The claim is that a senior civil servant who was working temporarily as an acting staff member in her office ("to help ease the home secretary into her new position after the recent sacking of her predecessor, Priti Patel") was asked by her to arrange a private course for her. The civil servant was concerned about whether this was appropriate, and reported it to the Permanent Secretary. Braverman's request is alleged to have been made in an email. The claim by Braverman's "team" that she only asked for advice, rather than instructing civil servant to arrange the course for her, is disputed by "sources elsewhere in government".
Even if she had asked the civil servant to do something why is that wrong?
Given the amount of discussion there's already been about precisely that point, I'll treat that as a rhetorical question.
But I think these two facts tell us something: (1) people briefing for Braverman off the record have clearly been insistent that she only asked for advice rather than instructing a civil servant to set up the course and (2) Braverman answering questions on the record has repeatedly refused to deny that she instructed them to set up the course.
It isn’t a rhetorical point.
She asked a civil service colleague to do something. The colleague said no, it’s personal/political and I can’t. The colleague informed the permanent secretary.
*Based on what we know* there is nothing wrong in that fact pattern. The only slight warning sign is that the colleague felt it was necessary to inform their boss that the request had been made. That may be nothing, it may just be procedure, or it may be a sign that they felt they needed senior support.
To make a request isn’t a breach of the ministerial code.
On your second point I think you are making a distinction with a difference. “Please look into booking is a private course”. Is that a request for advice or action? Either way if there was no action then nothing wrong was done.
What you're doing there is reciting a story that has clearly been fed to the press, but that Braverman herself very much didn't give in the Commons yesterday despite repeated invitations to do so.
Considering a recent former PM is facing suspension, and possibly a by-election, for misleading the House, why do you think that is?
Looks like this Russian has never heard of the French, IRA, or the SNP?
Igor Shishkin counsels that they need to find England’s “enemies…who harbor a serious grudge against the British” who would want to “use a Javelin [missile] in London right now”.
Many consider that the ending of close Soviet support for the Provos in the 1990s was the point that the IRA "Army Council" decided to seek negotiations. The KGB certainly provided considerable support to various terrorist organisations over the course of several decades.
The difference now is that the KGB were competently evil, whereas the current gang in Moscow are so transparently brutal and self serving as well as corrupt, that only amoral narcissists find anything attractive about late Putinism.
Is there more to the Braverman story than meets the eye? I assumed it was Westminster village fluff yesterday. Seemed silly and trivial. Am I missing something?
On a serious point, this story isn't really about Braverman. We all knew she's useless, incompetent, arrogant, self-regarding and possibly dishonest.
But it really does go to the heart of Sunak's appalling judgement. He reappointed her Home Secretary after she had committed an action that in other job would have seen her fired on the spot and unable to return. Just as he retained Zahawi, Williamson, and Raab, who have all had to be removed.
This offence is prima facie fairly trivial. But it's yet more evidence Braverman is a loose cannon. She is also possibly the worst Home Secretary of all time (and when you consider that list includes Jacqui Smith and Henry Brooke, that's saying quite something). There is no reason to keep her. None.
This whole saga confirms - if it needed confirming - that his judgement of people and management skills are simply not good enough. And for a Prime Minister that's a big problem.
R4 Today is down a familiar track this morning: Vaping among children is a scandal. Everyone, even in leafy suburbs is doing it. (Sotto voce: everything about it, sale, use whatever, is already illegal). Nothing in the current law is being enforced. Guess the answer: The answer is further laws and regulation.
The claim is that a senior civil servant who was working temporarily as an acting staff member in her office ("to help ease the home secretary into her new position after the recent sacking of her predecessor, Priti Patel") was asked by her to arrange a private course for her. The civil servant was concerned about whether this was appropriate, and reported it to the Permanent Secretary. Braverman's request is alleged to have been made in an email. The claim by Braverman's "team" that she only asked for advice, rather than instructing civil servant to arrange the course for her, is disputed by "sources elsewhere in government".
Even if she had asked the civil servant to do something why is that wrong?
The civil servant said no, and (presumably) was backed up by her permanent secretary.
..She even tried to get Jenrick to take one of the questions which he correctly refused to do.
I almost felt sorry for her at that, it was so pitifully inept. Did she ever practice as a lawyer ?
She did.
She obviously needs a lot more practice if she wants to be good at it.
I am beginning to feel some sympathy for Braverman. New in the job, gets done for speeding, asks officials (she is surrounded by officials, is one of the few protected cabinet members, I'm sure someone stirs her tea for her) what the form is can you keep me away from the masses and then this is somehow breaking the ministerial code if that's the charge. Official consults and it turns out this is one area where she doesn't have special treatment.
Unless she instructed the DVLA and Met Police to treat her differently, or her official to ensure they did I'm failing to see the smoking gun.
But Braverman and by default Sunak are the Laurel and Hardy pair who have engineered something enormous out of nothing. It would seem, between them they couldn't have made a more hamfisted effort to put the story down.
Well like most of the country I haven't really been paying attention and some people seem to think there was a cover up which probably needs looking at. But when the Opposition calls for a cabinet minister to resign then I can see why the wagons are being circled.
In these days of inflation and non-zero interest rates you need a platform that pays you interest or lets you bet an inflation-proof asset like canned mackerel or CocaCola stock. Robert F. Kennedy is obviously not a 4% chance of being the next US president, but also you shouldn't bet against it.
The idea that he has one fifth the chance of Donald Trump is absurd
Likewise the idea that he's got twice as much chance as Kamala, who has a lovely, simple route to the White House consisting of
1) Very old person dies or gets sick 2) Incumbent president beats proven sex offender who is also being prosecuted for multiple other crimes
I’m rewatching West Wing.
Damn our politicians are shit.
Not all the politicians in West Wing were brilliant, see Bartlett's 2022 Presidential election opponent Florida Governor Robert Ritchie for example. Just those shown in a less flattering light tended to be Republicans (though in the final season they did decide to make a John McCain like principled GOP moderate maverick Arnold Vinick the Republican candidate, he still lost though, albeit Sorkin decided to give him the popular vote)
The claim is that a senior civil servant who was working temporarily as an acting staff member in her office ("to help ease the home secretary into her new position after the recent sacking of her predecessor, Priti Patel") was asked by her to arrange a private course for her. The civil servant was concerned about whether this was appropriate, and reported it to the Permanent Secretary. Braverman's request is alleged to have been made in an email. The claim by Braverman's "team" that she only asked for advice, rather than instructing civil servant to arrange the course for her, is disputed by "sources elsewhere in government".
Even if she had asked the civil servant to do something why is that wrong?
The civil servant said no, and (presumably) was backed up by her permanent secretary.
..She even tried to get Jenrick to take one of the questions which he correctly refused to do.
I almost felt sorry for her at that, it was so pitifully inept. Did she ever practice as a lawyer ?
She did.
She obviously needs a lot more practice if she wants to be good at it.
She just seems so arrogant, I know her background is similar to mine, and you need a lot of self belief to succeed, but I try and avoid crossing the line into arrogance, I should know my toe has stood on that line.
My seemingly indestructible 88-yr old aunt with significant co-morbidities, bent in half, thin as a sheet of paper, albeit still whip smart and retains all her critical faculties sent me a text yesterday. This from someone who doesn't go onto the internet and has not laptop/smartphone, etc so quite a technophobe or a techno never bothered with it.
Apparently her mobile provider is phasing out 3G phones at the end of 2024 and she is worried. Will she need to get a new phone.
The point being that she needs to make it to the end of 2024 and worry about the phone later, and each month it becomes more challenging.
Is the problem Joe Biden is facing. He may be fit to stand for POTUS now but in peoples' minds will be each successive year and his abilities.
A weird obsession with his age and mental faculty here on pb. If he was facing a 45 year old it would be an issue. But he is facing a man who was delighted to have aced a really tough memory test back in 2020.
The questions?
"The fifth-to-last question on the test asks you to repeat a sentence out loud, before naming as many words as you can starting with F. In the following “abstraction” section, you have to spot the similarity between different objects such as trains and bicycles (modes of transport), or a watch and a ruler (measuring devices).
Next, you have to recall the random words that were included in the earlier memory section. This may be the part that’s easiest to trip over. And finally, for the orientation part of the test, you have to … say what the date is."
You think age has no bearing on peoples' ability? I'm sure you have relatives who were absolutely on the ball up until and through, say, their 80s (it will differ for everyone, might be earlier, might be later) and then dramatically deteriorated both in physical and mental energy. It is a factor over 80 imo and people are not illogical to think about it.
Will it disqualify him from running or winning? Of course not. But it is a factor that will influence some, perhaps many people.
If he was 45yrs old I would have plenty of issues with his performance and ability but age-related deterioration would not be one of them.
The point is that if Biden (old) is facing a 45-year-old, age is an issue. If Biden (old) faces Trump (old) then not so much.
Braverman is handling her speeding story badly. By so obviously not answering basic questions she gives the story legs. If she falls it will be entirely self inflicted.
Whether or not she falls, her Commons performance yesterday has surely done her fatal damage in a future leadership race. Simply delivering one scripted line again and again was clay-footed and embarrassing in the extreme. That will have come across very clearly to right wing Tories who she's looking to appeal to.
That's what Maggie did.. didn't harm her...
Maggie never once performed as badly as Braverman did yesterday. It was embarrassing.
I don't really understand why Tim Scott isn't a more credible contender in terms of polling. He's articulate, intelligent, credibly ticks the relevant GOP boxes on conservatism and religion, is an elected Senator, and has a clear case to be someone who broadens the GOP's appeal.
I get that his rhetoric is more postive and less warrior-like than is the current fashion, but is it really so unfashionable to make him an asterisk in many polls? I guess so... which is still pretty amazing.
My seemingly indestructible 88-yr old aunt with significant co-morbidities, bent in half, thin as a sheet of paper, albeit still whip smart and retains all her critical faculties sent me a text yesterday. This from someone who doesn't go onto the internet and has not laptop/smartphone, etc so quite a technophobe or a techno never bothered with it.
Apparently her mobile provider is phasing out 3G phones at the end of 2024 and she is worried. Will she need to get a new phone.
The point being that she needs to make it to the end of 2024 and worry about the phone later, and each month it becomes more challenging.
Is the problem Joe Biden is facing. He may be fit to stand for POTUS now but in peoples' minds will be each successive year and his abilities.
A weird obsession with his age and mental faculty here on pb. If he was facing a 45 year old it would be an issue. But he is facing a man who was delighted to have aced a really tough memory test back in 2020.
The questions?
"The fifth-to-last question on the test asks you to repeat a sentence out loud, before naming as many words as you can starting with F. In the following “abstraction” section, you have to spot the similarity between different objects such as trains and bicycles (modes of transport), or a watch and a ruler (measuring devices).
Next, you have to recall the random words that were included in the earlier memory section. This may be the part that’s easiest to trip over. And finally, for the orientation part of the test, you have to … say what the date is."
You think age has no bearing on peoples' ability? I'm sure you have relatives who were absolutely on the ball up until and through, say, their 80s (it will differ for everyone, might be earlier, might be later) and then dramatically deteriorated both in physical and mental energy. It is a factor over 80 imo and people are not illogical to think about it.
Will it disqualify him from running or winning? Of course not. But it is a factor that will influence some, perhaps many people.
If he was 45yrs old I would have plenty of issues with his performance and ability but age-related deterioration would not be one of them.
The point is that if Biden (old) is facing a 45-year-old, age is an issue. If Biden (old) faces Trump (old) then not so much.
Ah sorry speed reading. Yes that is a fair point. Trump seems a lot more vital than Biden, that said.
Braverman is handling her speeding story badly. By so obviously not answering basic questions she gives the story legs. If she falls it will be entirely self inflicted.
Very easy to say that but when the opposition, civil service and the media are attacking like a frenzied pack of hounds, not so easy.
Why not give the answer then that her supporters are providing here? That would seem simple enough. Could it be that she is unable to that without getting into much much deeper water?
The claim is that a senior civil servant who was working temporarily as an acting staff member in her office ("to help ease the home secretary into her new position after the recent sacking of her predecessor, Priti Patel") was asked by her to arrange a private course for her. The civil servant was concerned about whether this was appropriate, and reported it to the Permanent Secretary. Braverman's request is alleged to have been made in an email. The claim by Braverman's "team" that she only asked for advice, rather than instructing civil servant to arrange the course for her, is disputed by "sources elsewhere in government".
Even if she had asked the civil servant to do something why is that wrong?
The civil servant said no, and (presumably) was backed up by her permanent secretary.
..She even tried to get Jenrick to take one of the questions which he correctly refused to do.
I almost felt sorry for her at that, it was so pitifully inept. Did she ever practice as a lawyer ?
She did.
She obviously needs a lot more practice if she wants to be good at it.
She just seems so arrogant, I know her background is similar to mine, and you need a lot of self belief to succeed, but I try and avoid crossing the line into arrogance, I should know my toe has stood on that line.
My seemingly indestructible 88-yr old aunt with significant co-morbidities, bent in half, thin as a sheet of paper, albeit still whip smart and retains all her critical faculties sent me a text yesterday. This from someone who doesn't go onto the internet and has not laptop/smartphone, etc so quite a technophobe or a techno never bothered with it.
Apparently her mobile provider is phasing out 3G phones at the end of 2024 and she is worried. Will she need to get a new phone.
The point being that she needs to make it to the end of 2024 and worry about the phone later, and each month it becomes more challenging.
Is the problem Joe Biden is facing. He may be fit to stand for POTUS now but in peoples' minds will be each successive year and his abilities.
A weird obsession with his age and mental faculty here on pb. If he was facing a 45 year old it would be an issue. But he is facing a man who was delighted to have aced a really tough memory test back in 2020.
The questions?
"The fifth-to-last question on the test asks you to repeat a sentence out loud, before naming as many words as you can starting with F. In the following “abstraction” section, you have to spot the similarity between different objects such as trains and bicycles (modes of transport), or a watch and a ruler (measuring devices).
Next, you have to recall the random words that were included in the earlier memory section. This may be the part that’s easiest to trip over. And finally, for the orientation part of the test, you have to … say what the date is."
You think age has no bearing on peoples' ability? I'm sure you have relatives who were absolutely on the ball up until and through, say, their 80s (it will differ for everyone, might be earlier, might be later) and then dramatically deteriorated both in physical and mental energy. It is a factor over 80 imo and people are not illogical to think about it.
Will it disqualify him from running or winning? Of course not. But it is a factor that will influence some, perhaps many people.
If he was 45yrs old I would have plenty of issues with his performance and ability but age-related deterioration would not be one of them.
The point is that if Biden (old) is facing a 45-year-old, age is an issue. If Biden (old) faces Trump (old) then not so much.
It’s quite amazing that both parties in the US appear to think that an octogenarian can be the best candidate, for one of the most stressful jobs in the country.
It may be a job they’ve both done before, but there have to be younger people out there who are more suitable.
One of the main problems with Bravermanspeedingoneononetrainingethicscivilservantsadvicegivenornotgate is that it is so fucking boring
All we need to know is that a senior Tory tried to get out of what the rest of us would have to do. It only needs an attention span of ten seconds or so.
She tried to get out of doing a speed awareness course as part of a group in favour of doing a speed awareness course as an individual, something which many prominent people do. Big deal. And nor do I really care whether she initially tried to involve a civil service aide or not.
I cannot for the life of me see what electoral benefit Labour gets from pursuing this, at the expense of all the other meaningful things they should be concentrating on. Even if she goes, it would be a case of replacing an unpopular minister with someone potentially less obnoxious, be careful what you wish for.
The only meat in the story is that the circumstances and timing of it all coming out indicates a move by Sunak to bring her to heel.
Looks like this Russian has never heard of the French, IRA, or the SNP?
Igor Shishkin counsels that they need to find England’s “enemies…who harbor a serious grudge against the British” who would want to “use a Javelin [missile] in London right now”.
Many consider that the ending of close Soviet support for the Provos in the 1990s was the point that the IRA "Army Council" decided to seek negotiations. The KGB certainly provided considerable support to various terrorist organisations over the course of several decades.
The difference now is that the KGB were competently evil, whereas the current gang in Moscow are so transparently brutal and self serving as well as corrupt, that only amoral narcissists find anything attractive about late Putinism.
Although there are various extremists who support Putin as he is anti-west.
And there are more mainstream people who are happy to pander to Putin as opposing him is a distraction to things they prefer to do.
On the left its people who want to focus on environmentalism, racism, colonialism and trans while on the right its people who want to focus on business profits, political bribes and trans.
The claim is that a senior civil servant who was working temporarily as an acting staff member in her office ("to help ease the home secretary into her new position after the recent sacking of her predecessor, Priti Patel") was asked by her to arrange a private course for her. The civil servant was concerned about whether this was appropriate, and reported it to the Permanent Secretary. Braverman's request is alleged to have been made in an email. The claim by Braverman's "team" that she only asked for advice, rather than instructing civil servant to arrange the course for her, is disputed by "sources elsewhere in government".
Even if she had asked the civil servant to do something why is that wrong?
The civil servant said no, and (presumably) was backed up by her permanent secretary.
..She even tried to get Jenrick to take one of the questions which he correctly refused to do.
I almost felt sorry for her at that, it was so pitifully inept. Did she ever practice as a lawyer ?
She did.
She obviously needs a lot more practice if she wants to be good at it.
She just seems so arrogant, I know her background is similar to mine, and you need a lot of self belief to succeed, but I try and avoid crossing the line into arrogance, I should know my toe has stood on that line.
Your modesty is of course legendary.
Like a Cyclops...
I'm more like the Cyclops from a play by Euripides, now tell me where the satyrs are.
The claim is that a senior civil servant who was working temporarily as an acting staff member in her office ("to help ease the home secretary into her new position after the recent sacking of her predecessor, Priti Patel") was asked by her to arrange a private course for her. The civil servant was concerned about whether this was appropriate, and reported it to the Permanent Secretary. Braverman's request is alleged to have been made in an email. The claim by Braverman's "team" that she only asked for advice, rather than instructing civil servant to arrange the course for her, is disputed by "sources elsewhere in government".
Even if she had asked the civil servant to do something why is that wrong?
The civil servant said no, and (presumably) was backed up by her permanent secretary.
..She even tried to get Jenrick to take one of the questions which he correctly refused to do.
I almost felt sorry for her at that, it was so pitifully inept. Did she ever practice as a lawyer ?
She did.
She obviously needs a lot more practice if she wants to be good at it.
She just seems so arrogant, I know her background is similar to mine, and you need a lot of self belief to succeed, but I try and avoid crossing the line into arrogance, I should know my toe has stood on that line.
Your modesty is of course legendary.
Like a Cyclops...
I'm more like the Cyclops from a play by Euripides, now tell me where the satyrs are.
My seemingly indestructible 88-yr old aunt with significant co-morbidities, bent in half, thin as a sheet of paper, albeit still whip smart and retains all her critical faculties sent me a text yesterday. This from someone who doesn't go onto the internet and has not laptop/smartphone, etc so quite a technophobe or a techno never bothered with it.
Apparently her mobile provider is phasing out 3G phones at the end of 2024 and she is worried. Will she need to get a new phone.
The point being that she needs to make it to the end of 2024 and worry about the phone later, and each month it becomes more challenging.
Is the problem Joe Biden is facing. He may be fit to stand for POTUS now but in peoples' minds will be each successive year and his abilities.
A weird obsession with his age and mental faculty here on pb. If he was facing a 45 year old it would be an issue. But he is facing a man who was delighted to have aced a really tough memory test back in 2020.
The questions?
"The fifth-to-last question on the test asks you to repeat a sentence out loud, before naming as many words as you can starting with F. In the following “abstraction” section, you have to spot the similarity between different objects such as trains and bicycles (modes of transport), or a watch and a ruler (measuring devices).
Next, you have to recall the random words that were included in the earlier memory section. This may be the part that’s easiest to trip over. And finally, for the orientation part of the test, you have to … say what the date is."
You think age has no bearing on peoples' ability? I'm sure you have relatives who were absolutely on the ball up until and through, say, their 80s (it will differ for everyone, might be earlier, might be later) and then dramatically deteriorated both in physical and mental energy. It is a factor over 80 imo and people are not illogical to think about it.
Will it disqualify him from running or winning? Of course not. But it is a factor that will influence some, perhaps many people.
If he was 45yrs old I would have plenty of issues with his performance and ability but age-related deterioration would not be one of them.
The point is that if Biden (old) is facing a 45-year-old, age is an issue. If Biden (old) faces Trump (old) then not so much.
Ah sorry speed reading. Yes that is a fair point. Trump seems a lot more vital than Biden, that said.
You better check your autocorrect. It just changed "mental" to " vital".
One of the main problems with Bravermanspeedingoneononetrainingethicscivilservantsadvicegivenornotgate is that it is so fucking boring
All we need to know is that a senior Tory tried to get out of what the rest of us would have to do. It only needs an attention span of ten seconds or so.
She tried to get out of doing a speed awareness course as part of a group in favour of doing a speed awareness course as an individual, something which many prominent people do. Big deal. And nor do I really care whether she initially tried to involve a civil service aide or not.
I cannot for the life of me see what electoral benefit Labour gets from pursuing this, at the expense of all the other meaningful things they should be concentrating on. Even if she goes, it would be a case of replacing an unpopular minister with someone potentially less obnoxious, be careful what you wish for.
The only meat in the story is that the circumstances and timing of it all coming out indicates a move by Sunak to bring her to heel.
It’s all revenge for Brexit
Karma is a remarkable thing.
Peak karma currently pencilled in for October next year...
I am beginning to feel some sympathy for Braverman. New in the job, gets done for speeding, asks officials (she is surrounded by officials, is one of the few protected cabinet members, I'm sure someone stirs her tea for her) what the form is can you keep me away from the masses and then this is somehow breaking the ministerial code if that's the charge. Official consults and it turns out this is one area where she doesn't have special treatment.
Unless she instructed the DVLA and Met Police to treat her differently, or her official to ensure they did I'm failing to see the smoking gun.
Bent as a three bob bit and a nasty pice of work , ie a Tory. To the tumbril I say.
One of the main problems with Bravermanspeedingoneononetrainingethicscivilservantsadvicegivenornotgate is that it is so fucking boring
All we need to know is that a senior Tory tried to get out of what the rest of us would have to do. It only needs an attention span of ten seconds or so.
She tried to get out of doing a speed awareness course as part of a group in favour of doing a speed awareness course as an individual, something which many prominent people do. Big deal. And nor do I really care whether she initially tried to involve a civil service aide or not.
I cannot for the life of me see what electoral benefit Labour gets from pursuing this, at the expense of all the other meaningful things they should be concentrating on. Even if she goes, it would be a case of replacing an unpopular minister with someone potentially less obnoxious, be careful what you wish for.
The only meat in the story is that the circumstances and timing of it all coming out indicates a move by Sunak to bring her to heel.
It’s all revenge for Brexit
There was me thinking you would never outdo yourself on the Liz Truss will surprise on the upside stakes.
My seemingly indestructible 88-yr old aunt with significant co-morbidities, bent in half, thin as a sheet of paper, albeit still whip smart and retains all her critical faculties sent me a text yesterday. This from someone who doesn't go onto the internet and has not laptop/smartphone, etc so quite a technophobe or a techno never bothered with it.
Apparently her mobile provider is phasing out 3G phones at the end of 2024 and she is worried. Will she need to get a new phone.
The point being that she needs to make it to the end of 2024 and worry about the phone later, and each month it becomes more challenging.
Is the problem Joe Biden is facing. He may be fit to stand for POTUS now but in peoples' minds will be each successive year and his abilities.
A weird obsession with his age and mental faculty here on pb. If he was facing a 45 year old it would be an issue. But he is facing a man who was delighted to have aced a really tough memory test back in 2020.
The questions?
"The fifth-to-last question on the test asks you to repeat a sentence out loud, before naming as many words as you can starting with F. In the following “abstraction” section, you have to spot the similarity between different objects such as trains and bicycles (modes of transport), or a watch and a ruler (measuring devices).
Next, you have to recall the random words that were included in the earlier memory section. This may be the part that’s easiest to trip over. And finally, for the orientation part of the test, you have to … say what the date is."
You think age has no bearing on peoples' ability? I'm sure you have relatives who were absolutely on the ball up until and through, say, their 80s (it will differ for everyone, might be earlier, might be later) and then dramatically deteriorated both in physical and mental energy. It is a factor over 80 imo and people are not illogical to think about it.
Will it disqualify him from running or winning? Of course not. But it is a factor that will influence some, perhaps many people.
If he was 45yrs old I would have plenty of issues with his performance and ability but age-related deterioration would not be one of them.
The point is that if Biden (old) is facing a 45-year-old, age is an issue. If Biden (old) faces Trump (old) then not so much.
Ah sorry speed reading. Yes that is a fair point. Trump seems a lot more vital than Biden, that said.
You better check your autocorrect. It just changed "mental" to " vital".
Mad as a box of frogs but definitely more va-va-voom than Biden.
Its noticeable that businesses which demand subsidies from the taxpayer at the threat of closing down get so much more publicity than businesses which invest and create jobs.
I am beginning to feel some sympathy for Braverman. New in the job, gets done for speeding, asks officials (she is surrounded by officials, is one of the few protected cabinet members, I'm sure someone stirs her tea for her) what the form is can you keep me away from the masses and then this is somehow breaking the ministerial code if that's the charge. Official consults and it turns out this is one area where she doesn't have special treatment.
Unless she instructed the DVLA and Met Police to treat her differently, or her official to ensure they did I'm failing to see the smoking gun.
But Braverman and by default Sunak are the Laurel and Hardy pair who have engineered something enormous out of nothing. It would seem, between them they couldn't have made a more hamfisted effort to put the story down.
Well like most of the country I haven't really been paying attention and some people seem to think there was a cover up which probably needs looking at. But when the Opposition calls for a cabinet minister to resign then I can see why the wagons are being circled.
The opposition mainly wants to keep the story in the news. The longer this is so, the more the idea that the Tories are in it for themselves sinks in for those not really paying attention.
Looks like this Russian has never heard of the French, IRA, or the SNP?
Igor Shishkin counsels that they need to find England’s “enemies…who harbor a serious grudge against the British” who would want to “use a Javelin [missile] in London right now”.
My seemingly indestructible 88-yr old aunt with significant co-morbidities, bent in half, thin as a sheet of paper, albeit still whip smart and retains all her critical faculties sent me a text yesterday. This from someone who doesn't go onto the internet and has not laptop/smartphone, etc so quite a technophobe or a techno never bothered with it.
Apparently her mobile provider is phasing out 3G phones at the end of 2024 and she is worried. Will she need to get a new phone.
The point being that she needs to make it to the end of 2024 and worry about the phone later, and each month it becomes more challenging.
Is the problem Joe Biden is facing. He may be fit to stand for POTUS now but in peoples' minds will be each successive year and his abilities.
A weird obsession with his age and mental faculty here on pb. If he was facing a 45 year old it would be an issue. But he is facing a man who was delighted to have aced a really tough memory test back in 2020.
The questions?
"The fifth-to-last question on the test asks you to repeat a sentence out loud, before naming as many words as you can starting with F. In the following “abstraction” section, you have to spot the similarity between different objects such as trains and bicycles (modes of transport), or a watch and a ruler (measuring devices).
Next, you have to recall the random words that were included in the earlier memory section. This may be the part that’s easiest to trip over. And finally, for the orientation part of the test, you have to … say what the date is."
You think age has no bearing on peoples' ability? I'm sure you have relatives who were absolutely on the ball up until and through, say, their 80s (it will differ for everyone, might be earlier, might be later) and then dramatically deteriorated both in physical and mental energy. It is a factor over 80 imo and people are not illogical to think about it.
Will it disqualify him from running or winning? Of course not. But it is a factor that will influence some, perhaps many people.
If he was 45yrs old I would have plenty of issues with his performance and ability but age-related deterioration would not be one of them.
The point is that if Biden (old) is facing a 45-year-old, age is an issue. If Biden (old) faces Trump (old) then not so much.
It’s quite amazing that both parties in the US appear to think that an octogenarian can be the best candidate, for one of the most stressful jobs in the country.
It may be a job they’ve both done before, but there have to be younger people out there who are more suitable.
Yes but for betting purposes, therein lies a trap. Bookmakers will pay out on whoever wins, not on whoever should have won in a more rational world. It is not enough to say that Senator X or Governor Y would be a better candidate or president; even if we are right (and we probably are) we also need to identify a path to that position.
If you try to build a political career by attacking privileged elites, you should expect political damage if you use your privileged status to help you with an embarrassing personal situation.
Fail to answer simple questions, just begs more questions.
Why would her Parliamentary colleagues want revenge for that?
Because some of them are Remainers?
Just look at the reaction on here. “I hate her because Brexit”. “She deserves to go for Brexit” etc etc
I don’t believe there is some vast blob Remoaner conspiracy to destroy brexiteer ministers. I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division
There are STILL people who think Brexit was a bad idea. They just can’t let go
My seemingly indestructible 88-yr old aunt with significant co-morbidities, bent in half, thin as a sheet of paper, albeit still whip smart and retains all her critical faculties, sent me a text yesterday. This from someone who doesn't go onto the internet and has never had a laptop or smartphone.
Apparently her mobile provider is phasing out 3G phones at the end of 2024 and she is worried. Will she need to get a new phone.
The point being that she needs to make it to the end of 2024 and worry about the phone later, and each month it becomes more challenging.
Is the problem Joe Biden is facing. He may be fit to stand for POTUS now but in peoples' minds will be each successive year and his abilities.
Quite. You look at him now and you inwardly wince. Ouch. He’s quite old. But he’ll probably make it though the day
If he runs in 2024 he’s got to last to 2028 when he will be 86. It’s insane
Have to say if I can do as well as Biden at his age, no problem. He is more effective than any recent president who apart from Trump were much younger than him.
But he does have a problem, at least of perception, which means the Dems have a problem. More importantly the rest of us have a problem because the alternative to Biden is likely to be much, much worse than him, even if he is senile.
In these days of inflation and non-zero interest rates you need a platform that pays you interest or lets you bet an inflation-proof asset like canned mackerel or CocaCola stock. Robert F. Kennedy is obviously not a 4% chance of being the next US president, but also you shouldn't bet against it.
The idea that he has one fifth the chance of Donald Trump is absurd
Likewise the idea that he's got twice as much chance as Kamala, who has a lovely, simple route to the White House consisting of
1) Very old person dies or gets sick 2) Incumbent president beats proven sex offender who is also being prosecuted for multiple other crimes
I’m rewatching West Wing.
Damn our politicians are shit.
Well they don't have Aaron Sorkin writing their scripts for them. Sorkin uses bright, extremely articulate characters to move the story along fast in the direction he wants it to go. The real world is not like that, funnily enough. People are not that articulate, are much less certain of what they want and how to get it and things are a lot more unpredictable.
Most of us, including our politicians, only think what they ought to have said long after the conversation is over. Sorkin's characters simply don't recognise that disappointment.
I am beginning to feel some sympathy for Braverman. New in the job, gets done for speeding, asks officials (she is surrounded by officials, is one of the few protected cabinet members, I'm sure someone stirs her tea for her) what the form is can you keep me away from the masses and then this is somehow breaking the ministerial code if that's the charge. Official consults and it turns out this is one area where she doesn't have special treatment.
Unless she instructed the DVLA and Met Police to treat her differently, or her official to ensure they did I'm failing to see the smoking gun.
But Braverman and by default Sunak are the Laurel and Hardy pair who have engineered something enormous out of nothing. It would seem, between them they couldn't have made a more hamfisted effort to put the story down.
Well like most of the country I haven't really been paying attention and some people seem to think there was a cover up which probably needs looking at. But when the Opposition calls for a cabinet minister to resign then I can see why the wagons are being circled.
The opposition mainly wants to keep the story in the news. The longer this is so, the more the idea that the Tories are in it for themselves sinks in for those not really paying attention.
Tbf the Opposition parties have just sat back and watched from the sidelines as spectators. Suella and Rishi are doing all the heavy lifting.
Biden deserves to be elected on the strength of his appearance in Parks & Recs. I can't think of him without thinking of "the kiss". Or attempted kiss.
This "email trail" seems from the reporting to be emails sent to the Cabinet Office by concerned parties (including the Home Secretary herself?), not emails from her ordering civil servants to arrange her course
I'd guess the leak is from the Cabinet Office
In wholly unrelated Cabinet Office news, the current Director General of the Economic and Domestic Affairs Secretariat is one Nicholas Joicey
"The Economic and Domestic Affairs Secretariat (EDS) is a secretariat in the United Kingdom Cabinet Office.
It supports the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and Minister for the Cabinet Office develop, co-ordinate and agree the UK government's domestic policy across the departments of state; with foreign and security policy co-ordinated by the separate National Security Secretariat (NSS). Together these two secretariats form the core what is the Cabinet Secretariat, and are the traditional redoubts of high fliers in the UK civil service. Being appointed to roles in EDS are highly coveted by talented civil servants, and competition is intense.
The head of EDS, who reports directly to the Cabinet Secretary, is a director general (or, before the mid-'90s renaming, a deputy secretary). It is widely regarded as one of the most powerful roles in the Civil Service due to having regular access to the prime minister, other cabinet-level ministers and their private secretaries, as well as the most senior officials in Whitehall to ensure 'collective agreement'. Without collective agreement and the issuing of a 'clearance' from EDS, departments cannot progress with policy announcements or take forward high profile and significant projects. In order to fulfil its duties, EDS officials work very closely with their counterparts in HM Treasury, 10 Downing Street and other teams in the Cabinet Office such as the Prime Minister's Implementation Unit.
The head of EDS (and more recently the head of the Cabinet Secretariats) is sometimes referred to as the Deputy Cabinet Secretary, due to running Cabinet and its subcommittees, as well as brokering policy decisions across government on behalf of the prime minister and his senior advisers. The head of EDS has a secure pass through the door that connects their office in 70 Whitehall to 10 Downing Street."
My seemingly indestructible 88-yr old aunt with significant co-morbidities, bent in half, thin as a sheet of paper, albeit still whip smart and retains all her critical faculties, sent me a text yesterday. This from someone who doesn't go onto the internet and has never had a laptop or smartphone.
Apparently her mobile provider is phasing out 3G phones at the end of 2024 and she is worried. Will she need to get a new phone.
The point being that she needs to make it to the end of 2024 and worry about the phone later, and each month it becomes more challenging.
Is the problem Joe Biden is facing. He may be fit to stand for POTUS now but in peoples' minds will be each successive year and his abilities.
Quite. You look at him now and you inwardly wince. Ouch. He’s quite old. But he’ll probably make it though the day
If he runs in 2024 he’s got to last to 2028 when he will be 86. It’s insane
Have to say if I can do as well as Biden at his age, no problem. He is more effective than any recent president who apart from Trump were much younger than him.
But he does have a problem, at least of perception, which means the Dems have a problem. More importantly the rest of us have a problem because the alternative to Biden is likely to be much, much worse than him, even if he is senile.
The alternative will probably be Kamala Harris. The main problem with her is that she’s dumb as a rock. But I expect America would survive. Advisors would rule and she’d be a figurehead
Why would her Parliamentary colleagues want revenge for that?
Because some of them are Remainers?
Just look at the reaction on here. “I hate her because Brexit”. “She deserves to go for Brexit” etc etc
I don’t believe there is some vast blob Remoaner conspiracy to destroy brexiteer ministers. I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division
There are STILL people who think Brexit was a bad idea. They just can’t let go
An ever growing band of commentators. Even you yourself on one or two of your more cogent/sober days have admitted as much.
The real issue here is the PM has to ask an “ethics advisor” if what his minister has done is unethical. He can't work it out for himself. It's like ethics is a complete mystery to him. The main question being: can we get away with this?
He can work it out himself, we just dont trust a PM to be ethical anymore.
Its a pointless job since most people are not going to alter their view based on whether some ethics adviser says it's ok or not.
The Braverman story reminds me of the SNP's current woes as it appears even if in the end it's all ok there was needless stupidity it carelessness which led to it.
There might well be people out to get her (presumably those crafty remainer pagans or whoever) but even in the best case scenario for her she's asked a dumb question which is embarrassing in its entitlement. At worst its hardly the most terrible thing a politician has done but would amount to an attempted petty abuse of power. As a court could tell you attempts can see you face consequences as well as successes.
@zoe_grunewald 11h "If Braverman returned to the back benches, she would be free to become a more vociferous critic of the government’s failures, including on immigration and reform of Whitehall."
Why I think Braverman is preparing to leave govt 👇
Based on the story if I were Rishi I'd keep Braverman on as she's damaging as rival and he's in a very weak position, and the story is pretty trivial even if still wrong if the worst is right.
But given even prior to this there was some speculation she wants out, he might face a dilemma that she will just be gone later anyway so is not worth defending.
Why would her Parliamentary colleagues want revenge for that?
Because some of them are Remainers?
Just look at the reaction on here. “I hate her because Brexit”. “She deserves to go for Brexit” etc etc
I don’t believe there is some vast blob Remoaner conspiracy to destroy brexiteer ministers. I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division
There are STILL people who think Brexit was a bad idea. They just can’t let go
An ever growing band of commentators. Even you yourself on one or two of your more cogent/sober days have admitted as much.
No. The more I look at the EU - as it coheres into a genuine superstate - the more convinced I am we would be deeply unhappy to be back inside it. Ever more so
What we emotionally want as a nation is free trade and some kind of free movement. Something like Switzerland
Based on the story if I were Rishi I'd keep Braverman on as she's damaging as rival and he's in a very weak position, and the story is pretty trivial even if still wrong if the worst is right.
But given even prior to this there was some speculation she wants out, he might face a dilemma that she will just be gone later anyway so is not worth defending.
He's too weak to sack her, but if she resigns instead he's weaker still.
One of the main problems with Bravermanspeedingoneononetrainingethicscivilservantsadvicegivenornotgate is that it is so fucking boring
All we need to know is that a senior Tory tried to get out of what the rest of us would have to do. It only needs an attention span of ten seconds or so.
She tried to get out of doing a speed awareness course as part of a group in favour of doing a speed awareness course as an individual, something which many prominent people do. Big deal. And nor do I really care whether she initially tried to involve a civil service aide or not.
I cannot for the life of me see what electoral benefit Labour gets from pursuing this, at the expense of all the other meaningful things they should be concentrating on. Even if she goes, it would be a case of replacing an unpopular minister with someone potentially less obnoxious, be careful what you wish for.
The only meat in the story is that the circumstances and timing of it all coming out indicates a move by Sunak to bring her to heel.
Ministers resigning or being sacked indicates chaos and lingers in the mind more than a replacement not being obviously terrible. Its always to be preferred.
The real issue here is the PM has to ask an “ethics advisor” if what his minister has done is unethical. He can't work it out for himself. It's like ethics is a complete mystery to him. The main question being: can we get away with this?
He can work it out himself, we just dont trust a PM to be ethical anymore.
Its a pointless job since most people are not going to alter their view based on whether some ethics adviser says it's ok or not.
The Braverman story reminds me of the SNP's current woes as it appears even if in the end it's all ok there was needless stupidity it carelessness which led to it.
There might well be people out to get her (presumably those crafty remainer pagans or whoever) but even in the best case scenario for her she's asked a dumb question which is embarrassing in its entitlement. At worst its hardly the most terrible thing a politician has done but would amount to an attempted petty abuse of power. As a court could tell you attempts can see you face consequences as well as successes.
I agree - it's a horrible job to have created; completely unneeded and a waste of taxpayers' money. Personally I don't believe in this case that Braverman has broken the ministerial code - I believe someone on here pointed out that celebs often have private courses and I've heard non ego-trip justification that others are distracted if say Justin Welby were to rock up (I know he didn't but lets use him as an example) or say Mo Salah. It doesn't change the nature of the punishment (Attending a course) I've done one myself to avoid points - something open to everyone on minor first offences (wrt 5 yr rule). I don't think there's a particular conflict of interest here; and ministers are fairly busy so passing admin work for your diary to the civil service seems the only open potential crime here which Braverman might be guilty of. Now Rishi might reach a different conclusion and sack Suella. But he shouldn't need a bloody ethics advisor to think for him. If she's directed her SPAD to say she didn't speed then that to mind would be a breach of the code - but I think he's likely guilty of denying something he genuinely had no idea about, which isn't right but isn't Braverman's issue.
Why would her Parliamentary colleagues want revenge for that?
Because some of them are Remainers?
Just look at the reaction on here. “I hate her because Brexit”. “She deserves to go for Brexit” etc etc
I don’t believe there is some vast blob Remoaner conspiracy to destroy brexiteer ministers. I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division
There are STILL people who think Brexit was a bad idea. They just can’t let go
" I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division"
While, being largely London-dwelling the Westminster civil service probably will skew remain, the idea that they'll corporately seek to wreak 'revenge' on Brexit-supporting ministers is nonsense. I knew we'd start getting snakes like Wootton creeping out and trying to shift the blame onto public servants rather than actually looking at the facts. It is far more likely that her fellow MPs are manoeuvring against her than civil servants (who after all, are well aware that there's hardly much likelihood of a liberal remainer being moved into Home Sec).
Have to say as well, the general thrust of 'she has to go' motivation I've seen on here seems to coalesce around her being thick, entitled and bonkers, rather than her being a brexiter.
If she really paid her fine in cash she goes well up in my estimation
In 1p coins.
You can't do that....Amazingly the British Coinage Act (1971) states that 1p and 2p coins are only legal tender up to the value of 20 pence.
It is still lawful to accept payment for larger sums in 1p/2p coins. But you don't have to.
What astonishes an older generation is that (counter intuitively) people are not obliged to accept 'legal tender' (ie generally notes) for payment. hence this phenomenon you get in cities (I live in a cash using backwater) of not taking cash even for small sums, and not providing facility for it at automated machines.
This might be sane for larger sums (+£1000?) but for coffee, newspapers and a short ride on a bus this is nuts.
One of the main problems with Bravermanspeedingoneononetrainingethicscivilservantsadvicegivenornotgate is that it is so fucking boring
All we need to know is that a senior Tory tried to get out of what the rest of us would have to do. It only needs an attention span of ten seconds or so.
She tried to get out of doing a speed awareness course as part of a group in favour of doing a speed awareness course as an individual, something which many prominent people do. Big deal. And nor do I really care whether she initially tried to involve a civil service aide or not.
I cannot for the life of me see what electoral benefit Labour gets from pursuing this, at the expense of all the other meaningful things they should be concentrating on. Even if she goes, it would be a case of replacing an unpopular minister with someone potentially less obnoxious, be careful what you wish for.
The only meat in the story is that the circumstances and timing of it all coming out indicates a move by Sunak to bring her to heel.
It’s all revenge for Brexit
There was me thinking you would never outdo yourself on the Liz Truss will surprise on the upside stakes.
Well done.
Beat me to it and with a wittier comment as well. I mean really digging the depths there @Leon. Paranoia on stilts.
Why would her Parliamentary colleagues want revenge for that?
Because some of them are Remainers?
Just look at the reaction on here. “I hate her because Brexit”. “She deserves to go for Brexit” etc etc
I don’t believe there is some vast blob Remoaner conspiracy to destroy brexiteer ministers. I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division
There are STILL people who think Brexit was a bad idea. They just can’t let go
" I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division"
While, being largely London-dwelling the Westminster civil service probably will skew remain, the idea that they'll corporately seek to wreak 'revenge' on Brexit-supporting ministers is nonsense. I knew we'd start getting snakes like Wootton creeping out and trying to shift the blame onto public servants rather than actually looking at the facts. It is far more likely that her fellow MPs are manoeuvring against her than civil servants (who after all, are well aware that there's hardly much likelihood of a liberal remainer being moved into Home Sec).
Have to say as well, the general thrust of 'she has to go' motivation I've seen on here seems to coalesce around her being thick, entitled and bonkers, rather than her being a brexiter.
Anyone who uses the ludicrous term “brexiter” is a tragic Remoaner fuck, so you can be politely ignored on this point
My seemingly indestructible 88-yr old aunt with significant co-morbidities, bent in half, thin as a sheet of paper, albeit still whip smart and retains all her critical faculties sent me a text yesterday. This from someone who doesn't go onto the internet and has not laptop/smartphone, etc so quite a technophobe or a techno never bothered with it.
Apparently her mobile provider is phasing out 3G phones at the end of 2024 and she is worried. Will she need to get a new phone.
The point being that she needs to make it to the end of 2024 and worry about the phone later, and each month it becomes more challenging.
Is the problem Joe Biden is facing. He may be fit to stand for POTUS now but in peoples' minds will be each successive year and his abilities.
A weird obsession with his age and mental faculty here on pb. If he was facing a 45 year old it would be an issue. But he is facing a man who was delighted to have aced a really tough memory test back in 2020.
The questions?
"The fifth-to-last question on the test asks you to repeat a sentence out loud, before naming as many words as you can starting with F. In the following “abstraction” section, you have to spot the similarity between different objects such as trains and bicycles (modes of transport), or a watch and a ruler (measuring devices).
Next, you have to recall the random words that were included in the earlier memory section. This may be the part that’s easiest to trip over. And finally, for the orientation part of the test, you have to … say what the date is."
You think age has no bearing on peoples' ability? I'm sure you have relatives who were absolutely on the ball up until and through, say, their 80s (it will differ for everyone, might be earlier, might be later) and then dramatically deteriorated both in physical and mental energy. It is a factor over 80 imo and people are not illogical to think about it.
Will it disqualify him from running or winning? Of course not. But it is a factor that will influence some, perhaps many people.
If he was 45yrs old I would have plenty of issues with his performance and ability but age-related deterioration would not be one of them.
The point is that if Biden (old) is facing a 45-year-old, age is an issue. If Biden (old) faces Trump (old) then not so much.
Ah sorry speed reading. Yes that is a fair point. Trump seems a lot more vital than Biden, that said.
You better check your autocorrect. It just changed "mental" to " vital".
Mad as a box of frogs but definitely more va-va-voom than Biden.
A would you want Jimmy Savile or David Jacobs to dj your kid’s party dilemma. When they were alive of course, either of their semi-mummified corpses would be sub optimal.
One of the main problems with Bravermanspeedingoneononetrainingethicscivilservantsadvicegivenornotgate is that it is so fucking boring
All we need to know is that a senior Tory tried to get out of what the rest of us would have to do. It only needs an attention span of ten seconds or so.
She tried to get out of doing a speed awareness course as part of a group in favour of doing a speed awareness course as an individual, something which many prominent people do. Big deal. And nor do I really care whether she initially tried to involve a civil service aide or not.
I cannot for the life of me see what electoral benefit Labour gets from pursuing this, at the expense of all the other meaningful things they should be concentrating on. Even if she goes, it would be a case of replacing an unpopular minister with someone potentially less obnoxious, be careful what you wish for.
The only meat in the story is that the circumstances and timing of it all coming out indicates a move by Sunak to bring her to heel.
In these days of inflation and non-zero interest rates you need a platform that pays you interest or lets you bet an inflation-proof asset like canned mackerel or CocaCola stock. Robert F. Kennedy is obviously not a 4% chance of being the next US president, but also you shouldn't bet against it.
The idea that he has one fifth the chance of Donald Trump is absurd
Likewise the idea that he's got twice as much chance as Kamala, who has a lovely, simple route to the White House consisting of
1) Very old person dies or gets sick 2) Incumbent president beats proven sex offender who is also being prosecuted for multiple other crimes
I’m rewatching West Wing.
Damn our politicians are shit.
Not all the politicians in West Wing were brilliant, see Bartlett's 2022 Presidential election opponent Florida Governor Robert Ritchie for example. Just those shown in a less flattering light tended to be Republicans...
The issue with the Braverman story is that it is a misdemeanour lots of the public a) understand and b) have had to deal with themselves. So even if it is unimportant, which I would agree in the grand scheme of her failures and awfulness it is, it is comprehensible. People can ignore large scale policy failures / lies as more politics, or something beyond their ken. Speeding and then getting a civil servant to try and sort it out for her has cut through. It's like Johnson and the parties - bad covid policies had a worse impact, but people could shrug and go "well, I wouldn't have known what to do either, he tried his best, etc.". Having a party in the office when you weren't allowed outside the house to visit other people - simple.
One of the main problems with Bravermanspeedingoneononetrainingethicscivilservantsadvicegivenornotgate is that it is so fucking boring
All we need to know is that a senior Tory tried to get out of what the rest of us would have to do. It only needs an attention span of ten seconds or so.
She tried to get out of doing a speed awareness course as part of a group in favour of doing a speed awareness course as an individual, something which many prominent people do. Big deal. And nor do I really care whether she initially tried to involve a civil service aide or not.
I cannot for the life of me see what electoral benefit Labour gets from pursuing this, at the expense of all the other meaningful things they should be concentrating on. Even if she goes, it would be a case of replacing an unpopular minister with someone potentially less obnoxious, be careful what you wish for.
The only meat in the story is that the circumstances and timing of it all coming out indicates a move by Sunak to bring her to heel.
It’s all revenge for Brexit
There was me thinking you would never outdo yourself on the Liz Truss will surprise on the upside stakes.
Well done.
Beat me to it and with a wittier comment as well. I mean really digging the depths there @Leon. Paranoia on stilts.
Mark my words, within a decade people will rather admit to bestiality than admit to voting for Brexit.
Why would her Parliamentary colleagues want revenge for that?
Because some of them are Remainers?
Just look at the reaction on here. “I hate her because Brexit”. “She deserves to go for Brexit” etc etc
I don’t believe there is some vast blob Remoaner conspiracy to destroy brexiteer ministers. I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division
There are STILL people who think Brexit was a bad idea. They just can’t let go
" I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division"
While, being largely London-dwelling the Westminster civil service probably will skew remain, the idea that they'll corporately seek to wreak 'revenge' on Brexit-supporting ministers is nonsense. I knew we'd start getting snakes like Wootton creeping out and trying to shift the blame onto public servants rather than actually looking at the facts. It is far more likely that her fellow MPs are manoeuvring against her than civil servants (who after all, are well aware that there's hardly much likelihood of a liberal remainer being moved into Home Sec).
Have to say as well, the general thrust of 'she has to go' motivation I've seen on here seems to coalesce around her being thick, entitled and bonkers, rather than her being a brexiter.
Anyone who uses the ludicrous term “brexiter” is a tragic Remoaner fuck, so you can be politely ignored on this point
Braverman is handling her speeding story badly. By so obviously not answering basic questions she gives the story legs. If she falls it will be entirely self inflicted.
Whether or not she falls, her Commons performance yesterday has surely done her fatal damage in a future leadership race. Simply delivering one scripted line again and again was clay-footed and embarrassing in the extreme. That will have come across very clearly to right wing Tories who she's looking to appeal to.
That's what Maggie did.. didn't harm her...
Maggie never once performed as badly as Braverman did yesterday. It was embarrassing.
Also Thatcher had (for better or worse) actual substance to the economics of her policy and philosophy, and she actually did stuff. Braverman has nowt beyond recycled alt-right tropes and a track record of achieving sweet FA.
Kudos to the multiple PB Tories on here who are calling her out as the fraud that she is.
This "email trail" seems from the reporting to be emails sent to the Cabinet Office by concerned parties (including the Home Secretary herself?), not emails from her ordering civil servants to arrange her course
I'd guess the leak is from the Cabinet Office
In wholly unrelated Cabinet Office news, the current Director General of the Economic and Domestic Affairs Secretariat is one Nicholas Joicey
"The Economic and Domestic Affairs Secretariat (EDS) is a secretariat in the United Kingdom Cabinet Office.
It supports the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and Minister for the Cabinet Office develop, co-ordinate and agree the UK government's domestic policy across the departments of state; with foreign and security policy co-ordinated by the separate National Security Secretariat (NSS). Together these two secretariats form the core what is the Cabinet Secretariat, and are the traditional redoubts of high fliers in the UK civil service. Being appointed to roles in EDS are highly coveted by talented civil servants, and competition is intense.
The head of EDS, who reports directly to the Cabinet Secretary, is a director general (or, before the mid-'90s renaming, a deputy secretary). It is widely regarded as one of the most powerful roles in the Civil Service due to having regular access to the prime minister, other cabinet-level ministers and their private secretaries, as well as the most senior officials in Whitehall to ensure 'collective agreement'. Without collective agreement and the issuing of a 'clearance' from EDS, departments cannot progress with policy announcements or take forward high profile and significant projects. In order to fulfil its duties, EDS officials work very closely with their counterparts in HM Treasury, 10 Downing Street and other teams in the Cabinet Office such as the Prime Minister's Implementation Unit.
The head of EDS (and more recently the head of the Cabinet Secretariats) is sometimes referred to as the Deputy Cabinet Secretary, due to running Cabinet and its subcommittees, as well as brokering policy decisions across government on behalf of the prime minister and his senior advisers. The head of EDS has a secure pass through the door that connects their office in 70 Whitehall to 10 Downing Street."
You think a politically-biased civil servant is risking his career to try and weaken a government that all the polls say will soon be swept away in any case? Sounds more like a desperate smear. Cui bono?
Why would her Parliamentary colleagues want revenge for that?
Because some of them are Remainers?
Just look at the reaction on here. “I hate her because Brexit”. “She deserves to go for Brexit” etc etc
I don’t believe there is some vast blob Remoaner conspiracy to destroy brexiteer ministers. I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division
There are STILL people who think Brexit was a bad idea. They just can’t let go
" I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division"
While, being largely London-dwelling the Westminster civil service probably will skew remain, the idea that they'll corporately seek to wreak 'revenge' on Brexit-supporting ministers is nonsense. I knew we'd start getting snakes like Wootton creeping out and trying to shift the blame onto public servants rather than actually looking at the facts. It is far more likely that her fellow MPs are manoeuvring against her than civil servants (who after all, are well aware that there's hardly much likelihood of a liberal remainer being moved into Home Sec).
Have to say as well, the general thrust of 'she has to go' motivation I've seen on here seems to coalesce around her being thick, entitled and bonkers, rather than her being a brexiter.
Anyone who uses the ludicrous term “brexiter” is a tragic Remoaner fuck, so you can be politely ignored on this point
How can they remain when weve left ? They're like the League of Empire Loyalist trying to turn back the clock to a world that has disappeared.
You must be quite adept at reading between the lines as I found nothing particularly unpleasant about the tweet. Will he be missed?
The comment about his children is the nasty bit.
You have assigned an intention to Jess Phillips that any reasonable person can see she didn't have and on the strength of that declared her to be a nasty pierce of work.
If she really paid her fine in cash she goes well up in my estimation
In 1p coins.
You can't do that....Amazingly the British Coinage Act (1971) states that 1p and 2p coins are only legal tender up to the value of 20 pence.
It is still lawful to accept payment for larger sums in 1p/2p coins. But you don't have to.
What astonishes an older generation is that (counter intuitively) people are not obliged to accept 'legal tender' (ie generally notes) for payment. hence this phenomenon you get in cities (I live in a cash using backwater) of not taking cash even for small sums, and not providing facility for it at automated machines.
This might be sane for larger sums (+£1000?) but for coffee, newspapers and a short ride on a bus this is nuts.
Why? Lots of places are entirely cashless because few/none of their customers ever use cash. Up to them. Loads like that around here.
Why would her Parliamentary colleagues want revenge for that?
Because some of them are Remainers?
Just look at the reaction on here. “I hate her because Brexit”. “She deserves to go for Brexit” etc etc
I don’t believe there is some vast blob Remoaner conspiracy to destroy brexiteer ministers. I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division
There are STILL people who think Brexit was a bad idea. They just can’t let go
" I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division"
While, being largely London-dwelling the Westminster civil service probably will skew remain, the idea that they'll corporately seek to wreak 'revenge' on Brexit-supporting ministers is nonsense. I knew we'd start getting snakes like Wootton creeping out and trying to shift the blame onto public servants rather than actually looking at the facts. It is far more likely that her fellow MPs are manoeuvring against her than civil servants (who after all, are well aware that there's hardly much likelihood of a liberal remainer being moved into Home Sec).
Have to say as well, the general thrust of 'she has to go' motivation I've seen on here seems to coalesce around her being thick, entitled and bonkers, rather than her being a brexiter.
Anyone who uses the ludicrous term “brexiter” is a tragic Remoaner fuck, so you can be politely ignored on this point
Indeed the term is "Brexiteer". Anyway who uses "Remoaner" anymore? We left. There are only Rejoiners and those who have come to terms with the Castell Coch sized folly that is Brexit.
Why would her Parliamentary colleagues want revenge for that?
Because some of them are Remainers?
Just look at the reaction on here. “I hate her because Brexit”. “She deserves to go for Brexit” etc etc
I don’t believe there is some vast blob Remoaner conspiracy to destroy brexiteer ministers. I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division
There are STILL people who think Brexit was a bad idea. They just can’t let go
" I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division"
While, being largely London-dwelling the Westminster civil service probably will skew remain, the idea that they'll corporately seek to wreak 'revenge' on Brexit-supporting ministers is nonsense. I knew we'd start getting snakes like Wootton creeping out and trying to shift the blame onto public servants rather than actually looking at the facts. It is far more likely that her fellow MPs are manoeuvring against her than civil servants (who after all, are well aware that there's hardly much likelihood of a liberal remainer being moved into Home Sec).
Have to say as well, the general thrust of 'she has to go' motivation I've seen on here seems to coalesce around her being thick, entitled and bonkers, rather than her being a brexiter.
Anyone who uses the ludicrous term “brexiter” is a tragic Remoaner fuck, so you can be politely ignored on this point
How can they remain when weve left ? They're like the League of Empire Loyalist trying to turn back the clock to a world that has disappeared.
The issue with the Braverman story is that it is a misdemeanour lots of the public a) understand and b) have had to deal with themselves. So even if it is unimportant, which I would agree in the grand scheme of her failures and awfulness it is, it is comprehensible. People can ignore large scale policy failures / lies as more politics, or something beyond their ken. Speeding and then getting a civil servant to try and sort it out for her has cut through. It's like Johnson and the parties - bad covid policies had a worse impact, but people could shrug and go "well, I wouldn't have known what to do either, he tried his best, etc.". Having a party in the office when you weren't allowed outside the house to visit other people - simple.
If the civil servant had "sorted" it for her, she'd have attended a speed awareness course. Seeing as they're all done over zoom these days she'd have been in precisely the same position as anyone else doing one. It would have gone down on her record as a course and she wouldn't have potentially been offered another one for 5 years. It's the same position any other 1st time speeder is in.
I don't think people particularly care about the issue at hand here and are just judging Braverman on whether they like her or not.
My seemingly indestructible 88-yr old aunt with significant co-morbidities, bent in half, thin as a sheet of paper, albeit still whip smart and retains all her critical faculties, sent me a text yesterday. This from someone who doesn't go onto the internet and has never had a laptop or smartphone.
Apparently her mobile provider is phasing out 3G phones at the end of 2024 and she is worried. Will she need to get a new phone.
The point being that she needs to make it to the end of 2024 and worry about the phone later, and each month it becomes more challenging.
Is the problem Joe Biden is facing. He may be fit to stand for POTUS now but in peoples' minds will be each successive year and his abilities.
Quite. You look at him now and you inwardly wince. Ouch. He’s quite old. But he’ll probably make it though the day
If he runs in 2024 he’s got to last to 2028 when he will be 86. It’s insane
Have to say if I can do as well as Biden at his age, no problem. He is more effective than any recent president who apart from Trump were much younger than him.
But he does have a problem, at least of perception, which means the Dems have a problem. More importantly the rest of us have a problem because the alternative to Biden is likely to be much, much worse than him, even if he is senile.
I agree there's an issue, but it seems to be mostly ageism, for the reason you say. Objectively, Biden is a very effective President who sometimes misspeaks. Because he's old, people wonder if he's senile, but actually it's a habit he's had for many years, and in the round it really doesn't matter.
So yes, there may be an electability issue if there's a strong challenger. But there probably shouldn't be. The system, for all its failings, has produced a pretty good President.
One of the main problems with Bravermanspeedingoneononetrainingethicscivilservantsadvicegivenornotgate is that it is so fucking boring
All we need to know is that a senior Tory tried to get out of what the rest of us would have to do. It only needs an attention span of ten seconds or so.
She tried to get out of doing a speed awareness course as part of a group in favour of doing a speed awareness course as an individual, something which many prominent people do. Big deal. And nor do I really care whether she initially tried to involve a civil service aide or not.
I cannot for the life of me see what electoral benefit Labour gets from pursuing this, at the expense of all the other meaningful things they should be concentrating on. Even if she goes, it would be a case of replacing an unpopular minister with someone potentially less obnoxious, be careful what you wish for.
The only meat in the story is that the circumstances and timing of it all coming out indicates a move by Sunak to bring her to heel.
It’s all revenge for Brexit
There was me thinking you would never outdo yourself on the Liz Truss will surprise on the upside stakes.
Well done.
Beat me to it and with a wittier comment as well. I mean really digging the depths there @Leon. Paranoia on stilts.
Mark my words, within a decade people will rather admit to bestiality than admit to voting for Brexit.
Leon’s paranoia is an early indication of that.
Those who voted either way voted for something most people didn't want. There would have been a clear majority for a reformed EU offering serious two sided derogations to the UK for very good reasons.
If Remain had won we would be in a political turmoil, but a different one, because the democratic deficit would not have gone away.
Why would her Parliamentary colleagues want revenge for that?
Because some of them are Remainers?
Just look at the reaction on here. “I hate her because Brexit”. “She deserves to go for Brexit” etc etc
I don’t believe there is some vast blob Remoaner conspiracy to destroy brexiteer ministers. I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division
There are STILL people who think Brexit was a bad idea. They just can’t let go
" I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division"
While, being largely London-dwelling the Westminster civil service probably will skew remain, the idea that they'll corporately seek to wreak 'revenge' on Brexit-supporting ministers is nonsense. I knew we'd start getting snakes like Wootton creeping out and trying to shift the blame onto public servants rather than actually looking at the facts. It is far more likely that her fellow MPs are manoeuvring against her than civil servants (who after all, are well aware that there's hardly much likelihood of a liberal remainer being moved into Home Sec).
Have to say as well, the general thrust of 'she has to go' motivation I've seen on here seems to coalesce around her being thick, entitled and bonkers, rather than her being a brexiter.
Anyone who uses the ludicrous term “brexiter” is a tragic Remoaner fuck, so you can be politely ignored on this point
How can they remain when weve left ? They're like the League of Empire Loyalist trying to turn back the clock to a world that has disappeared.
It became "The Commonwealth" in 1931.
I think youll find the LEL were thinking more in terms of 1899
Why would her Parliamentary colleagues want revenge for that?
Because some of them are Remainers?
Just look at the reaction on here. “I hate her because Brexit”. “She deserves to go for Brexit” etc etc
I don’t believe there is some vast blob Remoaner conspiracy to destroy brexiteer ministers. I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division
There are STILL people who think Brexit was a bad idea. They just can’t let go
" I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division"
While, being largely London-dwelling the Westminster civil service probably will skew remain, the idea that they'll corporately seek to wreak 'revenge' on Brexit-supporting ministers is nonsense. I knew we'd start getting snakes like Wootton creeping out and trying to shift the blame onto public servants rather than actually looking at the facts. It is far more likely that her fellow MPs are manoeuvring against her than civil servants (who after all, are well aware that there's hardly much likelihood of a liberal remainer being moved into Home Sec).
Have to say as well, the general thrust of 'she has to go' motivation I've seen on here seems to coalesce around her being thick, entitled and bonkers, rather than her being a brexiter.
Anyone who uses the ludicrous term “brexiter” is a tragic Remoaner fuck, so you can be politely ignored on this point
Genuinely not sure I understand what you mean? What's the proper word for someone who supported Brexit that is any more/less ludicrous than 'Brexiter'? As opposed to 'Remainer', which it's the counterpart to? Seems pretty innocuous to me.
The Braverman story is definitely blue on blue. Sounds emanating from somewhere near Sunak suggest he's reconciled to her going.
It's a stretch to have this braking the ministerial code (To my mind anyway), but I guess it's a stretch that Sunak may want to make if he feels he needs to ditch Braverman.
Braverman asked and the civil servants said no: minor breach. Her special adviser misled a journalist: major breach
what did the spad do/say to the journalist?
...
Isn't a speed awareness course designed to prevent you from being "done for speeding"?
You'll be shocked to learn that "done for" is not a legal term of art. However, in this context, most would argue she was "done" by the speed camera and had a choice of punishment. She could have chosen the course but instead chose the points. She could also have chosen to contest the being "done" in a Magistrates Court but sensibly decided against it.
Comments
Considering a recent former PM is facing suspension, and possibly a by-election, for misleading the House, why do you think that is?
The difference now is that the KGB were competently evil, whereas the current gang in Moscow are so transparently brutal and self serving as well as corrupt, that only amoral narcissists find anything attractive about late Putinism.
IIRC, you can only pay for the fine via card or online bank transfer.
But it really does go to the heart of Sunak's appalling judgement. He reappointed her Home Secretary after she had committed an action that in other job would have seen her fired on the spot and unable to return. Just as he retained Zahawi, Williamson, and Raab, who have all had to be removed.
This offence is prima facie fairly trivial. But it's yet more evidence Braverman is a loose cannon. She is also possibly the worst Home Secretary of all time (and when you consider that list includes Jacqui Smith and Henry Brooke, that's saying quite something). There is no reason to keep her. None.
This whole saga confirms - if it needed confirming - that his judgement of people and management skills are simply not good enough. And for a Prime Minister that's a big problem.
Vaping among children is a scandal.
Everyone, even in leafy suburbs is doing it.
(Sotto voce: everything about it, sale, use whatever, is already illegal). Nothing in the current law is being enforced.
Guess the answer: The answer is further laws and regulation.
Ditto the story in the Guardian.
I get that his rhetoric is more postive and less warrior-like than is the current fashion, but is it really so unfashionable to make him an asterisk in many polls? I guess so... which is still pretty amazing.
The furore over the worst Home Secretary in history has obscured the catastrophic borrowing figures this morning
And no coincidence that it followed shortly after that speech.
Like a Cyclops...
It may be a job they’ve both done before, but there have to be younger people out there who are more suitable.
And there are more mainstream people who are happy to pander to Putin as opposing him is a distraction to things they prefer to do.
On the left its people who want to focus on environmentalism, racism, colonialism and trans while on the right its people who want to focus on business profits, political bribes and trans.
Braverman asked and the civil servants said no: minor breach. Her special adviser misled a journalist: major breach
Peak karma currently pencilled in for October next year...
Well done.
Forterra has officially opened its new factory in Desford, Leicestershire – the largest and most efficient brick factory in Europe.
https://www.manufacturingmanagement.co.uk/content/news/forterra-opens-95m-brick-factory-in-leicestershire/
Its noticeable that businesses which demand subsidies from the taxpayer at the threat of closing down get so much more publicity than businesses which invest and create jobs.
Do you think Suella Braverman should resign from her role as Home Secretary, or should she remain in her role?
All Britons
Should resign: 41%
Should remain in her role: 22%
Con voters
Should resign: 25%
Should remain in her role: 44%
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1660641314059300872?s=20
Provided she paid for it herself.
If you try to build a political career by attacking privileged elites, you should expect political damage if you use your privileged status to help you with an embarrassing personal situation.
Fail to answer simple questions, just begs more questions.
Just look at the reaction on here. “I hate her because Brexit”. “She deserves to go for Brexit” etc etc
I don’t believe there is some vast blob Remoaner conspiracy to destroy brexiteer ministers. I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division
There are STILL people who think Brexit was a bad idea. They just can’t let go
But he does have a problem, at least of perception, which means the Dems have a problem. More importantly the rest of us have a problem because the alternative to Biden is likely to be much, much worse than him, even if he is senile.
The “idiot” of West Wing…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXNDKeVcwf4
I'd guess the leak is from the Cabinet Office
In wholly unrelated Cabinet Office news, the current Director General of the Economic and Domestic Affairs Secretariat is one Nicholas Joicey
"The Economic and Domestic Affairs Secretariat (EDS) is a secretariat in the United Kingdom Cabinet Office.
It supports the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and Minister for the Cabinet Office develop, co-ordinate and agree the UK government's domestic policy across the departments of state; with foreign and security policy co-ordinated by the separate National Security Secretariat (NSS). Together these two secretariats form the core what is the Cabinet Secretariat, and are the traditional redoubts of high fliers in the UK civil service. Being appointed to roles in EDS are highly coveted by talented civil servants, and competition is intense.
The head of EDS, who reports directly to the Cabinet Secretary, is a director general (or, before the mid-'90s renaming, a deputy secretary). It is widely regarded as one of the most powerful roles in the Civil Service due to having regular access to the prime minister, other cabinet-level ministers and their private secretaries, as well as the most senior officials in Whitehall to ensure 'collective agreement'. Without collective agreement and the issuing of a 'clearance' from EDS, departments cannot progress with policy announcements or take forward high profile and significant projects. In order to fulfil its duties, EDS officials work very closely with their counterparts in HM Treasury, 10 Downing Street and other teams in the Cabinet Office such as the Prime Minister's Implementation Unit.
The head of EDS (and more recently the head of the Cabinet Secretariats) is sometimes referred to as the Deputy Cabinet Secretary, due to running Cabinet and its subcommittees, as well as brokering policy decisions across government on behalf of the prime minister and his senior advisers. The head of EDS has a secure pass through the door that connects their office in 70 Whitehall to 10 Downing Street."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_and_Domestic_Affairs_Secretariat
Joicey isn't on the list of DGs so I'm not sure when he was appointed
I wonder if he was married to the Shadow Chancellor at the time, or the Shadow Minister for the Cabinet Office, or just the MP for Leeds West
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Joicey
Trump? Dunno
Its a pointless job since most people are not going to alter their view based on whether some ethics adviser says it's ok or not.
The Braverman story reminds me of the SNP's current woes as it appears even if in the end it's all ok there was needless stupidity it carelessness which led to it.
There might well be people out to get her (presumably those crafty remainer pagans or whoever) but even in the best case scenario for her she's asked a dumb question which is embarrassing in its entitlement. At worst its hardly the most terrible thing a politician has done but would amount to an attempted petty abuse of power. As a court could tell you attempts can see you face consequences as well as successes.
https://twitter.com/jessphillips/status/1660789996704481281
“Pardon”
11h
"If Braverman returned to the back benches, she would be free to become a more vociferous critic of the government’s failures, including on immigration and reform of Whitehall."
Why I think Braverman is preparing to leave govt 👇
https://twitter.com/zoe_grunewald/status/1660736731434438665
But given even prior to this there was some speculation she wants out, he might face a dilemma that she will just be gone later anyway so is not worth defending.
What we emotionally want as a nation is free trade and some kind of free movement. Something like Switzerland
He was certainly more competent than Braverman.
Now Rishi might reach a different conclusion and sack Suella. But he shouldn't need a bloody ethics advisor to think for him.
If she's directed her SPAD to say she didn't speed then that to mind would be a breach of the code - but I think he's likely guilty of denying something he genuinely had no idea about, which isn't right but isn't Braverman's issue.
" I do believe the Westminster civil service is very Remainery (how can it not be?) and will take the chance to enact revenge on prominent Leavers if given an opportunity. It’s a big cultural division"
While, being largely London-dwelling the Westminster civil service probably will skew remain, the idea that they'll corporately seek to wreak 'revenge' on Brexit-supporting ministers is nonsense. I knew we'd start getting snakes like Wootton creeping out and trying to shift the blame onto public servants rather than actually looking at the facts. It is far more likely that her fellow MPs are manoeuvring against her than civil servants (who after all, are well aware that there's hardly much likelihood of a liberal remainer being moved into Home Sec).
Have to say as well, the general thrust of 'she has to go' motivation I've seen on here seems to coalesce around her being thick, entitled and bonkers, rather than her being a brexiter.
The master, of course, managed a better one, on the same subject.
https://twitter.com/MattCartoonist/status/1660686626459201536
What astonishes an older generation is that (counter intuitively) people are not obliged to accept 'legal tender' (ie generally notes) for payment. hence this phenomenon you get in cities (I live in a cash using backwater) of not taking cash even for small sums, and not providing facility for it at automated machines.
This might be sane for larger sums (+£1000?) but for coffee, newspapers and a short ride on a bus this is nuts.
I pay my mortgage with 20p coins AS A POINT OF PRINCIPLE.
When they were alive of course, either of their semi-mummified corpses would be sub optimal.
Leon’s paranoia is an early indication of that.
Kudos to the multiple PB Tories on here who are calling her out as the fraud that she is.
I don't think people particularly care about the issue at hand here and are just judging Braverman on whether they like her or not.
So yes, there may be an electability issue if there's a strong challenger. But there probably shouldn't be. The system, for all its failings, has produced a pretty good President.
If Remain had won we would be in a political turmoil, but a different one, because the democratic deficit would not have gone away.