly wealthy parts of west or central London, or the trendy bits of the East like Shoreditch and Spitalifields, the restaurants are excellent. Maybe this is all the fault of people like @Kinabalu - affluent lefties who are self-confessed philistines about food
I refer the honorable Gentleman to the answer I gave two moments ago - Jin Kichi.
Yes, I’ve been there! Good fun, but a bit tiny and crowded
It’s still an unimpressive display for a burb as phenomenally wealthy and “sophisticated” as NW3
Oh, I agree.
It is embarrassing.
And there's no real excuse for it. But it's not that uncommon. St John's Wood - number of good restaurants... zero. Richmond/Kew... one. Primrose Hill... zero.
My apartment on Shaftesbury Avenue has a dozen excellent restaurants within a five minute walk.
Primrose Hill has Odette's which is pretty good.
Yes, it's decent - just as Delicatessen in Hampstead is pretty decent.
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.
Almost every residential area in the world is generally low rise. For very good reason, people prefer low rise by and large.
For the small minority who want high rise, good luck to them, they should be able to get it. For everyone else, they should be able to get what they want too.
Most New Yorkers live in Long Island not Manhattan for a reason.
Is it because Long Island is 1,401 square miles in size while Manhattan is 22 square miles?
(It is also worth remembering that 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day.)
Precisely my point. Long Island has the space so people have spread out to live there, as they'd rather use the space than go up into the sky as GW proposes.
Approximately as many people commute into Manhattan every day as the entire population of Manhattan (including children and pensioners) who live there. So it seems reasonable to believe that even most workers in Manhattan have chosen not to live there.
Surely "have chosen" need to be caveated by "cannot afford to"?
The price per square foot in Manhattan is off the charts - perhaps $2,500/square foot (and that's just for apartments; for brownstones it's probably going to be even higher), while in Queen's, prices are going to be dramatically less. And if you head out to Riverhead, I reckon you can get a place for no more than $300/square foot.
"Good" London is £2k per square foot now. And most of "Fairly Good" London has broken the £1k mark.
I'm deep in this atm as a prospective buyer. The market is very hot.
I would be very nervous about jumping into London residential right now, given the rapidly slowing economy. (And I speak as an owner!)
Yes, I'm thinking of pressing pause and revisiting at a later point. There's some silliness afoot. A 20% drop is imo likelier than a 10% rise from here.
You'll miss Hampstead.
Yes, I know.
When I should die, think only this of me, That there's some corner of a foreign field. That is forever the Hampstead crepe van.
I lived in Hampstead for ten years. In that time, I visited the crepe van exactly zero times.
The queues always put me off.
Yes, it's one of those things where the idea of it beats the reality by a distance.
Like mulled wine.
You have clearly never tasted my mulled wine.
Have you patented a way of preventing the 4th mouthful being just too cooled down and with an odd taste now coming through?
Because that would be truly special. Unique in fact.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
Boris is doing a pretty good job at the moment. He's rather repelling the tide of socialist policy dressed up in blue that seems to be pervading the Tory party. He does need to go, but until someone else starts to make a case for sensible Tory leadership of a hopefully more sensible Tory party he's the best man for the job.
Edit: And this is definitely not the Steve Bakers.
The Secret Barrister @BarristerSecret · 2h Think of how many thousands of people desperately wanted to “just” raise a glass to loved ones they had lost; loved ones who had died alone.
But they didn’t. Because @BorisJohnson told them they couldn’t.
On Topic. I don’t believe tactical voting will reduce Tories to 100 seats if there was an election tomorrow nor do I believe there will be a pact between Lib Dem and green and Labour as formal as the Lib Dems had with the greens to withdraw candidates. But does tactical voting really need that chummy and organised to prove effective? Probably more importantly, if you are a Lib Dem voter, does Starmer and fear of his government frighten you, ditto if you are remainer, what are your options for bashing the Brexit Government.
What the people in the header have done is scientifically prove, anyone saying Boris is safe because labours lead is only five points are bullshitters - because tactical voting is a thing now and Lab Lib Grn combined on 57 whilst Tory Rfm on 35 is real 22 point deficit that if it plays in tactical terms can make five point Lab con deficits into something far worse than it sounds on election nights.
Pippa Crerar @PippaCrerar · 32m Tory MP Roger Gale tells Times Radio PM should quit over "damning" new pics.
"It's absolutely clear there was a party, that he attended it, that he was raising a toast to glass one of his colleagues. Therefore, he misled us from the despatch box. Honorably there is one answer".
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
He caught Covid, and isn't known as Shagger for no reason. What are the odds he gets Monkeypox?
Just watched ITV News. Peston pointed out that as people have been fined for attending that party, it was by definition illegal. So whomever it was on here earlier dancing on a pinhead about things being legal just received a little prick.
A work meeting that turned into a party after the pm left, may be one way you are wrong. At least that will be the weasel words the met use.
...so it was it his stunt double that was at the party in the picture?
There's no party in the picture.
Unless you think what Starmer was at was a party. 🤷♂️
I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.
You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you. Ruth Davidson on Channel 4 News does not.
“ You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you.”
I am challenging you on that Pete. I am asking you to supply evidence to support you claim the police saw these photos before leaked today. All we have so far is Downing Street insisting the police had “access” to the photo’s… and police silence. You currently have zero evidence to support that claim in your post.
The understanding on ITV News was that similar pictures of this event were enclosed in Gray's evidence to the Met.
Ruth Davidson and Steve "Hardman" Baker are not taken in but Barty and BigG. have taken the bait
The Met investigation was a whitewash from start to finish. I am very skeptical that of the only two events Johnson attended one resulted in a fine for Sunak as well as Johnson. Bad behaviour, as we have read on here tonight is baked into Johnson's polling but the FPN skewered Sunak.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
He caught Covid, and isn't known as Shagger for no reason. What are the odds he gets Monkeypox?
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
He caught Covid, and isn't known as Shagger for no reason. What are the odds he gets Monkeypox?
Any entrants for the Monkeypox sweepstake?
My punt is on Gove. Nailed on...
Really? I thought the suggestion was he did the nailing...
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
You mean you're not really Peter Mannion MP? Christ, that's a disappointing revelation.
I like to think that he walked over No Deal Brexit, a la Ken Clarke.
Pippa Crerar @PippaCrerar · 32m Tory MP Roger Gale tells Times Radio PM should quit over "damning" new pics.
"It's absolutely clear there was a party, that he attended it, that he was raising a toast to glass one of his colleagues. Therefore, he misled us from the despatch box. Honorably there is one answer".
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.
Almost every residential area in the world is generally low rise. For very good reason, people prefer low rise by and large.
For the small minority who want high rise, good luck to them, they should be able to get it. For everyone else, they should be able to get what they want too.
Most New Yorkers live in Long Island not Manhattan for a reason.
Is it because Long Island is 1,401 square miles in size while Manhattan is 22 square miles?
(It is also worth remembering that 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day.)
Precisely my point. Long Island has the space so people have spread out to live there, as they'd rather use the space than go up into the sky as GW proposes.
Approximately as many people commute into Manhattan every day as the entire population of Manhattan (including children and pensioners) who live there. So it seems reasonable to believe that even most workers in Manhattan have chosen not to live there.
Surely "have chosen" need to be caveated by "cannot afford to"?
The price per square foot in Manhattan is off the charts - perhaps $2,500/square foot (and that's just for apartments; for brownstones it's probably going to be even higher), while in Queen's, prices are going to be dramatically less. And if you head out to Riverhead, I reckon you can get a place for no more than $300/square foot.
"Good" London is £2k per square foot now. And most of "Fairly Good" London has broken the £1k mark.
I'm deep in this atm as a prospective buyer. The market is very hot.
I would be very nervous about jumping into London residential right now, given the rapidly slowing economy. (And I speak as an owner!)
Yes, I'm thinking of pressing pause and revisiting at a later point. There's some silliness afoot. A 20% drop is imo likelier than a 10% rise from here.
You'll miss Hampstead.
Yes, I know.
When I should die, think only this of me, That there's some corner of a foreign field. That is forever the Hampstead crepe van.
I lived in Hampstead for ten years. In that time, I visited the crepe van exactly zero times.
The queues always put me off.
Also, a crepe is a crepe…. is a crepe
Nice but not life-changing
This is true of all Hampstead. It lacks really impressive restaurants, which is odd, given the wealth of the area (this is also true of Camden & Primrose Hill, tho Camden has the market which now has fantastic street food)
In similarly wealthy parts of west or central London, or the trendy bits of the East like Shoreditch and Spitalifields, the restaurants are excellent. Maybe this is all the fault of people like @Kinabalu - affluent lefties who are self-confessed philistines about food
I refer the honorable Gentleman to the answer I gave two moments ago - Jin Kichi.
Currently closed until August for refurbishment according to the website.
Guess it will have to be Côte, after all.
What's embarrassing about Hampstead is that Côte is always heaving. Because there's nowhere else.
Côte is simply average. The food is acceptable. The prices merely high rather than utterly egregious.
That it is permanently full is a stain on NW3.
I have zero tolerance for Côte. The food is blah. The whole thing is ersatz.
The cheese is Reblochon FFS!
Cote is somewhere I would go and eat, at a pinch, in a provincial British city. Reading or Sunderland or Portsmouth or Edinburgh
Hampstead?? Why aren’t there 12 great restaurants and gastropubs? Houses cost £5m FFS, and people really live there, it’s not some buy to let zombieland. Quite peculiar
Edinburgh is good for food. I presume that was put in there deliberately to rile the Scot Nat contingent.
Sunderland is the worst city I’ve ever visited, food-wise. Literally the worst.
You’re half right. i did put it in to provoke Nats, tho it is also true, to an extent. I’ve never eaten well in Edinburgh - to me it has been like Hampstead. Wealthy, beautiful, full of tourists, not great food. Not terrible just not great
Sunderland is interesting. Could you not find decent ethnic food? They are usually the saviour of British cities. Wherever you are, you can generally get decent Indian, and probably Chinese and Thai as well. This is no small thing. It means you can eat well almost anywhere in the UK, it just won’t be “British” food
There's a really excellent Indian in South End Green (which is sort of Hampstead).
The Stag is pretty good for artery-clogging fare, or was.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
He caught Covid, and isn't known as Shagger for no reason. What are the odds he gets Monkeypox?
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
He caught Covid, and isn't known as Shagger for no reason. What are the odds he gets Monkeypox?
Just watched ITV News. Peston pointed out that as people have been fined for attending that party, it was by definition illegal. So whomever it was on here earlier dancing on a pinhead about things being legal just received a little prick.
A work meeting that turned into a party after the pm left, may be one way you are wrong. At least that will be the weasel words the met use.
...so it was it his stunt double that was at the party in the picture?
There's no party in the picture.
Unless you think what Starmer was at was a party. 🤷♂️
I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.
You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you. Ruth Davidson on Channel 4 News does not.
“ You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you.”
I am challenging you on that Pete. I am asking you to supply evidence to support you claim the police saw these photos before leaked today. All we have so far is Downing Street insisting the police had “access” to the photo’s… and police silence. You currently have zero evidence to support that claim in your post.
The understanding on ITV News was that similar pictures of this event were enclosed in Gray's evidence to the Met.
Ruth Davidson and Steve "Hardman" Baker are not taken in but Barty and BigG. have taken the bait
The Met investigation was a whitewash from start to finish. I am very skeptical that of the only two events Johnson attended one resulted in a fine for Sunak as well as Johnson. Bad behaviour, as we have read on here tonight is baked into Johnson's polling but the FPN skewered Sunak.
I simply try to be fair but I really do not care about Boris and it is upto his mps and if they decide to remover him then good on them
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
He caught Covid, and isn't known as Shagger for no reason. What are the odds he gets Monkeypox?
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
He caught Covid, and isn't known as Shagger for no reason. What are the odds he gets Monkeypox?
Any entrants for the Monkeypox sweepstake?
My punt is on Gove. Nailed on...
Speaking of punts, nipplegate went quiet quickly.
That passed me by. What on earth is nipplegate?
Yet more allegations about a Tory mp and sexual assault/misdemeanour, this time potentially involving drugging
Your regular reminder that the gov’s initial choice to run this inquiry wasn’t Sue Gray but Simon Case, who’s now expected to be heavily criticised and then sacrificed to save Johnson. They never wanted an independent investigation to begin with - why would they want one now? https://twitter.com/jonlis1/status/1528697233675272192
Just watched ITV News. Peston pointed out that as people have been fined for attending that party, it was by definition illegal. So whomever it was on here earlier dancing on a pinhead about things being legal just received a little prick.
A work meeting that turned into a party after the pm left, may be one way you are wrong. At least that will be the weasel words the met use.
...so it was it his stunt double that was at the party in the picture?
There's no party in the picture.
Unless you think what Starmer was at was a party. 🤷♂️
I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.
You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you. Ruth Davidson on Channel 4 News does not.
The challenge for the Met is that other people have been fined for being at this party. So it was a party and was illegal. And the "I was at home" defence doesn't work either - especially as we know that Bonzo was the organiser - as hosting a party at home was also illegal.
We know why the Met fined the attendees but not the organiser...
Link that he organised it and also that he was not working
Quite right Big G, we must take the PM at his word, he is after all an honourable gentleman, and there are too few of those in public life in these barbaric times.
Keir on the other hand has questions to answer and should probably be horsewhipped regardless.
I was reporting what they said on the news. Something that my friend Big_G uses as defence all the time. Hacks have been told by people who know that the PM organised the leaving piss-up for Cain. Its a leaving do. Its not work. Has anyone claimed it was work...?
You simply do not have evidence Boris organised it, and the BBC did suggest he popped in during work for 10 minutes to toast a leaving colleague
I do not. The reporters who reported it do.
When you post what has been reported you stand by it. I am applying your methodology to what has been reported here.
Big G’s methodology is to breathlessly relay news favourable to Boris while repeating that he of course wants him to go.
Cakery.
Not at all
I do try to be honest and fair and most certainly not tribal
I genuinely do not care if Boris stays or goes but his mps should
Hang on you've moved! Before it was you wanted him gone otherwise your Con vote was at risk.
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.
Almost every residential area in the world is generally low rise. For very good reason, people prefer low rise by and large.
For the small minority who want high rise, good luck to them, they should be able to get it. For everyone else, they should be able to get what they want too.
Most New Yorkers live in Long Island not Manhattan for a reason.
Is it because Long Island is 1,401 square miles in size while Manhattan is 22 square miles?
(It is also worth remembering that 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day.)
Precisely my point. Long Island has the space so people have spread out to live there, as they'd rather use the space than go up into the sky as GW proposes.
Approximately as many people commute into Manhattan every day as the entire population of Manhattan (including children and pensioners) who live there. So it seems reasonable to believe that even most workers in Manhattan have chosen not to live there.
Surely "have chosen" need to be caveated by "cannot afford to"?
The price per square foot in Manhattan is off the charts - perhaps $2,500/square foot (and that's just for apartments; for brownstones it's probably going to be even higher), while in Queen's, prices are going to be dramatically less. And if you head out to Riverhead, I reckon you can get a place for no more than $300/square foot.
"Good" London is £2k per square foot now. And most of "Fairly Good" London has broken the £1k mark.
I'm deep in this atm as a prospective buyer. The market is very hot.
I would be very nervous about jumping into London residential right now, given the rapidly slowing economy. (And I speak as an owner!)
Yes, I'm thinking of pressing pause and revisiting at a later point. There's some silliness afoot. A 20% drop is imo likelier than a 10% rise from here.
You'll miss Hampstead.
Yes, I know.
When I should die, think only this of me, That there's some corner of a foreign field. That is forever the Hampstead crepe van.
I lived in Hampstead for ten years. In that time, I visited the crepe van exactly zero times.
The queues always put me off.
Also, a crepe is a crepe…. is a crepe
Nice but not life-changing
This is true of all Hampstead. It lacks really impressive restaurants, which is odd, given the wealth of the area (this is also true of Camden & Primrose Hill, tho Camden has the market which now has fantastic street food)
In similarly wealthy parts of west or central London, or the trendy bits of the East like Shoreditch and Spitalifields, the restaurants are excellent. Maybe this is all the fault of people like @Kinabalu - affluent lefties who are self-confessed philistines about food
I refer the honorable Gentleman to the answer I gave two moments ago - Jin Kichi.
Currently closed until August for refurbishment according to the website.
Guess it will have to be Côte, after all.
What's embarrassing about Hampstead is that Côte is always heaving. Because there's nowhere else.
Côte is simply average. The food is acceptable. The prices merely high rather than utterly egregious.
That it is permanently full is a stain on NW3.
I have zero tolerance for Côte. The food is blah. The whole thing is ersatz.
The cheese is Reblochon FFS!
Cote is somewhere I would go and eat, at a pinch, in a provincial British city. Reading or Sunderland or Portsmouth or Edinburgh
Hampstead?? Why aren’t there 12 great restaurants and gastropubs? Houses cost £5m FFS, and people really live there, it’s not some buy to let zombieland. Quite peculiar
Edinburgh is good for food. I presume that was put in there deliberately to rile the Scot Nat contingent.
Sunderland is the worst city I’ve ever visited, food-wise. Literally the worst.
You’re half right. i did put it in to provoke Nats, tho it is also true, to an extent. I’ve never eaten well in Edinburgh - to me it has been like Hampstead. Wealthy, beautiful, full of tourists, not great food. Not terrible just not great
Sunderland is interesting. Could you not find decent ethnic food? They are usually the saviour of British cities. Wherever you are, you can generally get decent Indian, and probably Chinese and Thai as well. This is no small thing. It means you can eat well almost anywhere in the UK, it just won’t be “British” food
There's a really excellent Indian in South End Green (which is sort of Hampstead).
The Stag is pretty good for artery-clogging fare, or was.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
He caught Covid, and isn't known as Shagger for no reason. What are the odds he gets Monkeypox?
Calling this 'partygate' and waffling on about parties suits Boris very well. I don't think any of these events were 'parties' in the everyday sense of the word. If they were, they were pretty rubbish.
Surely the discourse should be about 'illegal gatherings' rather than 'parties'. If the gatherings BJ attended were illegal under the Covid rules at the relevant time, then he's guilty at best of lying. It doesn't really matter if they were/weren't parties, or if there was alcohol present (but not involved).
(I'm really pissed of with myself now, as I'd made a vow not to comment on the tedium of xxxxxgate ever again).
I don’t really see any risk to him from photos of an event the police have seen and didn’t fine him for to be honest - only if he withheld them. As far as I can see those saying he should go are the ones who always have, and his defenders are awaiting the line to take.
Re: Lying to Parliament, the public just don’t care, no matter how much we on here think they should. The long term damage of this all comes down to whether enough people forgive him this when he shoves cash at them in a few weeks as part of a “non-emergency Budget” emergency Budget.
I remain of the option that if cost of living impacts due to Ukraine can be unwound in a few months (hopefully with a Ukrainian victory) then he’s odds on to win the next election.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
He caught Covid, and isn't known as Shagger for no reason. What are the odds he gets Monkeypox?
Any entrants for the Monkeypox sweepstake?
My punt is on Gove. Nailed on...
Speaking of punts, nipplegate went quiet quickly.
That passed me by. What on earth is nipplegate?
Yet more allegations about a Tory mp and sexual assault/misdemeanour, this time potentially involving drugging
The Secret Barrister @BarristerSecret · 2h Think of how many thousands of people desperately wanted to “just” raise a glass to loved ones they had lost; loved ones who had died alone.
But they didn’t. Because @BorisJohnson told them they couldn’t.
And they followed his rules.
Indeed, I think the rules were utterly stupid and did far more harm than good.
But Boris was the one who was responsible for them, and for that he deserves to be hung by them.
One wonders what keeps Roger Gale from crossing the floor? I mean, he's 78 and not much to lose tbh.
Very likely that he will have strong personal relationships with people in his local Conservative Association, and among MPs on the benches around him. In the end, the personal is political. It will be a contest between whether he can leave those people behind, or can continue to look people who aren't in the party in the eye and justify still being in the party with Johnson as the leader.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
Boris is doing a pretty good job at the moment. He's rather repelling the tide of socialist policy dressed up in blue that seems to be pervading the Tory party. He does need to go, but until someone else starts to make a case for sensible Tory leadership of a hopefully more sensible Tory party he's the best man for the job.
Edit: And this is definitely not the Steve Bakers.
I don't really think that's true. I think his Government (whatever his own true feelings are, which we never learn) seems to be exactly as you describe. Boris just doesn't take the flak for it because every now and again he declares something vaguely commonsensical, eg. that 18 stone hulks of testosterone with balls like melons shouldn't compete in women's shinty, and Telegraph readers get all excited. It's pretty thin gruel really isn't it?
I see that BR is still trying to say "whats the difference between this and Starmer". Without wasting everyone's time as he will keep repeating the same guff and ignore everyone else, remember that the Starmer case is that campaigning events were legal in April 21. There was no similar legal allowance for leaving parties etc in November 20.
Putting things very bluntly, what will absolutely fuck him is the string of lies to Parliament. Not only did Allegra Stratton describe this kind of thing and get angrily fired for doing so, Bonzo told everyone he too was very upset.
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”. Now a provable lie as here he is at the very same party. No "its only a cake" excuses here. He was there. At a party. Then said "I have been told there was no party".
Liar. Resign. (he won't, but now we have to watch "I'll say anything for money" Tory MPs soil themselves on TV trying to claim otherwise)
What we know is:
Boris has not been fined for attending any party
Anything that Boris attended that was a party was officially legal for him
And therefore, him saying there weren't any (illegal) parties is not a provable lie.
Utterly wrong, where on earth are you getting "officially legal for him" from? From plod's decision not to FPN?
Exactly. No FPN = officially legal.
Hang on: so if John is discovered shot, and the evidence suggest that Bill did it, but it's not enough to convict, then no murder took place?
If there's no conviction then, officially, Bill is not a murderer.
I don't believe one would say "well, given the lack of a conviction, Bill's actions were officially legal". One might say "he's been found not guilty, and that should be the end of it", but unless one were high of rather strong hallucinogens, I don't think you would use the phrase "officially legal".
It depends what Bill's defence was. If it was self-defence, then yes, I think I would.
"I was quaffing wine in self defence."
Actually, given the tediousness of some in No10, he might just go with that...
Appalled at the illegal gathering I'd burst in upon whilst working late on the priorities of the British people, I wrested a glass of illicit cava from the hand of one of the revellers. Holding it aloft to prevent the miscreant from snatching it back, I remonstrated severely with the group, leaving them in no doubt of the grave nature of their actions, when the common, salt of the earth people of Britain were cowering under the jackboot of Covid. It was at this point that somebody seems to have snapped me with their camera phone, and frankly, any other interpretation of these events says more about the mucky cynicism of the British press than it does about me.
Very good, but you should also add "I was so angry, all memory of the event and my own fury was erased from my mind".
Just watched ITV News. Peston pointed out that as people have been fined for attending that party, it was by definition illegal. So whomever it was on here earlier dancing on a pinhead about things being legal just received a little prick.
A work meeting that turned into a party after the pm left, may be one way you are wrong. At least that will be the weasel words the met use.
...so it was it his stunt double that was at the party in the picture?
There's no party in the picture.
Unless you think what Starmer was at was a party. 🤷♂️
I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.
You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you. Ruth Davidson on Channel 4 News does not.
The challenge for the Met is that other people have been fined for being at this party. So it was a party and was illegal. And the "I was at home" defence doesn't work either - especially as we know that Bonzo was the organiser - as hosting a party at home was also illegal.
We know why the Met fined the attendees but not the organiser...
Link that he organised it and also that he was not working
Quite right Big G, we must take the PM at his word, he is after all an honourable gentleman, and there are too few of those in public life in these barbaric times.
Keir on the other hand has questions to answer and should probably be horsewhipped regardless.
I was reporting what they said on the news. Something that my friend Big_G uses as defence all the time. Hacks have been told by people who know that the PM organised the leaving piss-up for Cain. Its a leaving do. Its not work. Has anyone claimed it was work...?
You simply do not have evidence Boris organised it, and the BBC did suggest he popped in during work for 10 minutes to toast a leaving colleague
I do not. The reporters who reported it do.
When you post what has been reported you stand by it. I am applying your methodology to what has been reported here.
Big G’s methodology is to breathlessly relay news favourable to Boris while repeating that he of course wants him to go.
Cakery.
Not at all
I do try to be honest and fair and most certainly not tribal
I genuinely do not care if Boris stays or goes but his mps should
Hang on you've moved! Before it was you wanted him gone otherwise your Con vote was at risk.
All part of the Big G shimmy and shuffle.
By 2024 it will be, “with a heavy heart I must vote for Boris to raise taxation on working people to 90 pennies in the pound because Keir has questions to answer about whether it was a korma or a masala, as suggested by James Delingpole’s son in the Daily Express”.
Just watched ITV News. Peston pointed out that as people have been fined for attending that party, it was by definition illegal. So whomever it was on here earlier dancing on a pinhead about things being legal just received a little prick.
A work meeting that turned into a party after the pm left, may be one way you are wrong. At least that will be the weasel words the met use.
...so it was it his stunt double that was at the party in the picture?
There's no party in the picture.
Unless you think what Starmer was at was a party. 🤷♂️
I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.
You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you. Ruth Davidson on Channel 4 News does not.
The challenge for the Met is that other people have been fined for being at this party. So it was a party and was illegal. And the "I was at home" defence doesn't work either - especially as we know that Bonzo was the organiser - as hosting a party at home was also illegal.
We know why the Met fined the attendees but not the organiser...
Link that he organised it and also that he was not working
Quite right Big G, we must take the PM at his word, he is after all an honourable gentleman, and there are too few of those in public life in these barbaric times.
Keir on the other hand has questions to answer and should probably be horsewhipped regardless.
I was reporting what they said on the news. Something that my friend Big_G uses as defence all the time. Hacks have been told by people who know that the PM organised the leaving piss-up for Cain. Its a leaving do. Its not work. Has anyone claimed it was work...?
You simply do not have evidence Boris organised it, and the BBC did suggest he popped in during work for 10 minutes to toast a leaving colleague
I do not. The reporters who reported it do.
When you post what has been reported you stand by it. I am applying your methodology to what has been reported here.
Big G’s methodology is to breathlessly relay news favourable to Boris while repeating that he of course wants him to go.
Cakery.
Not at all
I do try to be honest and fair and most certainly not tribal
I genuinely do not care if Boris stays or goes but his mps should
Hang on you've moved! Before it was you wanted him gone otherwise your Con vote was at risk.
The Secret Barrister @BarristerSecret · 2h Think of how many thousands of people desperately wanted to “just” raise a glass to loved ones they had lost; loved ones who had died alone.
But they didn’t. Because @BorisJohnson told them they couldn’t.
And they followed his rules.
At the time of this ‘event’, I believe the rule limited meetings to two people ?
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
He caught Covid, and isn't known as Shagger for no reason. What are the odds he gets Monkeypox?
Any entrants for the Monkeypox sweepstake?
My punt is on Gove. Nailed on...
Speaking of punts, nipplegate went quiet quickly.
That passed me by. What on earth is nipplegate?
Yet more allegations about a Tory mp and sexual assault/misdemeanour, this time potentially involving drugging
But nipplegate?!?
There are allegations of unprovoked nipple licking.
It has suddenly disappeared, so I assume it has fallen under a super-injunction or something and we won’t find out until 2072.
When full Gray report out, the Met will have to explain: Why they fined the PM for one 9 min event instigated by others (🎂), but did not fine him for a 9 min event he instigated (🍾) One answer? 🎂 fine seen as over zealous, so overreacted + caved to pressure from PM's lawyer? https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1528819099475877888
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
He caught Covid, and isn't known as Shagger for no reason. What are the odds he gets Monkeypox?
Any entrants for the Monkeypox sweepstake?
My punt is on Gove. Nailed on...
That is because as a doctor you know this isn’t so much a sexually transmitted disease as a intimately transmitted disease, so there’s certain social groups and behaviour more at risk, at this time? A recently single man rumour has it is a bit AC/DC considering his boss calls him Jon bom govi. I have a partner, so pleased to see me again yesterday she changed plans to go into office today to WFH 😉 But six years ago when I first came to college in London, and I was going to bed with any lady who would let me touch her, a rise in Monkey pox would make me think a bit.
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.
Almost every residential area in the world is generally low rise. For very good reason, people prefer low rise by and large.
For the small minority who want high rise, good luck to them, they should be able to get it. For everyone else, they should be able to get what they want too.
Most New Yorkers live in Long Island not Manhattan for a reason.
Is it because Long Island is 1,401 square miles in size while Manhattan is 22 square miles?
(It is also worth remembering that 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day.)
Precisely my point. Long Island has the space so people have spread out to live there, as they'd rather use the space than go up into the sky as GW proposes.
Approximately as many people commute into Manhattan every day as the entire population of Manhattan (including children and pensioners) who live there. So it seems reasonable to believe that even most workers in Manhattan have chosen not to live there.
Surely "have chosen" need to be caveated by "cannot afford to"?
The price per square foot in Manhattan is off the charts - perhaps $2,500/square foot (and that's just for apartments; for brownstones it's probably going to be even higher), while in Queen's, prices are going to be dramatically less. And if you head out to Riverhead, I reckon you can get a place for no more than $300/square foot.
"Good" London is £2k per square foot now. And most of "Fairly Good" London has broken the £1k mark.
I'm deep in this atm as a prospective buyer. The market is very hot.
I would be very nervous about jumping into London residential right now, given the rapidly slowing economy. (And I speak as an owner!)
Yes, I'm thinking of pressing pause and revisiting at a later point. There's some silliness afoot. A 20% drop is imo likelier than a 10% rise from here.
You'll miss Hampstead.
Yes, I know.
When I should die, think only this of me, That there's some corner of a foreign field. That is forever the Hampstead crepe van.
I lived in Hampstead for ten years. In that time, I visited the crepe van exactly zero times.
The queues always put me off.
Also, a crepe is a crepe…. is a crepe
Nice but not life-changing
This is true of all Hampstead. It lacks really impressive restaurants, which is odd, given the wealth of the area (this is also true of Camden & Primrose Hill, tho Camden has the market which now has fantastic street food)
In similarly wealthy parts of west or central London, or the trendy bits of the East like Shoreditch and Spitalifields, the restaurants are excellent. Maybe this is all the fault of people like @Kinabalu - affluent lefties who are self-confessed philistines about food
I refer the honorable Gentleman to the answer I gave two moments ago - Jin Kichi.
Yes, I’ve been there! Good fun, but a bit tiny and crowded
It’s still an unimpressive display for a burb as phenomenally wealthy and “sophisticated” as NW3
Oh, I agree.
It is embarrassing.
And there's no real excuse for it. But it's not that uncommon. St John's Wood - number of good restaurants... zero. Richmond/Kew... one. Primrose Hill... zero.
My apartment on Shaftesbury Avenue has a dozen excellent restaurants within a five minute walk.
Primrose Hill has Odette's which is pretty good.
It is. Also, with the Crepe Van, yes there's a queue but you know you're doing it with good progressive people and you can risk a conversation.
Just watched ITV News. Peston pointed out that as people have been fined for attending that party, it was by definition illegal. So whomever it was on here earlier dancing on a pinhead about things being legal just received a little prick.
A work meeting that turned into a party after the pm left, may be one way you are wrong. At least that will be the weasel words the met use.
...so it was it his stunt double that was at the party in the picture?
There's no party in the picture.
Unless you think what Starmer was at was a party. 🤷♂️
I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.
You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you. Ruth Davidson on Channel 4 News does not.
The challenge for the Met is that other people have been fined for being at this party. So it was a party and was illegal. And the "I was at home" defence doesn't work either - especially as we know that Bonzo was the organiser - as hosting a party at home was also illegal.
We know why the Met fined the attendees but not the organiser...
Link that he organised it and also that he was not working
Quite right Big G, we must take the PM at his word, he is after all an honourable gentleman, and there are too few of those in public life in these barbaric times.
Keir on the other hand has questions to answer and should probably be horsewhipped regardless.
I was reporting what they said on the news. Something that my friend Big_G uses as defence all the time. Hacks have been told by people who know that the PM organised the leaving piss-up for Cain. Its a leaving do. Its not work. Has anyone claimed it was work...?
You simply do not have evidence Boris organised it, and the BBC did suggest he popped in during work for 10 minutes to toast a leaving colleague
I do not. The reporters who reported it do.
When you post what has been reported you stand by it. I am applying your methodology to what has been reported here.
Big G’s methodology is to breathlessly relay news favourable to Boris while repeating that he of course wants him to go.
Cakery.
Not at all
I do try to be honest and fair and most certainly not tribal
I genuinely do not care if Boris stays or goes but his mps should
Hang on you've moved! Before it was you wanted him gone otherwise your Con vote was at risk.
All part of the Big G shimmy and shuffle.
By 2024 it will be, “with a heavy heart I must vote for Boris to raise taxation on working people to 90 pennies in the pound because Keir has questions to answer about whether it was a korma or a masala, as suggested by James Delingpole’s son in the Daily Express”.
Yes. He's a good example of the type of Tory 2019 voter who is telling pollsters they don't know who they will vote for, but will find some justification for returning to the fold at the next GE. Unless Starmer can do something a bit more impressive and win them over.
This is why we should expect swingback as things stand.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
He caught Covid, and isn't known as Shagger for no reason. What are the odds he gets Monkeypox?
Any entrants for the Monkeypox sweepstake?
My punt is on Gove. Nailed on...
Speaking of punts, nipplegate went quiet quickly.
That passed me by. What on earth is nipplegate?
Yet more allegations about a Tory mp and sexual assault/misdemeanour, this time potentially involving drugging
But nipplegate?!?
There are allegations of unprovoked nipple licking.
It has suddenly disappeared, so I assume it has fallen under a super-injunction or something and we won’t find out until 2072.
When full Gray report out, the Met will have to explain: Why they fined the PM for one 9 min event instigated by others (🎂), but did not fine him for a 9 min event he instigated (🍾) One answer? 🎂 fine seen as over zealous, so overreacted + caved to pressure from PM's lawyer? https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1528819099475877888
From what I have seen, a great many of the fines nationwide have fallen apart in court because the police were being overzealous around what constituted a “reasonable” excuse compared to the view a court (and definitely a jury) would take.
The key lesson we should all learn is that the rules were stupid and FTPs should rarely be used.
Doesn’t let Boris and co off the hook thought. Lawmaker/breaker is always an issue.
Just watched ITV News. Peston pointed out that as people have been fined for attending that party, it was by definition illegal. So whomever it was on here earlier dancing on a pinhead about things being legal just received a little prick.
A work meeting that turned into a party after the pm left, may be one way you are wrong. At least that will be the weasel words the met use.
...so it was it his stunt double that was at the party in the picture?
There's no party in the picture.
Unless you think what Starmer was at was a party. 🤷♂️
I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.
You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you. Ruth Davidson on Channel 4 News does not.
The challenge for the Met is that other people have been fined for being at this party. So it was a party and was illegal. And the "I was at home" defence doesn't work either - especially as we know that Bonzo was the organiser - as hosting a party at home was also illegal.
We know why the Met fined the attendees but not the organiser...
Link that he organised it and also that he was not working
Quite right Big G, we must take the PM at his word, he is after all an honourable gentleman, and there are too few of those in public life in these barbaric times.
Keir on the other hand has questions to answer and should probably be horsewhipped regardless.
I was reporting what they said on the news. Something that my friend Big_G uses as defence all the time. Hacks have been told by people who know that the PM organised the leaving piss-up for Cain. Its a leaving do. Its not work. Has anyone claimed it was work...?
You simply do not have evidence Boris organised it, and the BBC did suggest he popped in during work for 10 minutes to toast a leaving colleague
I do not. The reporters who reported it do.
When you post what has been reported you stand by it. I am applying your methodology to what has been reported here.
Big G’s methodology is to breathlessly relay news favourable to Boris while repeating that he of course wants him to go.
Cakery.
Not at all
I do try to be honest and fair and most certainly not tribal
I genuinely do not care if Boris stays or goes but his mps should
Hang on you've moved! Before it was you wanted him gone otherwise your Con vote was at risk.
All part of the Big G shimmy and shuffle.
By 2024 it will be, “with a heavy heart I must vote for Boris to raise taxation on working people to 90 pennies in the pound because Keir has questions to answer about whether it was a korma or a masala, as suggested by James Delingpole’s son in the Daily Express”.
July this year will resolve Starmer issue, the one you tried to close down with your personal insults which you just cannot avoid
2024 is wide open for my vote though not with Plaid
Just watched ITV News. Peston pointed out that as people have been fined for attending that party, it was by definition illegal. So whomever it was on here earlier dancing on a pinhead about things being legal just received a little prick.
A work meeting that turned into a party after the pm left, may be one way you are wrong. At least that will be the weasel words the met use.
...so it was it his stunt double that was at the party in the picture?
There's no party in the picture.
Unless you think what Starmer was at was a party. 🤷♂️
I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.
You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you. Ruth Davidson on Channel 4 News does not.
“ You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you.”
I am challenging you on that Pete. I am asking you to supply evidence to support you claim the police saw these photos before leaked today. All we have so far is Downing Street insisting the police had “access” to the photo’s… and police silence. You currently have zero evidence to support that claim in your post.
The understanding on ITV News was that similar pictures of this event were enclosed in Gray's evidence to the Met.
Ruth Davidson and Steve "Hardman" Baker are not taken in but Barty and BigG. have taken the bait
The Met investigation was a whitewash from start to finish. I am very skeptical that of the only two events Johnson attended one resulted in a fine for Sunak as well as Johnson. Bad behaviour, as we have read on here tonight is baked into Johnson's polling but the FPN skewered Sunak.
It’s at least a credible hypothesis that the Met investigation was a deliberate whitewash.
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.
Almost every residential area in the world is generally low rise. For very good reason, people prefer low rise by and large.
For the small minority who want high rise, good luck to them, they should be able to get it. For everyone else, they should be able to get what they want too.
Most New Yorkers live in Long Island not Manhattan for a reason.
Is it because Long Island is 1,401 square miles in size while Manhattan is 22 square miles?
(It is also worth remembering that 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day.)
Precisely my point. Long Island has the space so people have spread out to live there, as they'd rather use the space than go up into the sky as GW proposes.
Approximately as many people commute into Manhattan every day as the entire population of Manhattan (including children and pensioners) who live there. So it seems reasonable to believe that even most workers in Manhattan have chosen not to live there.
Surely "have chosen" need to be caveated by "cannot afford to"?
The price per square foot in Manhattan is off the charts - perhaps $2,500/square foot (and that's just for apartments; for brownstones it's probably going to be even higher), while in Queen's, prices are going to be dramatically less. And if you head out to Riverhead, I reckon you can get a place for no more than $300/square foot.
"Good" London is £2k per square foot now. And most of "Fairly Good" London has broken the £1k mark.
I'm deep in this atm as a prospective buyer. The market is very hot.
I would be very nervous about jumping into London residential right now, given the rapidly slowing economy. (And I speak as an owner!)
Yes, I'm thinking of pressing pause and revisiting at a later point. There's some silliness afoot. A 20% drop is imo likelier than a 10% rise from here.
You'll miss Hampstead.
Yes, I know.
When I should die, think only this of me, That there's some corner of a foreign field. That is forever the Hampstead crepe van.
I lived in Hampstead for ten years. In that time, I visited the crepe van exactly zero times.
The queues always put me off.
Also, a crepe is a crepe…. is a crepe
Nice but not life-changing
This is true of all Hampstead. It lacks really impressive restaurants, which is odd, given the wealth of the area (this is also true of Camden & Primrose Hill, tho Camden has the market which now has fantastic street food)
In similarly wealthy parts of west or central London, or the trendy bits of the East like Shoreditch and Spitalifields, the restaurants are excellent. Maybe this is all the fault of people like @Kinabalu - affluent lefties who are self-confessed philistines about food
I refer the honorable Gentleman to the answer I gave two moments ago - Jin Kichi.
Currently closed until August for refurbishment according to the website.
Guess it will have to be Côte, after all.
What's embarrassing about Hampstead is that Côte is always heaving. Because there's nowhere else.
Côte is simply average. The food is acceptable. The prices merely high rather than utterly egregious.
That it is permanently full is a stain on NW3.
I have zero tolerance for Côte. The food is blah. The whole thing is ersatz.
The cheese is Reblochon FFS!
Cote is somewhere I would go and eat, at a pinch, in a provincial British city. Reading or Sunderland or Portsmouth or Edinburgh
Hampstead?? Why aren’t there 12 great restaurants and gastropubs? Houses cost £5m FFS, and people really live there, it’s not some buy to let zombieland. Quite peculiar
Edinburgh is good for food. I presume that was put in there deliberately to rile the Scot Nat contingent.
Sunderland is the worst city I’ve ever visited, food-wise. Literally the worst.
You’re half right. i did put it in to provoke Nats, tho it is also true, to an extent. I’ve never eaten well in Edinburgh - to me it has been like Hampstead. Wealthy, beautiful, full of tourists, not great food. Not terrible just not great
Sunderland is interesting. Could you not find decent ethnic food? They are usually the saviour of British cities. Wherever you are, you can generally get decent Indian, and probably Chinese and Thai as well. This is no small thing. It means you can eat well almost anywhere in the UK, it just won’t be “British” food
There's a really excellent Indian in South End Green (which is sort of Hampstead).
The Stag is pretty good for artery-clogging fare, or was.
Calling this 'partygate' and waffling on about parties suits Boris very well. I don't think any of these events were 'parties' in the everyday sense of the word. If they were, they were pretty rubbish.
Surely the discourse should be about 'illegal gatherings' rather than 'parties'. If the gatherings BJ attended were illegal under the Covid rules at the relevant time, then he's guilty at best of lying. It doesn't really matter if they were parties, or if there was alcohol present (but not involved).
(I'm really pissed of with myself now, as I'd made a vow not to comment on the tedium of xxxxxgate ever again).
I agree about this. In a sense this has always been about language. Firstly the laws/rules/guidance were such poor examples of communication and so badly thought out, that, as someone said earlier, we are still arguing two years on about what and wasn’t legal. And then there is the word ‘party’. I suspect none of the events that Johnson attended fit the bill of party in his head, and so he didn’t lie to parliament, on his terms. Others may differ.
And at the end of it all, why won’t he just resign? He doesn’t want to. He’s wanted the job all his life and doesn’t want it taken away. And so it’s up to others to remove him.
He is not the only guilty party. There should be no doubt that senior civil service officers severely cocked up. They should have known better. They will no doubt fail upwards.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
She’s disliked him for 30 years. I understand he was a bit of a shit to her when they worked together in Brussels but she’s hardly a neutral commentator
I don’t really see any risk to him from photos of an event the police have seen and didn’t fine him for to be honest - only if he withheld them. As far as I can see those saying he should go are the ones who always have, and his defenders are awaiting the line to take.
Re: Lying to Parliament, the public just don’t care, no matter how much we on here think they should. The long term damage of this all comes down to whether enough people forgive him this when he shoves cash at them in a few weeks as part of a “non-emergency Budget” emergency Budget.
I remain of the option that if cost of living impacts due to Ukraine can be unwound in a few months (hopefully with a Ukrainian victory) then he’s odds on to win the next election.
You might be right that the public don't care about him lying to Parliament,
But I think a significant minority of the public, including some of his former fans, have decided, and do care, that the PM is an inveterate liar, both in Parliament and elsewhere, and that will lose him quite a lot of votes/seats.
Calling this 'partygate' and waffling on about parties suits Boris very well. I don't think any of these events were 'parties' in the everyday sense of the word. If they were, they were pretty rubbish.
Surely the discourse should be about 'illegal gatherings' rather than 'parties'. If the gatherings BJ attended were illegal under the Covid rules at the relevant time, then he's guilty at best of lying. It doesn't really matter if they were/weren't parties, or if there was alcohol present (but not involved).
(I'm really pissed of with myself now, as I'd made a vow not to comment on the tedium of xxxxxgate ever again).
Surely the key to everything Partygate is did the PM mislead Parliament and was there some collusive activity between elements of the Met. Police and Team Johnson? My latter point may be a conspiracy theory on the scale of the "grassy knoll" but let's face it, the Met investigation couldn't have worked out better for Johnson if it had been planned to the Nth degree.
As long as you don’t think something is a party then it seems you can get away with it .
Bozo could bang a couple of hookers , be caught doing lines of charlie and down a bottle of gin and as long as he thinks it’s not a party then that’s the end of it .
Because how do you prove what’s in someone’s mind . So the privileges committee which now has 4 Tory MPs to one Labour and one SNP can just fall back on that defence .
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
He caught Covid, and isn't known as Shagger for no reason. What are the odds he gets Monkeypox?
Any entrants for the Monkeypox sweepstake?
My punt is on Gove. Nailed on...
Speaking of punts, nipplegate went quiet quickly.
That passed me by. What on earth is nipplegate?
Yet more allegations about a Tory mp and sexual assault/misdemeanour, this time potentially involving drugging
But nipplegate?!?
A victim, allegedly, woke up to the alleged MP in question licking the victim's nipple. Allegedly.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
I think I am less offended by Johnson's behaviour than the Met. Police intervening and then taking virtually no action against Johnson and no action against Case. Either by cock-up or conspiracy their action saved Johnson.
Those who cooperated with Gray were banged to rights, those who didn't got off scott free. On what did the Met. spend their £460,000?
You are still posting this defamatory crap about the police, but I am not aware you answered my question. Do you have evidence the police saw todays photos? Downing Street merely say the police had access to them, whilst the police silent.
Secondly, I am not calling you out as a liar when you posted this “ I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.” but I am asking you to share with us your evidence they had booze together after work, by how many people they were over what was clearly stated in the rules, and there was no social distancing at all as required.
"Defamatory Crap" my arse. The establishment looks after itself, always has done.
Where’s you’re evidence the police have Seen these photo’s before today? This particular leaving do for Cain Boris in part arranged, though he was only there about ten minutes apparently.
To work with Boris Johnson is to encounter something dark, sinister and totally without soul. It is a destructive experience that makes you doubt your very sanity. Sympathy therefore for the good people of Whitehall. I found that the only salvation is to tell what you've seen.
Lots of people have divided the world into two groups- those who BoJo has betayed and those he will betray.
The more interesting classification is threefold. Those who accept they have been betrayed, those who haven't realised it yet, and the ones in the middle. Those who, deep down, know they have been had but don't quite want to admit it.
Partygate though is example of how he trashed brands.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Yes and ho, as my avatar was forced to put it.
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
Boris is doing a pretty good job at the moment. He's rather repelling the tide of socialist policy dressed up in blue that seems to be pervading the Tory party. He does need to go, but until someone else starts to make a case for sensible Tory leadership of a hopefully more sensible Tory party he's the best man for the job.
Edit: And this is definitely not the Steve Bakers.
I don't really think that's true. I think his Government (whatever his own true feelings are, which we never learn) seems to be exactly as you describe. Boris just doesn't take the flak for it because every now and again he declares something vaguely commonsensical, eg. that 18 stone hulks of testosterone with balls like melons shouldn't compete in women's shinty, and Telegraph readers get all excited. It's pretty thin gruel really isn't it?
Very, very thin gruel. There have clearly been a lot of hurdles along the way, but this government seems set to have achieved nothing.
What's far worse is that they've completely lost the argument in many areas, and seem oblivious to it. The next Labour government is very likely to take us back to the situation in the 70s.
I see that BR is still trying to say "whats the difference between this and Starmer". Without wasting everyone's time as he will keep repeating the same guff and ignore everyone else, remember that the Starmer case is that campaigning events were legal in April 21. There was no similar legal allowance for leaving parties etc in November 20.
Putting things very bluntly, what will absolutely fuck him is the string of lies to Parliament. Not only did Allegra Stratton describe this kind of thing and get angrily fired for doing so, Bonzo told everyone he too was very upset.
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”. Now a provable lie as here he is at the very same party. No "its only a cake" excuses here. He was there. At a party. Then said "I have been told there was no party".
Liar. Resign. (he won't, but now we have to watch "I'll say anything for money" Tory MPs soil themselves on TV trying to claim otherwise)
What we know is:
Boris has not been fined for attending any party
Anything that Boris attended that was a party was officially legal for him
And therefore, him saying there weren't any (illegal) parties is not a provable lie.
Utterly wrong, where on earth are you getting "officially legal for him" from? From plod's decision not to FPN?
Exactly. No FPN = officially legal.
Hang on: so if John is discovered shot, and the evidence suggest that Bill did it, but it's not enough to convict, then no murder took place?
If there's no conviction then, officially, Bill is not a murderer.
I don't believe one would say "well, given the lack of a conviction, Bill's actions were officially legal". One might say "he's been found not guilty, and that should be the end of it", but unless one were high of rather strong hallucinogens, I don't think you would use the phrase "officially legal".
It depends what Bill's defence was. If it was self-defence, then yes, I think I would.
"I was quaffing wine in self defence."
Actually, given the tediousness of some in No10, he might just go with that...
Appalled at the illegal gathering I'd burst in upon whilst working late on the priorities of the British people, I wrested a glass of illicit cava from the hand of one of the revellers. Holding it aloft to prevent the miscreant from snatching it back, I remonstrated severely with the group, leaving them in no doubt of the grave nature of their actions, when the common, salt of the earth people of Britain were cowering under the jackboot of Covid. It was at this point that somebody seems to have snapped me with their camera phone, and frankly, any other interpretation of these events says more about the mucky cynicism of the British press than it does about me.
Very good, but you should also add "I was so angry, all memory of the event and my own fury was erased from my mind".
Pippa Crerar @PippaCrerar · 32m Tory MP Roger Gale tells Times Radio PM should quit over "damning" new pics.
"It's absolutely clear there was a party, that he attended it, that he was raising a toast to glass one of his colleagues. Therefore, he misled us from the despatch box. Honorably there is one answer".
I don’t really see any risk to him from photos of an event the police have seen and didn’t fine him for to be honest - only if he withheld them. As far as I can see those saying he should go are the ones who always have, and his defenders are awaiting the line to take.
Re: Lying to Parliament, the public just don’t care, no matter how much we on here think they should. The long term damage of this all comes down to whether enough people forgive him this when he shoves cash at them in a few weeks as part of a “non-emergency Budget” emergency Budget.
I remain of the option that if cost of living impacts due to Ukraine can be unwound in a few months (hopefully with a Ukrainian victory) then he’s odds on to win the next election.
You might be right that the public don't care about him lying to Parliament,
But I think a significant minority of the public, including some of his former fans, have decided, and do care, that the PM is an inveterate liar, both in Parliament and elsewhere, and that will lose him quite a lot of votes/seats.
We’ll see. I may be wrong but I think this will all pass. Though it will be one more thing that drags him now from “near landslide” to “just a majority”.
Just watched ITV News. Peston pointed out that as people have been fined for attending that party, it was by definition illegal. So whomever it was on here earlier dancing on a pinhead about things being legal just received a little prick.
A work meeting that turned into a party after the pm left, may be one way you are wrong. At least that will be the weasel words the met use.
...so it was it his stunt double that was at the party in the picture?
There's no party in the picture.
Unless you think what Starmer was at was a party. 🤷♂️
I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.
You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you. Ruth Davidson on Channel 4 News does not.
“ You may be right and Johnson was not at a party and therefore he did not mislead Parliament. The Met agree with you.”
I am challenging you on that Pete. I am asking you to supply evidence to support you claim the police saw these photos before leaked today. All we have so far is Downing Street insisting the police had “access” to the photo’s… and police silence. You currently have zero evidence to support that claim in your post.
The understanding on ITV News was that similar pictures of this event were enclosed in Gray's evidence to the Met.
Ruth Davidson and Steve "Hardman" Baker are not taken in but Barty and BigG. have taken the bait
The Met investigation was a whitewash from start to finish. I am very skeptical that of the only two events Johnson attended one resulted in a fine for Sunak as well as Johnson. Bad behaviour, as we have read on here tonight is baked into Johnson's polling but the FPN skewered Sunak.
The whole Met thing seems to have worked for him perfectly, doesn't it. Just very very serendipitous for the Magnificent Man.
Comments
Analysis box by Helen Catt, political correspondent
There have always been two big questions at the heart of 'Partygate': Did the prime minister himself break the law and has he been completely candid about what he knew about law-breaking in Downing Street?
Responding to these latest pictures, No 10 is pretty bullish.
It says that the police would have seen these photos and didn't fine him.
On the second point though, things may get a little trickier for Boris Johnson.
These pictures show him at an event for which somebody else was fined so can his insistence that he thought all the rules had been followed hold?
And there are two big audiences which really matter: MPs and the public.
There will be huge scrutiny of exactly what the prime minister said to Parliament about this and whether or not it was misleading.
The outcome of that could have a very swift impact on his prime ministerial future.
Beyond that though, pictures like these pose a potentially longer-term issue.
While there will be plenty of people who won't be bothered by them, the risk is that others will be and more may lose trust in Boris Johnson.
Take a dollop of sage and onion, deep fry it in batter. Ta da! Brilliant idea, but maybe don't take the bread roll.
Up there with Black Country orange chips and Humber spice.
The Police closing the investigation was certainly a big moment, as Save Big Dog had it parked into long grass up to that moment. The question for the Tories now is, does it remain “partygate”, mostly owned by Boris, meaning a new leader and administration installed by August can bat away more photo’s leaked in September. October. November. Etc. Or, by keeping Big Dog does this now morph into something more serious. I’ll explain what I mean. That famous ‘Partygate Heat Map’ of voters views, with the giant word LIAR in the middle, if liar is replaced by WHITEWASH, it doesn’t pass with Johnson’s vonking, the damage will hang more specifically on what the TORY PARTY done in power during covid.
My argument is this can now morph beyond a Boris crisis, more election threat even without Boris to the Tories in the coming general election and even ones after that.
Many if not most Tory MPs today would own the Partygate mess and step down if PM, as many previous And hopefully future Tory leaders would own Partygate and step down, putting Country and it’s people, and their Grand Old Party before their personal ambition. It is no longer in the interests of the Tory Party to keep Johnson, rather than choose a new leader and start putting this behind them.
Anyone disagree with that?
Kansas Fried Chicken
Montana Fried Chicken
Georgia Fried Chicken
Virginia Fried Chicken
Michigan Fried Chicken
Florida Fried Chicken
California Crispy Chicken
Nebraska Fried Chicken
Plus Dallas Fried Chicken
Orlando Fried Chicken
Toronto Fried Chicken
Almost all of which are on the same town centre street.
Then there are those who never will.
Nor would I go so far as to assume that animals that end up in shelters are all awful. Many dogs become separated from the owners because the owner can no longer afford to keep them, isn't capable or perhaps isn't allowed to keep them (common with older people forced to go into care homes,) or has died. Where I would agree with you is that all these soppy charities that promise never to put a healthy dog down are very irresponsible. Some dogs are dumped because they're dangerous and unmanageable, and need to be destroyed before they have the chance to cause serious harm.
Hilarious fantasy politics header from OGH that is never going to happen, but does show potential of a more tacit pact for targetting and campaigning.
If Johnson is sober, he should be worried.
When you post what has been reported you stand by it. I am applying your methodology to what has been reported here.
Do they have a secret recipe or summat?
Cakery.
Secondly, I am not calling you out as a liar when you posted this “ I believe Starmer did technically breach the rules from the evidence I have read and will get a fixed penalty notice. The evidence is they had their meal, with a beer after work, they were not socially distanced and there were too many people at the event.” but I am asking you to share with us your evidence they had booze together after work, by how many people they were over what was clearly stated in the rules, and there was no social distancing at all as required.
Tonight's Redfield & Wilton Strategies
It will be interesting to see if this changes after todays revelations
Westminster Voting Intention (22 May):
Labour 39% (–)
Conservative 33% (–)
Liberal Democrat 12% (–)
Green 5% (+1)
Scottish National Party 4% (–)
Reform UK 4% (-1)
Other 3% (–)
Changes +/- 18 May
Just a pity the rest of us have to suffer too.
Adam Wagner
@AdamWagner1
Replying to
@MatthewStadlen
and
@PippaCrerar
It wouldn't matter that he was in his home in November 2020. That loophole was closed on 31 May 2020
I do try to be honest and fair and most certainly not tribal
I genuinely do not care if Boris stays or goes but his mps should
It's definitely in the interests of the Conservative Party (as well as the country) that Johnson goes. But it's not entirely in their interests that Conservative MPs make him go. After all, it will be a painful business. Some currently senior Conservatives know that no possible future leader will keep them on. Others know that they will look pretty silly, having gone to so much trouble to put him into office. And there's no sign of anyone out there who won't lose at the next election. So it's really tempting to procrastinate, hope someone else who do the dirty work, even if every day makes things worse.
Maybe the time has come for the Macmillan solution. Find a tame doctor to tell Bozza that he's got some terrible medical problem, the only solution is complete rest, preferably in a warmer climate than Britain has to offer...
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1528815423885541379
https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/1528815543741980674
Edit: And this is definitely not the Steve Bakers.
The Secret Barrister
@BarristerSecret
·
2h
Think of how many thousands of people desperately wanted to “just” raise a glass to loved ones they had lost; loved ones who had died alone.
But they didn’t. Because
@BorisJohnson
told them they couldn’t.
And they followed his rules.
I mean, he's 78 and not much to lose tbh.
What the people in the header have done is scientifically prove, anyone saying Boris is safe because labours lead is only five points are bullshitters - because tactical voting is a thing now and Lab Lib Grn combined on 57 whilst Tory Rfm on 35 is real 22 point deficit that if it plays in tactical terms can make five point Lab con deficits into something far worse than it sounds on election nights.
They will do that only if they're fighting a guerrilla/spoiler campaign.
My punt is on Gove. Nailed on...
Ruth Davidson and Steve "Hardman" Baker are not taken in but Barty and BigG. have taken the bait
The Met investigation was a whitewash from start to finish. I am very skeptical that of the only two events Johnson attended one resulted in a fine for Sunak as well as Johnson. Bad behaviour, as we have read on here tonight is baked into Johnson's polling but the FPN skewered Sunak.
Has any UK politician been a Melechon Style hologram yet?
I have already text my mp saying Boris should go
https://twitter.com/jonlis1/status/1528697233675272192
Surely the discourse should be about 'illegal gatherings' rather than 'parties'. If the gatherings BJ attended were illegal under the Covid rules at the relevant time, then he's guilty at best of lying. It doesn't really matter if they were/weren't parties, or if there was alcohol present (but not involved).
(I'm really pissed of with myself now, as I'd made a vow not to comment on the tedium of xxxxxgate ever again).
Re: Lying to Parliament, the public just don’t care, no matter how much we on here think they should. The long term damage of this all comes down to whether enough people forgive him this when he shoves cash at them in a few weeks as part of a “non-emergency Budget” emergency Budget.
I remain of the option that if cost of living impacts due to Ukraine can be unwound in a few months (hopefully with a Ukrainian victory) then he’s odds on to win the next election.
But Boris was the one who was responsible for them, and for that he deserves to be hung by them.
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”.
Even if the events were parties AND Boris *knew* they were parties that quote is not necessarily a lie.
All he is saying is he was “repeatedly assured” about something at a given point in time.
Is that really the killer quote / smoking gun?
By 2024 it will be, “with a heavy heart I must vote for Boris to raise taxation on working people to 90 pennies in the pound because Keir has questions to answer about whether it was a korma or a masala, as suggested by James Delingpole’s son in the Daily Express”.
It has suddenly disappeared, so I assume it has fallen under a super-injunction or something and we won’t find out until 2072.
Why they fined the PM for one 9 min event instigated by others (🎂), but did not fine him for a 9 min event he instigated (🍾)
One answer? 🎂 fine seen as over zealous, so overreacted + caved to pressure from PM's lawyer?
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1528819099475877888
I have a partner, so pleased to see me again yesterday she changed plans to go into office today to WFH 😉
But six years ago when I first came to college in London, and I was going to bed with any lady who would let me touch her, a rise in Monkey pox would make me think a bit.
This is why we should expect swingback as things stand.
The key lesson we should all learn is that the rules were stupid and FTPs should rarely be used.
Doesn’t let Boris and co off the hook thought. Lawmaker/breaker is always an issue.
2024 is wide open for my vote though not with Plaid
And at the end of it all, why won’t he just resign? He doesn’t want to. He’s wanted the job all his life and doesn’t want it taken away. And so it’s up to others to remove him.
He is not the only guilty party. There should be no doubt that senior civil service officers severely cocked up. They should have known better. They will no doubt fail upwards.
But I think a significant minority of the public, including some of his former fans, have decided, and do care, that the PM is an inveterate liar, both in Parliament and elsewhere, and that will lose him quite a lot of votes/seats.
Bozo could bang a couple of hookers , be caught doing lines of charlie and down a bottle of gin and as long as he thinks it’s not a party then that’s the end of it .
Because how do you prove what’s in someone’s mind . So the privileges committee which now has 4 Tory MPs to one Labour and one SNP can just fall back on that defence .
What's far worse is that they've completely lost the argument in many areas, and seem oblivious to it. The next Labour government is very likely to take us back to the situation in the 70s.
But it is still not a good look for a Prime Minister to be so reliant on appearing to be bloody clueless and incurious about everything.
One big reason Switzerland appears to have so much lower inflation than basically anywhere else
Hydroelectric and nuclear power FTW
https://efginternational.com/us/insights/2022/Why-is-Swiss-inflation-low.html
For hydro, substitute wind and tidal.
The first hasn’t happened fast enough; the second has been completely and irrationally hobbled.
The UK seems to specialise in such fictions while maintaining that it is a deregulated, post-Thatcher paradise.