@LucyMPowell 7m There’s another investigation report incoming to the PM and Parliament (and me as I asked for it) - into the appointment process of the BBC Chair. Who was very much involved and part of that process as the then Culture Secretary? Yes, Oliver Dowden …
Well I’ve just read it. All of it. What a load of shite about nothing. Raab has every reason to be aggrieved
I wouldn't worry. Two years today he'll be leader of the opposition.
You think Raab can hold Esher and Walton?
Personally I think there's a good chance he will be one of the big "were you up for" moments in Election 24?
Nothing will top being up for ‘Palmer’
To clarify I assume @Taz means last night's revelation rather than the Good Doctor losing his Nottingham seat to Anna Soubry back in 2010?
You’re quite right !!
An important clarification as I was slightly concerned @NickPalmer would have taken offence!
What was last night's revelation?
Oh my, you really missed out. I suggest you read last night's BLT discourse, as to summarise is, in this case, to diminish.
The whole thread is already a PB legend. Those of us that were there were privileged indeed
I missed that. Just been to look it up. Worth it.
Every 20th April, Nick's account should be the PB Header.
Yes, 20th April shall henceforth be known as Nick Palmer Swiss Threesome Day. We can have street parties with suggestive Toblerones, give each other kink-themed cuckoo clocks, etc
And we will sing a song to the tune of “Oh Tannenbaum”
Nick palmer day, nick palmer day, Such kinky acts we celebrate, Nick Palmer day, Nick Palmer day, The secret master of three-way.
His Swiss adventures, one of which Were Nick Palmer in a sandwich
Nick Palmer Day Nick Palmer day We raise a glass and shout wha-hey.
Needs a bit of work, but I like the concept. You've got a year to polish it...
"He may be a bit of a bully, but he's nowhere near as bad as Gordon Brown, Alex Ferguson or Adolf Hitler".
Ferguson is a genuinely interesting one, the other two are silly. Fergie was undoubtedly a bully at times and undoubtedly successful with longevity.
But, lots of Premier League clubs tried to replicate him, indeed by 2011 there were 7 managers from Glasgow. The likes of Malky Mackay, Billy Davies and Alex McCleish were disasters leading their clubs to long term decline.
It is not impossible to manage successfully with that style in certain contexts but the winners are very rare.
Successful chefs are supposed to be often very toxic managers. I've worked in a few kitchens and found the light-touch approach works best. But I've never worked with anyone like Michelin star winning chef. Has anyone got any experience of this?
Worked as an F&B manager a couple of decades ago, nowhere near Michelin star but restaurants and and function rooms. Plenty of food and equipment sent flying across the room, by the senior chefs. Not every day, not even every week, but every so often the lid would blow on the pressure cooker.
AIUI, at the very top, there are way more Gordon Ramsay types, than Heston Blumental types.
One of the problems is booze. Lots of chefs appear to be alcoholics or damn near it. Long ago, I worked with a very good French chef (he was English but trained in the classical French style) who would sink 6-7 pints of premium lager within an hour or so of service ending each night. So, every day, he'd show up hungover and thus in a foul mood.
He was very mean to the waitresses to the point that they all dreaded being on the pass and had to strictly rota to minimise their exposure to the kitchen. He lasted longer than he should have done because he was an excellent cook and they were few and far between in the northern city I was living in at the time.
Sadly, catering does rather encourage alcoholism – I am led to believe that such experiences aren't that rare.
And drugs. Coke during the service, heroin afterwards. Read Kitchen Confidential by Anthony Bourdain (a brilliant book anyway)
Then there’s the after service drinking sessions to wind down
What surprises me however is that all these people describe the horrors of working in major or important kitchens - the terrible hours, the burned hands, the shouting and screaming, the nasty bullying - and yet so many also say they adore it. The intensity
It is a buzz. I need a good reading book so thanks for the recommendation – I'll order it. Thinking back, the head KP was addicted to speed (!) and the maitre d was shagging the chief waitress - they both got sacked after opening the restaurant to themselves when it was closed one bank holiday, drinking it dry and then presumably using the venue as a temple of love.
Crazy days.
It’s a superb read - you’ll see why it made him famous. Full of juicy gossip and excellent insights. He was a fine writer, albeit a depressive drug taking boozer. A tragic loss at 62
And yes kitchens and hotels are, er, hotbeds of nookie. The Maldives are amongst the worst, because the staff are trapped on that one hotel island even on days off. They only get to properly leave once or twice a year
There is nothing for them to do but snorkelling, and shagging. So that’s what they do. Polyamory rules - it is accepted that the chef will have three girls on the go, but the girls will also be bedding the concierge and the scuba guys and so on. And they are absolutely happy to gossip about it, as that also alleviates the boredom
Basically the Maldives are paradise to visit but purgatory to work in, albeit purgatory with lots of sex
Was there last year, for a belated honeymoon. I did think that it must be total cabin fever for the staff, especially in the more remote islands where you have to hope for a space on the seaplane on your day off.
It’s so bad it is regarded as something of a hardship posting. OTOH I believe the resorts pay staff really well - they have no choice
Also, even if you can get away, where do you go? To another resort island 20 minutes away which will be just like yours? Or the main island Mahe which is dismal, quasi-Islamist, overcrowded, and there’s no booze. I suppose you could always go to the garbage island
The only real choice is India, which means a serious flight. So they don’t bother and they sleep with the sous chef instead
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
Lovely in South West Scotland, sunny with a light breeze. I have taken off my dufflecoat.
Yep - gorgeous in North East Scotland too. The last several days have been truly splendid here, and to the west, in the Highlands, where I've bagged a few hills lately. Sitting by a cairn looking across to the Torridons and the Cuillins on Skye. There really is nowhere better when the weather is kind.
Well I’ve just read it. All of it. What a load of shite about nothing. Raab has every reason to be aggrieved
I wouldn't worry. Two years today he'll be leader of the opposition.
You think Raab can hold Esher and Walton?
Personally I think there's a good chance he will be one of the big "were you up for" moments in Election 24?
Nothing will top being up for ‘Palmer’
To clarify I assume @Taz means last night's revelation rather than the Good Doctor losing his Nottingham seat to Anna Soubry back in 2010?
You’re quite right !!
An important clarification as I was slightly concerned @NickPalmer would have taken offence!
What was last night's revelation?
Oh my, you really missed out. I suggest you read last night's BLT discourse, as to summarise is, in this case, to diminish.
The whole thread is already a PB legend. Those of us that were there were privileged indeed
I missed that. Just been to look it up. Worth it.
Every 20th April, Nick's account should be the PB Header.
Yes, 20th April shall henceforth be known as Nick Palmer Swiss Threesome Day. We can have street parties with suggestive Toblerones, give each other kink-themed cuckoo clocks, etc
And we will sing a song to the tune of “Oh Tannenbaum”
Nick palmer day, nick palmer day, Such kinky acts we celebrate, Nick Palmer day, Nick Palmer day, The secret master of three-way.
His Swiss adventures, one of which Were Nick Palmer in a sandwich
Nick Palmer Day Nick Palmer day We raise a glass and shout wha-hey.
Hhahahahaha
Terrible scansion, ludicrous rhyme scheme, and it made me LOL, especially the second stanza
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
Yes. There’s something actually off putting about Starmer’s dullness. It’s not simply that he’s stiff and boring, there is something else. A bit of David Brent, a bit of Gordon Brittas, a bit too much I’m-so-honest earnestness, it is actively annoying. Also surprising given that he was such a successful lawyer - aren’t they meant to be plausible and persuasive?
Like you, I don’t believe it will prevent Labour winning. Might stop them winning big
"He may be a bit of a bully, but he's nowhere near as bad as Gordon Brown, Alex Ferguson or Adolf Hitler".
Ferguson is a genuinely interesting one, the other two are silly. Fergie was undoubtedly a bully at times and undoubtedly successful with longevity.
But, lots of Premier League clubs tried to replicate him, indeed by 2011 there were 7 managers from Glasgow. The likes of Malky Mackay, Billy Davies and Alex McCleish were disasters leading their clubs to long term decline.
It is not impossible to manage successfully with that style in certain contexts but the winners are very rare.
Successful chefs are supposed to be often very toxic managers. I've worked in a few kitchens and found the light-touch approach works best. But I've never worked with anyone like Michelin star winning chef. Has anyone got any experience of this?
Worked as an F&B manager a couple of decades ago, nowhere near Michelin star but restaurants and and function rooms. Plenty of food and equipment sent flying across the room, by the senior chefs. Not every day, not even every week, but every so often the lid would blow on the pressure cooker.
AIUI, at the very top, there are way more Gordon Ramsay types, than Heston Blumental types.
One of the problems is booze. Lots of chefs appear to be alcoholics or damn near it. Long ago, I worked with a very good French chef (he was English but trained in the classical French style) who would sink 6-7 pints of premium lager within an hour or so of service ending each night. So, every day, he'd show up hungover and thus in a foul mood.
He was very mean to the waitresses to the point that they all dreaded being on the pass and had to strictly rota to minimise their exposure to the kitchen. He lasted longer than he should have done because he was an excellent cook and they were few and far between in the northern city I was living in at the time.
Sadly, catering does rather encourage alcoholism – I am led to believe that such experiences aren't that rare.
And drugs. Coke during the service, heroin afterwards. Read Kitchen Confidential by Anthony Bourdain (a brilliant book anyway)
Then there’s the after service drinking sessions to wind down
What surprises me however is that all these people describe the horrors of working in major or important kitchens - the terrible hours, the burned hands, the shouting and screaming, the nasty bullying - and yet so many also say they adore it. The intensity
It is a buzz. I need a good reading book so thanks for the recommendation – I'll order it. Thinking back, the head KP was addicted to speed (!) and the maitre d was shagging the chief waitress - they both got sacked after opening the restaurant to themselves when it was closed one bank holiday, drinking it dry and then presumably using the venue as a temple of love.
Crazy days.
It’s a superb read - you’ll see why it made him famous. Full of juicy gossip and excellent insights. He was a fine writer, albeit a depressive drug taking boozer. A tragic loss at 62
And yes kitchens and hotels are, er, hotbeds of nookie. The Maldives are amongst the worst, because the staff are trapped on that one hotel island even on days off. They only get to properly leave once or twice a year
There is nothing for them to do but snorkelling, and shagging. So that’s what they do. Polyamory rules - it is accepted that the chef will have three girls on the go, but the girls will also be bedding the concierge and the scuba guys and so on. And they are absolutely happy to gossip about it, as that also alleviates the boredom
Basically the Maldives are paradise to visit but purgatory to work in, albeit purgatory with lots of sex
Was there last year, for a belated honeymoon. I did think that it must be total cabin fever for the staff, especially in the more remote islands where you have to hope for a space on the seaplane on your day off.
It’s so bad it is regarded as something of a hardship posting. OTOH I believe the resorts pay staff really well - they have no choice
Also, even if you can get away, where do you go? To another resort island 20 minutes away which will be just like yours? Or the main island Mahe which is dismal, quasi-Islamist, overcrowded, and there’s no booze. I suppose you could always go to the garbage island
The only real choice is India, which means a serious flight. So they don’t bother and they sleep with the sous chef instead
They’d better be paying the staff well, because they were charging me £900 a night!
That said, as in the sandpit you’ll have precisely zero expenses working there, apart from maybe your toothpaste. Your salary goes straight to the savings account every month.
Yes, the main island is as dry as Saudi, even the lounge at the airport doesn’t have a bar.
IIRC most of the flights were either to the Middle East or India. Not cheap to escape the middle of nowhere.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
Yes. There’s something actually off putting about Starmer’s dullness. It’s not simply that he’s stiff and boring, there is something else. A bit of David Brent, a bit of Gordon Brittas, a bit too much I’m-so-honest earnestness, it is actively annoying. Also surprising given that he was such a successful lawyer - aren’t they meant to be plausible and persuasive?
Like you, I don’t believe it will prevent Labour winning. Might stop them winning big
Indeed, I still think Starmer will end up the UK Francois Hollande. Wins because of the unpopularity of the government and incumbent but more narrowly than expected.
Only lasts a term and becomes very unpopular before being replaced by a younger and more charismatic alternative. Wes Streeting for our Macron?
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Wins elections though.
Creates terrible governments though.
You are misdiagnosing the problem - governments are bad in modern times because there aren’t enough public schoolboys running things.
If you just took a moment to think about it, in the days when the government was full of public schoolboys and aristocrats we were amazing. We had the empire, we invented everything, we were the richest. We were the top nation.
Since they’ve allowed any old hoi polloi into governments that’s where the country has slid down the leagues.
Alex Ferguson was an abrasive boss. He would famously give under performing players the “hairdryer” treatment
He was also one of the most successful club managers of all time
The idea that all good bosses must be these lovely emollient encouraging types is nonsense. Different management styles can be equally effective
Says the man who has already outlined his credentials in this debate.
Nobody is saying that bosses need to be "lovely emollient encouraging types". A boss does not need to be nice. He/she does not need to be liked. It helps if they are respected. Raab is clearly a jerk with no leadership or management skill, and probably isn't even respected by his mother.
Sunak, who it appears to me has both to some degree has ruthlessly fired him (through facilitating his resignation). It is a good call.
Bosses who think they are Alex Ferguson calibre are probably not Alex Ferguson calibre!
It is also questionable as to how good a leader Fergusson was, because one of the most important aspects of leadership is succession, so when we look at how MU performed post departure it could be argued there was a strong failure of leadership on Fergusson's part
It is also questionable how giod a leader was because, frankly, winning the league two times out of three shoukd only be about par when your resources are so much greater than everyone else's. It was notable that Man Utd's dominance waned rather as the extent to which its riches exceeded those of other clubs waned. Ferguson's biggest achievment was winning the ECWC with Aberdeen.
Eh? He established Man Utd as dominant from being not far from the equivalent of Spurs today. It was in no sense gifted to him. Liverpool were dominant, and Man Utd not ahead of Arsenal or even Everton at the time. He maintained it for two decades, re-inventing the team repeatedly.
But that's only where they should have been, given how much richer they were than every other club. They had the resources to buy all the best players: no great surprise that they are then the best team. I'm not saying that Ferguson was a bad manager - just that leading the richest club to success isn't necessarily a massive test.
But Ferguson made them the richest club! Liverpool were the dominant club and attracted the best players when he took over. Ferguson started in 1986 and it wasn't until the mid nineties, after they had won the title, that United started getting the choice of best players.
I only hazily remember this - so please treat as 'bloke on the internet told me' - but my memory is that during the 80s, Utd were rich, but not dramatically richer than anyone else. ISTR in those days gate receipts were shared between home and away, so if you were a club who didn't attract many home fans, you still got a decent few pay days when you played the likes of Man Utd away. And in those days gate receipts were a big, big share of your income - the football league's once-a-week game on ITV wasn't a major money spinner. Then the rules were changes to allow big clubs to keep more of their money. Then the Premier League came along, with the associated telly money - which again, disproportionately went to the big clubs - and meant they didn't have to share at all with anyone outside the top tier.
And Utd have had the biggest fan base in the country for as long as I have been alive (a hangover, it's said, from the sympathy garnered from the Munich air disaster - the fightback from which to win the European Cup a decade later is a fantastic story).
Thus, Utd went from being averagely rich to far richer than everyone else.
Now that all happened when Ferguson was in charge - maybe it didn't happen by accident? Maybe he deserves some of the credit? In which case, yes, credit is deserved (though he rather ruined the game for everyone else, if that's so).
But the point is, United were never short of a bob or two. Whereas with Aberdeen Ferguson succeeded with far more limited means.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Wins elections though.
Creates terrible governments though.
I take it you are referring to the government run by that Fettes-educated, public school charmer, Tony Blair?
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
Yes. There’s something actually off putting about Starmer’s dullness. It’s not simply that he’s stiff and boring, there is something else. A bit of David Brent, a bit of Gordon Brittas, a bit too much I’m-so-honest earnestness, it is actively annoying. Also surprising given that he was such a successful lawyer - aren’t they meant to be plausible and persuasive?
Like you, I don’t believe it will prevent Labour winning. Might stop them winning big
Plus his age.
Starmer ressembles a character in a Dennis Potter drama about a seedy seaside town. There's a chance he will completely bomb in a high-profile national election campaign.
"He may be a bit of a bully, but he's nowhere near as bad as Gordon Brown, Alex Ferguson or Adolf Hitler".
Ferguson is a genuinely interesting one, the other two are silly. Fergie was undoubtedly a bully at times and undoubtedly successful with longevity.
But, lots of Premier League clubs tried to replicate him, indeed by 2011 there were 7 managers from Glasgow. The likes of Malky Mackay, Billy Davies and Alex McCleish were disasters leading their clubs to long term decline.
It is not impossible to manage successfully with that style in certain contexts but the winners are very rare.
Successful chefs are supposed to be often very toxic managers. I've worked in a few kitchens and found the light-touch approach works best. But I've never worked with anyone like Michelin star winning chef. Has anyone got any experience of this?
Worked as an F&B manager a couple of decades ago, nowhere near Michelin star but restaurants and and function rooms. Plenty of food and equipment sent flying across the room, by the senior chefs. Not every day, not even every week, but every so often the lid would blow on the pressure cooker.
AIUI, at the very top, there are way more Gordon Ramsay types, than Heston Blumental types.
One of the problems is booze. Lots of chefs appear to be alcoholics or damn near it. Long ago, I worked with a very good French chef (he was English but trained in the classical French style) who would sink 6-7 pints of premium lager within an hour or so of service ending each night. So, every day, he'd show up hungover and thus in a foul mood.
He was very mean to the waitresses to the point that they all dreaded being on the pass and had to strictly rota to minimise their exposure to the kitchen. He lasted longer than he should have done because he was an excellent cook and they were few and far between in the northern city I was living in at the time.
Sadly, catering does rather encourage alcoholism – I am led to believe that such experiences aren't that rare.
And drugs. Coke during the service, heroin afterwards. Read Kitchen Confidential by Anthony Bourdain (a brilliant book anyway)
Then there’s the after service drinking sessions to wind down
What surprises me however is that all these people describe the horrors of working in major or important kitchens - the terrible hours, the burned hands, the shouting and screaming, the nasty bullying - and yet so many also say they adore it. The intensity
It is a buzz. I need a good reading book so thanks for the recommendation – I'll order it. Thinking back, the head KP was addicted to speed (!) and the maitre d was shagging the chief waitress - they both got sacked after opening the restaurant to themselves when it was closed one bank holiday, drinking it dry and then presumably using the venue as a temple of love.
Crazy days.
It’s a superb read - you’ll see why it made him famous. Full of juicy gossip and excellent insights. He was a fine writer, albeit a depressive drug taking boozer. A tragic loss at 62
And yes kitchens and hotels are, er, hotbeds of nookie. The Maldives are amongst the worst, because the staff are trapped on that one hotel island even on days off. They only get to properly leave once or twice a year
There is nothing for them to do but snorkelling, and shagging. So that’s what they do. Polyamory rules - it is accepted that the chef will have three girls on the go, but the girls will also be bedding the concierge and the scuba guys and so on. And they are absolutely happy to gossip about it, as that also alleviates the boredom
Basically the Maldives are paradise to visit but purgatory to work in, albeit purgatory with lots of sex
Was there last year, for a belated honeymoon. I did think that it must be total cabin fever for the staff, especially in the more remote islands where you have to hope for a space on the seaplane on your day off.
It’s so bad it is regarded as something of a hardship posting. OTOH I believe the resorts pay staff really well - they have no choice
Also, even if you can get away, where do you go? To another resort island 20 minutes away which will be just like yours? Or the main island Mahe which is dismal, quasi-Islamist, overcrowded, and there’s no booze. I suppose you could always go to the garbage island
The only real choice is India, which means a serious flight. So they don’t bother and they sleep with the sous chef instead
They’d better be paying the staff well, because they were charging me £900 a night!
That said, as in the sandpit you’ll have precisely zero expenses working there, apart from maybe your toothpaste. Your salary goes straight to the savings account every month.
Yes, the main island is as dry as Saudi, even the lounge at the airport doesn’t have a bar.
IIRC most of the flights were either to the Middle East or India. Not cheap to escape the middle of nowhere.
it’s such a weird place. It is quite seriously Islamic (apart from a Christian atoll in the far south) and yet it makes all its money from some of the most opulently hedonistic hotels on the globe, with villas explicitly designed for oligarchs with multiple girlfriends
Also mad and often quite corrupt, turbulent politics. A few years ago there was a prime minister or president or whatever who took his religion VERY seriously and wanted to ban alcohol across the archipelago - ie in all the hotels. It was quite brusquely pointed out to him that this would destroy the economy in weeks and then he was violently removed from office
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Wins elections though.
Creates terrible governments though.
I take it you are referring to the government run by that Fettes-educated, public school charmer, Tony Blair?
Nice try, I win £5. The exception that proves the rule. 😉
After Dave, Boris and Rishi Rich we need someone with a rough edge, but some actual substance and grit.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Wins elections though.
Creates terrible governments though.
You are misdiagnosing the problem - governments are bad in modern times because there aren’t enough public schoolboys running things.
If you just took a moment to think about it, in the days when the government was full of public schoolboys and aristocrats we were amazing. We had the empire, we invented everything, we were the richest. We were the top nation.
Since they’ve allowed any old hoi polloi into governments that’s where the country has slid down the leagues.
We had the Empire with non public school Lloyd George or Ramsay Macdonald as PM and were still largely top dog economically and militarily albeit with the US chasing.
We now have a public school educated PM and Chancellor and are mid rank but the age of Empire is over (except for Putin). Incidentally he seems to have had a breakdown
Alex Ferguson was an abrasive boss. He would famously give under performing players the “hairdryer” treatment
He was also one of the most successful club managers of all time
The idea that all good bosses must be these lovely emollient encouraging types is nonsense. Different management styles can be equally effective
Says the man who has already outlined his credentials in this debate.
Nobody is saying that bosses need to be "lovely emollient encouraging types". A boss does not need to be nice. He/she does not need to be liked. It helps if they are respected. Raab is clearly a jerk with no leadership or management skill, and probably isn't even respected by his mother.
Sunak, who it appears to me has both to some degree has ruthlessly fired him (through facilitating his resignation). It is a good call.
Bosses who think they are Alex Ferguson calibre are probably not Alex Ferguson calibre!
It is also questionable as to how good a leader Fergusson was, because one of the most important aspects of leadership is succession, so when we look at how MU performed post departure it could be argued there was a strong failure of leadership on Fergusson's part
It is also questionable how giod a leader was because, frankly, winning the league two times out of three shoukd only be about par when your resources are so much greater than everyone else's. It was notable that Man Utd's dominance waned rather as the extent to which its riches exceeded those of other clubs waned. Ferguson's biggest achievment was winning the ECWC with Aberdeen.
Eh? He established Man Utd as dominant from being not far from the equivalent of Spurs today. It was in no sense gifted to him. Liverpool were dominant, and Man Utd not ahead of Arsenal or even Everton at the time. He maintained it for two decades, re-inventing the team repeatedly.
But that's only where they should have been, given how much richer they were than every other club. They had the resources to buy all the best players: no great surprise that they are then the best team. I'm not saying that Ferguson was a bad manager - just that leading the richest club to success isn't necessarily a massive test.
But Ferguson made them the richest club! Liverpool were the dominant club and attracted the best players when he took over. Ferguson started in 1986 and it wasn't until the mid nineties, after they had won the title, that United started getting the choice of best players.
I only hazily remember this - so please treat as 'bloke on the internet told me' - but my memory is that during the 80s, Utd were rich, but not dramatically richer than anyone else. ISTR in those days gate receipts were shared between home and away, so if you were a club who didn't attract many home fans, you still got a decent few pay days when you played the likes of Man Utd away. And in those days gate receipts were a big, big share of your income - the football league's once-a-week game on ITV wasn't a major money spinner. Then the rules were changes to allow big clubs to keep more of their money. Then the Premier League came along, with the associated telly money - which again, disproportionately went to the big clubs - and meant they didn't have to share at all with anyone outside the top tier.
And Utd have had the biggest fan base in the country for as long as I have been alive (a hangover, it's said, from the sympathy garnered from the Munich air disaster - the fightback from which to win the European Cup a decade later is a fantastic story).
Thus, Utd went from being averagely rich to far richer than everyone else.
Now that all happened when Ferguson was in charge - maybe it didn't happen by accident? Maybe he deserves some of the credit? In which case, yes, credit is deserved (though he rather ruined the game for everyone else, if that's so).
But the point is, United were never short of a bob or two. Whereas with Aberdeen Ferguson succeeded with far more limited means.
That's how I remember it, anyway.
That's a fairly accurate summary. The other factor is that through the 90s overseas money became significant for the first time - and MU being the most successful big club in the early PL years got the majority of the bandwagon money, and it became self-perpetuating right until the billionaires came along.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I agree with a lot of this. I met SKS once and found him pretty charmless. I voted for Lisa Nandy to be leader as a result. I would hope that it is something he can work on, but it might become a real impediment. On the other hand, Sunak also has a really grating demeanour.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Wins elections though.
Creates terrible governments though.
You are misdiagnosing the problem - governments are bad in modern times because there aren’t enough public schoolboys running things.
If you just took a moment to think about it, in the days when the government was full of public schoolboys and aristocrats we were amazing. We had the empire, we invented everything, we were the richest. We were the top nation.
Since they’ve allowed any old hoi polloi into governments that’s where the country has slid down the leagues.
We had the Empire with non public school Lloyd George or Ramsay Macdonald as PM and were still largely top dog economically and militarily albeit with the US chasing.
We now have a public school educated PM and Chancellor and are mid rank but the age of Empire is over (except for Putin)
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
Yes. There’s something actually off putting about Starmer’s dullness. It’s not simply that he’s stiff and boring, there is something else. A bit of David Brent, a bit of Gordon Brittas, a bit too much I’m-so-honest earnestness, it is actively annoying. Also surprising given that he was such a successful lawyer - aren’t they meant to be plausible and persuasive?
Like you, I don’t believe it will prevent Labour winning. Might stop them winning big
Plus his age.
Starmer ressembles a character in a Dennis Potter drama about a seedy seaside town. There's a chance he will completely bomb in a high-profile national election campaign.
FWIW I believe that politics/election anoraks are in for a fascinating 18 months, as long as you don't need the cult of personality to keep you going. The people at the centre are deadly dull, we have never had such a boring bunch across the board, (O Kate; O Jezza; O Boris; O Blair; O Kemi. Where have you all gone) but the possibilities and range of outcomes is amazing.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Wins elections though.
Creates terrible governments though.
I take it you are referring to the government run by that Fettes-educated, public school charmer, Tony Blair?
Nice try, I win £5. The exception that proves the rule. 😉
After Dave, Boris and Rishi Rich we need someone with a rough edge, but some actual substance and grit.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I agree with a lot of this. I met SKS once and found him pretty charmless. I voted for Lisa Nandy to be leader as a result. I would hope that it is something he can work on, but it might become a real impediment. On the other hand, Sunak also has a really grating demeanour.
For all his paid for charm, Sunak is pretty smarmy, trying a little too hard to be down with the kids.
From another report it sounds like he did quite a lot of damage to trees and vegetation alongside the river so not just dredging.
I know the River Lugg very well. It is exquisite. This guy is a barbarian. He’s been attacking the riverscape for years - he got prison this time because he he’s broken the law - pointlessly tearing down trees etc - multiple times going back decades
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I agree with a lot of this. I met SKS once and found him pretty charmless. I voted for Lisa Nandy to be leader as a result. I would hope that it is something he can work on, but it might become a real impediment. On the other hand, Sunak also has a really grating demeanour.
I don't think Sunak has an issue with his demeanour. His issue is not he has no idea how the other 99% live. He has simply no interest in them.
I haven't read the report - but this situation highlights one of my chief worries about our system - that is, how can a minister enact a policy that his civil servants fundamentally don't want to do?
They do it all the time. Part of being a civil servant is understanding that your job is to deliver the policies of the government of the day, unless it's actively illegal* or impossible. The idea that civil servants (who range from diplomats to jobcentre workers to rural bee inspectors and much more beside) act with a kind of professional unanimity is misguided, even the tiny proportion of them that fit the popular Sir Humphrey image of what a civil servant is. While I'm sure there are probably loads of examples of 'that can't be done, Minister', I very much doubt there are many at all of 'I refuse to do that, Minister'.
*usually.
One issue is that, as a result of the activism of its staff; the civil service increasingly internalises many values that inhibit this impartial approach to policy making and policy delivery in certain areas; ie equality, diversity, human rights.I think that is probably how Ministers see the problem - it inhibits policy delivery.
I've got some friends in the civil service who work in policy development and were passionate remainers and promoted it as such on their social media profiles... I can see how this would be very annoying to Ministers.
Ultimately you have to be completely neutral for this system to work and keep your private views to yourself, but often this is not how it works in practice with civil servants.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
Yes. There’s something actually off putting about Starmer’s dullness. It’s not simply that he’s stiff and boring, there is something else. A bit of David Brent, a bit of Gordon Brittas, a bit too much I’m-so-honest earnestness, it is actively annoying. Also surprising given that he was such a successful lawyer - aren’t they meant to be plausible and persuasive?
Like you, I don’t believe it will prevent Labour winning. Might stop them winning big
Indeed, I still think Starmer will end up the UK Francois Hollande. Wins because of the unpopularity of the government and incumbent but more narrowly than expected.
Only lasts a term and becomes very unpopular before being replaced by a younger and more charismatic alternative. Wes Streeting for our Macron?
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Wins elections though.
Creates terrible governments though.
I take it you are referring to the government run by that Fettes-educated, public school charmer, Tony Blair?
Nice try, I win £5. The exception that proves the rule. 😉
After Dave, Boris and Rishi Rich we need someone with a rough edge, but some actual substance and grit.
I thoroughly disagree, the more of Rishi I see, the more I see him as utterly out of his depth, out of control and his Tony Blair tribute act is very tired.
From another report it sounds like he did quite a lot of damage to trees and vegetation alongside the river so not just dredging.
I know the River Lugg very well. It is exquisite. This guy is a barbarian. He’s been attacking the riverscape for years - he got prison this time because he he’s broken the law - pointlessly tearing down trees etc - multiple times going back decades
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Wins elections though.
Creates terrible governments though.
I take it you are referring to the government run by that Fettes-educated, public school charmer, Tony Blair?
Nice try, I win £5. The exception that proves the rule. 😉
After Dave, Boris and Rishi Rich we need someone with a rough edge, but some actual substance and grit.
So why are you offering us Sir Keir Starmer?
To irritate you ?
Having nobody to vote for will do that, it's true.
From another report it sounds like he did quite a lot of damage to trees and vegetation alongside the river so not just dredging.
I know the River Lugg very well. It is exquisite. This guy is a barbarian. He’s been attacking the riverscape for years - he got prison this time because he he’s broken the law - pointlessly tearing down trees etc - multiple times going back decades
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Wins elections though.
Creates terrible governments though.
I take it you are referring to the government run by that Fettes-educated, public school charmer, Tony Blair?
Nice try, I win £5. The exception that proves the rule. 😉
After Dave, Boris and Rishi Rich we need someone with a rough edge, but some actual substance and grit.
So why are you offering us Sir Keir Starmer?
To irritate you ?
Having nobody to vote for will do that, it's true.
From another report it sounds like he did quite a lot of damage to trees and vegetation alongside the river so not just dredging.
I know the River Lugg very well. It is exquisite. This guy is a barbarian. He’s been attacking the riverscape for years - he got prison this time because he he’s broken the law - pointlessly tearing down trees etc - multiple times going back decades
"He may be a bit of a bully, but he's nowhere near as bad as Gordon Brown, Alex Ferguson or Adolf Hitler".
Ferguson is a genuinely interesting one, the other two are silly. Fergie was undoubtedly a bully at times and undoubtedly successful with longevity.
But, lots of Premier League clubs tried to replicate him, indeed by 2011 there were 7 managers from Glasgow. The likes of Malky Mackay, Billy Davies and Alex McCleish were disasters leading their clubs to long term decline.
It is not impossible to manage successfully with that style in certain contexts but the winners are very rare.
Successful chefs are supposed to be often very toxic managers. I've worked in a few kitchens and found the light-touch approach works best. But I've never worked with anyone like Michelin star winning chef. Has anyone got any experience of this?
Worked as an F&B manager a couple of decades ago, nowhere near Michelin star but restaurants and and function rooms. Plenty of food and equipment sent flying across the room, by the senior chefs. Not every day, not even every week, but every so often the lid would blow on the pressure cooker.
AIUI, at the very top, there are way more Gordon Ramsay types, than Heston Blumental types.
One of the problems is booze. Lots of chefs appear to be alcoholics or damn near it. Long ago, I worked with a very good French chef (he was English but trained in the classical French style) who would sink 6-7 pints of premium lager within an hour or so of service ending each night. So, every day, he'd show up hungover and thus in a foul mood.
He was very mean to the waitresses to the point that they all dreaded being on the pass and had to strictly rota to minimise their exposure to the kitchen. He lasted longer than he should have done because he was an excellent cook and they were few and far between in the northern city I was living in at the time.
Sadly, catering does rather encourage alcoholism – I am led to believe that such experiences aren't that rare.
And drugs. Coke during the service, heroin afterwards. Read Kitchen Confidential by Anthony Bourdain (a brilliant book anyway)
Then there’s the after service drinking sessions to wind down
What surprises me however is that all these people describe the horrors of working in major or important kitchens - the terrible hours, the burned hands, the shouting and screaming, the nasty bullying - and yet so many also say they adore it. The intensity
It is a buzz. I need a good reading book so thanks for the recommendation – I'll order it. Thinking back, the head KP was addicted to speed (!) and the maitre d was shagging the chief waitress - they both got sacked after opening the restaurant to themselves when it was closed one bank holiday, drinking it dry and then presumably using the venue as a temple of love.
Crazy days.
It’s a superb read - you’ll see why it made him famous. Full of juicy gossip and excellent insights. He was a fine writer, albeit a depressive drug taking boozer. A tragic loss at 62
And yes kitchens and hotels are, er, hotbeds of nookie. The Maldives are amongst the worst, because the staff are trapped on that one hotel island even on days off. They only get to properly leave once or twice a year
There is nothing for them to do but snorkelling, and shagging. So that’s what they do. Polyamory rules - it is accepted that the chef will have three girls on the go, but the girls will also be bedding the concierge and the scuba guys and so on. And they are absolutely happy to gossip about it, as that also alleviates the boredom
Basically the Maldives are paradise to visit but purgatory to work in, albeit purgatory with lots of sex
Was there last year, for a belated honeymoon. I did think that it must be total cabin fever for the staff, especially in the more remote islands where you have to hope for a space on the seaplane on your day off.
It’s so bad it is regarded as something of a hardship posting. OTOH I believe the resorts pay staff really well - they have no choice
Also, even if you can get away, where do you go? To another resort island 20 minutes away which will be just like yours? Or the main island Mahe which is dismal, quasi-Islamist, overcrowded, and there’s no booze. I suppose you could always go to the garbage island
The only real choice is India, which means a serious flight. So they don’t bother and they sleep with the sous chef instead
They’d better be paying the staff well, because they were charging me £900 a night!
That said, as in the sandpit you’ll have precisely zero expenses working there, apart from maybe your toothpaste. Your salary goes straight to the savings account every month.
Yes, the main island is as dry as Saudi, even the lounge at the airport doesn’t have a bar.
IIRC most of the flights were either to the Middle East or India. Not cheap to escape the middle of nowhere.
it’s such a weird place. It is quite seriously Islamic (apart from a Christian atoll in the far south) and yet it makes all its money from some of the most opulently hedonistic hotels on the globe, with villas explicitly designed for oligarchs with multiple girlfriends
Also mad and often quite corrupt, turbulent politics. A few years ago there was a prime minister or president or whatever who took his religion VERY seriously and wanted to ban alcohol across the archipelago - ie in all the hotels. It was quite brusquely pointed out to him that this would destroy the economy in weeks and then he was violently removed from office
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Wins elections though.
Creates terrible governments though.
I take it you are referring to the government run by that Fettes-educated, public school charmer, Tony Blair?
Nice try, I win £5. The exception that proves the rule. 😉
After Dave, Boris and Rishi Rich we need someone with a rough edge, but some actual substance and grit.
So why are you offering us Sir Keir Starmer?
To irritate you ?
Having nobody to vote for will do that, it's true.
On of the reasons I support PR.
Wouldn't matter. Even under PR the choice of PM would still be the same.
From another report it sounds like he did quite a lot of damage to trees and vegetation alongside the river so not just dredging.
I know the River Lugg very well. It is exquisite. This guy is a barbarian. He’s been attacking the riverscape for years - he got prison this time because he he’s broken the law - pointlessly tearing down trees etc - multiple times going back decades
From another report it sounds like he did quite a lot of damage to trees and vegetation alongside the river so not just dredging.
I know the River Lugg very well. It is exquisite. This guy is a barbarian. He’s been attacking the riverscape for years - he got prison this time because he he’s broken the law - pointlessly tearing down trees etc - multiple times going back decades
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Wins elections though.
Creates terrible governments though.
I take it you are referring to the government run by that Fettes-educated, public school charmer, Tony Blair?
Nice try, I win £5. The exception that proves the rule. 😉
After Dave, Boris and Rishi Rich we need someone with a rough edge, but some actual substance and grit.
So why are you offering us Sir Keir Starmer?
To irritate you ?
Having nobody to vote for will do that, it's true.
On of the reasons I support PR.
Wouldn't matter. Even under PR the choice of PM would still be the same.
If we had PR we would have completely different parties, so it wouldn't be the same.
Sometimes people need to go to prison, because they keep ignoring rules even after they have been told to stop what they are doing. This is also quite common with unauthorised demolition and building work, people think they can just ignore the Council and court rulings, etc. The threat of prison is often the only thing that can influence them.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Wins elections though.
Creates terrible governments though.
I take it you are referring to the government run by that Fettes-educated, public school charmer, Tony Blair?
Nice try, I win £5. The exception that proves the rule. 😉
After Dave, Boris and Rishi Rich we need someone with a rough edge, but some actual substance and grit.
So why are you offering us Sir Keir Starmer?
To irritate you ?
Having nobody to vote for will do that, it's true.
On of the reasons I support PR.
Wouldn't matter. Even under PR the choice of PM would still be the same.
If we had PR we would have completely different parties, so it wouldn't.
Would we? Certainly Labour and the Tories as the main parties of their respective sides would be smaller, but they'd still be the two biggest parties and their leaders would still be the only possible candidates for PM.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Wins elections though.
Creates terrible governments though.
You are just jealous
Nah, it's bad for the country when PMs haven't a clue how 99.9999% of people live.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
Yes. There’s something actually off putting about Starmer’s dullness. It’s not simply that he’s stiff and boring, there is something else. A bit of David Brent, a bit of Gordon Brittas, a bit too much I’m-so-honest earnestness, it is actively annoying. Also surprising given that he was such a successful lawyer - aren’t they meant to be plausible and persuasive?
Like you, I don’t believe it will prevent Labour winning. Might stop them winning big
Indeed, I still think Starmer will end up the UK Francois Hollande. Wins because of the unpopularity of the government and incumbent but more narrowly than expected.
Only lasts a term and becomes very unpopular before being replaced by a younger and more charismatic alternative. Wes Streeting for our Macron?
Starmer's triumph and tragedy is that he's even in the frame for PM- really his role in 2020 was to clean out the Labour stables, lose not to badly in 2023 and resign with dignity then, having done a good, necessary but underappreciated job. What few of us foresaw was how quickly BoJo would throw it away and that the Conservatives would follow that up with the Trussterfuck.
So, if Starmer wins (likely) it will be because things are a mess. My hope is that there will be enough marginal gains by not being clapped out, useless or mad that he can point to a growing light on the horizon, because that's as good as it will get for a bit. And that's a blooming hard sell. But if Starmer can do another good, necessary but underappreciated job, it's probably a better fate than the UK deserves.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Getting worried?
No more than usual. Tory public schoolboys playing at PM cause no end of problems.
"He may be a bit of a bully, but he's nowhere near as bad as Gordon Brown, Alex Ferguson or Adolf Hitler".
Ferguson is a genuinely interesting one, the other two are silly. Fergie was undoubtedly a bully at times and undoubtedly successful with longevity.
But, lots of Premier League clubs tried to replicate him, indeed by 2011 there were 7 managers from Glasgow. The likes of Malky Mackay, Billy Davies and Alex McCleish were disasters leading their clubs to long term decline.
It is not impossible to manage successfully with that style in certain contexts but the winners are very rare.
Successful chefs are supposed to be often very toxic managers. I've worked in a few kitchens and found the light-touch approach works best. But I've never worked with anyone like Michelin star winning chef. Has anyone got any experience of this?
Worked as an F&B manager a couple of decades ago, nowhere near Michelin star but restaurants and and function rooms. Plenty of food and equipment sent flying across the room, by the senior chefs. Not every day, not even every week, but every so often the lid would blow on the pressure cooker.
AIUI, at the very top, there are way more Gordon Ramsay types, than Heston Blumental types.
One of the problems is booze. Lots of chefs appear to be alcoholics or damn near it. Long ago, I worked with a very good French chef (he was English but trained in the classical French style) who would sink 6-7 pints of premium lager within an hour or so of service ending each night. So, every day, he'd show up hungover and thus in a foul mood.
He was very mean to the waitresses to the point that they all dreaded being on the pass and had to strictly rota to minimise their exposure to the kitchen. He lasted longer than he should have done because he was an excellent cook and they were few and far between in the northern city I was living in at the time.
Sadly, catering does rather encourage alcoholism – I am led to believe that such experiences aren't that rare.
And drugs. Coke during the service, heroin afterwards. Read Kitchen Confidential by Anthony Bourdain (a brilliant book anyway)
Then there’s the after service drinking sessions to wind down
What surprises me however is that all these people describe the horrors of working in major or important kitchens - the terrible hours, the burned hands, the shouting and screaming, the nasty bullying - and yet so many also say they adore it. The intensity
It is a buzz. I need a good reading book so thanks for the recommendation – I'll order it. Thinking back, the head KP was addicted to speed (!) and the maitre d was shagging the chief waitress - they both got sacked after opening the restaurant to themselves when it was closed one bank holiday, drinking it dry and then presumably using the venue as a temple of love.
Crazy days.
It’s a superb read - you’ll see why it made him famous. Full of juicy gossip and excellent insights. He was a fine writer, albeit a depressive drug taking boozer. A tragic loss at 62
And yes kitchens and hotels are, er, hotbeds of nookie. The Maldives are amongst the worst, because the staff are trapped on that one hotel island even on days off. They only get to properly leave once or twice a year
There is nothing for them to do but snorkelling, and shagging. So that’s what they do. Polyamory rules - it is accepted that the chef will have three girls on the go, but the girls will also be bedding the concierge and the scuba guys and so on. And they are absolutely happy to gossip about it, as that also alleviates the boredom
Basically the Maldives are paradise to visit but purgatory to work in, albeit purgatory with lots of sex
Was there last year, for a belated honeymoon. I did think that it must be total cabin fever for the staff, especially in the more remote islands where you have to hope for a space on the seaplane on your day off.
It’s so bad it is regarded as something of a hardship posting. OTOH I believe the resorts pay staff really well - they have no choice
Also, even if you can get away, where do you go? To another resort island 20 minutes away which will be just like yours? Or the main island Mahe which is dismal, quasi-Islamist, overcrowded, and there’s no booze. I suppose you could always go to the garbage island
The only real choice is India, which means a serious flight. So they don’t bother and they sleep with the sous chef instead
They’d better be paying the staff well, because they were charging me £900 a night!
That said, as in the sandpit you’ll have precisely zero expenses working there, apart from maybe your toothpaste. Your salary goes straight to the savings account every month.
Yes, the main island is as dry as Saudi, even the lounge at the airport doesn’t have a bar.
IIRC most of the flights were either to the Middle East or India. Not cheap to escape the middle of nowhere.
it’s such a weird place. It is quite seriously Islamic (apart from a Christian atoll in the far south) and yet it makes all its money from some of the most opulently hedonistic hotels on the globe, with villas explicitly designed for oligarchs with multiple girlfriends
Also mad and often quite corrupt, turbulent politics. A few years ago there was a prime minister or president or whatever who took his religion VERY seriously and wanted to ban alcohol across the archipelago - ie in all the hotels. It was quite brusquely pointed out to him that this would destroy the economy in weeks and then he was violently removed from office
That looks pretty definitive. I must be wrong. And yet I have a memory of a church in Addu Atoll - the one I am referring to. Must be a false memory. However Addu is definitely LESS Islamic than the rest of the chain, especially Male. There is an old British base in Addu, some ragged villages, it is quite laid back and feels more like Sri Lanka than the super Muslim and very uptight Male
Well I’ve just read it. All of it. What a load of shite about nothing. Raab has every reason to be aggrieved
I wouldn't worry. Two years today he'll be leader of the opposition.
You think Raab can hold Esher and Walton?
Personally I think there's a good chance he will be one of the big "were you up for" moments in Election 24?
Nothing will top being up for ‘Palmer’
To clarify I assume @Taz means last night's revelation rather than the Good Doctor losing his Nottingham seat to Anna Soubry back in 2010?
You’re quite right !!
An important clarification as I was slightly concerned @NickPalmer would have taken offence!
What was last night's revelation?
Oh my, you really missed out. I suggest you read last night's BLT discourse, as to summarise is, in this case, to diminish.
The whole thread is already a PB legend. Those of us that were there were privileged indeed
I missed that. Just been to look it up. Worth it.
Every 20th April, Nick's account should be the PB Header.
Yes, 20th April shall henceforth be known as Nick Palmer Swiss Threesome Day. We can have street parties with suggestive Toblerones, give each other kink-themed cuckoo clocks, etc
"And gentlemen of PBland NOT in bed Shall think themselves unlucky they were not there And hold their own manhoods alas when any squeeks That were with him upon Nick's Threesome day."
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Getting worried?
Interesting isn't it. Sunak is in a different league to Starmer when it comes lo general likeability - the left could just admit this rather than resorting to silly jibes - they are going to win anyway.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Wins elections though.
Creates terrible governments though.
I take it you are referring to the government run by that Fettes-educated, public school charmer, Tony Blair?
Nice try, I win £5. The exception that proves the rule. 😉
After Dave, Boris and Rishi Rich we need someone with a rough edge, but some actual substance and grit.
So why are you offering us Sir Keir Starmer?
To irritate you ?
Having nobody to vote for will do that, it's true.
On of the reasons I support PR.
Wouldn't matter. Even under PR the choice of PM would still be the same.
If we had PR we would have completely different parties, so it wouldn't.
Would we? Certainly Labour and the Tories as the main parties of their respective sides would be smaller, but they'd still be the two biggest parties and their leaders would still be the only possible candidates for PM.
Why would you think that when it is not the case in most of the countries that have PR. I would expect a Socialist party (made up from primarily Labour), a Social democrat party (made up of Labour and LDs), a Liberal party (made up of LDs and maybe some libertarians) , a Centre right party (made up of LDs and Tories), a Right wing party (made up of Tories and UKIP/Reform) a Far Right party (made up of UKIP/Reform and others), and a Green party.
I would expect them all to have significant influence, even the Liberal party, which I would anticipate would always remain relatively small but which I would be a member of.
From another report it sounds like he did quite a lot of damage to trees and vegetation alongside the river so not just dredging.
I know the River Lugg very well. It is exquisite. This guy is a barbarian. He’s been attacking the riverscape for years - he got prison this time because he he’s broken the law - pointlessly tearing down trees etc - multiple times going back decades
From another report it sounds like he did quite a lot of damage to trees and vegetation alongside the river so not just dredging.
I know the River Lugg very well. It is exquisite. This guy is a barbarian. He’s been attacking the riverscape for years - he got prison this time because he he’s broken the law - pointlessly tearing down trees etc - multiple times going back decades
My word that is shocking and upsetting. Jail's too good for him.
Unfortunately there are some real swine who own important tracts of countryside and seem to get a kick from trashing it, and putting up two fingers to those who object. Because it's "their" land, they have the money, and they simply can. He ought to be dispossessed of ownership altogether.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Getting worried?
Interesting isn't it. Sunak is in a different league to Starmer when it comes lo general likeability - the left could just admit this rather than resorting to silly jibes - they are going to win anyway.
Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland and Marcus Decker, who scaled a bridge on the Dartford Crossing forcing police to close it to traffic, have been sentenced to three years in prison, and two years and seven months in prison respectively for causing a public nuisance.
Sometimes people need to go to prison, because they keep ignoring rules even after they have been told to stop what they are doing. This is also quite common with unauthorised demolition and building work, people think they can just ignore the Council and court rulings, etc. The threat of prison is often the only thing that can influence them.
Yes and no. I’d rather see non-violent non-sex offenders given meaningful community punishments, rather than prison time. He wasn’t specifically found guilty of contempt of court, which yes should result in a custodial sentence.
From another report it sounds like he did quite a lot of damage to trees and vegetation alongside the river so not just dredging.
I know the River Lugg very well. It is exquisite. This guy is a barbarian. He’s been attacking the riverscape for years - he got prison this time because he he’s broken the law - pointlessly tearing down trees etc - multiple times going back decades
We went on a school field trip to see the Lugg flood plain near Mordiford for geography A level. It was very dreary, so after a two mile hike, we wound up at The Green Man, which was altogether more satisfying.
Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland and Marcus Decker, who scaled a bridge on the Dartford Crossing forcing police to close it to traffic, have been sentenced to three years in prison, and two years and seven months in prison respectively for causing a public nuisance.
From another report it sounds like he did quite a lot of damage to trees and vegetation alongside the river so not just dredging.
I know the River Lugg very well. It is exquisite. This guy is a barbarian. He’s been attacking the riverscape for years - he got prison this time because he he’s broken the law - pointlessly tearing down trees etc - multiple times going back decades
Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland and Marcus Decker, who scaled a bridge on the Dartford Crossing forcing police to close it to traffic, have been sentenced to three years in prison, and two years and seven months in prison respectively for causing a public nuisance.
Washington Post - Mike Lindell’s firm told to pay $5 million in ‘Prove Mike Wrong’ election-fraud challenge
MyPillow founder and prominent election denier Mike Lindell made a bold offer ahead of a “cyber symposium” he held in August 2021 in South Dakota: He claimed he had data showing Chinese interference and said he would pay $5 million to anyone who could prove the material was not from the previous year’s U.S. election.
He called the challenge “Prove Mike Wrong.”
On Wednesday, a private arbitration panel ruled that someone did.
The panel said Robert Zeidman, a computer forensics expert and 63-year-old Trump voter from Nevada, was entitled to the $5 million payout.
Zeidman had examined Lindell’s data and concluded that not only did it not prove voter fraud, it also had no connection to the 2020 election. He was the only expert who submitted a claim, arbitration records show.
He turned to the arbitrators after Lindell Management, which created the contest, refused to pay him.
In their 23-page decision [see link below], the arbitrators said Zeidman proved that Lindell’s material “unequivocally did not reflect November 2020 election data.” They directed Lindell’s firm to pay Zeidman within 30 days.
In a statement to The Washington Post, Zeidman said he was “really happy” with the arbitrators’ decision. “They clearly saw this as I did — that the data we were given at the symposium was not at all what Mr. Lindell said it was,” he said. “The truth is finally out there.” . . .
Lindell said in a text to The Post: “They made a terribly wrong decision! This will be going to court!” His attorneys did not reply to a request seeking comment.
A copy of contest rules submitted in the arbitration said disputes would be “resolved exclusively by final and binding arbitration” and noted that arbitration “is subject to very limited review by courts.” . . .
Lindell also faces a $1.3 billion defamation suit from Dominion Voting Systems and a defamation lawsuit from one of Dominion’s former executives.
In the months after Trump’s 2020 election loss, Lindell spent millions of dollars to finance lawsuits, support right-wing activists nationwide and launch a streaming television station dedicated to amplifying election-fraud falsehoods.
During frequent media appearances, he had advertised his three-day symposium as the event where he would finally provide data proving his claims. And he issued his high-stakes challenge.
“There’s a $5 million prize for anybody that can prove the election data that I have from the 2020 election was false, is not from the 2020 election,” Lindell said on the conservative show “The Glazov Gang,” which streams online. . . .
A senior lawyer who used his daily jog to repeatedly flash schoolgirls has been struck off.
Mark Pittaway was a director of Thursfields Solicitors in the West Midlands when he regularly exposed himself over a three-year period to at least four girls, one of whom told the court he had flashed her more than 30 times.
Pittaway pulled his shorts to one side as he ran past the children while they were on their way to school or waiting at a bus stop.
The solicitor, whose running for charity regularly featured in the press, was charged with five counts of indecent exposure while jogging around the Portland area of Dorset.
He was also his firm’s compliance officer, and reported himself to the SRA in 2021. He informed the regulator that “Last Thursday I was charged with offences, all of which I deny, but which are likely to become public knowledge at some stage whereby both the reputation of my firm and that of the profession might be harmed. They are not fraud or dishonesty related but may attract media attention nonetheless”.
The solicitor claimed to police that if anyone had seen his genitals it was “purely accidental” and a result of him wearing short shorts.
When he was shown CCTV footage he conceded that his genitals were on display, but maintained that he must have been hitching up his shorts to “scratch his groin area”.
Four eyewitnesses gave evidence at his trial. One said that "nearly every day for two years, this man would flash his genitals to me. I was in school. Walking to and from school. lt was horrible. I would go to school scared and frightened of what will happen to me. I thought he would've raped me or done stuff to me. I have never been so scared in my life. lt has degraded me as a woman and I felt targeted. When it first happened I was fourteen years old. I was a child".
A second victim said, "This incident left me feeling so uncomfortable going into school. lt got to the point that I would always make sure I was with someone or get a lift....I would think about the other children who must have seen this. There must have been so many children”.
Convicted of all five charges, Pittaway was given a suspended 12 month sentence and a 12 week curfew between 9pm and 9am.
Sometimes people need to go to prison, because they keep ignoring rules even after they have been told to stop what they are doing. This is also quite common with unauthorised demolition and building work, people think they can just ignore the Council and court rulings, etc. The threat of prison is often the only thing that can influence them.
Yes and no. I’d rather see non-violent non-sex offenders given meaningful community punishments, rather than prison time. He wasn’t specifically found guilty of contempt of court, which yes should result in a custodial sentence.
Given that he was destroying the countryside your typical community service order of cleaning an area up isn't really appropriate. He would bulldoze it first to make things easier.
A senior lawyer who used his daily jog to repeatedly flash schoolgirls has been struck off.
Mark Pittaway was a director of Thursfields Solicitors in the West Midlands when he regularly exposed himself over a three-year period to at least four girls, one of whom told the court he had flashed her more than 30 times.
Pittaway pulled his shorts to one side as he ran past the children while they were on their way to school or waiting at a bus stop.
The solicitor, whose running for charity regularly featured in the press, was charged with five counts of indecent exposure while jogging around the Portland area of Dorset.
He was also his firm’s compliance officer, and reported himself to the SRA in 2021. He informed the regulator that “Last Thursday I was charged with offences, all of which I deny, but which are likely to become public knowledge at some stage whereby both the reputation of my firm and that of the profession might be harmed. They are not fraud or dishonesty related but may attract media attention nonetheless”.
The solicitor claimed to police that if anyone had seen his genitals it was “purely accidental” and a result of him wearing short shorts.
When he was shown CCTV footage he conceded that his genitals were on display, but maintained that he must have been hitching up his shorts to “scratch his groin area”.
Four eyewitnesses gave evidence at his trial. One said that "nearly every day for two years, this man would flash his genitals to me. I was in school. Walking to and from school. lt was horrible. I would go to school scared and frightened of what will happen to me. I thought he would've raped me or done stuff to me. I have never been so scared in my life. lt has degraded me as a woman and I felt targeted. When it first happened I was fourteen years old. I was a child".
A second victim said, "This incident left me feeling so uncomfortable going into school. lt got to the point that I would always make sure I was with someone or get a lift....I would think about the other children who must have seen this. There must have been so many children”.
Convicted of all five charges, Pittaway was given a suspended 12 month sentence and a 12 week curfew between 9pm and 9am.
Washington Post - Mike Lindell’s firm told to pay $5 million in ‘Prove Mike Wrong’ election-fraud challenge
MyPillow founder and prominent election denier Mike Lindell made a bold offer ahead of a “cyber symposium” he held in August 2021 in South Dakota: He claimed he had data showing Chinese interference and said he would pay $5 million to anyone who could prove the material was not from the previous year’s U.S. election.
He called the challenge “Prove Mike Wrong.”
On Wednesday, a private arbitration panel ruled that someone did.
The panel said Robert Zeidman, a computer forensics expert and 63-year-old Trump voter from Nevada, was entitled to the $5 million payout...
Now the farmer under 25? If so, he can claim he wasn’t responsible, surely?
Only in Scotland.
You’re probably a bit out of the loop on what the Tory governments of the last 13 years have been up to, but no, not only in Scotland.
No, there are completely different legal systems in England and Scotland. The advise with regard to offenders under 25, was very specifically from the Scottish government to the Scottish judiciary. If only the councel for the prosecution frequented this forum.
A senior lawyer who used his daily jog to repeatedly flash schoolgirls has been struck off.
Mark Pittaway was a director of Thursfields Solicitors in the West Midlands when he regularly exposed himself over a three-year period to at least four girls, one of whom told the court he had flashed her more than 30 times.
Pittaway pulled his shorts to one side as he ran past the children while they were on their way to school or waiting at a bus stop.
The solicitor, whose running for charity regularly featured in the press, was charged with five counts of indecent exposure while jogging around the Portland area of Dorset.
He was also his firm’s compliance officer, and reported himself to the SRA in 2021. He informed the regulator that “Last Thursday I was charged with offences, all of which I deny, but which are likely to become public knowledge at some stage whereby both the reputation of my firm and that of the profession might be harmed. They are not fraud or dishonesty related but may attract media attention nonetheless”.
The solicitor claimed to police that if anyone had seen his genitals it was “purely accidental” and a result of him wearing short shorts.
When he was shown CCTV footage he conceded that his genitals were on display, but maintained that he must have been hitching up his shorts to “scratch his groin area”.
Four eyewitnesses gave evidence at his trial. One said that "nearly every day for two years, this man would flash his genitals to me. I was in school. Walking to and from school. lt was horrible. I would go to school scared and frightened of what will happen to me. I thought he would've raped me or done stuff to me. I have never been so scared in my life. lt has degraded me as a woman and I felt targeted. When it first happened I was fourteen years old. I was a child".
A second victim said, "This incident left me feeling so uncomfortable going into school. lt got to the point that I would always make sure I was with someone or get a lift....I would think about the other children who must have seen this. There must have been so many children”.
Convicted of all five charges, Pittaway was given a suspended 12 month sentence and a 12 week curfew between 9pm and 9am.
From another report it sounds like he did quite a lot of damage to trees and vegetation alongside the river so not just dredging.
I know the River Lugg very well. It is exquisite. This guy is a barbarian. He’s been attacking the riverscape for years - he got prison this time because he he’s broken the law - pointlessly tearing down trees etc - multiple times going back decades
From another report it sounds like he did quite a lot of damage to trees and vegetation alongside the river so not just dredging.
I know the River Lugg very well. It is exquisite. This guy is a barbarian. He’s been attacking the riverscape for years - he got prison this time because he he’s broken the law - pointlessly tearing down trees etc - multiple times going back decades
A senior lawyer who used his daily jog to repeatedly flash schoolgirls has been struck off.
Mark Pittaway was a director of Thursfields Solicitors in the West Midlands when he regularly exposed himself over a three-year period to at least four girls, one of whom told the court he had flashed her more than 30 times.
Pittaway pulled his shorts to one side as he ran past the children while they were on their way to school or waiting at a bus stop.
The solicitor, whose running for charity regularly featured in the press, was charged with five counts of indecent exposure while jogging around the Portland area of Dorset.
He was also his firm’s compliance officer, and reported himself to the SRA in 2021. He informed the regulator that “Last Thursday I was charged with offences, all of which I deny, but which are likely to become public knowledge at some stage whereby both the reputation of my firm and that of the profession might be harmed. They are not fraud or dishonesty related but may attract media attention nonetheless”.
The solicitor claimed to police that if anyone had seen his genitals it was “purely accidental” and a result of him wearing short shorts.
When he was shown CCTV footage he conceded that his genitals were on display, but maintained that he must have been hitching up his shorts to “scratch his groin area”.
Four eyewitnesses gave evidence at his trial. One said that "nearly every day for two years, this man would flash his genitals to me. I was in school. Walking to and from school. lt was horrible. I would go to school scared and frightened of what will happen to me. I thought he would've raped me or done stuff to me. I have never been so scared in my life. lt has degraded me as a woman and I felt targeted. When it first happened I was fourteen years old. I was a child".
A second victim said, "This incident left me feeling so uncomfortable going into school. lt got to the point that I would always make sure I was with someone or get a lift....I would think about the other children who must have seen this. There must have been so many children”.
Convicted of all five charges, Pittaway was given a suspended 12 month sentence and a 12 week curfew between 9pm and 9am.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
We joke about Raab looking like a rabbit in the headlights. I think the same is true with Starmer and even worse than Raaaab.
Starmer comes across as plastic because his eyes are so odd. Like Gordon Brown, his eyes look dead regardless of what the rest of his face is trying to do. Perhaps it is KC training at work, but he needs to be more expressive.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
You Tories are sucker for a public schoolboy with that paid for charm. Sadly, look beyond that charm and you find problems. I would have thought you might have learned by now.
Getting worried?
Interesting isn't it. Sunak is in a different league to Starmer when it comes lo general likeability - the left could just admit this rather than resorting to silly jibes - they are going to win anyway.
I think ‘in a different league’ is stretching it unless one is of a right wing inclination; Sunak gets over a lowish bar by not being an amoral absolute prick or a deranged nitwit (the last two offerings).
Of course I’m old enough to remember when the general likeability of Boris was being extolled right and centre, if not left.
Sometimes people need to go to prison, because they keep ignoring rules even after they have been told to stop what they are doing. This is also quite common with unauthorised demolition and building work, people think they can just ignore the Council and court rulings, etc. The threat of prison is often the only thing that can influence them.
Yes and no. I’d rather see non-violent non-sex offenders given meaningful community punishments, rather than prison time. He wasn’t specifically found guilty of contempt of court, which yes should result in a custodial sentence.
No. I know people like this guy, As @Burgessian says, they actually get a perverse thrill from saying Fuck off I can cut down all the trees I like, it’s my land, even when that is legally untrue. Moreover, he’s been doing this since the 1990s, as the report shows. And the River Lugg on a fine summer’s day is - was? - one of the world’s heavenly places
He’s lucky he hasn’t gone to jail sooner. And it’s clear that jail is the only thing that will stop his vandalism. Throw him in a cell and somehow lose the key
A senior lawyer who used his daily jog to repeatedly flash schoolgirls has been struck off.
Mark Pittaway was a director of Thursfields Solicitors in the West Midlands when he regularly exposed himself over a three-year period to at least four girls, one of whom told the court he had flashed her more than 30 times.
Pittaway pulled his shorts to one side as he ran past the children while they were on their way to school or waiting at a bus stop.
The solicitor, whose running for charity regularly featured in the press, was charged with five counts of indecent exposure while jogging around the Portland area of Dorset.
He was also his firm’s compliance officer, and reported himself to the SRA in 2021. He informed the regulator that “Last Thursday I was charged with offences, all of which I deny, but which are likely to become public knowledge at some stage whereby both the reputation of my firm and that of the profession might be harmed. They are not fraud or dishonesty related but may attract media attention nonetheless”.
The solicitor claimed to police that if anyone had seen his genitals it was “purely accidental” and a result of him wearing short shorts.
When he was shown CCTV footage he conceded that his genitals were on display, but maintained that he must have been hitching up his shorts to “scratch his groin area”.
Four eyewitnesses gave evidence at his trial. One said that "nearly every day for two years, this man would flash his genitals to me. I was in school. Walking to and from school. lt was horrible. I would go to school scared and frightened of what will happen to me. I thought he would've raped me or done stuff to me. I have never been so scared in my life. lt has degraded me as a woman and I felt targeted. When it first happened I was fourteen years old. I was a child".
A second victim said, "This incident left me feeling so uncomfortable going into school. lt got to the point that I would always make sure I was with someone or get a lift....I would think about the other children who must have seen this. There must have been so many children”.
Convicted of all five charges, Pittaway was given a suspended 12 month sentence and a 12 week curfew between 9pm and 9am.
Now the farmer under 25? If so, he can claim he wasn’t responsible, surely?
Only in Scotland.
You’re probably a bit out of the loop on what the Tory governments of the last 13 years have been up to, but no, not only in Scotland.
No, there are completely different legal systems in England and Scotland. The advise with regard to offenders under 25, was very specifically from the Scottish government to the Scottish judiciary. If only the councel for the prosecution frequented this forum.
A senior lawyer who used his daily jog to repeatedly flash schoolgirls has been struck off.
Mark Pittaway was a director of Thursfields Solicitors in the West Midlands when he regularly exposed himself over a three-year period to at least four girls, one of whom told the court he had flashed her more than 30 times.
Pittaway pulled his shorts to one side as he ran past the children while they were on their way to school or waiting at a bus stop.
The solicitor, whose running for charity regularly featured in the press, was charged with five counts of indecent exposure while jogging around the Portland area of Dorset.
He was also his firm’s compliance officer, and reported himself to the SRA in 2021. He informed the regulator that “Last Thursday I was charged with offences, all of which I deny, but which are likely to become public knowledge at some stage whereby both the reputation of my firm and that of the profession might be harmed. They are not fraud or dishonesty related but may attract media attention nonetheless”.
The solicitor claimed to police that if anyone had seen his genitals it was “purely accidental” and a result of him wearing short shorts.
When he was shown CCTV footage he conceded that his genitals were on display, but maintained that he must have been hitching up his shorts to “scratch his groin area”.
Four eyewitnesses gave evidence at his trial. One said that "nearly every day for two years, this man would flash his genitals to me. I was in school. Walking to and from school. lt was horrible. I would go to school scared and frightened of what will happen to me. I thought he would've raped me or done stuff to me. I have never been so scared in my life. lt has degraded me as a woman and I felt targeted. When it first happened I was fourteen years old. I was a child".
A second victim said, "This incident left me feeling so uncomfortable going into school. lt got to the point that I would always make sure I was with someone or get a lift....I would think about the other children who must have seen this. There must have been so many children”.
Convicted of all five charges, Pittaway was given a suspended 12 month sentence and a 12 week curfew between 9pm and 9am.
"He may be a bit of a bully, but he's nowhere near as bad as Gordon Brown, Alex Ferguson or Adolf Hitler".
Ferguson is a genuinely interesting one, the other two are silly. Fergie was undoubtedly a bully at times and undoubtedly successful with longevity.
But, lots of Premier League clubs tried to replicate him, indeed by 2011 there were 7 managers from Glasgow. The likes of Malky Mackay, Billy Davies and Alex McCleish were disasters leading their clubs to long term decline.
It is not impossible to manage successfully with that style in certain contexts but the winners are very rare.
Successful chefs are supposed to be often very toxic managers. I've worked in a few kitchens and found the light-touch approach works best. But I've never worked with anyone like Michelin star winning chef. Has anyone got any experience of this?
Worked as an F&B manager a couple of decades ago, nowhere near Michelin star but restaurants and and function rooms. Plenty of food and equipment sent flying across the room, by the senior chefs. Not every day, not even every week, but every so often the lid would blow on the pressure cooker.
AIUI, at the very top, there are way more Gordon Ramsay types, than Heston Blumental types.
One of the problems is booze. Lots of chefs appear to be alcoholics or damn near it. Long ago, I worked with a very good French chef (he was English but trained in the classical French style) who would sink 6-7 pints of premium lager within an hour or so of service ending each night. So, every day, he'd show up hungover and thus in a foul mood.
He was very mean to the waitresses to the point that they all dreaded being on the pass and had to strictly rota to minimise their exposure to the kitchen. He lasted longer than he should have done because he was an excellent cook and they were few and far between in the northern city I was living in at the time.
Sadly, catering does rather encourage alcoholism – I am led to believe that such experiences aren't that rare.
And drugs. Coke during the service, heroin afterwards. Read Kitchen Confidential by Anthony Bourdain (a brilliant book anyway)
Then there’s the after service drinking sessions to wind down
What surprises me however is that all these people describe the horrors of working in major or important kitchens - the terrible hours, the burned hands, the shouting and screaming, the nasty bullying - and yet so many also say they adore it. The intensity
It is a buzz. I need a good reading book so thanks for the recommendation – I'll order it. Thinking back, the head KP was addicted to speed (!) and the mare
A senior lawyer who used his daily jog to repeatedly flash schoolgirls has been struck off.
Mark Pittaway was a director of Thursfields Solicitors in the West Midlands when he regularly exposed himself over a three-year period to at least four girls, one of whom told the court he had flashed her more than 30 times.
Pittaway pulled his shorts to one side as he ran past the children while they were on their way to school or waiting at a bus stop.
The solicitor, whose running for charity regularly featured in the press, was charged with five counts of indecent exposure while jogging around the Portland area of Dorset.
He was also his firm’s compliance officer, and reported himself to the SRA in 2021. He informed the regulator that “Last Thursday I was charged with offences, all of which I deny, but which are likely to become public knowledge at some stage whereby both the reputation of my firm and that of the profession might be harmed. They are not fraud or dishonesty related but may attract media attention nonetheless”.
The solicitor claimed to police that if anyone had seen his genitals it was “purely accidental” and a result of him wearing short shorts.
When he was shown CCTV footage he conceded that his genitals were on display, but maintained that he must have been hitching up his shorts to “scratch his groin area”.
Four eyewitnesses gave evidence at his trial. One said that "nearly every day for two years, this man would flash his genitals to me. I was in school. Walking to and from school. lt was horrible. I would go to school scared and frightened of what will happen to me. I thought he would've raped me or done stuff to me. I have never been so scared in my life. lt has degraded me as a woman and I felt targeted. When it first happened I was fourteen years old. I was a child".
A second victim said, "This incident left me feeling so uncomfortable going into school. lt got to the point that I would always make sure I was with someone or get a lift....I would think about the other children who must have seen this. There must have been so many children”.
Convicted of all five charges, Pittaway was given a suspended 12 month sentence and a 12 week curfew between 9pm and 9am.
I have to say it makes me think of @Leon and his observation that the more you see of Rishi the more likeable he seems while the opposite is true of Starmer.
In fact, Sir Keir is in danger of seeming not just dull, but quite utterly charmless. And contrasting very much with his opponent in this respect.
Something Labour needs to watch out for. A weakness which may only become apparent during an election campaign when voters have to consider do they really want this man on my screen(s) morning, noon and night for the next 5 years.
Still, don't think it will stop him winning through.
I saw that interview and agree
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
We joke about Raab looking like a rabbit in the headlights. I think the same is true with Starmer and even worse than Raaaab.
Starmer comes across as plastic because his eyes are so odd. Like Gordon Brown, his eyes look dead regardless of what the rest of his face is trying to do. Perhaps it is KC training at work, but he needs to be more expressive.
Starmer appears to have suffered from a charisma bypass. Sunak seems studious but friendly.
Now the farmer under 25? If so, he can claim he wasn’t responsible, surely?
Only in Scotland.
You’re probably a bit out of the loop on what the Tory governments of the last 13 years have been up to, but no, not only in Scotland.
No, there are completely different legal systems in England and Scotland. The advise with regard to offenders under 25, was very specifically from the Scottish government to the Scottish judiciary. If only the councel for the prosecution frequented this forum.
Yeah, yeah..
Do you have an actual link to an actual case, rather than what looks like a doctorered-up facsimile of the BBC website?
Comments
7m
There’s another investigation report incoming to the PM and Parliament (and me as I asked for it) - into the appointment process of the BBC Chair. Who was very much involved and part of that process as the then Culture Secretary? Yes, Oliver Dowden …
You've got a year to polish it...
Also, even if you can get away, where do you go? To another resort island 20 minutes away which will be just like yours? Or the main island Mahe which is dismal, quasi-Islamist, overcrowded, and there’s no booze. I suppose you could always go to the garbage island
The only real choice is India, which means a serious flight. So they don’t bother and they sleep with the sous chef instead
LAB: 47% (-1)
CON: 27% (+2)
LDM: 7% (-2)
RFM: 7% (=)
GRN: 6% (+1)
SNP: 4% (=)
Via @Omnisis, 20-21 Apr.
Changes w/ 13-14 Apr.
Sunak v Starmer will be a very compelling battle at GE 24
Terrible scansion, ludicrous rhyme scheme, and it made me LOL, especially the second stanza
Bravo
@GoodwinMJ
I read these extracts and think a lot about the culture of victimhood in our New Elite institutions
Quote Tweet
Yuan Yi Zhu
@yuanyi_z
·
3h
The Raab bullying report in full: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1152026/2023.04.20_Investigation_Report_to_the_Prime_Minister.pdf"
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1649383683470548995
Like you, I don’t believe it will prevent Labour winning. Might stop them winning big
That said, as in the sandpit you’ll have precisely zero expenses working there, apart from maybe your toothpaste. Your salary goes straight to the savings account every month.
Yes, the main island is as dry as Saudi, even the lounge at the airport doesn’t have a bar.
IIRC most of the flights were either to the Middle East or India. Not cheap to escape the middle of nowhere.
Only lasts a term and becomes very unpopular before being replaced by a younger and more charismatic alternative. Wes Streeting for our Macron?
If you just took a moment to think about it, in the days when the government was full of public schoolboys and aristocrats we were amazing. We had the empire, we invented everything, we were the richest. We were the top nation.
Since they’ve allowed any old hoi polloi into governments that’s where the country has slid down the leagues.
Then the rules were changes to allow big clubs to keep more of their money.
Then the Premier League came along, with the associated telly money - which again, disproportionately went to the big clubs - and meant they didn't have to share at all with anyone outside the top tier.
And Utd have had the biggest fan base in the country for as long as I have been alive (a hangover, it's said, from the sympathy garnered from the Munich air disaster - the fightback from which to win the European Cup a decade later is a fantastic story).
Thus, Utd went from being averagely rich to far richer than everyone else.
Now that all happened when Ferguson was in charge - maybe it didn't happen by accident? Maybe he deserves some of the credit? In which case, yes, credit is deserved (though he rather ruined the game for everyone else, if that's so).
But the point is, United were never short of a bob or two. Whereas with Aberdeen Ferguson succeeded with far more limited means.
That's how I remember it, anyway.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/environment/2023/04/20/farmer-jailed-dredging-stretch-river-stop-homes-flooding
Starmer ressembles a character in a Dennis Potter drama about a seedy seaside town. There's a chance he will completely bomb in a high-profile national election campaign.
Also mad and often quite corrupt, turbulent politics. A few years ago there was a prime minister or president or whatever who took his religion VERY seriously and wanted to ban alcohol across the archipelago - ie in all the hotels. It was quite brusquely pointed out to him that this would destroy the economy in weeks and then he was violently removed from office
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/04/20/less-than-a-year-for-electrician-who-killed-banker/
After Dave, Boris and Rishi Rich we need someone with a rough edge, but some actual substance and grit.
We now have a public school educated PM and Chancellor and are mid rank but the age of Empire is over (except for Putin). Incidentally he seems to have had a breakdown
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1760692/putin-breakdown-cancer-drugs
Should have given him five years. Ten
This is a more balanced report
“Diggers used to illegally rip trees from banks of River Lugg https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-65309046
I've got some friends in the civil service who work in policy development and were passionate remainers and promoted it as such on their social media profiles... I can see how this would be very annoying to Ministers.
Ultimately you have to be completely neutral for this system to work and keep your private views to yourself, but often this is not how it works in practice with civil servants.
https://www.markpack.org.uk/170888/electoral-calculuss-local-election-predictions/
@ElectionMapsUK
Westminster Voting Intention:
LAB: 47% (-1)
CON: 27% (+2)
LDM: 7% (-2)
RFM: 7% (=)
GRN: 6% (+1)
SNP: 4% (=)
Via
@Omnisis
, 20-21 Apr.
Changes w/ 13-14 Apr."
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1649406135709884416
Bet the Telegraph didn't publish those ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_the_Maldives
My word. Gone up in my estimation immeasurably.
So, if Starmer wins (likely) it will be because things are a mess. My hope is that there will be enough marginal gains by not being clapped out, useless or mad that he can point to a growing light on the horizon, because that's as good as it will get for a bit. And that's a blooming hard sell. But if Starmer can do another good, necessary but underappreciated job, it's probably a better fate than the UK deserves.
AKP~NI: 36% (+2)
CHP-S&D: 29% (+3)
İYİ~RE: 12% (-2)
YSP-Greens/EFA: 10% (new)
MHP~NI: 7% (+1)
YRP-*: 1%
TİP-*: 1% (new)
...
+/- vs. 8-15 March 2023
Fieldwork: 10-16 April 2023
Sample size: 5,750
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1649415994379567106
It was actually independent for a short while
https://www.lonelyplanet.com/maldives/southern-atolls/addu-atoll
Shall think themselves unlucky they were not there
And hold their own manhoods alas when any squeeks
That were with him upon Nick's Threesome day."
Then the Government + Support got 53.7% of the votes now they are on 43%...
I would expect them all to have significant influence, even the Liberal party, which I would anticipate would always remain relatively small but which I would be a member of.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/apr/21/just-stop-oil-protesters-jailed-for-dartford-crossing-protest
(Dredging could itself be bad enough)
‘What?!’ Orbán throws cold water on Ukraine’s NATO hopes
Budapest’s relationship with Kyiv takes another nosedive.
https://www.politico.eu/article/viktor-orban-hungary-ukraine-nato-membership-aspirations-twitter/
Washington Post - Mike Lindell’s firm told to pay $5 million in ‘Prove Mike Wrong’ election-fraud challenge
MyPillow founder and prominent election denier Mike Lindell made a bold offer ahead of a “cyber symposium” he held in August 2021 in South Dakota: He claimed he had data showing Chinese interference and said he would pay $5 million to anyone who could prove the material was not from the previous year’s U.S. election.
He called the challenge “Prove Mike Wrong.”
On Wednesday, a private arbitration panel ruled that someone did.
The panel said Robert Zeidman, a computer forensics expert and 63-year-old Trump voter from Nevada, was entitled to the $5 million payout.
Zeidman had examined Lindell’s data and concluded that not only did it not prove voter fraud, it also had no connection to the 2020 election. He was the only expert who submitted a claim, arbitration records show.
He turned to the arbitrators after Lindell Management, which created the contest, refused to pay him.
In their 23-page decision [see link below], the arbitrators said Zeidman proved that Lindell’s material “unequivocally did not reflect November 2020 election data.” They directed Lindell’s firm to pay Zeidman within 30 days.
In a statement to The Washington Post, Zeidman said he was “really happy” with the arbitrators’ decision. “They clearly saw this as I did — that the data we were given at the symposium was not at all what Mr. Lindell said it was,” he said. “The truth is finally out there.” . . .
Lindell said in a text to The Post: “They made a terribly wrong decision! This will be going to court!” His attorneys did not reply to a request seeking comment.
A copy of contest rules submitted in the arbitration said disputes would be “resolved exclusively by final and binding arbitration” and noted that arbitration “is subject to very limited review by courts.” . . .
Lindell also faces a $1.3 billion defamation suit from Dominion Voting Systems and a defamation lawsuit from one of Dominion’s former executives.
In the months after Trump’s 2020 election loss, Lindell spent millions of dollars to finance lawsuits, support right-wing activists nationwide and launch a streaming television station dedicated to amplifying election-fraud falsehoods.
During frequent media appearances, he had advertised his three-day symposium as the event where he would finally provide data proving his claims. And he issued his high-stakes challenge.
“There’s a $5 million prize for anybody that can prove the election data that I have from the 2020 election was false, is not from the 2020 election,” Lindell said on the conservative show “The Glazov Gang,” which streams online. . . .
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2023/04/20/mike-lindell-prove-wrong-contest/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/a68b42f4-d5dc-4ff9-b34e-84d52fa3fc32.pdf?itid=lk_inline_manual_11
A senior lawyer who used his daily jog to repeatedly flash schoolgirls has been struck off.
Mark Pittaway was a director of Thursfields Solicitors in the West Midlands when he regularly exposed himself over a three-year period to at least four girls, one of whom told the court he had flashed her more than 30 times.
Pittaway pulled his shorts to one side as he ran past the children while they were on their way to school or waiting at a bus stop.
The solicitor, whose running for charity regularly featured in the press, was charged with five counts of indecent exposure while jogging around the Portland area of Dorset.
He was also his firm’s compliance officer, and reported himself to the SRA in 2021. He informed the regulator that “Last Thursday I was charged with offences, all of which I deny, but which are likely to become public knowledge at some stage whereby both the reputation of my firm and that of the profession might be harmed. They are not fraud or dishonesty related but may attract media attention nonetheless”.
The solicitor claimed to police that if anyone had seen his genitals it was “purely accidental” and a result of him wearing short shorts.
When he was shown CCTV footage he conceded that his genitals were on display, but maintained that he must have been hitching up his shorts to “scratch his groin area”.
Four eyewitnesses gave evidence at his trial. One said that "nearly every day for two years, this man would flash his genitals to me. I was in school. Walking to and from school. lt was horrible. I would go to school scared and frightened of what will happen to me. I thought he would've raped me or done stuff to me. I have never been so scared in my life. lt has degraded me as a woman and I felt targeted. When it first happened I was fourteen years old. I was a child".
A second victim said, "This incident left me feeling so uncomfortable going into school. lt got to the point that I would always make sure I was with someone or get a lift....I would think about the other children who must have seen this. There must have been so many children”.
Convicted of all five charges, Pittaway was given a suspended 12 month sentence and a 12 week curfew between 9pm and 9am.
https://www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/jogging-lawyer-who-flashed-schoolgirls-struck
I wonder who was the DPP, the last time the sentencing guidelines for sexual offences were updated?
Starmer comes across as plastic because his eyes are so odd. Like Gordon Brown, his eyes look dead regardless of what the rest of his face is trying to do. Perhaps it is KC training at work, but he needs to be more expressive.
Of course I’m old enough to remember when the general likeability of Boris was being extolled right and centre, if not left.
He’s lucky he hasn’t gone to jail sooner. And it’s clear that jail is the only thing that will stop his vandalism. Throw him in a cell and somehow lose the key
Also if they are so inept they can't change anything, why vote for them?
It’s not fair to blame Parliament for the actions of the Judiciary, and vice-versa.
A pattern that is consistently wrong - absolutely parliaments job and responsibility to fix it.