The clown now on the record as denying his piled bodies comment.
If there is a recording, things get interesting.
Boris denial now puts the cards on the table
If he did not say it he is in the clear, if he did he is looking at resignation
He won't resign, even if it is proved he's lied about this comment.
I think it's very likely he did indeed say it, and it's distasteful. But I'm afraid that both saying it and lying about it will be dismissed as "Boris will be Boris" both by apologists and enough of the wider public. Had it come out in mid-January, different story - but it's come out when prospects look far brighter. I wish it weren't the case that he'll get away with it all, but there you are.
The quote just doesn't make sense as it's meant to be an outburst. 'Let the bodies pile up in their thousands' is overly wordy.
Anyway, he would have said it in Latin, wouldn't he?
But the chaps and chapesses in Cabinet wouldn't understand.
From Simon Case's wafer-thin answers to the PACAC today - uniting Tory and Labour members in condemnation - it's clear the once formidable position of Cabinet Secretary is no longer feared by PMs. Now appears to exist solely to clean up their mess, not to stop it from being made.
Sounds like the PM will make a late declaration to Electoral Commission. He can charm his way out of culpability on things that would skewer lesser politicians but it’d be remarkable if he is forced to admit he hid a £58k donation in breach of the rules without any consequence. https://twitter.com/theobertram/status/1386666166299545600
Scott n paste strikes again !
I had actually though the text was his own referring to the content of the tweet. This lack of embedding isn't ideal.
On the contrary, it's wonderful and doesn't pollute every thread with twatter spam from nobodies with blue ticks.
Agreed, the site is infinitely better without the embedding, both from a functionality standpoint (it now actually works) and a content one. No longer do we have to hear from Dave Keating every two minutes.
I think that's because he finally stopped posting dodgy graphs and statistics, rather than anything PB has done.
Most tweets on this site were garbage – his being a prime example – that served only to clutter the site. It's easy enough to copy a tweet if it's really worth doing. PB is far, far better without daft tweets everywhere.
Was it a decision by VanillaForums or PB? (Good move IMO).
If you want to put up tweets all day go on twitter. If someone uses Twitter and thinks what is being said on twitter us important tell us what is being said and why you think it is important. I literally don't care if some no name is slagging off Johnson or Starmer on twitter. Isn't that what twitter is?
I used to like the tweets. They broke up the walls of text and triggered some good one-liners. Brought a bit of tabloid fizz to the place. Not saying there's no upside to the change. The site is faster for one. But for me we have lost something. You now have to make the effort to click into the tweet to check it out. And then reverse that to get back to your place on the thread. So I'm often not bothering and therefore missing out on some shits and giggles.
It's infinitely better now. One or two PBers relied solely on recycling tweets for their contribution. Now I can skip past their posts without needing to engage with whatever rubbish they're prattling on about.
Well I gather most agree with you, but for me the balance was about right. Both in terms of tweets vs text and in terms of "annoying" use vs "creative" use. With you and I no doubt transposed on what we found annoying vs creative.
The clown now on the record as denying his piled bodies comment.
If there is a recording, things get interesting.
Boris denial now puts the cards on the table
If he did not say it he is in the clear, if he did he is looking at resignation
The other option that the truth is somewhere in the middle. There's a difference between the BBC apparently being told that Boris Johnson suggested that "bodies could pile high" and the Mail claiming Johnson had said "let the bodies pile high in their thousands". He can truthfully deny the second if what he said was the first - there's also a quite crucial potential difference in meaning - the first may be a colourful way of going through the consequences if no lockdown, rather than endorsing those consequences.
The BBC version, of course, requires context to understand what was meant.
It all requires context.
If the answer was in response to a question such as "Prime Minister, you have an invidious choice. Do you want to keep the country open but risk we let the bodies could pile high? Or do you want to lockdown the country and have the economy crash, it being bankruptcies and company failures that pile high?"
PM: "If that is the choice, then we have to take the risk that the bodies pile high before the vaccines can do their work. But I expect the vaccines to work."
I think there would be an interesting article about Boris's main strength and weakness ; he doesn't play by the rules. That can be attractive in some contexts - he solved the intractable issue of Brexit by realising that as there are no Tory MPs in NI the easiest way to sort out was to ignore their issues. He also quickly got rid of old time centrist Tories before the election as he realised there was not going to be a middle ground option and they were hindering delivering Brexit. Whatever you think of his politics you have to admit he sailed those waters more easily than May, whilst Cameron jumped overboard at the prospect.
The other side of the coin is that he has an interesting concept of telling the truth (lying) and he seems to want to please people and be positive above everything else. Whilst this can be attractive tactic for day-to-day I always feel that he is only ever days from being kicked out because he will run out of road. He doesn't seem to have a long term strategy or any strongly held beliefs or philosophy, just pragmatism for the next issue.
The clown now on the record as denying his piled bodies comment.
If there is a recording, things get interesting.
Boris denial now puts the cards on the table
If he did not say it he is in the clear, if he did he is looking at resignation
He won't resign, even if it is proved he's lied about this comment.
I think it's very likely he did indeed say it, and it's distasteful. But I'm afraid that both saying it and lying about it will be dismissed as "Boris will be Boris" both by apologists and enough of the wider public. Had it come out in mid-January, different story - but it's come out when prospects look far brighter. I wish it weren't the case that he'll get away with it all, but there you are.
I wish it was the case that he did say it, and meant it, and could make the case that lockdowns are an ineffective way of saving lives and that themselves cause deaths, both now and in the long term, most likely in much greater numbers of life years lost. But I doubt that will happen too.
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
But paid only when rumbled. Not sure that gets him off.
I dont get the issue with the flat.
If someone paid a PM £100k or whatever and it is not declared it does not matter who paid the bill for the flat, the issue is the donation and influence it may buy.
I used to like the tweets. They broke up the walls of text and triggered some good one-liners. Brought a bit of tabloid fizz to the place. Not saying there's no upside to the change. The site is faster for one. But for me we have lost something. You now have to make the effort to click into the tweet to check it out. And then reverse that to get back to your place on the thread. So I'm often not bothering and therefore missing out on some shits and giggles.
Quick way to post pics also, which breaks up the screeds of (no doubt deathless) text.
Yes, that's exactly what I meant by tabloid fizz. The visuals were more lively. It's all gone a bit "The Independent" now. Course, as you say, the copy produced by every single contributor on here is absolutely top drawer, but still.
he has an interesting concept of telling the truth (lying) and he seems to want to please people and be positive above everything else. Whilst this can be attractive tactic for day-to-day I always feel that he is only ever days from being kicked out because he will run out of road.
The truth is this was one of those awful instances where the computer system was not 100% perfect (yet seemed to be) and a company who thought they had finally identified a means of catching fraud...
They were prosecuting on average of one postmaster per week for years based purely on Horizon evidence. That number should have set alarm bells ringing for PO management.
That the vast majority of these people were long-serving postmasters of good standing with nothing at all in their past to suggest they were of a criminal bent, and there was no evidence of them actually possessing or having spent the 'stolen' money, should have have made those bells deafening. At the very least the PO should have commissioned an independent audit of the Horizon code base to check for any possible bugs that could cause missing transactions or incorrect balances.
But it seems Paula Vennells is one of those tech illiterate people who always believes the computer is right, even when confronted with overwhelming evidence that it isn't. And the PO's IT department was either too incompetent or too weak to force a change in position.
Hopefully this case with change some minds about the moronic "computer says it's true so it must be" attitude. But probably not.
I like the old Muslim saying as a guide for how to handle these situations; "trust Allah, but tie up your camel". Believe the computer, but always have a way of validating what it's telling you is correct. Just in case.
NHS Vaccination booking system definitely just had a big update....a couple of friends in their early 40s, I told them to give it a cheeky ping today, this morning they said nothing, just reported based on here that it seems slots becoming available.
They got back to me and said all booked up now for next few days, although 2nd does they had to book for sites along way away.
It still says 44 on the front page, but as I mentioned earlier they unlock (perhaps just in specific localities?) slots for younger age groups a few days before advertising the fact. Perhaps another tactic to prevent the site being swamped.
Decline in positive tests and deaths appears to have largely plateaud. When you look at individual districts, it is clear that some - those whose numbers of positives are still relatively high - are generally declining, but there seems to be a floor rate of roughly 8-20 beneath which nowhere can really sink for too long. Similarly, deaths seem to be tootling along now at a steady rate of a little under 20 a day. Is this simply a function of running 1million plus tests per day? Any views an what the floor level is?
The clown now on the record as denying his piled bodies comment.
If there is a recording, things get interesting.
Boris denial now puts the cards on the table
If he did not say it he is in the clear, if he did he is looking at resignation
He won't resign, even if it is proved he's lied about this comment.
I think it's very likely he did indeed say it, and it's distasteful. But I'm afraid that both saying it and lying about it will be dismissed as "Boris will be Boris" both by apologists and enough of the wider public. Had it come out in mid-January, different story - but it's come out when prospects look far brighter. I wish it weren't the case that he'll get away with it all, but there you are.
The quote just doesn't make sense as it's meant to be an outburst. 'Let the bodies pile up in their thousands' is overly wordy.
It sounds like he was on one of those lovable "Boris" riffs of his where he does that kind of facetious, mock-classical orator thing. I can hear it right now in my head. I can't imagine any other politician doing it but I absolutely can him. It's totally credible.to me.
Decline in positive tests and deaths appears to have largely plateaud. When you look at individual districts, it is clear that some - those whose numbers of positives are still relatively high - are generally declining, but there seems to be a floor rate of roughly 8-20 beneath which nowhere can really sink for too long. Similarly, deaths seem to be tootling along now at a steady rate of a little under 20 a day. Is this simply a function of running 1million plus tests per day? Any views an what the floor level is?
If the specificity is 99.9% and you run 1 million tests, you will get 1,000 false positives.
Hmm, I often find an example sentence helpful to fully understand - in this case adding the name of a person who would be a good example of a snollygoster. Any ideas?
I cannot think of anybody i this country since the days of Disraeli. And he was a Conservative, so definitely not him.
On the other hand, dear old HY keeps on reminding us that the Conservative Party is the most successful party ever created, and it is perfetly content to abandon its principles whenever it sees an electoral advantage.
So perhaps somewhere in the ranks oof the Conservative Party - but I'm afraid that is as close to a snollygoster as I care to get.
The clown now on the record as denying his piled bodies comment.
If there is a recording, things get interesting.
Boris denial now puts the cards on the table
If he did not say it he is in the clear, if he did he is looking at resignation
He won't resign, even if it is proved he's lied about this comment.
I think it's very likely he did indeed say it, and it's distasteful. But I'm afraid that both saying it and lying about it will be dismissed as "Boris will be Boris" both by apologists and enough of the wider public. Had it come out in mid-January, different story - but it's come out when prospects look far brighter. I wish it weren't the case that he'll get away with it all, but there you are.
The quote just doesn't make sense as it's meant to be an outburst. 'Let the bodies pile up in their thousands' is overly wordy.
It sounds like he was on one of those lovable "Boris" riffs of his where he does that kind of facetious, mock-classical orator thing. I can hear it right now in my head. I can't imagine any other politician doing it but I absolutely can him. It's totally credible.to me.
In the context where Gove was supposedly laying it on thick about needing the army to protect hospitals, I can imagine him saying it as a way to say, "You won't impress me with lurid predictions of doom."
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
But paid only when rumbled. Not sure that gets him off.
I dont get the issue with the flat.
If someone paid a PM £100k or whatever and it is not declared it does not matter who paid the bill for the flat, the issue is the donation and influence it may buy.
I think that is the issue. He hatched a plan to get donors to cough up towards the flat makeover and in return they get favours.
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
As Peston points out earlier today - the question is who initially paid the bill?
In the USA thay are paying $4 billion to get the President a new plane, and we are worried spending a tiny amount on where the PM of our Country lives.
The truth is this was one of those awful instances where the computer system was not 100% perfect (yet seemed to be) and a company who thought they had finally identified a means of catching fraud...
They were prosecuting on average of one postmaster per week for years based purely on Horizon evidence. That number should have set alarm bells ringing for PO management.
That the vast majority of these people were long-serving postmasters of good standing with nothing at all in their past to suggest they were of a criminal bent, and there was no evidence of them actually possessing or having spent the 'stolen' money, should have have made those bells deafening. At the very least the PO should have commissioned an independent audit of the Horizon code base to check for any possible bugs that could cause missing transactions or incorrect balances.
But it seems Paula Vennells is one of those tech illiterate people who always believes the computer is right, even when confronted with overwhelming evidence that it isn't. And the PO's IT department was either too incompetent or too weak to force a change in position.
Hopefully this case with change some minds about the moronic "computer says it's true so it must be" attitude. But probably not.
I like the old Muslim saying as a guide for how to handle these situations; "trust Allah, but tie up your camel". Believe the computer, but always have a way of validating what it's telling you is correct. Just in case.
"trust Allah, but tie up your camel"
I shall remember that one!
New to me, but I've heard the similar "pray to God, but row away from the rocks" many times. Wonder which came first or whether both share an older origin?
https://twitter.com/KevinMKruse/status/1386121674001567746 Giving D.C. full representation in the House and Senate is such a far-fetched, left-wing pipe dream that in 1978 it had the support of Barry Goldwater, Howard Baker, Bob Dole and Strom Thurmond, as well as the endorsement of the entire Republican Party in its 1976 platform...
It's clearly wrong that the people of DC are excluded from the US democratic process. It is less clear to me that there's a compelling case for creating a US State with the second smallest population in the US.
A better proposal might be to distribute the residents between Virginia and Maryland.
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
But paid only when rumbled. Not sure that gets him off.
I dont get the issue with the flat.
If someone paid a PM £100k or whatever and it is not declared it does not matter who paid the bill for the flat, the issue is the donation and influence it may buy.
I think that is the issue. He hatched a plan to get donors to cough up towards the flat makeover and in return they get favours.
Say the PM agrees a book deal now for £1m but the book and payment are to occur only after he leaves office. Would such an arrangement need to be declared? If not the rules don't really matter anyway as it would be trivial to get around them.
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
As Peston points out earlier today - the question is who initially paid the bill?
In the USA thay are paying $4 billion to get the President a new plane, and we are worried spending a tiny amount on where the PM of our Country lives.
The issue, as far as I understand it, is not whether Boris or the Taxpayer pays the bill, the issue is whether unknown donor(s) paid the bill to begin with — giving what is essentially a private loan to the PM without it being declared.
https://twitter.com/KevinMKruse/status/1386121674001567746 Giving D.C. full representation in the House and Senate is such a far-fetched, left-wing pipe dream that in 1978 it had the support of Barry Goldwater, Howard Baker, Bob Dole and Strom Thurmond, as well as the endorsement of the entire Republican Party in its 1976 platform...
It's clearly wrong that the people of DC are excluded from the US democratic process. It is less clear to me that there's a compelling case for creating a US State with the second smallest population in the US.
A better proposal might be to distribute the residents between Virginia and Maryland.
All the remaining land of DC was originally MD. The VA part, Alexandria and Arlington, has already reverted, hence the SW quadrant chunk out of the diamond.
https://twitter.com/KevinMKruse/status/1386121674001567746 Giving D.C. full representation in the House and Senate is such a far-fetched, left-wing pipe dream that in 1978 it had the support of Barry Goldwater, Howard Baker, Bob Dole and Strom Thurmond, as well as the endorsement of the entire Republican Party in its 1976 platform...
It's clearly wrong that the people of DC are excluded from the US democratic process. It is less clear to me that there's a compelling case for creating a US State with the second smallest population in the US.
A better proposal might be to distribute the residents between Virginia and Maryland.
Virginia has already had its territory back. Stick the rest of the district in MD which it never should have been split off from in the first place.
NHS Vaccination booking system definitely just had a big update....a couple of friends in their early 40s, I told them to give it a cheeky ping today, this morning they said nothing, just reported based on here that it seems slots becoming available.
They got back to me and said all booked up now for next few days, although 2nd does they had to book for sites along way away.
It still says 44 on the front page, but as I mentioned earlier they unlock (perhaps just in specific localities?) slots for younger age groups a few days before advertising the fact. Perhaps another tactic to prevent the site being swamped.
My guess is that there has been a big delivery and the next few days it will be publicly announced if you are 40+, get jabbed immediately.
The NHS site availability has followed a similar pattern throughout the rollout, quietly availability is opened up beyond what the front page says and then Hancock pops up couple of days later.
Decline in positive tests and deaths appears to have largely plateaud. When you look at individual districts, it is clear that some - those whose numbers of positives are still relatively high - are generally declining, but there seems to be a floor rate of roughly 8-20 beneath which nowhere can really sink for too long. Similarly, deaths seem to be tootling along now at a steady rate of a little under 20 a day. Is this simply a function of running 1million plus tests per day? Any views an what the floor level is?
If the specificity is 99.9% and you run 1 million tests, you will get 1,000 false positives.
Thanks. How sure are we about that level of specificity? That seems remarkably high to me, but I am no expert. And is this likely to imply a similar floor of deaths?
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
But paid only when rumbled. Not sure that gets him off.
I dont get the issue with the flat.
If someone paid a PM £100k or whatever and it is not declared it does not matter who paid the bill for the flat, the issue is the donation and influence it may buy.
I think that is the issue. He hatched a plan to get donors to cough up towards the flat makeover and in return they get favours.
Say the PM agrees a book deal now for £1m but the book and payment are to occur only after he leaves office. Would such an arrangement need to be declared? If not the rules don't really matter anyway as it would be trivial to get around them.
My understanding is yes. The relevant thing is when the payment is agreed, not when it falls due.
https://twitter.com/KevinMKruse/status/1386121674001567746 Giving D.C. full representation in the House and Senate is such a far-fetched, left-wing pipe dream that in 1978 it had the support of Barry Goldwater, Howard Baker, Bob Dole and Strom Thurmond, as well as the endorsement of the entire Republican Party in its 1976 platform...
It's clearly wrong that the people of DC are excluded from the US democratic process. It is less clear to me that there's a compelling case for creating a US State with the second smallest population in the US.
A better proposal might be to distribute the residents between Virginia and Maryland.
All the remaining land of DC was originally MD. The VA part, Alexandria and Arlington, has already reverted, hence the SW quadrant chunk out of the diamond.
Just lump it back in with MD.
If the residents do not want to be part of Maryland, or if Maryland doesn't want those bits back, is it fair to force them to choose between democratic representation and that?
I used to like the tweets. They broke up the walls of text and triggered some good one-liners. Brought a bit of tabloid fizz to the place. Not saying there's no upside to the change. The site is faster for one. But for me we have lost something. You now have to make the effort to click into the tweet to check it out. And then reverse that to get back to your place on the thread. So I'm often not bothering and therefore missing out on some shits and giggles.
Quick way to post pics also, which breaks up the screeds of (no doubt deathless) text.
The pictures broke the text up so much that quite often it was impossible to load.
Not having the site run like it used to is a liberation for anyone with a tablet.
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
As Peston points out earlier today - the question is who initially paid the bill?
In the USA thay are paying $4 billion to get the President a new plane, and we are worried spending a tiny amount on where the PM of our Country lives.
The issue, as far as I understand it, is not whether Boris or the Taxpayer pays the bill, the issue is whether unknown donor(s) paid the bill to begin with — giving what is essentially a private loan to the PM without it being declared.
The PM does not own the Flat, the Taxpayer does, the Flat has been done up to a high standard at absolutely no cost to the taxpayer. And everyone is worried about that? Madness.
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
But paid only when rumbled. Not sure that gets him off.
There's precedent. Quite a number of MPs managed to avoid jail following the expenses scandal using that logic.
Avoid jail, yes. But it would have brought Gordon down if he'd claimed for a duckhouse. You can't continue as PM in this country once revealed as a dodgy geezer. Which is what might (and I think will) save Johnson. He can't be revealed as a dodgy geezer because everyone knows he's one to start with. I think he'll be ok for a while yet. But the ghastly prospect of him being PM for a decade starts to recede. This stuff will eventually erode his stature and authority. The cheers will turn to jeers and that will be it. My hope is that this happens at a general election. The next one.
The clown now on the record as denying his piled bodies comment.
If there is a recording, things get interesting.
Boris denial now puts the cards on the table
If he did not say it he is in the clear, if he did he is looking at resignation
The other option that the truth is somewhere in the middle. There's a difference between the BBC apparently being told that Boris Johnson suggested that "bodies could pile high" and the Mail claiming Johnson had said "let the bodies pile high in their thousands". He can truthfully deny the second if what he said was the first - there's also a quite crucial potential difference in meaning - the first may be a colourful way of going through the consequences if no lockdown, rather than endorsing those consequences.
The BBC version, of course, requires context to understand what was meant.
It all requires context.
If the answer was in response to a question such as "Prime Minister, you have an invidious choice. Do you want to keep the country open but risk we let the bodies could pile high? Or do you want to lockdown the country and have the economy crash, it being bankruptcies and company failures that pile high?"
PM: "If that is the choice, then we have to take the risk that the bodies pile high before the vaccines can do their work. But I expect the vaccines to work."
Interesting this is almost identical to his use of "on the chin" quote that was misquoted repeatedly. It's his style, as if he is devil's advocating himself:
"Well it’s a very, very important question, and that’s where a lot of the debate has been and one of the theories is, that perhaps you could take it on the chin, take it all in one go and allow the disease, as it were, to move through the population, without taking as many draconian measures. I think we need to strike a balance, I think it is very important, we’ve got a fantastic NHS, we will give them all the support that they need, we will make sure that they have all preparations, all the kit that they need for us to get through it. But I think it would be better if we take all the measures that we can now to stop the peak of the disease being as difficult for the NHS as it might be, I think there are things that we may be able to do."
He did the same on brexit before he came down on side of leave.
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
As Peston points out earlier today - the question is who initially paid the bill?
In the USA thay are paying $4 billion to get the President a new plane, and we are worried spending a tiny amount on where the PM of our Country lives.
When Bute House was done up - who paid - Nicola Sturgeon or the Scottish Taxpayer?
When Nicola Sturgeon couldn't stay in Bute House because of said refurbishments - who paid?
"“It can be said with pride, India . . . defeated Covid-19 under the able, sensible, committed and visionary leadership of Prime Minister Modi . . . The party unequivocally hails its leadership for introducing India to the world as a proud and victorious nation in the fight against Covid.” Those were the words of a resolution passed by India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata party, just a few weeks ago in February."
https://twitter.com/KevinMKruse/status/1386121674001567746 Giving D.C. full representation in the House and Senate is such a far-fetched, left-wing pipe dream that in 1978 it had the support of Barry Goldwater, Howard Baker, Bob Dole and Strom Thurmond, as well as the endorsement of the entire Republican Party in its 1976 platform...
It's clearly wrong that the people of DC are excluded from the US democratic process. It is less clear to me that there's a compelling case for creating a US State with the second smallest population in the US.
A better proposal might be to distribute the residents between Virginia and Maryland.
All the remaining land of DC was originally MD. The VA part, Alexandria and Arlington, has already reverted, hence the SW quadrant chunk out of the diamond.
Just lump it back in with MD.
If the residents do not want to be part of Maryland, or if Maryland doesn't want those bits back, is it fair to force them to choose between democratic representation and that?
Why would a Democrat State want more Democrat voters when instead it can create 2 more Democrat senators by supporting Statehood.
Decline in positive tests and deaths appears to have largely plateaud. When you look at individual districts, it is clear that some - those whose numbers of positives are still relatively high - are generally declining, but there seems to be a floor rate of roughly 8-20 beneath which nowhere can really sink for too long. Similarly, deaths seem to be tootling along now at a steady rate of a little under 20 a day. Is this simply a function of running 1million plus tests per day? Any views an what the floor level is?
If the specificity is 99.9% and you run 1 million tests, you will get 1,000 false positives.
I cannot find anything recent on the specificity of RT-PCR testing for COVID. The only real paper, from the American College of Pathologists, was from early on, stating that in the real world (not theoretical lab only tests), 99.8%. So 1 million tests would yield 2,000 false positives. But things have presumably improved since the early days.
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
But paid only when rumbled. Not sure that gets him off.
I dont get the issue with the flat.
If someone paid a PM £100k or whatever and it is not declared it does not matter who paid the bill for the flat, the issue is the donation and influence it may buy.
I think that is the issue. He hatched a plan to get donors to cough up towards the flat makeover and in return they get favours.
It's not his flat, remember. It's a national asset. If donors want to pay for refurbishment then they are in effect paying an additional voluntary tax. So far no problem (IMO). The issue comes if it was to curry favour for something. This would be corrupt (and the favour need not be tangible, i.e. could be a knighthood?) but not high-level corrupt in my view because it is for upkeep of a national asset and not to enrich Johnson/Symonds. So I can't get too worked up about this one.
What I can't understand is why Johnson didn't ask parliament to agree that £30k is an inadequate sum for refurbishment. He'd have got this through with his majority.
https://twitter.com/KevinMKruse/status/1386121674001567746 Giving D.C. full representation in the House and Senate is such a far-fetched, left-wing pipe dream that in 1978 it had the support of Barry Goldwater, Howard Baker, Bob Dole and Strom Thurmond, as well as the endorsement of the entire Republican Party in its 1976 platform...
It's clearly wrong that the people of DC are excluded from the US democratic process. It is less clear to me that there's a compelling case for creating a US State with the second smallest population in the US.
A better proposal might be to distribute the residents between Virginia and Maryland.
All the remaining land of DC was originally MD. The VA part, Alexandria and Arlington, has already reverted, hence the SW quadrant chunk out of the diamond.
Just lump it back in with MD.
If the residents do not want to be part of Maryland, or if Maryland doesn't want those bits back, is it fair to force them to choose between democratic representation and that?
They should 'auction' DC between the 10 states with lowest populations and just merge with whichever one wants them most... The State of Alaska+DC would be an interesting one to represent...
https://twitter.com/KevinMKruse/status/1386121674001567746 Giving D.C. full representation in the House and Senate is such a far-fetched, left-wing pipe dream that in 1978 it had the support of Barry Goldwater, Howard Baker, Bob Dole and Strom Thurmond, as well as the endorsement of the entire Republican Party in its 1976 platform...
It's clearly wrong that the people of DC are excluded from the US democratic process. It is less clear to me that there's a compelling case for creating a US State with the second smallest population in the US.
A better proposal might be to distribute the residents between Virginia and Maryland.
All the remaining land of DC was originally MD. The VA part, Alexandria and Arlington, has already reverted, hence the SW quadrant chunk out of the diamond.
Just lump it back in with MD.
If the residents do not want to be part of Maryland, or if Maryland doesn't want those bits back, is it fair to force them to choose between democratic representation and that?
Why would a Democrat State want more Democrat voters when instead it can create 2 more Democrat senators by supporting Statehood.
https://twitter.com/KevinMKruse/status/1386121674001567746 Giving D.C. full representation in the House and Senate is such a far-fetched, left-wing pipe dream that in 1978 it had the support of Barry Goldwater, Howard Baker, Bob Dole and Strom Thurmond, as well as the endorsement of the entire Republican Party in its 1976 platform...
It's clearly wrong that the people of DC are excluded from the US democratic process. It is less clear to me that there's a compelling case for creating a US State with the second smallest population in the US.
A better proposal might be to distribute the residents between Virginia and Maryland.
Not sure that would work.
The principle is that the states may vary in size (indeed do, considerably) but each governs itself in certain respects whilst delegating responsibility for matters that cross state lines (federal matters) to the national government. One of the things they get for that is two Senators who participate in the national decision making.
Under your proposal, not only DC but also Virginia and Maryland get sold short - the State of Maryland and Commonwealth of Virginia no longer get two Senators to represent their interests in DC, but two people who divide their attentions between the interests of that state and those of DC (which has no interest or involvement in the state level politics of either).
BUT if you hover your mouse pointer over them then you get a pop up with the tweet showing in it?
(Disclaimer: this will be at the absolute limit of my Javascript skills, and therefore probably won't happen until the weekend.)
I was going to suggest this earlier (and could probably do it) but reflected that I didn't have the time to do it* and so probably shouldn't suggest someone else did the work for me.
Suggestion: maybe onclick rather than onmouseover? The latter either easy to trigger accidentally (and there will be a lag loading the tweet) or requires a delay to trigger.
*Of course, maybe if I spent less time reading/commenting here then I could find that time.
Further, If DC is absorbed into Maryland I don’t think Maryland would get the benefit of any additional representatives in the House until the next census. Granted I don’t know if they would indeed qualify for any extra.
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
As Peston points out earlier today - the question is who initially paid the bill?
In the USA thay are paying $4 billion to get the President a new plane, and we are worried spending a tiny amount on where the PM of our Country lives.
The issue, as far as I understand it, is not whether Boris or the Taxpayer pays the bill, the issue is whether unknown donor(s) paid the bill to begin with — giving what is essentially a private loan to the PM without it being declared.
The PM does not own the Flat, the Taxpayer does, the Flat has been done up to a high standard at absolutely no cost to the taxpayer. And everyone is worried about that? Madness.
Again, you're missing the point. Probably deliberately.
The issue is about conflicts of interest and undeclared pseudo donations. Either there's rules or there is a free for all. You can't have both. Boris knows the rules so there's no excuse.
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
But paid only when rumbled. Not sure that gets him off.
I dont get the issue with the flat.
If someone paid a PM £100k or whatever and it is not declared it does not matter who paid the bill for the flat, the issue is the donation and influence it may buy.
I think that is the issue. He hatched a plan to get donors to cough up towards the flat makeover and in return they get favours.
It's not his flat, remember. It's a national asset. If donors want to pay for refurbishment then they are in effect paying an additional voluntary tax. So far no problem (IMO). The issue comes if it was to curry favour for something. This would be corrupt (and the favour need not be tangible, i.e. could be a knighthood?) but not high-level corrupt in my view because it is for upkeep of a national asset and not to enrich Johnson/Symonds. So I can't get too worked up about this one.
What I can't understand is why Johnson didn't ask parliament to agree that £30k is an inadequate sum for refurbishment. He'd have got this through with his majority.
It wouldn't have looked good. And we all know what the priority of this team of clowns is.
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
But paid only when rumbled. Not sure that gets him off.
I dont get the issue with the flat.
If someone paid a PM £100k or whatever and it is not declared it does not matter who paid the bill for the flat, the issue is the donation and influence it may buy.
I think that is the issue. He hatched a plan to get donors to cough up towards the flat makeover and in return they get favours.
It's not his flat, remember. It's a national asset. If donors want to pay for refurbishment then they are in effect paying an additional voluntary tax. So far no problem (IMO). The issue comes if it was to curry favour for something. This would be corrupt (and the favour need not be tangible, i.e. could be a knighthood?) but not high-level corrupt in my view because it is for upkeep of a national asset and not to enrich Johnson/Symonds. So I can't get too worked up about this one.
What I can't understand is why Johnson didn't ask parliament to agree that £30k is an inadequate sum for refurbishment. He'd have got this through with his majority.
As you say paying for the flat from public finances or a donor publically would be far better than the current mess.
I think a bigger Cabinet Office scandal in the news today is why they ever recruited the ex post office CEO who has conspired to have dozens of innocent people kept in jail over a number of years, and wasted tax payer money to aid her in this.
https://twitter.com/KevinMKruse/status/1386121674001567746 Giving D.C. full representation in the House and Senate is such a far-fetched, left-wing pipe dream that in 1978 it had the support of Barry Goldwater, Howard Baker, Bob Dole and Strom Thurmond, as well as the endorsement of the entire Republican Party in its 1976 platform...
It's clearly wrong that the people of DC are excluded from the US democratic process. It is less clear to me that there's a compelling case for creating a US State with the second smallest population in the US.
A better proposal might be to distribute the residents between Virginia and Maryland.
All the remaining land of DC was originally MD. The VA part, Alexandria and Arlington, has already reverted, hence the SW quadrant chunk out of the diamond.
Just lump it back in with MD.
If the residents do not want to be part of Maryland, or if Maryland doesn't want those bits back, is it fair to force them to choose between democratic representation and that?
Why would a Democrat State want more Democrat voters when instead it can create 2 more Democrat senators by supporting Statehood.
Whilst I've separately explained why the proposal doesn't work based on constitutional principle, Virginia is still just about a purple state (albeit trending blue). It was within 1% in the 2014 Senate election, went for Bush Jnr twice, and there's a reasonable chance of it being a tipping point state or going GOP in a fairly poor year for the Democrats at Senate level. So, if I was a Virginia Democrat, I'd be happy to gain some DC voters to firm it up.
Maryland not so much - no chance of being a tipping point state, and hasn't voted Republican at Senate level for 40 years (has an unusual anti-Trumper GOP governor, but I think the suggestion is DC voters wouldn't get involved in that anyway).
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
But paid only when rumbled. Not sure that gets him off.
I dont get the issue with the flat.
If someone paid a PM £100k or whatever and it is not declared it does not matter who paid the bill for the flat, the issue is the donation and influence it may buy.
I think that is the issue. He hatched a plan to get donors to cough up towards the flat makeover and in return they get favours.
It's not his flat, remember. It's a national asset. If donors want to pay for refurbishment then they are in effect paying an additional voluntary tax. So far no problem (IMO). The issue comes if it was to curry favour for something. This would be corrupt (and the favour need not be tangible, i.e. could be a knighthood?) but not high-level corrupt in my view because it is for upkeep of a national asset and not to enrich Johnson/Symonds. So I can't get too worked up about this one.
What I can't understand is why Johnson didn't ask parliament to agree that £30k is an inadequate sum for refurbishment. He'd have got this through with his majority.
It's the under-the-counter aspect, the arcanery of the scheme, the furtiveness. It has a dodgy feel to it. WTF was going on? God knows. It is indeed a national asset and I'd see no problem with the taxpayer (yes, MY taxes) funding improvements. Within reason, obviously, but I wouldn't be too hairshirt about it. Guy's doing a big job for us (imo badly but still) and he needs and deserves a harmonious domestic environment. Even stuff like a jacuzzi would be fine by me.
The clown now on the record as denying his piled bodies comment.
If there is a recording, things get interesting.
Boris denial now puts the cards on the table
If he did not say it he is in the clear, if he did he is looking at resignation
He won't resign, even if it is proved he's lied about this comment.
I think it's very likely he did indeed say it, and it's distasteful. But I'm afraid that both saying it and lying about it will be dismissed as "Boris will be Boris" both by apologists and enough of the wider public. Had it come out in mid-January, different story - but it's come out when prospects look far brighter. I wish it weren't the case that he'll get away with it all, but there you are.
The quote just doesn't make sense as it's meant to be an outburst. 'Let the bodies pile up in their thousands' is overly wordy.
It sounds like he was on one of those lovable "Boris" riffs of his where he does that kind of facetious, mock-classical orator thing. I can hear it right now in my head. I can't imagine any other politician doing it but I absolutely can him. It's totally credible.to me.
In the context where Gove was supposedly laying it on thick about needing the army to protect hospitals, I can imagine him saying it as a way to say, "You won't impress me with lurid predictions of doom."
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
But paid only when rumbled. Not sure that gets him off.
I dont get the issue with the flat.
If someone paid a PM £100k or whatever and it is not declared it does not matter who paid the bill for the flat, the issue is the donation and influence it may buy.
I think that is the issue. He hatched a plan to get donors to cough up towards the flat makeover and in return they get favours.
It's not his flat, remember. It's a national asset. If donors want to pay for refurbishment then they are in effect paying an additional voluntary tax. So far no problem (IMO). The issue comes if it was to curry favour for something. This would be corrupt (and the favour need not be tangible, i.e. could be a knighthood?) but not high-level corrupt in my view because it is for upkeep of a national asset and not to enrich Johnson/Symonds. So I can't get too worked up about this one.
What I can't understand is why Johnson didn't ask parliament to agree that £30k is an inadequate sum for refurbishment. He'd have got this through with his majority.
Not sure I actually agree that the benefit doesn't primarily go to Johnson and Symonds because of the nature of the work. Suppose I plan to stay in my present place for five to ten years, most of that is for me not for the value of the property. If I extend my house or add a conservatory, that's adding value - but a lot of the value in carpets and curtains relates to the taste of the occupant and loses value fairly rapidly anyway.
In any event, you have to ask why a donor wants to make a secret contribution to do up the private quarters of Number 10 rather than a public one to refurb the local school hall or whatever. They might be wrong to believe it gets them closer to a knighthood or a contract or whatever... but that pretty obviously is their belief.
BUT if you hover your mouse pointer over them then you get a pop up with the tweet showing in it?
(Disclaimer: this will be at the absolute limit of my Javascript skills, and therefore probably won't happen until the weekend.)
I suspect that's going to be a whole lot harder than you think it sounds.
And why bother? If you want to look at tweets, go to Twitter. What other serious discussion forum enables tweets to be spammed directly into it?
Most - as it's actually a useful thing for a lot of people.
I suspect I know how to actually do it but it requires checking how vanilla works, how it pulls in the tweets and whether I can inject some javascript from the main website.
Gyms: anyone know of actual government rules re gyms? My gym still has signs up asking punters to spray pink gloop everywhere before AND after each bit of machinery is used. Meanwhile, the air con is sometimes on and sometimes not (and inadequate/ old anyway) and windows are only open sometimes.
My understanding of the science @Nigelb is that things have moved on since the first lockdown when we were cleaning everything in sight to an understanding that Covid via fomites (surface transmission) is not anywhere near the risk that airborne transmission is (aerosols particular potential concern in a gym (no jokes)) but my gym doesn't seem to have got the memo.
I think ventilation is the key not cleaning surfaces.
I'd like to tackle them over this but I need some ammo.
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
As Peston points out earlier today - the question is who initially paid the bill?
In the USA thay are paying $4 billion to get the President a new plane, and we are worried spending a tiny amount on where the PM of our Country lives.
The issue, as far as I understand it, is not whether Boris or the Taxpayer pays the bill, the issue is whether unknown donor(s) paid the bill to begin with — giving what is essentially a private loan to the PM without it being declared.
The PM does not own the Flat, the Taxpayer does, the Flat has been done up to a high standard at absolutely no cost to the taxpayer. And everyone is worried about that? Madness.
What little they have shown in papers it looks like shit and only a classless hooray henry could think it anything other than horrific. Any normal person moving in would have it changed immediately.
Incroyable! @vonderleyen en remet encore une couche sur la misogynie de Recep Erdogan et de Charles Michel alors qu’on sait que c’est son incompétence qu’elle a payé à Ankara. La division et la haine entre les deux responsables européens étalée au grand jour. Translated from French by Google: Unbelievable! @vonderleyen puts another layer on the misogyny of Recep Erdogan and Charles Michel when we know that it is his incompetence that she paid for in Ankara. The division and the hatred between the two European leaders exposed in broad daylight.
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
As Peston points out earlier today - the question is who initially paid the bill?
In the USA thay are paying $4 billion to get the President a new plane, and we are worried spending a tiny amount on where the PM of our Country lives.
The issue, as far as I understand it, is not whether Boris or the Taxpayer pays the bill, the issue is whether unknown donor(s) paid the bill to begin with — giving what is essentially a private loan to the PM without it being declared.
The PM does not own the Flat, the Taxpayer does, the Flat has been done up to a high standard at absolutely no cost to the taxpayer. And everyone is worried about that? Madness.
Out of interest, if the Labour Chairman of the Planning Committee on your local Council, who happens to live in a Council flat (which ultimately belongs to the taxpayer), suddenly obtained a new kitchen due to the largesse of persons unknown, would you be equally chilled about it?
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
But paid only when rumbled. Not sure that gets him off.
There's precedent. Quite a number of MPs managed to avoid jail following the expenses scandal using that logic.
Not doing something jail worthy does not equal all above board of course.
The thing that still stings me most about the MPs' Expenses Fiddling was the declaration that was signed for every expense by every MP:
eg I confirm that I incurred these expenses wholly, exclusively and necessarily to enable me stay overnght away from my only or main home for the purpose of performing my duties as...
When you consider MPs spending eg £600 on houseplants four years running via such a declaration, then that in my view is perjury, which is jail worthy, as the statement is a lie. I would be interested in any comment from a real lawyer. I am not aware of any one prosecuted for this.
Here is the second home form, with that declaration:
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
But paid only when rumbled. Not sure that gets him off.
There's precedent. Quite a number of MPs managed to avoid jail following the expenses scandal using that logic.
Not doing something jail worthy does not equal all above board of course.
The thing that still stings me most about the MPs' Expenses Fiddling was the declaration that was signed for every expense by every MP:
eg I confirm that I incurred these expenses wholly, exclusively and necessarily to enable me stay overnght away from my only or main home for the purpose of performing my duties as...
When you consider MPs spending eg £600 on houseplants four years running via such a declaration, then that in my view is perjury, which is jail worthy, as the statement is a lie. I would be interested in any comment from a real lawyer. I am not aware of any one prosecuted for this.
Here is the second home form, with that declaration:
They were all “at it” because a culture grew up whereby it was considered Ok to claim given derisory remuneration.
I keep reading that the EU’s vaccination program could catch the UK’s. It can’t. It’s over. UK will reach 70% inoculation next month. Yes, maybe the EU will reach 97% when UK is at 95% sometime in 2022, but this is not a game or sports...
Given vaccine hesitancy in EU member states, driven in part by the EU & governments dicking around over AZ I doubt the EU will ever overtake the UK.....
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
But paid only when rumbled. Not sure that gets him off.
There's precedent. Quite a number of MPs managed to avoid jail following the expenses scandal using that logic.
Not doing something jail worthy does not equal all above board of course.
The thing that still stings me most about the MPs' Expenses Fiddling was the declaration that was signed for every expense by every MP:
eg I confirm that I incurred these expenses wholly, exclusively and necessarily to enable me stay overnght away from my only or main home for the purpose of performing my duties as...
When you consider MPs spending eg £600 on houseplants four years running via such a declaration, then that in my view is perjury, which is jail worthy, as the statement is a lie. I would be interested in any comment from a real lawyer. I am not aware of any one prosecuted for this.
Here is the second home form, with that declaration:
They were all “at it” because a culture grew up whereby it was considered Ok to claim given derisory remuneration.
Remuneration is still derisory.
We may be going to disagree here.
A top 4% income is not derisory. It is simply not. Especially when you add a 1/60th or 1/40th Final Salary pension on top, with an approx. 10k a year employer contribution.
And add in all the other elements of the package.
And I am not aware that "we were all doing it Guv" is a defence in law.
I'm understand CCHQ (Tory Party) made payment to the Cabinet Office to cover initial costs of refurbishing the PM's home in Downing Street, and the PM is now repaying CCHQ. There is an audit trail. Cabinet Sec Simon Case knows about it. Which is presumably why he told MPs...
today that he would do a report on the propriety of how the decoration and furnishing was funded. This is breaking news and I will update
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
But paid only when rumbled. Not sure that gets him off.
There's precedent. Quite a number of MPs managed to avoid jail following the expenses scandal using that logic.
Not doing something jail worthy does not equal all above board of course.
The thing that still stings me most about the MPs' Expenses Fiddling was the declaration that was signed for every expense by every MP:
eg I confirm that I incurred these expenses wholly, exclusively and necessarily to enable me stay overnght away from my only or main home for the purpose of performing my duties as...
When you consider MPs spending eg £600 on houseplants four years running via such a declaration, then that in my view is perjury, which is jail worthy, as the statement is a lie. I would be interested in any comment from a real lawyer. I am not aware of any one prosecuted for this.
Here is the second home form, with that declaration:
They were all “at it” because a culture grew up whereby it was considered Ok to claim given derisory remuneration.
Remuneration is still derisory.
We may be going to disagree here.
A top 4% income is not derisory. It is simply not. Especially when you add a 1/60th or 1/40th Final Salary pension on top, with an approx. 10k a year employer contribution.
And add in all the other elements of the package.
And I am not aware that "we were all doing it Guv" is a defence in law.
Happy to disagree
An MP’s base salary is derisory given comparative jobs (senior doctors, barristers, or even executive managers in the public sector).
“They’re all at it” is not a defence in contract law, but it might be in common law. Or; it may mitigate any penalties.
I keep reading that the EU’s vaccination program could catch the UK’s. It can’t. It’s over. UK will reach 70% inoculation next month. Yes, maybe the EU will reach 97% when UK is at 95% sometime in 2022, but this is not a game or sports...
Given vaccine hesitancy in EU member states, driven in part by the EU & governments dicking around over AZ I doubt the EU will ever overtake the UK.....
It won't catch up.
The constraint is delivery systems.
Any claims made to minimise the difference will be based on a new definition of "vaccinated" as one dose, ignoring the extra month for distribution / immunity growing, and unlocking quickly.
Other differences will be declared "not to matter", just as they started claiming that contract wording was less important than 'morality' and 'fairness' once they discovered it did not say what they claimed.
Today both Boris and Gove have said he paid for the flat makeover
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
But paid only when rumbled. Not sure that gets him off.
There's precedent. Quite a number of MPs managed to avoid jail following the expenses scandal using that logic.
Not doing something jail worthy does not equal all above board of course.
The thing that still stings me most about the MPs' Expenses Fiddling was the declaration that was signed for every expense by every MP:
eg I confirm that I incurred these expenses wholly, exclusively and necessarily to enable me stay overnght away from my only or main home for the purpose of performing my duties as...
When you consider MPs spending eg £600 on houseplants four years running via such a declaration, then that in my view is perjury, which is jail worthy, as the statement is a lie. I would be interested in any comment from a real lawyer. I am not aware of any one prosecuted for this.
Here is the second home form, with that declaration:
They were all “at it” because a culture grew up whereby it was considered Ok to claim given derisory remuneration.
Remuneration is still derisory.
We may be going to disagree here.
A top 4% income is not derisory. It is simply not. Especially when you add a 1/60th or 1/40th Final Salary pension on top, with an approx. 10k a year employer contribution.
And add in all the other elements of the package.
And I am not aware that "we were all doing it Guv" is a defence in law.
Happy to disagree
An MP’s base salary is derisory given comparative jobs (senior doctors, barristers, or even executive managers in the public sector).
“They’re all at it” is not a defence in contract law, but it might be in common law. Or; it may mitigate any penalties.
Agree on your last point.
However, none were even attempted to be prosecuted.
Comments
Surely Australia or any other country shouldn’t let the players back in.
And now throwing Liverpool at labour
Labour and others will have to prove that did not happen
If there's a tape, Johnson goes. If there isn't, he stays and hardly anyone will have had their views shifted.
What larks!
If the answer was in response to a question such as "Prime Minister, you have an invidious choice. Do you want to keep the country open but risk we let the bodies could pile high? Or do you want to lockdown the country and have the economy crash, it being bankruptcies and company failures that pile high?"
PM: "If that is the choice, then we have to take the risk that the bodies pile high before the vaccines can do their work. But I expect the vaccines to work."
The other side of the coin is that he has an interesting concept of telling the truth (lying) and he seems to want to please people and be positive above everything else. Whilst this can be attractive tactic for day-to-day I always feel that he is only ever days from being kicked out because he will run out of road. He doesn't seem to have a long term strategy or any strongly held beliefs or philosophy, just pragmatism for the next issue.
But I doubt that will happen too.
If someone paid a PM £100k or whatever and it is not declared it does not matter who paid the bill for the flat, the issue is the donation and influence it may buy.
As to your first paragraph, I have a £53m invisible Garden Bridge to sell you.
I shall remember that one!
When you look at individual districts, it is clear that some - those whose numbers of positives are still relatively high - are generally declining, but there seems to be a floor rate of roughly 8-20 beneath which nowhere can really sink for too long. Similarly, deaths seem to be tootling along now at a steady rate of a little under 20 a day.
Is this simply a function of running 1million plus tests per day? Any views an what the floor level is?
Glowing testament of Boris from Gove
On the other hand, dear old HY keeps on reminding us that the Conservative Party is the most successful party ever created, and it is perfetly content to abandon its principles whenever it sees an electoral advantage.
So perhaps somewhere in the ranks oof the Conservative Party - but I'm afraid that is as close to a snollygoster as I care to get.
A better proposal might be to distribute the residents between Virginia and Maryland.
Just lump it back in with MD.
The NHS site availability has followed a similar pattern throughout the rollout, quietly availability is opened up beyond what the front page says and then Hancock pops up couple of days later.
How sure are we about that level of specificity? That seems remarkably high to me, but I am no expert.
And is this likely to imply a similar floor of deaths?
Not having the site run like it used to is a liberation for anyone with a tablet.
https://twitter.com/jasonscampbell/status/1386685340522536961?s=21
"Well it’s a very, very important question, and that’s where a lot of the debate has been and one of the theories is, that perhaps you could take it on the chin, take it all in one go and allow the disease, as it were, to move through the population, without taking as many draconian measures. I think we need to strike a balance, I think it is very important, we’ve got a fantastic NHS, we will give them all the support that they need, we will make sure that they have all preparations, all the kit that they need for us to get through it. But I think it would be better if we take all the measures that we can now to stop the peak of the disease being as difficult for the NHS as it might be, I think there are things that we may be able to do."
He did the same on brexit before he came down on side of leave.
They don't load in thread.
BUT if you hover your mouse pointer over them then you get a pop up with the tweet showing in it?
(Disclaimer: this will be at the absolute limit of my Javascript skills, and therefore probably won't happen until the weekend.)
But not for the bullsh8t that the commentariat is going on about.
How do we know this? Because there is f8ck all swing to labour.
When Nicola Sturgeon couldn't stay in Bute House because of said refurbishments - who paid?
How many guesses do you need?
The resurgence of the pandemic in India holds dangers and lessons for the world
GIDEON RACHMAN" (£)
https://www.ft.com/content/fa3096ff-4325-4a02-97fd-89095e44d5c1
"“It can be said with pride, India . . . defeated Covid-19 under the able, sensible, committed and visionary leadership of Prime Minister Modi . . . The party unequivocally hails its leadership for introducing India to the world as a proud and victorious nation in the fight against Covid.” Those were the words of a resolution passed by India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata party, just a few weeks ago in February."
What I can't understand is why Johnson didn't ask parliament to agree that £30k is an inadequate sum for refurbishment. He'd have got this through with his majority.
The principle is that the states may vary in size (indeed do, considerably) but each governs itself in certain respects whilst delegating responsibility for matters that cross state lines (federal matters) to the national government. One of the things they get for that is two Senators who participate in the national decision making.
Under your proposal, not only DC but also Virginia and Maryland get sold short - the State of Maryland and Commonwealth of Virginia no longer get two Senators to represent their interests in DC, but two people who divide their attentions between the interests of that state and those of DC (which has no interest or involvement in the state level politics of either).
Suggestion: maybe onclick rather than onmouseover? The latter either easy to trigger accidentally (and there will be a lag loading the tweet) or requires a delay to trigger.
*Of course, maybe if I spent less time reading/commenting here then I could find that time.
The issue is about conflicts of interest and undeclared pseudo donations. Either there's rules or there is a free for all. You can't have both. Boris knows the rules so there's no excuse.
Much better to have an undercover operaton.
I think a bigger Cabinet Office scandal in the news today is why they ever recruited the ex post office CEO who has conspired to have dozens of innocent people kept in jail over a number of years, and wasted tax payer money to aid her in this.
Maryland not so much - no chance of being a tipping point state, and hasn't voted Republican at Senate level for 40 years (has an unusual anti-Trumper GOP governor, but I think the suggestion is DC voters wouldn't get involved in that anyway).
Any way for it to work on Android phones?
In any event, you have to ask why a donor wants to make a secret contribution to do up the private quarters of Number 10 rather than a public one to refurb the local school hall or whatever. They might be wrong to believe it gets them closer to a knighthood or a contract or whatever... but that pretty obviously is their belief.
Conservative 44% (–)
Labour 34% (–)
Liberal Democrat 8% (-2)
SNP 5% (+1)
Green 4% (–)
Reform UK 3% (–)
Awkward for Correct Horse Battery. Its as if Westminster gossip isnt for everyone...
I suspect I know how to actually do it but it requires checking how vanilla works, how it pulls in the tweets and whether I can inject some javascript from the main website.
Why do all the journalists insist Boris said it, while Boris (and now Gove) are confident enough to deny it?
Indeed, who could even remember a throwaway comment in the heat of battle?
Who donated the money to Boris/the Conservatives to renovate the flat? What favours did they expect in return?
Was Boris the key actor in the decision to delay lockdown in autumn, thus causing thousands of unnecessary deaths? If not, then who?
My understanding of the science @Nigelb is that things have moved on since the first lockdown when we were cleaning everything in sight to an understanding that Covid via fomites (surface transmission) is not anywhere near the risk that airborne transmission is (aerosols particular potential concern in a gym (no jokes)) but my gym doesn't seem to have got the memo.
I think ventilation is the key not cleaning surfaces.
I'd like to tackle them over this but I need some ammo.
At a loss with the others.
Current CON lead by pollster:
Ipsos: +3
Survation: +6
ComRes: +9
YouGov: +10
Redfield: +10
Opinium: +11
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1386713087236001798?s=20
Translated from French by Google:
Unbelievable! @vonderleyen puts another layer on the misogyny of Recep Erdogan and Charles Michel when we know that it is his incompetence that she paid for in Ankara. The division and the hatred between the two European leaders exposed in broad daylight.
https://twitter.com/quatremer/status/1386714527337701381?s=20
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1386711691753365508?s=19
eg I confirm that I incurred these expenses wholly, exclusively and necessarily to enable me stay overnght away from my only or main home for the purpose of performing my duties as...
When you consider MPs spending eg £600 on houseplants four years running via such a declaration, then that in my view is perjury, which is jail worthy, as the statement is a lie. I would be interested in any comment from a real lawyer. I am not aware of any one prosecuted for this.
Here is the second home form, with that declaration:
Remuneration is still derisory.
But they always add overheads.
https://twitter.com/MacaesBruno/status/1386719840023588867?s=20
Given vaccine hesitancy in EU member states, driven in part by the EU & governments dicking around over AZ I doubt the EU will ever overtake the UK.....
A top 4% income is not derisory. It is simply not. Especially when you add a 1/60th or 1/40th Final Salary pension on top, with an approx. 10k a year employer contribution.
And add in all the other elements of the package.
And I am not aware that "we were all doing it Guv" is a defence in law.
I'm understand CCHQ (Tory Party) made payment to the Cabinet Office to cover initial costs of refurbishing the PM's home in Downing Street, and the PM is now repaying CCHQ. There is an audit trail. Cabinet Sec Simon Case knows about it. Which is presumably why he told MPs...
today that he would do a report on the propriety of how the decoration and furnishing was funded. This is breaking news and I will update
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1386723023550652428?s=20
An MP’s base salary is derisory given comparative jobs (senior doctors, barristers, or even executive managers in the public sector).
“They’re all at it” is not a defence in contract law, but it might be in common law. Or; it may mitigate any penalties.
The constraint is delivery systems.
Any claims made to minimise the difference will be based on a new definition of "vaccinated" as one dose, ignoring the extra month for distribution / immunity growing, and unlocking quickly.
Other differences will be declared "not to matter", just as they started claiming that contract wording was less important than 'morality' and 'fairness' once they discovered it did not say what they claimed.
However, none were even attempted to be prosecuted.
And the wall of secrecy is now creeping back.