One key thing about this Boris story is that there are clearly insiders trying to get rid of him. It reminds me of house of cards. I suspect that there are those who consider that Boris has served his purpose, so he can go now.
1) I am a Tory activist. Pretty committed one too.
2) I don't think Laura K is left wing - I'm not sure I know her politics at all. Which is quite a good thing in a BBC journo I reckon.
3) I'm pretty concerned about the political ramifications of these revelations. For me the biggest political impact will come from one or both of a) the suggestion that JL furnishings are a nightmare and b) that they seem to have spent big bucks on something which wasn't necessarily within their budget
4) Whilst it clearly does matter, legally, who paid for what, when and where, I suspect it won't be this that cuts through. I'm disappointed in activists who think it doesn't actually matter. We should hold our elected officials to account.
5) I've never really thought Boris would be leader at the next election. This may hasten his departure in my mind.
6) I still think we'll do rather well next Thursday.
We will need to do extremely well to hold all our county council seats though given we had an 11% lead nationally when they were last up in 2017
One key thing about this Boris story is that there are clearly insiders trying to get rid of him. It reminds me of house of cards. I suspect that there are those who consider that Boris has served his purpose, so he can go now.
So, since we are apparently supposed to take this seriously:
(1) Boris has a budget of £30k a year to do up the Downing Street flat. (2) For reasons that seem pretty much inexplicable redecorating and refurnishing comes in nearer to £90k. (3) Boris doesn't have that sort of cash, a point he might have thought about before he spent it, so his friends are asked to rally around, which they do. (4) This gets awkward so friends are reimbursed and Boris pays it himself. (5) Except that he doesn't (see (3)) but instead gets a loan from the Conservative party to whom the friends (see (4)) may or may not have made donations.
No public money is spent beyond the £30k. There is no failure to declare because the deadline for this has not yet passed. There may be an attempt to conceal what is effectively financial support from friends who may or may not be up for government contracts.
Have I missed anything material?
So why is Boris so angry and impassioned? why doesn't he stand up and say to Starmer, with all that's going on in the world, is this really the best you have got, you irrelevant nobody? A flat refurbishment? Labour leaders of the past must be turning in their graves.
The reason is that he and his government crave the approval and support of the commentariat, the soft left and the mainstream media. Its far more important than all of those votes in the red wall.
The are playing Starmer's game on Starmer's territory. And why they are entangled in this.
Well, maybe we will find that these friends, who clearly want to remain anonymous, do have government contracts, possibly even contracts that went through the accelerated procedures for Covid related contracts on a non competitive tendering basis. I am not saying that there is nothing to this. But there is a hell of a lot of smoke floating about at the moment without much sign of a fire.
Donors above a trivial value cannot remain anonymous. As a lawyer surely you will know why this is the case.
Absolutely. And no doubt their donations, if they made any, to the Conservative party, will be declared in due course. If their donations to the State on behalf of the PM were repaid in full, however, I am not so sure that needs to be declared.
I remember "loans" were used to hide millions of what were in fact donations in Blair's time and my understanding is that after that loans had to be declared so Boris's loan from the Conservative party will need to be declared too. What is wrong here? I am not getting a straight answer from anyone.
They *haven't* been declared in due time. Thats the whole point. Even now they haven't been declared - he said that he would make whatever declarations the enquiry requires him to make.
You're insisting they "haven't" with great certainty, I must have missed the court case that settled that issue. Can you point me to when this was determined please?
Well the list of people who believe they haven't declared it includes the PM - he said that he WILL make declarations if they are required following the investigation into whether he has yet made the due declarations. We need to follow due process, but sometimes the evidence is self-evident. He is legally innocent at the moment but increasingly politically guilty.
Unless of course he wants to clear all this up now on the record and with a flourish show how the Labour Party are duplicitous liars putting around disprovable nonsense.
If he asks for advice and the advice says that says that there is something to declare and he declares it then due process has been followed.
No, because it hasn't been declared in the period required. Due process would have been to declare the loan / gift in the first place as required.
If a court of law determines that then you're right.
Presumably you're expecting one to do so, right?
I don't expect it to go to court. He will be placed on an accidentally positioned sword before they actually prosecute.
So, since we are apparently supposed to take this seriously:
(1) Boris has a budget of £30k a year to do up the Downing Street flat. (2) For reasons that seem pretty much inexplicable redecorating and refurnishing comes in nearer to £90k. (3) Boris doesn't have that sort of cash, a point he might have thought about before he spent it, so his friends are asked to rally around, which they do. (4) This gets awkward so friends are reimbursed and Boris pays it himself. (5) Except that he doesn't (see (3)) but instead gets a loan from the Conservative party to whom the friends (see (4)) may or may not have made donations.
No public money is spent beyond the £30k. There is no failure to declare because the deadline for this has not yet passed. There may be an attempt to conceal what is effectively financial support from friends who may or may not be up for government contracts.
Have I missed anything material?
So why is Boris so angry and impassioned? why doesn't he stand up and say to Starmer, with all that's going on in the world, is this really the best you have got, you irrelevant nobody? A flat refurbishment? Labour leaders of the past must be turning in their graves.
The reason is that he and his government crave the approval and support of the commentariat, the soft left and the mainstream media. Its far more important than all of those votes in the red wall.
The are playing Starmer's game on Starmer's territory. And why they are entangled in this.
Well, maybe we will find that these friends, who clearly want to remain anonymous, do have government contracts, possibly even contracts that went through the accelerated procedures for Covid related contracts on a non competitive tendering basis. I am not saying that there is nothing to this. But there is a hell of a lot of smoke floating about at the moment without much sign of a fire.
Donors above a trivial value cannot remain anonymous. As a lawyer surely you will know why this is the case.
Absolutely. And no doubt their donations, if they made any, to the Conservative party, will be declared in due course. If their donations to the State on behalf of the PM were repaid in full, however, I am not so sure that needs to be declared.
I remember "loans" were used to hide millions of what were in fact donations in Blair's time and my understanding is that after that loans had to be declared so Boris's loan from the Conservative party will need to be declared too. What is wrong here? I am not getting a straight answer from anyone.
They *haven't* been declared in due time. Thats the whole point. Even now they haven't been declared - he said that he would make whatever declarations the enquiry requires him to make.
You're insisting they "haven't" with great certainty, I must have missed the court case that settled that issue. Can you point me to when this was determined please?
Well the list of people who believe they haven't declared it includes the PM - he said that he WILL make declarations if they are required following the investigation into whether he has yet made the due declarations. We need to follow due process, but sometimes the evidence is self-evident. He is legally innocent at the moment but increasingly politically guilty.
Unless of course he wants to clear all this up now on the record and with a flourish show how the Labour Party are duplicitous liars putting around disprovable nonsense.
If he asks for advice and the advice says that says that there is something to declare and he declares it then due process has been followed.
What bollox, there are laid down rules about how long you have to declare loans, donations , bribes etc. Time has long past as they had no intention of it ever seeing the light of day.
The prime minister approaches truth the way a toddler handles broccoli. He understands the idea that it contains some goodness, but it will touch his lips only if a higher authority compels it there. Everyone who has worked with him in journalism and politics describes a pattern of selfishness and unreliability. He craves affection and demands loyalty, but lacks the qualities that would cultivate proper friendship. The public bonhomie hides a private streak of brooding paranoia. Being incapable of faithfulness, he presumes others are just as ready to betray him, which they duly do, provoked by his duplicity.
Johnson is driven by a restless sense of his own entitlement to be at the apex of power and a conviction, supported by evidence gathered on his journey to the top, that rules are a trap to catch weaker men and honour is a plastic trophy that losers award themselves in consolation for unfulfilled ambition. Having such a personality at the heart of government makes a nonsense of unwritten protocol. Much of British politics proceeds by the observance of invisible rails guarding against the tyrannical caprices that formal constitutions explicitly prohibit.
Conservative MPs are not under any illusions about the man who leads them. They appointed a rogue as their king because they craved the success that his methods bring. It was inevitable that evidence of his unsuitability for the job would leak into the public domain, even if it takes a while for misrule to have an electoral consequence. The question pinging around Tory WhatsApp groups is how far the current furore reaches beyond Westminster.
Downing Street is now a machine for generating vindictive enmity. Energies that should be spent on policy are consumed settling scores and lighting new fires to fight old ones. This is not a phase, nor is it an accident. It is a new mode of government being improvised because events flattened the old way. The court of King Boris combines the zealotry of a revolution with the conceit of an empire and the probity of gangsters. It is hard to predict how long such a regime can last, but two things can be forecast with confidence: the fall will be messy, and few who cheer Johnson today will boast of having done so once he is gone.
One key thing about this Boris story is that there are clearly insiders trying to get rid of him. It reminds me of house of cards. I suspect that there are those who consider that Boris has served his purpose, so he can go now.
It is hard to predict how long such a regime can last, but two things can be forecast with confidence: the fall will be messy, and few who cheer Johnson today will boast of having done so once he is gone.
One key thing about this Boris story is that there are clearly insiders trying to get rid of him. It reminds me of house of cards. I suspect that there are those who consider that Boris has served his purpose, so he can go now.
Wonder which of his friends is out to bury him.
Is Michael Gove a friend of Boris ?
No.
Then again Gove was a very close friend of David Cameron and look how that turned out.
What I don't think is sustainable is a Tory approach to all of this which essentially revolves around claiming the British people do not mind being lied to or taken for fools by their political leaders because they are more interested in other things. That is dangerous hubris.
Except it works.
It works now when the vaccine roll-out is successful, lockdown is easing, the furlough is shielding incomes, house prices are rising and the triple lock is doing its thing. In other words, it's a strategy for the political good times. Gambling that the good times will never end is not necessarily the wisest choice.
We will likely have 6% to 8% gdp growth over the next twelve months with the massive increase in unemployment not happening. The good times have another year or two to run yet.
One key thing about this Boris story is that there are clearly insiders trying to get rid of him. It reminds me of house of cards. I suspect that there are those who consider that Boris has served his purpose, so he can go now.
Wonder which of his friends is out to bury him.
I doubt he has (m)any friends......
Ex-friends, then. Though perhaps "former associates" may be more accurate.
1) I am a Tory activist. Pretty committed one too.
2) I don't think Laura K is left wing - I'm not sure I know her politics at all. Which is quite a good thing in a BBC journo I reckon.
3) I'm pretty concerned about the political ramifications of these revelations. For me the biggest political impact will come from one or both of a) the suggestion that JL furnishings are a nightmare and b) that they seem to have spent big bucks on something which wasn't necessarily within their budget
4) Whilst it clearly does matter, legally, who paid for what, when and where, I suspect it won't be this that cuts through. I'm disappointed in activists who think it doesn't actually matter. We should hold our elected officials to account.
5) I've never really thought Boris would be leader at the next election. This may hasten his departure in my mind.
6) I still think we'll do rather well next Thursday.
Double digit 'likes' and rightly so. This episode is dividing PB Tories into good uns and bad uns. I'm making a list.
"Where, in the assessment of the Independent Adviser, he believes an allegation about a breach of the Code might warrant further investigation, he will raise the issue confidentially with the Prime Minister". And that's it.
FPT - @CarlottaVance that's why Project Fear won't work in stopping a second IndyRef, IMHO, because that Ashcroft polling shows Scots are fully aware of the risks and downsides, but they still want independence.
There is quite a contrast between the views of Yes & No supporters:
I agree there should be a positive case made for the Union - but "Project Reality" may be a powerful motivator for the "No" (or should that be "Remain"?) vote.
The only one of those where Nats might be right is rejoining the EU, but of course that in itself would make some of the other issues, like the border, even more likely to pose a problem. The idea that you can leave the UK, have no border, use the £, use the English NHS, have no budget deficit, and negotiate all that independence entails quickly is laughable.
They didn't test - but it's fondly believed that The UK will pay your pension....
I see the usual morons are spouting the usual scare stories thinking that the Scottish are all stupid. Bricking it as they get ever more desperate. Thickos do not even know we have our own NHS, that anyone who wants can use any currency for good or bad and think we would have UK budget deficit, what a hoot.
FPT - @CarlottaVance that's why Project Fear won't work in stopping a second IndyRef, IMHO, because that Ashcroft polling shows Scots are fully aware of the risks and downsides, but they still want independence.
It does not say that on Carlotta's propaganda sheets, you will give her a headache.
1) I am a Tory activist. Pretty committed one too.
2) I don't think Laura K is left wing - I'm not sure I know her politics at all. Which is quite a good thing in a BBC journo I reckon.
3) I'm pretty concerned about the political ramifications of these revelations. For me the biggest political impact will come from one or both of a) the suggestion that JL furnishings are a nightmare and b) that they seem to have spent big bucks on something which wasn't necessarily within their budget
4) Whilst it clearly does matter, legally, who paid for what, when and where, I suspect it won't be this that cuts through. I'm disappointed in activists who think it doesn't actually matter. We should hold our elected officials to account.
5) I've never really thought Boris would be leader at the next election. This may hasten his departure in my mind.
6) I still think we'll do rather well next Thursday.
Double digit 'likes' and rightly so. This episode is dividing PB Tories into good uns and bad uns. I'm making a list.
You should add the two beady eyes pic to that post like you did to PT the other day.
Question: suppose the imbecile goes in the next few months. Is it a walk in the park for Sunak? Will Hunt or Truss be his principal opponent?
I think Raab is underestimated as the 'PM falls under a bus candidate'.
Honestly the nicest politician I have ever met. I don't think his warmth comes across on screen, but person to person, amongst colleagues, I can see it working.
Raab would be a good choice, although I do think Hunt would be even better, Matt Hancock deserves a shot at the job as well.
Raab is my biggest long. He's the John Major here.
FPT - @CarlottaVance that's why Project Fear won't work in stopping a second IndyRef, IMHO, because that Ashcroft polling shows Scots are fully aware of the risks and downsides, but they still want independence.
It does not say that on Carlotta's propaganda sheets, you will give her a headache.
FPT - @CarlottaVance that's why Project Fear won't work in stopping a second IndyRef, IMHO, because that Ashcroft polling shows Scots are fully aware of the risks and downsides, but they still want independence.
There is quite a contrast between the views of Yes & No supporters:
I agree there should be a positive case made for the Union - but "Project Reality" may be a powerful motivator for the "No" (or should that be "Remain"?) vote.
The only one of those where Nats might be right is rejoining the EU
"Leave/Yes" supporters believe it will be quicker to join the EU (56%) than leave the UK (43%)......
Not sure how that works.....
I'd agree with that and it's because of separate clocks.
The clock on how long it takes to negotiate with the UK effectively begins from the referendum until independence, however the clock on EU membership I'd think as from independence until accession.
If the timetable was similar to Brexit, say close to four years negotiating divorce, about a year "transition" then they were EU members, I'd say that's rapid accession from independence but a long time negotiating divorce.
That's about what I'd expect BTW. They could sign the acquis communitaire pretty quickly.
My problem with the wallpaper story is that I just don’t GAFS.
Everyone knows Boris and most another politicians chisel a bit here and there, so why is everyone surprised? This example seems fairly trivial in the scheme of things, albeit quite amusing as a distraction.
1) I am a Tory activist. Pretty committed one too.
2) I don't think Laura K is left wing - I'm not sure I know her politics at all. Which is quite a good thing in a BBC journo I reckon.
3) I'm pretty concerned about the political ramifications of these revelations. For me the biggest political impact will come from one or both of a) the suggestion that JL furnishings are a nightmare and b) that they seem to have spent big bucks on something which wasn't necessarily within their budget
4) Whilst it clearly does matter, legally, who paid for what, when and where, I suspect it won't be this that cuts through. I'm disappointed in activists who think it doesn't actually matter. We should hold our elected officials to account.
5) I've never really thought Boris would be leader at the next election. This may hasten his departure in my mind.
6) I still think we'll do rather well next Thursday.
Double digit 'likes' and rightly so. This episode is dividing PB Tories into good uns and bad uns. I'm making a list.
FPT - @CarlottaVance that's why Project Fear won't work in stopping a second IndyRef, IMHO, because that Ashcroft polling shows Scots are fully aware of the risks and downsides, but they still want independence.
There is quite a contrast between the views of Yes & No supporters:
I agree there should be a positive case made for the Union - but "Project Reality" may be a powerful motivator for the "No" (or should that be "Remain"?) vote.
The only one of those where Nats might be right is rejoining the EU
"Leave/Yes" supporters believe it will be quicker to join the EU (56%) than leave the UK (43%)......
Not sure how that works.....
I'd agree with that and it's because of separate clocks.
The clock on how long it takes to negotiate with the UK effectively begins from the referendum until independence, however the clock on EU membership I'd think as from independence until accession.
If the timetable was similar to Brexit, say close to four years negotiating divorce, about a year "transition" then they were EU members, I'd say that's rapid accession from independence but a long time negotiating divorce.
That's about what I'd expect BTW. They could sign the acquis communitaire pretty quickly.
Fair enough, but therte is a logical exception with a real world example. If Mr Johnson wanted he could put Scotland in the same zone as NI - in which case the clocks would be the same (except the independence one might never ring).
1) I am a Tory activist. Pretty committed one too.
2) I don't think Laura K is left wing - I'm not sure I know her politics at all. Which is quite a good thing in a BBC journo I reckon.
3) I'm pretty concerned about the political ramifications of these revelations. For me the biggest political impact will come from one or both of a) the suggestion that JL furnishings are a nightmare and b) that they seem to have spent big bucks on something which wasn't necessarily within their budget
4) Whilst it clearly does matter, legally, who paid for what, when and where, I suspect it won't be this that cuts through. I'm disappointed in activists who think it doesn't actually matter. We should hold our elected officials to account.
5) I've never really thought Boris would be leader at the next election. This may hasten his departure in my mind.
6) I still think we'll do rather well next Thursday.
I think wait and see is the only approach to how big this is. It has some of the makings of one of those things which a few years down the line you struggle remember what it was all about, but it has seeds of destruction in it;
depending on...
the critical factor which is at some point the 'Time for a change' moment will come both about the Tories and about Boris.
The valid bit which the otherwise absurd Churchill/Boris comparison makers might want to reflect on is that the moment the job Churchill was installed to do was done the voters unceremoniously ditched him for a great man of dull probity who promised decent things for the working class.
Boris is working on that flank, in that he was installed, without doubt, to Get Brexit Done and to dish the nasty bit of the left (and thus indirectly assist in making Labour electable again), but TBF he is doing his best to govern as a sort of Attlee for the honest working class. Boris intends to outflank Churchill by being Attlee as well.
As yet, and remarkably, Labour show no sign of being a better Attlee than Boris is. if they have a clear, progressive, dull and decent vision they are keeping it under wraps.
IMHO for now they need more than an anti- Boris on moral/probity grounds to make progress. They need both to demolish his character (not hard) and to make a better offer. That's proving hard and the Tories, whether Boris or post Boris will make a fight for the middling sort vote.
Public standards chief Lord Evans recommended new independent adviser on ministerial code shd be able to instigate their own investigations. Today, No.10 rejected that idea. Instead if adviser wants fresh probe he will only be able to "raise the issue confidentially with the PM" https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1387396127272624132/photo/1
Laura K uses "rattled" so five live use it.. it will rattled everywhere.. its almost as though the loathsome BBC. Is developing a meme to attack the Govt.
Impartial BBC.. risible.
Is there a better word for rattled than rattled?
Angry..
Good word, albeit as a complement rather than a substitute. Ditto "passionate".
But, yes, I'd be ok with "angry and passionate and rattled". If that's how Johnson is described on the main news tonight, I don't think there can be too many complaints.
So, since we are apparently supposed to take this seriously:
(1) Boris has a budget of £30k a year to do up the Downing Street flat. (2) For reasons that seem pretty much inexplicable redecorating and refurnishing comes in nearer to £90k. (3) Boris doesn't have that sort of cash, a point he might have thought about before he spent it, so his friends are asked to rally around, which they do. (4) This gets awkward so friends are reimbursed and Boris pays it himself. (5) Except that he doesn't (see (3)) but instead gets a loan from the Conservative party to whom the friends (see (4)) may or may not have made donations.
No public money is spent beyond the £30k. There is no failure to declare because the deadline for this has not yet passed. There may be an attempt to conceal what is effectively financial support from friends who may or may not be up for government contracts.
Have I missed anything material?
So why is Boris so angry and impassioned? why doesn't he stand up and say to Starmer, with all that's going on in the world, is this really the best you have got, you irrelevant nobody? A flat refurbishment? Labour leaders of the past must be turning in their graves.
The reason is that he and his government crave the approval and support of the commentariat, the soft left and the mainstream media. Its far more important than all of those votes in the red wall.
The are playing Starmer's game on Starmer's territory. And why they are entangled in this.
Well, maybe we will find that these friends, who clearly want to remain anonymous, do have government contracts, possibly even contracts that went through the accelerated procedures for Covid related contracts on a non competitive tendering basis. I am not saying that there is nothing to this. But there is a hell of a lot of smoke floating about at the moment without much sign of a fire.
Donors above a trivial value cannot remain anonymous. As a lawyer surely you will know why this is the case.
Absolutely. And no doubt their donations, if they made any, to the Conservative party, will be declared in due course. If their donations to the State on behalf of the PM were repaid in full, however, I am not so sure that needs to be declared.
I remember "loans" were used to hide millions of what were in fact donations in Blair's time and my understanding is that after that loans had to be declared so Boris's loan from the Conservative party will need to be declared too. What is wrong here? I am not getting a straight answer from anyone.
They *haven't* been declared in due time. Thats the whole point. Even now they haven't been declared - he said that he would make whatever declarations the enquiry requires him to make.
You're insisting they "haven't" with great certainty, I must have missed the court case that settled that issue. Can you point me to when this was determined please?
Well the list of people who believe they haven't declared it includes the PM - he said that he WILL make declarations if they are required following the investigation into whether he has yet made the due declarations. We need to follow due process, but sometimes the evidence is self-evident. He is legally innocent at the moment but increasingly politically guilty.
Unless of course he wants to clear all this up now on the record and with a flourish show how the Labour Party are duplicitous liars putting around disprovable nonsense.
If he asks for advice and the advice says that says that there is something to declare and he declares it then due process has been followed.
No, because it hasn't been declared in the period required. Due process would have been to declare the loan / gift in the first place as required.
If a court of law determines that then you're right.
Presumably you're expecting one to do so, right?
I don't expect it to go to court. He will be placed on an accidentally positioned sword before they actually prosecute.
We'll see if you're right.
As I said, if a court of law says he's broken the law then I think he'd have to go. That's the benchmark.
My problem with the wallpaper story is that I just don’t GAFS.
Everyone knows Boris and most another politicians chisel a bit here and there, so why is everyone surprised? This example seems fairly trivial in the scheme of things, albeit quite amusing as a distraction.
Same here. I like seeing politicians on the ropes no matter the trivial scandal but there's too many dimensions and subplots of this for me to care about and keep track of. I've even forgotten about most of them, the only two that stick in my mind are the bodies comment and the questionable funding about the flat.
Question: suppose the imbecile goes in the next few months. Is it a walk in the park for Sunak? Will Hunt or Truss be his principal opponent?
I think Raab is underestimated as the 'PM falls under a bus candidate'.
Honestly the nicest politician I have ever met. I don't think his warmth comes across on screen, but person to person, amongst colleagues, I can see it working.
Raab would be a good choice, although I do think Hunt would be even better, Matt Hancock deserves a shot at the job as well.
Hunt wouldn't get it because he wouldn't score particularly well in the Red Wall parts. I'd agree Raab is underestimated. Hancock has definitely upped his chances but I don't think by enough.
Trouble for Raab is Esher & Walton now not safe, big Lib remain vote.
Liz Truss is the dark horse. Done a great job on trade. Proper quite dry conservative. Not tainted by any of the covid stuff. Sound on wokery. Doesn't secretly crave Islington voters. Third female Tory PM.
Question: suppose the imbecile goes in the next few months. Is it a walk in the park for Sunak? Will Hunt or Truss be his principal opponent?
I think Raab is underestimated as the 'PM falls under a bus candidate'.
Honestly the nicest politician I have ever met. I don't think his warmth comes across on screen, but person to person, amongst colleagues, I can see it working.
Raab would be a good choice, although I do think Hunt would be even better, Matt Hancock deserves a shot at the job as well.
Hunt wouldn't get it because he wouldn't score particularly well in the Red Wall parts. I'd agree Raab is underestimated. Hancock has definitely upped his chances but I don't think by enough.
Trouble for Raab is Esher & Walton now not safe, big Lib remain vote.
Liz Truss is the dark horse. Done a great job on trade. Proper quite dry conservative. Not tainted by any of the covid stuff. Sound on wokery. Doesn't secretly crave Islington voters. Third female Tory PM.
Ridiculed by Party insiders.
Also, I don't think Raab will have any problems getting back to a 5 figure majority at the next election. Even more so if he is PM.
Question: suppose the imbecile goes in the next few months. Is it a walk in the park for Sunak? Will Hunt or Truss be his principal opponent?
I think Raab is underestimated as the 'PM falls under a bus candidate'.
Honestly the nicest politician I have ever met. I don't think his warmth comes across on screen, but person to person, amongst colleagues, I can see it working.
Raab would be a good choice, although I do think Hunt would be even better, Matt Hancock deserves a shot at the job as well.
Hunt wouldn't get it because he wouldn't score particularly well in the Red Wall parts. I'd agree Raab is underestimated. Hancock has definitely upped his chances but I don't think by enough.
Trouble for Raab is Esher & Walton now not safe, big Lib remain vote.
Liz Truss is the dark horse. Done a great job on trade. Proper quite dry conservative. Not tainted by any of the covid stuff. Sound on wokery. Doesn't secretly crave Islington voters. Third female Tory PM.
Ridiculed by Party insiders.
Would that be the same "insiders" who ridiculed Johnson before he won an eighth seat majority?
Truss has been a stalwart in Cabinet for three different PMs for nearly a decade and is massively outshining the Foreign Secretary on international relations.
So, since we are apparently supposed to take this seriously:
(1) Boris has a budget of £30k a year to do up the Downing Street flat. (2) For reasons that seem pretty much inexplicable redecorating and refurnishing comes in nearer to £90k. (3) Boris doesn't have that sort of cash, a point he might have thought about before he spent it, so his friends are asked to rally around, which they do. (4) This gets awkward so friends are reimbursed and Boris pays it himself. (5) Except that he doesn't (see (3)) but instead gets a loan from the Conservative party to whom the friends (see (4)) may or may not have made donations.
No public money is spent beyond the £30k. There is no failure to declare because the deadline for this has not yet passed. There may be an attempt to conceal what is effectively financial support from friends who may or may not be up for government contracts.
Have I missed anything material?
So why is Boris so angry and impassioned? why doesn't he stand up and say to Starmer, with all that's going on in the world, is this really the best you have got, you irrelevant nobody? A flat refurbishment? Labour leaders of the past must be turning in their graves.
The reason is that he and his government crave the approval and support of the commentariat, the soft left and the mainstream media. Its far more important than all of those votes in the red wall.
The are playing Starmer's game on Starmer's territory. And why they are entangled in this.
Well, maybe we will find that these friends, who clearly want to remain anonymous, do have government contracts, possibly even contracts that went through the accelerated procedures for Covid related contracts on a non competitive tendering basis. I am not saying that there is nothing to this. But there is a hell of a lot of smoke floating about at the moment without much sign of a fire.
Donors above a trivial value cannot remain anonymous. As a lawyer surely you will know why this is the case.
Absolutely. And no doubt their donations, if they made any, to the Conservative party, will be declared in due course. If their donations to the State on behalf of the PM were repaid in full, however, I am not so sure that needs to be declared.
I remember "loans" were used to hide millions of what were in fact donations in Blair's time and my understanding is that after that loans had to be declared so Boris's loan from the Conservative party will need to be declared too. What is wrong here? I am not getting a straight answer from anyone.
They *haven't* been declared in due time. Thats the whole point. Even now they haven't been declared - he said that he would make whatever declarations the enquiry requires him to make.
You're insisting they "haven't" with great certainty, I must have missed the court case that settled that issue. Can you point me to when this was determined please?
Well the list of people who believe they haven't declared it includes the PM - he said that he WILL make declarations if they are required following the investigation into whether he has yet made the due declarations. We need to follow due process, but sometimes the evidence is self-evident. He is legally innocent at the moment but increasingly politically guilty.
Unless of course he wants to clear all this up now on the record and with a flourish show how the Labour Party are duplicitous liars putting around disprovable nonsense.
If he asks for advice and the advice says that says that there is something to declare and he declares it then due process has been followed.
No, because it hasn't been declared in the period required. Due process would have been to declare the loan / gift in the first place as required.
If a court of law determines that then you're right.
Presumably you're expecting one to do so, right?
I don't expect it to go to court. He will be placed on an accidentally positioned sword before they actually prosecute.
We'll see if you're right.
As I said, if a court of law says he's broken the law then I think he'd have to go. That's the benchmark.
The prime minister approaches truth the way a toddler handles broccoli. He understands the idea that it contains some goodness, but it will touch his lips only if a higher authority compels it there. Everyone who has worked with him in journalism and politics describes a pattern of selfishness and unreliability. He craves affection and demands loyalty, but lacks the qualities that would cultivate proper friendship. The public bonhomie hides a private streak of brooding paranoia. Being incapable of faithfulness, he presumes others are just as ready to betray him, which they duly do, provoked by his duplicity.
Johnson is driven by a restless sense of his own entitlement to be at the apex of power and a conviction, supported by evidence gathered on his journey to the top, that rules are a trap to catch weaker men and honour is a plastic trophy that losers award themselves in consolation for unfulfilled ambition. Having such a personality at the heart of government makes a nonsense of unwritten protocol. Much of British politics proceeds by the observance of invisible rails guarding against the tyrannical caprices that formal constitutions explicitly prohibit.
Conservative MPs are not under any illusions about the man who leads them. They appointed a rogue as their king because they craved the success that his methods bring. It was inevitable that evidence of his unsuitability for the job would leak into the public domain, even if it takes a while for misrule to have an electoral consequence. The question pinging around Tory WhatsApp groups is how far the current furore reaches beyond Westminster.
Downing Street is now a machine for generating vindictive enmity. Energies that should be spent on policy are consumed settling scores and lighting new fires to fight old ones. This is not a phase, nor is it an accident. It is a new mode of government being improvised because events flattened the old way. The court of King Boris combines the zealotry of a revolution with the conceit of an empire and the probity of gangsters. It is hard to predict how long such a regime can last, but two things can be forecast with confidence: the fall will be messy, and few who cheer Johnson today will boast of having done so once he is gone.
Terrific piece of prose. I really am wondering whether to close my bet on him still being PM on 1st July 2022. It's still in decent profit but it's getting smaller. Maybe Johnson's days truly are numbered. Maybe I've been calling this wrong and El Capitano (Topping) has it right. That he's so enormously and obviously unfit to be PM that he simply cannot last for more than a couple of years. Hmm. Dunno.
So, since we are apparently supposed to take this seriously:
(1) Boris has a budget of £30k a year to do up the Downing Street flat. (2) For reasons that seem pretty much inexplicable redecorating and refurnishing comes in nearer to £90k. (3) Boris doesn't have that sort of cash, a point he might have thought about before he spent it, so his friends are asked to rally around, which they do. (4) This gets awkward so friends are reimbursed and Boris pays it himself. (5) Except that he doesn't (see (3)) but instead gets a loan from the Conservative party to whom the friends (see (4)) may or may not have made donations.
No public money is spent beyond the £30k. There is no failure to declare because the deadline for this has not yet passed. There may be an attempt to conceal what is effectively financial support from friends who may or may not be up for government contracts.
Have I missed anything material?
So why is Boris so angry and impassioned? why doesn't he stand up and say to Starmer, with all that's going on in the world, is this really the best you have got, you irrelevant nobody? A flat refurbishment? Labour leaders of the past must be turning in their graves.
The reason is that he and his government crave the approval and support of the commentariat, the soft left and the mainstream media. Its far more important than all of those votes in the red wall.
The are playing Starmer's game on Starmer's territory. And why they are entangled in this.
Well, maybe we will find that these friends, who clearly want to remain anonymous, do have government contracts, possibly even contracts that went through the accelerated procedures for Covid related contracts on a non competitive tendering basis. I am not saying that there is nothing to this. But there is a hell of a lot of smoke floating about at the moment without much sign of a fire.
Donors above a trivial value cannot remain anonymous. As a lawyer surely you will know why this is the case.
Absolutely. And no doubt their donations, if they made any, to the Conservative party, will be declared in due course. If their donations to the State on behalf of the PM were repaid in full, however, I am not so sure that needs to be declared.
I remember "loans" were used to hide millions of what were in fact donations in Blair's time and my understanding is that after that loans had to be declared so Boris's loan from the Conservative party will need to be declared too. What is wrong here? I am not getting a straight answer from anyone.
They *haven't* been declared in due time. Thats the whole point. Even now they haven't been declared - he said that he would make whatever declarations the enquiry requires him to make.
You're insisting they "haven't" with great certainty, I must have missed the court case that settled that issue. Can you point me to when this was determined please?
Well the list of people who believe they haven't declared it includes the PM - he said that he WILL make declarations if they are required following the investigation into whether he has yet made the due declarations. We need to follow due process, but sometimes the evidence is self-evident. He is legally innocent at the moment but increasingly politically guilty.
Unless of course he wants to clear all this up now on the record and with a flourish show how the Labour Party are duplicitous liars putting around disprovable nonsense.
If he asks for advice and the advice says that says that there is something to declare and he declares it then due process has been followed.
No, because it hasn't been declared in the period required. Due process would have been to declare the loan / gift in the first place as required.
If a court of law determines that then you're right.
Presumably you're expecting one to do so, right?
I don't expect it to go to court. He will be placed on an accidentally positioned sword before they actually prosecute.
We'll see if you're right.
As I said, if a court of law says he's broken the law then I think he'd have to go. That's the benchmark.
Question: suppose the imbecile goes in the next few months. Is it a walk in the park for Sunak? Will Hunt or Truss be his principal opponent?
I think Raab is underestimated as the 'PM falls under a bus candidate'.
Honestly the nicest politician I have ever met. I don't think his warmth comes across on screen, but person to person, amongst colleagues, I can see it working.
Raab would be a good choice, although I do think Hunt would be even better, Matt Hancock deserves a shot at the job as well.
Hunt wouldn't get it because he wouldn't score particularly well in the Red Wall parts. I'd agree Raab is underestimated. Hancock has definitely upped his chances but I don't think by enough.
Trouble for Raab is Esher & Walton now not safe, big Lib remain vote.
Liz Truss is the dark horse. Done a great job on trade. Proper quite dry conservative. Not tainted by any of the covid stuff. Sound on wokery. Doesn't secretly crave Islington voters. Third female Tory PM.
Ridiculed by Party insiders.
You don’t have to be a party insider to find her ridiculous. Just say cheese...
Question: suppose the imbecile goes in the next few months. Is it a walk in the park for Sunak? Will Hunt or Truss be his principal opponent?
I think Raab is underestimated as the 'PM falls under a bus candidate'.
Honestly the nicest politician I have ever met. I don't think his warmth comes across on screen, but person to person, amongst colleagues, I can see it working.
Raab would be a good choice, although I do think Hunt would be even better, Matt Hancock deserves a shot at the job as well.
Hunt wouldn't get it because he wouldn't score particularly well in the Red Wall parts. I'd agree Raab is underestimated. Hancock has definitely upped his chances but I don't think by enough.
Trouble for Raab is Esher & Walton now not safe, big Lib remain vote.
Liz Truss is the dark horse. Done a great job on trade. Proper quite dry conservative. Not tainted by any of the covid stuff. Sound on wokery. Doesn't secretly crave Islington voters. Third female Tory PM.
Ridiculed by Party insiders.
Also, I don't think Raab will have any problems getting back to a 5 figure majority at the next election. Even more so if he is PM.
I've always rated Raab. Am on him over 20s.
"English Channel" people wail. But someone so obviously bright will have done/said this for other purposes.
Question: suppose the imbecile goes in the next few months. Is it a walk in the park for Sunak? Will Hunt or Truss be his principal opponent?
I think Raab is underestimated as the 'PM falls under a bus candidate'.
Honestly the nicest politician I have ever met. I don't think his warmth comes across on screen, but person to person, amongst colleagues, I can see it working.
Raab would be a good choice, although I do think Hunt would be even better, Matt Hancock deserves a shot at the job as well.
Hunt wouldn't get it because he wouldn't score particularly well in the Red Wall parts. I'd agree Raab is underestimated. Hancock has definitely upped his chances but I don't think by enough.
Trouble for Raab is Esher & Walton now not safe, big Lib remain vote.
Liz Truss is the dark horse. Done a great job on trade. Proper quite dry conservative. Not tainted by any of the covid stuff. Sound on wokery. Doesn't secretly crave Islington voters. Third female Tory PM.
Ridiculed by Party insiders.
Would that be the same "insiders" who ridiculed Johnson before he won an eighth seat majority?
Truss has been a stalwart in Cabinet for three different PMs for nearly a decade and is massively outshining the Foreign Secretary on international relations.
Party insiders. Not members who think it's fine if the PM breaks the law.
So, since we are apparently supposed to take this seriously:
(1) Boris has a budget of £30k a year to do up the Downing Street flat. (2) For reasons that seem pretty much inexplicable redecorating and refurnishing comes in nearer to £90k. (3) Boris doesn't have that sort of cash, a point he might have thought about before he spent it, so his friends are asked to rally around, which they do. (4) This gets awkward so friends are reimbursed and Boris pays it himself. (5) Except that he doesn't (see (3)) but instead gets a loan from the Conservative party to whom the friends (see (4)) may or may not have made donations.
No public money is spent beyond the £30k. There is no failure to declare because the deadline for this has not yet passed. There may be an attempt to conceal what is effectively financial support from friends who may or may not be up for government contracts.
Have I missed anything material?
So why is Boris so angry and impassioned? why doesn't he stand up and say to Starmer, with all that's going on in the world, is this really the best you have got, you irrelevant nobody? A flat refurbishment? Labour leaders of the past must be turning in their graves.
The reason is that he and his government crave the approval and support of the commentariat, the soft left and the mainstream media. Its far more important than all of those votes in the red wall.
The are playing Starmer's game on Starmer's territory. And why they are entangled in this.
Well, maybe we will find that these friends, who clearly want to remain anonymous, do have government contracts, possibly even contracts that went through the accelerated procedures for Covid related contracts on a non competitive tendering basis. I am not saying that there is nothing to this. But there is a hell of a lot of smoke floating about at the moment without much sign of a fire.
Donors above a trivial value cannot remain anonymous. As a lawyer surely you will know why this is the case.
Absolutely. And no doubt their donations, if they made any, to the Conservative party, will be declared in due course. If their donations to the State on behalf of the PM were repaid in full, however, I am not so sure that needs to be declared.
I remember "loans" were used to hide millions of what were in fact donations in Blair's time and my understanding is that after that loans had to be declared so Boris's loan from the Conservative party will need to be declared too. What is wrong here? I am not getting a straight answer from anyone.
They *haven't* been declared in due time. Thats the whole point. Even now they haven't been declared - he said that he would make whatever declarations the enquiry requires him to make.
You're insisting they "haven't" with great certainty, I must have missed the court case that settled that issue. Can you point me to when this was determined please?
Well the list of people who believe they haven't declared it includes the PM - he said that he WILL make declarations if they are required following the investigation into whether he has yet made the due declarations. We need to follow due process, but sometimes the evidence is self-evident. He is legally innocent at the moment but increasingly politically guilty.
Unless of course he wants to clear all this up now on the record and with a flourish show how the Labour Party are duplicitous liars putting around disprovable nonsense.
If he asks for advice and the advice says that says that there is something to declare and he declares it then due process has been followed.
No, because it hasn't been declared in the period required. Due process would have been to declare the loan / gift in the first place as required.
If a court of law determines that then you're right.
Presumably you're expecting one to do so, right?
I don't expect it to go to court. He will be placed on an accidentally positioned sword before they actually prosecute.
We'll see if you're right.
As I said, if a court of law says he's broken the law then I think he'd have to go. That's the benchmark.
Its ok. Downing Street have confirmed that once Lord Geidt concludes his report onto the alleged breach of the ministerial code, the final decision on whether Boris Johnson did so will be made by the Prime Minister.
Laura K uses "rattled" so five live use it.. it will rattled everywhere.. its almost as though the loathsome BBC. Is developing a meme to attack the Govt.
Impartial BBC.. risible.
Laura Kuensberg has been the most pro-government BBC political editor I can remember over many decades. Even Robin Oakley, who was a former Tory aide I seem to remember, was more probing in the late Major years.
The BBC's coverage of the Cameron and Johnson story at the top of the programme on Today this morning , with a two-way between Sarah Vine and Blair's former adviser, was also very poor and meek. The ex-Blair adviser was on to say that we treat ex-Prime Ministers too harshly ; in between Robinson cooing over the quality of Sarah Vine's column in the Daily Mail . Vine's contribution was that everything was fine with Johnson's refurbishment too, and "prime ministers can hardly live in a skip". Hardly vengeful and biased, or even particularly thorough, probing, and effective broadcasting.
There’s far too much musing in general on LauraK’s perceived bias and too little on the cause of the problem: that she is just a really, really shit journalist. She just parrots the press office’s line far too often, mostly for the government, sometimes for the opposition. She adds no value, and is by some distance the worst appointment the BBC have made in that role during my years on Earth.
Question: suppose the imbecile goes in the next few months. Is it a walk in the park for Sunak? Will Hunt or Truss be his principal opponent?
I think Raab is underestimated as the 'PM falls under a bus candidate'.
Honestly the nicest politician I have ever met. I don't think his warmth comes across on screen, but person to person, amongst colleagues, I can see it working.
Raab would be a good choice, although I do think Hunt would be even better, Matt Hancock deserves a shot at the job as well.
Hunt wouldn't get it because he wouldn't score particularly well in the Red Wall parts. I'd agree Raab is underestimated. Hancock has definitely upped his chances but I don't think by enough.
Trouble for Raab is Esher & Walton now not safe, big Lib remain vote.
Liz Truss is the dark horse. Done a great job on trade. Proper quite dry conservative. Not tainted by any of the covid stuff. Sound on wokery. Doesn't secretly crave Islington voters. Third female Tory PM.
Question: suppose the imbecile goes in the next few months. Is it a walk in the park for Sunak? Will Hunt or Truss be his principal opponent?
I think Raab is underestimated as the 'PM falls under a bus candidate'.
Honestly the nicest politician I have ever met. I don't think his warmth comes across on screen, but person to person, amongst colleagues, I can see it working.
Raab would be a good choice, although I do think Hunt would be even better, Matt Hancock deserves a shot at the job as well.
Hunt wouldn't get it because he wouldn't score particularly well in the Red Wall parts. I'd agree Raab is underestimated. Hancock has definitely upped his chances but I don't think by enough.
Trouble for Raab is Esher & Walton now not safe, big Lib remain vote.
Liz Truss is the dark horse. Done a great job on trade. Proper quite dry conservative. Not tainted by any of the covid stuff. Sound on wokery. Doesn't secretly crave Islington voters. Third female Tory PM.
Ridiculed by Party insiders.
Would that be the same "insiders" who ridiculed Johnson before he won an eighth seat majority?
Truss has been a stalwart in Cabinet for three different PMs for nearly a decade and is massively outshining the Foreign Secretary on international relations.
Party insiders. Not members who think it's fine if the PM breaks the law.
I don't think it's fine if the PM breaks the law. If a court rules he's broken the law then he should go.
Which "party insiders" are you talking about are ridiculing a Cabinet Secretary who has been in the Cabinet for almost a decade, under three consecutive PMs and has done a tremendous job negotiating on behalf of the UK with countries around the world?
PS its members who get the vote of course in the end between the final two.
So, since we are apparently supposed to take this seriously:
(1) Boris has a budget of £30k a year to do up the Downing Street flat. (2) For reasons that seem pretty much inexplicable redecorating and refurnishing comes in nearer to £90k. (3) Boris doesn't have that sort of cash, a point he might have thought about before he spent it, so his friends are asked to rally around, which they do. (4) This gets awkward so friends are reimbursed and Boris pays it himself. (5) Except that he doesn't (see (3)) but instead gets a loan from the Conservative party to whom the friends (see (4)) may or may not have made donations.
No public money is spent beyond the £30k. There is no failure to declare because the deadline for this has not yet passed. There may be an attempt to conceal what is effectively financial support from friends who may or may not be up for government contracts.
Have I missed anything material?
So why is Boris so angry and impassioned? why doesn't he stand up and say to Starmer, with all that's going on in the world, is this really the best you have got, you irrelevant nobody? A flat refurbishment? Labour leaders of the past must be turning in their graves.
The reason is that he and his government crave the approval and support of the commentariat, the soft left and the mainstream media. Its far more important than all of those votes in the red wall.
The are playing Starmer's game on Starmer's territory. And why they are entangled in this.
Well, maybe we will find that these friends, who clearly want to remain anonymous, do have government contracts, possibly even contracts that went through the accelerated procedures for Covid related contracts on a non competitive tendering basis. I am not saying that there is nothing to this. But there is a hell of a lot of smoke floating about at the moment without much sign of a fire.
Donors above a trivial value cannot remain anonymous. As a lawyer surely you will know why this is the case.
Absolutely. And no doubt their donations, if they made any, to the Conservative party, will be declared in due course. If their donations to the State on behalf of the PM were repaid in full, however, I am not so sure that needs to be declared.
I remember "loans" were used to hide millions of what were in fact donations in Blair's time and my understanding is that after that loans had to be declared so Boris's loan from the Conservative party will need to be declared too. What is wrong here? I am not getting a straight answer from anyone.
They *haven't* been declared in due time. Thats the whole point. Even now they haven't been declared - he said that he would make whatever declarations the enquiry requires him to make.
You're insisting they "haven't" with great certainty, I must have missed the court case that settled that issue. Can you point me to when this was determined please?
Well the list of people who believe they haven't declared it includes the PM - he said that he WILL make declarations if they are required following the investigation into whether he has yet made the due declarations. We need to follow due process, but sometimes the evidence is self-evident. He is legally innocent at the moment but increasingly politically guilty.
Unless of course he wants to clear all this up now on the record and with a flourish show how the Labour Party are duplicitous liars putting around disprovable nonsense.
If he asks for advice and the advice says that says that there is something to declare and he declares it then due process has been followed.
No, because it hasn't been declared in the period required. Due process would have been to declare the loan / gift in the first place as required.
If a court of law determines that then you're right.
Presumably you're expecting one to do so, right?
I don't expect it to go to court. He will be placed on an accidentally positioned sword before they actually prosecute.
We'll see if you're right.
As I said, if a court of law says he's broken the law then I think he'd have to go. That's the benchmark.
You think?
Yes. You don't?
It was your use of the words "I think" within the sentence I was questioning - they didn't need to be there.
So, since we are apparently supposed to take this seriously:
(1) Boris has a budget of £30k a year to do up the Downing Street flat. (2) For reasons that seem pretty much inexplicable redecorating and refurnishing comes in nearer to £90k. (3) Boris doesn't have that sort of cash, a point he might have thought about before he spent it, so his friends are asked to rally around, which they do. (4) This gets awkward so friends are reimbursed and Boris pays it himself. (5) Except that he doesn't (see (3)) but instead gets a loan from the Conservative party to whom the friends (see (4)) may or may not have made donations.
No public money is spent beyond the £30k. There is no failure to declare because the deadline for this has not yet passed. There may be an attempt to conceal what is effectively financial support from friends who may or may not be up for government contracts.
Have I missed anything material?
So why is Boris so angry and impassioned? why doesn't he stand up and say to Starmer, with all that's going on in the world, is this really the best you have got, you irrelevant nobody? A flat refurbishment? Labour leaders of the past must be turning in their graves.
The reason is that he and his government crave the approval and support of the commentariat, the soft left and the mainstream media. Its far more important than all of those votes in the red wall.
The are playing Starmer's game on Starmer's territory. And why they are entangled in this.
Well, maybe we will find that these friends, who clearly want to remain anonymous, do have government contracts, possibly even contracts that went through the accelerated procedures for Covid related contracts on a non competitive tendering basis. I am not saying that there is nothing to this. But there is a hell of a lot of smoke floating about at the moment without much sign of a fire.
Donors above a trivial value cannot remain anonymous. As a lawyer surely you will know why this is the case.
Absolutely. And no doubt their donations, if they made any, to the Conservative party, will be declared in due course. If their donations to the State on behalf of the PM were repaid in full, however, I am not so sure that needs to be declared.
I remember "loans" were used to hide millions of what were in fact donations in Blair's time and my understanding is that after that loans had to be declared so Boris's loan from the Conservative party will need to be declared too. What is wrong here? I am not getting a straight answer from anyone.
They *haven't* been declared in due time. Thats the whole point. Even now they haven't been declared - he said that he would make whatever declarations the enquiry requires him to make.
You're insisting they "haven't" with great certainty, I must have missed the court case that settled that issue. Can you point me to when this was determined please?
Well the list of people who believe they haven't declared it includes the PM - he said that he WILL make declarations if they are required following the investigation into whether he has yet made the due declarations. We need to follow due process, but sometimes the evidence is self-evident. He is legally innocent at the moment but increasingly politically guilty.
Unless of course he wants to clear all this up now on the record and with a flourish show how the Labour Party are duplicitous liars putting around disprovable nonsense.
If he asks for advice and the advice says that says that there is something to declare and he declares it then due process has been followed.
No, because it hasn't been declared in the period required. Due process would have been to declare the loan / gift in the first place as required.
If a court of law determines that then you're right.
Presumably you're expecting one to do so, right?
I don't expect it to go to court. He will be placed on an accidentally positioned sword before they actually prosecute.
We'll see if you're right.
As I said, if a court of law says he's broken the law then I think he'd have to go. That's the benchmark.
Its ok. Downing Street have confirmed that once Lord Geidt concludes his report onto the alleged breach of the ministerial code, the final decision on whether Boris Johnson did so will be made by the Prime Minister.
Due process being followed.
If the law has been broken then Police can get involved and so can the CPS and the Courts.
So, since we are apparently supposed to take this seriously:
(1) Boris has a budget of £30k a year to do up the Downing Street flat. (2) For reasons that seem pretty much inexplicable redecorating and refurnishing comes in nearer to £90k. (3) Boris doesn't have that sort of cash, a point he might have thought about before he spent it, so his friends are asked to rally around, which they do. (4) This gets awkward so friends are reimbursed and Boris pays it himself. (5) Except that he doesn't (see (3)) but instead gets a loan from the Conservative party to whom the friends (see (4)) may or may not have made donations.
No public money is spent beyond the £30k. There is no failure to declare because the deadline for this has not yet passed. There may be an attempt to conceal what is effectively financial support from friends who may or may not be up for government contracts.
Have I missed anything material?
So why is Boris so angry and impassioned? why doesn't he stand up and say to Starmer, with all that's going on in the world, is this really the best you have got, you irrelevant nobody? A flat refurbishment? Labour leaders of the past must be turning in their graves.
The reason is that he and his government crave the approval and support of the commentariat, the soft left and the mainstream media. Its far more important than all of those votes in the red wall.
The are playing Starmer's game on Starmer's territory. And why they are entangled in this.
Well, maybe we will find that these friends, who clearly want to remain anonymous, do have government contracts, possibly even contracts that went through the accelerated procedures for Covid related contracts on a non competitive tendering basis. I am not saying that there is nothing to this. But there is a hell of a lot of smoke floating about at the moment without much sign of a fire.
Donors above a trivial value cannot remain anonymous. As a lawyer surely you will know why this is the case.
Absolutely. And no doubt their donations, if they made any, to the Conservative party, will be declared in due course. If their donations to the State on behalf of the PM were repaid in full, however, I am not so sure that needs to be declared.
I remember "loans" were used to hide millions of what were in fact donations in Blair's time and my understanding is that after that loans had to be declared so Boris's loan from the Conservative party will need to be declared too. What is wrong here? I am not getting a straight answer from anyone.
They *haven't* been declared in due time. Thats the whole point. Even now they haven't been declared - he said that he would make whatever declarations the enquiry requires him to make.
You're insisting they "haven't" with great certainty, I must have missed the court case that settled that issue. Can you point me to when this was determined please?
Well the list of people who believe they haven't declared it includes the PM - he said that he WILL make declarations if they are required following the investigation into whether he has yet made the due declarations. We need to follow due process, but sometimes the evidence is self-evident. He is legally innocent at the moment but increasingly politically guilty.
Unless of course he wants to clear all this up now on the record and with a flourish show how the Labour Party are duplicitous liars putting around disprovable nonsense.
If he asks for advice and the advice says that says that there is something to declare and he declares it then due process has been followed.
No, because it hasn't been declared in the period required. Due process would have been to declare the loan / gift in the first place as required.
If a court of law determines that then you're right.
Presumably you're expecting one to do so, right?
I don't expect it to go to court. He will be placed on an accidentally positioned sword before they actually prosecute.
We'll see if you're right.
As I said, if a court of law says he's broken the law then I think he'd have to go. That's the benchmark.
You think?
Yes. You don't?
It was your use of the words "I think" within the sentence I was questioning - they didn't need to be there.
I was giving my opinion. Others have given a different opinion (unless I've made a mistake)
The prime minister approaches truth the way a toddler handles broccoli. He understands the idea that it contains some goodness, but it will touch his lips only if a higher authority compels it there. Everyone who has worked with him in journalism and politics describes a pattern of selfishness and unreliability. He craves affection and demands loyalty, but lacks the qualities that would cultivate proper friendship. The public bonhomie hides a private streak of brooding paranoia. Being incapable of faithfulness, he presumes others are just as ready to betray him, which they duly do, provoked by his duplicity.
Johnson is driven by a restless sense of his own entitlement to be at the apex of power and a conviction, supported by evidence gathered on his journey to the top, that rules are a trap to catch weaker men and honour is a plastic trophy that losers award themselves in consolation for unfulfilled ambition. Having such a personality at the heart of government makes a nonsense of unwritten protocol. Much of British politics proceeds by the observance of invisible rails guarding against the tyrannical caprices that formal constitutions explicitly prohibit.
Conservative MPs are not under any illusions about the man who leads them. They appointed a rogue as their king because they craved the success that his methods bring. It was inevitable that evidence of his unsuitability for the job would leak into the public domain, even if it takes a while for misrule to have an electoral consequence. The question pinging around Tory WhatsApp groups is how far the current furore reaches beyond Westminster.
Downing Street is now a machine for generating vindictive enmity. Energies that should be spent on policy are consumed settling scores and lighting new fires to fight old ones. This is not a phase, nor is it an accident. It is a new mode of government being improvised because events flattened the old way. The court of King Boris combines the zealotry of a revolution with the conceit of an empire and the probity of gangsters. It is hard to predict how long such a regime can last, but two things can be forecast with confidence: the fall will be messy, and few who cheer Johnson today will boast of having done so once he is gone.
Terrific piece of prose. I really am wondering whether to close my bet on him still being PM on 1st July 2022. It's still in decent profit but it's getting smaller. Maybe Johnson's days truly are numbered. Maybe I've been calling this wrong and El Capitano (Topping) has it right. That he's so enormously and obviously unfit to be PM that he simply cannot last for more than a couple of years. Hmm. Dunno.
Don’t be swayed by prose in the guardian. Mistaking elegance for insight will make you a fool. For betting purposes it’s irrelevant.
1) I am a Tory activist. Pretty committed one too.
2) I don't think Laura K is left wing - I'm not sure I know her politics at all. Which is quite a good thing in a BBC journo I reckon.
3) I'm pretty concerned about the political ramifications of these revelations. For me the biggest political impact will come from one or both of a) the suggestion that JL furnishings are a nightmare and b) that they seem to have spent big bucks on something which wasn't necessarily within their budget
4) Whilst it clearly does matter, legally, who paid for what, when and where, I suspect it won't be this that cuts through. I'm disappointed in activists who think it doesn't actually matter. We should hold our elected officials to account.
5) I've never really thought Boris would be leader at the next election. This may hasten his departure in my mind.
6) I still think we'll do rather well next Thursday.
Double digit 'likes' and rightly so. This episode is dividing PB Tories into good uns and bad uns. I'm making a list.
You should add the two beady eyes pic to that post like you did to PT the other day.
- Can only do that one on my phone. I'm grinding on the laptop today.
My problem with the wallpaper story is that I just don’t GAFS.
Everyone knows Boris and most another politicians chisel a bit here and there, so why is everyone surprised? This example seems fairly trivial in the scheme of things, albeit quite amusing as a distraction.
Same here. I like seeing politicians on the ropes no matter the trivial scandal but there's too many dimensions and subplots of this for me to care about and keep track of. I've even forgotten about most of them, the only two that stick in my mind are the bodies comment and the questionable funding about the flat.
Indeed, Wallpaper-Gate is the modern day Schleswig-Holstein Question: only three people understand it, and one of them has gone mad, the second is dead and the third has forgotten all about it.
“ The Sputnik V vaccine Ad5 vector is evidently replication competent. The makers apparently neglected to delete E1, so getting this vaccine means being infected with live adenovirus 5.
Question: suppose the imbecile goes in the next few months. Is it a walk in the park for Sunak? Will Hunt or Truss be his principal opponent?
I think Raab is underestimated as the 'PM falls under a bus candidate'.
Honestly the nicest politician I have ever met. I don't think his warmth comes across on screen, but person to person, amongst colleagues, I can see it working.
Raab would be a good choice, although I do think Hunt would be even better, Matt Hancock deserves a shot at the job as well.
Hunt wouldn't get it because he wouldn't score particularly well in the Red Wall parts. I'd agree Raab is underestimated. Hancock has definitely upped his chances but I don't think by enough.
Trouble for Raab is Esher & Walton now not safe, big Lib remain vote.
Liz Truss is the dark horse. Done a great job on trade. Proper quite dry conservative. Not tainted by any of the covid stuff. Sound on wokery. Doesn't secretly crave Islington voters. Third female Tory PM.
Ridiculed by Party insiders.
Also, I don't think Raab will have any problems getting back to a 5 figure majority at the next election. Even more so if he is PM.
I've always rated Raab. Am on him over 20s.
"English Channel" people wail. But someone so obviously bright will have done/said this for other purposes.
Question: suppose the imbecile goes in the next few months. Is it a walk in the park for Sunak? Will Hunt or Truss be his principal opponent?
I think Raab is underestimated as the 'PM falls under a bus candidate'.
Honestly the nicest politician I have ever met. I don't think his warmth comes across on screen, but person to person, amongst colleagues, I can see it working.
Raab would be a good choice, although I do think Hunt would be even better, Matt Hancock deserves a shot at the job as well.
Raab is my biggest long. He's the John Major here.
When it happens, and it could be years yet despite the frenzy, the Tories will be on the search for someone whom you can look at and say, fairly quickly: 'They can win an election, no doubt'. On that test I would say: Hunt - no (with great regret); Hancock - no; Raab - a definite maybe; Truss - yes; Patel - no; Gove - no; Sunak - wait and see once he stops the magic money. And so on.
It could well be someone we have never heard of yet.
Question: suppose the imbecile goes in the next few months. Is it a walk in the park for Sunak? Will Hunt or Truss be his principal opponent?
I think Raab is underestimated as the 'PM falls under a bus candidate'.
Honestly the nicest politician I have ever met. I don't think his warmth comes across on screen, but person to person, amongst colleagues, I can see it working.
Raab would be a good choice, although I do think Hunt would be even better, Matt Hancock deserves a shot at the job as well.
Hunt wouldn't get it because he wouldn't score particularly well in the Red Wall parts. I'd agree Raab is underestimated. Hancock has definitely upped his chances but I don't think by enough.
Trouble for Raab is Esher & Walton now not safe, big Lib remain vote.
Liz Truss is the dark horse. Done a great job on trade. Proper quite dry conservative. Not tainted by any of the covid stuff. Sound on wokery. Doesn't secretly crave Islington voters. Third female Tory PM.
Strong Remainer though.
She's still been given the role of trade deals and made the base very happy with her performance. I think she's the clear value in the race tbh.
We know the prime minister paid the Tory Party the £60k it paid the Cabinet Office to cover the costs of refurbishing his Downing Street home. That would be a donation by Boris Johnson to the Tory Party. There is no record on the Electoral Commission's database... https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1387395256908402689
Question: suppose the imbecile goes in the next few months. Is it a walk in the park for Sunak? Will Hunt or Truss be his principal opponent?
I think Raab is underestimated as the 'PM falls under a bus candidate'.
Honestly the nicest politician I have ever met. I don't think his warmth comes across on screen, but person to person, amongst colleagues, I can see it working.
Raab would be a good choice, although I do think Hunt would be even better, Matt Hancock deserves a shot at the job as well.
Raab is my biggest long. He's the John Major here.
When it happens, and it could be years yet despite the frenzy, the Tories will be on the search for someone whom you can look at and say, fairly quickly: 'They can win an election, no doubt'. On that test I would say: Hunt - no (with great regret); Hancock - no; Raab - a definite maybe; Truss - yes; Patel - no; Gove - no; Sunak - wait and see once he stops the magic money. And so on.
It could well be someone we have never heard of yet.
The next leader and PM market very much depends on the time and style of departure.
Soon and it will be Sunak, in a years time probably someone entirely different, if Boris stays until 2027 - we probably haven't even heard of them yet.
We know the prime minister paid the Tory Party the £60k it paid the Cabinet Office to cover the costs of refurbishing his Downing Street home. That would be a donation by Boris Johnson to the Tory Party. There is no record on the Electoral Commission's database... https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1387395256908402689
Would it? I don't consider repaying a loan as a donation....
Is LauraK, who I wouldn’t presume her politics from her journalism, any worse than any of the other political hacks we have. Any worse than a Beth Rigby, Peston and co. These people, and others, made the covid press conferences such a waste of time with endlessly rambling questions. Political journalism is as poor these days as the political classes.
FPT - @CarlottaVance that's why Project Fear won't work in stopping a second IndyRef, IMHO, because that Ashcroft polling shows Scots are fully aware of the risks and downsides, but they still want independence.
Its an educated gamble, like Brexit.
If you want the union to survive you need to make a positive case to make the Scots want to stay in the UK, something Remainers abjectly failed to do with Europe. If the union is worth saving that should be easily possible, if it can't be done then so be it time to move on.
48% still voted Remain because of the economic risks of Brexit and there is far less emotional attachment to the EU than there is to the UK.
55% voted to stay in the UK in 2014 in a campaign mainly focused on the risks of Scexit from the No side
There’s two key positives for the union in that Ashcroft polling - a positive case for the economic case of supporting people through the pandemic, and the vaccine procurement.
50% of population* first dosed. *(Our World in data est)
Population or eligible cohort? Remember that no vaccines are approved for paediatric use in the UK AIUI so this needs to be expressed as a proportion of over-16s (or over 18s?).
The prime minister approaches truth the way a toddler handles broccoli. He understands the idea that it contains some goodness, but it will touch his lips only if a higher authority compels it there. Everyone who has worked with him in journalism and politics describes a pattern of selfishness and unreliability. He craves affection and demands loyalty, but lacks the qualities that would cultivate proper friendship. The public bonhomie hides a private streak of brooding paranoia. Being incapable of faithfulness, he presumes others are just as ready to betray him, which they duly do, provoked by his duplicity.
Johnson is driven by a restless sense of his own entitlement to be at the apex of power and a conviction, supported by evidence gathered on his journey to the top, that rules are a trap to catch weaker men and honour is a plastic trophy that losers award themselves in consolation for unfulfilled ambition. Having such a personality at the heart of government makes a nonsense of unwritten protocol. Much of British politics proceeds by the observance of invisible rails guarding against the tyrannical caprices that formal constitutions explicitly prohibit.
Conservative MPs are not under any illusions about the man who leads them. They appointed a rogue as their king because they craved the success that his methods bring. It was inevitable that evidence of his unsuitability for the job would leak into the public domain, even if it takes a while for misrule to have an electoral consequence. The question pinging around Tory WhatsApp groups is how far the current furore reaches beyond Westminster.
Downing Street is now a machine for generating vindictive enmity. Energies that should be spent on policy are consumed settling scores and lighting new fires to fight old ones. This is not a phase, nor is it an accident. It is a new mode of government being improvised because events flattened the old way. The court of King Boris combines the zealotry of a revolution with the conceit of an empire and the probity of gangsters. It is hard to predict how long such a regime can last, but two things can be forecast with confidence: the fall will be messy, and few who cheer Johnson today will boast of having done so once he is gone.
Terrific piece of prose. I really am wondering whether to close my bet on him still being PM on 1st July 2022. It's still in decent profit but it's getting smaller. Maybe Johnson's days truly are numbered. Maybe I've been calling this wrong and El Capitano (Topping) has it right. That he's so enormously and obviously unfit to be PM that he simply cannot last for more than a couple of years. Hmm. Dunno.
Don’t be swayed by prose in the guardian. Mistaking elegance for insight will make you a fool. For betting purposes it’s irrelevant.
The value is on him staying the course, IMO
100% agree. Johnson is at no risk until he fall behind in the polls, and would probably get a year or so to turn it around even then. He might get a kick in the teeth if the sleaze stories do hit at just the right/wrong time for the locals and they lose a couple of mayoralties they could have won, but it's looking likely they will have a good night and rightly or wrongly (and tbh, I think quite reasonably) the Tory membership and MPs care a lot more about that than headlines which last a few days.
The only exception to this is if he gets into serious legal trouble, but which I'd expect actual criminal charges. I think an electoral commission fine wouldn't be an issue.
It is hard to predict how long such a regime can last, but two things can be forecast with confidence: the fall will be messy, and few who cheer Johnson today will boast of having done so once he is gone.
The author clearly doesn't read PB The fanbois will never leave him...
I disagree with you on that, Mr Scott. Conservatives are almost always desperately loyal to their leader, despite all the evidence that they should not be. But once he becomes their ex-leader, everything changes. Mrs May was pathetic - and always was. Mr Cameron is an unsavoury creep - and always was. I forget who their leaders were before that. But they were all first class chaps at the time.
Whilst Boris Johnson is not an employee of the Conservative Party he holds an office - leader. For tax purposes employee includes an office holder, so any loans from the conservative party would be employment related loans and as TSE mentions a P11D filed for any taxable benefits received.
Question: suppose the imbecile goes in the next few months. Is it a walk in the park for Sunak? Will Hunt or Truss be his principal opponent?
I think Raab is underestimated as the 'PM falls under a bus candidate'.
Honestly the nicest politician I have ever met. I don't think his warmth comes across on screen, but person to person, amongst colleagues, I can see it working.
Raab would be a good choice, although I do think Hunt would be even better, Matt Hancock deserves a shot at the job as well.
Hunt wouldn't get it because he wouldn't score particularly well in the Red Wall parts. I'd agree Raab is underestimated. Hancock has definitely upped his chances but I don't think by enough.
Trouble for Raab is Esher & Walton now not safe, big Lib remain vote.
Liz Truss is the dark horse. Done a great job on trade. Proper quite dry conservative. Not tainted by any of the covid stuff. Sound on wokery. Doesn't secretly crave Islington voters. Third female Tory PM.
Ridiculed by Party insiders.
Would that be the same "insiders" who ridiculed Johnson before he won an eighth seat majority?
Truss has been a stalwart in Cabinet for three different PMs for nearly a decade and is massively outshining the Foreign Secretary on international relations.
Party insiders. Not members who think it's fine if the PM breaks the law.
I don't think it's fine if the PM breaks the law. If a court rules he's broken the law then he should go.
Which "party insiders" are you talking about are ridiculing a Cabinet Secretary who has been in the Cabinet for almost a decade, under three consecutive PMs and has done a tremendous job negotiating on behalf of the UK with countries around the world?
PS its members who get the vote of course in the end between the final two.
The prime minister approaches truth the way a toddler handles broccoli. He understands the idea that it contains some goodness, but it will touch his lips only if a higher authority compels it there. Everyone who has worked with him in journalism and politics describes a pattern of selfishness and unreliability. He craves affection and demands loyalty, but lacks the qualities that would cultivate proper friendship. The public bonhomie hides a private streak of brooding paranoia. Being incapable of faithfulness, he presumes others are just as ready to betray him, which they duly do, provoked by his duplicity.
Johnson is driven by a restless sense of his own entitlement to be at the apex of power and a conviction, supported by evidence gathered on his journey to the top, that rules are a trap to catch weaker men and honour is a plastic trophy that losers award themselves in consolation for unfulfilled ambition. Having such a personality at the heart of government makes a nonsense of unwritten protocol. Much of British politics proceeds by the observance of invisible rails guarding against the tyrannical caprices that formal constitutions explicitly prohibit.
Conservative MPs are not under any illusions about the man who leads them. They appointed a rogue as their king because they craved the success that his methods bring. It was inevitable that evidence of his unsuitability for the job would leak into the public domain, even if it takes a while for misrule to have an electoral consequence. The question pinging around Tory WhatsApp groups is how far the current furore reaches beyond Westminster.
Downing Street is now a machine for generating vindictive enmity. Energies that should be spent on policy are consumed settling scores and lighting new fires to fight old ones. This is not a phase, nor is it an accident. It is a new mode of government being improvised because events flattened the old way. The court of King Boris combines the zealotry of a revolution with the conceit of an empire and the probity of gangsters. It is hard to predict how long such a regime can last, but two things can be forecast with confidence: the fall will be messy, and few who cheer Johnson today will boast of having done so once he is gone.
Terrific piece of prose. I really am wondering whether to close my bet on him still being PM on 1st July 2022. It's still in decent profit but it's getting smaller. Maybe Johnson's days truly are numbered. Maybe I've been calling this wrong and El Capitano (Topping) has it right. That he's so enormously and obviously unfit to be PM that he simply cannot last for more than a couple of years. Hmm. Dunno.
Don’t be swayed by prose in the guardian. Mistaking elegance for insight will make you a fool. For betting purposes it’s irrelevant.
The value is on him staying the course, IMO
It's not the eloquence it's the argument. That if something is truly absurd, the fact of it being so will dawn at some point. If it has not yet happened, (eg No Deal Brexit, EU Ref2, Trump 2nd Term, PM Corbyn) it will never happen, and if it has happened (eg Boris Johnson as PM) it will be reversed.
But then again, there's the inertia rule that says far more big things (eg the lurid Fall of Johnson) don't happen than happen. And he's popular. And he won a landslide GE quite recently. And the polls are good. And he's about to win Hartlepool.
So on balance, 1.47 to still be PM on 1st July next year? Yep, still more a buy than a lay, isn't it.
Roll out the footy analogies... 'We are 6-0 up, in the last minute of the game, but sides have lost from here before...'
After all that hard work a third party intervention could make all our slow, steady accumulation of points, and our position at the top of the league irrelevant.
The prime minister approaches truth the way a toddler handles broccoli. He understands the idea that it contains some goodness, but it will touch his lips only if a higher authority compels it there. Everyone who has worked with him in journalism and politics describes a pattern of selfishness and unreliability. He craves affection and demands loyalty, but lacks the qualities that would cultivate proper friendship. The public bonhomie hides a private streak of brooding paranoia. Being incapable of faithfulness, he presumes others are just as ready to betray him, which they duly do, provoked by his duplicity.
Johnson is driven by a restless sense of his own entitlement to be at the apex of power and a conviction, supported by evidence gathered on his journey to the top, that rules are a trap to catch weaker men and honour is a plastic trophy that losers award themselves in consolation for unfulfilled ambition. Having such a personality at the heart of government makes a nonsense of unwritten protocol. Much of British politics proceeds by the observance of invisible rails guarding against the tyrannical caprices that formal constitutions explicitly prohibit.
Conservative MPs are not under any illusions about the man who leads them. They appointed a rogue as their king because they craved the success that his methods bring. It was inevitable that evidence of his unsuitability for the job would leak into the public domain, even if it takes a while for misrule to have an electoral consequence. The question pinging around Tory WhatsApp groups is how far the current furore reaches beyond Westminster.
Downing Street is now a machine for generating vindictive enmity. Energies that should be spent on policy are consumed settling scores and lighting new fires to fight old ones. This is not a phase, nor is it an accident. It is a new mode of government being improvised because events flattened the old way. The court of King Boris combines the zealotry of a revolution with the conceit of an empire and the probity of gangsters. It is hard to predict how long such a regime can last, but two things can be forecast with confidence: the fall will be messy, and few who cheer Johnson today will boast of having done so once he is gone.
Terrific piece of prose. I really am wondering whether to close my bet on him still being PM on 1st July 2022. It's still in decent profit but it's getting smaller. Maybe Johnson's days truly are numbered. Maybe I've been calling this wrong and El Capitano (Topping) has it right. That he's so enormously and obviously unfit to be PM that he simply cannot last for more than a couple of years. Hmm. Dunno.
Don’t be swayed by prose in the guardian. Mistaking elegance for insight will make you a fool. For betting purposes it’s irrelevant.
The value is on him staying the course, IMO
100% agree. Johnson is at no risk until he fall behind in the polls, and would probably get a year or so to turn it around even then. He might get a kick in the teeth if the sleaze stories do hit at just the right/wrong time for the locals and they lose a couple of mayoralties they could have won, but it's looking likely they will have a good night and rightly or wrongly (and tbh, I think quite reasonably) the Tory membership and MPs care a lot more about that than headlines which last a few days.
The only exception to this is if he gets into serious legal trouble, but which I'd expect actual criminal charges. I think an electoral commission fine wouldn't be an issue.
So if the Electoral Commission conclude that he broke electoral law and fine him for doing so, he should just carry on? Any other laws that he should be allowed to break?
The prime minister approaches truth the way a toddler handles broccoli. He understands the idea that it contains some goodness, but it will touch his lips only if a higher authority compels it there. Everyone who has worked with him in journalism and politics describes a pattern of selfishness and unreliability. He craves affection and demands loyalty, but lacks the qualities that would cultivate proper friendship. The public bonhomie hides a private streak of brooding paranoia. Being incapable of faithfulness, he presumes others are just as ready to betray him, which they duly do, provoked by his duplicity.
Johnson is driven by a restless sense of his own entitlement to be at the apex of power and a conviction, supported by evidence gathered on his journey to the top, that rules are a trap to catch weaker men and honour is a plastic trophy that losers award themselves in consolation for unfulfilled ambition. Having such a personality at the heart of government makes a nonsense of unwritten protocol. Much of British politics proceeds by the observance of invisible rails guarding against the tyrannical caprices that formal constitutions explicitly prohibit.
Conservative MPs are not under any illusions about the man who leads them. They appointed a rogue as their king because they craved the success that his methods bring. It was inevitable that evidence of his unsuitability for the job would leak into the public domain, even if it takes a while for misrule to have an electoral consequence. The question pinging around Tory WhatsApp groups is how far the current furore reaches beyond Westminster.
Downing Street is now a machine for generating vindictive enmity. Energies that should be spent on policy are consumed settling scores and lighting new fires to fight old ones. This is not a phase, nor is it an accident. It is a new mode of government being improvised because events flattened the old way. The court of King Boris combines the zealotry of a revolution with the conceit of an empire and the probity of gangsters. It is hard to predict how long such a regime can last, but two things can be forecast with confidence: the fall will be messy, and few who cheer Johnson today will boast of having done so once he is gone.
Terrific piece of prose. I really am wondering whether to close my bet on him still being PM on 1st July 2022. It's still in decent profit but it's getting smaller. Maybe Johnson's days truly are numbered. Maybe I've been calling this wrong and El Capitano (Topping) has it right. That he's so enormously and obviously unfit to be PM that he simply cannot last for more than a couple of years. Hmm. Dunno.
Don’t be swayed by prose in the guardian. Mistaking elegance for insight will make you a fool. For betting purposes it’s irrelevant.
The value is on him staying the course, IMO
It's not the eloquence it's the argument. That if something is truly absurd, the fact of it being so will dawn at some point. If it has not yet happened, (eg No Deal Brexit, EU Ref2, Trump 2nd Term, PM Corbyn) it will never happen, and if it has happened (eg Boris Johnson as PM) it will be reversed.
But then again, there's the inertia rule that says far more big things (eg the lurid Fall of Johnson) don't happen than happen. And he's popular. And he won a landslide GE quite recently. And the polls are good. And he's about to win Hartlepool.
So on balance, 1.47 to still be PM on 1st July next year? Yep, still more a buy than a lay, isn't it.
Have you got any bets on Johnson exit markets?
The thing that makes this different/dangerous is that there is someone close to the PM who is clearly out to get him.
“ The Sputnik V vaccine Ad5 vector is evidently replication competent. The makers apparently neglected to delete E1, so getting this vaccine means being infected with live adenovirus 5.
Question: suppose the imbecile goes in the next few months. Is it a walk in the park for Sunak? Will Hunt or Truss be his principal opponent?
I think Raab is underestimated as the 'PM falls under a bus candidate'.
Honestly the nicest politician I have ever met. I don't think his warmth comes across on screen, but person to person, amongst colleagues, I can see it working.
Raab would be a good choice, although I do think Hunt would be even better, Matt Hancock deserves a shot at the job as well.
Hunt wouldn't get it because he wouldn't score particularly well in the Red Wall parts. I'd agree Raab is underestimated. Hancock has definitely upped his chances but I don't think by enough.
Trouble for Raab is Esher & Walton now not safe, big Lib remain vote.
Liz Truss is the dark horse. Done a great job on trade. Proper quite dry conservative. Not tainted by any of the covid stuff. Sound on wokery. Doesn't secretly crave Islington voters. Third female Tory PM.
Ridiculed by Party insiders.
Would that be the same "insiders" who ridiculed Johnson before he won an eighth seat majority?
Truss has been a stalwart in Cabinet for three different PMs for nearly a decade and is massively outshining the Foreign Secretary on international relations.
Party insiders. Not members who think it's fine if the PM breaks the law.
I don't think it's fine if the PM breaks the law. If a court rules he's broken the law then he should go.
Which "party insiders" are you talking about are ridiculing a Cabinet Secretary who has been in the Cabinet for almost a decade, under three consecutive PMs and has done a tremendous job negotiating on behalf of the UK with countries around the world?
PS its members who get the vote of course in the end between the final two.
Obvs can't say.
OK. Can you say if they're an insider who would have backed Johnson or ridiculed him before he won two-thirds of the vote in the Leadership Election and went on to win an eighty seat majority?
“ The Sputnik V vaccine Ad5 vector is evidently replication competent. The makers apparently neglected to delete E1, so getting this vaccine means being infected with live adenovirus 5.
The prime minister approaches truth the way a toddler handles broccoli. He understands the idea that it contains some goodness, but it will touch his lips only if a higher authority compels it there. Everyone who has worked with him in journalism and politics describes a pattern of selfishness and unreliability. He craves affection and demands loyalty, but lacks the qualities that would cultivate proper friendship. The public bonhomie hides a private streak of brooding paranoia. Being incapable of faithfulness, he presumes others are just as ready to betray him, which they duly do, provoked by his duplicity.
Johnson is driven by a restless sense of his own entitlement to be at the apex of power and a conviction, supported by evidence gathered on his journey to the top, that rules are a trap to catch weaker men and honour is a plastic trophy that losers award themselves in consolation for unfulfilled ambition. Having such a personality at the heart of government makes a nonsense of unwritten protocol. Much of British politics proceeds by the observance of invisible rails guarding against the tyrannical caprices that formal constitutions explicitly prohibit.
Conservative MPs are not under any illusions about the man who leads them. They appointed a rogue as their king because they craved the success that his methods bring. It was inevitable that evidence of his unsuitability for the job would leak into the public domain, even if it takes a while for misrule to have an electoral consequence. The question pinging around Tory WhatsApp groups is how far the current furore reaches beyond Westminster.
Downing Street is now a machine for generating vindictive enmity. Energies that should be spent on policy are consumed settling scores and lighting new fires to fight old ones. This is not a phase, nor is it an accident. It is a new mode of government being improvised because events flattened the old way. The court of King Boris combines the zealotry of a revolution with the conceit of an empire and the probity of gangsters. It is hard to predict how long such a regime can last, but two things can be forecast with confidence: the fall will be messy, and few who cheer Johnson today will boast of having done so once he is gone.
Terrific piece of prose. I really am wondering whether to close my bet on him still being PM on 1st July 2022. It's still in decent profit but it's getting smaller. Maybe Johnson's days truly are numbered. Maybe I've been calling this wrong and El Capitano (Topping) has it right. That he's so enormously and obviously unfit to be PM that he simply cannot last for more than a couple of years. Hmm. Dunno.
Don’t be swayed by prose in the guardian. Mistaking elegance for insight will make you a fool. For betting purposes it’s irrelevant.
The value is on him staying the course, IMO
100% agree. Johnson is at no risk until he fall behind in the polls, and would probably get a year or so to turn it around even then. He might get a kick in the teeth if the sleaze stories do hit at just the right/wrong time for the locals and they lose a couple of mayoralties they could have won, but it's looking likely they will have a good night and rightly or wrongly (and tbh, I think quite reasonably) the Tory membership and MPs care a lot more about that than headlines which last a few days.
The only exception to this is if he gets into serious legal trouble, but which I'd expect actual criminal charges. I think an electoral commission fine wouldn't be an issue.
So if the Electoral Commission conclude that he broke electoral law and fine him for doing so, he should just carry on? Any other laws that he should be allowed to break?
The Electoral Commission aren't a court of law. After the way they treated Grimes et al if that happens the decision should be appealled to a proper court of law.
The prime minister approaches truth the way a toddler handles broccoli. He understands the idea that it contains some goodness, but it will touch his lips only if a higher authority compels it there. Everyone who has worked with him in journalism and politics describes a pattern of selfishness and unreliability. He craves affection and demands loyalty, but lacks the qualities that would cultivate proper friendship. The public bonhomie hides a private streak of brooding paranoia. Being incapable of faithfulness, he presumes others are just as ready to betray him, which they duly do, provoked by his duplicity.
Johnson is driven by a restless sense of his own entitlement to be at the apex of power and a conviction, supported by evidence gathered on his journey to the top, that rules are a trap to catch weaker men and honour is a plastic trophy that losers award themselves in consolation for unfulfilled ambition. Having such a personality at the heart of government makes a nonsense of unwritten protocol. Much of British politics proceeds by the observance of invisible rails guarding against the tyrannical caprices that formal constitutions explicitly prohibit.
Conservative MPs are not under any illusions about the man who leads them. They appointed a rogue as their king because they craved the success that his methods bring. It was inevitable that evidence of his unsuitability for the job would leak into the public domain, even if it takes a while for misrule to have an electoral consequence. The question pinging around Tory WhatsApp groups is how far the current furore reaches beyond Westminster.
Downing Street is now a machine for generating vindictive enmity. Energies that should be spent on policy are consumed settling scores and lighting new fires to fight old ones. This is not a phase, nor is it an accident. It is a new mode of government being improvised because events flattened the old way. The court of King Boris combines the zealotry of a revolution with the conceit of an empire and the probity of gangsters. It is hard to predict how long such a regime can last, but two things can be forecast with confidence: the fall will be messy, and few who cheer Johnson today will boast of having done so once he is gone.
Terrific piece of prose. I really am wondering whether to close my bet on him still being PM on 1st July 2022. It's still in decent profit but it's getting smaller. Maybe Johnson's days truly are numbered. Maybe I've been calling this wrong and El Capitano (Topping) has it right. That he's so enormously and obviously unfit to be PM that he simply cannot last for more than a couple of years. Hmm. Dunno.
Don’t be swayed by prose in the guardian. Mistaking elegance for insight will make you a fool. For betting purposes it’s irrelevant.
The value is on him staying the course, IMO
100% agree. Johnson is at no risk until he fall behind in the polls, and would probably get a year or so to turn it around even then. He might get a kick in the teeth if the sleaze stories do hit at just the right/wrong time for the locals and they lose a couple of mayoralties they could have won, but it's looking likely they will have a good night and rightly or wrongly (and tbh, I think quite reasonably) the Tory membership and MPs care a lot more about that than headlines which last a few days.
The only exception to this is if he gets into serious legal trouble, but which I'd expect actual criminal charges. I think an electoral commission fine wouldn't be an issue.
So if the Electoral Commission conclude that he broke electoral law and fine him for doing so, he should just carry on? Any other laws that he should be allowed to break?
There are two answers to that: What I would want to happen, and what I think the 'selectorate' who can oust/replace him would want to happen.
I think he should resign for misleading Parliament on this and earlier issues, and his treatment of the Ministerial Code.
But I bet on the second answer, and given the reaction (or lack thereof) of that selectorate to the prior issues I think they would shrug off anything short of criminal charges.
The prime minister approaches truth the way a toddler handles broccoli. He understands the idea that it contains some goodness, but it will touch his lips only if a higher authority compels it there. Everyone who has worked with him in journalism and politics describes a pattern of selfishness and unreliability. He craves affection and demands loyalty, but lacks the qualities that would cultivate proper friendship. The public bonhomie hides a private streak of brooding paranoia. Being incapable of faithfulness, he presumes others are just as ready to betray him, which they duly do, provoked by his duplicity.
Johnson is driven by a restless sense of his own entitlement to be at the apex of power and a conviction, supported by evidence gathered on his journey to the top, that rules are a trap to catch weaker men and honour is a plastic trophy that losers award themselves in consolation for unfulfilled ambition. Having such a personality at the heart of government makes a nonsense of unwritten protocol. Much of British politics proceeds by the observance of invisible rails guarding against the tyrannical caprices that formal constitutions explicitly prohibit.
Conservative MPs are not under any illusions about the man who leads them. They appointed a rogue as their king because they craved the success that his methods bring. It was inevitable that evidence of his unsuitability for the job would leak into the public domain, even if it takes a while for misrule to have an electoral consequence. The question pinging around Tory WhatsApp groups is how far the current furore reaches beyond Westminster.
Downing Street is now a machine for generating vindictive enmity. Energies that should be spent on policy are consumed settling scores and lighting new fires to fight old ones. This is not a phase, nor is it an accident. It is a new mode of government being improvised because events flattened the old way. The court of King Boris combines the zealotry of a revolution with the conceit of an empire and the probity of gangsters. It is hard to predict how long such a regime can last, but two things can be forecast with confidence: the fall will be messy, and few who cheer Johnson today will boast of having done so once he is gone.
European Union lawyers today demanded AstraZeneca immediately deliver Covid-19 vaccines from its factories in Britain, in a move that risks reigniting tensions with Downing Street over scarce vaccine supplies in the bloc.
50% of population* first dosed. *(Our World in data est)
Population or eligible cohort? Remember that no vaccines are approved for paediatric use in the UK AIUI so this needs to be expressed as a proportion of over-16s (or over 18s?).
Population uptake is the key factor for herd immunity. We will be doing 12 - 17 after adults. That gives a ceiling of 85.6% of the population
For Covid the estimated threshold for herd immunity is at least 65%-70%.
We won't need to bother with 0 - 11 year olds, 12+ year olds + prior infection (And we have had massive prior infection !) + high takeup + good vaccines (Not Sinopharm) will absolubtely smash it.
Roll out the footy analogies... 'We are 6-0 up, in the last minute of the game, but sides have lost from here before...'
LOL
I'd like to think our journalists would ask about lifting restrictions early, but I suspect they will be wittering on about holidays again, and with a subsidary about decorating... I firmly believe we have enough evidence in terms of cases (not rising), population antibodies (thanks ONS), evidence of real world vaccine effects (both within patient, and in preventing/reducing transmission) to be less cautious, but I'd be amazed if any of the lobby ask about it.
50% of population* first dosed. *(Our World in data est)
Population or eligible cohort? Remember that no vaccines are approved for paediatric use in the UK AIUI so this needs to be expressed as a proportion of over-16s (or over 18s?).
Population uptake is the key factor for herd immunity. We will be doing 12 - 17 after adults. That gives a ceiling of 85.6% of the population
For Covid the estimated threshold for herd immunity is at least 65%-70%.
We won't need to bother with 0 - 11 year olds, 12+ year olds + prior infection (And we have had massive prior infection !) + high takeup + good vaccines (Not Sinopharm) will absolubtely smash it.
Though we're already at 65% for antibodies given that we have prior infections as well as 50% vaccinated.
The prime minister approaches truth the way a toddler handles broccoli. He understands the idea that it contains some goodness, but it will touch his lips only if a higher authority compels it there. Everyone who has worked with him in journalism and politics describes a pattern of selfishness and unreliability. He craves affection and demands loyalty, but lacks the qualities that would cultivate proper friendship. The public bonhomie hides a private streak of brooding paranoia. Being incapable of faithfulness, he presumes others are just as ready to betray him, which they duly do, provoked by his duplicity.
Johnson is driven by a restless sense of his own entitlement to be at the apex of power and a conviction, supported by evidence gathered on his journey to the top, that rules are a trap to catch weaker men and honour is a plastic trophy that losers award themselves in consolation for unfulfilled ambition. Having such a personality at the heart of government makes a nonsense of unwritten protocol. Much of British politics proceeds by the observance of invisible rails guarding against the tyrannical caprices that formal constitutions explicitly prohibit.
Conservative MPs are not under any illusions about the man who leads them. They appointed a rogue as their king because they craved the success that his methods bring. It was inevitable that evidence of his unsuitability for the job would leak into the public domain, even if it takes a while for misrule to have an electoral consequence. The question pinging around Tory WhatsApp groups is how far the current furore reaches beyond Westminster.
Downing Street is now a machine for generating vindictive enmity. Energies that should be spent on policy are consumed settling scores and lighting new fires to fight old ones. This is not a phase, nor is it an accident. It is a new mode of government being improvised because events flattened the old way. The court of King Boris combines the zealotry of a revolution with the conceit of an empire and the probity of gangsters. It is hard to predict how long such a regime can last, but two things can be forecast with confidence: the fall will be messy, and few who cheer Johnson today will boast of having done so once he is gone.
Terrific piece of prose. I really am wondering whether to close my bet on him still being PM on 1st July 2022. It's still in decent profit but it's getting smaller. Maybe Johnson's days truly are numbered. Maybe I've been calling this wrong and El Capitano (Topping) has it right. That he's so enormously and obviously unfit to be PM that he simply cannot last for more than a couple of years. Hmm. Dunno.
Don’t be swayed by prose in the guardian. Mistaking elegance for insight will make you a fool. For betting purposes it’s irrelevant.
The value is on him staying the course, IMO
100% agree. Johnson is at no risk until he fall behind in the polls, and would probably get a year or so to turn it around even then. He might get a kick in the teeth if the sleaze stories do hit at just the right/wrong time for the locals and they lose a couple of mayoralties they could have won, but it's looking likely they will have a good night and rightly or wrongly (and tbh, I think quite reasonably) the Tory membership and MPs care a lot more about that than headlines which last a few days.
The only exception to this is if he gets into serious legal trouble, but which I'd expect actual criminal charges. I think an electoral commission fine wouldn't be an issue.
So if the Electoral Commission conclude that he broke electoral law and fine him for doing so, he should just carry on? Any other laws that he should be allowed to break?
If he does that, the Suburban Samurai will start trolling him via the Good Law Project, as he did with Grimes / Electoral Commission.
The prime minister approaches truth the way a toddler handles broccoli. He understands the idea that it contains some goodness, but it will touch his lips only if a higher authority compels it there. Everyone who has worked with him in journalism and politics describes a pattern of selfishness and unreliability. He craves affection and demands loyalty, but lacks the qualities that would cultivate proper friendship. The public bonhomie hides a private streak of brooding paranoia. Being incapable of faithfulness, he presumes others are just as ready to betray him, which they duly do, provoked by his duplicity.
Johnson is driven by a restless sense of his own entitlement to be at the apex of power and a conviction, supported by evidence gathered on his journey to the top, that rules are a trap to catch weaker men and honour is a plastic trophy that losers award themselves in consolation for unfulfilled ambition. Having such a personality at the heart of government makes a nonsense of unwritten protocol. Much of British politics proceeds by the observance of invisible rails guarding against the tyrannical caprices that formal constitutions explicitly prohibit.
Conservative MPs are not under any illusions about the man who leads them. They appointed a rogue as their king because they craved the success that his methods bring. It was inevitable that evidence of his unsuitability for the job would leak into the public domain, even if it takes a while for misrule to have an electoral consequence. The question pinging around Tory WhatsApp groups is how far the current furore reaches beyond Westminster.
Downing Street is now a machine for generating vindictive enmity. Energies that should be spent on policy are consumed settling scores and lighting new fires to fight old ones. This is not a phase, nor is it an accident. It is a new mode of government being improvised because events flattened the old way. The court of King Boris combines the zealotry of a revolution with the conceit of an empire and the probity of gangsters. It is hard to predict how long such a regime can last, but two things can be forecast with confidence: the fall will be messy, and few who cheer Johnson today will boast of having done so once he is gone.
Terrific piece of prose. I really am wondering whether to close my bet on him still being PM on 1st July 2022. It's still in decent profit but it's getting smaller. Maybe Johnson's days truly are numbered. Maybe I've been calling this wrong and El Capitano (Topping) has it right. That he's so enormously and obviously unfit to be PM that he simply cannot last for more than a couple of years. Hmm. Dunno.
Don’t be swayed by prose in the guardian. Mistaking elegance for insight will make you a fool. For betting purposes it’s irrelevant.
The value is on him staying the course, IMO
100% agree. Johnson is at no risk until he fall behind in the polls, and would probably get a year or so to turn it around even then. He might get a kick in the teeth if the sleaze stories do hit at just the right/wrong time for the locals and they lose a couple of mayoralties they could have won, but it's looking likely they will have a good night and rightly or wrongly (and tbh, I think quite reasonably) the Tory membership and MPs care a lot more about that than headlines which last a few days.
The only exception to this is if he gets into serious legal trouble, but which I'd expect actual criminal charges. I think an electoral commission fine wouldn't be an issue.
So if the Electoral Commission conclude that he broke electoral law and fine him for doing so, he should just carry on? Any other laws that he should be allowed to break?
The Electoral Commission aren't a court of law. After the way they treated Grimes et al if that happens the decision should be appealled to a proper court of law.
The prime minister approaches truth the way a toddler handles broccoli. He understands the idea that it contains some goodness, but it will touch his lips only if a higher authority compels it there. Everyone who has worked with him in journalism and politics describes a pattern of selfishness and unreliability. He craves affection and demands loyalty, but lacks the qualities that would cultivate proper friendship. The public bonhomie hides a private streak of brooding paranoia. Being incapable of faithfulness, he presumes others are just as ready to betray him, which they duly do, provoked by his duplicity.
Johnson is driven by a restless sense of his own entitlement to be at the apex of power and a conviction, supported by evidence gathered on his journey to the top, that rules are a trap to catch weaker men and honour is a plastic trophy that losers award themselves in consolation for unfulfilled ambition. Having such a personality at the heart of government makes a nonsense of unwritten protocol. Much of British politics proceeds by the observance of invisible rails guarding against the tyrannical caprices that formal constitutions explicitly prohibit.
Conservative MPs are not under any illusions about the man who leads them. They appointed a rogue as their king because they craved the success that his methods bring. It was inevitable that evidence of his unsuitability for the job would leak into the public domain, even if it takes a while for misrule to have an electoral consequence. The question pinging around Tory WhatsApp groups is how far the current furore reaches beyond Westminster.
Downing Street is now a machine for generating vindictive enmity. Energies that should be spent on policy are consumed settling scores and lighting new fires to fight old ones. This is not a phase, nor is it an accident. It is a new mode of government being improvised because events flattened the old way. The court of King Boris combines the zealotry of a revolution with the conceit of an empire and the probity of gangsters. It is hard to predict how long such a regime can last, but two things can be forecast with confidence: the fall will be messy, and few who cheer Johnson today will boast of having done so once he is gone.
Terrific piece of prose. I really am wondering whether to close my bet on him still being PM on 1st July 2022. It's still in decent profit but it's getting smaller. Maybe Johnson's days truly are numbered. Maybe I've been calling this wrong and El Capitano (Topping) has it right. That he's so enormously and obviously unfit to be PM that he simply cannot last for more than a couple of years. Hmm. Dunno.
Don’t be swayed by prose in the guardian. Mistaking elegance for insight will make you a fool. For betting purposes it’s irrelevant.
The value is on him staying the course, IMO
100% agree. Johnson is at no risk until he fall behind in the polls, and would probably get a year or so to turn it around even then. He might get a kick in the teeth if the sleaze stories do hit at just the right/wrong time for the locals and they lose a couple of mayoralties they could have won, but it's looking likely they will have a good night and rightly or wrongly (and tbh, I think quite reasonably) the Tory membership and MPs care a lot more about that than headlines which last a few days.
The only exception to this is if he gets into serious legal trouble, but which I'd expect actual criminal charges. I think an electoral commission fine wouldn't be an issue.
So if the Electoral Commission conclude that he broke electoral law and fine him for doing so, he should just carry on? Any other laws that he should be allowed to break?
The Electoral Commission aren't a court of law. After the way they treated Grimes et al if that happens the decision should be appealled to a proper court of law.
What are they?
They make judgements and fine people.
If they make fine people, could they please step it up a bit and make some more?
Comments
Wonder which of his friends is out to bury him.
If Johnson doesn't remain leader to contest the next election who is most likely to succeed?
🏴 85,067 1st doses / 313,616 2nd doses
🏴 7,816 / 40,257
🏴 15,081 / 14,326
NI 8,364 / 11,066
Johnson is driven by a restless sense of his own entitlement to be at the apex of power and a conviction, supported by evidence gathered on his journey to the top, that rules are a trap to catch weaker men and honour is a plastic trophy that losers award themselves in consolation for unfulfilled ambition. Having such a personality at the heart of government makes a nonsense of unwritten protocol. Much of British politics proceeds by the observance of invisible rails guarding against the tyrannical caprices that formal constitutions explicitly prohibit.
Conservative MPs are not under any illusions about the man who leads them. They appointed a rogue as their king because they craved the success that his methods bring. It was inevitable that evidence of his unsuitability for the job would leak into the public domain, even if it takes a while for misrule to have an electoral consequence. The question pinging around Tory WhatsApp groups is how far the current furore reaches beyond Westminster.
Downing Street is now a machine for generating vindictive enmity. Energies that should be spent on policy are consumed settling scores and lighting new fires to fight old ones. This is not a phase, nor is it an accident. It is a new mode of government being improvised because events flattened the old way. The court of King Boris combines the zealotry of a revolution with the conceit of an empire and the probity of gangsters. It is hard to predict how long such a regime can last, but two things can be forecast with confidence: the fall will be messy, and few who cheer Johnson today will boast of having done so once he is gone.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/28/court-king-boris-brexit-covid-prime-minister-politics
The fanbois will never leave him...
Then again Gove was a very close friend of David Cameron and look how that turned out.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/981552/Independent_Adviser_-_Terms_of_Reference_-_April_2021.pdf
So in other words, the PM remains the prosecuting authority, the judge and the jury for any ministerial wrongdoing. Or, he continues to mark his own Government's homework. Begs the question, why did Lord Geidt agree to take the job then?
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1387393420205957120
You know, numbers.
Ah, I see the problem.....
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Lord-Ashcroft-Polls-Scottish-Political-Research-April-2021-2.pdf
NEW: No 10 basically admits PM got it wrong on Labour's Brexit vote - but won't correct record.
PM said: “Last night our friends in the European Union voted to approve our Brexit deal – which he opposed."
But No 10: "It's a matter of record that they did vote in favour of it". https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1387366542468390919
The clock on how long it takes to negotiate with the UK effectively begins from the referendum until independence, however the clock on EU membership I'd think as from independence until accession.
If the timetable was similar to Brexit, say close to four years negotiating divorce, about a year "transition" then they were EU members, I'd say that's rapid accession from independence but a long time negotiating divorce.
That's about what I'd expect BTW. They could sign the acquis communitaire pretty quickly.
Everyone knows Boris and most another politicians chisel a bit here and there, so why is everyone surprised? This example seems fairly trivial in the scheme of things, albeit quite amusing as a distraction.
*(Our World in data est)
depending on...
the critical factor which is at some point the 'Time for a change' moment will come both about the Tories and about Boris.
The valid bit which the otherwise absurd Churchill/Boris comparison makers might want to reflect on is that the moment the job Churchill was installed to do was done the voters unceremoniously ditched him for a great man of dull probity who promised decent things for the working class.
Boris is working on that flank, in that he was installed, without doubt, to Get Brexit Done and to dish the nasty bit of the left (and thus indirectly assist in making Labour electable again), but TBF he is doing his best to govern as a sort of Attlee for the honest working class. Boris intends to outflank Churchill by being Attlee as well.
As yet, and remarkably, Labour show no sign of being a better Attlee than Boris is. if they have a clear, progressive, dull and decent vision they are keeping it under wraps.
IMHO for now they need more than an anti- Boris on moral/probity grounds to make progress. They need both to demolish his character (not hard) and to make a better offer. That's proving hard and the Tories, whether Boris or post Boris will make a fight for the middling sort vote.
Today, No.10 rejected that idea. Instead if adviser wants fresh probe he will only be able to "raise the issue confidentially with the PM" https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1387396127272624132/photo/1
But, yes, I'd be ok with "angry and passionate and rattled". If that's how Johnson is described on the main news tonight, I don't think there can be too many complaints.
As I said, if a court of law says he's broken the law then I think he'd have to go. That's the benchmark.
Truss has been a stalwart in Cabinet for three different PMs for nearly a decade and is massively outshining the Foreign Secretary on international relations.
"English Channel" people wail. But someone so obviously bright will have done/said this for other purposes.
Which "party insiders" are you talking about are ridiculing a Cabinet Secretary who has been in the Cabinet for almost a decade, under three consecutive PMs and has done a tremendous job negotiating on behalf of the UK with countries around the world?
PS its members who get the vote of course in the end between the final two.
If the law has been broken then Police can get involved and so can the CPS and the Courts.
The value is on him staying the course, IMO
https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1387394219212480514?s=20
“ The Sputnik V vaccine Ad5 vector is evidently replication competent. The makers apparently neglected to delete E1, so getting this vaccine means being infected with live adenovirus 5.
Hence Brazil’s regulator correctly rejected it.”
https://twitter.com/angie_rasmussen/status/1387397186372005893
It could well be someone we have never heard of yet.
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1387395256908402689
Soon and it will be Sunak, in a years time probably someone entirely different, if Boris stays until 2027 - we probably haven't even heard of them yet.
That seems like quite a positive message...
Population or eligible cohort? Remember that no vaccines are approved for paediatric use in the UK AIUI so this needs to be expressed as a proportion of over-16s (or over 18s?).
The only exception to this is if he gets into serious legal trouble, but which I'd expect actual criminal charges. I think an electoral commission fine wouldn't be an issue.
But then again, there's the inertia rule that says far more big things (eg the lurid Fall of Johnson) don't happen than happen. And he's popular. And he won a landslide GE quite recently. And the polls are good. And he's about to win Hartlepool.
So on balance, 1.47 to still be PM on 1st July next year? Yep, still more a buy than a lay, isn't it.
Have you got any bets on Johnson exit markets?
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-wants-to-buy-30-million-sputnik-v-vaccine-doses-state-premier/a-57287686
I think he should resign for misleading Parliament on this and earlier issues, and his treatment of the Ministerial Code.
But I bet on the second answer, and given the reaction (or lack thereof) of that selectorate to the prior issues I think they would shrug off anything short of criminal charges.
No, but 1.47 for the pm to last 15 months is a great bet.
Let me get this right
The EU want our doses so they can sit on them?
Is that about right?
European Union lawyers today demanded AstraZeneca immediately deliver Covid-19 vaccines from its factories in Britain, in a move that risks reigniting tensions with Downing Street over scarce vaccine supplies in the bloc.
We will be doing 12 - 17 after adults. That gives a ceiling of 85.6% of the population
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56722186
For Covid the estimated threshold for herd immunity is at least 65%-70%.
We won't need to bother with 0 - 11 year olds, 12+ year olds + prior infection (And we have had massive prior infection !) + high takeup + good vaccines (Not Sinopharm) will absolubtely smash it.
So we're there already.
They make judgements and fine people.