On the day that a Times poll has the Tories 13% ahead it will be Mail that will get the most attenti

FrancisUrquhart said:

Foxy said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Two genuinely stupid moves by Johnson yesterday and both can easily be linked. The first is this story about the No 10 refit which is just crass and stupid. It says Johnson is worried - well he bloody well should be. And if the story is true then he should be ashamed.

The second story - which for me is linked - is the idiotic decision to give NHS staff a pay rise below inflation. It just looks callous and makes a mockery of all the claims about how important they are and how much they are valued.

Yes things are tough and yes we can't keep splashing taxpayers money around all over the place without regard for the debt but a 1% pay rise is £340 million. So go for 5% and make it meaningful. As the study by the London Economics consultancy shows the Government will get most of that back anyway in increased taxes.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/18/government-pay-rise-cost-nhs-england-staff-report

As OGH says. Very poor optics across the board yesterday for Johnson.

Agree 100%. I can live without a pay rise for next year - it would be nice but times are tough and I’m aware others are ahead in the queue - but after the year they’ve had NHS medical staff definitely deserve one. Especially nursing staff.

I actually think this ridiculously low one for a small number is worse than none at all. It looks tokenistic.

Personally, I have no problem with 1%, and a blanket payrise for all NHS staff is poorly targeted.

An extra 2 weeks paid holiday for all those who worked in covid units, to be taken later in the year for recovery would be my suggestion.

As would be investment in training, so redeployed staff are not punished for not acquiring the skills that they should have been developing. My registrar has been on covid ICU for 3 months so has missed a large chunk of her Specialist Training. She is at risk of missing career progression as a result.

Paid holiday is a great idea. Give them all £1,000 tax free to spend on it too.

But the next couple of years are also going to see the NHS under extreme stress as they deal with the vast backlog of treatment deferred. The staff are going to be under the cosh into the mid-distance.

And politically, unlike the NHS there are going to be so many people in the private sector who have lost their jobs, taken pay cuts, lost pensions. They might also rightly claim they have made a huge sacrifice in these times of Covid.

For a cunning CoE, an extra week or two of paid leave as a one off doesn't inflate subsequent years too.

And investment in remedial training would truly be an investment. It is essential for both staff retention and tackling those backlogs.

Incidentally my Trust is building in decompression time to the return of redeployed staff, many of whom like Mrs Foxy have found it very gruelling.

I imagine the danger of offering just an extra weeks holiday is that it can easily be spun as "that won't pay the mortgage"...."what am I supposed to do with it, I can't afford to go anywhere".

YBarddCwsc said:

Gardenwalker said:

YBarddCwsc said:

kjh said:

YBarddCwsc said:

kjh said:

However on the point you thought I was making about prices - they do seem somewhat high, but I suspect we are talking about different things when we say refurbishing. However I suspect there are also some decorators who charge a lot more for the same service to the gullible rich.

I think the point is that -- in a building like No 10 -- you will need to use heritage craftspeople, not trustatrader.

If you need to replace a door, or some flooring, or a toilet cistern, then it will have to be constructed bespoke because the building & its interior is listed.

The bespoke door or flooring will need to be made by a craftsman. The cistern may have to be sourced from a specialist dealer or made bespoke.

That is how historic, listed buildings work.😉

I have no idea whether the DM story is true, whether the sum is 200k, but your analogy was always ridiculous.

I agree with the point you are making but we are talking about order of magnitude here. It is gross. And we are talking about decoration and furnishings. Now going back to my house (no please don't) my stairs and porch are solid oak and handmade. So how do you account for that difference? None of the stuff you mention even if by craftsman should cost this unless you are paying through the nose.

Your stairs and porch are bespoke solid oak, sure.

But if you replace something in Downing Street -- say a door -- then it will have to be exactly the same as the original.

In practice, this will need to be a bespoke door made by a craftsperson in the same style as the original and with the same original material (if it can even be still sourced).

The rates charged by heritage craftspeople are very different from the rates charged by builders. It is a completely different scale, and it probably is an order of magnitude.

(As the building is listed, then any changes will need listed building consent, and so this will be insisted upon -- it is not Boris' and PNN's choice).

You are making a stout effort, but surely Carrie was only focused on wallpaper, paint and new furniture?

Farrow and Ball’s “Breakfast Room Green” is expensive but not *that* expensive.

I know because I have the up-keep of my listed "Valleys dunghill" to worry about 😁.

Anyhow, it is a Daily Merkle story, so I expect it is mainly bollocks.

The only relevance perhaps is this.

We know dreary Theresa gets paid 120k a speech.

If that is the going rate for a dumbster like Theresa, then Boris is really going to coin it as an ex-PM.

200k will then be nothing to him then -- mebbe just an hour's work -- so these money woes (if true) do suggest that Boris is likely to piss off sooner rather than later.

Foxy said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Two genuinely stupid moves by Johnson yesterday and both can easily be linked. The first is this story about the No 10 refit which is just crass and stupid. It says Johnson is worried - well he bloody well should be. And if the story is true then he should be ashamed.

The second story - which for me is linked - is the idiotic decision to give NHS staff a pay rise below inflation. It just looks callous and makes a mockery of all the claims about how important they are and how much they are valued.

Yes things are tough and yes we can't keep splashing taxpayers money around all over the place without regard for the debt but a 1% pay rise is £340 million. So go for 5% and make it meaningful. As the study by the London Economics consultancy shows the Government will get most of that back anyway in increased taxes.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/18/government-pay-rise-cost-nhs-england-staff-report

As OGH says. Very poor optics across the board yesterday for Johnson.

Agree 100%. I can live without a pay rise for next year - it would be nice but times are tough and I’m aware others are ahead in the queue - but after the year they’ve had NHS medical staff definitely deserve one. Especially nursing staff.

I actually think this ridiculously low one for a small number is worse than none at all. It looks tokenistic.

Personally, I have no problem with 1%, and a blanket payrise for all NHS staff is poorly targeted.

An extra 2 weeks paid holiday for all those who worked in covid units, to be taken later in the year for recovery would be my suggestion.

As would be investment in training, so redeployed staff are not punished for not acquiring the skills that they should have been developing. My registrar has been on covid ICU for 3 months so has missed a large chunk of her Specialist Training. She is at risk of missing career progression as a result.

Paid holiday is a great idea. Give them all £1,000 tax free to spend on it too.

But the next couple of years are also going to see the NHS under extreme stress as they deal with the vast backlog of treatment deferred. The staff are going to be under the cosh into the mid-distance.

And politically, unlike the NHS there are going to be so many people in the private sector who have lost their jobs, taken pay cuts, lost pensions. They might also rightly claim they have made a huge sacrifice in these times of Covid.

For a cunning CoE, an extra week or two of paid leave as a one off doesn't inflate subsequent years too.

And investment in remedial training would truly be an investment. It is essential for both staff retention and tackling those backlogs.

Incidentally my Trust is building in decompression time to the return of redeployed staff, many of whom like Mrs Foxy have found it very gruelling.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I may have mentioned it a few times on here but the focus groups have consistently picked up on the monies spent on track & trace and on contracts that seem to end up with Tory donors but what is really egregious is the fact the contracts are seemingly to those inexperienced and unqualified to deliver them.

It is a bonanza for Tory donors, pensioners are safe, and austerity for the rest of us.

We locked down to save granny, but granny doesn’t give a shite.

You really are very unpleasant today.

This pensioner does care and expects the triple lock to go, indeed it would have but for labour who decided they wanted it to stay for some strange reason (politics)

Wait, so it is Labour’s fault?

Wow. You have severe Stockholm Syndrome.

The continuation of the triple lock was a labour commitment like it or not

When?

GE 2019

Remind me who won that election?
I do recall Corbyn lost it.

The labour 2019 manifesto stated

We will maintain the ‘triple lock’ and
guarantee the Winter Fuel Payment,
free TV licences and free bus passes
as universal benefits.

It is still labour policy unless you can show me where they have rejected it since December 2019

Big G.

It is this Tory government that is responsible for keeping pensioners stuffed with gold, while ordinary working people and younger folk can only look forward to austerity.

Or worse if you are one of the poor schmucks paying 5.6% on your university loan.

Putting the blame on Labour is truly pathetic, you are better than that.

The political consensus as of now is to keep it

I hope Rishi abolishes it next year but you cannot discount labour having ensured that it continued

Nemtynakht said:

kjh said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Two genuinely stupid moves by Johnson yesterday and both can easily be linked. The first is this story about the No 10 refit which is just crass and stupid. It says Johnson is worried - well he bloody well should be. And if the story is true then he should be ashamed.

The second story - which for me is linked - is the idiotic decision to give NHS staff a pay rise below inflation. It just looks callous and makes a mockery of all the claims about how important they are and how much they are valued.

Yes things are tough and yes we can't keep splashing taxpayers money around all over the place without regard for the debt but a 1% pay rise is £340 million. So go for 5% and make it meaningful. As the study by the London Economics consultancy shows the Government will get most of that back anyway in increased taxes.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/18/government-pay-rise-cost-nhs-england-staff-report

As OGH says. Very poor optics across the board yesterday for Johnson.

Agree 100%. I can live without a pay rise for next year - it would be nice but times are tough and I’m aware others are ahead in the queue - but after the year they’ve had NHS medical staff definitely deserve one. Especially nursing staff.

I actually think this ridiculously low one for a small number is worse than none at all. It looks tokenistic.

Personally, I have no problem with 1%, and a blanket payrise for all NHS staff is poorly targeted.

An extra 2 weeks paid holiday for all those who worked in covid units, to be taken later in the year for recovery would be my suggestion.

As would be investment in training, so redeployed staff are not punished for not acquiring the skills that they should have been developing. My registrar has been on covid ICU for 3 months so has missed a large chunk of her Specialist Training. She is at risk of missing career progression as a result.

Paid holiday is a great idea. Give them all £1,000 tax free to spend on it too.

But the next couple of years are also going to see the NHS under extreme stress as they deal with the vast backlog of treatment deferred. The staff are going to be under the cosh into the mid-distance.

And politically, unlike the NHS there are going to be so many people in the private sector who have lost their jobs, taken pay cuts, lost pensions. They might also rightly claim they have made a huge sacrifice in these times of Covid.

I agree with Foxy and you on this. I don't think an extra pay rise is appropriate, but it looks bad for Boris by not doing so. If a £1000 tax free bonus was offered to those on the frontline for cleaners, nurses, doctors below consultants, etc, etc in the budget it would have gone down well. I have no idea what that would have cost.

And it should have been given to them in time for shops, pubs and restaurants opening up. A flat figure would have been worth more to those on lower salaries who would also be most likely to spend it soon and in the UK.

Cyclefree said:

And if it is indeed a historic interior a la Kedleston Hall then it is wholly unsuitable to be lived in by a couple with toddler and dog.

noneoftheabove said:

Cyclefree said:

1.

noneoftheabove said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Jonathan said:

The bottom line is that decorating number ten should not be a priority at this moment. It's a total indulgence.

And it is a private matter unless public money is involved which as I understand it is not the case

How is our elected officials accepting cash bungs a private matter?

What on earth has happened to standards in public life?

Remember Sir Alex Allan, the PM's advisor on Ministerial standards, who resigned 3 months ago, when the PM ignored his report on Priti Patel and bullying, the same Priti Patel whose treatment of Sir Philip Rutnam has led to a rumoured payout of £340,000 to him?

No. Not a surprise. The PM seems to have forgotten too. No replacement has been announced. There are no Ministerial standards anymore. Or, indeed, any standards in public life. Those who think there should be are stupid and/or naive old fogies. Snouts in the trough is the new and only standard.

No, its not stupid or naive to expect standards. They will come back in fashion eventually and those who ignore them currently should be shamed, even if they neither feel personally ashamed nor suffer electorally for it.

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Gardenwalker said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MattW said:

Gardenwalker said:

Charles said:

kjh said:

RobD said:

kjh said:

I can't grasp how it is possible to spend £200k on a decoration unless you have more money than sense. I spent a similar amount between 2012 and 2014 but that got me a huge oak porch, a large extension to the garage, new heating to 17 room house, a massive patio, a concrete raised pond demolished and filled in, new natural style pond dug, new oak staircase, walls demolished and new walls built with several beams, 4 bathrooms bought and fitted and a kitchen and utility room, etc, etc.

Oh and decorated.

A couple of years ago we bought a terrace house in Southwold. Gutted, new kitchen, bathroom, electrics and heating for about £20k.

Oh and decorated.

Admit it, you just made this comment for the humblebrag about your £200k refurb.

Nope. I suspect there are several on here who can outbrag me. I know I am lucky to be able to afford it, but how else do you make the point that £200k on a flat is ridiculous.

I am also retired. It is the consequence of two well paid older individuals who aren't gullible and waste money on overpriced stuff.

As a rule of thumb for a complete refurbishment London is about £150-£200 psf for a flat.

I don’t know how large their flat is but if it is being totally redone I’m not surprised by the price.

I would say the same, but that includes rewiring and plumbing etc.

How big is the bloody flat anyway.

PB Decor Service, at your Service

It's 4 bedroom. The Daily Mail has an article about the last 3 makeovers. 64k for the Camerons for a bathroom, kitchen area, and new floor and ceiling. Dualit toaster and Britannia Range Cooker.

And 127k over several years for the Blairs. But then Cherie probably made more money than Boris, and did not have umpteen former husbands.

Here's the old plan, which you can access on the site mentioned I assume. It is some of this:



I will refrain from adding the Hello photos, unless you ask nicely.

Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9316209/The-modern-makeovers-Number-11-Downing-Street.html

You say its 4 bedroom but that floor plan shows - between No 10 and No 11 - a total of 18 bedrooms. How much of that do they have to refurbish?

Not that much, the issue is that Mrs May followed David Cameron's & Margaret Thatcher's lead that the taxpayer shouldn't lavish Number 10 but Ms Symonds really doesn't like Mrs May's John Lewis nightmare choice of decor.

If she doesn't like it she should pay for the changes herself. I can understand making changes/redecorating because of wear and tear but it should be within a fixed budget and on a fixed timescale - every so many years. And both those should be decided by someone other than the PM and his current sleeping partner.

There's an annual £30k maintenance budget for the PM and their spouse to use on the upkeep for Downing Street.

Clearly that's not enough for Boris Johnson and his inamorata.

What’s the plural of inamorata?
Or is it already a plural.

Google tells me the plural of inamorata is inamoratas.

Bidey-ins for we North British.

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

It interesting that Boris Johnson has been more focussed on getting the money for doing up Number 10 than say feeding starving kids.

Marcus Rashford really has shamed him on that front.

I dont actually mind public money being spent on the refurb, but pretending its a charitable cause or hoping for cash bungs is out of order.

Agree, I've said for years the entire Downing Street complex is unsuitable for the leader of our country.

Kick Brenda out of Buckingham Palace and move the PM and most of the government there.

It costs the country nothing.

Isn't there hundreds of millions worth of refurbishment to do to Buckingham palace as well that the crown estate currently pays for? Unless of course you're suggesting we expropriate that too?

350 million pounds worth of renovations. The Crown would still pay for that, think of it as all the backdated income tax the Queen and her antecedents failed to pay.

There shouldn't be anything backdated but anything belonging to "The Crown" including the full Crown Estates should belong to the country upon becoming a republic.

The Royals should be thanked for their service and given a generous payoff and pension.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Gardenwalker said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MattW said:

Gardenwalker said:

Charles said:

kjh said:

RobD said:

kjh said:

I can't grasp how it is possible to spend £200k on a decoration unless you have more money than sense. I spent a similar amount between 2012 and 2014 but that got me a huge oak porch, a large extension to the garage, new heating to 17 room house, a massive patio, a concrete raised pond demolished and filled in, new natural style pond dug, new oak staircase, walls demolished and new walls built with several beams, 4 bathrooms bought and fitted and a kitchen and utility room, etc, etc.

Oh and decorated.

A couple of years ago we bought a terrace house in Southwold. Gutted, new kitchen, bathroom, electrics and heating for about £20k.

Oh and decorated.

Admit it, you just made this comment for the humblebrag about your £200k refurb.

Nope. I suspect there are several on here who can outbrag me. I know I am lucky to be able to afford it, but how else do you make the point that £200k on a flat is ridiculous.

I am also retired. It is the consequence of two well paid older individuals who aren't gullible and waste money on overpriced stuff.

As a rule of thumb for a complete refurbishment London is about £150-£200 psf for a flat.

I don’t know how large their flat is but if it is being totally redone I’m not surprised by the price.

I would say the same, but that includes rewiring and plumbing etc.

How big is the bloody flat anyway.

PB Decor Service, at your Service

It's 4 bedroom. The Daily Mail has an article about the last 3 makeovers. 64k for the Camerons for a bathroom, kitchen area, and new floor and ceiling. Dualit toaster and Britannia Range Cooker.

And 127k over several years for the Blairs. But then Cherie probably made more money than Boris, and did not have umpteen former husbands.

Here's the old plan, which you can access on the site mentioned I assume. It is some of this:



I will refrain from adding the Hello photos, unless you ask nicely.

Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9316209/The-modern-makeovers-Number-11-Downing-Street.html

You say its 4 bedroom but that floor plan shows - between No 10 and No 11 - a total of 18 bedrooms. How much of that do they have to refurbish?

Not that much, the issue is that Mrs May followed David Cameron's & Margaret Thatcher's lead that the taxpayer shouldn't lavish Number 10 but Ms Symonds really doesn't like Mrs May's John Lewis nightmare choice of decor.

If she doesn't like it she should pay for the changes herself. I can understand making changes/redecorating because of wear and tear but it should be within a fixed budget and on a fixed timescale - every so many years. And both those should be decided by someone other than the PM and his current sleeping partner.

There's an annual £30k maintenance budget for the PM and their spouse to use on the upkeep for Downing Street.

Clearly that's not enough for Boris Johnson and his inamorata.

What’s the plural of inamorata?
Or is it already a plural.

Google tells me the plural of inamorata is inamoratas.

Bidey-ins for we North British.

I've never heard of the term Bidey-in before.

Is it a benign term or does it have a judgmental/disapproving tone that might get me slapped if I used towards a Scot?

Fysics_Teacher said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

It interesting that Boris Johnson has been more focussed on getting the money for doing up Number 10 than say feeding starving kids.

Marcus Rashford really has shamed him on that front.

I dont actually mind public money being spent on the refurb, but pretending its a charitable cause or hoping for cash bungs is out of order.

Agree, I've said for years the entire Downing Street complex is unsuitable for the leader of our country.

Kick Brenda out of Buckingham Palace and move the PM and most of the government there.

It costs the country nothing.

Isn't there hundreds of millions worth of refurbishment to do to Buckingham palace as well that the crown estate currently pays for? Unless of course you're suggesting we expropriate that too?

350 million pounds worth of renovations. The Crown would still pay for that, think of it as all the backdated income tax the Queen and her antecedents failed to pay.

There shouldn't be anything backdated but anything belonging to "The Crown" including the full Crown Estates should belong to the country upon becoming a republic.

The Royals should be thanked for their service and given a generous payoff and pension.

You do know that the all the Crown Estate's income already goes directly to the Treasury, don't you?

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Gardenwalker said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MattW said:

Gardenwalker said:

Charles said:

kjh said:

RobD said:

kjh said:

I can't grasp how it is possible to spend £200k on a decoration unless you have more money than sense. I spent a similar amount between 2012 and 2014 but that got me a huge oak porch, a large extension to the garage, new heating to 17 room house, a massive patio, a concrete raised pond demolished and filled in, new natural style pond dug, new oak staircase, walls demolished and new walls built with several beams, 4 bathrooms bought and fitted and a kitchen and utility room, etc, etc.

Oh and decorated.

A couple of years ago we bought a terrace house in Southwold. Gutted, new kitchen, bathroom, electrics and heating for about £20k.

Oh and decorated.

Admit it, you just made this comment for the humblebrag about your £200k refurb.

Nope. I suspect there are several on here who can outbrag me. I know I am lucky to be able to afford it, but how else do you make the point that £200k on a flat is ridiculous.

I am also retired. It is the consequence of two well paid older individuals who aren't gullible and waste money on overpriced stuff.

As a rule of thumb for a complete refurbishment London is about £150-£200 psf for a flat.

I don’t know how large their flat is but if it is being totally redone I’m not surprised by the price.

I would say the same, but that includes rewiring and plumbing etc.

How big is the bloody flat anyway.

PB Decor Service, at your Service

It's 4 bedroom. The Daily Mail has an article about the last 3 makeovers. 64k for the Camerons for a bathroom, kitchen area, and new floor and ceiling. Dualit toaster and Britannia Range Cooker.

And 127k over several years for the Blairs. But then Cherie probably made more money than Boris, and did not have umpteen former husbands.

Here's the old plan, which you can access on the site mentioned I assume. It is some of this:



I will refrain from adding the Hello photos, unless you ask nicely.

Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9316209/The-modern-makeovers-Number-11-Downing-Street.html

You say its 4 bedroom but that floor plan shows - between No 10 and No 11 - a total of 18 bedrooms. How much of that do they have to refurbish?

Not that much, the issue is that Mrs May followed David Cameron's & Margaret Thatcher's lead that the taxpayer shouldn't lavish Number 10 but Ms Symonds really doesn't like Mrs May's John Lewis nightmare choice of decor.

If she doesn't like it she should pay for the changes herself. I can understand making changes/redecorating because of wear and tear but it should be within a fixed budget and on a fixed timescale - every so many years. And both those should be decided by someone other than the PM and his current sleeping partner.

There's an annual £30k maintenance budget for the PM and their spouse to use on the upkeep for Downing Street.

Clearly that's not enough for Boris Johnson and his inamorata.

What’s the plural of inamorata?
Or is it already a plural.

Google tells me the plural of inamorata is inamoratas.

Bidey-ins for we North British.

I've never heard of the term Bidey-in before.

Is it a benign term or does it have a judgmental/disapproving tone that might get me slapped if I used towards a Scot?

YBarddCwsc said:

Gardenwalker said:

If it listed, I assume your dung-hill is of great architectural or historic merit.

Was it, perhaps, the last known midden of Llywelyn ap Gruffudd?

Many famous Welshmen have taken a dump on my dung-hill.

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Gardenwalker said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

MattW said:

Gardenwalker said:

Charles said:

kjh said:

RobD said:

kjh said:

I can't grasp how it is possible to spend £200k on a decoration unless you have more money than sense. I spent a similar amount between 2012 and 2014 but that got me a huge oak porch, a large extension to the garage, new heating to 17 room house, a massive patio, a concrete raised pond demolished and filled in, new natural style pond dug, new oak staircase, walls demolished and new walls built with several beams, 4 bathrooms bought and fitted and a kitchen and utility room, etc, etc.

Oh and decorated.

A couple of years ago we bought a terrace house in Southwold. Gutted, new kitchen, bathroom, electrics and heating for about £20k.

Oh and decorated.

Admit it, you just made this comment for the humblebrag about your £200k refurb.

Nope. I suspect there are several on here who can outbrag me. I know I am lucky to be able to afford it, but how else do you make the point that £200k on a flat is ridiculous.

I am also retired. It is the consequence of two well paid older individuals who aren't gullible and waste money on overpriced stuff.

As a rule of thumb for a complete refurbishment London is about £150-£200 psf for a flat.

I don’t know how large their flat is but if it is being totally redone I’m not surprised by the price.

I would say the same, but that includes rewiring and plumbing etc.

How big is the bloody flat anyway.

PB Decor Service, at your Service

It's 4 bedroom. The Daily Mail has an article about the last 3 makeovers. 64k for the Camerons for a bathroom, kitchen area, and new floor and ceiling. Dualit toaster and Britannia Range Cooker.

And 127k over several years for the Blairs. But then Cherie probably made more money than Boris, and did not have umpteen former husbands.

Here's the old plan, which you can access on the site mentioned I assume. It is some of this:



I will refrain from adding the Hello photos, unless you ask nicely.

Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9316209/The-modern-makeovers-Number-11-Downing-Street.html

You say its 4 bedroom but that floor plan shows - between No 10 and No 11 - a total of 18 bedrooms. How much of that do they have to refurbish?

Not that much, the issue is that Mrs May followed David Cameron's & Margaret Thatcher's lead that the taxpayer shouldn't lavish Number 10 but Ms Symonds really doesn't like Mrs May's John Lewis nightmare choice of decor.

If she doesn't like it she should pay for the changes herself. I can understand making changes/redecorating because of wear and tear but it should be within a fixed budget and on a fixed timescale - every so many years. And both those should be decided by someone other than the PM and his current sleeping partner.

There's an annual £30k maintenance budget for the PM and their spouse to use on the upkeep for Downing Street.

Clearly that's not enough for Boris Johnson and his inamorata.

What’s the plural of inamorata?
Or is it already a plural.

Google tells me the plural of inamorata is inamoratas.

Bidey-ins for we North British.

I've never heard of the term Bidey-in before.

Is it a benign term or does it have a judgmental/disapproving tone that might get me slapped if I used towards a Scot?

There certainly used to be a curtain twitching element to it but it's pretty harmless nowadays, can be used in an ironic, post modern way without getting a slap.

We may be almost at the point when the last Church of Scotland minister has been strangled by the last copy of the Sunday Post.

TheScreamingEagles said:

another_richard said:

Even if it is 200k why doesn't Boris pay for it himself ?

After he leaves politics he'll be able to 'earn' that much by giving a speech or two.

Boris Johnson is not a man of sound personal finances.

Remember back in 2008 when Ken Livingstone challenged Boris Johnson to publish his tax returns hoping to find tax dodges only to find that Johnson was on PAYE for everything and paying way more tax than he should than if he went limited liability.

Remember Johnson has two ex wives and countless kids to support.

I suspect every future bit of income is already spoken for.

another_richard said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

another_richard said:

Even if it is 200k why doesn't Boris pay for it himself ?

After he leaves politics he'll be able to 'earn' that much by giving a speech or two.

Boris Johnson is not a man of sound personal finances.

Remember back in 2008 when Ken Livingstone challenged Boris Johnson to publish his tax returns hoping to find tax dodges only to find that Johnson was on PAYE for everything and paying way more tax than he should than if he went limited liability.

Remember Johnson has two ex wives and countless kids to support.

I suspect every future bit of income is already spoken for.

Marina Wheeler is a barrister - why does he have to support her ?

Most of his children are adults - why does he have to support them ?

Fysics_Teacher said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

It interesting that Boris Johnson has been more focussed on getting the money for doing up Number 10 than say feeding starving kids.

Marcus Rashford really has shamed him on that front.

I dont actually mind public money being spent on the refurb, but pretending its a charitable cause or hoping for cash bungs is out of order.

Agree, I've said for years the entire Downing Street complex is unsuitable for the leader of our country.

Kick Brenda out of Buckingham Palace and move the PM and most of the government there.

It costs the country nothing.

Isn't there hundreds of millions worth of refurbishment to do to Buckingham palace as well that the crown estate currently pays for? Unless of course you're suggesting we expropriate that too?

350 million pounds worth of renovations. The Crown would still pay for that, think of it as all the backdated income tax the Queen and her antecedents failed to pay.

There shouldn't be anything backdated but anything belonging to "The Crown" including the full Crown Estates should belong to the country upon becoming a republic.

The Royals should be thanked for their service and given a generous payoff and pension.

You do know that the all the Crown Estate's income already goes directly to the Treasury, don't you?

And has done for centuries yes, "the crown" belongs to the country and is not the plaything of the House of Windsor - but that should be made official and irreversible once we become a republic.

Why on earth would we want to do that?

Philip_Thompson said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

another_richard said:

Even if it is 200k why doesn't Boris pay for it himself ?

After he leaves politics he'll be able to 'earn' that much by giving a speech or two.

Boris Johnson is not a man of sound personal finances.

Remember back in 2008 when Ken Livingstone challenged Boris Johnson to publish his tax returns hoping to find tax dodges only to find that Johnson was on PAYE for everything and paying way more tax than he should than if he went limited liability.

Remember Johnson has two ex wives and countless kids to support.

I suspect every future bit of income is already spoken for.

When he leaves office the country's finances will look like a facsimile of his own.

So with no dodges despite his political opponents assuming there was? 🤔

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/matt_dathan/status/1367542628380770310?s=20

TheScreamingEagles said:

another_richard said:

Even if it is 200k why doesn't Boris pay for it himself ?

After he leaves politics he'll be able to 'earn' that much by giving a speech or two.

Boris Johnson is not a man of sound personal finances.

Remember back in 2008 when Ken Livingstone challenged Boris Johnson to publish his tax returns hoping to find tax dodges only to find that Johnson was on PAYE for everything and paying way more tax than he should than if he went limited liability.

Remember Johnson has two ex wives and countless kids to support.

I suspect every future bit of income is already spoken for.

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

another_richard said:

Even if it is 200k why doesn't Boris pay for it himself ?

After he leaves politics he'll be able to 'earn' that much by giving a speech or two.

Boris Johnson is not a man of sound personal finances.

Remember back in 2008 when Ken Livingstone challenged Boris Johnson to publish his tax returns hoping to find tax dodges only to find that Johnson was on PAYE for everything and paying way more tax than he should than if he went limited liability.

Remember Johnson has two ex wives and countless kids to support.

I suspect every future bit of income is already spoken for.

So what you're saying is he's not dodgy and plays by both the spirit and letter of the tax rules despite people assuming he would be dodging his taxes?

And that's a criticism?

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

another_richard said:

Even if it is 200k why doesn't Boris pay for it himself ?

After he leaves politics he'll be able to 'earn' that much by giving a speech or two.

Boris Johnson is not a man of sound personal finances.

Remember back in 2008 when Ken Livingstone challenged Boris Johnson to publish his tax returns hoping to find tax dodges only to find that Johnson was on PAYE for everything and paying way more tax than he should than if he went limited liability.

Remember Johnson has two ex wives and countless kids to support.

I suspect every future bit of income is already spoken for.

So what you're saying is he's not dodgy and plays by both the spirit and letter of the tax rules despite people assuming he would be dodging his taxes?

And that's a criticism?

FrancisUrquhart said:

Foxy said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Two genuinely stupid moves by Johnson yesterday and both can easily be linked. The first is this story about the No 10 refit which is just crass and stupid. It says Johnson is worried - well he bloody well should be. And if the story is true then he should be ashamed.

The second story - which for me is linked - is the idiotic decision to give NHS staff a pay rise below inflation. It just looks callous and makes a mockery of all the claims about how important they are and how much they are valued.

Yes things are tough and yes we can't keep splashing taxpayers money around all over the place without regard for the debt but a 1% pay rise is £340 million. So go for 5% and make it meaningful. As the study by the London Economics consultancy shows the Government will get most of that back anyway in increased taxes.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/18/government-pay-rise-cost-nhs-england-staff-report

As OGH says. Very poor optics across the board yesterday for Johnson.

Agree 100%. I can live without a pay rise for next year - it would be nice but times are tough and I’m aware others are ahead in the queue - but after the year they’ve had NHS medical staff definitely deserve one. Especially nursing staff.

I actually think this ridiculously low one for a small number is worse than none at all. It looks tokenistic.

Personally, I have no problem with 1%, and a blanket payrise for all NHS staff is poorly targeted.

An extra 2 weeks paid holiday for all those who worked in covid units, to be taken later in the year for recovery would be my suggestion.

As would be investment in training, so redeployed staff are not punished for not acquiring the skills that they should have been developing. My registrar has been on covid ICU for 3 months so has missed a large chunk of her Specialist Training. She is at risk of missing career progression as a result.

Paid holiday is a great idea. Give them all £1,000 tax free to spend on it too.

But the next couple of years are also going to see the NHS under extreme stress as they deal with the vast backlog of treatment deferred. The staff are going to be under the cosh into the mid-distance.

And politically, unlike the NHS there are going to be so many people in the private sector who have lost their jobs, taken pay cuts, lost pensions. They might also rightly claim they have made a huge sacrifice in these times of Covid.

For a cunning CoE, an extra week or two of paid leave as a one off doesn't inflate subsequent years too.

And investment in remedial training would truly be an investment. It is essential for both staff retention and tackling those backlogs.

Incidentally my Trust is building in decompression time to the return of redeployed staff, many of whom like Mrs Foxy have found it very gruelling.

I imagine the danger of offering just an extra weeks holiday is that it can easily be spun as "that won't pay the mortgage"...."what am I supposed to do with it, I can't afford to go anywhere".

GIN1138 said:

I can't see the Mail's campaign against Boris and Carrie going anywhere. When it comes to stories like this Boris is like Blair - Teflon.

Morris_Dancer said:

F1: the 'totally not a flag' livery of Haas is being investigated:
https://twitter.com/LukeSmithF1/status/1367777213576282112

another_richard said:

Even if it is 200k why doesn't Boris pay for it himself ?

After he leaves politics he'll be able to 'earn' that much by giving a speech or two.

MaxPB said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

another_richard said:

Even if it is 200k why doesn't Boris pay for it himself ?

After he leaves politics he'll be able to 'earn' that much by giving a speech or two.

Boris Johnson is not a man of sound personal finances.

Remember back in 2008 when Ken Livingstone challenged Boris Johnson to publish his tax returns hoping to find tax dodges only to find that Johnson was on PAYE for everything and paying way more tax than he should than if he went limited liability.

Remember Johnson has two ex wives and countless kids to support.

I suspect every future bit of income is already spoken for.

So what you're saying is he's not dodgy and plays by both the spirit and letter of the tax rules despite people assuming he would be dodging his taxes?

And that's a criticism?

In the same way that someone might praise Donald Trump for getting away with not paying tax at all...

another_richard said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

another_richard said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

another_richard said:

Even if it is 200k why doesn't Boris pay for it himself ?

After he leaves politics he'll be able to 'earn' that much by giving a speech or two.

Boris Johnson is not a man of sound personal finances.

Remember back in 2008 when Ken Livingstone challenged Boris Johnson to publish his tax returns hoping to find tax dodges only to find that Johnson was on PAYE for everything and paying way more tax than he should than if he went limited liability.

Remember Johnson has two ex wives and countless kids to support.

I suspect every future bit of income is already spoken for.

Marina Wheeler is a barrister - why does he have to support her ?

Most of his children are adults - why does he have to support them ?

There are least two children who are nowhere near close to adulthood.

As for the support of Ms Wheeler, I believe he needs to help pay off the mortgage they took out.

So two kids and part of a mortgage.

Even at Eton and Mayfair prices that's a few weeks 'earnings' for an ex Prime Minister.

GIN1138 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

GIN1138 said:

I can't see the Mail's campaign against Boris and Carrie going anywhere. When it comes to stories like this Boris is like Blair - Teflon.

Well Boris Johnson has been sacked twice for being liar.

Never by the electorate though...

GIN1138 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

GIN1138 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

GIN1138 said:

I can't see the Mail's campaign against Boris and Carrie going anywhere. When it comes to stories like this Boris is like Blair - Teflon.

Well Boris Johnson has been sacked twice for being liar.

Never by the electorate though...

The voters of Clywd South say hello.

LOL!

I guess it still grates that Cameron and Osborne were scrabbling around to try and get a majority in 2010 an 2015 and then along comes Boris and gets an 80 seat majority in 2019...

Foxy said:

We know from work with military PTSD and combat fatigue that short periods of rest and group discussion are very effective at maintaining morale and cohesion. This can be both formal counselling or informal R and R in the style of @Dura_Ace.

CarlottaVance said:

Iain Dale in ConHome:

The EU has no interest in Northern Ireland’s future prosperity. It just sees it as a mechanism to exert its power. It is a constitutional outrage that British companies are not free to trade without restriction to all parts of the sovereign United Kingdom. The checks that are now being demanded by the EU are so disproportionate as to be totally unreasonable. The British government bent over backwards to make a compromise to meet EU concerns that the Single Market could be compromised, but its goodwill has been exploited at every turn.

At some point this has to stop, and the unilateral extension of the grace period is the inevitable consequence of EU inflexibility. It is not, as the Irish government unhelpfully says, a breach of international law. What it is, is a sign that Britain’s patience with the EU on this issue is about to expire.

https://www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/2021/03/iain-dale-the-eu-has-no-interest-in-northern-irelands-future-prosperity-it-just-sees-it-as-a-mechanism-to-exert-its-power.html

Dura_Ace said:

Foxy said:

We know from work with military PTSD and combat fatigue that short periods of rest and group discussion are very effective at maintaining morale and cohesion. This can be both formal counselling or informal R and R in the style of @Dura_Ace.

Also...

In my experience it's really important to try to retain people in the institution after the period of maximum trauma so they are in a somewhat familiar structure. Leaving everything behind immediately might seem like a good idea but my observation is that it's not.

I am sure there will be plenty of people who feel like quitting the NHS after the Goldman Sachs Elf's 1% kick in the teeth but the conditions for recovery and recuperation are worse on the outside.

I went straight from the mean streets of Basra to unemployed in four days and was utterly lost. I went into my parents' garden shed and stayed in it for nearly a year talking only to the dog. Comrades who experienced far worse than me but stayed in for a few years in a low pressure job seemed to cope much better.

algarkirk said:

Slackbladder said:

I see the hashtag #toryscum is trending. I wonder if the angry of Islington will ever realise that most people even they think something is wrong don't live in a perpetual state of outrage and hatred all the time, and this is actually putting the average person off.

To win Labour have two big jobs, neither close to being done yet: They have to explain convincingly what they are for when we have a Heseltine + Brexit+ populist style government spending money like water.

And they have to convince millions of people currently inclined to vote Tory that they don't believe that they are 'scum', 'vermin' etc but that they are bright centrists who vote both with their hearts and heads.

The Labour membership have lost so many Rochdale Pioneers (see yesterday's brilliant analysis) that the remaining ones are unable to get the point that you cannot get people to vote for you by calling them scum. This alone renders them unfit to govern.

This is hard, but the first problem - What is Labour for? - is harder.

Richard_Tyndall said:

OldKingCole said:

NerysHughes said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Two genuinely stupid moves by Johnson yesterday and both can easily be linked. The first is this story about the No 10 refit which is just crass and stupid. It says Johnson is worried - well he bloody well should be. And if the story is true then he should be ashamed.

The second story - which for me is linked - is the idiotic decision to give NHS staff a pay rise below inflation. It just looks callous and makes a mockery of all the claims about how important they are and how much they are valued.

Yes things are tough and yes we can't keep splashing taxpayers money around all over the place without regard for the debt but a 1% pay rise is £340 million. So go for 5% and make it meaningful. As the study by the London Economics consultancy shows the Government will get most of that back anyway in increased taxes.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/18/government-pay-rise-cost-nhs-england-staff-report

As OGH says. Very poor optics across the board yesterday for Johnson.

Agree 100%. I can live without a pay rise for next year - it would be nice but times are tough and I’m aware others are ahead in the queue - but after the year they’ve had NHS medical staff definitely deserve one. Especially nursing staff.

I actually think this ridiculously low one for a small number is worse than none at all. It looks tokenistic.

Personally, I have no problem with 1%, and a blanket payrise for all NHS staff is poorly targeted.

An extra 2 weeks paid holiday for all those who worked in covid units, to be taken later in the year for recovery would be my suggestion.

As would be investment in training, so redeployed staff are not punished for not acquiring the skills that they should have been developing. My registrar has been on covid ICU for 3 months so has missed a large chunk of her Specialist Training. She is at risk of missing career progression as a result.

Paid holiday is a great idea. Give them all £1,000 tax free to spend on it too.

But the next couple of years are also going to see the NHS under extreme stress as they deal with the vast backlog of treatment deferred. The staff are going to be under the cosh into the mid-distance.

And politically, unlike the NHS there are going to be so many people in the private sector who have lost their jobs, taken pay cuts, lost pensions. They might also rightly claim they have made a huge sacrifice in these times of Covid.

A nurse with 10 years service already gets 10 weeks holiday

One problem with 10 or so weeks holiday is that, as posted elsewhere, you can't afford to do much with all of it. Staff rotas are a bugger, too.
Back in the day I used to get 7 weeks, plus Time in Lieu for nights and Sundays. I did know one or two people who tried to save them up for a major trip, but that was frowned upon.

This is certainly a huge problem in many private companies. A lot of the staff people I work with who get 25 days a year plus public but who also have to do additional time for operations and get it in lieu will get to the end of the year and find they still have 3 or 4 weeks worth of holiday that they just can't take. Most companies have a 'use it or lose it' policy as they can't afford to have staff build up huge amounts of holiday time and as a result giving people extra holiday time as a reward is pretty pointless.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1367790037102960641