The French Army up for a fight? I've seen it all now.
Ossuaire de Douaumont
I know, I've been there, as you may have noticed I mention Verdun a few posts ago.
Like Colleville-sur-Mer it really does hit you just how many people died in the two world wars.
The ones that stick with me most are the German war cemetries. Lots of dead soldiers piled up in as little ground as the invaded nations begrudgingly gave up. Langemarck in Belgium sticks out.
By contrast the German cemetry in Cannock is more llike our own with lots of space and well tended. Most of the dead were POWs or pilots.
Yes it was very noticeable that (certainly the ones that I have visited) the Allied cemeteries are bright, open, sunny, light, whereas the German ones were shaded with placques on the ground for the dead rather than crosses. A completely different mood. I think they were very well done, actually.
I wonder when the single-issue mob are going to notice the cross in every war cemetery, and start getting offended on behalf of the deceased who they will claim would be offended.
On the basis that you are offensive to pretty much anything or anyone, your comment would normally pass without mention. My point is purely that to attack Carrie for who she is or how she speaks is hardly fair.. but none of us is without sin... and her diction to me is a plus, but then I am not a fan of Eastenders 'speak'.
Two sources who claim Boris Johnson did say he would rather have ‘bodies pile high in their thousands’ than implement a third lockdown are prepared to speak publicly.
That Johnson is a liar will not be news to anyone. The only attack that will work is convincing the thicko Johnson lovers-well represented on here-that it matters
I happen to be able to see the wood for the trees, as can SO. No one cares enough to get their blood pressure raised about these trivialities, apart from a tiny number of partisan political obsessives. The voters are too busy down the pub, playing golf, keeping their businesses afloat, making up for lost time with family etc... and they are the ones that have life right.
Family being the key word. The PM chose to kill members of lots of people's families to generate "Boris Saves Christmas" headlines. Now that the proof comes out, expect the anger to turn into rage.
When you say "chose to kill" you alienate anyone who is not already convinced that Johnson is evil incarnate. There will be rage - among people who already agree that he is evil incarnate.
It was deliberate and it was done twice.
First - the policy to ship Covid patients into care homes from hospital with no testing allowed. Reports at the time of fraught care home staff arguing with ambulance crews that they wouldn't take the residents back, denials that it was policy until it was proven. Result - 20,000 dead in care homes in a short period Second - the denial of the need to lock down through the winter. The declaration of the absurd 5 day period where Covid wouldn't get us. The Boris Saves Christmas headlines. Result? 68k cases a day in January. We haven't had the proof yet, but Cummings and now two other people have come forward to prove it.
Watch the Daily Mail. Their coverage at the moment is there to whip up a frenzy. Next they move into heart-rendering stories of people who lost their closest loved-ones as a direct result of this policy. We already had it on radio phone-ins yesterday, and the popular tabloids will be plastered with it.
I've been saying for months that this policy will sink him and that the Mail would go crazy over it. And here they are.
The Daily Heil exists to whip up hate.
But its impact is rather trivial and its typically laughed at by most normal people.
Its a shame you've succombed to its lure.
Putting things in context
The UK is fretting about some wallpaper meanwhile
The head of the EU believes her priority is who gets to sit on a sofa first rather than the 1000s of her citizens dying each day
The french army is making noises about why it might be better if it ran the country instead of the fop president
The UK is "fretting" about the probity of its PM. This is allowed, I think, despite this being a big old complex world with lots of bad stuff going on.
LOL show me a UK PM whose probity wasnt questionable. Likewise a LOTO
Clement Attlee? And I don't recall much of this sort of muck being thrown around Eden, either. Competence questions yes, but honesty no. Unless I don't remember.
Anecdotal stories from India hospitals that Remdesivir isn't helping much against their local variant.
Disappointing.
More than disappointing, worrying.....its no magic bullet, but it has saved loads of lives.
Remember that lots of these pieces of anecdotal ‘evidence’ have proved unworthy of the billing since COVID began. Most in fact. So I’d suggest waiting for proper evidence before jumping to any conclusions.
Yes, I remember the panic about reinfection in Brazil after that one unreviewed study which then turned out to be a load of rubbish.
The French Army up for a fight? I've seen it all now.
Ossuaire de Douaumont
I know, I've been there, as you may have noticed I mention Verdun a few posts ago.
Like Colleville-sur-Mer it really does hit you just how many people died in the two world wars.
The ones that stick with me most are the German war cemetries. Lots of dead soldiers piled up in as little ground as the invaded nations begrudgingly gave up. Langemarck in Belgium sticks out.
By contrast the German cemetry in Cannock is more llike our own with lots of space and well tended. Most of the dead were POWs or pilots.
Yes it was very noticeable that (certainly the ones that I have visited) the Allied cemeteries are bright, open, sunny, light, whereas the German ones were shaded with placques on the ground for the dead rather than crosses. A completely different mood. I think they were very well done, actually.
I agree, Im not knocking the German cemetries they did their best with much restricted means, it's why I find visiting them and seeing the other side of the coin a worthwhile trip.
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
There appears to be both a "nothing to see here, move along" defence from PB Tories and pessimists on the left saying "it won't cut through".
It will, and here's why. The capstone was, is, and remains the government policy to let people die en masse to save Christmas / get positive headlines. There is no longer any doubt that Liar said it - both the promised recording and now people willing to testify under oath points to it happening. What will do him isn't that he said it, but that he has been caught lying about saying it.
He could have survived this. "There is a delicate balance to strike between being ultra-cautious and killing the economy. Whilst I regret the colourful language said in the middle of the most harrowing of meetings in the midst of a national emergency, I don't regret being the person making the decisions - I almost died of Covid remember." He'd have been OK.
Instead we have total denial. Never said it, didn't happen, of course it didn't happen would be an outrage to say such an awful thing". Then its proven he did say it. But his own definition then its the worst thing that could have been said.
The rest of the scandals - and he should resign like Mandelson over the undeclared house loan - will then suddenly gain weight whereas by themselves they would have been ineffective.
Not that this is manna from heaven for Labour. All this does is removes Liar and the cabal of idiots from government and replaces them with Sunak/Truss. Labour and IDStarmer won't get a look in.
@Philip_Thompson, for example, after a quiet day yesterday getting his story together for today, has come back all guns blazing. I paraphrase, but "Boris saved the lives of the nation with his clarion call on vaccinations", a fair point, and indeed all the other nonsense for Johnson is just froth.
On the news last night LauraK. took us into Mrs May's dour beige Downing Street flat, proof if it were needed that a tasteful makeover was desperately required, irrespective of who paid. But back to the saved lives element of the story. Isn't Johnson's popularity all about his Churchillian patriotism, leading the nation from the front to defeat the pandemic? Indeed it is, and should his callous, angry quip be true, it might cause him a problem. And if it does, will Mr and Mrs Sunak, just have to live with Carrie's god-awful wallpaper?
Or - radical idea - they can buy some new wallpaper or cans of paint like the rest of the world do.
Call me boring if you want but I don't see what's wrong with a can of Magnolia from B&Q. Good enough for me.
What others do on their walls - to be honest I couldn't care less, so long as I'm not expected to pay for it.
I'm sorry but £60k to redecorate a small flat is a racket. Its twatty wallpaper sold at ludicrous prices to effete snobs. Someone posted the Harry and Paul "I saw you coming" sketch the other day and its literally that.
There's no need to use wallpaper, paint is a fraction of the cost and just as good in my opinion.
But other people have other priorities. I'm a coffee snob, I love the stuff but won't drink instant, I hate it. A coffee isn't a decent coffee without a proper crema. But other people will look at it and think there's nothing wrong with instant, in the same way as I see nothing wrong with paint. 🤷♂️
Everyone has stuff they want to spend their money on. So long as they're not spending mine I don't care.
What achieves “cut through” and enters the public consciousness, and which stories remain confined to the Westminster bubble, is part of the art and alchemy of politics. Having an eye for the difference between what gets voters excited and what makes people in Westminster excitable is key to successful political communications.
As people have said it depends on the context - I don't want to add to the great posts about this today.
I would say, however, that as we know Boris' instinct is to make people happy and anti-restrictions of freedom. I can't quite remember when all the lockdowns started and finished (first Mar 23 - Jun ??; was there a second?; third Jan - Jun).
But I think it absolutely reasonable for a PM to question whether it is right and correct to keep the whole nation locked down for what, 10 out of 15 months.
Of course, we want to know - but never will - the context, tone, and intent of his comment. If he made it.
So for me the thought of questioning lockdown is a good one; the flippancy if that is what it was, about tens of thousands of deaths is unforgiveable (and cf my example yesterday if he'd been so blase - in private or anywhere else - about, say, the death of a British soldier on ops).
The second English lockdown was in November to early December.
The problem was the preference for lockdowns rather than border control.
A view shared by pretty much all the political and media class.
They were willing for the bodies to pile up by the tens of thousands so that Kay Burley could go to South Africa and Boris could go to India.
I'm not sure although take the point. It was the "Kent" variant. Was it so named because it emerged in Kent? If so then travel was incidental to the 2nd wave?
If we hadn't imported covid a second time during last summer then there would have been less chance that variants would emerge in this country.
Assuming that is the Kent variant did emerge here rather than only being first identified here.
There is also the aspect that slack border control allowed the export of the Kent variant from this country to others.
I wonder how the traditional Tory vote, e.g. @HYUFD and @TheScreamingEagles, feel about BoJo's apparent inability to spend money wisely and without corruption.
The French Army up for a fight? I've seen it all now.
Ossuaire de Douaumont
I know, I've been there, as you may have noticed I mention Verdun a few posts ago.
Like Colleville-sur-Mer it really does hit you just how many people died in the two world wars.
Near Hanover there's a British military cemetery with the grave of someone who was killed on May 7th 1945. His poor family!!
But the saddest one to which I've been was that at Kanchanaburi, Thailand. All those young men who died as PoW's as a result of brutality and neglect.
There’s a Soviet cemetery in Potsdam where quite a few of the grave stones have a death year of 1946. I wonder if that’s to do with the dead being given official burial after disinterring from temporary battlefield graves?
I wonder how the traditional Tory vote, e.g. @HYUFD and @TheScreamingEagles, feel about BoJo's apparent inability to spend money wisely and without corruption.
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
That aside, it's very clear that an independent trust should be in charge of decorating No.10/11, which ironically would cost the taxpayer more.
On Boris, none of the current stories will bring him down, obviously. Not the redecoration. Nor the intemperate remarks. Nor the cronyism/mates' contracts. Nor the failure to replace Alex Allan. Nor the failure to update the Register of Members' Interests. Nor the failure to sack Patel for breaching the Ministerial Code. Nor the loss of lives to Covid. Nor the money wasted on track and trace. Nor Greensill and Cameron. I could go on. Individually, each of these does not have cut through. But collectively, they might, as a narrative of sleaze and cronyism is building.
I agree with those who argue that despite the Tories being more or less in power for 11 years, the Boris government really is brand new. And it's been in power less than 18 months. It usually takes a lot longer than that for sleaze allegations to take hold. In this respect, this government is performing more swiftly than any predecessor I can think of. I'm beginning to wonder if Boris will survive as long as I'd previously assumed. Government/ministerial/civil service self-discipline seems to be severely lacking, and the level of leaks and smears so early in Boris's reign does not augur well for a prolonged Johnson premiership. Hope I'm right (though I'll probably change my mind next week).
As people have said it depends on the context - I don't want to add to the great posts about this today.
I would say, however, that as we know Boris' instinct is to make people happy and anti-restrictions of freedom. I can't quite remember when all the lockdowns started and finished (first Mar 23 - Jun ??; was there a second?; third Jan - Jun).
But I think it absolutely reasonable for a PM to question whether it is right and correct to keep the whole nation locked down for what, 10 out of 15 months.
Of course, we want to know - but never will - the context, tone, and intent of his comment. If he made it.
So for me the thought of questioning lockdown is a good one; the flippancy if that is what it was, about tens of thousands of deaths is unforgiveable (and cf my example yesterday if he'd been so blase - in private or anywhere else - about, say, the death of a British soldier on ops).
The second English lockdown was in November to early December.
The problem was the preference for lockdowns rather than border control.
A view shared by pretty much all the political and media class.
They were willing for the bodies to pile up by the tens of thousands so that Kay Burley could go to South Africa and Boris could go to India.
I'm not sure although take the point. It was the "Kent" variant. Was it so named because it emerged in Kent? If so then travel was incidental to the 2nd wave?
It was called Kent because that was where it was first identified. There is every chance it was introduced into this county by somebody flying back from a jaunt somewhere.
Epidemiologically implausible given the evidence we have.
Given how much more transmissable it is, wherever it was imported from would have seen a massive surge like Kent saw - but nowhere did in the same way, despite restrictions at the time being similar.
Plus when a new (but not more transmissable) variant was imported earlier in the year from Spain it was seen all over the UK at the same time, as people were travelling from Spain to all of the UK. The epicentre of Kent makes it unlikely that this was imported as if it was it would have been imported to other locations too given the lack of travel restrictions at the time.
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election far more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
I wonder how the traditional Tory vote, e.g. @HYUFD and @TheScreamingEagles, feel about BoJo's apparent inability to spend money wisely and without corruption.
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
That aside, it's very clear that an independent trust should be in charge of decorating No.10/11, which ironically would cost the taxpayer more.
The issue, as far as I understand it, is not that money is being spent — the issue is about undeclared benefits from donors and/or private organisations.
Besides, I found out this morning that the PM gets a grant from the treasury of 30k to decorate No.10/11. 30k gets you quite a lot of furniture...
I wonder how the traditional Tory vote, e.g. @HYUFD and @TheScreamingEagles, feel about BoJo's apparent inability to spend money wisely and without corruption.
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
That aside, it's very clear that an independent trust should be in charge of decorating No.10/11, which ironically would cost the taxpayer more.
Do we know the repayment terms of the loan? Is it in repayable 2121at 0% interest perhaps?
I wonder how the traditional Tory vote, e.g. @HYUFD and @TheScreamingEagles, feel about BoJo's apparent inability to spend money wisely and without corruption.
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
That aside, it's very clear that an independent trust should be in charge of decorating No.10/11, which ironically would cost the taxpayer more.
An undeclared loan is a breach of the ministerial code which is a resignation offence.
The French Army up for a fight? I've seen it all now.
Ossuaire de Douaumont
I know, I've been there, as you may have noticed I mention Verdun a few posts ago.
Like Colleville-sur-Mer it really does hit you just how many people died in the two world wars.
Near Hanover there's a British military cemetery with the grave of someone who was killed on May 7th 1945. His poor family!!
But the saddest one to which I've been was that at Kanchanaburi, Thailand. All those young men who died as PoW's as a result of brutality and neglect.
There’s a Soviet cemetery in Potsdam where quite a few of the grave stones have a death year of 1946. I wonder if that’s to do with the dead being given official burial after disinterring from temporary battlefield graves?
There's a thought. I don't think there was any sporadic German resistance after May 1945, as there was with the Japanese.
I wonder how the traditional Tory vote, e.g. @HYUFD and @TheScreamingEagles, feel about BoJo's apparent inability to spend money wisely and without corruption.
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today on coming home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung our to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more inbalance and Nicky Campbell in fairness did say the were receiving texts acciusing him that he was leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant,,and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had exoectec that only Starmer would be under pressure
I'm not sure what relevance the polling has to this, other than for betting purposes.
Just because the public on the whole doesn't care about something doesn't mean it is right or ok. Standards do matter for the integrity of the office itself.
I wonder how the traditional Tory vote, e.g. @HYUFD and @TheScreamingEagles, feel about BoJo's apparent inability to spend money wisely and without corruption.
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
That aside, it's very clear that an independent trust should be in charge of decorating No.10/11, which ironically would cost the taxpayer more.
An undeclared loan is a breach of the ministerial code which is a resignation offence.
On Boris, none of the current stories will bring him down, obviously. Not the redecoration. Nor the intemperate remarks. Nor the cronyism/mates' contracts. Nor the failure to replace Alex Allan. Nor the failure to update the Register of Members' Interests. Nor the failure to sack Patel for breaching the Ministerial Code. Nor the loss of lives to Covid. Nor the money wasted on track and trace. Nor Greensill and Cameron. I could go on. Individually, each of these does not have cut through. But collectively, they might, as a narrative of sleaze and cronyism is building.
I agree with those who argue that despite the Tories being more or less in power for 11 years, the Boris government really is brand new. And it's been in power less than 18 months. It usually takes a lot longer than that for sleaze allegations to take hold. In this respect, this government is performing more swiftly than any predecessor I can think of. I'm beginning to wonder if Boris will survive as long as I'd previously assumed. Government/ministerial/civil service self-discipline seems to be severely lacking, and the level of leaks and smears so early in Boris's reign does not augur well for a prolonged Johnson premiership. Hope I'm right (though I'll probably change my mind next week).
I think the current stories will play a part in bringing him down, but not now. It will be when the government has to do something unpopular with Tory voters, whether its on tax, care, immigration or whatever. At that point these stories will stop many hitherto Boris fan voters giving him the benefit of the doubt. Without them there will be many Tory MPs queuing up to knife him in the back.
I wonder how the traditional Tory vote, e.g. @HYUFD and @TheScreamingEagles, feel about BoJo's apparent inability to spend money wisely and without corruption.
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
That aside, it's very clear that an independent trust should be in charge of decorating No.10/11, which ironically would cost the taxpayer more.
An undeclared loan is a breach of the ministerial code which is a resignation offence.
"was" rather than "is", unfortunately.
Though the Banterverse outcome would definitely be for Boris to pay for the redecorating and then not get to enjoy it.
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
What evidence do you have that he said these remarks?
Goodness me we’ve approached tiresome silly season in the British media haven’t we.
SCANDAL: Political party pays for redecoration of official residence so it doesn’t fall on the taxpayer!!
DISGRACE: Unnamed sources disclose that man who nearly dies of covid still retains balance when assessing pros and cons of lockdown!!
If this is the best that long standing enemies can come up with after a year long cease fire, it only serves to show the PM has successfully navigated the choppy waters of both Brexit and the catastrophe of Covid. These are bulllets that would bounce off the Marshmellow Man, much less the Terminator.
If Gove is behind the briefing (Mail links suggest he might be), he will be out of government by Christmas is my guess.
The story is not who paid, but Johnson not declaring it. In previous governments this has been a resignation matter. Ask Peter Mandelson. But it is undoubtedly true that standards have so slipped under Johnson that at a time when economic optimism is soaring on the back of a highly successful vaccine roll-out this episode will have no effect on anything. Had the story broken at the start of the year, when the government and the PM were far less popular, it would probably have been a very different matter.
What did Peter Mandelson resign for?
I remember lying on a mortgage application and something to do with corruptly accelerating a passport application fir a billionaire. Was there something else as well?
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
As people have said it depends on the context - I don't want to add to the great posts about this today.
I would say, however, that as we know Boris' instinct is to make people happy and anti-restrictions of freedom. I can't quite remember when all the lockdowns started and finished (first Mar 23 - Jun ??; was there a second?; third Jan - Jun).
But I think it absolutely reasonable for a PM to question whether it is right and correct to keep the whole nation locked down for what, 10 out of 15 months.
Of course, we want to know - but never will - the context, tone, and intent of his comment. If he made it.
So for me the thought of questioning lockdown is a good one; the flippancy if that is what it was, about tens of thousands of deaths is unforgiveable (and cf my example yesterday if he'd been so blase - in private or anywhere else - about, say, the death of a British soldier on ops).
The second English lockdown was in November to early December.
The problem was the preference for lockdowns rather than border control.
A view shared by pretty much all the political and media class.
They were willing for the bodies to pile up by the tens of thousands so that Kay Burley could go to South Africa and Boris could go to India.
I'm not sure although take the point. It was the "Kent" variant. Was it so named because it emerged in Kent? If so then travel was incidental to the 2nd wave?
If we hadn't imported covid a second time during last summer then there would have been less chance that variants would emerge in this country.
Assuming that is the Kent variant did emerge here rather than only being first identified here.
There is also the aspect that slack border control allowed the export of the Kent variant from this country to others.
Hmm yes but surely variants can emerge anywhere.
I get the point about nasty foreign variants coming over here and infecting our women (and men) but it is all part of the lockdown totality.
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
It wasn't a loan, until it became public knowledge.
My take is
(a) the taxpayer (his landlord) (ie me) didn't pay for it. That is good.
(b) who gives a flying f*** what Boris says in private? We already know he likes flowery language.
I reckon that's how the average Tory-inclined voter will think, too.
Unfortunately it's hiding lots of more real stuff, like cronyism, conflict of interest, etc.
And I thought Dominic Cummings was a contemptible little man, none of what he says is to be believed. Suddenly he is He Who Talks Truth To Power. Laughable.
I wonder how the traditional Tory vote, e.g. @HYUFD and @TheScreamingEagles, feel about BoJo's apparent inability to spend money wisely and without corruption.
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
That aside, it's very clear that an independent trust should be in charge of decorating No.10/11, which ironically would cost the taxpayer more.
An undeclared loan is a breach of the ministerial code which is a resignation offence.
An undeclared loan would need to become a declared loan, if there is anything to declare.
Can you name anyone who has ever resigned due to a loan like that? And no Peter Mandelson committing fraud was not the same thing.
The payment for Carrie’s wallpaper was effectively money laundering.
No, it really wasn’t. Money laundering has 3 distinct elements, the only one of which I can remember is “layering”.
And layering your wallpaper is a definite no no.
Might I suggest some remedial training? I have it ready to be rolled out ........ with humour, wit and insight. And how often can you say that about Compliance training?
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
It wasn't a loan, until it became public knowledge.
My take is
(a) the taxpayer (his landlord) (ie me) didn't pay for it. That is good.
(b) who gives a flying f*** what Boris says in private? We already know he likes flowery language.
I reckon that's how the average Tory-inclined voter will think, too.
Unfortunately it's hiding lots of more real stuff, like cronyism, conflict of interest, etc.
And I thought Dominic Cummings was a contemptible little man, none of what he says is to be believed. Suddenly he is He Who Talks Truth To Power. Laughable.
As regards b), I suspect women will find that offensive. Men won't care as much.
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
It wasn't a loan, until it became public knowledge.
My take is
(a) the taxpayer (his landlord) (ie me) didn't pay for it. That is good.
(b) who gives a flying f*** what Boris says in private? We already know he likes flowery language.
I reckon that's how the average Tory-inclined voter will think, too.
Unfortunately it's hiding lots of more real stuff, like cronyism, conflict of interest, etc.
And I thought Dominic Cummings was a contemptible little man, none of what he says is to be believed. Suddenly he is He Who Talks Truth To Power. Laughable.
Multiple sources according to ITV that are prepared to swear on oath that King Liar said let the bodies pile up in their thousands.
Epicurious @epicurious Today we announced that Epicurious is cutting out beef. It won’t appear in new Epi recipes, articles, newsletters, or on social. This isn’t a vendetta against cows or people who eat them. It’s a shift about sustainability; not anti-beef but pro-planet.
That's more pro-PR than pro-Planet.
Fools. Differences in beef production systems can give differences in emission levels of 5x. Just like everything else.
Over time it can be fixed or optimised.
There's beef farming and there's beef farming
Exactly. I'm all for moving to more sustainable forms of beef-farming.
As people have said it depends on the context - I don't want to add to the great posts about this today.
I would say, however, that as we know Boris' instinct is to make people happy and anti-restrictions of freedom. I can't quite remember when all the lockdowns started and finished (first Mar 23 - Jun ??; was there a second?; third Jan - Jun).
But I think it absolutely reasonable for a PM to question whether it is right and correct to keep the whole nation locked down for what, 10 out of 15 months.
Of course, we want to know - but never will - the context, tone, and intent of his comment. If he made it.
So for me the thought of questioning lockdown is a good one; the flippancy if that is what it was, about tens of thousands of deaths is unforgiveable (and cf my example yesterday if he'd been so blase - in private or anywhere else - about, say, the death of a British soldier on ops).
The second English lockdown was in November to early December.
The problem was the preference for lockdowns rather than border control.
A view shared by pretty much all the political and media class.
They were willing for the bodies to pile up by the tens of thousands so that Kay Burley could go to South Africa and Boris could go to India.
I'm not sure although take the point. It was the "Kent" variant. Was it so named because it emerged in Kent? If so then travel was incidental to the 2nd wave?
It was called Kent because that was where it was first identified. There is every chance it was introduced into this county by somebody flying back from a jaunt somewhere.
Epidemiologically implausible given the evidence we have.
Given how much more transmissable it is, wherever it was imported from would have seen a massive surge like Kent saw - but nowhere did in the same way, despite restrictions at the time being similar.
Plus when a new (but not more transmissable) variant was imported earlier in the year from Spain it was seen all over the UK at the same time, as people were travelling from Spain to all of the UK. The epicentre of Kent makes it unlikely that this was imported as if it was it would have been imported to other locations too given the lack of travel restrictions at the time.
There was a massive surge in Belgium in October peaking at a seven day average of over 17k per day:
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
What evidence do you have that he said these remarks?
Multiple sources and a recording due in next couple of days.
Goodness me we’ve approached tiresome silly season in the British media haven’t we.
SCANDAL: Political party pays for redecoration of official residence so it doesn’t fall on the taxpayer!!
DISGRACE: Unnamed sources disclose that man who nearly dies of covid still retains balance when assessing pros and cons of lockdown!!
If this is the best that long standing enemies can come up with after a year long cease fire, it only serves to show the PM has successfully navigated the choppy waters of both Brexit and the catastrophe of Covid. These are bulllets that would bounce off the Marshmellow Man, much less the Terminator.
If Gove is behind the briefing (Mail links suggest he might be), he will be out of government by Christmas is my guess.
The story is not who paid, but Johnson not declaring it. In previous governments this has been a resignation matter. Ask Peter Mandelson. But it is undoubtedly true that standards have so slipped under Johnson that at a time when economic optimism is soaring on the back of a highly successful vaccine roll-out this episode will have no effect on anything. Had the story broken at the start of the year, when the government and the PM were far less popular, it would probably have been a very different matter.
What did Peter Mandelson resign for?
I remember lying on a mortgage application and something to do with corruptly accelerating a passport application fir a billionaire. Was there something else as well?
That was his second resignation. The first resignation was the one relevant to this one - he failed to declare a loan in the register of member's interests. It was a breach of the ministerial code, so he resigned.
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
What evidence do you have that he said these remarks?
Well two sources are apparently willing to swear under oath that he made those comments and on past form these comments aren’t really much of a surprise. We had Die in a Ditch , fxck business , Operation Last Gasp etc . So it doesn’t take much to join the dots up.
Big G, I hope your son-in-law's operation goes well.
Thank you OKC
The operation itself is fairly routine, but he has been told his recovery even with extensive physiotherapy is likely to take 3 months so hopefully by the time he retires in December, he will be up and ready to enjoy retired life
Multiple witnesses to Boris Johnson’s comments say they are prepared to swear on oath that he said he would “let the bodies pile high in their thousands.”
Goodness me we’ve approached tiresome silly season in the British media haven’t we.
SCANDAL: Political party pays for redecoration of official residence so it doesn’t fall on the taxpayer!!
DISGRACE: Unnamed sources disclose that man who nearly dies of covid still retains balance when assessing pros and cons of lockdown!!
If this is the best that long standing enemies can come up with after a year long cease fire, it only serves to show the PM has successfully navigated the choppy waters of both Brexit and the catastrophe of Covid. These are bulllets that would bounce off the Marshmellow Man, much less the Terminator.
If Gove is behind the briefing (Mail links suggest he might be), he will be out of government by Christmas is my guess.
The story is not who paid, but Johnson not declaring it. In previous governments this has been a resignation matter. Ask Peter Mandelson. But it is undoubtedly true that standards have so slipped under Johnson that at a time when economic optimism is soaring on the back of a highly successful vaccine roll-out this episode will have no effect on anything. Had the story broken at the start of the year, when the government and the PM were far less popular, it would probably have been a very different matter.
What did Peter Mandelson resign for?
I remember lying on a mortgage application and something to do with corruptly accelerating a passport application fir a billionaire. Was there something else as well?
Being Mandelbrot, there's no indication that what he resigned for was what he *said* he resigned for. But officially it was the passport.
This caught my eye on that link. 10k in newspaper articles in 4 weeks in 2001.
24 January 2001: Speculation grows that Mr Mandelson will resign as he is summoned to a morning meeting at Downing Street to help the prime minister "pin down" a "number of areas of fact".
1330 GMT: Mr Mandelson emerges from Downing Street to announce that he is resigning from the government.
19 February: Mr Mandelson donates his earnings from newspaper articles since his resignation, totalling £10,000, to the Omagh Victim's Legal Trust.
Epicurious @epicurious Today we announced that Epicurious is cutting out beef. It won’t appear in new Epi recipes, articles, newsletters, or on social. This isn’t a vendetta against cows or people who eat them. It’s a shift about sustainability; not anti-beef but pro-planet.
That's more pro-PR than pro-Planet.
Fools. Differences in beef production systems can give differences in emission levels of 5x. Just like everything else.
Over time it can be fixed or optimised.
There's beef farming and there's beef farming
Exactly. I'm all for moving to more sustainable forms of beef-farming.
I'm not for absolutist virtue-signalling.
The posts under that tweet have a depressingly familiar ring about them too
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
It wasn't a loan, until it became public knowledge.
My take is
(a) the taxpayer (his landlord) (ie me) didn't pay for it. That is good.
(b) who gives a flying f*** what Boris says in private? We already know he likes flowery language.
I reckon that's how the average Tory-inclined voter will think, too.
Unfortunately it's hiding lots of more real stuff, like cronyism, conflict of interest, etc.
And I thought Dominic Cummings was a contemptible little man, none of what he says is to be believed. Suddenly he is He Who Talks Truth To Power. Laughable.
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today on coming home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung our to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more inbalance and Nicky Campbell in fairness did say the were receiving texts acciusing him that he was leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant,,and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had exoectec that only Starmer would be under pressure
I'm not sure what relevance the polling has to this, other than for betting purposes.
Just because the public on the whole doesn't care about something doesn't mean it is right or ok. Standards do matter for the integrity of the office itself.
I fully understand your sentiment but in real politics winning is the bench mark and Boris has been excellent at that, rightly or wrongly
And thank you for your kind comments about my son in law
I'm still not seeing where the corruption is in taking a loan from his own party.
It wasn't a loan, until it became public knowledge.
My take is
(a) the taxpayer (his landlord) (ie me) didn't pay for it. That is good.
(b) who gives a flying f*** what Boris says in private? We already know he likes flowery language.
I reckon that's how the average Tory-inclined voter will think, too.
Unfortunately it's hiding lots of more real stuff, like cronyism, conflict of interest, etc.
And I thought Dominic Cummings was a contemptible little man, none of what he says is to be believed. Suddenly he is He Who Talks Truth To Power. Laughable.
Multiple sources according to ITV that are prepared to swear on oath that King Liar said let the bodies pile up in their thousands.
Gove will be loving this.
It's nearly always the lie that gets you/me/them.
And whatever his genuine talents, BoJo lies a lot, even by the standards of modern politicians.
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
What evidence do you have that he said these remarks?
Well two sources are apparently willing to swear under oath that he made those comments and on past form these comments aren’t really much of a surprise. We had Die in a Ditch , fxck business , Operation Last Gasp etc . So it doesn’t take much to join the dots up.
If they are willing to swear where are they ? Same with the alleged recording. It’s not evidence at all. It is hearsay at the moment.
UBS needs a decent compliance/investigations director in place to sort this stuff out. UBS reveals a $774m loss on Archegos trades - plus another $87m hit coming next quarter. But previously they said it was "not material"
'Tis but a flesh wound ?
It is an entirely avoidable loss. I know exactly why it happened. The corporate memory was lost. The database with the relevant information is still there but was not consulted. To the extent that anyone remembered or realised that the person behind Archegos had been convicted of insider dealing in relation to deals on which UBS was the lead advisor, they found any number of excuses to justify ignoring that in order to earn what they thought were juicy fees, which will be horribly outweighed by the costs.
Something like this happens every single time .........
Is anyone there asking themselves why they did not do the necessary due diligence?
I think we forget here, where we mostly think the government cocked up massively by having the Christmas relaxation rather than bringing in another lockdown in December, that not everyone shares that view. I know plety of people in the south who were - and still are, after all that has happened - royally pissed off that "Boris cancelled Christmas". As bad as January was, they still don't personally know anyone who died and it's all a bit abstract for them. Not everyone thinks the government was too slow and some would agree with "letting the bodies pile up" (as long as they're other people's bodies) to "save Christmas".
I know the national polling suggests the public favours all and every restriction on freedom, but what matters is two things: - How much is that true of Johnson supporters? By definition, they're mostly pro-Brexit and damn the consequences - taking actions to prevent harm may not be in their psyche. Labour/Lib-Dem/SNP supporters frothing at the mouth over 'Boris the Butcher' has little relevance to Johnson's electoral prospects. - How much do people actually care whether the restrictions are in law? If you plan to not visit relatives, then you're unlikely to be against a ban on visiting relatives. But do you actually care if there is no ban?
There appears to be both a "nothing to see here, move along" defence from PB Tories and pessimists on the left saying "it won't cut through".
It will, and here's why. The capstone was, is, and remains the government policy to let people die en masse to save Christmas / get positive headlines. There is no longer any doubt that Liar said it - both the promised recording and now people willing to testify under oath points to it happening. What will do him isn't that he said it, but that he has been caught lying about saying it.
He could have survived this. "There is a delicate balance to strike between being ultra-cautious and killing the economy. Whilst I regret the colourful language said in the middle of the most harrowing of meetings in the midst of a national emergency, I don't regret being the person making the decisions - I almost died of Covid remember." He'd have been OK.
Instead we have total denial. Never said it, didn't happen, of course it didn't happen would be an outrage to say such an awful thing". Then its proven he did say it. But his own definition then its the worst thing that could have been said.
The rest of the scandals - and he should resign like Mandelson over the undeclared house loan - will then suddenly gain weight whereas by themselves they would have been ineffective.
Not that this is manna from heaven for Labour. All this does is removes Liar and the cabal of idiots from government and replaces them with Sunak/Truss. Labour and IDStarmer won't get a look in.
@Philip_Thompson, for example, after a quiet day yesterday getting his story together for today, has come back all guns blazing. I paraphrase, but "Boris saved the lives of the nation with his clarion call on vaccinations", a fair point, and indeed all the other nonsense for Johnson is just froth.
On the news last night LauraK. took us into Mrs May's dour beige Downing Street flat, proof if it were needed that a tasteful makeover was desperately required, irrespective of who paid. But back to the saved lives element of the story. Isn't Johnson's popularity all about his Churchillian patriotism, leading the nation from the front to defeat the pandemic? Indeed it is, and should his callous, angry quip be true, it might cause him a problem. And if it does, will Mr and Mrs Sunak, just have to live with Carrie's god-awful wallpaper?
Or - radical idea - they can buy some new wallpaper or cans of paint like the rest of the world do.
Call me boring if you want but I don't see what's wrong with a can of Magnolia from B&Q. Good enough for me.
What others do on their walls - to be honest I couldn't care less, so long as I'm not expected to pay for it.
I'm sorry but £60k to redecorate a small flat is a racket. Its twatty wallpaper sold at ludicrous prices to effete snobs. Someone posted the Harry and Paul "I saw you coming" sketch the other day and its literally that.
What achieves “cut through” and enters the public consciousness, and which stories remain confined to the Westminster bubble, is part of the art and alchemy of politics. Having an eye for the difference between what gets voters excited and what makes people in Westminster excitable is key to successful political communications.
Personally I still don't think the the decor/furnishings stuff is going anywhere. Boris can brazen that out.
The "pile bodies high" remark is much more damaging and will cut through with the public though. That's absolutely terrible for Boris if proven to be true.
The payment for Carrie’s wallpaper was effectively money laundering.
No, it really wasn’t. Money laundering has 3 distinct elements, the only one of which I can remember is “layering”.
And layering your wallpaper is a definite no no.
Might I suggest some remedial training? I have it ready to be rolled out ........ with humour, wit and insight. And how often can you say that about Compliance training?
Epicurious @epicurious Today we announced that Epicurious is cutting out beef. It won’t appear in new Epi recipes, articles, newsletters, or on social. This isn’t a vendetta against cows or people who eat them. It’s a shift about sustainability; not anti-beef but pro-planet.
That's more pro-PR than pro-Planet.
Fools. Differences in beef production systems can give differences in emission levels of 5x. Just like everything else.
Over time it can be fixed or optimised.
There's beef farming and there's beef farming
Exactly. I'm all for moving to more sustainable forms of beef-farming.
I'm not for absolutist virtue-signalling.
The posts under that tweet have a depressingly familiar ring about them too
Epicurious will find this gives them little breathing space; this will now be used by campaigners to exert pressure on them to go entirely vegan.
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
You do know the current editor is pro remain unlike Dacre
The idea Keir Starmer is going to resign if Labour loses Hartlepool is for the birds, he's in for as long as he wants the job.
Unless he loses a General Election surely that will challenge things?
Even though the Labour Party do have a history of allowing losers to lose again, like Kinnock and Corbyn.
Keir will be there until the GE, which will probably be in 2024. Then he loses the GE. But he does better than LAB did in 2019.
So the problem for LAB is who can replace him. Nandy? Rayner?
In many ways Starmer is like Kinnock, following Corbyn who was like Foot. It will be interesting then to see if Starmer does indeed stay to lose 2029 as well as 2024.
What achieves “cut through” and enters the public consciousness, and which stories remain confined to the Westminster bubble, is part of the art and alchemy of politics. Having an eye for the difference between what gets voters excited and what makes people in Westminster excitable is key to successful political communications.
Personally I still don't think the the decor/furnishings stuff is going anywhere. Boris can brazen that out.
The "pile bodies high" remark is much more damaging and will cut through with the public though. That's absolutely terrible for Boris if proven to be true.
I agree no one really cares about the refurbishment and it won’t impact the public but the callous comments are hugely damaging . I can only imagine the furore in here from the Bozo Cult if Starmer had made similar alleged comments .
There appears to be both a "nothing to see here, move along" defence from PB Tories and pessimists on the left saying "it won't cut through".
It will, and here's why. The capstone was, is, and remains the government policy to let people die en masse to save Christmas / get positive headlines. There is no longer any doubt that Liar said it - both the promised recording and now people willing to testify under oath points to it happening. What will do him isn't that he said it, but that he has been caught lying about saying it.
He could have survived this. "There is a delicate balance to strike between being ultra-cautious and killing the economy. Whilst I regret the colourful language said in the middle of the most harrowing of meetings in the midst of a national emergency, I don't regret being the person making the decisions - I almost died of Covid remember." He'd have been OK.
Instead we have total denial. Never said it, didn't happen, of course it didn't happen would be an outrage to say such an awful thing". Then its proven he did say it. But his own definition then its the worst thing that could have been said.
The rest of the scandals - and he should resign like Mandelson over the undeclared house loan - will then suddenly gain weight whereas by themselves they would have been ineffective.
Not that this is manna from heaven for Labour. All this does is removes Liar and the cabal of idiots from government and replaces them with Sunak/Truss. Labour and IDStarmer won't get a look in.
Fair play for pinning your colours to the mast. I'm still in the 'won't cut through' box. I certainly don't expect Boris to go over this.
I think we forget here, where we mostly think the government cocked up massively by having the Christmas relaxation rather than bringing in another lockdown in December, that not everyone shares that view. I know plety of people in the south who were - and still are, after all that has happened - royally pissed off that "Boris cancelled Christmas". As bad as January was, they still don't personally know anyone who died and it's all a bit abstract for them. Not everyone thinks the government was too slow and some would agree with "letting the bodies pile up" (as long as they're other people's bodies) to "save Christmas".
I know the national polling suggests the public favours all and every restriction on freedom, but what matters is two things: - How much is that true of Johnson supporters? By definition, they're mostly pro-Brexit and damn the consequences - taking actions to prevent harm may not be in their psyche. Labour/Lib-Dem/SNP supporters frothing at the mouth over 'Boris the Butcher' has little relevance to Johnson's electoral prospects. - How much do people actually care whether the restrictions are in law? If you plan to not visit relatives, then you're unlikely to be against a ban on visiting relatives. But do you actually care if there is no ban?
The extent to which Leave/Remain (or even left/right, or any other axis) matches pro/anti lockdown is a little unclear. Based purely on the people who post angry things on facebook, I can see no correlation whatsoever. You'd have thought there might be a correlation-by-proxy to young/old, but even here I can't see any obvious correlation between views.
The story of what is effectively another Oxford success. (And like everything else which has worked during the pandemic, had its genesis a decade or more back.)
How the UK found the first effective Covid-19 treatment — and saved a million lives The United Kingdom is not a pandemic success story. But its massive Covid-19 trials program is. https://www.vox.com/22397833/dexamethasone-coronavirus-uk-recovery-trial ...The road to the Recovery Trial started in the 1980s, when a group of Oxford scholars was dissatisfied with the lack of treatments for heart attacks. They imagined a trial that could test different interventions — a massive trial, perhaps as many as 10,000 to 15,000 patients. For such a big trial to work, it had to be simple: Nurses and doctors would need to be able to try out the treatments the researchers were testing as part of their normal care routine....
As people have said it depends on the context - I don't want to add to the great posts about this today.
I would say, however, that as we know Boris' instinct is to make people happy and anti-restrictions of freedom. I can't quite remember when all the lockdowns started and finished (first Mar 23 - Jun ??; was there a second?; third Jan - Jun).
But I think it absolutely reasonable for a PM to question whether it is right and correct to keep the whole nation locked down for what, 10 out of 15 months.
Of course, we want to know - but never will - the context, tone, and intent of his comment. If he made it.
So for me the thought of questioning lockdown is a good one; the flippancy if that is what it was, about tens of thousands of deaths is unforgiveable (and cf my example yesterday if he'd been so blase - in private or anywhere else - about, say, the death of a British soldier on ops).
The second English lockdown was in November to early December.
The problem was the preference for lockdowns rather than border control.
A view shared by pretty much all the political and media class.
They were willing for the bodies to pile up by the tens of thousands so that Kay Burley could go to South Africa and Boris could go to India.
I'm not sure although take the point. It was the "Kent" variant. Was it so named because it emerged in Kent? If so then travel was incidental to the 2nd wave?
It was called Kent because that was where it was first identified. There is every chance it was introduced into this county by somebody flying back from a jaunt somewhere.
Epidemiologically implausible given the evidence we have.
Given how much more transmissable it is, wherever it was imported from would have seen a massive surge like Kent saw - but nowhere did in the same way, despite restrictions at the time being similar.
Plus when a new (but not more transmissable) variant was imported earlier in the year from Spain it was seen all over the UK at the same time, as people were travelling from Spain to all of the UK. The epicentre of Kent makes it unlikely that this was imported as if it was it would have been imported to other locations too given the lack of travel restrictions at the time.
There was a massive surge in Belgium in October peaking at a seven day average of over 17k per day:
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today, and on driving home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Big G, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken if you think that the Mail is "the doyen of the left and EU supporters". As a member of both, I can reassure you that the left hate the Mail with a vengeance. You can be confident in the Mail's support for the Tories at the next GE, whenever that is. The Mail remains a scurrilous, unpleasant, right-wing rag.
You do know the current editor is pro remain unlike Dacre
Indeed the Mail on Sunday which he edited backed Remain.
I was up very early this morning (5.30am) to take my son in law into hospital in Wrexham for his complete knee replacement operation later today on coming home I listened to the radio
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung our to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more inbalance and Nicky Campbell in fairness did say the were receiving texts acciusing him that he was leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election fair more relevant,,and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had exoectec that only Starmer would be under pressure
I'm not sure what relevance the polling has to this, other than for betting purposes.
Just because the public on the whole doesn't care about something doesn't mean it is right or ok. Standards do matter for the integrity of the office itself.
I fully understand your sentiment but in real politics winning is the bench mark and Boris has been excellent at that, rightly or wrongly
And thank you for your kind comments about my son in law
Its irrelevant whether Johnson went on to bring in further lockdowns . The defense from some is he did the right thing anyway which completely misses the point . The issue is he viewed more bodies piling up as a price worth paying if he kept the economy open.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
What evidence do you have that he said these remarks?
Multiple sources and a recording due in next couple of days.
I was on a Facebook group last night (for fans of The Office, if you must know) and lots of young men, all big football fans etc, and not necessarily "woke" - making lots of close to the bone jokes etc. - were liking a post were the thrust of the joke was that Keir Starmer was a Tory. This got something like 60-70 likes, a lot.
Comments
Has anyone asked Andy Street his views on the Downing Street flat being described as a ‘John Lewis nightmare’?
https://twitter.com/richardmorrisuk/status/1386959811233857536?s=20
and her diction to me is a plus, but then I am not a fan of Eastenders 'speak'.
There are of course always a range of factors when politicians have to make these difficult decisions , balancing the risk to life v damage to the economy . However it’s the callous nature of the comments and the dismissive tone of the people who could die that is the real problem for no 10 .
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1386957353539538946?s=21
But other people have other priorities. I'm a coffee snob, I love the stuff but won't drink instant, I hate it. A coffee isn't a decent coffee without a proper crema. But other people will look at it and think there's nothing wrong with instant, in the same way as I see nothing wrong with paint. 🤷♂️
Everyone has stuff they want to spend their money on. So long as they're not spending mine I don't care.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5d2e7434-a6b0-11eb-b000-cc13f23b4eff
Assuming that is the Kent variant did emerge here rather than only being first identified here.
There is also the aspect that slack border control allowed the export of the Kent variant from this country to others.
https://twitter.com/MattHancock/status/1386956335787413507
That aside, it's very clear that an independent trust should be in charge of decorating No.10/11, which ironically would cost the taxpayer more.
I agree with those who argue that despite the Tories being more or less in power for 11 years, the Boris government really is brand new. And it's been in power less than 18 months. It usually takes a lot longer than that for sleaze allegations to take hold. In this respect, this government is performing more swiftly than any predecessor I can think of. I'm beginning to wonder if Boris will survive as long as I'd previously assumed. Government/ministerial/civil service self-discipline seems to be severely lacking, and the level of leaks and smears so early in Boris's reign does not augur well for a prolonged Johnson premiership. Hope I'm right (though I'll probably change my mind next week).
Given how much more transmissable it is, wherever it was imported from would have seen a massive surge like Kent saw - but nowhere did in the same way, despite restrictions at the time being similar.
Plus when a new (but not more transmissable) variant was imported earlier in the year from Spain it was seen all over the UK at the same time, as people were travelling from Spain to all of the UK. The epicentre of Kent makes it unlikely that this was imported as if it was it would have been imported to other locations too given the lack of travel restrictions at the time.
I was aware of the dreadful headlines for Boris from todays papers, and not least from the Mail which has suddenly become the doyen of the left and EU supporters, and expected Boris to be hung out to dry
However, the reporting was more balanced than I expected, indeed fairly critical of Labour who have been using sleaze for some time with no cut through yet in the polls. That is not to say Boris received a free pass, but the alleged comments were put more in balance and Nicky Campbell, in fairness, did say they were receiving texts accusing him of leading the left in the attacks on Boris.
On returning home, Sky were fairly similar, but I believe Kate McCann of Sky was spot on when she said we only have just over a week to see the results of the nationwide ballot and whether it cuts through
I would suggest if after all this Boris does OK and wins Harlepool ( which I do not expect) then Starmer is going to come under huge pressure
The last few days has made next week's election far more relevant, and important for both Boris and Starmer, while previously I had expected that only Starmer would be under pressure
Besides, I found out this morning that the PM gets a grant from the treasury of 30k to decorate No.10/11. 30k gets you quite a lot of furniture...
Thought; armed German women resisting rape?
Just because the public on the whole doesn't care about something doesn't mean it is right or ok. Standards do matter for the integrity of the office itself.
Though the Banterverse outcome would definitely be for Boris to pay for the redecorating and then not get to enjoy it.
Once for passports for favours.
Once for mortgage fraud.
Never for for a short term loan.
Starting to feel actually close rather than ages off, hopefully in the next few weeks.
I get the point about nasty foreign variants coming over here and infecting our women (and men) but it is all part of the lockdown totality.
Today @Europarl_EN is voting on the Trade and Cooperation Agreement with the UK.
It represents the unity, responsibility and solidarity within the EU to protect the interests of our citizens and our Union.
This agreement protects the rights of our citizens and the integrity of the Single Market.
It will give us the tools we need to ensure full and faithful compliance with the obligations, which both sides signed up to.
And it will focus minds on finding pragmatic solutions where they are needed – most urgently around the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland.
The next step is to mutually agree on compliance paths, with concrete deadlines and milestones."
https://twitter.com/vonderleyen/status/1386941803182624768
(a) the taxpayer (his landlord) (ie me) didn't pay for it. That is good.
(b) who gives a flying f*** what Boris says in private? We already know he likes flowery language.
I reckon that's how the average Tory-inclined voter will think, too.
Unfortunately it's hiding lots of more real stuff, like cronyism, conflict of interest, etc.
And I thought Dominic Cummings was a contemptible little man, none of what he says is to be believed. Suddenly he is He Who Talks Truth To Power. Laughable.
Can you name anyone who has ever resigned due to a loan like that? And no Peter Mandelson committing fraud was not the same thing.
The issue is not with the loan per se. Only if there were conditions attached. Which is why we have a disclosure regime.
Oh, there were PMs with honour and integrity, to be sure, but we kid ourselves that there was some gentlemanly understanding of acceptable behaviour.
Doesnt make it right or inevitable, but rose tinted goggles are still wrong.
I reckon I could refurb my whole house x2 over for 30k.
Gove will be loving this.
I'm not for absolutist virtue-signalling.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/belgium/
Belgium, Kent ? Hmmm.
The operation itself is fairly routine, but he has been told his recovery even with extensive physiotherapy is likely to take 3 months so hopefully by the time he retires in December, he will be up and ready to enjoy retired life
https://www.businessinsider.com/boris-johnson-let-bodies-pile-high-witnesses-swear-on-oath-2021-4
This caught my eye on that link. 10k in newspaper articles in 4 weeks in 2001.
24 January 2001: Speculation grows that Mr Mandelson will resign as he is summoned to a morning meeting at Downing Street to help the prime minister "pin down" a "number of areas of fact".
1330 GMT: Mr Mandelson emerges from Downing Street to announce that he is resigning from the government.
19 February: Mr Mandelson donates his earnings from newspaper articles since his resignation, totalling £10,000, to the Omagh Victim's Legal Trust.
The posts under that tweet have a depressingly familiar ring about them too
Except that he has evidence.
I will give you the fact that it is an opinion
And thank you for your kind comments about my son in law
And whatever his genuine talents, BoJo lies a lot, even by the standards of modern politicians.
https://twitter.com/drgregorsmith/status/1386745363168641027?s=21
Something like this happens every single time .........
Is anyone there asking themselves why they did not do the necessary due diligence?
I think we forget here, where we mostly think the government cocked up massively by having the Christmas relaxation rather than bringing in another lockdown in December, that not everyone shares that view. I know plety of people in the south who were - and still are, after all that has happened - royally pissed off that "Boris cancelled Christmas". As bad as January was, they still don't personally know anyone who died and it's all a bit abstract for them. Not everyone thinks the government was too slow and some would agree with "letting the bodies pile up" (as long as they're other people's bodies) to "save Christmas".
I know the national polling suggests the public favours all and every restriction on freedom, but what matters is two things:
- How much is that true of Johnson supporters? By definition, they're mostly pro-Brexit and damn the consequences - taking actions to prevent harm may not be in their psyche. Labour/Lib-Dem/SNP supporters frothing at the mouth over 'Boris the Butcher' has little relevance to Johnson's electoral prospects.
- How much do people actually care whether the restrictions are in law? If you plan to not visit relatives, then you're unlikely to be against a ban on visiting relatives. But do you actually care if there is no ban?
The "pile bodies high" remark is much more damaging and will cut through with the public though. That's absolutely terrible for Boris if proven to be true.
He lies, effortlessly, continuously, automatically.
Even though the Labour Party do have a history of allowing losers to lose again, like Kinnock and Corbyn.
So the problem for LAB is who can replace him. Nandy?
I certainly don't expect Boris to go over this.
You'd have thought there might be a correlation-by-proxy to young/old, but even here I can't see any obvious correlation between views.
(And like everything else which has worked during the pandemic, had its genesis a decade or more back.)
How the UK found the first effective Covid-19 treatment — and saved a million lives
The United Kingdom is not a pandemic success story. But its massive Covid-19 trials program is.
https://www.vox.com/22397833/dexamethasone-coronavirus-uk-recovery-trial
...The road to the Recovery Trial started in the 1980s, when a group of Oxford scholars was dissatisfied with the lack of treatments for heart attacks. They imagined a trial that could test different interventions — a massive trial, perhaps as many as 10,000 to 15,000 patients. For such a big trial to work, it had to be simple: Nurses and doctors would need to be able to try out the treatments the researchers were testing as part of their normal care routine....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-europe-54650791
The descriptions are so reminiscent to other places hit by new variants.
If the EU is going to "overtake the UK, crawling on its knees" it had better get a shift on.....
https://twitter.com/eurocontrolDG/status/1386971890468769794?s=20
Can someone explain this to me, please?
SNP now on just 45% on the constituency vote, below the 46.5% they got in 2016 and on just 36% on the list vote, well below the 41% they got in 2016.
Labour and the LDs are both up 2% on the constituency vote and Labour and the Greens are up 1% each on the list vote
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1386964900589805572?s=20