Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Only in the Midlands and Wales do more people think Johnson’s “clean and honest” over those who thin

1356

Comments

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,309
    Charles said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    TimT said:

    I know that for politics geeks like us, the Cummings stuff is explosive. But is it for Joe Normal?

    No, or not yet. I am trying to remember the course of the Tory sleaze surrounding the Major government. My suspicion is decorating the flat might have more cut-through, if and when we ever get the details, which is probably why we will not get the details.
    Except it’s not his flat. It’s a government flat. I know that’s not a justification but it will put enough people off the scent.

    Separately why are we so cheap with government property? Spending £250k on doing up a flat is not that much for a PM.
    Only a supercilious rich Tory arse could come out with crap like that.
    Top of the morning to you as well Malcolm

    My point is that the PM does a high stress job. It is not unreasonable to expect the state to provide reasonable accommodation where they can relax. Penny pinching doesn’t really achieve much.
    Good morning, He has Chequers for relaxing. The amount spent of other people's money is gross. If he wanted that much he should have requested it , not spent it and then used grift to pay for it.
    He is parsimonius with cash for poor people but thinks he can just splash the public's cash on himself, no excuse for it.
    The one room I saw was hideous and whoever ordered and designed it should be tarred and feathered and run out of town.
    Not only stealing public or Tory donated money but wasting it on hideous decorating and ruination of a perfectly good flat. For that alone he should be railroaded.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,112
    edited April 2021

    Boris opponents’ problem:


    The Cameron issue is the only really serious one in play imo. The PPE stuff may bring up something procedural. The flat is fluff.

    Consider that two of the last four French Heads of State have received prison sentences for Corruption:

    2 years for embezzlement whilst Mayor of Paris. (Chirac)
    Who? (Hollande)
    3 years for corruption. (Sarkozy)
    Mons. Macaron.

    And they are trying to convince us that *we* have major problems.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    All caveats, such as Leave Remain, age, etc still don't adequately explain the PM and the Tories resounding success in the Midlands.

    When? In 2019 the key was probably under-the-radar social media campaigning about how Corbyn wanted to disband the armed forces and had applauded the IRA's bombing campaigns.
    I mean longer term than one campaign. It is a region that has dramatically swung blue over several elections. Much faster than the rest of the nation.
    And the PM polls well there too.
    I don't see why this should necessarily be so.
    Housing.

    New builds in the North and Midlands have been able to be bought by people, allowing them to own their own homes, meaning they're far more likely to be Tory.

    Idiotic councils down South in comparison think pampering NIMBYs is the solution, meaning house prices rise, meaning people can't afford homes, meaning the region is relatively swinging Labour.
    NIMBY's vote though. Often Tory!
    But NIMBYs getting overruled here means more houses, more home owners, more Tory votes.

    NIMBYs getting their way there means fewer houses, more tenants in cramped shared accommodation, more Labour votes.

    The key determination is whether people own their own home, not whether someone else's is built.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,297
    edited April 2021
    Charles said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    TimT said:

    I know that for politics geeks like us, the Cummings stuff is explosive. But is it for Joe Normal?

    No, or not yet. I am trying to remember the course of the Tory sleaze surrounding the Major government. My suspicion is decorating the flat might have more cut-through, if and when we ever get the details, which is probably why we will not get the details.
    Except it’s not his flat. It’s a government flat. I know that’s not a justification but it will put enough people off the scent.

    Separately why are we so cheap with government property? Spending £250k on doing up a flat is not that much for a PM.
    Only a supercilious rich Tory arse could come out with crap like that.
    Top of the morning to you as well Malcolm

    My point is that the PM does a high stress job. It is not unreasonable to expect the state to provide reasonable accommodation where they can relax. Penny pinching doesn’t really achieve much.
    This is a party politician broadcast for the National Chumocrats.

    There’s ALREADY a 30k per annum decoration budget, and Cameron did a major overhaul less than 10 years ago.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,309

    ydoethur said:

    Once he is back from flying his whippet, professional northerner @TheScreamingEagles will be shocked to learn that gravity is racist according to his local university.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/24/isaac-newton-latest-historical-figure-swept-decolonisation-drive/

    Good Morning everyone. Not quite as bright this morning, but maybe a little warmer, possibly due to cloud cover.

    There is a site where one can check whether anyone's forebears were officially compensated for the loss of their slaves, and I'm pleased to say none of mine appear on it. Of course given my (real) surname I can't be sure.
    And I've no means of knowing whether any of them 'profited; in other ways...... served on slaving ships etc.
    Everyone in Britain profited from the slave trade. If they didn’t actually trade in them, they still provided the goods traded for slaves in West Africa, and built the ships used for transport, and above all they ate the sugar, smoked the tobacco and wore the cotton that was the upshot of it.

    That does not mean we should suddenly disown everyone involved and pretend it never happened, which - ironically, given their stated aims - is what is actually happening here.
    That is the irony. We are in danger of airbrushing slavery out of history.
    It was hundreds of years ago , give it a break , no-one nowadays has any clue about it and does not give a flying F*** about it either, apart from a few nutjobs who will move on to the crusades soon and cavemen after that.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,112
    edited April 2021

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Once he is back from flying his whippet, professional northerner @TheScreamingEagles will be shocked to learn that gravity is racist according to his local university.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/24/isaac-newton-latest-historical-figure-swept-decolonisation-drive/

    Good Morning everyone. Not quite as bright this morning, but maybe a little warmer, possibly due to cloud cover.

    There is a site where one can check whether anyone's forebears were officially compensated for the loss of their slaves, and I'm pleased to say none of mine appear on it. Of course given my (real) surname I can't be sure.
    And I've no means of knowing whether any of them 'profited; in other ways...... served on slaving ships etc.
    Everyone in Britain profited from the slave trade. If they didn’t actually trade in them, they still provided the goods traded for slaves in West Africa, and built the ships used for transport, and above all they ate the sugar, smoked the tobacco and wore the cotton that was the upshot of it.

    That does not mean we should suddenly disown everyone involved and pretend it never happened, which - ironically, given their stated aims - is what is actually happening here.
    If they smoked the tobacco, it is unlikely to have benefitted them......
    Given the age at which they died from many other causes until at least the 1920s, the transient pleasure working people got from smoking probably far outweighed the downsides.
    Do people get pleasure from smoking? Or does their body feel bad when they are not getting their next hit?

    The two are not the same, at least in my opinion. My lifetime smoking experience is probably in the hundreds of cigarettes but never really got any pleasure from it, not sure if others do, and if so how they distinguish it from their addiction being fed?
    Smoking surely is the same mechanism as any other drug dependency.

    It sounds as though you never had the buzz outweighing the unpleasantness of parts of the experience.

    I mean, who would voluntarily do the jabbing or whatever else of a serious habit?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859

    Charles said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    TimT said:

    I know that for politics geeks like us, the Cummings stuff is explosive. But is it for Joe Normal?

    No, or not yet. I am trying to remember the course of the Tory sleaze surrounding the Major government. My suspicion is decorating the flat might have more cut-through, if and when we ever get the details, which is probably why we will not get the details.
    Except it’s not his flat. It’s a government flat. I know that’s not a justification but it will put enough people off the scent.

    Separately why are we so cheap with government property? Spending £250k on doing up a flat is not that much for a PM.
    Only a supercilious rich Tory arse could come out with crap like that.
    Top of the morning to you as well Malcolm

    My point is that the PM does a high stress job. It is not unreasonable to expect the state to provide reasonable accommodation where they can relax. Penny pinching doesn’t really achieve much.
    This is a party politician broadcast for the National Chumocrats.

    There’s ALREADY a 30k per annum decoration budget, and Cameron did a major overhaul less than 10 years ago.
    That it was Cammo's decorations (and probably Mrs Cammo's choices) surely explains why so much money was spent to allow Carrie to cover it all over?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,309

    Once he is back from flying his whippet, professional northerner @TheScreamingEagles will be shocked to learn that gravity is racist according to his local university.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/24/isaac-newton-latest-historical-figure-swept-decolonisation-drive/

    Good Morning everyone. Not quite as bright this morning, but maybe a little warmer, possibly due to cloud cover.

    There is a site where one can check whether anyone's forebears were officially compensated for the loss of their slaves, and I'm pleased to say none of mine appear on it. Of course given my (real) surname I can't be sure.
    And I've no means of knowing whether any of them 'profited; in other ways...... served on slaving ships etc.
    Morning OKC, sunshine yet again here, unbelievable. has to have been one of best and driest April's ever here.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,399
    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    If Labour talked more like you did just then in that post there than you'd be winning.

    You just wrote something mildly monarchist, softly patriotic but also equitably centre-left all in one post.

    You've got it.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,297
    MattW said:

    Boris opponents’ problem:


    The Cameron issue is the only really serious one in play imo. The PPE stuff may bring up something procedural. The flat is fluff.

    Consider that two of the last four French Heads of State have received prison sentences for Corruption:

    2 years for embezzlement whilst Mayor of Paris. (Chirac)
    Who? (Hollande)
    3 years for corruption. (Sarkozy)
    Mons. Macaron.

    And they are trying to convince us that *we* have major problems.
    Who is “they”?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,297

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    All caveats, such as Leave Remain, age, etc still don't adequately explain the PM and the Tories resounding success in the Midlands.

    When? In 2019 the key was probably under-the-radar social media campaigning about how Corbyn wanted to disband the armed forces and had applauded the IRA's bombing campaigns.
    I mean longer term than one campaign. It is a region that has dramatically swung blue over several elections. Much faster than the rest of the nation.
    And the PM polls well there too.
    I don't see why this should necessarily be so.
    Housing.

    New builds in the North and Midlands have been able to be bought by people, allowing them to own their own homes, meaning they're far more likely to be Tory.

    Idiotic councils down South in comparison think pampering NIMBYs is the solution, meaning house prices rise, meaning people can't afford homes, meaning the region is relatively swinging Labour.
    NIMBY's vote though. Often Tory!
    The Midlands has always been a cesspit of reactionary opinion. Imperial preference and all that.

    No wonder Shakespeare got the hell out as soon as he was able.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859

    MattW said:

    Boris opponents’ problem:


    The Cameron issue is the only really serious one in play imo. The PPE stuff may bring up something procedural. The flat is fluff.

    Consider that two of the last four French Heads of State have received prison sentences for Corruption:

    2 years for embezzlement whilst Mayor of Paris. (Chirac)
    Who? (Hollande)
    3 years for corruption. (Sarkozy)
    Mons. Macaron.

    And they are trying to convince us that *we* have major problems.
    Who is “they”?
    His argument makes no sense in any case. Finding somewhere worse in an attempt to gloss over problems at home is a well known gambit of last resort.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,309
    Leon said:

    Poor old SCons, what a shame.

    'Projections based on the survey, carried out for The Sunday Post by polling company Survation, suggests the SNP will win 67 seats, giving Nicola Sturgeon a majority of five at Holyrood.
    Scottish Labour is projected to win 24 seats, the same number the party won in the last Holyrood election, with the Scottish Tories coming third with 22 seats, nine fewer than they won in 2016. Meanwhile, the survey of more than 1,000 Scots last week, suggests the Scottish Greens could almost double their seats from six to 11.'

    https://twitter.com/sunday_post/status/1386073051645812736?s=21

    At the last Holyrood election the Tories were lead by Cameron at Westminster and Davidson at Holyrood. Johnson/Ross on track to lose nearly a third of their seats - which is a massive setback under a pseudo-PR system.
    I have a weird feeling - a change in me waters - that Scottish Labour are about to stage a significant revival

    Sturgeon is now fucking boring. She just is. Sorry. Salmond is a has-been sex-pest. I know the sort.

    Prediction: labour are now at the depth of their nadir, all seems lost, no way back.

    Yet this is not the case. The party was born in scotland and it will revive, again, in Scotland, first.

    Boris will refuse Sindyref2 - to the quiet relief of the majority in Scotland who don’t fancy Brexit 2.0 times a zillion. But the Tories wont benefit, and neither will the Nats (who will split on UDI and all that). The quiet beneficiaries will be Labour, who will seem sane between these two extremes and will cultivate devomax and so forth

    Labour will rebound in Scotland enabling them to take a large chunk of Scottish seats off the Nats in 2024, and maybe win a hung parliament in Westminster. Even if they don’t manage that, they will be sufficiently vibrant in Scotland to win an overall majority in the UK in the next GE after 2024.

    I suddenly see that happening. Dunno why. Might be the excellent curry I just enjoyed

    Still pissed it seems. As long as Labour regional office are a London party run by dullards operated from down south they will go absolutely nowhere. If that tool Anas had had any brains and stated they supported independence he would hav ehad a great chance given Sturgeon is heading for the bin.
    Now it will be SNP as majority with Alba pushing them and the puppet Greens helping for baubles.
    Sturgeon will be gone either through court cases or getting a better gig.
    Only fly in the ointment is if Macbeth gets back in it will take longer to clear out the SNP stables.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,207
    IanB2 said:

    MattW said:

    Boris opponents’ problem:


    The Cameron issue is the only really serious one in play imo. The PPE stuff may bring up something procedural. The flat is fluff.

    Consider that two of the last four French Heads of State have received prison sentences for Corruption:

    2 years for embezzlement whilst Mayor of Paris. (Chirac)
    Who? (Hollande)
    3 years for corruption. (Sarkozy)
    Mons. Macaron.

    And they are trying to convince us that *we* have major problems.
    Who is “they”?
    His argument makes no sense in any case. Finding somewhere worse in an attempt to gloss over problems at home is a well known gambit of last resort.
    "Shoplifter's Defence", I believe it's called.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,023
    Sandpit said:

    Presumably, everyone who’s spend the last couple of years describing Dominic Cummings as a liar who can’t be trusted, now think the sun shines out of his arse and everything he says is true?

    Happy Sunday folks! ;)

    Morning, Sandpit.
    You’ll know that’s not the case, as we’ve already discussed the difficulty in working out which of the two is the more habitual liar.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,309

    ydoethur said:

    Once he is back from flying his whippet, professional northerner @TheScreamingEagles will be shocked to learn that gravity is racist according to his local university.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/24/isaac-newton-latest-historical-figure-swept-decolonisation-drive/

    Good Morning everyone. Not quite as bright this morning, but maybe a little warmer, possibly due to cloud cover.

    There is a site where one can check whether anyone's forebears were officially compensated for the loss of their slaves, and I'm pleased to say none of mine appear on it. Of course given my (real) surname I can't be sure.
    And I've no means of knowing whether any of them 'profited; in other ways...... served on slaving ships etc.
    Everyone in Britain profited from the slave trade. If they didn’t actually trade in them, they still provided the goods traded for slaves in West Africa, and built the ships used for transport, and above all they ate the sugar, smoked the tobacco and wore the cotton that was the upshot of it.

    That does not mean we should suddenly disown everyone involved and pretend it never happened, which - ironically, given their stated aims - is what is actually happening here.
    Indeed; and my wife's ancestors were working in the cotton mills on Lancashire in the 1840's. Whiat they did in the "Cotton Famine' I don't know, and probably never will..
    My father and his brother and sister all worked in the Lancashire cotton mills
    And, if they were working prior to about 1860 worked with cotton picked by slaves. As ydoethur notes, Lancashire's prosperity, so far as it existed for those low down in 'the heap' was largely built on 'slave products'.

    On a wider point I was struck, while musing the other day, what diverse connections my family has; from Cambodia via Sweden and Switzerland to Ireland. And that's without taking into account those who have emigrated.
    Exactly the luxuries they got from slavery , working 365 years a day for about 14 hours, a hovel and not enough food to feed a dog. They must have been rubbing their hands and thinking slavery was wonderful. I think I would have preferred picking the cotton, they were not the only slaves.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    On topic as ever, the Sunday Rawnsley:

    Dominic Cummings offering a lecture on integrity in government is like a cannibal telling you how to be a good vegan. When his subject matter is Boris Johnson, it is nevertheless worth paying attention. Few possess a more detailed map of where the prime minister’s skeletons are secreted than the man who was once his most senior aide.

    The accusation most likely to cut through to the typical voter is that Mr Johnson hatched a plan to have Tory donors secretly pay for the renovation of the Downing Street flat, which was “unethical, foolish, possibly illegal and almost certainly broke the rules on proper disclosure of political donations”.

    The allegation that will most horrify Whitehall is that the prime minister sought to impede an official inquiry into a leak about lockdown timing that compromised the response to the pandemic.

    The argument goes that Mr Johnson won’t be much hurt because an expectation that he will behave badly is already “in the price”. I hear this view expressed by blase Tory MPs, who blithely think that their leader is lacquered with a Teflon coating that makes him invulnerable to any scandal, however appalling.

    History suggests that voters are generally more tolerant of sleaze when they are feeling good about their own lives and much less forgiving when they are miserable. This context will change and become more menacing for the government when vaccine euphoria wears off, business and job support schemes are unwound and ministers implement some excruciatingly tough choices about how to pay the bill for the pandemic.

    What won’t fundamentally alter is the character of Mr Johnson’s government. If you’ve missed the latest sleaze story, don’t worry, another one will be along in a minute. As I like to remark from time to time, the personality of institutions is hugely influenced by the example set by the person at the top. When the prime minister is a man with a lifelong contempt for the norms of decent behaviour and a career history of behaving as if he can get away with anything, the government is going to reflect his amoral character.

    A culture of impunity in which unethical behaviour, however outrageous, never goes punished, is pretty much a guarantee of even worse to come in the future. I cannot tell you how the Johnson government will end or when, but it will surely not be a happily ever after.

    To paraphrase Ernest Hemingway, governments become bankrupt in the eyes of the voters gradually, then suddenly.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,309
    ydoethur said:

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Poor old SCons, what a shame.

    'Projections based on the survey, carried out for The Sunday Post by polling company Survation, suggests the SNP will win 67 seats, giving Nicola Sturgeon a majority of five at Holyrood.
    Scottish Labour is projected to win 24 seats, the same number the party won in the last Holyrood election, with the Scottish Tories coming third with 22 seats, nine fewer than they won in 2016. Meanwhile, the survey of more than 1,000 Scots last week, suggests the Scottish Greens could almost double their seats from six to 11.'

    https://twitter.com/sunday_post/status/1386073051645812736?s=21

    At the last Holyrood election the Tories were lead by Cameron at Westminster and Davidson at Holyrood. Johnson/Ross on track to lose nearly a third of their seats - which is a massive setback under a pseudo-PR system.
    In 2016 the SCons got 22% on the constituency and list, this poll has them on 20% and 21% so barely any difference, tactical voting from other Unionists to keep the SNP out could still see them hold more constituencies than this poll suggests.

    Overall Survation also has No on 51% ahead of Yes on 49%
    The problem for the Tory constituency seats is that the SNP share of the constituency vote is up quite a bit on 2016 according to this poll - that implies a swing to the SNP, and is why their forecast to pick up constituency seats from the Tories.

    You'd also expect that, all other things being equal, all the changes since 2016 - Brexit, Johnson, Ross - will mean that there is likely to be less Unionist tactical voting for the Tories this time.
    Polls significantly overestimated the SNP constituency vote in 2016. Apparently - according to reports from a source sympathetic to the SNP on Vote UK Forum - there is some concern in SNP circles regarding Sturgeon's own prospects v Sarwar in her own seat. Canvass returns are not brilliant.
    That would be the optimal result for the SNP. Majority, and the removal of a controversial, disgraced and exhausted leader so they can start afresh.
    Isn't she on the list too, so she'd still be in the Parliament.
    She’s second on the list, and it’s very unlikely that the SNP would get more than one list seat in that area unless they had an awful night on the constituencies.
    Yes and top is a BAME/disabled prioritised candidate, though they can self id as disabled and probably BAME as well so all the central clique can top the lists.
    Be nice her forcing them to resign so she can get back in.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,350

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    All caveats, such as Leave Remain, age, etc still don't adequately explain the PM and the Tories resounding success in the Midlands.

    When? In 2019 the key was probably under-the-radar social media campaigning about how Corbyn wanted to disband the armed forces and had applauded the IRA's bombing campaigns.
    I mean longer term than one campaign. It is a region that has dramatically swung blue over several elections. Much faster than the rest of the nation.
    And the PM polls well there too.
    I don't see why this should necessarily be so.
    Housing.

    New builds in the North and Midlands have been able to be bought by people, allowing them to own their own homes, meaning they're far more likely to be Tory.

    Idiotic councils down South in comparison think pampering NIMBYs is the solution, meaning house prices rise, meaning people can't afford homes, meaning the region is relatively swinging Labour.
    NIMBY's vote though. Often Tory!
    The Midlands has always been a cesspit of reactionary opinion. Imperial preference and all that.

    No wonder Shakespeare got the hell out as soon as he was able.
    Gee, thanks.

    As I’m a Welshman in the Midlands I must be doubly damned.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Once he is back from flying his whippet, professional northerner @TheScreamingEagles will be shocked to learn that gravity is racist according to his local university.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/24/isaac-newton-latest-historical-figure-swept-decolonisation-drive/

    Good Morning everyone. Not quite as bright this morning, but maybe a little warmer, possibly due to cloud cover.

    There is a site where one can check whether anyone's forebears were officially compensated for the loss of their slaves, and I'm pleased to say none of mine appear on it. Of course given my (real) surname I can't be sure.
    And I've no means of knowing whether any of them 'profited; in other ways...... served on slaving ships etc.
    Everyone in Britain profited from the slave trade. If they didn’t actually trade in them, they still provided the goods traded for slaves in West Africa, and built the ships used for transport, and above all they ate the sugar, smoked the tobacco and wore the cotton that was the upshot of it.

    That does not mean we should suddenly disown everyone involved and pretend it never happened, which - ironically, given their stated aims - is what is actually happening here.
    If they smoked the tobacco, it is unlikely to have benefitted them......
    Given the age at which they died from many other causes until at least the 1920s, the transient pleasure working people got from smoking probably far outweighed the downsides.
    Do people get pleasure from smoking? Or does their body feel bad when they are not getting their next hit?

    The two are not the same, at least in my opinion. My lifetime smoking experience is probably in the hundreds of cigarettes but never really got any pleasure from it, not sure if others do, and if so how they distinguish it from their addiction being fed?
    You have it back to front; the pleasure is in feeding the addiction. A cigarette when you're not addicted is like having a glass of tap water to maintain your fluid levels; when you are it's like a pint of ice cold shandy on a hot day.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    TimT said:

    I know that for politics geeks like us, the Cummings stuff is explosive. But is it for Joe Normal?

    No, or not yet. I am trying to remember the course of the Tory sleaze surrounding the Major government. My suspicion is decorating the flat might have more cut-through, if and when we ever get the details, which is probably why we will not get the details.
    Except it’s not his flat. It’s a government flat. I know that’s not a justification but it will put enough people off the scent.

    Separately why are we so cheap with government property? Spending £250k on doing up a flat is not that much for a PM.
    Only a supercilious rich Tory arse could come out with crap like that.
    Yes; even round here one could BUY quite a nice one for that! In a 'desirable' conversion.
    Round here you could buy rather a nice house for that.
    When we refurbished a flat that size (the former servants quarters at the shop that my brother lives in) it cost far more than that for a similar property (4 bedrooms, Kitchen, 2 reception rooms and a bathroom).

    Grade 1 is a pain in the backside - in our case the Georgian Society got involved - greatly reduced the utility of the space and massively increased the costs
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,309

    Poor old SCons, what a shame.

    'Projections based on the survey, carried out for The Sunday Post by polling company Survation, suggests the SNP will win 67 seats, giving Nicola Sturgeon a majority of five at Holyrood.
    Scottish Labour is projected to win 24 seats, the same number the party won in the last Holyrood election, with the Scottish Tories coming third with 22 seats, nine fewer than they won in 2016. Meanwhile, the survey of more than 1,000 Scots last week, suggests the Scottish Greens could almost double their seats from six to 11.'

    https://twitter.com/sunday_post/status/1386073051645812736?s=21

    At the last Holyrood election the Tories were lead by Cameron at Westminster and Davidson at Holyrood. Johnson/Ross on track to lose nearly a third of their seats - which is a massive setback under a pseudo-PR system.
    Sarwar's personal popularity does now seem to be pulling Labour up - supporting Mike's theory that leadership ratings are a leading indicator for party support.
    He is typical Labour , millionaire who pays his workers crap wages , kids at private schools etc. Just perfect for socialists.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,362
    edited April 2021
    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Once he is back from flying his whippet, professional northerner @TheScreamingEagles will be shocked to learn that gravity is racist according to his local university.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/24/isaac-newton-latest-historical-figure-swept-decolonisation-drive/

    Good Morning everyone. Not quite as bright this morning, but maybe a little warmer, possibly due to cloud cover.

    There is a site where one can check whether anyone's forebears were officially compensated for the loss of their slaves, and I'm pleased to say none of mine appear on it. Of course given my (real) surname I can't be sure.
    And I've no means of knowing whether any of them 'profited; in other ways...... served on slaving ships etc.
    Everyone in Britain profited from the slave trade. If they didn’t actually trade in them, they still provided the goods traded for slaves in West Africa, and built the ships used for transport, and above all they ate the sugar, smoked the tobacco and wore the cotton that was the upshot of it.

    That does not mean we should suddenly disown everyone involved and pretend it never happened, which - ironically, given their stated aims - is what is actually happening here.
    If they smoked the tobacco, it is unlikely to have benefitted them......
    Given the age at which they died from many other causes until at least the 1920s, the transient pleasure working people got from smoking probably far outweighed the downsides.
    Do people get pleasure from smoking? Or does their body feel bad when they are not getting their next hit?

    The two are not the same, at least in my opinion. My lifetime smoking experience is probably in the hundreds of cigarettes but never really got any pleasure from it, not sure if others do, and if so how they distinguish it from their addiction being fed?
    I’ve been told that there are 2-3 cigarettes a day that are pleasurable, with the rest being just habit and barely noticed
    I guess the problem is that it's the X, Y and Z cigarettes of the day that are pleasurable and not the first 2-3.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    ydoethur said:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    All caveats, such as Leave Remain, age, etc still don't adequately explain the PM and the Tories resounding success in the Midlands.

    When? In 2019 the key was probably under-the-radar social media campaigning about how Corbyn wanted to disband the armed forces and had applauded the IRA's bombing campaigns.
    I mean longer term than one campaign. It is a region that has dramatically swung blue over several elections. Much faster than the rest of the nation.
    And the PM polls well there too.
    I don't see why this should necessarily be so.
    Housing.

    New builds in the North and Midlands have been able to be bought by people, allowing them to own their own homes, meaning they're far more likely to be Tory.

    Idiotic councils down South in comparison think pampering NIMBYs is the solution, meaning house prices rise, meaning people can't afford homes, meaning the region is relatively swinging Labour.
    NIMBY's vote though. Often Tory!
    The Midlands has always been a cesspit of reactionary opinion. Imperial preference and all that.

    No wonder Shakespeare got the hell out as soon as he was able.
    Gee, thanks.

    As I’m a Welshman in the Midlands I must be doubly damned.
    Pun your way out of that one.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,297
    ydoethur said:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    All caveats, such as Leave Remain, age, etc still don't adequately explain the PM and the Tories resounding success in the Midlands.

    When? In 2019 the key was probably under-the-radar social media campaigning about how Corbyn wanted to disband the armed forces and had applauded the IRA's bombing campaigns.
    I mean longer term than one campaign. It is a region that has dramatically swung blue over several elections. Much faster than the rest of the nation.
    And the PM polls well there too.
    I don't see why this should necessarily be so.
    Housing.

    New builds in the North and Midlands have been able to be bought by people, allowing them to own their own homes, meaning they're far more likely to be Tory.

    Idiotic councils down South in comparison think pampering NIMBYs is the solution, meaning house prices rise, meaning people can't afford homes, meaning the region is relatively swinging Labour.
    NIMBY's vote though. Often Tory!
    The Midlands has always been a cesspit of reactionary opinion. Imperial preference and all that.

    No wonder Shakespeare got the hell out as soon as he was able.
    Gee, thanks.

    As I’m a Welshman in the Midlands I must be doubly damned.
    I had you down as a Dissenter, though.
    Which makes you OK...
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,633
    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    TimT said:

    I know that for politics geeks like us, the Cummings stuff is explosive. But is it for Joe Normal?

    No, or not yet. I am trying to remember the course of the Tory sleaze surrounding the Major government. My suspicion is decorating the flat might have more cut-through, if and when we ever get the details, which is probably why we will not get the details.
    Except it’s not his flat. It’s a government flat. I know that’s not a justification but it will put enough people off the scent.

    Separately why are we so cheap with government property? Spending £250k on doing up a flat is not that much for a PM.
    Only a supercilious rich Tory arse could come out with crap like that.
    Yes; even round here one could BUY quite a nice one for that! In a 'desirable' conversion.
    Round here you could buy rather a nice house for that.
    When we refurbished a flat that size (the former servants quarters at the shop that my brother lives in) it cost far more than that for a similar property (4 bedrooms, Kitchen, 2 reception rooms and a bathroom).

    Grade 1 is a pain in the backside - in our case the Georgian Society got involved - greatly reduced the utility of the space and massively increased the costs
    You managed without taxpayer help?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,350
    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    All caveats, such as Leave Remain, age, etc still don't adequately explain the PM and the Tories resounding success in the Midlands.

    When? In 2019 the key was probably under-the-radar social media campaigning about how Corbyn wanted to disband the armed forces and had applauded the IRA's bombing campaigns.
    I mean longer term than one campaign. It is a region that has dramatically swung blue over several elections. Much faster than the rest of the nation.
    And the PM polls well there too.
    I don't see why this should necessarily be so.
    Housing.

    New builds in the North and Midlands have been able to be bought by people, allowing them to own their own homes, meaning they're far more likely to be Tory.

    Idiotic councils down South in comparison think pampering NIMBYs is the solution, meaning house prices rise, meaning people can't afford homes, meaning the region is relatively swinging Labour.
    NIMBY's vote though. Often Tory!
    The Midlands has always been a cesspit of reactionary opinion. Imperial preference and all that.

    No wonder Shakespeare got the hell out as soon as he was able.
    Gee, thanks.

    As I’m a Welshman in the Midlands I must be doubly damned.
    Pun your way out of that one.
    It would be as painful as having root canol surgery.

    (That one is for Welsh speakers!)
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,023
    Interesting thread on the likely long term future of the coronavirus.
    https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1385664864765444098
    We've written a perspective on a new study by
    @MAMdayIndayOut
    that helps explain why some viruses (measles) don't evolve to escape immunity but others (influenza) do. Provides some clues relevant to future for #SARSCoV2 as well..


    Concludes it’s very likely to be more like flu, but that carefully designed new vaccines might provide long term immunity even as the virus evolves.

    (It also notes that flu vaccines provide protection for at least quarter of century against the particular strain of flu they are directed at.)
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    TimT said:

    I know that for politics geeks like us, the Cummings stuff is explosive. But is it for Joe Normal?

    No, or not yet. I am trying to remember the course of the Tory sleaze surrounding the Major government. My suspicion is decorating the flat might have more cut-through, if and when we ever get the details, which is probably why we will not get the details.
    Except it’s not his flat. It’s a government flat. I know that’s not a justification but it will put enough people off the scent.

    Separately why are we so cheap with government property? Spending £250k on doing up a flat is not that much for a PM.
    Only a supercilious rich Tory arse could come out with crap like that.
    Yes; even round here one could BUY quite a nice one for that! In a 'desirable' conversion.
    Round here you could buy rather a nice house for that.
    When we refurbished a flat that size (the former servants quarters at the shop that my brother lives in) it cost far more than that for a similar property (4 bedrooms, Kitchen, 2 reception rooms and a bathroom).

    Grade 1 is a pain in the backside - in our case the Georgian Society got involved - greatly reduced the utility of the space and massively increased the costs
    Perilously close to self-pastiche here.
    Nothing perilously close about it! My theory is he’s actually a cab driver (furloughed) from Deptford.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,826
    Very much a Lib Dem bar chart. Should have been a histogram! For 80% of the public it's between +4 and -7. The divides are startling though. Dare I suggest other political factors may be in play in determining opinions?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Once he is back from flying his whippet, professional northerner @TheScreamingEagles will be shocked to learn that gravity is racist according to his local university.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/24/isaac-newton-latest-historical-figure-swept-decolonisation-drive/

    Good Morning everyone. Not quite as bright this morning, but maybe a little warmer, possibly due to cloud cover.

    There is a site where one can check whether anyone's forebears were officially compensated for the loss of their slaves, and I'm pleased to say none of mine appear on it. Of course given my (real) surname I can't be sure.
    And I've no means of knowing whether any of them 'profited; in other ways...... served on slaving ships etc.
    Everyone in Britain profited from the slave trade. If they didn’t actually trade in them, they still provided the goods traded for slaves in West Africa, and built the ships used for transport, and above all they ate the sugar, smoked the tobacco and wore the cotton that was the upshot of it.

    That does not mean we should suddenly disown everyone involved and pretend it never happened, which - ironically, given their stated aims - is what is actually happening here.
    If they smoked the tobacco, it is unlikely to have benefitted them......
    Given the age at which they died from many other causes until at least the 1920s, the transient pleasure working people got from smoking probably far outweighed the downsides.
    Do people get pleasure from smoking? Or does their body feel bad when they are not getting their next hit?

    The two are not the same, at least in my opinion. My lifetime smoking experience is probably in the hundreds of cigarettes but never really got any pleasure from it, not sure if others do, and if so how they distinguish it from their addiction being fed?
    You have it back to front; the pleasure is in feeding the addiction. A cigarette when you're not addicted is like having a glass of tap water to maintain your fluid levels; when you are it's like a pint of ice cold shandy on a hot day.
    Not how I remember my first, and only, cigarette!

    Most things that are pleasant to eat or drink taste good the first time you have them.

    But there is a collection of things that, at first taste, are unpleasant and you cannot understand how everyone else is enjoying them. First cup of tea or coffee. First glass of wine. The cigarette is in the same category. That everyone else seems to be enjoying it forces you to persist until you overcome that initial reaction born from unfamiliarity. Like how you come to appreciate a complicated musical piece that did nothing for you at first listen.

    Then there are things like Marmite that remain revolting however long you persist with them.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,207
    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Presumably, everyone who’s spend the last couple of years describing Dominic Cummings as a liar who can’t be trusted, now think the sun shines out of his arse and everything he says is true?

    Happy Sunday folks! ;)

    Morning, Sandpit.
    You’ll know that’s not the case, as we’ve already discussed the difficulty in working out which of the two is the more habitual liar.
    Key thing is that they use different forms of mendacity.
    Dom will take true facts and prop them up selectively to give a misleading impression. That Number on That Bus was incredibly dishonest as a conclusion, but was based on true data- just put together to give a false impression.
    Boris will just say any old nonsense to keep his audience of the moment happy.

    Frankly, they deserve each other.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,309
    Jonathan said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    TimT said:

    I know that for politics geeks like us, the Cummings stuff is explosive. But is it for Joe Normal?

    No, or not yet. I am trying to remember the course of the Tory sleaze surrounding the Major government. My suspicion is decorating the flat might have more cut-through, if and when we ever get the details, which is probably why we will not get the details.
    Except it’s not his flat. It’s a government flat. I know that’s not a justification but it will put enough people off the scent.

    Separately why are we so cheap with government property? Spending £250k on doing up a flat is not that much for a PM.
    Only a supercilious rich Tory arse could come out with crap like that.
    Yes; even round here one could BUY quite a nice one for that! In a 'desirable' conversion.
    Round here you could buy rather a nice house for that.
    When we refurbished a flat that size (the former servants quarters at the shop that my brother lives in) it cost far more than that for a similar property (4 bedrooms, Kitchen, 2 reception rooms and a bathroom).

    Grade 1 is a pain in the backside - in our case the Georgian Society got involved - greatly reduced the utility of the space and massively increased the costs
    You managed without taxpayer help?
    You are joking :D
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,826
    Actually that may be 75%
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    eek said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Once he is back from flying his whippet, professional northerner @TheScreamingEagles will be shocked to learn that gravity is racist according to his local university.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/24/isaac-newton-latest-historical-figure-swept-decolonisation-drive/

    Good Morning everyone. Not quite as bright this morning, but maybe a little warmer, possibly due to cloud cover.

    There is a site where one can check whether anyone's forebears were officially compensated for the loss of their slaves, and I'm pleased to say none of mine appear on it. Of course given my (real) surname I can't be sure.
    And I've no means of knowing whether any of them 'profited; in other ways...... served on slaving ships etc.
    Everyone in Britain profited from the slave trade. If they didn’t actually trade in them, they still provided the goods traded for slaves in West Africa, and built the ships used for transport, and above all they ate the sugar, smoked the tobacco and wore the cotton that was the upshot of it.

    That does not mean we should suddenly disown everyone involved and pretend it never happened, which - ironically, given their stated aims - is what is actually happening here.
    If they smoked the tobacco, it is unlikely to have benefitted them......
    Given the age at which they died from many other causes until at least the 1920s, the transient pleasure working people got from smoking probably far outweighed the downsides.
    Do people get pleasure from smoking? Or does their body feel bad when they are not getting their next hit?

    The two are not the same, at least in my opinion. My lifetime smoking experience is probably in the hundreds of cigarettes but never really got any pleasure from it, not sure if others do, and if so how they distinguish it from their addiction being fed?
    I’ve been told that there are 2-3 cigarettes a day that are pleasurable, with the rest being just habit and barely noticed
    I guess the problem is that it's the X, Y and Z cigarettes of the day that are pleasurable and not the first 2-3.
    Yes, typically the first in the morning, the first after lunch and sometimes one other
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,309
    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    They expect millions to live in very substandard accommodation , who cannot afford to upgrade it from their ill gotten gains. Why should they expect the public to give them even more largesse than they filch already. Parasites.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,112

    MattW said:

    Boris opponents’ problem:


    The Cameron issue is the only really serious one in play imo. The PPE stuff may bring up something procedural. The flat is fluff.

    Consider that two of the last four French Heads of State have received prison sentences for Corruption:

    2 years for embezzlement whilst Mayor of Paris. (Chirac)
    Who? (Hollande)
    3 years for corruption. (Sarkozy)
    Mons. Macaron.

    And they are trying to convince us that *we* have major problems.
    Who is “they”?
    Good question. Too many to enumerate.

    Perhaps we could start with several members of the Shadow Cab pretending that Hancock runs the Welsh NHS. Plus last week at PMQ.

    Though I've also been watching Euro Twitter during the pandemic, and many there (incl. journos, so not just Twatters, seem obsessed with anything about the UK, whilst passing it off as complaints about the UK's alleged obsession with the EU.

    Also plenty in the UK media.

    For a comparison, read about Chirac's time as Mayor of Paris for 18 years. He avoided prosecution by being President of the Republic, who is immune during the term.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Chirac#Mayor_of_Paris:_1977–1995
    ..satirical newspaper Le Canard enchaîné revealed the astronomical "food expenses" paid by the Parisian municipality (€15 million a year according to the Canard), expenses managed by Roger Romani (who allegedly destroyed all archives of the period 1978–93 during night raids in 1999–2000).

    Personally, I think the ovedone rhetoric it a price worth paying for a less corrupt system.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 3,028
    Just reflecting on the latest Scottish election - the SNP vote constituency vote could be anything between 45% to 51%. Interesting variance emerging between pollsters
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Jonathan said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    TimT said:

    I know that for politics geeks like us, the Cummings stuff is explosive. But is it for Joe Normal?

    No, or not yet. I am trying to remember the course of the Tory sleaze surrounding the Major government. My suspicion is decorating the flat might have more cut-through, if and when we ever get the details, which is probably why we will not get the details.
    Except it’s not his flat. It’s a government flat. I know that’s not a justification but it will put enough people off the scent.

    Separately why are we so cheap with government property? Spending £250k on doing up a flat is not that much for a PM.
    Only a supercilious rich Tory arse could come out with crap like that.
    Yes; even round here one could BUY quite a nice one for that! In a 'desirable' conversion.
    Round here you could buy rather a nice house for that.
    When we refurbished a flat that size (the former servants quarters at the shop that my brother lives in) it cost far more than that for a similar property (4 bedrooms, Kitchen, 2 reception rooms and a bathroom).

    Grade 1 is a pain in the backside - in our case the Georgian Society got involved - greatly reduced the utility of the space and massively increased the costs
    You managed without taxpayer help?
    We don’t work for the state.

    I’m also of the view that the PM is underpaid.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,112
    dixiedean said:

    All caveats, such as Leave Remain, age, etc still don't adequately explain the PM and the Tories resounding success in the Midlands.

    Around where I am (M1J28) there were 2 reasons: Brexit and Corbyn.

    The question was: "We voted to leave the EU as a country. Why haven't we left?"
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,687
    Hodges gives Carrie both barrels this morning. Oh what larks! Pass the popcorn.


    "In December 2019, the people handed Boris an overwhelming majority. But they did not hand it to his girlfriend."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9507629/DAN-HODGES-Britain-votes-Prime-Ministers-not-partners.html
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,569
    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    They expect millions to live in very substandard accommodation , who cannot afford to upgrade it from their ill gotten gains. Why should they expect the public to give them even more largesse than they filch already. Parasites.
    A drop in the ocean compared to the £414m spent on the Scottish Parliament building.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,687
    Johnson's mates are now up and awake:

    https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1386227468336574470
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,777
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/04/24/wipe-non-crime-hate-allegations-says-priti-patel/

    Bloody hell, a Priti Patel policy that I, and most others, will agree with! Unusually liberal from her as well, wtf.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    TimT said:

    I know that for politics geeks like us, the Cummings stuff is explosive. But is it for Joe Normal?

    No, or not yet. I am trying to remember the course of the Tory sleaze surrounding the Major government. My suspicion is decorating the flat might have more cut-through, if and when we ever get the details, which is probably why we will not get the details.
    Except it’s not his flat. It’s a government flat. I know that’s not a justification but it will put enough people off the scent.

    Separately why are we so cheap with government property? Spending £250k on doing up a flat is not that much for a PM.
    Only a supercilious rich Tory arse could come out with crap like that.
    Yes; even round here one could BUY quite a nice one for that! In a 'desirable' conversion.
    Round here you could buy rather a nice house for that.
    When we refurbished a flat that size (the former servants quarters at the shop that my brother lives in) it cost far more than that for a similar property (4 bedrooms, Kitchen, 2 reception rooms and a bathroom).

    Grade 1 is a pain in the backside - in our case the Georgian Society got involved - greatly reduced the utility of the space and massively increased the costs
    Perilously close to self-pastiche here.
    Nothing perilously close about it! My theory is he’s actually a cab driver (furloughed) from Deptford.
    Not any cab driver. An Albanian cab driver.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    A treat for PB'ers with both Truss and Rayner on #Marr
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,032
    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    They expect millions to live in very substandard accommodation , who cannot afford to upgrade it from their ill gotten gains. Why should they expect the public to give them even more largesse than they filch already. Parasites.
    A drop in the ocean compared to the £414m spent on the Scottish Parliament building.
    Or indeed the £12 billion to refurbish the Palace of Westminster.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,633
    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    I disagree that free luxury accommodation is a necessary perk of any public sector job.

    Getting a rent free flat in central London is a hefty privilege in itself. If you don’t like the decor, you can use the savings you make on rent to update it or or you are free to live elsewhere under your own means like the rest of the human race.

    Do we want our political leaders to remain in touch with those they represent or live in Ivory towers?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    They expect millions to live in very substandard accommodation , who cannot afford to upgrade it from their ill gotten gains. Why should they expect the public to give them even more largesse than they filch already. Parasites.
    The asset remains in public ownership. No one is being given anything.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,687
    (((Dan Hodges)))
    @DPJHodges
    ·
    7m
    Replying to
    @ZacGoldsmith
    Given you've just accused me of fabricating stories - a very serious allegation - could you detail which one's aren't true please.

    ((Dan Hodges)))
    @DPJHodges
    ·
    2m
    For those not aware,
    @ZacGoldsmith
    is a Minister, and a friend of Carrie Symonds.

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    TimT said:

    I know that for politics geeks like us, the Cummings stuff is explosive. But is it for Joe Normal?

    No, or not yet. I am trying to remember the course of the Tory sleaze surrounding the Major government. My suspicion is decorating the flat might have more cut-through, if and when we ever get the details, which is probably why we will not get the details.
    Except it’s not his flat. It’s a government flat. I know that’s not a justification but it will put enough people off the scent.

    Separately why are we so cheap with government property? Spending £250k on doing up a flat is not that much for a PM.
    Only a supercilious rich Tory arse could come out with crap like that.
    Yes; even round here one could BUY quite a nice one for that! In a 'desirable' conversion.
    Round here you could buy rather a nice house for that.
    When we refurbished a flat that size (the former servants quarters at the shop that my brother lives in) it cost far more than that for a similar property (4 bedrooms, Kitchen, 2 reception rooms and a bathroom).

    Grade 1 is a pain in the backside - in our case the Georgian Society got involved - greatly reduced the utility of the space and massively increased the costs
    You managed without taxpayer help?
    We don’t work for the state.

    I’m also of the view that the PM is underpaid.
    I don't disagree.

    As Major, Blair, Cameron and May have all proven, getting by on "poverty wages" tends to be a temporary inconvenience, quickly and handsomely rectified once out of office.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    Liz "Surgical" Truss looks absolutely overjoyed to be answering questions about Johnson's interior decoration arrangements on Sky.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859

    Hodges gives Carrie both barrels this morning. Oh what larks! Pass the popcorn.


    "In December 2019, the people handed Boris an overwhelming majority. But they did not hand it to his girlfriend."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9507629/DAN-HODGES-Britain-votes-Prime-Ministers-not-partners.html

    It's an open secret within Westminster how Ms Symonds's influence extends over government. As another No 10 insider told me: 'It's not that you get a phone call direct from her demanding something. What happens is Boris will suddenly turn up one morning and say, 'Er, what are we doing about badgers?' It won't be something he has any interest in. So we all know it comes from Carrie.'

    Ministers attempt to appease her and her whims, because they know it's the only way to keep their careers on track. Journalists appease her for fear of being ostracised by the No 10 communications team she helped build. Or because they benefit personally from her briefings. Or because they fear the cabal of sycophants she surrounds herself with will turn on them, and issue one of their ritualistic denunciations of 'sexism'.

    But worst of all is the way the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom continues to appease her.

    Team Carrie needs to disband. The 'friends' need to go. The unofficial press operation needs to go. The lobbying on policy, appointments and strategy needs to stop. And the next roll of wallpaper needs to be paid for out of her own pocket, not from some Tory fat cat. Because if these things don't happen, then it won't be Ms Symonds who ultimately pays the price. The nation will.

    Back in 2019, I said the Prime Minister had to choose between his team and Team Carrie. Today the choice is even starker. What does Boris care about most? His fiancee? Or his country?
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 3,242
    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    All caveats, such as Leave Remain, age, etc still don't adequately explain the PM and the Tories resounding success in the Midlands.

    When? In 2019 the key was probably under-the-radar social media campaigning about how Corbyn wanted to disband the armed forces and had applauded the IRA's bombing campaigns.
    I mean longer term than one campaign. It is a region that has dramatically swung blue over several elections. Much faster than the rest of the nation.
    And the PM polls well there too.
    I don't see why this should necessarily be so.
    Housing.

    New builds in the North and Midlands have been able to be bought by people, allowing them to own their own homes, meaning they're far more likely to be Tory.

    Idiotic councils down South in comparison think pampering NIMBYs is the solution, meaning house prices rise, meaning people can't afford homes, meaning the region is relatively swinging Labour.
    NIMBY's vote though. Often Tory!
    The Midlands has always been a cesspit of reactionary opinion. Imperial preference and all that.

    No wonder Shakespeare got the hell out as soon as he was able.
    Gee, thanks.

    As I’m a Welshman in the Midlands I must be doubly damned.
    Pun your way out of that one.
    It would be as painful as having root canol surgery.

    (That one is for Welsh speakers!)
    Root calon surgery would be worse.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,112
    edited April 2021

    Charles said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    TimT said:

    I know that for politics geeks like us, the Cummings stuff is explosive. But is it for Joe Normal?

    No, or not yet. I am trying to remember the course of the Tory sleaze surrounding the Major government. My suspicion is decorating the flat might have more cut-through, if and when we ever get the details, which is probably why we will not get the details.
    Except it’s not his flat. It’s a government flat. I know that’s not a justification but it will put enough people off the scent.

    Separately why are we so cheap with government property? Spending £250k on doing up a flat is not that much for a PM.
    Only a supercilious rich Tory arse could come out with crap like that.
    Top of the morning to you as well Malcolm

    My point is that the PM does a high stress job. It is not unreasonable to expect the state to provide reasonable accommodation where they can relax. Penny pinching doesn’t really achieve much.
    This is a party politician broadcast for the National Chumocrats.

    There’s ALREADY a 30k per annum decoration budget, and Cameron did a major overhaul less than 10 years ago.
    It covers more than decoration; it is everything internal afaics. Gordon Brown had the right approach by sticking within the 30k each year, but using nearly all of it.

    Quite interesting that the 30k per annum budget does not seem to have gone up in *cash* terms since at least 2007.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13580108

    Labour MP Tom Watson said the £30,000 grant was a "hidden bonus for the PM" for a flat he lives in rent-free.

    Downing Street said any cost of renovations above the £30,000 budget was paid for by the Camerons themselves.

    Earlier this week the White House released a picture of Samantha Cameron and Michelle Obama in the recently renovated flat above Number 11 Downing Street, where the PM and his family live.

    The picture showed, for the first time, the newly installed kitchen.

    Labour MP Mr Watson told the BBC: "Good Prime Ministers lead by example. David Cameron says the public sector should tighten belts and come clean where taxpayers' money is spent. Yet when it comes to the Downing Street flat, we see a refusal to answer even basic questions on costs. He has now been forced to admit it cost at least £30,000 to refurbish his grace and favour home - more than a policeman's salary. Are we really all in this together?"

    Downing Street sources said former Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown spent between £28,150 and £29,389 of the annual budget for refurbishing the PM's residence during his time in office.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,309
    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    They expect millions to live in very substandard accommodation , who cannot afford to upgrade it from their ill gotten gains. Why should they expect the public to give them even more largesse than they filch already. Parasites.
    A drop in the ocean compared to the £414m spent on the Scottish Parliament building.
    Away you halfwit, I would be here all day stating the waste on buildings in London that we paid for and England did not pay for Holyrood, it came out of our pockets and yet we have paid a share for all the buildings in London , Crossrail, Westminster , the planned billions on parliament and on and on and on. Go get a bucket of sand outdoors and stick your head in it.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Jonathan said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    I disagree that free luxury accommodation is a necessary perk of any public sector job.

    Getting a rent free flat in central London is a hefty privilege in itself. If you don’t like the decor, you can use the savings you make on rent to update it or or you are free to live elsewhere under your own means like the rest of the human race.

    Do we want our political leaders to remain in touch with those they represent or live in Ivory towers?
    I suspect the security costs of the PM living elsewhere would outweigh the savings.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,309
    Fishing said:

    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    They expect millions to live in very substandard accommodation , who cannot afford to upgrade it from their ill gotten gains. Why should they expect the public to give them even more largesse than they filch already. Parasites.
    A drop in the ocean compared to the £414m spent on the Scottish Parliament building.
    Or indeed the £12 billion to refurbish the Palace of Westminster.
    The addled halfwit does not count such things, talks through his union jack underpants.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,297
    edited April 2021
    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Boris opponents’ problem:


    The Cameron issue is the only really serious one in play imo. The PPE stuff may bring up something procedural. The flat is fluff.

    Consider that two of the last four French Heads of State have received prison sentences for Corruption:

    2 years for embezzlement whilst Mayor of Paris. (Chirac)
    Who? (Hollande)
    3 years for corruption. (Sarkozy)
    Mons. Macaron.

    And they are trying to convince us that *we* have major problems.
    Who is “they”?
    Good question. Too many to enumerate.

    Perhaps we could start with several members of the Shadow Cab pretending that Hancock runs the Welsh NHS. Plus last week at PMQ.

    Though I've also been watching Euro Twitter during the pandemic, and many there (incl. journos, so not just Twatters, seem obsessed with anything about the UK, whilst passing it off as complaints about the UK's alleged obsession with the EU.

    Also plenty in the UK media.

    For a comparison, read about Chirac's time as Mayor of Paris for 18 years. He avoided prosecution by being President of the Republic, who is immune during the term.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Chirac#Mayor_of_Paris:_1977–1995
    ..satirical newspaper Le Canard enchaîné revealed the astronomical "food expenses" paid by the Parisian municipality (€15 million a year according to the Canard), expenses managed by Roger Romani (who allegedly destroyed all archives of the period 1978–93 during night raids in 1999–2000).

    Personally, I think the ovedone rhetoric it a price worth paying for a less corrupt system.
    Mud is thrown at Hancock because he failed to declare an interest in a government sub-contractor.

    A relatively minor misdemeanour, but notable in the context of the Ministry of Kleptocratic Procurement that he runs.

    There has been a noticeable decline in public standards under the Johnson administration.

    Nobody wants us to be France, or Italy, or Nigeria for that matter - but we can do better than we are.

    See https://ukandeu.ac.uk/how-corrupt-is-britains-chumocracy/ for a good primer.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,504
    malcolmg said:

    Once he is back from flying his whippet, professional northerner @TheScreamingEagles will be shocked to learn that gravity is racist according to his local university.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/24/isaac-newton-latest-historical-figure-swept-decolonisation-drive/

    Good Morning everyone. Not quite as bright this morning, but maybe a little warmer, possibly due to cloud cover.

    There is a site where one can check whether anyone's forebears were officially compensated for the loss of their slaves, and I'm pleased to say none of mine appear on it. Of course given my (real) surname I can't be sure.
    And I've no means of knowing whether any of them 'profited; in other ways...... served on slaving ships etc.
    Morning OKC, sunshine yet again here, unbelievable. has to have been one of best and driest April's ever here.
    Although for me in rural Lincolnshire one of the coldest I have ever known. I don't remember an April where we have consistently had ground frosts every morning for almost the whole month. I am keeping a record because of moth trapping and bat recording and we have had two nights so far where the temperature was above 2° overnight.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,569
    Charles said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    They expect millions to live in very substandard accommodation , who cannot afford to upgrade it from their ill gotten gains. Why should they expect the public to give them even more largesse than they filch already. Parasites.
    The asset remains in public ownership. No one is being given anything.
    A sensible compromise might be for government buildings to be decorated to a schedule by the estate managers, as opposed to allowing the incumbent occupant free rein over the design and fit out.

    Most of the incumbents and their families won’t have much experience in Grade I refurbs, and don’t see where the money actually goes.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,112
    edited April 2021
    MaxPB said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/04/24/wipe-non-crime-hate-allegations-says-priti-patel/

    Bloody hell, a Priti Patel policy that I, and most others, will agree with! Unusually liberal from her as well, wtf.

    Potential for a touch of sanity in the Nottinghamshire Constabulary. Good.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,361
    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    They expect millions to live in very substandard accommodation , who cannot afford to upgrade it from their ill gotten gains. Why should they expect the public to give them even more largesse than they filch already. Parasites.
    A drop in the ocean compared to the £414m spent on the Scottish Parliament building.
    Away you halfwit, I would be here all day stating the waste on buildings in London that we paid for and England did not pay for Holyrood, it came out of our pockets and yet we have paid a share for all the buildings in London , Crossrail, Westminster , the planned billions on parliament and on and on and on. Go get a bucket of sand outdoors and stick your head in it.

    Kinder politics nationalist style.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,350

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    All caveats, such as Leave Remain, age, etc still don't adequately explain the PM and the Tories resounding success in the Midlands.

    When? In 2019 the key was probably under-the-radar social media campaigning about how Corbyn wanted to disband the armed forces and had applauded the IRA's bombing campaigns.
    I mean longer term than one campaign. It is a region that has dramatically swung blue over several elections. Much faster than the rest of the nation.
    And the PM polls well there too.
    I don't see why this should necessarily be so.
    Housing.

    New builds in the North and Midlands have been able to be bought by people, allowing them to own their own homes, meaning they're far more likely to be Tory.

    Idiotic councils down South in comparison think pampering NIMBYs is the solution, meaning house prices rise, meaning people can't afford homes, meaning the region is relatively swinging Labour.
    NIMBY's vote though. Often Tory!
    The Midlands has always been a cesspit of reactionary opinion. Imperial preference and all that.

    No wonder Shakespeare got the hell out as soon as he was able.
    Gee, thanks.

    As I’m a Welshman in the Midlands I must be doubly damned.
    Pun your way out of that one.
    It would be as painful as having root canol surgery.

    (That one is for Welsh speakers!)
    Root calon surgery would be worse.
    Oh, have a heart.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    TimT said:

    I know that for politics geeks like us, the Cummings stuff is explosive. But is it for Joe Normal?

    No, or not yet. I am trying to remember the course of the Tory sleaze surrounding the Major government. My suspicion is decorating the flat might have more cut-through, if and when we ever get the details, which is probably why we will not get the details.
    Except it’s not his flat. It’s a government flat. I know that’s not a justification but it will put enough people off the scent.

    Separately why are we so cheap with government property? Spending £250k on doing up a flat is not that much for a PM.
    Only a supercilious rich Tory arse could come out with crap like that.
    Yes; even round here one could BUY quite a nice one for that! In a 'desirable' conversion.
    Round here you could buy rather a nice house for that.
    When we refurbished a flat that size (the former servants quarters at the shop that my brother lives in) it cost far more than that for a similar property (4 bedrooms, Kitchen, 2 reception rooms and a bathroom).

    Grade 1 is a pain in the backside - in our case the Georgian Society got involved - greatly reduced the utility of the space and massively increased the costs
    You managed without taxpayer help?
    We don’t work for the state.

    I’m also of the view that the PM is underpaid.
    I don't disagree.

    As Major, Blair, Cameron and May have all proven, getting by on "poverty wages" tends to be a temporary inconvenience, quickly and handsomely rectified once out of office.
    Indeed. I would far prefer that we pay them a decent salary, a handsome pension and then heavily restrict what roles they can take on once they leave office. It is very unseemly that they hawk their contacts. At least Major was discreet about it and operated within a regulated environment (Carlyle) rather than flogging himself to any passive g dictator or flashy con-man.

    May and Brown may have been terrible PMs but they have behaved with decorum since
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,297
    edited April 2021
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    TimT said:

    I know that for politics geeks like us, the Cummings stuff is explosive. But is it for Joe Normal?

    No, or not yet. I am trying to remember the course of the Tory sleaze surrounding the Major government. My suspicion is decorating the flat might have more cut-through, if and when we ever get the details, which is probably why we will not get the details.
    Except it’s not his flat. It’s a government flat. I know that’s not a justification but it will put enough people off the scent.

    Separately why are we so cheap with government property? Spending £250k on doing up a flat is not that much for a PM.
    Only a supercilious rich Tory arse could come out with crap like that.
    Yes; even round here one could BUY quite a nice one for that! In a 'desirable' conversion.
    Round here you could buy rather a nice house for that.
    When we refurbished a flat that size (the former servants quarters at the shop that my brother lives in) it cost far more than that for a similar property (4 bedrooms, Kitchen, 2 reception rooms and a bathroom).

    Grade 1 is a pain in the backside - in our case the Georgian Society got involved - greatly reduced the utility of the space and massively increased the costs
    Perilously close to self-pastiche here.
    Nothing perilously close about it! My theory is he’s actually a cab driver (furloughed) from Deptford.
    Not any cab driver. An Albanian cab driver.
    You have very good English, sir.

    And an uncommon knowledge of the Diaries of James Lees-Milne and the Book of Common Prayer.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    An interesting Guardian long read about Deliveroo and restaurant deliveries:

    https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/apr/25/deliveroo-tech-delivery-restaurant-service-dark-kitchens
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,112
    edited April 2021
    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    They expect millions to live in very substandard accommodation , who cannot afford to upgrade it from their ill gotten gains. Why should they expect the public to give them even more largesse than they filch already. Parasites.
    The asset remains in public ownership. No one is being given anything.
    A sensible compromise might be for government buildings to be decorated to a schedule by the estate managers, as opposed to allowing the incumbent occupant free rein over the design and fit out.

    Most of the incumbents and their families won’t have much experience in Grade I refurbs, and don’t see where the money actually goes.
    I think that the existing arrangement is fine if no one behaves like an arse, which Boris has done. He walked into a lamp post he could have avoided.

    But it's still fluff. Did I hear Mr Starmer warbling on about 'abuse of party funds', which had been given to pay for it? Or was that someone else?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,297
    MaxPB said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/04/24/wipe-non-crime-hate-allegations-says-priti-patel/

    Bloody hell, a Priti Patel policy that I, and most others, will agree with! Unusually liberal from her as well, wtf.

    Meanwhile, the “sainted” Ardern is extending hate speech maximum penalties to 3 years imprisonment.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,297
    Charles said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    They expect millions to live in very substandard accommodation , who cannot afford to upgrade it from their ill gotten gains. Why should they expect the public to give them even more largesse than they filch already. Parasites.
    The asset remains in public ownership. No one is being given anything.
    Hahahahaahah
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,207

    (((Dan Hodges)))
    @DPJHodges
    ·
    7m
    Replying to
    @ZacGoldsmith
    Given you've just accused me of fabricating stories - a very serious allegation - could you detail which one's aren't true please.

    ((Dan Hodges)))
    @DPJHodges
    ·
    2m
    For those not aware,
    @ZacGoldsmith
    is a Minister, and a friend of Carrie Symonds.

    Few things say "this isn't a story" less well than a minister weighing in on Twitter.

    It's as if Zac isn't very good at electoral politics.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    They expect millions to live in very substandard accommodation , who cannot afford to upgrade it from their ill gotten gains. Why should they expect the public to give them even more largesse than they filch already. Parasites.
    The asset remains in public ownership. No one is being given anything.
    A sensible compromise might be for government buildings to be decorated to a schedule by the estate managers, as opposed to allowing the incumbent occupant free rein over the design and fit out.

    Most of the incumbents and their families won’t have much experience in Grade I refurbs, and don’t see where the money actually goes.
    Possibly, although design should be left to the incumbent.

    The issue will be - I suspect - that Carrie went for Farrer & Ball paint rather than doing what normal people doing and going to Homebase to colour match a sample pot
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    TimT said:

    I know that for politics geeks like us, the Cummings stuff is explosive. But is it for Joe Normal?

    No, or not yet. I am trying to remember the course of the Tory sleaze surrounding the Major government. My suspicion is decorating the flat might have more cut-through, if and when we ever get the details, which is probably why we will not get the details.
    Except it’s not his flat. It’s a government flat. I know that’s not a justification but it will put enough people off the scent.

    Separately why are we so cheap with government property? Spending £250k on doing up a flat is not that much for a PM.
    Only a supercilious rich Tory arse could come out with crap like that.
    Yes; even round here one could BUY quite a nice one for that! In a 'desirable' conversion.
    Round here you could buy rather a nice house for that.
    When we refurbished a flat that size (the former servants quarters at the shop that my brother lives in) it cost far more than that for a similar property (4 bedrooms, Kitchen, 2 reception rooms and a bathroom).

    Grade 1 is a pain in the backside - in our case the Georgian Society got involved - greatly reduced the utility of the space and massively increased the costs
    Perilously close to self-pastiche here.
    Nothing perilously close about it! My theory is he’s actually a cab driver (furloughed) from Deptford.
    Not any cab driver. An Albanian cab driver.
    You have very good English, sir.

    And an uncommon knowledge of the Diaries of James Lees-Milne and the Book of Common Prayer.
    Doesn’t everyone?
  • https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/1386233049944313860

    Ah so she went to the Jeremy Corbyn school of answering questions
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,615
    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    Once he is back from flying his whippet, professional northerner @TheScreamingEagles will be shocked to learn that gravity is racist according to his local university.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/24/isaac-newton-latest-historical-figure-swept-decolonisation-drive/

    Good Morning everyone. Not quite as bright this morning, but maybe a little warmer, possibly due to cloud cover.

    There is a site where one can check whether anyone's forebears were officially compensated for the loss of their slaves, and I'm pleased to say none of mine appear on it. Of course given my (real) surname I can't be sure.
    And I've no means of knowing whether any of them 'profited; in other ways...... served on slaving ships etc.
    Everyone in Britain profited from the slave trade. If they didn’t actually trade in them, they still provided the goods traded for slaves in West Africa, and built the ships used for transport, and above all they ate the sugar, smoked the tobacco and wore the cotton that was the upshot of it.

    That does not mean we should suddenly disown everyone involved and pretend it never happened, which - ironically, given their stated aims - is what is actually happening here.
    Indeed; and my wife's ancestors were working in the cotton mills on Lancashire in the 1840's. Whiat they did in the "Cotton Famine' I don't know, and probably never will..
    My father and his brother and sister all worked in the Lancashire cotton mills
    And, if they were working prior to about 1860 worked with cotton picked by slaves. As ydoethur notes, Lancashire's prosperity, so far as it existed for those low down in 'the heap' was largely built on 'slave products'.

    On a wider point I was struck, while musing the other day, what diverse connections my family has; from Cambodia via Sweden and Switzerland to Ireland. And that's without taking into account those who have emigrated.
    Exactly the luxuries they got from slavery , working 365 years a day for about 14 hours, a hovel and not enough food to feed a dog. They must have been rubbing their hands and thinking slavery was wonderful. I think I would have preferred picking the cotton, they were not the only slaves.
    Both slaves and wage slaves were abused by their masters, who accumulated vast wealth from the exploitation, but only one set of people were owned, whipped, raped and families sold.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,309
    Charles said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    They expect millions to live in very substandard accommodation , who cannot afford to upgrade it from their ill gotten gains. Why should they expect the public to give them even more largesse than they filch already. Parasites.
    The asset remains in public ownership. No one is being given anything.
    £200K of public money is being squandered , allowance is £30K. It is out and out stealing, and asking donor's to donate illegally as well.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,794
    IanB2 said:
    These internet businesses are extremely parasitical. When booking hotels I always go direct because I know that my money is then being used to maintain the service I want to use rather than one I don't care about. Sometimes you will also get a better deal that way although it is normally a condition of these sites that you can't undercut them.

    With restaurants and carry outs order direct where you can. Weirdly, some businesses have given up and no longer offer that option. The most bizarre one I had was with Nandos in Dundee who had Deliveroo "delivering" carryouts from their front door to their car park where we were sitting during the first lockdown. 35% of the sale for walking over the carpark. Bizarre.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    Charles said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    They expect millions to live in very substandard accommodation , who cannot afford to upgrade it from their ill gotten gains. Why should they expect the public to give them even more largesse than they filch already. Parasites.
    The asset remains in public ownership. No one is being given anything.
    It's not a lasting asset, though, is it?

    Were it an extension, you could argue that the ongoing value of the state's property has increased.

    But we are talking wallpaper and paint and fixtures and fittings - stuff that the next PM is sure to spend his or her allowance papering over.

    So it's a time-limited, temporary, benefit, enjoyed almost entirely by the current incumbent.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Foxy said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    Once he is back from flying his whippet, professional northerner @TheScreamingEagles will be shocked to learn that gravity is racist according to his local university.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/24/isaac-newton-latest-historical-figure-swept-decolonisation-drive/

    Good Morning everyone. Not quite as bright this morning, but maybe a little warmer, possibly due to cloud cover.

    There is a site where one can check whether anyone's forebears were officially compensated for the loss of their slaves, and I'm pleased to say none of mine appear on it. Of course given my (real) surname I can't be sure.
    And I've no means of knowing whether any of them 'profited; in other ways...... served on slaving ships etc.
    Everyone in Britain profited from the slave trade. If they didn’t actually trade in them, they still provided the goods traded for slaves in West Africa, and built the ships used for transport, and above all they ate the sugar, smoked the tobacco and wore the cotton that was the upshot of it.

    That does not mean we should suddenly disown everyone involved and pretend it never happened, which - ironically, given their stated aims - is what is actually happening here.
    Indeed; and my wife's ancestors were working in the cotton mills on Lancashire in the 1840's. Whiat they did in the "Cotton Famine' I don't know, and probably never will..
    My father and his brother and sister all worked in the Lancashire cotton mills
    And, if they were working prior to about 1860 worked with cotton picked by slaves. As ydoethur notes, Lancashire's prosperity, so far as it existed for those low down in 'the heap' was largely built on 'slave products'.

    On a wider point I was struck, while musing the other day, what diverse connections my family has; from Cambodia via Sweden and Switzerland to Ireland. And that's without taking into account those who have emigrated.
    Exactly the luxuries they got from slavery , working 365 years a day for about 14 hours, a hovel and not enough food to feed a dog. They must have been rubbing their hands and thinking slavery was wonderful. I think I would have preferred picking the cotton, they were not the only slaves.
    Both slaves and wage slaves were abused by their masters, who accumulated vast wealth from the exploitation, but only one set of people were owned, whipped, raped and families sold.
    I’ve been reading Hague’s bio of Wilberforce (highly recommended).

    I hadn’t realised that Virginian slave owners were breeding slaves for sale in Charleston and New Orleans.

    I mean, slave-owning is bad enough, but breeding? Eeesh.
  • Good Morning

    Well, what a night that was

    My grandson (12) was overcome early yesterday evening with extreme pain in his left testicle and was admitted to hospital as a medical emergency. In the early hours he underwent an operation, and we were so relieved that the surgeon confirmed post the operation it was not testicular torsion, but orchitis treatable with antibiotics, but of course he will have to be careful over the next few weeks and refrain from sport. We were so grateful for our What’s app which kept us all in touch throughout the night and hoping both his mother and him will be home later today. And to add to medical matters his father is to have complete knee replacement surgery on Tuesday.

    On politics I am not sure that this Cummings – Boris spat will harm Boris, not least because Cummings in so discredited with the public and Boris remains popular if the polls are to be believed. Indeed, there is a remarkable similarity between Nicola v Salmond and Boris v Cummings, in as much as it is two popular leaders v discredited opponents, and of course we have less than two weeks to see the outcome as the results come from the largest nationwide poll since the GE.

    And on Scotland, colleagues on here may be surprised but I really want to see Anas Sarwar do well and revive labour in Scotland and I think it is possible to see a modest bounce for labour. The union is of immense importance to me and my Scots family and anything that reduces SNP support is to be welcomed and of course SNP voters are not going to migrate to the SCons. Indeed, just as in Wales, the Scon have a poor leader in Douglas Ross and with Boris in Westminster the Scons are likely to suffer lost seats, though in Wales they may improve but labour in Wales will win probably in coalition with Plaid.

    It was interesting in last night’s Scots poll that ‘no’ continued to lead 51/49 but also only 18% of Scots put independence as an important issue. The Scots are very ‘cannie’ and I think they want the SNP to govern, labour to improve, and Nicola to get on with the day job and put independence on the back burner. And of course, it may yet be that support for independence falls further due to the complex nature that Brexit has caused and ongoing issues on who is responsible for future Scots pensions.
    I would conclude, and I believe it was hinted at yesterday, that labour in Scotland and Wales are taking a strong line in favour of the union and that is all good to me.

    There I have said it.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,569
    Taz said:

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    They expect millions to live in very substandard accommodation , who cannot afford to upgrade it from their ill gotten gains. Why should they expect the public to give them even more largesse than they filch already. Parasites.
    A drop in the ocean compared to the £414m spent on the Scottish Parliament building.
    Away you halfwit, I would be here all day stating the waste on buildings in London that we paid for and England did not pay for Holyrood, it came out of our pockets and yet we have paid a share for all the buildings in London , Crossrail, Westminster , the planned billions on parliament and on and on and on. Go get a bucket of sand outdoors and stick your head in it.

    Kinder politics nationalist style.
    Most disappointed not to have got a ‘turnip’. ;)
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,846
    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    They expect millions to live in very substandard accommodation , who cannot afford to upgrade it from their ill gotten gains. Why should they expect the public to give them even more largesse than they filch already. Parasites.
    The asset remains in public ownership. No one is being given anything.
    A sensible compromise might be for government buildings to be decorated to a schedule by the estate managers, as opposed to allowing the incumbent occupant free rein over the design and fit out.

    Most of the incumbents and their families won’t have much experience in Grade I refurbs, and don’t see where the money actually goes.
    Possibly, although design should be left to the incumbent.

    The issue will be - I suspect - that Carrie went for Farrer & Ball paint rather than doing what normal people doing and going to Homebase to colour match a sample pot
    This short Sun video with David Cameron shows the shiny new kitchen and a bit of the flat after SamCam did up Number 10.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9hqE5HVVQk
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    They expect millions to live in very substandard accommodation , who cannot afford to upgrade it from their ill gotten gains. Why should they expect the public to give them even more largesse than they filch already. Parasites.
    The asset remains in public ownership. No one is being given anything.
    £200K of public money is being squandered , allowance is £30K. It is out and out stealing, and asking donor's to donate illegally as well.
    Just to be clear, getting donors to pay is wrong. And if Boris spent more than the allowance he should pay the excess himself (no backdating)

    But I think the allowance is too low.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    edited April 2021
    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    In the British system the crown is where we focus palaces, posh wallpaper, gold and glitz, the pm is not a president.

    The pms job is to work away from all the tempting baubles that separate them from us. It is one of our systems key strengths.

    The bottom line is the pm is paid enough to wallpaper a flat and should get on the it like the rest of us.

    FWIW when my grandmother moved into admiralty arch it was absolutely hideous. The allowance was utter ridiculous. Fortunately she was able and rolling to refurbish it out of her own pocket but it is pathetic that we expect senior state executives to live in substandard accommodation
    They expect millions to live in very substandard accommodation , who cannot afford to upgrade it from their ill gotten gains. Why should they expect the public to give them even more largesse than they filch already. Parasites.
    The asset remains in public ownership. No one is being given anything.
    A sensible compromise might be for government buildings to be decorated to a schedule by the estate managers, as opposed to allowing the incumbent occupant free rein over the design and fit out.

    Most of the incumbents and their families won’t have much experience in Grade I refurbs, and don’t see where the money actually goes.
    Possibly, although design should be left to the incumbent.

    The issue will be - I suspect - that Carrie went for Farrer & Ball paint rather than doing what normal people doing and going to Homebase to colour match a sample pot
    I bet a chunk of it went on someone to design and project manage and buy the stuff, their being too busy to do so themselves.

    Farrow & Ball, to give it the correct name, has an attractive chalky matt appearance, if you dont mind having to paint four coats to get a decent finish. And if you so much as brush against it thereafter, you'll have a mark to repair or a patch of paint might simply drop off the wall.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,615
    edited April 2021
    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:
    These internet businesses are extremely parasitical. When booking hotels I always go direct because I know that my money is then being used to maintain the service I want to use rather than one I don't care about. Sometimes you will also get a better deal that way although it is normally a condition of these sites that you can't undercut them.

    With restaurants and carry outs order direct where you can. Weirdly, some businesses have given up and no longer offer that option. The most bizarre one I had was with Nandos in Dundee who had Deliveroo "delivering" carryouts from their front door to their car park where we were sitting during the first lockdown. 35% of the sale for walking over the carpark. Bizarre.
    One of my favourite Korean restaurants only has a takeout window, and you have to order via deliveroo. You cannot ask the guy in the window to take an order, but have to do it via the app, and it will often make you wait 45 min. It used to be less than 5 minutes when walking in. They have put up their prices too to cover the commission.

    I haven't had anything from them since the first lockdown. It seems a crazy way to go out of business
  • A smart opposition - Keir / Rishi etc - will continue to drip feed Boris sleaze stories over the next month. Keep the smoke blowing from the unseen fire so that even the strongest Boris fanbois have to admit there is a fire.

    And then, Cummings at the Committee. He is going to turn up and do one of him uber-arrogant but calm and measured demolition jobs. And when someone asks how we can trust his word after Barnard Castle, he simply produces the evidence.

    The hacks are already talking about how he walked up and down Whitehall in his final weeks with the medical evidence that the PM was ignoring - he will still have all of that and a whole lot more.

    Its easy to deflect allegations - Boris gives tax breaks to party donors, Boris gets patrons to pay his £250k decorating bill, Boris hands out £107m contracts for PPE to friends with no experience of PPE - your average man in the pub garden does all of that, he's just one of the lads isn't he?

    But when its deaths. Tens of thousands of deaths. That wouldn't have died had Liar listened to the scientists. That will provoke a blizzard of Daily Heil stories where grieving people vent their anger. And then the whole house on the sand implodes. All the stuff that happened and was dismissed as unpatriotic - the government saying they follow the science, then the government saying the science is only part of the process and ministers make the decisions, then the government following the science again - it will all be hurled against him to bury him.

    And at the end? A new Tory PM who will ride a popularity wave as the UK moves into recovery. Poor Keir - he won't get a look in.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    IanB2 said:

    Hodges gives Carrie both barrels this morning. Oh what larks! Pass the popcorn.


    "In December 2019, the people handed Boris an overwhelming majority. But they did not hand it to his girlfriend."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9507629/DAN-HODGES-Britain-votes-Prime-Ministers-not-partners.html

    It's an open secret within Westminster how Ms Symonds's influence extends over government. As another No 10 insider told me: 'It's not that you get a phone call direct from her demanding something. What happens is Boris will suddenly turn up one morning and say, 'Er, what are we doing about badgers?' It won't be something he has any interest in. So we all know it comes from Carrie.'

    Ministers attempt to appease her and her whims, because they know it's the only way to keep their careers on track. Journalists appease her for fear of being ostracised by the No 10 communications team she helped build. Or because they benefit personally from her briefings. Or because they fear the cabal of sycophants she surrounds herself with will turn on them, and issue one of their ritualistic denunciations of 'sexism'.

    But worst of all is the way the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom continues to appease her.

    Team Carrie needs to disband. The 'friends' need to go. The unofficial press operation needs to go. The lobbying on policy, appointments and strategy needs to stop. And the next roll of wallpaper needs to be paid for out of her own pocket, not from some Tory fat cat. Because if these things don't happen, then it won't be Ms Symonds who ultimately pays the price. The nation will.

    Back in 2019, I said the Prime Minister had to choose between his team and Team Carrie. Today the choice is even starker. What does Boris care about most? His fiancee? Or his country?
    What absolute misogynistic bullshit.

    So is Boris not supposed to speak to his fiancée or take an interest in issues that interest her? Should women be seen but not heard.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,112
    I think someone was trying to remember the cause of "Major Sleaze".

    IIRC Major's 'sleaze' was mainly about hypocrisy not corruption: Back to Basics. Which slogan was nt intended to be about sex, but the MPs and the Tabloids .. er .. cocked it up.

    There were cases - Jonathan Aitken making money from Saudi contacts, and accepting 2 nights at a Paris Hotel from Mr Al Fayed, and then escalating press reporting into a libel action where he committed perjury. And was jailed for committing the perjury aiui.

    (Aside: I hadn't noticed that JA has now been Ordained.)


  • A smart opposition - Keir / Rishi etc - will continue to drip feed Boris sleaze stories over the next month. Keep the smoke blowing from the unseen fire so that even the strongest Boris fanbois have to admit there is a fire.

    And then, Cummings at the Committee. He is going to turn up and do one of him uber-arrogant but calm and measured demolition jobs. And when someone asks how we can trust his word after Barnard Castle, he simply produces the evidence.

    The hacks are already talking about how he walked up and down Whitehall in his final weeks with the medical evidence that the PM was ignoring - he will still have all of that and a whole lot more.

    Its easy to deflect allegations - Boris gives tax breaks to party donors, Boris gets patrons to pay his £250k decorating bill, Boris hands out £107m contracts for PPE to friends with no experience of PPE - your average man in the pub garden does all of that, he's just one of the lads isn't he?

    But when its deaths. Tens of thousands of deaths. That wouldn't have died had Liar listened to the scientists. That will provoke a blizzard of Daily Heil stories where grieving people vent their anger. And then the whole house on the sand implodes. All the stuff that happened and was dismissed as unpatriotic - the government saying they follow the science, then the government saying the science is only part of the process and ministers make the decisions, then the government following the science again - it will all be hurled against him to bury him.

    And at the end? A new Tory PM who will ride a popularity wave as the UK moves into recovery. Poor Keir - he won't get a look in.

    I don't think any Tory leader after Johnson will be as popular as him - and the idea it's going to be plain sailing seems far fetched.

    Starmer will get a look in.
  • A smart opposition - Keir / Rishi etc - will continue to drip feed Boris sleaze stories over the next month. Keep the smoke blowing from the unseen fire so that even the strongest Boris fanbois have to admit there is a fire.

    And then, Cummings at the Committee. He is going to turn up and do one of him uber-arrogant but calm and measured demolition jobs. And when someone asks how we can trust his word after Barnard Castle, he simply produces the evidence.

    The hacks are already talking about how he walked up and down Whitehall in his final weeks with the medical evidence that the PM was ignoring - he will still have all of that and a whole lot more.

    Its easy to deflect allegations - Boris gives tax breaks to party donors, Boris gets patrons to pay his £250k decorating bill, Boris hands out £107m contracts for PPE to friends with no experience of PPE - your average man in the pub garden does all of that, he's just one of the lads isn't he?

    But when its deaths. Tens of thousands of deaths. That wouldn't have died had Liar listened to the scientists. That will provoke a blizzard of Daily Heil stories where grieving people vent their anger. And then the whole house on the sand implodes. All the stuff that happened and was dismissed as unpatriotic - the government saying they follow the science, then the government saying the science is only part of the process and ministers make the decisions, then the government following the science again - it will all be hurled against him to bury him.

    And at the end? A new Tory PM who will ride a popularity wave as the UK moves into recovery. Poor Keir - he won't get a look in.

    I ask this rather politely but have you been on that wonderful Scots whisky produced nearby
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,775
    Mr. Thompson, she isn't elected, she isn't a minister, she isn't a politician.

    She shouldn't have the degree of influence over government policy that's asserted.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    edited April 2021
    MattW said:

    I think someone was trying to remember the cause of "Major Sleaze".

    IIRC Major's 'sleaze' was mainly about hypocrisy not corruption: Back to Basics. Which slogan was nt intended to be about sex, but the MPs and the Tabloids .. er .. cocked it up.

    There were cases - Jonathan Aitken making money from Saudi contacts, and accepting 2 nights at a Paris Hotel from Mr Al Fayed, and then escalating press reporting into a libel action where he committed perjury. And was jailed for committing the perjury aiui.

    (Aside: I hadn't noticed that JA has now been Ordained.)


    Cash for questions! Which became the making of Neil Hamilton, who never went away.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,112
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    TimT said:

    I know that for politics geeks like us, the Cummings stuff is explosive. But is it for Joe Normal?

    No, or not yet. I am trying to remember the course of the Tory sleaze surrounding the Major government. My suspicion is decorating the flat might have more cut-through, if and when we ever get the details, which is probably why we will not get the details.
    Except it’s not his flat. It’s a government flat. I know that’s not a justification but it will put enough people off the scent.

    Separately why are we so cheap with government property? Spending £250k on doing up a flat is not that much for a PM.
    Only a supercilious rich Tory arse could come out with crap like that.
    Yes; even round here one could BUY quite a nice one for that! In a 'desirable' conversion.
    Round here you could buy rather a nice house for that.
    When we refurbished a flat that size (the former servants quarters at the shop that my brother lives in) it cost far more than that for a similar property (4 bedrooms, Kitchen, 2 reception rooms and a bathroom).

    Grade 1 is a pain in the backside - in our case the Georgian Society got involved - greatly reduced the utility of the space and massively increased the costs
    Perilously close to self-pastiche here.
    Nothing perilously close about it! My theory is he’s actually a cab driver (furloughed) from Deptford.
    Not any cab driver. An Albanian cab driver.
    You have very good English, sir.

    And an uncommon knowledge of the Diaries of James Lees-Milne and the Book of Common Prayer.
    Doesn’t everyone?
    Anyone who things listed and the amenity societies are not a complication should try restoring one in 2021.
This discussion has been closed.