But those would show the tweet before it was deleted, there wouldn't be a message below the deleted tweet saying "this tweet has been deleted". I thought the whole point of deleting a tweet was that it was, you know, deleted. I suspect this is just a fake.
TfL has been in financial trouble for years; Covid has just brought all the troubles home to roost. However: Khan's fare freeze was a stupid electoral bung, as many people said at the time, and worsened a bad problem.
Try to excuse Sadiq as much as you like: the fare freeze was a cast-iron sign that he was uninterested in the finances of TfL - as he thought the government would have to bail them out.
Incidentally, the whole situation was made worse by TfL's greed in trying to hoover up as much transport in and around the capital as they could get: e.g. the creation of London Overground.
The issue pre-Covid was the network, hampered in some places by antiquated track and signalling, was running at capacity. Trains were full and there simply wasn't the capacity to run more trains over some parts of the system because the signalling couldn't handle it.
Many cities have co-ordinated passenger transport systems - bringing some of the rail lines into TfL was generally and genuinely welcomed at the time.
The problem now is a third of the passengers have gone - the Government insisted in 2020 as a condition of bail out all services were maintained so you had empty tubes going up and down the lines. TfL have begun to reduce capacity discretely by not replacing drivers who leave - fewer drivers means more gaps in the service whether they are called "cancellations" or not.
If Sunak wants to look "tough" and reduce the subsidy, the options will either be a big Council Tax rise (which any future Conservative Mayor will have to retain) or a reduction in services (up to 10% of buses could be axed) or the complete mothballing of one or more lines (the Bakerloo, for a number of reasons, is the obvious target but even then maintenance will have to continue so it's not a complete saving).
So you're saying the problem pre-Covid was outdated infrastructure. If that was the case, the answer was simple: invest in the infrastructure - i.e. spend - rather than have a massive electoral bung in the form of a fare freeze, and make matters worse.
Mayor of London is a bit of a paper king without control of tfl. If I didn’t know better Boris wants his old job back but from the comfort of No 10.
Re the posters asking what's motivated this sudden drugs "crackdown", it seems that we've missed this crucial story from a couple of hours ago.
Lindsey Hoyle is actually calling in police because of the amount of traces of drugs found on the parliamentary estate, including in the toilets next to Boris Johnson's office.
It seems that this could be damage limitation, not least because of the very significant potential toxicity of it, so to speak, in combination with other current high-level corruption and double standards stories. The "whiff of decadence", if you like.
How could we get a drug sniffer dog visiting No 10?
Supporters of prohibition are dreamers. It can’t ever be effected properly. Even in countries where possession carries the death penalty, drug abuse still goes on under the surface, with the harsh enforcement policies leading to even more ruthless criminal syndicates to facilitate the trade.
Policy is about choosing between hard choices. Either you can criminalise otherwise law abiding contributors to society and enable a vast black economy that funds all manner of other criminal activity. Or you accept that humans are gonna get high and seek to legislate in such a way to minimise societal harm in the process.
It genuinely puzzles me that we are still stuck on the same broken record.
The issue is that often the sane choices are "brave" decisions because no one is prepared to do the education required to explain why you are doing what you are doing.
It’s because they have to undo the decades of propaganda before they can even start the education! As my old grandad once said, when he was a lad opiate addicts were pitied rather than criminalised. “No one would choose that life, it makes no sense trying to send them to prison” or words to that effect.
In a perfect world we’d have a JV between the Ministries of Health and Science researching the perfect narcotic. One which carries no physical addiction, has minimal negative health consequences and where the effects can be switched off by antidote.
Some doctors appear to be warming to the idea that microdoses of LSD and magic mushrooms might roughly fit this profile, according to the report I posted up here earlier in the week.
According to the government's new post-Boris Johnson's toilets crackdown announced today, these would lose you your license and freedom to travel, ofcourse.
Copying the US "War on Drugs" ain't a great plan. Almost certain to backfire.
Yeah, whatever. The Bakerloo line won’t be mothballed and - guess what - the Tube will keep on trucking.
Regardless of the bizarre fantasies of the bumpkins on PB.
I'm quoting from the Evening Standard - hardly a paper to publish rubbish.
The fact is that this time next week TfL runs out of money - and that means the Treasury needs to find more.
And having cut HS2E the Treasury cannot just write a blank cheque so they are looking for TfL to fix their multi-billion pound annual shortfall without it costing Red Wall voters a penny.
Ironically - one reason why TfL have managed to get to December is because Crossrail isn't live yet. Were it operating the money would have ran out in October...
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Re the posters asking what's motivated this sudden drugs "crackdown", it seems that we've missed this crucial story from a couple of hours ago.
Lindsey Hoyle is actually calling in police because of the amount of traces of drugs found on the parliamentary estate, including in the toilets next to Boris Johnson's office.
It seems that this could be damage limitation, not least because of the very significant potential toxicity of it, so to speak, in combination with other current high-level corruption and double standards stories. The "whiff of decadence", if you like.
How could we get a drug sniffer dog visiting No 10?
Supporters of prohibition are dreamers. It can’t ever be effected properly. Even in countries where possession carries the death penalty, drug abuse still goes on under the surface, with the harsh enforcement policies leading to even more ruthless criminal syndicates to facilitate the trade.
Policy is about choosing between hard choices. Either you can criminalise otherwise law abiding contributors to society and enable a vast black economy that funds all manner of other criminal activity. Or you accept that humans are gonna get high and seek to legislate in such a way to minimise societal harm in the process.
It genuinely puzzles me that we are still stuck on the same broken record.
The issue is that often the sane choices are "brave" decisions because no one is prepared to do the education required to explain why you are doing what you are doing.
It’s because they have to undo the decades of propaganda before they can even start the education! As my old grandad once said, when he was a lad opiate addicts were pitied rather than criminalised. “No one would choose that life, it makes no sense trying to send them to prison” or words to that effect.
In a perfect world we’d have a JV between the Ministries of Health and Science researching the perfect narcotic. One which carries no physical addiction, has minimal negative health consequences and where the effects can be switched off by antidote.
How would that help? It isn't going to reduce demand for the other stuff.
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I thought most businesses spent most of their time sending people on bonding experiences these days
But those would show the tweet before it was deleted, there wouldn't be a message below the deleted tweet saying "this tweet has been deleted". I thought the whole point of deleting a tweet was that it was, you know, deleted. I suspect this is just a fake.
TfL has been in financial trouble for years; Covid has just brought all the troubles home to roost. However: Khan's fare freeze was a stupid electoral bung, as many people said at the time, and worsened a bad problem.
Try to excuse Sadiq as much as you like: the fare freeze was a cast-iron sign that he was uninterested in the finances of TfL - as he thought the government would have to bail them out.
Incidentally, the whole situation was made worse by TfL's greed in trying to hoover up as much transport in and around the capital as they could get: e.g. the creation of London Overground.
The issue pre-Covid was the network, hampered in some places by antiquated track and signalling, was running at capacity. Trains were full and there simply wasn't the capacity to run more trains over some parts of the system because the signalling couldn't handle it.
Many cities have co-ordinated passenger transport systems - bringing some of the rail lines into TfL was generally and genuinely welcomed at the time.
The problem now is a third of the passengers have gone - the Government insisted in 2020 as a condition of bail out all services were maintained so you had empty tubes going up and down the lines. TfL have begun to reduce capacity discretely by not replacing drivers who leave - fewer drivers means more gaps in the service whether they are called "cancellations" or not.
If Sunak wants to look "tough" and reduce the subsidy, the options will either be a big Council Tax rise (which any future Conservative Mayor will have to retain) or a reduction in services (up to 10% of buses could be axed) or the complete mothballing of one or more lines (the Bakerloo, for a number of reasons, is the obvious target but even then maintenance will have to continue so it's not a complete saving).
So you're saying the problem pre-Covid was outdated infrastructure. If that was the case, the answer was simple: invest in the infrastructure - i.e. spend - rather than have a massive electoral bung in the form of a fare freeze, and make matters worse.
TfL have been improving infrastructure - the issue is those projects take years and cost money. I think the improvements to the Metropolitan line took 15 years from start to finish.
Re the posters asking what's motivated this sudden drugs "crackdown", it seems that we've missed this crucial story from a couple of hours ago.
Lindsey Hoyle is actually calling in police because of the amount of traces of drugs found on the parliamentary estate, including in the toilets next to Boris Johnson's office.
It seems that this could be damage limitation, not least because of the very significant potential toxicity of it, so to speak, in combination with other current high-level corruption and double standards stories. The "whiff of decadence", if you like.
How could we get a drug sniffer dog visiting No 10?
Supporters of prohibition are dreamers. It can’t ever be effected properly. Even in countries where possession carries the death penalty, drug abuse still goes on under the surface, with the harsh enforcement policies leading to even more ruthless criminal syndicates to facilitate the trade.
Policy is about choosing between hard choices. Either you can criminalise otherwise law abiding contributors to society and enable a vast black economy that funds all manner of other criminal activity. Or you accept that humans are gonna get high and seek to legislate in such a way to minimise societal harm in the process.
It genuinely puzzles me that we are still stuck on the same broken record.
The issue is that often the sane choices are "brave" decisions because no one is prepared to do the education required to explain why you are doing what you are doing.
Believe it or not HS2 is a prime example of this. It's sold as speed but in reality it's about Capacity. However speed doesn't require any explanation but the impact on capacity of trains running at different speeds would require a lot of explanation.. So HS2 was sold as faster trains to London and all the other benefits went unsaid.
Just to say- education of people who don't really want to be educated is blooming hard work.
Amirite, teachers?
More seriously- that was the genius of Domski's "Three Word Slogan, repeated endlessly" approach- that just about gets under people's defences.
It has the downside that the only things government can do are those that can be boiled down to three word slogans.
Re the posters asking what's motivated this sudden drugs "crackdown", it seems that we've missed this crucial story from a couple of hours ago.
Lindsey Hoyle is actually calling in police because of the amount of traces of drugs found on the parliamentary estate, including in the toilets next to Boris Johnson's office.
It seems that this could be damage limitation, not least because of the very significant potential toxicity of it, so to speak, in combination with other current high-level corruption and double standards stories. The "whiff of decadence", if you like.
How could we get a drug sniffer dog visiting No 10?
Supporters of prohibition are dreamers. It can’t ever be effected properly. Even in countries where possession carries the death penalty, drug abuse still goes on under the surface, with the harsh enforcement policies leading to even more ruthless criminal syndicates to facilitate the trade.
Policy is about choosing between hard choices. Either you can criminalise otherwise law abiding contributors to society and enable a vast black economy that funds all manner of other criminal activity. Or you accept that humans are gonna get high and seek to legislate in such a way to minimise societal harm in the process.
It genuinely puzzles me that we are still stuck on the same broken record.
The issue is that often the sane choices are "brave" decisions because no one is prepared to do the education required to explain why you are doing what you are doing.
It’s because they have to undo the decades of propaganda before they can even start the education! As my old grandad once said, when he was a lad opiate addicts were pitied rather than criminalised. “No one would choose that life, it makes no sense trying to send them to prison” or words to that effect.
In a perfect world we’d have a JV between the Ministries of Health and Science researching the perfect narcotic. One which carries no physical addiction, has minimal negative health consequences and where the effects can be switched off by antidote.
Some doctors appear to be warming to the idea that microdoses of LSD and magic mushrooms might roughly fit this profile, according to the report I posted up here earlier in the week.
According to the government's new post-Boris Johnson's toilets crackdown announced today, these would lose you your license and freedom to travel, ofcourse.
Copying the US "War on Drugs" ain't a great plan. Almost certain to backfire.
Am enjoying Narcos Mexico. But it does all feel pretty futile that 40 years later the gang violence is even worse and volumes of drugs on the street even greater than then. Come on Biden. Do something useful and admit defeat in another unwinnable war, reallocate the funds from closing the DEA to tackling obesity.
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I thought most businesses spent most of their time sending people on bonding experiences these days
Not very easy in Lockdown. Which is the point here, I suppose.
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
Eats, drinks and shoots up. A sequel for Lynn/Liz Truss.
Yeah, whatever. The Bakerloo line won’t be mothballed and - guess what - the Tube will keep on trucking.
Regardless of the bizarre fantasies of the bumpkins on PB.
I'm quoting from the Evening Standard - hardly a paper to publish rubbish.
The fact is that this time next week TfL runs out of money - and that means the Treasury needs to find more.
And having cut HS2E the Treasury cannot just write a blank cheque so they are looking for TfL to fix their multi-billion pound annual shortfall without it costing Red Wall voters a penny.
Ironically - one reason why TfL have managed to get to December is because Crossrail isn't live yet. Were it operating the money would have ran out in October...
But those would show the tweet before it was deleted, there wouldn't be a message below the deleted tweet saying "this tweet has been deleted". I thought the whole point of deleting a tweet was that it was, you know, deleted. I suspect this is just a fake.
I refer to my previous comment about not being a twitter expert.
A screenshot with a deleted tweet where the tweet was not actually deleted did seem odd. Usually it just returns an error saying the page does not exist. Hence the need for pages like politwhoops.
Re the posters asking what's motivated this sudden drugs "crackdown", it seems that we've missed this crucial story from a couple of hours ago.
Lindsey Hoyle is actually calling in police because of the amount of traces of drugs found on the parliamentary estate, including in the toilets next to Boris Johnson's office.
It seems that this could be damage limitation, not least because of the very significant potential toxicity of it, so to speak, in combination with other current high-level corruption and double standards stories. The "whiff of decadence", if you like.
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
"Secret Santa", quiz, drinks and food and not working, indeed cramming into rooms to get pished, sounds awfully like a party. Like Dilyn sounds like a dog.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
Re the posters asking what's motivated this sudden drugs "crackdown", it seems that we've missed this crucial story from a couple of hours ago.
Lindsey Hoyle is actually calling in police because of the amount of traces of drugs found on the parliamentary estate, including in the toilets next to Boris Johnson's office.
It seems that this could be damage limitation, not least because of the very significant potential toxicity of it, so to speak, in combination with other current high-level corruption and double standards stories. The "whiff of decadence", if you like.
How could we get a drug sniffer dog visiting No 10?
Supporters of prohibition are dreamers. It can’t ever be effected properly. Even in countries where possession carries the death penalty, drug abuse still goes on under the surface, with the harsh enforcement policies leading to even more ruthless criminal syndicates to facilitate the trade.
Policy is about choosing between hard choices. Either you can criminalise otherwise law abiding contributors to society and enable a vast black economy that funds all manner of other criminal activity. Or you accept that humans are gonna get high and seek to legislate in such a way to minimise societal harm in the process.
It genuinely puzzles me that we are still stuck on the same broken record.
The issue is that often the sane choices are "brave" decisions because no one is prepared to do the education required to explain why you are doing what you are doing.
It’s because they have to undo the decades of propaganda before they can even start the education! As my old grandad once said, when he was a lad opiate addicts were pitied rather than criminalised. “No one would choose that life, it makes no sense trying to send them to prison” or words to that effect.
In a perfect world we’d have a JV between the Ministries of Health and Science researching the perfect narcotic. One which carries no physical addiction, has minimal negative health consequences and where the effects can be switched off by antidote.
Some doctors appear to be warming to the idea that microdoses of LSD and magic mushrooms might roughly fit this profile, according to the report I posted up here earlier in the week.
According to the government's new post-Boris Johnson's toilets crackdown announced today, these would lose you your license and freedom to travel, ofcourse.
Um, not really. Microdosing is probably woo: it is hard to do research because of legal concerns but the most authoritative study suggests it's mainly placebo. Macrodosing and yes, you are off to the races, but it is being overhyped and the danger of bad trips underplayed by acid enthusiasts like the Countess of Wemyss.
Re the posters asking what's motivated this sudden drugs "crackdown", it seems that we've missed this crucial story from a couple of hours ago.
Lindsey Hoyle is actually calling in police because of the amount of traces of drugs found on the parliamentary estate, including in the toilets next to Boris Johnson's office.
It seems that this could be damage limitation, not least because of the very significant potential toxicity of it, so to speak, in combination with other current high-level corruption and double standards stories. The "whiff of decadence", if you like.
How could we get a drug sniffer dog visiting No 10?
Supporters of prohibition are dreamers. It can’t ever be effected properly. Even in countries where possession carries the death penalty, drug abuse still goes on under the surface, with the harsh enforcement policies leading to even more ruthless criminal syndicates to facilitate the trade.
Policy is about choosing between hard choices. Either you can criminalise otherwise law abiding contributors to society and enable a vast black economy that funds all manner of other criminal activity. Or you accept that humans are gonna get high and seek to legislate in such a way to minimise societal harm in the process.
It genuinely puzzles me that we are still stuck on the same broken record.
The issue is that often the sane choices are "brave" decisions because no one is prepared to do the education required to explain why you are doing what you are doing.
It’s because they have to undo the decades of propaganda before they can even start the education! As my old grandad once said, when he was a lad opiate addicts were pitied rather than criminalised. “No one would choose that life, it makes no sense trying to send them to prison” or words to that effect.
In a perfect world we’d have a JV between the Ministries of Health and Science researching the perfect narcotic. One which carries no physical addiction, has minimal negative health consequences and where the effects can be switched off by antidote.
How would that help? It isn't going to reduce demand for the other stuff.
Depends how good it is. Professional footballers love a bit of hippy crack because it wears off fast, doesn’t impact their athletic performance and is undetectable by drugs tests.
Yeah, whatever. The Bakerloo line won’t be mothballed and - guess what - the Tube will keep on trucking.
Regardless of the bizarre fantasies of the bumpkins on PB.
I'm quoting from the Evening Standard - hardly a paper to publish rubbish.
The fact is that this time next week TfL runs out of money - and that means the Treasury needs to find more.
And having cut HS2E the Treasury cannot just write a blank cheque so they are looking for TfL to fix their multi-billion pound annual shortfall without it costing Red Wall voters a penny.
Ironically - one reason why TfL have managed to get to December is because Crossrail isn't live yet. Were it operating the money would have ran out in October...
File under: Ain’t Going To Happen.
File under - given a conversation I had on Friday - be surprised.
Rishi Sunak really is a £$@* and other rude words.
He really hates the trains and the users therein.
Train operators have been told to find ways to cut hundreds of millions of pounds from the railway’s operating costs next year, in a move that is likely to spell fewer services and worse stations for passengers.
The Department for Transport seeks to cut spending by 10% following Rishi Sunak’s autumn budget.
With the Treasury anxious to limit spending on rail, which increased massively during the pandemic, letters from the DfT’s managing director of passenger services, Peter Wilkinson, have been sent to individual operators setting out the swingeing cuts needed across the industry.
Well, there are only two ways to cover the cost of the railways: from the farepayer and from the taxpayer. Increasing the latter is politically impossible because it's effectively a subsidy of relatively rich South Eastern commuters and hence contrary to leveling up, and if increasing the former is politically impossible because media coverage is dictated by journalists who predominantly are relatively rich South Eastern commuters, then there's only one solution left - cut costs.
Can't see that that is the case at all, except insofar as there is an overall budget pie to be cut up.
(1) That doesn't cover the case of Scotland, NI and IIRC recently) Wales. (2) That doesn't cover capital investment grants to specific projects. HS2 is an obvious example. (3) That doesn't allow for the point that different Train Operating Companies have different budgets and agreements with DfT.
For all those reasons, differential funding can be and is applied to different areas. So one could reduce funding for London and increase it for the Adlestrop branch line, for instance. Or the converse. Indeed, it was the absurdly small funding to the NE as opposed to London commuters that exemplifies the issue -but also shows the poiint that differential funding does exist.
Does Oxford-Worcester count as a branch line? Should be referred to Sunil for a definitive judgment.
The old O, W and W was something of a loose end in the old days ... but not latterly. You are right!
Went to Adlestrop (the name!) a few years ago. The old station sign now adorns the village bus shelter. A spine-tingling sight, so perhaps the shade of Edward Thomas was still lurking.
That confused me horribly for a moment, because when I think of 'railways' and 'Edward Thomas' I naturally think of the Talyllyn first.
But then I remembered about the poet...
"All the birds of Oxfordshire and Gloucestershire" has an echo of Housman's Bredon Hill which you mentioned a few months ago. All the birds of Worcestershire and Gloucestershire, indeed.
Re the posters asking what's motivated this sudden drugs "crackdown", it seems that we've missed this crucial story from a couple of hours ago.
Lindsey Hoyle is actually calling in police because of the amount of traces of drugs found on the parliamentary estate, including in the toilets next to Boris Johnson's office.
It seems that this could be damage limitation, not least because of the very significant potential toxicity of it, so to speak, in combination with other current high-level corruption and double standards stories. The "whiff of decadence", if you like.
Probably the Downing St parties were legal, and I certainly don’t begrudge them it. It’s really important for staff to get together and have a knees-up at Christmas time.
What pisses me off is the hectoring, lecturing, busybodying government telling other people they couldn’t have a decent screw while having a rave up themselves.
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
"Secret Santa", quiz, drinks and food and not working, indeed cramming into rooms to get pished, sounds awfully like a party. Like Dilyn sounds like a dog.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
If it is a party it is illegal, however if it is in a work environment at the end of the day then under the regulations it is not
But those would show the tweet before it was deleted, there wouldn't be a message below the deleted tweet saying "this tweet has been deleted". I thought the whole point of deleting a tweet was that it was, you know, deleted. I suspect this is just a fake.
I refer to my previous comment about not being a twitter expert.
A screenshot with a deleted tweet where the tweet was not actually deleted did seem odd. Usually it just returns an error saying the page does not exist. Hence the need for pages like politwhoops.
I am also not a twitter expert, but I believe that eg the Wayback Machine allows you to only screenshot retrieved deleted tweets as they are no longer extant tweets, which makes a kind of sense.
Re the posters asking what's motivated this sudden drugs "crackdown", it seems that we've missed this crucial story from a couple of hours ago.
Lindsey Hoyle is actually calling in police because of the amount of traces of drugs found on the parliamentary estate, including in the toilets next to Boris Johnson's office.
It seems that this could be damage limitation, not least because of the very significant potential toxicity of it, so to speak, in combination with other current high-level corruption and double standards stories. The "whiff of decadence", if you like.
How could we get a drug sniffer dog visiting No 10?
Supporters of prohibition are dreamers. It can’t ever be effected properly. Even in countries where possession carries the death penalty, drug abuse still goes on under the surface, with the harsh enforcement policies leading to even more ruthless criminal syndicates to facilitate the trade.
Policy is about choosing between hard choices. Either you can criminalise otherwise law abiding contributors to society and enable a vast black economy that funds all manner of other criminal activity. Or you accept that humans are gonna get high and seek to legislate in such a way to minimise societal harm in the process.
It genuinely puzzles me that we are still stuck on the same broken record.
The issue is that often the sane choices are "brave" decisions because no one is prepared to do the education required to explain why you are doing what you are doing.
Believe it or not HS2 is a prime example of this. It's sold as speed but in reality it's about Capacity. However speed doesn't require any explanation but the impact on capacity of trains running at different speeds would require a lot of explanation.. So HS2 was sold as faster trains to London and all the other benefits went unsaid.
Just to say- education of people who don't really want to be educated is blooming hard work.
Amirite, teachers?
More seriously- that was the genius of Domski's "Three Word Slogan, repeated endlessly" approach- that just about gets under people's defences.
It has the downside that the only things government can do are those that can be boiled down to three word slogans.
the fact you can't do it is the whole point.
You end up with things like "war on drugs" which means a ceasefire becomes impossible to initiate. And again HS2 is about speed when it really isn't.
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
"Secret Santa", quiz, drinks and food and not working, indeed cramming into rooms to get pished, sounds awfully like a party. Like Dilyn sounds like a dog.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
@Big_G_NorthWales is defending the indefensible, and he knows it. He would be apoplectic if it was Drakefords office party...
Re the posters asking what's motivated this sudden drugs "crackdown", it seems that we've missed this crucial story from a couple of hours ago.
Lindsey Hoyle is actually calling in police because of the amount of traces of drugs found on the parliamentary estate, including in the toilets next to Boris Johnson's office.
It seems that this could be damage limitation, not least because of the very significant potential toxicity of it, so to speak, in combination with other current high-level corruption and double standards stories. The "whiff of decadence", if you like.
How could we get a drug sniffer dog visiting No 10?
Supporters of prohibition are dreamers. It can’t ever be effected properly. Even in countries where possession carries the death penalty, drug abuse still goes on under the surface, with the harsh enforcement policies leading to even more ruthless criminal syndicates to facilitate the trade.
Policy is about choosing between hard choices. Either you can criminalise otherwise law abiding contributors to society and enable a vast black economy that funds all manner of other criminal activity. Or you accept that humans are gonna get high and seek to legislate in such a way to minimise societal harm in the process.
It genuinely puzzles me that we are still stuck on the same broken record.
The issue is that often the sane choices are "brave" decisions because no one is prepared to do the education required to explain why you are doing what you are doing.
Believe it or not HS2 is a prime example of this. It's sold as speed but in reality it's about Capacity. However speed doesn't require any explanation but the impact on capacity of trains running at different speeds would require a lot of explanation.. So HS2 was sold as faster trains to London and all the other benefits went unsaid.
Just to say- education of people who don't really want to be educated is blooming hard work.
Amirite, teachers?
More seriously- that was the genius of Domski's "Three Word Slogan, repeated endlessly" approach- that just about gets under people's defences.
It has the downside that the only things government can do are those that can be boiled down to three word slogans.
the fact you can't do it is the whole point.
You end up with things like "war on drugs" which means a ceasefire becomes impossible to initiate. And again HS2 is about speed when it really isn't.
Slightly unfortunate expression about HS2 in the current circs ...
But those would show the tweet before it was deleted, there wouldn't be a message below the deleted tweet saying "this tweet has been deleted". I thought the whole point of deleting a tweet was that it was, you know, deleted. I suspect this is just a fake.
I refer to my previous comment about not being a twitter expert.
A screenshot with a deleted tweet where the tweet was not actually deleted did seem odd. Usually it just returns an error saying the page does not exist. Hence the need for pages like politwhoops.
I am also not a twitter expert, but I believe that eg the Wayback Machine allows you to only screenshot retrieved deleted tweets as they are no longer extant tweets, which makes a kind of sense.
Yeah, but they wouldn't have a message at the bottom saying it was deleted, since it would be a snapshot from before when it was tweeted. Hence my confusion.
Re the posters asking what's motivated this sudden drugs "crackdown", it seems that we've missed this crucial story from a couple of hours ago.
Lindsey Hoyle is actually calling in police because of the amount of traces of drugs found on the parliamentary estate, including in the toilets next to Boris Johnson's office.
It seems that this could be damage limitation, not least because of the very significant potential toxicity of it, so to speak, in combination with other current high-level corruption and double standards stories. The "whiff of decadence", if you like.
How could we get a drug sniffer dog visiting No 10?
Supporters of prohibition are dreamers. It can’t ever be effected properly. Even in countries where possession carries the death penalty, drug abuse still goes on under the surface, with the harsh enforcement policies leading to even more ruthless criminal syndicates to facilitate the trade.
Policy is about choosing between hard choices. Either you can criminalise otherwise law abiding contributors to society and enable a vast black economy that funds all manner of other criminal activity. Or you accept that humans are gonna get high and seek to legislate in such a way to minimise societal harm in the process.
It genuinely puzzles me that we are still stuck on the same broken record.
The issue is that often the sane choices are "brave" decisions because no one is prepared to do the education required to explain why you are doing what you are doing.
Believe it or not HS2 is a prime example of this. It's sold as speed but in reality it's about Capacity. However speed doesn't require any explanation but the impact on capacity of trains running at different speeds would require a lot of explanation.. So HS2 was sold as faster trains to London and all the other benefits went unsaid.
Just to say- education of people who don't really want to be educated is blooming hard work.
Amirite, teachers?
More seriously- that was the genius of Domski's "Three Word Slogan, repeated endlessly" approach- that just about gets under people's defences.
It has the downside that the only things government can do are those that can be boiled down to three word slogans.
the fact you can't do it is the whole point.
You end up with things like "war on drugs" which means a ceasefire becomes impossible to initiate. And again HS2 is about speed when it really isn't.
Slightly unfortunate expression about HS2 in the current circs ...
Re the posters asking what's motivated this sudden drugs "crackdown", it seems that we've missed this crucial story from a couple of hours ago.
Lindsey Hoyle is actually calling in police because of the amount of traces of drugs found on the parliamentary estate, including in the toilets next to Boris Johnson's office.
It seems that this could be damage limitation, not least because of the very significant potential toxicity of it, so to speak, in combination with other current high-level corruption and double standards stories. The "whiff of decadence", if you like.
How could we get a drug sniffer dog visiting No 10?
Supporters of prohibition are dreamers. It can’t ever be effected properly. Even in countries where possession carries the death penalty, drug abuse still goes on under the surface, with the harsh enforcement policies leading to even more ruthless criminal syndicates to facilitate the trade.
Policy is about choosing between hard choices. Either you can criminalise otherwise law abiding contributors to society and enable a vast black economy that funds all manner of other criminal activity. Or you accept that humans are gonna get high and seek to legislate in such a way to minimise societal harm in the process.
It genuinely puzzles me that we are still stuck on the same broken record.
The issue is that often the sane choices are "brave" decisions because no one is prepared to do the education required to explain why you are doing what you are doing.
Believe it or not HS2 is a prime example of this. It's sold as speed but in reality it's about Capacity. However speed doesn't require any explanation but the impact on capacity of trains running at different speeds would require a lot of explanation.. So HS2 was sold as faster trains to London and all the other benefits went unsaid.
Just to say- education of people who don't really want to be educated is blooming hard work.
Amirite, teachers?
More seriously- that was the genius of Domski's "Three Word Slogan, repeated endlessly" approach- that just about gets under people's defences.
It has the downside that the only things government can do are those that can be boiled down to three word slogans.
the fact you can't do it is the whole point.
You end up with things like "war on drugs" which means a ceasefire becomes impossible to initiate. And again HS2 is about speed when it really isn't.
Slightly unfortunate expression about HS2 in the current circs ...
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
"Secret Santa", quiz, drinks and food and not working, indeed cramming into rooms to get pished, sounds awfully like a party. Like Dilyn sounds like a dog.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
If it is a party it is illegal, however if it is in a work environment at the end of the day then under the regulations it is not
I was wondering how a knees-up would have been within the regulations. But a working group bubble sounds okay to me. Egg on the faces of journos.
Re the posters asking what's motivated this sudden drugs "crackdown", it seems that we've missed this crucial story from a couple of hours ago.
Lindsey Hoyle is actually calling in police because of the amount of traces of drugs found on the parliamentary estate, including in the toilets next to Boris Johnson's office.
It seems that this could be damage limitation, not least because of the very significant potential toxicity of it, so to speak, in combination with other current high-level corruption and double standards stories. The "whiff of decadence", if you like.
How could we get a drug sniffer dog visiting No 10?
Supporters of prohibition are dreamers. It can’t ever be effected properly. Even in countries where possession carries the death penalty, drug abuse still goes on under the surface, with the harsh enforcement policies leading to even more ruthless criminal syndicates to facilitate the trade.
Policy is about choosing between hard choices. Either you can criminalise otherwise law abiding contributors to society and enable a vast black economy that funds all manner of other criminal activity. Or you accept that humans are gonna get high and seek to legislate in such a way to minimise societal harm in the process.
It genuinely puzzles me that we are still stuck on the same broken record.
The issue is that often the sane choices are "brave" decisions because no one is prepared to do the education required to explain why you are doing what you are doing.
Believe it or not HS2 is a prime example of this. It's sold as speed but in reality it's about Capacity. However speed doesn't require any explanation but the impact on capacity of trains running at different speeds would require a lot of explanation.. So HS2 was sold as faster trains to London and all the other benefits went unsaid.
Just to say- education of people who don't really want to be educated is blooming hard work.
Amirite, teachers?
More seriously- that was the genius of Domski's "Three Word Slogan, repeated endlessly" approach- that just about gets under people's defences.
It has the downside that the only things government can do are those that can be boiled down to three word slogans.
the fact you can't do it is the whole point.
You end up with things like "war on drugs" which means a ceasefire becomes impossible to initiate. And again HS2 is about speed when it really isn't.
Slightly unfortunate expression about HS2 in the current circs ...
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
"Secret Santa", quiz, drinks and food and not working, indeed cramming into rooms to get pished, sounds awfully like a party. Like Dilyn sounds like a dog.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
@Big_G_NorthWales is defending the indefensible, and he knows it. He would be apoplectic if it was Drakefords office party...
I doing no such thing
If it was a party it was illegal, if it was a working environment at the end of the day it is not under the definition showed by Marr
Yeah, whatever. The Bakerloo line won’t be mothballed and - guess what - the Tube will keep on trucking.
Regardless of the bizarre fantasies of the bumpkins on PB.
I'm quoting from the Evening Standard - hardly a paper to publish rubbish.
The fact is that this time next week TfL runs out of money - and that means the Treasury needs to find more.
And having cut HS2E the Treasury cannot just write a blank cheque so they are looking for TfL to fix their multi-billion pound annual shortfall without it costing Red Wall voters a penny.
Ironically - one reason why TfL have managed to get to December is because Crossrail isn't live yet. Were it operating the money would have ran out in October...
File under: Ain’t Going To Happen.
File under - given a conversation I had on Friday - be surprised.
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
"Secret Santa", quiz, drinks and food and not working, indeed cramming into rooms to get pished, sounds awfully like a party. Like Dilyn sounds like a dog.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
If it is a party it is illegal, however if it is in a work environment at the end of the day then under the regulations it is not
You're confusing regulations with common sense and the truth. Remember that regulations say that Jaffa Cakes are biscuits when they are made of sponge cake with marmalade and choc.
The regulations may say it was not a party. But it was, and they should have had far more sense than to have one and show a dreadful example to the public.
Yeah, whatever. The Bakerloo line won’t be mothballed and - guess what - the Tube will keep on trucking.
Regardless of the bizarre fantasies of the bumpkins on PB.
I'm quoting from the Evening Standard - hardly a paper to publish rubbish.
The fact is that this time next week TfL runs out of money - and that means the Treasury needs to find more.
And having cut HS2E the Treasury cannot just write a blank cheque so they are looking for TfL to fix their multi-billion pound annual shortfall without it costing Red Wall voters a penny.
Ironically - one reason why TfL have managed to get to December is because Crossrail isn't live yet. Were it operating the money would have ran out in October...
File under: Ain’t Going To Happen.
File under - given a conversation I had on Friday - be surprised.
What happens next do you think? DfT taking over the bus contracts and direct control of the tube?
Another day, another example of David Cameron’s Twitter maxim.
Why are political parties still not properly vetting their candidates’ social media histories, when they know that not-so-friendly opponents and newspapers definitely will be?
Helen Morgan, Lib Dem candidate in North Shropshire with today’s Godwin award, for writing, in the context of her son reading a book about the Holocaust:
“He commented that the Nazis were only able to do such terrible things because they didn’t think their victims were people. He’s 11. On Twitter this morning, there are people talking about cancelling their RNLI donations because they have picked up “illegals”. The language used every day in this country – by the Government, press and people with thousands of followers on social media – it’s nothing short of chilling.”
Then she liked a post from someone who replied:
‘Having visited Auschwitz concentration camp in the recent past. It really brings home man’s inhumanity to man. Now on a daily basis the language and actions of the Conservative Party make me more and more concerned about the direction they are taking the UK and its people.’
Her own post is totally on the money. The post she liked is perhaps a bit over the top. But I'm sure that plenty of people share the sentiment that the othering and scapegoating of refugees that's going on in this country right now is chilling, and, for anyone with a knowledge of European history, has some alarming historical resonances.
The suggestion that the Tories are similar to the Nazis in outlook and policies is absurd and, frankly, as good an example of "othering" as you will find. The SNP do very similar things demonising something like 25% of Scots who vote Tory and who, as a result, are apparently not real Scots. It also encourages the arrogance and moral superiority complex that so many liberals, in the broadest sense, are prone to and is one of the reasons that they fail at the ballot box.
There was a chap about 2000 years ago who had some interesting observations about motes and beams. She should reflect on it.
Thank goodness Tories and Unionists never indulge in that kind of behaviour (I couldn’t find the photoshop of Sturgeon in an SS uniform so beloved by your fruitier fellow travellers, I suspect twitter may have banned it). Motes and beams indeed.
That’s the one. Ironically what one might call the far right in Scotland tends to Unionism.
That’s a very seriously point actually as to why the SNP are wrong. Like Hitler they love the politics of nationalism. Take off those tinted glasses though and they see across the border in north of old Albion they feel 100% just the same as SNP about flipping London dominance.
Also SNP need to realise just how many Scots are in London flipping enjoying that flipping London south Albion thing!
SNP won’t last much longer. People of Scotland will tire of the Nationalism spectacles, gravitate to another approach and Scot nationalism will go back to be a fringe thing.
I see you’re as insightful and original on this topic as on others.
😕
I’m genuine sorry if I touched a nerve on Scottish Separatism that matters to you. To be honest divvy I really would like to listen and learn here as I have never chatted with SNP before. can you answer a few straightforward questions about it?
1. Last time ref said it wanted to keep both the £ and the Monarchy? Will that be exactly the same in the next ref? 2. Really? Having both those things, is it proper independence from continued English and London influence? or a sort of half way house have your cake and eat it independence? 3. Surely the only True definition of independence is own currency and negotiate trade deal with what’s left of UK and everywhere else? Like Ireland? Because the place to avoid is the basket case facade democracy, Zimbabwe ending up in, you can have a parliament but not own the land, the resources, the ability to tax the necessary amount of wealth? 4. If Scotland has independence from England, does it have the economy and assets to maintain the current lifestyle, free higher education etc, enough wealth owned, invested and generated, to tax, to maintain standards of living it currently enjoys? What main industry will it have other than tourism? 5. Basically boils down to simple question, are the English currently takers from Scotland, Scotland takers from England, or current balance about right and fair? 6. If you want to keep the monarchy, then why not trust a Royal Commission how we can share these Isles, in a helping sharing UK commonwealth (which it should already have been the last few hundred years) where everyone’s regional and local identity feels in a happy place? But To create such a happy place cannot be achieved through ramping nationalism and localism, and holding separatist referendums, can it?
On the whole currency thing, I think it's widely acknowledged that the proposal to keep the pound was disingenuously sold and very poor politics. The factual point about it being viable in the short term was true, but it was an impossible message to sell to the public. I think the reality was that as soon as independence happened, or possibly even as part of the negotiations, the Scottish government would have pivoted away from that and launched their own currency / gone straight to the Euro if the EU accession fast-track would have been on. As a long term proposal, using the pound wouldn't have worked and I think the people saw through that particular ruse. Keeping the monarchy is a different matter. I'm certain the Scottish government wouldn't have moved at all on changing that. I can foresee a future, post-independence campaign for it, but I don't know whether it would really get the traction, and nobody on the mild-republican side of Scottish politics would want to risk their own position fighting a losing battle.
As for the comments comparing any mainstream UK party with the Nazis, you're clearly an idiot.
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
"Secret Santa", quiz, drinks and food and not working, indeed cramming into rooms to get pished, sounds awfully like a party. Like Dilyn sounds like a dog.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
@Big_G_NorthWales is defending the indefensible, and he knows it. He would be apoplectic if it was Drakefords office party...
I doing no such thing
If it was a party it was illegal, if it was a working environment at the end of the day it is not under the definition showed by Marr
It's one rule for them, another for us plebs. Time after time.
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
"Secret Santa", quiz, drinks and food and not working, indeed cramming into rooms to get pished, sounds awfully like a party. Like Dilyn sounds like a dog.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
@Big_G_NorthWales is defending the indefensible, and he knows it. He would be apoplectic if it was Drakefords office party...
The Drake’s Christmas ‘party’ sounds well worth missing, TBH.
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
"Secret Santa", quiz, drinks and food and not working, indeed cramming into rooms to get pished, sounds awfully like a party. Like Dilyn sounds like a dog.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
If it is a party it is illegal, however if it is in a work environment at the end of the day then under the regulations it is not
I was wondering how a knees-up would have been within the regulations. But a working group bubble sounds okay to me. Egg on the faces of journos.
It does rather look as if this is what happened and I really cannot see both Boris and Raab saying it conformed with regulations if it did not
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
"Secret Santa", quiz, drinks and food and not working, indeed cramming into rooms to get pished, sounds awfully like a party. Like Dilyn sounds like a dog.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
@Big_G_NorthWales is defending the indefensible, and he knows it. He would be apoplectic if it was Drakefords office party...
It may well be that there's nothing in the regulations which allows for prosecution. And essence of Johnsonism is that unless you can enforce a punishment on me for doing X, I'm allowed to do X.
But that's not really the point- it's an offence against fair play, common sense and all those other things that the government thinks are better than rules'n'red tape. It will play badly with Mr and Mrs Voter.
The government are probably right that we'll all get bored and the circus will move on. But they can't deny that the carousing happened (presumably because it did), and they can't say "yes, but so what?" (because that would cement the worst things we think about BoJo and co- the "one rule for them" has the potential to hurt a lot). So they're stuck with "police shouldn't investigate past events", which is nuts if you think about it for more than 3 seconds.
Eric Zemmour has launched his new party called “Reconquest”.
A clever move on his part. Even if he does not win the Presidential election, which is probable, he can thus retain some influence if his new party can win a few seats in the National Assembly elections in June
Re the posters asking what's motivated this sudden drugs "crackdown", it seems that we've missed this crucial story from a couple of hours ago.
Lindsey Hoyle is actually calling in police because of the amount of traces of drugs found on the parliamentary estate, including in the toilets next to Boris Johnson's office.
It seems that this could be damage limitation, not least because of the very significant potential toxicity of it, so to speak, in combination with other current high-level corruption and double standards stories. The "whiff of decadence", if you like.
How could we get a drug sniffer dog visiting No 10?
Supporters of prohibition are dreamers. It can’t ever be effected properly. Even in countries where possession carries the death penalty, drug abuse still goes on under the surface, with the harsh enforcement policies leading to even more ruthless criminal syndicates to facilitate the trade.
Policy is about choosing between hard choices. Either you can criminalise otherwise law abiding contributors to society and enable a vast black economy that funds all manner of other criminal activity. Or you accept that humans are gonna get high and seek to legislate in such a way to minimise societal harm in the process.
It genuinely puzzles me that we are still stuck on the same broken record.
The issue is that often the sane choices are "brave" decisions because no one is prepared to do the education required to explain why you are doing what you are doing.
It’s because they have to undo the decades of propaganda before they can even start the education! As my old grandad once said, when he was a lad opiate addicts were pitied rather than criminalised. “No one would choose that life, it makes no sense trying to send them to prison” or words to that effect.
In a perfect world we’d have a JV between the Ministries of Health and Science researching the perfect narcotic. One which carries no physical addiction, has minimal negative health consequences and where the effects can be switched off by antidote.
Some doctors appear to be warming to the idea that microdoses of LSD and magic mushrooms might roughly fit this profile, according to the report I posted up here earlier in the week.
According to the government's new post-Boris Johnson's toilets crackdown announced today, these would lose you your license and freedom to travel, ofcourse.
Um, not really. Microdosing is probably woo: it is hard to do research because of legal concerns but the most authoritative study suggests it's mainly placebo. Macrodosing and yes, you are off to the races, but it is being overhyped and the danger of bad trips underplayed by acid enthusiasts like the Countess of Wemyss.
The jury's still out on microdosing and research is just at the beginning, but the research atmosphere around psychedelics is very different from even a decade ago. Some psychiatrists and neuroscientists even seem to be starting to tentatively dip their toes in the waters of recommending some macrodosing too, under very carefully controlled conditions, which would have been unthinkable for most of the last fifty years .
I've never seen DIe Hard, but shouldn't it be obvious whether or not it's a Christmas film from the presence or otherwise of things like Christmas trees and Santa Claus?
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
"Secret Santa", quiz, drinks and food and not working, indeed cramming into rooms to get pished, sounds awfully like a party. Like Dilyn sounds like a dog.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
@Big_G_NorthWales is defending the indefensible, and he knows it. He would be apoplectic if it was Drakefords office party...
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
"Secret Santa", quiz, drinks and food and not working, indeed cramming into rooms to get pished, sounds awfully like a party. Like Dilyn sounds like a dog.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
@Big_G_NorthWales is defending the indefensible, and he knows it. He would be apoplectic if it was Drakefords office party...
It may well be that there's nothing in the regulations which allows for prosecution. And essence of Johnsonism is that unless you can enforce a punishment on me for doing X, I'm allowed to do X.
But that's not really the point- it's an offence against fair play, common sense and all those other things that the government thinks are better than rules'n'red tape. It will play badly with Mr and Mrs Voter.
The government are probably right that we'll all get bored and the circus will move on. But they can't deny that the carousing happened (presumably because it did), and they can't say "yes, but so what?" (because that would cement the worst things we think about BoJo and co- the "one rule for them" has the potential to hurt a lot). So they're stuck with "police shouldn't investigate past events", which is nuts if you think about it for more than 3 seconds.
Let's face it, the regs at the time allowed you to drive the length of England to lock down in a house with a garden make alternative childcare arrangements and take nice trips on your wife's birthday carry out eye tests. Is anyone going to get worked up over a couple of glasses of bubbly?
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
"Secret Santa", quiz, drinks and food and not working, indeed cramming into rooms to get pished, sounds awfully like a party. Like Dilyn sounds like a dog.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
@Big_G_NorthWales is defending the indefensible, and he knows it. He would be apoplectic if it was Drakefords office party...
I doing no such thing
If it was a party it was illegal, if it was a working environment at the end of the day it is not under the definition showed by Marr
It's one rule for them, another for us plebs. Time after time.
But you do not know the circumstances of this party and yet shout guilty
Innocent until proved guilty used to be the law in this land, seems some have reversed it
Re the posters asking what's motivated this sudden drugs "crackdown", it seems that we've missed this crucial story from a couple of hours ago.
Lindsey Hoyle is actually calling in police because of the amount of traces of drugs found on the parliamentary estate, including in the toilets next to Boris Johnson's office.
It seems that this could be damage limitation, not least because of the very significant potential toxicity of it, so to speak, in combination with other current high-level corruption and double standards stories. The "whiff of decadence", if you like.
How could we get a drug sniffer dog visiting No 10?
Supporters of prohibition are dreamers. It can’t ever be effected properly. Even in countries where possession carries the death penalty, drug abuse still goes on under the surface, with the harsh enforcement policies leading to even more ruthless criminal syndicates to facilitate the trade.
Policy is about choosing between hard choices. Either you can criminalise otherwise law abiding contributors to society and enable a vast black economy that funds all manner of other criminal activity. Or you accept that humans are gonna get high and seek to legislate in such a way to minimise societal harm in the process.
It genuinely puzzles me that we are still stuck on the same broken record.
The issue is that often the sane choices are "brave" decisions because no one is prepared to do the education required to explain why you are doing what you are doing.
It’s because they have to undo the decades of propaganda before they can even start the education! As my old grandad once said, when he was a lad opiate addicts were pitied rather than criminalised. “No one would choose that life, it makes no sense trying to send them to prison” or words to that effect.
In a perfect world we’d have a JV between the Ministries of Health and Science researching the perfect narcotic. One which carries no physical addiction, has minimal negative health consequences and where the effects can be switched off by antidote.
Some doctors appear to be warming to the idea that microdoses of LSD and magic mushrooms might roughly fit this profile, according to the report I posted up here earlier in the week.
According to the government's new post-Boris Johnson's toilets crackdown announced today, these would lose you your license and freedom to travel, ofcourse.
Um, not really. Microdosing is probably woo: it is hard to do research because of legal concerns but the most authoritative study suggests it's mainly placebo. Macrodosing and yes, you are off to the races, but it is being overhyped and the danger of bad trips underplayed by acid enthusiasts like the Countess of Wemyss.
The jury's still out and research is just at the beginning, but the research atmosphere around psychedelics is very different from even a decade ago. Some psychiatrists and neuroscientists even seem to be starting to tentatively dip their toes in the waters of recommending some macrodosing, under very carefully controlled circumstances, which would have been unthinkable for most of the last fifty years :
I was a little taken aback to find that acc to Wiki the C of W has experimented with holes in the head, though I suppose it's a good old shamanic practice so there might be something in it. Not volunteering for the controlled trial of trepanation myself though (how would one have a placebo anyway, apart from having someone remove a chunk of my scalp and applying a vibrator for a minute or so then sewing it up?).
I've never seen DIe Hard, but shouldn't it be obvious whether or not it's a Christmas film from the presence or otherwise of things like Christmas trees and Santa Claus?
However it was released in July as a Summer Blockbuster.
The Christmas party is there to give the story plausibility...
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
"Secret Santa", quiz, drinks and food and not working, indeed cramming into rooms to get pished, sounds awfully like a party. Like Dilyn sounds like a dog.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
@Big_G_NorthWales is defending the indefensible, and he knows it. He would be apoplectic if it was Drakefords office party...
I doing no such thing
If it was a party it was illegal, if it was a working environment at the end of the day it is not under the definition showed by Marr
It's one rule for them, another for us plebs. Time after time.
Yup that’s about the size of it. At the time this lot were toasting the dodgy procurement contracts they’d arranged for their mates, some of us were in a very dark place indeed due to the enforced absence of human contact. Not to go all Keegan on you but I’d love it love it if some of them saw the inside of a cell.
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
"Secret Santa", quiz, drinks and food and not working, indeed cramming into rooms to get pished, sounds awfully like a party. Like Dilyn sounds like a dog.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
@Big_G_NorthWales is defending the indefensible, and he knows it. He would be apoplectic if it was Drakefords office party...
I doing no such thing
If it was a party it was illegal, if it was a working environment at the end of the day it is not under the definition showed by Marr
It's one rule for them, another for us plebs. Time after time.
But you do not know the circumstances of this party and yet shout guilty
Innocent until proved guilty used to be the law in this land, seems some have reversed it
They had a party, at a time when No 10 - those people - had forbidden the world to have parties. Can you not see that pleading legal technicalities only makes it worse?
I've never seen DIe Hard, but shouldn't it be obvious whether or not it's a Christmas film from the presence or otherwise of things like Christmas trees and Santa Claus?
However it was released in July as a Summer Blockbuster.
The Christmas party is there to give the story plausibility...
Although it’s a massive stretch because the party is staged on … Christmas Eve. What company stages its works party on 24 December FFS? A massive plot hole in what is an otherwise superb (Christmas) film.
They've done this sort of thing before. A few years ago, I was listening to the F1 whilst driving. They changed sport, and said the F1 moved to 5 Live Extra. I tuned to 5LE, which was playing another sport. After a few minutes, 5LE said the F1 was on the main 5 Live. I tuned back, only for another sport. Neither channel had the F1 on, and both were saying it was on the other channel...
(I heard a funny anecdote once about BBC swapping channels...)
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
"Secret Santa", quiz, drinks and food and not working, indeed cramming into rooms to get pished, sounds awfully like a party. Like Dilyn sounds like a dog.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
@Big_G_NorthWales is defending the indefensible, and he knows it. He would be apoplectic if it was Drakefords office party...
I doing no such thing
If it was a party it was illegal, if it was a working environment at the end of the day it is not under the definition showed by Marr
It's one rule for them, another for us plebs. Time after time.
But you do not know the circumstances of this party and yet shout guilty
Innocent until proved guilty used to be the law in this land, seems some have reversed it
They had a party, at a time when No 10 - those people - had forbidden the world to have parties. Can you not see that pleading legal technicalities only makes it worse?
I accept that is the narrative and it may have been an illegal party, but if it was in a workplace environment, indeed any workplace environment, drinks at the end of the day would not be contary to covid regs
I've never seen DIe Hard, but shouldn't it be obvious whether or not it's a Christmas film from the presence or otherwise of things like Christmas trees and Santa Claus?
However it was released in July as a Summer Blockbuster.
The Christmas party is there to give the story plausibility...
I think Christmas films have to be released on Christmas Day itself. Otherwise they're simply Advent films.
The spam flag is not a disagree button. Do not use it as such.
Just a suggestion but as valid spam and O/T flaggings are as rare as hummable radiohead melodies, why not just redirect the notifications to, I dunno, Richard Burgon or the French Embassy or somewhere?
I can’t remember who it was, but some model / singer / it girl was traduced last December for holding a party during a photoshoot. As the shoot was work it was legal, but as I recall it didn’t stop the hectoring busybodies from the government making an example of her.
The spam flag is not a disagree button. Do not use it as such.
Just a suggestion but as valid spam and O/T flaggings are as rare as hummable radiohead melodies, why not just redirect the notifications to, I dunno, Richard Burgon or the French Embassy or somewhere?
Or hide the Spam button behind the Flag button if possible?
Would remove a lot of the accidental clicks on it at least, since you'd need to make two presses to register it.
File under - given a conversation I had on Friday - be surprised.
What happens next do you think? DfT taking over the bus contracts and direct control of the tube?
There are some big capital projects on going - the Bank Station refurbishment and the upgrade to the City Branch of the Northern Line which will be closed for four months.
They've done this sort of thing before. A few years ago, I was listening to the F1 whilst driving. They changed sport, and said the F1 moved to 5 Live Extra. I tuned to 5LE, which was playing another sport. After a few minutes, 5LE said the F1 was on the main 5 Live. I tuned back, only for another sport. Neither channel had the F1 on, and both were saying it was on the other channel...
(I heard a funny anecdote once about BBC swapping channels...)
Watch it on sky? Who wants to listen to F1 on the radio??
I've never seen DIe Hard, but shouldn't it be obvious whether or not it's a Christmas film from the presence or otherwise of things like Christmas trees and Santa Claus?
However it was released in July as a Summer Blockbuster.
The Christmas party is there to give the story plausibility...
Although it’s a massive stretch because the party is staged on … Christmas Eve. What company stages its works party on 24 December FFS? A massive plot hole in what is an otherwise superb (Christmas) film.
In America only Christmas Day is a holiday, so a party Christmas Eve plausible.
Not that plausibility is required in Christmas productions. Scrooge bought his turkey for the Cratchitts on Christmas Day itself
The spam flag is not a disagree button. Do not use it as such.
Just a suggestion but as valid spam and O/T flaggings are as rare as hummable radiohead melodies, why not just redirect the notifications to, I dunno, Richard Burgon or the French Embassy or somewhere?
Or hide the Spam button behind the Flag button if possible?
Would remove a lot of the accidental clicks on it at least, since you'd need to make two presses to register it.
I suspect the front end is vanilla's lovingly crafted htmlmanship, and immutable.
The spam flag is not a disagree button. Do not use it as such.
Just a suggestion but as valid spam and O/T flaggings are as rare as hummable radiohead melodies, why not just redirect the notifications to, I dunno, Richard Burgon or the French Embassy or somewhere?
Or hide the Spam button behind the Flag button if possible?
Would remove a lot of the accidental clicks on it at least, since you'd need to make two presses to register it.
I've never seen DIe Hard, but shouldn't it be obvious whether or not it's a Christmas film from the presence or otherwise of things like Christmas trees and Santa Claus?
I've never seen DIe Hard, but shouldn't it be obvious whether or not it's a Christmas film from the presence or otherwise of things like Christmas trees and Santa Claus?
However it was released in July as a Summer Blockbuster.
The Christmas party is there to give the story plausibility...
Although it’s a massive stretch because the party is staged on … Christmas Eve. What company stages its works party on 24 December FFS? A massive plot hole in what is an otherwise superb (Christmas) film.
In America only Christmas Day is a holiday, so a party Christmas Eve plausible.
Not that plausibility is required in Christmas productions. Scrooge bought his turkey for the Cratchitts on Christmas Day itself
Good effort (hence the like) but I can assure you that even in America, companies very rarely (if ever) stage their parties on Christmas Eve!
File under - given a conversation I had on Friday - be surprised.
What happens next do you think? DfT taking over the bus contracts and direct control of the tube?
There are some big capital projects on going - the Bank Station refurbishment and the upgrade to the City Branch of the Northern Line which will be closed for four months.
And given the timing can't now be stopped.
The issues are interesting:-
TfL can't go bankrupt as the cost will impact Government Borrowing so all bonds need to continue to be paid.
Treasury can't however provide ongoing subsidies and it's clear that fares won't cover costs - so the money has to come from somewhere.
Now I pointed out the options and the Treasury won't care where the tax money comes from (within reason) but it will need to (in the medium / long term) come from somewhere that isn't a central Government pot.
So I suspect we will see a combination of a business rate levy and some reduction in bus services.
File under - given a conversation I had on Friday - be surprised.
What happens next do you think? DfT taking over the bus contracts and direct control of the tube?
There are some big capital projects on going - the Bank Station refurbishment and the upgrade to the City Branch of the Northern Line which will be closed for four months.
And given the timing can't now be stopped.
The issues are interesting:-
TfL can't go bankrupt as the cost will impact Government Borrowing so all bonds need to continue to be paid.
Treasury can't however provide ongoing subsidies and it's clear that fares won't cover costs - so the money has to come from somewhere.
Now I pointed out the options and the Treasury won't care where the tax money comes from (within reason) but it will need to (in the medium / long term) come from somewhere that isn't a central Government pot.
So I suspect we will see a combination of a business rate levy and some reduction in bus services.
Not selling off TfL assets such as the holes in the ground?
They've done this sort of thing before. A few years ago, I was listening to the F1 whilst driving. They changed sport, and said the F1 moved to 5 Live Extra. I tuned to 5LE, which was playing another sport. After a few minutes, 5LE said the F1 was on the main 5 Live. I tuned back, only for another sport. Neither channel had the F1 on, and both were saying it was on the other channel...
(I heard a funny anecdote once about BBC swapping channels...)
Watch it on sky? Who wants to listen to F1 on the radio??
Mail: Boris Johnson is today facing more pressure to explain events at Downing Street Christmas parties last year after his deputy admitted any 'formal' events would have breached Covid laws.
Dominic Raab made the admission after Labour MPs demanded the Metropolitan Police probe two gatherings in November and December last year.
Both are said to have seen 40 or 50 people crammed 'cheek by jowl' in an inside room, and one is reported to have included a secret Santa and festive quiz.
Marr displayed the rule and it seems for it to be illegal it would have to be a party , not a few drinks at the end of the day in a work environment
I doubt we will ever know
I think we already know. There's a reason why every government spokesperson is parroting the same line and refusing to say any more.
As a matter of interest did you watch Marr and read the definition and understand just why this may well have been legal
Eating, drinking, and playing party games isn't ever going to come under the definition of a gathering that is primarily for business reasons, is it?
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
I am not part of a lynch mob and you have not answered the question
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
"Secret Santa", quiz, drinks and food and not working, indeed cramming into rooms to get pished, sounds awfully like a party. Like Dilyn sounds like a dog.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
@Big_G_NorthWales is defending the indefensible, and he knows it. He would be apoplectic if it was Drakefords office party...
I doing no such thing
If it was a party it was illegal, if it was a working environment at the end of the day it is not under the definition showed by Marr
It's one rule for them, another for us plebs. Time after time.
But you do not know the circumstances of this party and yet shout guilty
Innocent until proved guilty used to be the law in this land, seems some have reversed it
They had a party, at a time when No 10 - those people - had forbidden the world to have parties. Can you not see that pleading legal technicalities only makes it worse?
I accept that is the narrative and it may have been an illegal party, but if it was in a workplace environment, indeed any workplace environment, drinks at the end of the day would not be contary to covid regs
Drinking till after midnight and playing party games has not been a feature of our staff non-party get-togethers. But I think the subject's been done to death - pretty obviously the rules were hypocritically broken, and nobody is especially surprised. Either the the "One rule for them" thing worries people or it doesn't - according to the North Shropshire report today, most people just shrug and say "They're all at it".
Comments
The fact is that this time next week TfL runs out of money - and that means the Treasury needs to find more.
And having cut HS2E the Treasury cannot just write a blank cheque so they are looking for TfL to fix their multi-billion pound annual shortfall without it costing Red Wall voters a penny.
Ironically - one reason why TfL have managed to get to December is because Crossrail isn't live yet. Were it operating the money would have ran out in October...
What proof do you have that this was illegal and if so provide it
Indeed neither Boris or Carrie were present
Is this a fake also?
https://twitter.com/FacundoSavala/status/1467413219589476352?s=20
Amirite, teachers?
More seriously- that was the genius of Domski's "Three Word Slogan, repeated endlessly" approach- that just about gets under people's defences.
It has the downside that the only things government can do are those that can be boiled down to three word slogans.
You spent an entire year telling us all what a charlatan Boris was. Don't start defending him now.
A screenshot with a deleted tweet where the tweet was not actually deleted did seem odd. Usually it just returns an error saying the page does not exist. Hence the need for pages like politwhoops.
Very good at sniffing out the drugs, very bad at given them over to the police officer once they had them.
To claim it wasn't a party is about as honest as to claim Dilyn is a cat. Especially if everyone else has been forbidden to have parties.
What pisses me off is the hectoring, lecturing, busybodying government telling other people they couldn’t have a decent screw while having a rave up themselves.
THE SANTA Bus had to finish its route early after Father Christmas was hit in the face by a pack of sweets.
https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/19763352.santa-bus-ends-route-early-wish-road-hove-confrontation/?ref=ebmpn
You end up with things like "war on drugs" which means a ceasefire becomes impossible to initiate. And again HS2 is about speed when it really isn't.
Are they quite sure that it's tight enough?
If it was a party it was illegal, if it was a working environment at the end of the day it is not under the definition showed by Marr
The regulations may say it was not a party. But it was, and they should have had far more sense than to have one and show a dreadful example to the public.
And it's moved to football.
Poor, BBC. Very poor.
Keeping the monarchy is a different matter. I'm certain the Scottish government wouldn't have moved at all on changing that. I can foresee a future, post-independence campaign for it, but I don't know whether it would really get the traction, and nobody on the mild-republican side of Scottish politics would want to risk their own position fighting a losing battle.
As for the comments comparing any mainstream UK party with the Nazis, you're clearly an idiot.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_radio_five_live_sports_extra
But that's not really the point- it's an offence against fair play, common sense and all those other things that the government thinks are better than rules'n'red tape. It will play badly with Mr and Mrs Voter.
The government are probably right that we'll all get bored and the circus will move on. But they can't deny that the carousing happened (presumably because it did), and they can't say "yes, but so what?" (because that would cement the worst things we think about BoJo and co- the "one rule for them" has the potential to hurt a lot). So they're stuck with "police shouldn't investigate past events", which is nuts if you think about it for more than 3 seconds.
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2021/06/harvard-medical-school-professor-discusses-future-of-psychedelics/
We're net losers.
We should go on striker.
Elizabeth Hurley; OK, that's enough, come on.
drive the length of England to lock down in a house with a gardenmake alternative childcare arrangements andtake nice trips on your wife's birthdaycarry out eye tests. Is anyone going to get worked up over a couple of glasses of bubbly?Innocent until proved guilty used to be the law in this land, seems some have reversed it
The Christmas party is there to give the story plausibility...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_radio_five_live_sports_extra
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45667690
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/formula1/54911282
They've done this sort of thing before. A few years ago, I was listening to the F1 whilst driving. They changed sport, and said the F1 moved to 5 Live Extra. I tuned to 5LE, which was playing another sport. After a few minutes, 5LE said the F1 was on the main 5 Live. I tuned back, only for another sport. Neither channel had the F1 on, and both were saying it was on the other channel...
(I heard a funny anecdote once about BBC swapping channels...)
Funny old world.
Would remove a lot of the accidental clicks on it at least, since you'd need to make two presses to register it.
Not that plausibility is required in Christmas productions. Scrooge bought his turkey for the Cratchitts on Christmas Day itself
The safety car is going to help Mercedes, I think.
I fear the tyres might not last if there's no more safety car incidents.
RED FLAG.
Verstappen gets a free pit stop/tire change.
Advantage verstappen
The issues are interesting:-
TfL can't go bankrupt as the cost will impact Government Borrowing so all bonds need to continue to be paid.
Treasury can't however provide ongoing subsidies and it's clear that fares won't cover costs - so the money has to come from somewhere.
Now I pointed out the options and the Treasury won't care where the tax money comes from (within reason) but it will need to (in the medium / long term) come from somewhere that isn't a central Government pot.
So I suspect we will see a combination of a business rate levy and some reduction in bus services.
His next job is going to be at Red Bull isn't it?
(RIP Bob Dole, he had a good innings)
And are too tight to pay for Sky.