Thought that was common knowledge? It certainly was heavily featured on a Labour leaflet posted here a while back.
Just clicked on that Yorkshire post link and saw the picture of Johnson. Can someone please tell me, looking at that picture, why anyone thought it appropriate to put such a complete twat into a position where he could hold the most important office of state in our land. Bozo apologists please inform us.
Because a complete twat could get stuff done and even a complete twat was better than his predecessor or opposite number. Because the only person running against the complete twat in the leadership race had no solution to get us out of the Article 50 quagmire, but the complete twat did.
Sometimes, times call for a complete twat. For a limited time.
That's not a reason to keep the complete twat now, but it was a good reason to get him there in the first place over all alternatives on offer.
Perhaps we should be asking ourselves how we ended up in a position where even a complete twat stood head and shoulders above all alternatives?
Ah, the apologist in chief. The reality was that he got something done that you are obsessed with. A thing that was totally divisive and pointless and has been a car crash from beginning to end.
Exactly
The incessant drivel from Barty Roberts in defence of his hero Johnson is dragging down pb.com as a worthy site.
It's fine to have an opinion but hammering everyone over the head with repetitious Punch & Judy politics is extremely tiresome.
It's about time Johnson put an end to this absurdity. He has an opportunity to do so now.
He should say: "I have contacted Durham police and suggested that they cease the investigation into Kier Starmer potentially breaking Covid laws. We need to move on from the pandemic now; in a positive and optimistic way and stop blaming each other and trying to score political points. No leader of a political party should feel obliged to resign from office due to the issuing of a fixed penalty notice".
Right attitude in general, but wrong course of action, the PM should never be putting pressure on the Police either way.
The law should be amended though to remove these powers from the Police. Let the Courts act as judges, no the Police.
Not put pressure - just make the suggestion. If Durham police don't issue Starmer with a FPN (which I think is extremely likely) then there will be a hint out there that leniency has won the day thanks to Johnson. If the police do issue Starmer with a FPN then Starmer has resigned needlessly, absurdly even.
Which is why it'd be immoral and wrong for the PM to get involved. The PM has no right or responsibility to be exerting lenience or pressure on criminal investigations and to do so either way in political ones is even worse. That is the action of banana republics, not free democracies.
If there's an issue with the law (there is) fix the law, don't interfere in Police operations.
Err, you are aware that the Home Office and Culture Secretary were pressuring the police to re-open a closed investigation into Starmer?
How dare they have these insane booze-soaked, coke and Ecstasy fuelled, pet-play hookers-on-trampolines midget sex Korean dwarf ice skating free love dope-on-motorbike orgies when the rest of us were….
Oh.
Fpt And not even a cheeky korma or Mary Foy doing high kicks
They hired a photographer on tax payer expense to take that photo.
Great VFM 🤭
There’s a formal photographer on staff at No.10, as well as a couple of social media people who take photos and videos. They document the work of the PM and 10DS team.
Yes.
What a service to the nation providing police with the evidence needed, proving PM and his chancellor are law breakers.
What law is being broken in those photos? I can't see it
I am honestly attempting - perhaps failing - to look at these latest photos with neutral eyes. And to me it looks very much like a boring workplace lunch, at a stressful time: everyone has their tablets out and the rest. They are in the middle of work
Then someone remembered it was the PM's birthday and they got a six pack of warm beer from Aldi along with the shite orange juice, and during the lunch he raised his can of beer and said Thanks and Carry on. Then went glumly back to his takeaway plastic carton of salad
It does not look illegal. It does not look unreasonable. I don't think, purely on the basis of the photos, that he broke the law in this instance.
Did Sunak actually get fined for this? Absurd
The Police have shown themselves to sometimes be contemptible for many years sometimes, and far too trigger happy when given authoritah to abuse.
Thankfully in this nation its bollocks like FPNs over sitting at a park bench, or walking for more than an hour, or having carton sandwiches and a beer for your lunch rather than US style trigger happy with guns instead.
If this is the threshold for getting fined it reinforces the view already pre-existing both generally (Hillsborough, Sarah Everard vigil etc) and politically (Plebgate) that the Police are not fit for purpose.
We should be removing the right of the Police to issue FPNs in the first place. Not specifically for politicians but for everyone. If a crime has been committed, let that be proven in a court of law following due process, not having Police acting as judge, jury and executioner.
The police had an impossible task and they were set in motion by the politicians. Of course there were abuses by the police but the context of their actions was an unprecedented and very popular (not least on PB) curtailment of our liberties by the government, supported wholeheartedly by the Opposition.
As @Leon has noted perhaps it was the world that went mad but we certainly were in the leading rank and why should we have done what everyone else did. Absolutely pathetic.
It's about time Johnson put an end to this absurdity. He has an opportunity to do so now.
He should say: "I have contacted Durham police and suggested that they cease the investigation into Kier Starmer potentially breaking Covid laws. We need to move on from the pandemic now; in a positive and optimistic way and stop blaming each other and trying to score political points. No leader of a political party should feel obliged to resign from office due to the issuing of a fixed penalty notice".
It’s a nice thought, but the police should be operationally independent from politicians. They can change the law, however.
Yes but it would be an astute political move and would get Johnson on the front foot again.
Astute? It would be an appalling piece of government corruption of the rule of law and independence of the judicial process.
And Starmer's insistence that the Met should investigate Johnson is OK?
Yes. Saying "I think the police should investigate" is fine. Intervening to start or stop an investigation is not.
It's about time Johnson put an end to this absurdity. He has an opportunity to do so now.
He should say: "I have contacted Durham police and suggested that they cease the investigation into Kier Starmer potentially breaking Covid laws. We need to move on from the pandemic now; in a positive and optimistic way and stop blaming each other and trying to score political points. No leader of a political party should feel obliged to resign from office due to the issuing of a fixed penalty notice".
Right attitude in general, but wrong course of action, the PM should never be putting pressure on the Police either way.
The law should be amended though to remove these powers from the Police. Let the Courts act as judges, no the Police.
Not put pressure - just make the suggestion. If Durham police don't issue Starmer with a FPN (which I think is extremely likely) then there will be a hint out there that leniency has won the day thanks to Johnson. If the police do issue Starmer with a FPN then Starmer has resigned needlessly, absurdly even.
Which is why it'd be immoral and wrong for the PM to get involved. The PM has no right or responsibility to be exerting lenience or pressure on criminal investigations and to do so either way in political ones is even worse. That is the action of banana republics, not free democracies.
If there's an issue with the law (there is) fix the law, don't interfere in Police operations.
Err, you are aware that the Home Office and Culture Secretary were pressuring the police to re-open a closed investigation into Starmer?
It's about time Johnson put an end to this absurdity. He has an opportunity to do so now.
He should say: "I have contacted Durham police and suggested that they cease the investigation into Kier Starmer potentially breaking Covid laws. We need to move on from the pandemic now; in a positive and optimistic way and stop blaming each other and trying to score political points. No leader of a political party should feel obliged to resign from office due to the issuing of a fixed penalty notice".
Right attitude in general, but wrong course of action, the PM should never be putting pressure on the Police either way.
The law should be amended though to remove these powers from the Police. Let the Courts act as judges, no the Police.
Not put pressure - just make the suggestion. If Durham police don't issue Starmer with a FPN (which I think is extremely likely) then there will be a hint out there that leniency has won the day thanks to Johnson. If the police do issue Starmer with a FPN then Starmer has resigned needlessly, absurdly even.
The PM telling the police to stop or go forward with a police investigation would probably be a breach of the law. I'm thinking Misconduct in a Public Office or attempting to pervert the cause of justice. @PBLawyers?
Like 90% of the country, when I heard they had a "birthday party" for Boris, I was quite hacked off. Fucking wankers. And there I was walking around Richmond Park in the sleet wondering if I was allowed to sit on a bench with my single friend
But these photos do not, to put it mildly, reveal what I envisaged when I heard the phrase "birthday party". Especially one that had been "carefully planned and arranged". I expected music and party poppers and loads of booze and some champagne corks and the rest.
Instead, a glum PM munches his Tesco Value cous-cous, standing up. 2 metres away the Chancellor smiles as he LEANS ON A CHAIR. Tuna sandwiches wilt. The cheap orange juice goes undrunk. Risible
The government are so incompoment they can't even organise a birthday party.....
There are three key issues for the general public now:
Cost of living Cost of living and ...
Cost of living.
This is what the government wil be judged on now as we move to the GE.
But do LAB really have any answers?
All parties are committed to Net Zero.
In the short term (10-years?) that only means more impoverishment and more sacrifices until renewables actually deliver plentiful cheap energy or someone comes up with a new technology. The price of energy now tells us renewables are woefully, woefully short of that target.
The field's wide open to someone that wants to lift the hard target of 2050. For someone who wants to take their time. Wide open.
Renewables are our best hope of escaping high fossil fuel prices.
The opposite of what is happening in the real world, right now, then.
Fossil fuel energy prices are rocketing and renewables are not helping us escape them. Not in the slightest.
Renewables are failing utterly to rise to the challenge. Failing utterly.
It's about time Johnson put an end to this absurdity. He has an opportunity to do so now.
He should say: "I have contacted Durham police and suggested that they cease the investigation into Kier Starmer potentially breaking Covid laws. We need to move on from the pandemic now; in a positive and optimistic way and stop blaming each other and trying to score political points. No leader of a political party should feel obliged to resign from office due to the issuing of a fixed penalty notice".
Right attitude in general, but wrong course of action, the PM should never be putting pressure on the Police either way.
The law should be amended though to remove these powers from the Police. Let the Courts act as judges, no the Police.
Not put pressure - just make the suggestion. If Durham police don't issue Starmer with a FPN (which I think is extremely likely) then there will be a hint out there that leniency has won the day thanks to Johnson. If the police do issue Starmer with a FPN then Starmer has resigned needlessly, absurdly even.
The PM telling the police to stop or go forward with a police investigation would probably be a breach of the law. I'm thinking Misconduct in a Public Office or attempting to pervert the cause of justice. @PBLawyers?
Not "telling". That's not what I said. Couch it in the softest wording possible. Questioning?
Most speakers wouldn't have allowed that question from the Tory MP for Hartlepool because the PM doesn't have responsibility for Labour policy.
Since there is no LOTO Questions, when is the Opposition's policy supposed to be scrutinised?
Well, not at PMQs. Clue is in the name.
Since there is no LOTO Questions, when is the Opposition's policy supposed to be scrutinised?
PMQs is the closest we have.
Oppositions put forward their proposals when elections are called. The public scrutinise them and in Labour's case the public hasn't really fancied it for the past decade +. They aren't in Government, it's a waste of the House's time to scrutinise a potential manifesto rather than the serious business of running the country.
Most speakers wouldn't have allowed that question from the Tory MP for Hartlepool because the PM doesn't have responsibility for Labour policy.
Since there is no LOTO Questions, when is the Opposition's policy supposed to be scrutinised?
It's called an election.
There's not going to be one of those for a couple of years. Why should the LOTO get away without scrutiny in the meantime?
AIUI the LOTO salary is funded the same way as a Cabinet Minister's - there should be regular scrutiny.
He doesn't "get away" with anything. Anybody is at liberty to scrutinise Labour and its policies at any time they choose, and the media and commentators do so daily. The purpose of PMQs and other Questions is to scrutinise those who are actually in power. I'm a little surprised you need this explained.
There are three key issues for the general public now:
Cost of living Cost of living and ...
Cost of living.
This is what the government wil be judged on now as we move to the GE.
But do LAB really have any answers?
All parties are committed to Net Zero.
In the short term (10-years?) that only means more impoverishment and more sacrifices until renewables actually deliver plentiful cheap energy or someone comes up with a new technology. The price of energy now tells us renewables are woefully, woefully short of that target.
The field's wide open to someone that wants to lift the hard target of 2050. For someone who wants to take their time. Wide open.
Renewables are our best hope of escaping high fossil fuel prices.
The opposite of what is happening in the real world, right now, then.
Fossil fuel energy prices are rocketing and renewables are not helping us escape them. Not in the slightest.
Renewables are failing utterly to rise to the challenge. Failing utterly.
That's utter rot.
Renewables absolutely are rising to the challenge, the problem is we haven't got enough of them yet.
A decade ago the overwhelming majority of our electricity came from coal or gas. Now a plurality comes from renewables.
At the time of writing according to Gridwatch 45% of electricity is coming from Wind. Gas is making up a meagre 17%.
If renewables weren't there, we'd be paying even more for gas than we are now. Thank goodness we have as much renewables as we do.
What quite clear, without a change of PM, PartyGate doesn’t get closure and goes on dragging the Conservative Party down. There’s questions here today Boris can’t and won’t answer.
Most speakers wouldn't have allowed that question from the Tory MP for Hartlepool because the PM doesn't have responsibility for Labour policy.
Since there is no LOTO Questions, when is the Opposition's policy supposed to be scrutinised?
It's called an election.
There's not going to be one of those for a couple of years. Why should the LOTO get away without scrutiny in the meantime?
AIUI the LOTO salary is funded the same way as a Cabinet Minister's - there should be regular scrutiny.
He doesn't "get away" with anything. Anybody is at liberty to scrutinise Labour and its policies at any time they choose, and the media and commentators do so daily. The purpose of PMQs and other Questions is to scrutinise those who are actually in power. I'm a little surprised you need this explained.
Except for parliament, apparently.
Surely accurate scrutiny of government requires analysis of the alternative.
I can't believe the Prime Minister has the sheer effrontery to remain in office when there is now a photo, in the public domain, of him standing eating a sad meal 2 metres from the Chancellor, and all of this right next to a table, during the working day! - a table, no less, on which you can clearly see a plastic jug three-quarters-filled with cheap orange juice
There is no end to the squalor and the lies. AND THE DEBAUCHERY
They had a social gathering when they'd made it illegal for anyone else to do so. And then they lied about it.
You've got no self-respect for yourself if you tolerate that.
lol. We can all see the photos
We can see a selection of the photos.
But neatly done by Boris, dragging this out for three months and turning into a debate over the adequacy of the entertainment in No10, rather than his presiding over regular breach of his own rules and lying about it to the Commons.
What quite clear, without a change of PM, PartyGate doesn’t get closure and goes on dragging the Conservative Party down. There’s questions here today Boris can’t and won’t answer.
More significantly. He had no answers whatsoever on the economy.
He’s a sly one this Boris character, ruthless at ruining other politicians’ careers, see how he ended Chancellor Sunak’s credibility, and now he’s brutally destroying the career of Prime Minister Johnson.
There are three key issues for the general public now:
Cost of living Cost of living and ...
Cost of living.
This is what the government wil be judged on now as we move to the GE.
But do LAB really have any answers?
All parties are committed to Net Zero.
In the short term (10-years?) that only means more impoverishment and more sacrifices until renewables actually deliver plentiful cheap energy or someone comes up with a new technology. The price of energy now tells us renewables are woefully, woefully short of that target.
The field's wide open to someone that wants to lift the hard target of 2050. For someone who wants to take their time. Wide open.
Renewables are our best hope of escaping high fossil fuel prices.
The opposite of what is happening in the real world, right now, then.
Fossil fuel energy prices are rocketing and renewables are not helping us escape them. Not in the slightest.
Renewables are failing utterly to rise to the challenge. Failing utterly.
That's utter rot.
Renewables absolutely are rising to the challenge, the problem is we haven't got enough of them yet.
A decade ago the overwhelming majority of our electricity came from coal or gas. Now a plurality comes from renewables.
At the time of writing according to Gridwatch 45% of electricity is coming from Wind. Gas is making up a meagre 17%.
If renewables weren't there, we'd be paying even more for gas than we are now. Thank goodness we have as much renewables as we do.
IF we drilled for much more oil and gas, there would be much more oil and gas and we would have lower oil and gas prices. FFS this stuff isn't difficult.
I can't believe the Prime Minister has the sheer effrontery to remain in office when there is now a photo, in the public domain, of him standing eating a sad meal 2 metres from the Chancellor, and all of this right next to a table, during the working day! - a table, no less, on which you can clearly see a plastic jug three-quarters-filled with cheap orange juice
There is no end to the squalor and the lies. AND THE DEBAUCHERY
They had a social gathering when they'd made it illegal for anyone else to do so. And then they lied about it.
You've got no self-respect for yourself if you tolerate that.
lol. We can all see the photos
We can see a selection of the photos.
But neatly done by Boris, dragging this out for three months and turning into a debate over the adequacy of the entertainment in No10, rather than his presiding over regular breach of his own rules and lying about it to the Commons.
There's no lie. The photos don't show a lie.
Do you sandwiches at work at lunchtime to be a Party? I don't. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Do you consider saying goodbye to a colleague at work during work hours to be a Party? I don't and the Police didn't either. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Being wrong isn't a lie, saying something you know to be untrue is a lie and there's no evidence of that here.
In one leap Boris was free! But we now face the amazing possibility that Sir Keir will be forced to resign as LOTO in a few weeks. How smug would Boris feel if that happened - everyone was rounding on him over flouting Covid restrictions, but it's Labour who are plunged into crisis over it.
I'm watching about 20 minutes behind, so Boris is still speaking, but how often has Boris used the word "humble" or "humbled" in this statement?
Every other word at some points seems to be humble or humbled.
As predicted.
I remember Rupert Murdoch telling the DCMS select committee on phone hacking “this is the most humble day of my life”. He was lying. I expect the same level of insincerity from a supposedly “humbled” Boris Johnson today. https://mobile.twitter.com/RhonddaBryant/status/1529414152963465216
This all seems like Fair Comment from the BoJo the Bozzmeister
"Boris Johnson is responding to Keir Starmer.
He says that during Covid Starmer was “sniping from the sidelines and veering from one position to the next”.
In his response today, Starmer failed to show “common sense”, he claims. He says Starmer failed to appreciate the context of what happened. He says the boundaries between work and socialisting became blurred.
He accuses Starmer of being “sanctimonious”, and he descibes him as a “gaseous Zeppelin”, saying his pomposity has been punctured.
He goes on:
Sir Beer Korma is currently failing to hold himself to the same high standards he demanded of me.
Johnson says Starmer said that Johnson should resign when he was being investigated by the police. But Starmer is being investigated by the police, and he has not resigned.
Starmer IS a sanctimonious prick. He also wanted to cancel British democracy. Well said, Boris Bojo "Boz-boz" The Bozzington Bozzles Johnson, Bozmeister General
I can't believe the Prime Minister has the sheer effrontery to remain in office when there is now a photo, in the public domain, of him standing eating a sad meal 2 metres from the Chancellor, and all of this right next to a table, during the working day! - a table, no less, on which you can clearly see a plastic jug three-quarters-filled with cheap orange juice
There is no end to the squalor and the lies. AND THE DEBAUCHERY
They had a social gathering when they'd made it illegal for anyone else to do so. And then they lied about it.
You've got no self-respect for yourself if you tolerate that.
lol. We can all see the photos
We can see a selection of the photos.
But neatly done by Boris, dragging this out for three months and turning into a debate over the adequacy of the entertainment in No10, rather than his presiding over regular breach of his own rules and lying about it to the Commons.
There's no lie. The photos don't show a lie.
Do you sandwiches at work at lunchtime to be a Party? I don't. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Do you consider saying goodbye to a colleague at work during work hours to be a Party? I don't and the Police didn't either. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Being wrong isn't a lie, saying something you know to be untrue is a lie and there's no evidence of that here.
As I said, a selection.
And of course he remains outraged to hear about the far worse occasions where he was not present.
This all seems like Fair Comment from the BoJo the Bozzmeister
"Boris Johnson is responding to Keir Starmer.
He says that during Covid Starmer was “sniping from the sidelines and veering from one position to the next”.
In his response today, Starmer failed to show “common sense”, he claims. He says Starmer failed to appreciate the context of what happened. He says the boundaries between work and socialisting became blurred.
He accuses Starmer of being “sanctimonious”, and he descibes him as a “gaseous Zeppelin”, saying his pomposity has been punctured.
He goes on:
Sir Beer Korma is currently failing to hold himself to the same high standards he demanded of me.
Johnson says Starmer said that Johnson should resign when he was being investigated by the police. But Starmer is being investigated by the police, and he has not resigned.
Starmer IS a sanctimonious prick. He also wanted to cancel British democracy. Well said, Boris Bojo "Boz-boz" The Bozzington Bozzles Johnson, Bozmeister General
Did Johnson actually say that or have you made it up?
This all seems like Fair Comment from the BoJo the Bozzmeister
"Boris Johnson is responding to Keir Starmer.
He says that during Covid Starmer was “sniping from the sidelines and veering from one position to the next”.
In his response today, Starmer failed to show “common sense”, he claims. He says Starmer failed to appreciate the context of what happened. He says the boundaries between work and socialisting became blurred.
He accuses Starmer of being “sanctimonious”, and he descibes him as a “gaseous Zeppelin”, saying his pomposity has been punctured.
He goes on:
Sir Beer Korma is currently failing to hold himself to the same high standards he demanded of me.
Johnson says Starmer said that Johnson should resign when he was being investigated by the police. But Starmer is being investigated by the police, and he has not resigned.
Starmer IS a sanctimonious prick. He also wanted to cancel British democracy. Well said, Boris Bojo "Boz-boz" The Bozzington Bozzles Johnson, Bozmeister General
Only this very morning you were complaining to someone else that they were still banging on about Brexit. You may want to remove that splinter from your eye luv.
Most speakers wouldn't have allowed that question from the Tory MP for Hartlepool because the PM doesn't have responsibility for Labour policy.
Since there is no LOTO Questions, when is the Opposition's policy supposed to be scrutinised?
It's called an election.
There's not going to be one of those for a couple of years. Why should the LOTO get away without scrutiny in the meantime?
AIUI the LOTO salary is funded the same way as a Cabinet Minister's - there should be regular scrutiny.
He doesn't "get away" with anything. Anybody is at liberty to scrutinise Labour and its policies at any time they choose, and the media and commentators do so daily. The purpose of PMQs and other Questions is to scrutinise those who are actually in power. I'm a little surprised you need this explained.
Except for parliament, apparently.
Surely accurate scrutiny of government requires analysis of the alternative.
So you’re proposing that those actually in power be given occasions for formal scrutiny of the opposition ?
Most speakers wouldn't have allowed that question from the Tory MP for Hartlepool because the PM doesn't have responsibility for Labour policy.
Since there is no LOTO Questions, when is the Opposition's policy supposed to be scrutinised?
It's called an election.
There's not going to be one of those for a couple of years. Why should the LOTO get away without scrutiny in the meantime?
AIUI the LOTO salary is funded the same way as a Cabinet Minister's - there should be regular scrutiny.
He doesn't "get away" with anything. Anybody is at liberty to scrutinise Labour and its policies at any time they choose, and the media and commentators do so daily. The purpose of PMQs and other Questions is to scrutinise those who are actually in power. I'm a little surprised you need this explained.
Except for parliament, apparently.
Surely accurate scrutiny of government requires analysis of the alternative.
There are debates held when legislation and its amendments are proposed when specific proposals are discussed.
One of the purposes of parliament is to hold the government to account, and the set-piece Questions are one of the mechanisms for doing that. If you want to subvert those sessions to talk about anything other than the government, then you are saying you do not value that scrutiny. That's a mistake, in my view, because scrutiny is at the heart of democracy and good governance.
Parliament is at liberty to discuss whatever matters it likes and can do so without abandoning or subverting one of its core purposes. These mechanisms are there for a reason and if you don't like it you probably don't really care about democracy.
This all seems like Fair Comment from the BoJo the Bozzmeister
"Boris Johnson is responding to Keir Starmer.
He says that during Covid Starmer was “sniping from the sidelines and veering from one position to the next”.
In his response today, Starmer failed to show “common sense”, he claims. He says Starmer failed to appreciate the context of what happened. He says the boundaries between work and socialisting became blurred.
He accuses Starmer of being “sanctimonious”, and he descibes him as a “gaseous Zeppelin”, saying his pomposity has been punctured.
He goes on:
Sir Beer Korma is currently failing to hold himself to the same high standards he demanded of me.
Johnson says Starmer said that Johnson should resign when he was being investigated by the police. But Starmer is being investigated by the police, and he has not resigned.
Starmer IS a sanctimonious prick. He also wanted to cancel British democracy. Well said, Boris Bojo "Boz-boz" The Bozzington Bozzles Johnson, Bozmeister General
Boris is now making it all about Sir Keir. Very shrewd considering Sir Keir still has the Sword of Durhamocles hanging over him.
There are three key issues for the general public now:
Cost of living Cost of living and ...
Cost of living.
This is what the government wil be judged on now as we move to the GE.
But do LAB really have any answers?
All parties are committed to Net Zero.
In the short term (10-years?) that only means more impoverishment and more sacrifices until renewables actually deliver plentiful cheap energy or someone comes up with a new technology. The price of energy now tells us renewables are woefully, woefully short of that target.
The field's wide open to someone that wants to lift the hard target of 2050. For someone who wants to take their time. Wide open.
Renewables are our best hope of escaping high fossil fuel prices.
The opposite of what is happening in the real world, right now, then.
Fossil fuel energy prices are rocketing and renewables are not helping us escape them. Not in the slightest.
Renewables are failing utterly to rise to the challenge. Failing utterly.
That's utter rot.
Renewables absolutely are rising to the challenge, the problem is we haven't got enough of them yet.
A decade ago the overwhelming majority of our electricity came from coal or gas. Now a plurality comes from renewables.
At the time of writing according to Gridwatch 45% of electricity is coming from Wind. Gas is making up a meagre 17%.
If renewables weren't there, we'd be paying even more for gas than we are now. Thank goodness we have as much renewables as we do.
IF we drilled for much more oil and gas, there would be much more oil and gas and we would have lower oil and gas prices. FFS this stuff isn't difficult.
It is difficult actually. 83% of our energy currently is not oil or gas, 83% of our energy at this present moment of time is zero carbon alternatives to gas.
If we hadn't invested in renewables we would be consuming 600% of the gas we are presently consuming. Eliminating 83% of our consumption of a product saves our costs from that product far more.
On the other hand, your suggestion is like pissing in the ocean and expecting the tides to rise. Oil and gas prices are globally set based upon global supply and demand and most of that supply is held within the soil of frankly relatively hostile states, whether Putin's Russia or the Sheiks in the Middle East or elsewhere. Even if we marginally increased global oil and gas production by producing a marginal bit more ourselves, it would only marginally affect global oil and gas prices.
Your "solution" isn't a solution, removing the demand on the other hand absolutely is.
Investing in renewables means we don't need to pay the Sheiks or Putin for gas. It means we don't need to pay high gas prices.
This all seems like Fair Comment from the BoJo the Bozzmeister
"Boris Johnson is responding to Keir Starmer.
He says that during Covid Starmer was “sniping from the sidelines and veering from one position to the next”.
In his response today, Starmer failed to show “common sense”, he claims. He says Starmer failed to appreciate the context of what happened. He says the boundaries between work and socialisting became blurred.
He accuses Starmer of being “sanctimonious”, and he descibes him as a “gaseous Zeppelin”, saying his pomposity has been punctured.
He goes on:
Sir Beer Korma is currently failing to hold himself to the same high standards he demanded of me.
Johnson says Starmer said that Johnson should resign when he was being investigated by the police. But Starmer is being investigated by the police, and he has not resigned.
Starmer IS a sanctimonious prick. He also wanted to cancel British democracy. Well said, Boris Bojo "Boz-boz" The Bozzington Bozzles Johnson, Bozmeister General
Did Johnson actually say that or have you made it up?
He said it. And, I confess, I laughed out loud
It's the sheer chutzpah of delivering a clever pun (tho not one he made himself) during THIS most solemn of occasions, what an insult to the 7 trillion dead of plague, blah blah whatever
Most speakers wouldn't have allowed that question from the Tory MP for Hartlepool because the PM doesn't have responsibility for Labour policy.
Since there is no LOTO Questions, when is the Opposition's policy supposed to be scrutinised?
It's called an election.
There's not going to be one of those for a couple of years. Why should the LOTO get away without scrutiny in the meantime?
AIUI the LOTO salary is funded the same way as a Cabinet Minister's - there should be regular scrutiny.
He doesn't "get away" with anything. Anybody is at liberty to scrutinise Labour and its policies at any time they choose, and the media and commentators do so daily. The purpose of PMQs and other Questions is to scrutinise those who are actually in power. I'm a little surprised you need this explained.
Except for parliament, apparently.
Surely accurate scrutiny of government requires analysis of the alternative.
So you’re proposing that those actually in power be given occasions for formal scrutiny of the opposition ?
Are you an Orban fan, by any chance ?
Autocratic tendencies rising to the surface today.
But then I guess the government punching down is a useful distraction from the government downing punch.
This all seems like Fair Comment from the BoJo the Bozzmeister
"Boris Johnson is responding to Keir Starmer.
He says that during Covid Starmer was “sniping from the sidelines and veering from one position to the next”.
In his response today, Starmer failed to show “common sense”, he claims. He says Starmer failed to appreciate the context of what happened. He says the boundaries between work and socialisting became blurred.
He accuses Starmer of being “sanctimonious”, and he descibes him as a “gaseous Zeppelin”, saying his pomposity has been punctured.
He goes on:
Sir Beer Korma is currently failing to hold himself to the same high standards he demanded of me.
Johnson says Starmer said that Johnson should resign when he was being investigated by the police. But Starmer is being investigated by the police, and he has not resigned.
Starmer IS a sanctimonious prick. He also wanted to cancel British democracy. Well said, Boris Bojo "Boz-boz" The Bozzington Bozzles Johnson, Bozmeister General
Did Johnson actually say that or have you made it up?
In one leap Boris was free! But we now face the amazing possibility that Sir Keir will be forced to resign as LOTO in a few weeks. How smug would Boris feel if that happened - everyone was rounding on him over flouting Covid restrictions, but it's Labour who are plunged into crisis over it.
I will probably rupture my spleen with laughter if Sir Beer Korma has to resign after his solemn vow of Deep Personal Honesty. For the record, I don't think he will get a FPN, but if he did: CHORTLE
Also, Labour might then elect Rayner as leader, and she'd be much more fun and interesting and would be good for the country
What quite clear, without a change of PM, PartyGate doesn’t get closure and goes on dragging the Conservative Party down. There’s questions here today Boris can’t and won’t answer.
More significantly. He had no answers whatsoever on the economy.
That’s the thing from today the actual media commentary will pick up on, and probably the main reason for the coming VONC - the Tories need to turn a page on their rubbish broad brush economic performance of the last two years, they are not just gifting wins to Labour at the dispatch box on economy like PMQs today, but lack of economic strategy and plan is a nightmare for those out on the media rounds. Thinking ahead to the election they face a wipe out on not being combative on the economy.
You are right, newspaper editorials tomorrow and the morning of the VONC will describe it like this.
This all seems like Fair Comment from the BoJo the Bozzmeister
"Boris Johnson is responding to Keir Starmer.
He says that during Covid Starmer was “sniping from the sidelines and veering from one position to the next”.
In his response today, Starmer failed to show “common sense”, he claims. He says Starmer failed to appreciate the context of what happened. He says the boundaries between work and socialisting became blurred.
He accuses Starmer of being “sanctimonious”, and he descibes him as a “gaseous Zeppelin”, saying his pomposity has been punctured.
He goes on:
Sir Beer Korma is currently failing to hold himself to the same high standards he demanded of me.
Johnson says Starmer said that Johnson should resign when he was being investigated by the police. But Starmer is being investigated by the police, and he has not resigned.
Starmer IS a sanctimonious prick. He also wanted to cancel British democracy. Well said, Boris Bojo "Boz-boz" The Bozzington Bozzles Johnson, Bozmeister General
Did Johnson actually say that or have you made it up?
He said it. And, I confess, I laughed out loud
It's the sheer chutzpah of delivering a clever pun (tho not one he made himself) during THIS most solemn of occasions, what an insult to the 7 trillion dead of plague, blah blah whatever
It's all very well saying that "boundaries between work and socialising became blurred" and the same can be said of guidance vs laws but he was in charge and he (and others) stood at the pulpit and told everyone to follow the rules knowing full well that he was spouting guidance only. When the public hear "rules" they assume it is legal requirement. For example social distancing was never in law, it was only ever guidance.
This all seems like Fair Comment from the BoJo the Bozzmeister
"Boris Johnson is responding to Keir Starmer.
He says that during Covid Starmer was “sniping from the sidelines and veering from one position to the next”.
In his response today, Starmer failed to show “common sense”, he claims. He says Starmer failed to appreciate the context of what happened. He says the boundaries between work and socialisting became blurred.
He accuses Starmer of being “sanctimonious”, and he descibes him as a “gaseous Zeppelin”, saying his pomposity has been punctured.
He goes on:
Sir Beer Korma is currently failing to hold himself to the same high standards he demanded of me.
Johnson says Starmer said that Johnson should resign when he was being investigated by the police. But Starmer is being investigated by the police, and he has not resigned.
Starmer IS a sanctimonious prick. He also wanted to cancel British democracy. Well said, Boris Bojo "Boz-boz" The Bozzington Bozzles Johnson, Bozmeister General
Did Johnson actually say that or have you made it up?
He said it. And, I confess, I laughed out loud
It's the sheer chutzpah of delivering a clever pun (tho not one he made himself) during THIS most solemn of occasions, what an insult to the 7 trillion dead of plague, blah blah whatever
Yes, I can see that ‘it’s all a joke, nothing really matters’ might appeal to you. And it’s true that it’s the basis for Johnson’s career.
In one leap Boris was free! But we now face the amazing possibility that Sir Keir will be forced to resign as LOTO in a few weeks. How smug would Boris feel if that happened - everyone was rounding on him over flouting Covid restrictions, but it's Labour who are plunged into crisis over it.
I will probably rupture my spleen with laughter if Sir Beer Korma has to resign after his solemn vow of Deep Personal Honesty. For the record, I don't think he will get a FPN, but if he did: CHORTLE
Also, Labour might then elect Rayner as leader, and she'd be much more fun and interesting and would be good for the country
You havn’t been following it. She would have to resign too.
Starmer was very good today, very Primeministerial.
Unfortunately for Tories, what today tells us is partygate isn’t going away as a millstone on them, it’s hard to even see how they can turn a page and put it behind them.
The way the police messed up the investigation just hadn’t helped the party at all.
In one leap Boris was free! But we now face the amazing possibility that Sir Keir will be forced to resign as LOTO in a few weeks. How smug would Boris feel if that happened - everyone was rounding on him over flouting Covid restrictions, but it's Labour who are plunged into crisis over it.
I will probably rupture my spleen with laughter if Sir Beer Korma has to resign after his solemn vow of Deep Personal Honesty. For the record, I don't think he will get a FPN, but if he did: CHORTLE
Also, Labour might then elect Rayner as leader, and she'd be much more fun and interesting and would be good for the country
What does Starmer do if Durham plod take the obvious fudge and say like Big Dom that there could well have been minor breaches of the rules, but in line with policy decline to issue a FPN retrospectively?
This all seems like Fair Comment from the BoJo the Bozzmeister
"Boris Johnson is responding to Keir Starmer.
He says that during Covid Starmer was “sniping from the sidelines and veering from one position to the next”.
In his response today, Starmer failed to show “common sense”, he claims. He says Starmer failed to appreciate the context of what happened. He says the boundaries between work and socialisting became blurred.
He accuses Starmer of being “sanctimonious”, and he descibes him as a “gaseous Zeppelin”, saying his pomposity has been punctured.
He goes on:
Sir Beer Korma is currently failing to hold himself to the same high standards he demanded of me.
Johnson says Starmer said that Johnson should resign when he was being investigated by the police. But Starmer is being investigated by the police, and he has not resigned.
Starmer IS a sanctimonious prick. He also wanted to cancel British democracy. Well said, Boris Bojo "Boz-boz" The Bozzington Bozzles Johnson, Bozmeister General
Did Johnson actually say that or have you made it up?
He said it. And, I confess, I laughed out loud
It's the sheer chutzpah of delivering a clever pun (tho not one he made himself) during THIS most solemn of occasions, what an insult to the 7 trillion dead of plague, blah blah whatever
It's all very well saying that "boundaries between work and socialising became blurred" and the same can be said of guidance vs laws but he was in charge and he (and others) stood at the pulpit and told everyone to follow the rules knowing full well that he was spouting guidance only. When the public hear "rules" they assume it is legal requirement. For example social distancing was never in law, it was only ever guidance.
But it's just boring now. YAWN
Everyone wants to forget about Covid and have a life again. Boris is going to benefit from that (and these laughably non incriminating photos). He will survive this, and fight in 2024
Whether he wins is an entirely different matter, natch
In one leap Boris was free! But we now face the amazing possibility that Sir Keir will be forced to resign as LOTO in a few weeks. How smug would Boris feel if that happened - everyone was rounding on him over flouting Covid restrictions, but it's Labour who are plunged into crisis over it.
I will probably rupture my spleen with laughter if Sir Beer Korma has to resign after his solemn vow of Deep Personal Honesty. For the record, I don't think he will get a FPN, but if he did: CHORTLE
Also, Labour might then elect Rayner as leader, and she'd be much more fun and interesting and would be good for the country
You havn’t been following it. She would have to resign too.
Starmer was very good today, very Primeministerial.
Unfortunately for Tories, what today tells us is partygate isn’t going away as a millstone on them, it’s hard to even see how they can turn a page and put it behind them.
The way the police messed up the investigation just hadn’t helped the party at all.
Has she also promised to resign? I must have missed that
Shame, if so. I like her. She'd be a good Labour leader
Most speakers wouldn't have allowed that question from the Tory MP for Hartlepool because the PM doesn't have responsibility for Labour policy.
Since there is no LOTO Questions, when is the Opposition's policy supposed to be scrutinised?
It's called an election.
There's not going to be one of those for a couple of years. Why should the LOTO get away without scrutiny in the meantime?
AIUI the LOTO salary is funded the same way as a Cabinet Minister's - there should be regular scrutiny.
He doesn't "get away" with anything. Anybody is at liberty to scrutinise Labour and its policies at any time they choose, and the media and commentators do so daily. The purpose of PMQs and other Questions is to scrutinise those who are actually in power. I'm a little surprised you need this explained.
Except for parliament, apparently.
Surely accurate scrutiny of government requires analysis of the alternative.
So you’re proposing that those actually in power be given occasions for formal scrutiny of the opposition ?
Are you an Orban fan, by any chance ?
Autocratic tendencies rising to the surface today.
But then I guess the government punching down is a useful distraction from the government downing punch.
Punching down. Downing punch.
Sorry, but that was inspired. You people don't deserve me
I can't believe the Prime Minister has the sheer effrontery to remain in office when there is now a photo, in the public domain, of him standing eating a sad meal 2 metres from the Chancellor, and all of this right next to a table, during the working day! - a table, no less, on which you can clearly see a plastic jug three-quarters-filled with cheap orange juice
There is no end to the squalor and the lies. AND THE DEBAUCHERY
They had a social gathering when they'd made it illegal for anyone else to do so. And then they lied about it.
You've got no self-respect for yourself if you tolerate that.
lol. We can all see the photos
We can see a selection of the photos.
But neatly done by Boris, dragging this out for three months and turning into a debate over the adequacy of the entertainment in No10, rather than his presiding over regular breach of his own rules and lying about it to the Commons.
There's no lie. The photos don't show a lie.
Do you sandwiches at work at lunchtime to be a Party? I don't. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Do you consider saying goodbye to a colleague at work during work hours to be a Party? I don't and the Police didn't either. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Being wrong isn't a lie, saying something you know to be untrue is a lie and there's no evidence of that here.
IMV there is a central question that underlines partygate, beergate, and the verbal, physical and sexual abuse of people in parliament: is there too much of a drinking culture in politics - not just the politicians, but SPADs, civil servants, workers, and journos?
I can understand why there might be a drinking culture for many of these roles: they are stressful and multifaceted, and can involve long periods away from home and family.
A thought occurs. The cleaning staff who were laughed at and abused in Bonzo's Downing Street. Now that their abuse is out in the open will we get Sunday expose articles from unnamed staff being told to STFU by senior political staffers?
This all seems like Fair Comment from the BoJo the Bozzmeister
"Boris Johnson is responding to Keir Starmer.
He says that during Covid Starmer was “sniping from the sidelines and veering from one position to the next”.
In his response today, Starmer failed to show “common sense”, he claims. He says Starmer failed to appreciate the context of what happened. He says the boundaries between work and socialisting became blurred.
He accuses Starmer of being “sanctimonious”, and he descibes him as a “gaseous Zeppelin”, saying his pomposity has been punctured.
He goes on:
Sir Beer Korma is currently failing to hold himself to the same high standards he demanded of me.
Johnson says Starmer said that Johnson should resign when he was being investigated by the police. But Starmer is being investigated by the police, and he has not resigned.
Starmer IS a sanctimonious prick. He also wanted to cancel British democracy. Well said, Boris Bojo "Boz-boz" The Bozzington Bozzles Johnson, Bozmeister General
Did Johnson actually say that or have you made it up?
He said it. And, I confess, I laughed out loud
It's the sheer chutzpah of delivering a clever pun (tho not one he made himself) during THIS most solemn of occasions, what an insult to the 7 trillion dead of plague, blah blah whatever
This all seems like Fair Comment from the BoJo the Bozzmeister
"Boris Johnson is responding to Keir Starmer.
He says that during Covid Starmer was “sniping from the sidelines and veering from one position to the next”.
In his response today, Starmer failed to show “common sense”, he claims. He says Starmer failed to appreciate the context of what happened. He says the boundaries between work and socialisting became blurred.
He accuses Starmer of being “sanctimonious”, and he descibes him as a “gaseous Zeppelin”, saying his pomposity has been punctured.
He goes on:
Sir Beer Korma is currently failing to hold himself to the same high standards he demanded of me.
Johnson says Starmer said that Johnson should resign when he was being investigated by the police. But Starmer is being investigated by the police, and he has not resigned.
Starmer IS a sanctimonious prick. He also wanted to cancel British democracy. Well said, Boris Bojo "Boz-boz" The Bozzington Bozzles Johnson, Bozmeister General
Only this very morning you were complaining to someone else that they were still banging on about Brexit. You may want to remove that splinter from your eye luv.
I have to defend @leon here. He was referring to me and because I constantly have a go at him for bringing up Brexit as I also did this morning. He was, I believe joking, to get out of a hole he had dug for himself regarding the EU. I challenged him this morning for bringing up Brexit again (and as usual for no good reason whatsoever). He then came out with a nonsense statement about the EU which was very easy to prove was nonsense, so he deflected by calling me out instead on going on about Brexit, which I thought was a clever/funny deflection and also showing a deprecating self awareness.
Or of course he missed the whole irony of it, but I prefer to believe the former.
This all seems like Fair Comment from the BoJo the Bozzmeister
"Boris Johnson is responding to Keir Starmer.
He says that during Covid Starmer was “sniping from the sidelines and veering from one position to the next”.
In his response today, Starmer failed to show “common sense”, he claims. He says Starmer failed to appreciate the context of what happened. He says the boundaries between work and socialisting became blurred.
He accuses Starmer of being “sanctimonious”, and he descibes him as a “gaseous Zeppelin”, saying his pomposity has been punctured.
He goes on:
Sir Beer Korma is currently failing to hold himself to the same high standards he demanded of me.
Johnson says Starmer said that Johnson should resign when he was being investigated by the police. But Starmer is being investigated by the police, and he has not resigned.
Starmer IS a sanctimonious prick. He also wanted to cancel British democracy. Well said, Boris Bojo "Boz-boz" The Bozzington Bozzles Johnson, Bozmeister General
Did Johnson actually say that or have you made it up?
He said it. And, I confess, I laughed out loud
It's the sheer chutzpah of delivering a clever pun (tho not one he made himself) during THIS most solemn of occasions, what an insult to the 7 trillion dead of plague, blah blah whatever
It's puerile ffs. Shape up.
Of all the humourless pricks I expected not to laugh at Boris's deft and superbly funny pun, you are the humourless-est, and the prick-est, so thanks for fulfilling my priors
I can't believe the Prime Minister has the sheer effrontery to remain in office when there is now a photo, in the public domain, of him standing eating a sad meal 2 metres from the Chancellor, and all of this right next to a table, during the working day! - a table, no less, on which you can clearly see a plastic jug three-quarters-filled with cheap orange juice
There is no end to the squalor and the lies. AND THE DEBAUCHERY
They had a social gathering when they'd made it illegal for anyone else to do so. And then they lied about it.
You've got no self-respect for yourself if you tolerate that.
lol. We can all see the photos
We can see a selection of the photos.
But neatly done by Boris, dragging this out for three months and turning into a debate over the adequacy of the entertainment in No10, rather than his presiding over regular breach of his own rules and lying about it to the Commons.
There's no lie. The photos don't show a lie.
Do you sandwiches at work at lunchtime to be a Party? I don't. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Do you consider saying goodbye to a colleague at work during work hours to be a Party? I don't and the Police didn't either. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Being wrong isn't a lie, saying something you know to be untrue is a lie and there's no evidence of that here.
IMV there is a central question that underlines partygate, beergate, and the verbal, physical and sexual abuse of people in parliament: is there too much of a drinking culture in politics - not just the politicians, but SPADs, civil servants, workers, and journos?
I can understand why there might be a drinking culture for many of these roles: they are stressful and multifaceted, and can involve long periods away from home and family.
But that doesn't necessarily make it right.
This is the thing I dislike about this 'scandal', a deep puritanism as if alcohol is verboten rather than what the law was about.
Drinking doesn't cause abuse, abusers cause abuse and any abusers should be treated with zero tolerance but alcohol is not the cause it is not even an excuse.
Sir Beer Korma drinking beer isn't verbally, physically or sexually abusing anyone in doing so. The PM having an Estrella as a refreshment isn't either.
Alcohol is an acceptable and legal drink. People banging on about alcohol is as pathetic puritanism as Americans insisting that 18 year olds can't legally drink, but they can buy automatic rifles.
Most speakers wouldn't have allowed that question from the Tory MP for Hartlepool because the PM doesn't have responsibility for Labour policy.
Since there is no LOTO Questions, when is the Opposition's policy supposed to be scrutinised?
It's called an election.
There's not going to be one of those for a couple of years. Why should the LOTO get away without scrutiny in the meantime?
AIUI the LOTO salary is funded the same way as a Cabinet Minister's - there should be regular scrutiny.
He doesn't "get away" with anything. Anybody is at liberty to scrutinise Labour and its policies at any time they choose, and the media and commentators do so daily. The purpose of PMQs and other Questions is to scrutinise those who are actually in power. I'm a little surprised you need this explained.
Except for parliament, apparently.
Surely accurate scrutiny of government requires analysis of the alternative.
So you’re proposing that those actually in power be given occasions for formal scrutiny of the opposition ?
Are you an Orban fan, by any chance ?
Not necessarily, provided "so what would you do?" is acceptable at PMQs - which is where we came in.
In one leap Boris was free! But we now face the amazing possibility that Sir Keir will be forced to resign as LOTO in a few weeks. How smug would Boris feel if that happened - everyone was rounding on him over flouting Covid restrictions, but it's Labour who are plunged into crisis over it.
I will probably rupture my spleen with laughter if Sir Beer Korma has to resign after his solemn vow of Deep Personal Honesty. For the record, I don't think he will get a FPN, but if he did: CHORTLE
Also, Labour might then elect Rayner as leader, and she'd be much more fun and interesting and would be good for the country
The government quickly backed down in tussle with Roman, as many on here predicted. Maybe clearing the decks of as much contention as possible at the moment.
Chelsea now have a £200M transfer dowry to blow - number 1 target Declan Rice, number 2 target Oliver Watkins.
Since made PBs minister for sport, I’m all over these things. 🫡
I can't believe the Prime Minister has the sheer effrontery to remain in office when there is now a photo, in the public domain, of him standing eating a sad meal 2 metres from the Chancellor, and all of this right next to a table, during the working day! - a table, no less, on which you can clearly see a plastic jug three-quarters-filled with cheap orange juice
There is no end to the squalor and the lies. AND THE DEBAUCHERY
They had a social gathering when they'd made it illegal for anyone else to do so. And then they lied about it.
You've got no self-respect for yourself if you tolerate that.
lol. We can all see the photos
We can see a selection of the photos.
But neatly done by Boris, dragging this out for three months and turning into a debate over the adequacy of the entertainment in No10, rather than his presiding over regular breach of his own rules and lying about it to the Commons.
There's no lie. The photos don't show a lie.
Do you sandwiches at work at lunchtime to be a Party? I don't. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Do you consider saying goodbye to a colleague at work during work hours to be a Party? I don't and the Police didn't either. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Being wrong isn't a lie, saying something you know to be untrue is a lie and there's no evidence of that here.
IMV there is a central question that underlines partygate, beergate, and the verbal, physical and sexual abuse of people in parliament: is there too much of a drinking culture in politics - not just the politicians, but SPADs, civil servants, workers, and journos?
I can understand why there might be a drinking culture for many of these roles: they are stressful and multifaceted, and can involve long periods away from home and family.
But that doesn't necessarily make it right.
This is the thing I dislike about this 'scandal', a deep puritanism as if alcohol is verboten rather than what the law was about.
Drinking doesn't cause abuse, abusers cause abuse and any abusers should be treated with zero tolerance but alcohol is not the cause it is not even an excuse.
Sir Beer Korma drinking beer isn't verbally, physically or sexually abusing anyone in doing so. The PM having an Estrella as a refreshment isn't either.
Alcohol is an acceptable and legal drink. People banging on about alcohol is as pathetic puritanism as Americans insisting that 18 year olds can't legally drink, but they can buy automatic rifles.
You fired someone for having been drunk and behind the wheel. So you already know where are situations where drinking and work shouldn't mix. Don't condemn others for having similar view.
In one leap Boris was free! But we now face the amazing possibility that Sir Keir will be forced to resign as LOTO in a few weeks. How smug would Boris feel if that happened - everyone was rounding on him over flouting Covid restrictions, but it's Labour who are plunged into crisis over it.
I will probably rupture my spleen with laughter if Sir Beer Korma has to resign after his solemn vow of Deep Personal Honesty. For the record, I don't think he will get a FPN, but if he did: CHORTLE
Also, Labour might then elect Rayner as leader, and she'd be much more fun and interesting and would be good for the country
If SKS gets one, Rayner surely does as well.
We've already seen a situation this week where some attendees to a Downing Street party were fined and others weren't.
I can't believe the Prime Minister has the sheer effrontery to remain in office when there is now a photo, in the public domain, of him standing eating a sad meal 2 metres from the Chancellor, and all of this right next to a table, during the working day! - a table, no less, on which you can clearly see a plastic jug three-quarters-filled with cheap orange juice
There is no end to the squalor and the lies. AND THE DEBAUCHERY
They had a social gathering when they'd made it illegal for anyone else to do so. And then they lied about it.
You've got no self-respect for yourself if you tolerate that.
lol. We can all see the photos
We can see a selection of the photos.
But neatly done by Boris, dragging this out for three months and turning into a debate over the adequacy of the entertainment in No10, rather than his presiding over regular breach of his own rules and lying about it to the Commons.
There's no lie. The photos don't show a lie.
Do you sandwiches at work at lunchtime to be a Party? I don't. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Do you consider saying goodbye to a colleague at work during work hours to be a Party? I don't and the Police didn't either. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Being wrong isn't a lie, saying something you know to be untrue is a lie and there's no evidence of that here.
IMV there is a central question that underlines partygate, beergate, and the verbal, physical and sexual abuse of people in parliament: is there too much of a drinking culture in politics - not just the politicians, but SPADs, civil servants, workers, and journos?
I can understand why there might be a drinking culture for many of these roles: they are stressful and multifaceted, and can involve long periods away from home and family.
But that doesn't necessarily make it right.
This is the thing I dislike about this 'scandal', a deep puritanism as if alcohol is verboten rather than what the law was about.
Drinking doesn't cause abuse, abusers cause abuse and any abusers should be treated with zero tolerance but alcohol is not the cause it is not even an excuse.
Sir Beer Korma drinking beer isn't verbally, physically or sexually abusing anyone in doing so. The PM having an Estrella as a refreshment isn't either.
Alcohol is an acceptable and legal drink. People banging on about alcohol is as pathetic puritanism as Americans insisting that 18 year olds can't legally drink, but they can buy automatic rifles.
You fired someone for having been drunk and behind the wheel. So you already know where are situations where drinking and work shouldn't mix. Don't condemn others for having similar view.
Absolutely, I stand by that. Being behind the wheel and drinking don't mix - and that's true whether working or not working.
So long as you're not driving, having dinner and drinking absolutely can mix, whether that be at home, or Starmer, or Johnson.
This all seems like Fair Comment from the BoJo the Bozzmeister
"Boris Johnson is responding to Keir Starmer.
He says that during Covid Starmer was “sniping from the sidelines and veering from one position to the next”.
In his response today, Starmer failed to show “common sense”, he claims. He says Starmer failed to appreciate the context of what happened. He says the boundaries between work and socialisting became blurred.
He accuses Starmer of being “sanctimonious”, and he descibes him as a “gaseous Zeppelin”, saying his pomposity has been punctured.
He goes on:
Sir Beer Korma is currently failing to hold himself to the same high standards he demanded of me.
Johnson says Starmer said that Johnson should resign when he was being investigated by the police. But Starmer is being investigated by the police, and he has not resigned.
Starmer IS a sanctimonious prick. He also wanted to cancel British democracy. Well said, Boris Bojo "Boz-boz" The Bozzington Bozzles Johnson, Bozmeister General
Did Johnson actually say that or have you made it up?
He said it. And, I confess, I laughed out loud
It's the sheer chutzpah of delivering a clever pun (tho not one he made himself) during THIS most solemn of occasions, what an insult to the 7 trillion dead of plague, blah blah whatever
It doesn't quite work as a pun because Korma and Starmer don't rhyme. Boris Johnson can be funny on occasion (although if you know the original PG Wodehouse material you realise what a poor knockoff version Johnson peddles), but this particular effort is weak IMHO. Will only get trotted out by Johnson fanbois.
Much to I guess to everyone's surprise the Gray report looks like it isn't going to have much impact. Although we have been here before when Boris looked safe and then it all went wobbly a few days later when a number of Tory MPs reacted. So who knows.
Next test is the by elections. I personally think the Tories will lose both, but that Wakefield will be closer than Tiverton. The only thing, in my opinion, stopping the LDs in Tiverton is what looks like a good Tory candidate.
Why do I think that. Well it is easier for Tories to vote LD in a protest than to vote Labour for what might be a future Government.
This all seems like Fair Comment from the BoJo the Bozzmeister
"Boris Johnson is responding to Keir Starmer.
He says that during Covid Starmer was “sniping from the sidelines and veering from one position to the next”.
In his response today, Starmer failed to show “common sense”, he claims. He says Starmer failed to appreciate the context of what happened. He says the boundaries between work and socialisting became blurred.
He accuses Starmer of being “sanctimonious”, and he descibes him as a “gaseous Zeppelin”, saying his pomposity has been punctured.
He goes on:
Sir Beer Korma is currently failing to hold himself to the same high standards he demanded of me.
Johnson says Starmer said that Johnson should resign when he was being investigated by the police. But Starmer is being investigated by the police, and he has not resigned.
Starmer IS a sanctimonious prick. He also wanted to cancel British democracy. Well said, Boris Bojo "Boz-boz" The Bozzington Bozzles Johnson, Bozmeister General
Did Johnson actually say that or have you made it up?
He said it. And, I confess, I laughed out loud
It's the sheer chutzpah of delivering a clever pun (tho not one he made himself) during THIS most solemn of occasions, what an insult to the 7 trillion dead of plague, blah blah whatever
It's puerile ffs. Shape up.
Of all the humourless pricks I expected not to laugh at Boris's deft and superbly funny pun, you are the humourless-est, and the prick-est, so thanks for fulfilling my priors
‘Deft and superbly funny’ ….
AKA pretty lame piece of nose thumbing. It might raise a smile if you’d said it; pitiful from a prime minister.
"Sarah Jones (Lab) says she worked as a civil servant under Gordon Brown and Theresa May and neither of them would have allowed behaviour like this at No 10.
"Johnson says he never threw a stapler at anyone (a reference to an incident reportedly involving Brown)."
I can't believe the Prime Minister has the sheer effrontery to remain in office when there is now a photo, in the public domain, of him standing eating a sad meal 2 metres from the Chancellor, and all of this right next to a table, during the working day! - a table, no less, on which you can clearly see a plastic jug three-quarters-filled with cheap orange juice
There is no end to the squalor and the lies. AND THE DEBAUCHERY
They had a social gathering when they'd made it illegal for anyone else to do so. And then they lied about it.
You've got no self-respect for yourself if you tolerate that.
lol. We can all see the photos
We can see a selection of the photos.
But neatly done by Boris, dragging this out for three months and turning into a debate over the adequacy of the entertainment in No10, rather than his presiding over regular breach of his own rules and lying about it to the Commons.
There's no lie. The photos don't show a lie.
Do you sandwiches at work at lunchtime to be a Party? I don't. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Do you consider saying goodbye to a colleague at work during work hours to be a Party? I don't and the Police didn't either. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Being wrong isn't a lie, saying something you know to be untrue is a lie and there's no evidence of that here.
IMV there is a central question that underlines partygate, beergate, and the verbal, physical and sexual abuse of people in parliament: is there too much of a drinking culture in politics - not just the politicians, but SPADs, civil servants, workers, and journos?
I can understand why there might be a drinking culture for many of these roles: they are stressful and multifaceted, and can involve long periods away from home and family.
But that doesn't necessarily make it right.
This is the thing I dislike about this 'scandal', a deep puritanism as if alcohol is verboten rather than what the law was about.
Drinking doesn't cause abuse, abusers cause abuse and any abusers should be treated with zero tolerance but alcohol is not the cause it is not even an excuse.
Sir Beer Korma drinking beer isn't verbally, physically or sexually abusing anyone in doing so. The PM having an Estrella as a refreshment isn't either.
Alcohol is an acceptable and legal drink. People banging on about alcohol is as pathetic puritanism as Americans insisting that 18 year olds can't legally drink, but they can buy automatic rifles.
I understand what you mean, but:
1) Alcohol affects people in many different ways. It make me maudlin; it reduces the inhibitions of others and makes others violent. I certainly noticed the effect a couple of lunchtime pints would have on my work in the afternoon. It did not improve it (admittedly from a low base)...
2) Many workplaces ban all alcohol; for some, if you are working, you cannot have drunk alcohol for a certain number of hours beforehand. Anecdotally, this is becoming increasingly common, even for roles that are not safety critical.
The government quickly backed down in tussle with Roman, as many on here predicted. Maybe clearing the decks of as much contention as possible at the moment.
Chelsea now have a £200M transfer dowry to blow - number 1 target Declan Rice, number 2 target Oliver Watkins.
Since made PBs minister for sport, I’m all over these things. 🫡
As an aside, I couldn't resist a few quid on Aaron Bell as next leader of the Tories. >800/1 at the moment in a very illiquid market on betfair.
I think it's possible he might run because he's a) clearly fed up with Boris Johnson, b) in the kind of seat the Tories might struggle to hold if they get a bad result c) clearly smart, and must be looking round at his colleagues/cabinet and thinking... I could do a much better version of this.
Hard to see him winning certainly, but just being in the race would bring those odds tumbling down.
I can't believe the Prime Minister has the sheer effrontery to remain in office when there is now a photo, in the public domain, of him standing eating a sad meal 2 metres from the Chancellor, and all of this right next to a table, during the working day! - a table, no less, on which you can clearly see a plastic jug three-quarters-filled with cheap orange juice
There is no end to the squalor and the lies. AND THE DEBAUCHERY
They had a social gathering when they'd made it illegal for anyone else to do so. And then they lied about it.
You've got no self-respect for yourself if you tolerate that.
lol. We can all see the photos
We can see a selection of the photos.
But neatly done by Boris, dragging this out for three months and turning into a debate over the adequacy of the entertainment in No10, rather than his presiding over regular breach of his own rules and lying about it to the Commons.
There's no lie. The photos don't show a lie.
Do you sandwiches at work at lunchtime to be a Party? I don't. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Do you consider saying goodbye to a colleague at work during work hours to be a Party? I don't and the Police didn't either. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Being wrong isn't a lie, saying something you know to be untrue is a lie and there's no evidence of that here.
IMV there is a central question that underlines partygate, beergate, and the verbal, physical and sexual abuse of people in parliament: is there too much of a drinking culture in politics - not just the politicians, but SPADs, civil servants, workers, and journos?
I can understand why there might be a drinking culture for many of these roles: they are stressful and multifaceted, and can involve long periods away from home and family.
But that doesn't necessarily make it right.
This is the thing I dislike about this 'scandal', a deep puritanism as if alcohol is verboten rather than what the law was about.
Drinking doesn't cause abuse, abusers cause abuse and any abusers should be treated with zero tolerance but alcohol is not the cause it is not even an excuse.
Sir Beer Korma drinking beer isn't verbally, physically or sexually abusing anyone in doing so. The PM having an Estrella as a refreshment isn't either.
Alcohol is an acceptable and legal drink. People banging on about alcohol is as pathetic puritanism as Americans insisting that 18 year olds can't legally drink, but they can buy automatic rifles.
You fired someone for having been drunk and behind the wheel. So you already know where are situations where drinking and work shouldn't mix. Don't condemn others for having similar view.
Absolutely, I stand by that. Being behind the wheel and drinking don't mix - and that's true whether working or not working.
So long as you're not driving, having dinner and drinking absolutely can mix, whether that be at home, or Starmer, or Johnson.
It's not just driving though, is it? Would you be happy if your kids' teacher was rat-arsed in the classroom? Do you want a gas engineer having a liquid lunch before tackling your boiler? There are quite sensible views that revolve around not drinking on the job. It feels to me that the business of government is serious enough to warrant a view against drinking on the job. It's not a wildly puritan view to think so.
I can't believe the Prime Minister has the sheer effrontery to remain in office when there is now a photo, in the public domain, of him standing eating a sad meal 2 metres from the Chancellor, and all of this right next to a table, during the working day! - a table, no less, on which you can clearly see a plastic jug three-quarters-filled with cheap orange juice
There is no end to the squalor and the lies. AND THE DEBAUCHERY
They had a social gathering when they'd made it illegal for anyone else to do so. And then they lied about it.
You've got no self-respect for yourself if you tolerate that.
lol. We can all see the photos
We can see a selection of the photos.
But neatly done by Boris, dragging this out for three months and turning into a debate over the adequacy of the entertainment in No10, rather than his presiding over regular breach of his own rules and lying about it to the Commons.
There's no lie. The photos don't show a lie.
Do you sandwiches at work at lunchtime to be a Party? I don't. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Do you consider saying goodbye to a colleague at work during work hours to be a Party? I don't and the Police didn't either. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Being wrong isn't a lie, saying something you know to be untrue is a lie and there's no evidence of that here.
IMV there is a central question that underlines partygate, beergate, and the verbal, physical and sexual abuse of people in parliament: is there too much of a drinking culture in politics - not just the politicians, but SPADs, civil servants, workers, and journos?
I can understand why there might be a drinking culture for many of these roles: they are stressful and multifaceted, and can involve long periods away from home and family.
But that doesn't necessarily make it right.
This is the thing I dislike about this 'scandal', a deep puritanism as if alcohol is verboten rather than what the law was about.
Drinking doesn't cause abuse, abusers cause abuse and any abusers should be treated with zero tolerance but alcohol is not the cause it is not even an excuse.
Sir Beer Korma drinking beer isn't verbally, physically or sexually abusing anyone in doing so. The PM having an Estrella as a refreshment isn't either.
Alcohol is an acceptable and legal drink. People banging on about alcohol is as pathetic puritanism as Americans insisting that 18 year olds can't legally drink, but they can buy automatic rifles.
I understand what you mean, but:
1) Alcohol affects people in many different ways. It make me maudlin; it reduces the inhibitions of others and makes others violent. I certainly noticed the effect a couple of lunchtime pints would have on my work in the afternoon. It did not improve it (admittedly from a low base)...
2) Many workplaces ban all alcohol; for some, if you are working, you cannot have drunk alcohol for a certain number of hours beforehand. Anecdotally, this is becoming increasingly common, even for roles that are not safety critical.
1) The liberal thing to do is have the individual responsible for their own actions. If somebody is violent after drinking then they shouldn't be drinking, if somebody is a perfectly responsible and reasonable individual they can be.
2) That is a puritanical and retrograde step and not something to be encouraged or celebrated.
I can't believe the Prime Minister has the sheer effrontery to remain in office when there is now a photo, in the public domain, of him standing eating a sad meal 2 metres from the Chancellor, and all of this right next to a table, during the working day! - a table, no less, on which you can clearly see a plastic jug three-quarters-filled with cheap orange juice
There is no end to the squalor and the lies. AND THE DEBAUCHERY
They had a social gathering when they'd made it illegal for anyone else to do so. And then they lied about it.
You've got no self-respect for yourself if you tolerate that.
lol. We can all see the photos
We can see a selection of the photos.
But neatly done by Boris, dragging this out for three months and turning into a debate over the adequacy of the entertainment in No10, rather than his presiding over regular breach of his own rules and lying about it to the Commons.
There's no lie. The photos don't show a lie.
Do you sandwiches at work at lunchtime to be a Party? I don't. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Do you consider saying goodbye to a colleague at work during work hours to be a Party? I don't and the Police didn't either. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Being wrong isn't a lie, saying something you know to be untrue is a lie and there's no evidence of that here.
IMV there is a central question that underlines partygate, beergate, and the verbal, physical and sexual abuse of people in parliament: is there too much of a drinking culture in politics - not just the politicians, but SPADs, civil servants, workers, and journos?
I can understand why there might be a drinking culture for many of these roles: they are stressful and multifaceted, and can involve long periods away from home and family.
But that doesn't necessarily make it right.
This is the thing I dislike about this 'scandal', a deep puritanism as if alcohol is verboten rather than what the law was about.
Drinking doesn't cause abuse, abusers cause abuse and any abusers should be treated with zero tolerance but alcohol is not the cause it is not even an excuse.
Sir Beer Korma drinking beer isn't verbally, physically or sexually abusing anyone in doing so. The PM having an Estrella as a refreshment isn't either.
Alcohol is an acceptable and legal drink. People banging on about alcohol is as pathetic puritanism as Americans insisting that 18 year olds can't legally drink, but they can buy automatic rifles.
You fired someone for having been drunk and behind the wheel. So you already know where are situations where drinking and work shouldn't mix. Don't condemn others for having similar view.
Absolutely, I stand by that. Being behind the wheel and drinking don't mix - and that's true whether working or not working.
So long as you're not driving, having dinner and drinking absolutely can mix, whether that be at home, or Starmer, or Johnson.
It's not just driving though, is it? Would you be happy if your kids' teacher was rat-arsed in the classroom? Do you want a gas engineer having a liquid lunch before tackling your boiler? There are quite sensible views that revolve around not drinking on the job. It feels to me that the business of government is serious enough to warrant a view against drinking on the job. It's not a wildly puritan view to think so.
Rat arsed? No, that's a safety issue.
If the gas engineer is within legal limits and perfectly safe to tackle the boiler then I couldn't give less of a shit at what he or she had for lunch. If OTOH its a safety issue, then that is different, just like with driving.
I completely and 100% disagree that drinking on the job is not acceptable for "serious" jobs, quite the opposite in fact.
This all seems like Fair Comment from the BoJo the Bozzmeister
"Boris Johnson is responding to Keir Starmer.
He says that during Covid Starmer was “sniping from the sidelines and veering from one position to the next”.
In his response today, Starmer failed to show “common sense”, he claims. He says Starmer failed to appreciate the context of what happened. He says the boundaries between work and socialisting became blurred.
He accuses Starmer of being “sanctimonious”, and he descibes him as a “gaseous Zeppelin”, saying his pomposity has been punctured.
He goes on:
Sir Beer Korma is currently failing to hold himself to the same high standards he demanded of me.
Johnson says Starmer said that Johnson should resign when he was being investigated by the police. But Starmer is being investigated by the police, and he has not resigned.
Starmer IS a sanctimonious prick. He also wanted to cancel British democracy. Well said, Boris Bojo "Boz-boz" The Bozzington Bozzles Johnson, Bozmeister General
Did Johnson actually say that or have you made it up?
He said it. And, I confess, I laughed out loud
It's the sheer chutzpah of delivering a clever pun (tho not one he made himself) during THIS most solemn of occasions, what an insult to the 7 trillion dead of plague, blah blah whatever
It's puerile ffs. Shape up.
Of all the humourless pricks I expected not to laugh at Boris's deft and superbly funny pun, you are the humourless-est, and the prick-est, so thanks for fulfilling my priors
‘Deft and superbly funny’ ….
AKA pretty lame piece of nose thumbing. It might raise a smile if you’d said it; pitiful from a prime minister.
"Deft and superbly funny" was me trolling PB's very own Pomposity-Monger @kinabalu
"Sir Beer Korma" IS a good pun, tho. The measure of it is: would it make a more memorable Sun front page? And yes, it would. It raises a smile and maybe a chuckle
You need the "Sir" bit tho. That's the funny part. The contrast between the Sir - why the F does this supercilious idiot Starmer have a fucking knighthood anyway, and for what? - and the Beer and Korma is the essence of the tension and thus the humour
This all seems like Fair Comment from the BoJo the Bozzmeister
"Boris Johnson is responding to Keir Starmer.
He says that during Covid Starmer was “sniping from the sidelines and veering from one position to the next”.
In his response today, Starmer failed to show “common sense”, he claims. He says Starmer failed to appreciate the context of what happened. He says the boundaries between work and socialisting became blurred.
He accuses Starmer of being “sanctimonious”, and he descibes him as a “gaseous Zeppelin”, saying his pomposity has been punctured.
He goes on:
Sir Beer Korma is currently failing to hold himself to the same high standards he demanded of me.
Johnson says Starmer said that Johnson should resign when he was being investigated by the police. But Starmer is being investigated by the police, and he has not resigned.
Starmer IS a sanctimonious prick. He also wanted to cancel British democracy. Well said, Boris Bojo "Boz-boz" The Bozzington Bozzles Johnson, Bozmeister General
Did Johnson actually say that or have you made it up?
He said it. And, I confess, I laughed out loud
It's the sheer chutzpah of delivering a clever pun (tho not one he made himself) during THIS most solemn of occasions, what an insult to the 7 trillion dead of plague, blah blah whatever
It's puerile ffs. Shape up.
Of all the humourless pricks I expected not to laugh at Boris's deft and superbly funny pun, you are the humourless-est, and the prick-est, so thanks for fulfilling my priors
‘Deft and superbly funny’ ….
AKA pretty lame piece of nose thumbing. It might raise a smile if you’d said it; pitiful from a prime minister.
"Deft and superbly funny" was me trolling PB's very own Pomposity-Monger @kinabalu
"Sir Beer Korma" IS a good pun, tho. The measure of it is: would it make a more memorable Sun front page? And yes, it would. It raises a smile and maybe a chuckle
You need the "Sir" bit tho. That's the funny part. The contrast between the Sir - why the F does this supercilious idiot Starmer have a fucking knighthood anyway, and for what? - and the Beer and Korma is the essence of the tension and thus the humour
The government quickly backed down in tussle with Roman, as many on here predicted. Maybe clearing the decks of as much contention as possible at the moment.
Chelsea now have a £200M transfer dowry to blow - number 1 target Declan Rice, number 2 target Oliver Watkins.
Since made PBs minister for sport, I’m all over these things. 🫡
I can't believe the Prime Minister has the sheer effrontery to remain in office when there is now a photo, in the public domain, of him standing eating a sad meal 2 metres from the Chancellor, and all of this right next to a table, during the working day! - a table, no less, on which you can clearly see a plastic jug three-quarters-filled with cheap orange juice
There is no end to the squalor and the lies. AND THE DEBAUCHERY
They had a social gathering when they'd made it illegal for anyone else to do so. And then they lied about it.
You've got no self-respect for yourself if you tolerate that.
lol. We can all see the photos
We can see a selection of the photos.
But neatly done by Boris, dragging this out for three months and turning into a debate over the adequacy of the entertainment in No10, rather than his presiding over regular breach of his own rules and lying about it to the Commons.
There's no lie. The photos don't show a lie.
Do you sandwiches at work at lunchtime to be a Party? I don't. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Do you consider saying goodbye to a colleague at work during work hours to be a Party? I don't and the Police didn't either. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Being wrong isn't a lie, saying something you know to be untrue is a lie and there's no evidence of that here.
IMV there is a central question that underlines partygate, beergate, and the verbal, physical and sexual abuse of people in parliament: is there too much of a drinking culture in politics - not just the politicians, but SPADs, civil servants, workers, and journos?
I can understand why there might be a drinking culture for many of these roles: they are stressful and multifaceted, and can involve long periods away from home and family.
But that doesn't necessarily make it right.
This is the thing I dislike about this 'scandal', a deep puritanism as if alcohol is verboten rather than what the law was about.
Drinking doesn't cause abuse, abusers cause abuse and any abusers should be treated with zero tolerance but alcohol is not the cause it is not even an excuse.
Sir Beer Korma drinking beer isn't verbally, physically or sexually abusing anyone in doing so. The PM having an Estrella as a refreshment isn't either.
Alcohol is an acceptable and legal drink. People banging on about alcohol is as pathetic puritanism as Americans insisting that 18 year olds can't legally drink, but they can buy automatic rifles.
You fired someone for having been drunk and behind the wheel. So you already know where are situations where drinking and work shouldn't mix. Don't condemn others for having similar view.
Absolutely, I stand by that. Being behind the wheel and drinking don't mix - and that's true whether working or not working.
So long as you're not driving, having dinner and drinking absolutely can mix, whether that be at home, or Starmer, or Johnson.
It's not just driving though, is it? Would you be happy if your kids' teacher was rat-arsed in the classroom? Do you want a gas engineer having a liquid lunch before tackling your boiler? There are quite sensible views that revolve around not drinking on the job. It feels to me that the business of government is serious enough to warrant a view against drinking on the job. It's not a wildly puritan view to think so.
Rat arsed? No, that's a safety issue.
If the gas engineer is within legal limits and perfectly safe to tackle the boiler then I couldn't give less of a shit at what he or she had for lunch. If OTOH its a safety issue, then that is different, just like with driving.
I completely and 100% disagree that drinking on the job is not acceptable for "serious" jobs, quite the opposite in fact.
I'm not sure the gas engineer's employer would agree with you.
I can't believe the Prime Minister has the sheer effrontery to remain in office when there is now a photo, in the public domain, of him standing eating a sad meal 2 metres from the Chancellor, and all of this right next to a table, during the working day! - a table, no less, on which you can clearly see a plastic jug three-quarters-filled with cheap orange juice
There is no end to the squalor and the lies. AND THE DEBAUCHERY
They had a social gathering when they'd made it illegal for anyone else to do so. And then they lied about it.
You've got no self-respect for yourself if you tolerate that.
lol. We can all see the photos
We can see a selection of the photos.
But neatly done by Boris, dragging this out for three months and turning into a debate over the adequacy of the entertainment in No10, rather than his presiding over regular breach of his own rules and lying about it to the Commons.
There's no lie. The photos don't show a lie.
Do you sandwiches at work at lunchtime to be a Party? I don't. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Do you consider saying goodbye to a colleague at work during work hours to be a Party? I don't and the Police didn't either. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Being wrong isn't a lie, saying something you know to be untrue is a lie and there's no evidence of that here.
IMV there is a central question that underlines partygate, beergate, and the verbal, physical and sexual abuse of people in parliament: is there too much of a drinking culture in politics - not just the politicians, but SPADs, civil servants, workers, and journos?
I can understand why there might be a drinking culture for many of these roles: they are stressful and multifaceted, and can involve long periods away from home and family.
But that doesn't necessarily make it right.
This is the thing I dislike about this 'scandal', a deep puritanism as if alcohol is verboten rather than what the law was about.
Drinking doesn't cause abuse, abusers cause abuse and any abusers should be treated with zero tolerance but alcohol is not the cause it is not even an excuse.
Sir Beer Korma drinking beer isn't verbally, physically or sexually abusing anyone in doing so. The PM having an Estrella as a refreshment isn't either.
Alcohol is an acceptable and legal drink. People banging on about alcohol is as pathetic puritanism as Americans insisting that 18 year olds can't legally drink, but they can buy automatic rifles.
You fired someone for having been drunk and behind the wheel. So you already know where are situations where drinking and work shouldn't mix. Don't condemn others for having similar view.
Absolutely, I stand by that. Being behind the wheel and drinking don't mix - and that's true whether working or not working.
So long as you're not driving, having dinner and drinking absolutely can mix, whether that be at home, or Starmer, or Johnson.
It's not just driving though, is it? Would you be happy if your kids' teacher was rat-arsed in the classroom? Do you want a gas engineer having a liquid lunch before tackling your boiler? There are quite sensible views that revolve around not drinking on the job. It feels to me that the business of government is serious enough to warrant a view against drinking on the job. It's not a wildly puritan view to think so.
Rat arsed? No, that's a safety issue.
If the gas engineer is within legal limits and perfectly safe to tackle the boiler then I couldn't give less of a shit at what he or she had for lunch. If OTOH its a safety issue, then that is different, just like with driving.
I completely and 100% disagree that drinking on the job is not acceptable for "serious" jobs, quite the opposite in fact.
Winston Churchill says hi
As do a trillion actors, writers, artists, sculptors, dancers. For some of them, booze - or other intoxicants - can actually improve the work. Byron insisted he did his best work "with a light champagne hangover" and a hooker nearby, or, as he put it, more politely:
There's a whore on my right For I rhyme best at night When a C*nt is tied close to my inkstand
Comments
The incessant drivel from Barty Roberts in defence of his hero Johnson is dragging down pb.com as a worthy site.
It's fine to have an opinion but hammering everyone over the head with repetitious Punch & Judy politics is extremely tiresome.
PMQs is the closest we have.
As @Leon has noted perhaps it was the world that went mad but we certainly were in the leading rank and why should we have done what everyone else did. Absolutely pathetic.
(is there an echo in here?)
Fossil fuel energy prices are rocketing and renewables are not helping us escape them. Not in the slightest.
Renewables are failing utterly to rise to the challenge. Failing utterly.
If so, kudos. That's genuinely funny. So I hope he did
War in the Ukraine, people crossing the Channel, and the economy.
An interesting order.
AIUI the LOTO salary is funded the same way as a Cabinet Minister's - there should be regular scrutiny.
That makes me like Boris again. He has a genuine wit. Good at wordplay
You're easily amused. I can see what the mysterious attraction of Boris is now.
The purpose of PMQs and other Questions is to scrutinise those who are actually in power. I'm a little surprised you need this explained.
Renewables absolutely are rising to the challenge, the problem is we haven't got enough of them yet.
A decade ago the overwhelming majority of our electricity came from coal or gas. Now a plurality comes from renewables.
At the time of writing according to Gridwatch 45% of electricity is coming from Wind. Gas is making up a meagre 17%.
If renewables weren't there, we'd be paying even more for gas than we are now. Thank goodness we have as much renewables as we do.
Surely accurate scrutiny of government requires analysis of the alternative.
But neatly done by Boris, dragging this out for three months and turning into a debate over the adequacy of the entertainment in No10, rather than his presiding over regular breach of his own rules and lying about it to the Commons.
He had no answers whatsoever on the economy.
Do you sandwiches at work at lunchtime to be a Party? I don't. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Do you consider saying goodbye to a colleague at work during work hours to be a Party? I don't and the Police didn't either. If he didn't, he hasn't lied.
Being wrong isn't a lie, saying something you know to be untrue is a lie and there's no evidence of that here.
I remember Rupert Murdoch telling the DCMS select committee on phone hacking “this is the most humble day of my life”. He was lying. I expect the same level of insincerity from a supposedly “humbled” Boris Johnson today.
https://mobile.twitter.com/RhonddaBryant/status/1529414152963465216
"Boris Johnson is responding to Keir Starmer.
He says that during Covid Starmer was “sniping from the sidelines and veering from one position to the next”.
In his response today, Starmer failed to show “common sense”, he claims. He says Starmer failed to appreciate the context of what happened. He says the boundaries between work and socialisting became blurred.
He accuses Starmer of being “sanctimonious”, and he descibes him as a “gaseous Zeppelin”, saying his pomposity has been punctured.
He goes on:
Sir Beer Korma is currently failing to hold himself to the same high standards he demanded of me.
Johnson says Starmer said that Johnson should resign when he was being investigated by the police. But Starmer is being investigated by the police, and he has not resigned.
He urges Starmer to apologise"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2022/may/25/partygate-live-sue-gray-report-published-boris-johnson-downing-street-no-10-drinking
Starmer IS a sanctimonious prick. He also wanted to cancel British democracy. Well said, Boris Bojo "Boz-boz" The Bozzington Bozzles Johnson, Bozmeister General
https://news.sky.com/story/chelsea-fc-takeover-official-as-government-approve-sale-12620888
And of course he remains outraged to hear about the far worse occasions where he was not present.
Are you an Orban fan, by any chance ?
One of the purposes of parliament is to hold the government to account, and the set-piece Questions are one of the mechanisms for doing that. If you want to subvert those sessions to talk about anything other than the government, then you are saying you do not value that scrutiny. That's a mistake, in my view, because scrutiny is at the heart of democracy and good governance.
Parliament is at liberty to discuss whatever matters it likes and can do so without abandoning or subverting one of its core purposes. These mechanisms are there for a reason and if you don't like it you probably don't really care about democracy.
If we hadn't invested in renewables we would be consuming 600% of the gas we are presently consuming. Eliminating 83% of our consumption of a product saves our costs from that product far more.
On the other hand, your suggestion is like pissing in the ocean and expecting the tides to rise. Oil and gas prices are globally set based upon global supply and demand and most of that supply is held within the soil of frankly relatively hostile states, whether Putin's Russia or the Sheiks in the Middle East or elsewhere. Even if we marginally increased global oil and gas production by producing a marginal bit more ourselves, it would only marginally affect global oil and gas prices.
Your "solution" isn't a solution, removing the demand on the other hand absolutely is.
Investing in renewables means we don't need to pay the Sheiks or Putin for gas. It means we don't need to pay high gas prices.
It's the sheer chutzpah of delivering a clever pun (tho not one he made himself) during THIS most solemn of occasions, what an insult to the 7 trillion dead of plague, blah blah whatever
But then I guess the government punching down is a useful distraction from the government downing punch.
Also, Labour might then elect Rayner as leader, and she'd be much more fun and interesting and would be good for the country
You are right, newspaper editorials tomorrow and the morning of the VONC will describe it like this.
And it’s true that it’s the basis for Johnson’s career.
Starmer was very good today, very Primeministerial.
Unfortunately for Tories, what today tells us is partygate isn’t going away as a millstone on them, it’s hard to even see how they can turn a page and put it behind them.
The way the police messed up the investigation just hadn’t helped the party at all.
Everyone wants to forget about Covid and have a life again. Boris is going to benefit from that (and these laughably non incriminating photos). He will survive this, and fight in 2024
Whether he wins is an entirely different matter, natch
As for Starmer... I like his line about the Tories raising taxes 15 times. Strikes me as the kind of thing needed to appeal outside Labour base.
Shame, if so. I like her. She'd be a good Labour leader
But it’s just not working today is it?
Downing punch.
Sorry, but that was inspired. You people don't deserve me
I can understand why there might be a drinking culture for many of these roles: they are stressful and multifaceted, and can involve long periods away from home and family.
But that doesn't necessarily make it right.
Or of course he missed the whole irony of it, but I prefer to believe the former.
Drinking doesn't cause abuse, abusers cause abuse and any abusers should be treated with zero tolerance but alcohol is not the cause it is not even an excuse.
Sir Beer Korma drinking beer isn't verbally, physically or sexually abusing anyone in doing so. The PM having an Estrella as a refreshment isn't either.
Alcohol is an acceptable and legal drink. People banging on about alcohol is as pathetic puritanism as Americans insisting that 18 year olds can't legally drink, but they can buy automatic rifles.
Chelsea now have a £200M transfer dowry to blow - number 1 target Declan Rice, number 2 target Oliver Watkins.
Since made PBs minister for sport, I’m all over these things. 🫡
So long as you're not driving, having dinner and drinking absolutely can mix, whether that be at home, or Starmer, or Johnson.
Next test is the by elections. I personally think the Tories will lose both, but that Wakefield will be closer than Tiverton. The only thing, in my opinion, stopping the LDs in Tiverton is what looks like a good Tory candidate.
Why do I think that. Well it is easier for Tories to vote LD in a protest than to vote Labour for what might be a future Government.
AKA pretty lame piece of nose thumbing. It might raise a smile if you’d said it; pitiful from a prime minister.
"Sarah Jones (Lab) says she worked as a civil servant under Gordon Brown and Theresa May and neither of them would have allowed behaviour like this at No 10.
"Johnson says he never threw a stapler at anyone (a reference to an incident reportedly involving Brown)."
1) Alcohol affects people in many different ways. It make me maudlin; it reduces the inhibitions of others and makes others violent. I certainly noticed the effect a couple of lunchtime pints would have on my work in the afternoon. It did not improve it (admittedly from a low base)...
2) Many workplaces ban all alcohol; for some, if you are working, you cannot have drunk alcohol for a certain number of hours beforehand. Anecdotally, this is becoming increasingly common, even for roles that are not safety critical.
UK not planning to scrap NI Protocol - Truss via @RTENews
https://twitter.com/vincekearney/status/1529442810121814017
You can see me on the pitch!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M68LN7qgb2Y 😂 🥳 😇
🤭
>800/1 at the moment in a very illiquid market on betfair.
I think it's possible he might run because he's a) clearly fed up with Boris Johnson, b) in the kind of seat the Tories might struggle to hold if they get a bad result c) clearly smart, and must be looking round at his colleagues/cabinet and thinking... I could do a much better version of this.
Hard to see him winning certainly, but just being in the race would bring those odds tumbling down.
There are quite sensible views that revolve around not drinking on the job. It feels to me that the business of government is serious enough to warrant a view against drinking on the job. It's not a wildly puritan view to think so.
2) That is a puritanical and retrograde step and not something to be encouraged or celebrated.
If the gas engineer is within legal limits and perfectly safe to tackle the boiler then I couldn't give less of a shit at what he or she had for lunch. If OTOH its a safety issue, then that is different, just like with driving.
I completely and 100% disagree that drinking on the job is not acceptable for "serious" jobs, quite the opposite in fact.
"Sir Beer Korma" IS a good pun, tho. The measure of it is: would it make a more memorable Sun front page? And yes, it would. It raises a smile and maybe a chuckle
You need the "Sir" bit tho. That's the funny part. The contrast between the Sir - why the F does this supercilious idiot Starmer have a fucking knighthood anyway, and for what? - and the Beer and Korma is the essence of the tension and thus the humour
Sadly, it looks like a few cokeheads are going to ruin it for the rest of us.
As do a trillion actors, writers, artists, sculptors, dancers. For some of them, booze - or other intoxicants - can actually improve the work. Byron insisted he did his best work "with a light champagne hangover" and a hooker nearby, or, as he put it, more politely:
There's a whore on my right
For I rhyme best at night
When a C*nt is tied close to my inkstand