Is that Eric Pickles? The guy whose name seems too on the nose because he's so corpulent?

What a tosser. Conservative sleaze is back.

Om-Nominative determinism ?

I note that the Daily Mail has a "Starmer the Covid Party Hypocrite !" headline accompanying a long lens shot of Kier Starmer, with a bottle (presumably of beer) in hand talking to colleagues allegedly taken on April 30 2021.

I'd suggest that there are a number of key differences between this, and what the Prime Minister and various ministers, advisors and senior civil servants have done:

• The photo is clearly taken at night so it is entirely possible that it was taken as a busy working day was wrapping up - not mid-afternoon
• There's no suggestion that invitations were sent out to 100 people to attend this shindig
• There are three staff members visible in the photograph and as such was in line with restrictions at the time
• The are visibly in an office, not lolling around in a garden
• There is no suggestion that this was, like Wine Day Fridays, a regular occurrence to which tens of people were invited

It's regrettable that this photograph of Kier Starmer exists but once again it's an example of right wing whataboutism.

When the Mail are stealing debunked Sun stories from last May you know they’re in trouble.

It literally was work. There was video of the work event. And it didn’t break any rules.
The photo was taken on May 1st after restrictions were lifted.

Even then, it's when he was in the North East visiting Hartlepool and Durham supporting by election efforts.
It was in the office of a Labour candidate in a By election when they stopped for food half way through a constituency online event.
The Sun tried to run with it last year and it was shown to be bollocks then.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-b1993433.html

That's probably going to go down well amongst his staff.

The fact that he seems to realise it needs saving is also a tacit admission of vulnerability.

I thought the party line was that we should wait until everyone has forgotten about it Gray’s findings are published before pointing any fingers.

Surely not: he was the anti-corruption champion, after all.

It never went away, but Johnson's government has turned it up to 11

Unlike the Honourable Member for Braintree, who embodies the opposite of nominative determinism

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...ays-new-report

I doubt it will surprise no one:

I am surprised anyone thinks it needs a report to tell us.

Nadine Dorries tweets
@NadineDorries
· 3h
This licence fee announcement will be the last.
The days of the elderly being threatened with prison sentences and bailiffs knocking on doors, are over.
Time now to discuss and debate new ways of funding, supporting and selling great British content. https://dailymail.co.uk/news/article...arge-2024.html

I’m a little confused, wasn’t it a Conservative government that effectively demanded the end of free BBC licences for the over 75s as a cost cutting measure?

Labour introduced free TV licences for the over 75s and, crucially, recompensed the BBC for the lost value.
Osborne ditched that reimbursement, calculating that stupid people would blame the BBC.
Looks like he was right.

It almost made it to a hundred!

David Allen Green on the Sue Gray enquiry
https://davidallengreen.com/2022/01/...vestigation-2/

All she can do is present her findings to Boris.
He gets to decide what happens to them and what action is taken.

Oh yes and then it will be "this is old news" "lessons should be learned" "much has changed" "on the positive side the enquiry did show" etc. I may draw up a bingo card of them.

Yes. Labour funded free TV licenses for over 75s out of general taxation and the Tories told the BBC they were stopping the funding but expected the Beeb to keep doing it anyway.

Now the TV licence system needs a total rethink anyway. It will soon be as anachronistic as, say, trying to fund the internet by taxing phone landlines. But the alarming thing is imagining whatever madcap scheme they replace it with, with this shower of ***** in charge. You can fully expect that it'll be based not on a sensible long term plan but on exacting petty revenge for every real or imagined sleight the Tories hold against the BBC.

Don't be unfair, it will also be how much they can flog it to their mates as well as revenge!

Tim Shipman of the Sunday Times tweeted
@ShippersUnbound
·
14h
NEW: Boris Johnson is 'in survival mode' says a cabinet colleague. How does he know? 'Because he's started reading his briefing papers' to appear on top of things! My big read on another strange week in politics

Do you mean the electorate, or Dorries?

Unlike Ireland....


In other good news for UKians, Amazon UK stops accepting UK Visa credit cards in Wednesday.

Yet another Brexit Bonus.

The BBC will have to make deep cuts to its programme budgets after the government said that the broadcaster’s funding would be frozen for the next two years, with the licence fee abolished completely in 2027.

The culture secretary, Nadine Dorries, is expected to confirm that the cost of an annual licence, required to watch live television and access iPlayer services, will remain at £159 until 2024 before rising slightly for the following three years.
She said this would be the end of the current licence fee funding model for the BBC, raising doubts about the long-term financial future and editorial independence of the public service broadcaster under a Conservative government.
The decision, confirmed by government sources, was briefed to the media as part of a range of measures designed to shore up public support for Boris Johnson after he has faced calls to resign as prime minister.

The BBC will have to negotiate with the government over an entirely new funding model when the final licence fee funding deal expires in 2027 – with potential options including a subscription service, part-privatisation, or direct government funding.
The Mail on Sunday quoted an ally of Dorries as saying: “There will be a lot of anguished noises about how it will hit popular programmes, but they can learn to cut waste like any other business. This will be the last BBC licence fee negotiation ever. Work will start next week on a mid-term review to replace the charter with a new funding formula.
“It’s over for the BBC as they know it.”
The source added that “the days of state-run TV are over” and praised the growth of US-run private sector companies such as Netflix and YouTube.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...funding-frozen

:confused:

They actually think it will prove popular, let alone create support for Johnson? What planet are they living on?

A planet where the primary fear is negative headlines in the Tory papers, most of whom have yet to start turning the scew on Johnson. After all, who cares what the plebs think about Auntie when there's a career to save.

You may be surprised.

Lots of tweets in favour of it.

Here's a good one from Dan Wootton a GBNews presenter

Lots in agreement with him. Here is a selection of replies to just that one tweet.

"I don't watch or listen to any of these either, I shouldn't have to pay licence fee either, really grudge paying it"

"Don’t think anyone under the age of 50 uses any of them mate"

"Only interested in half a dozen of these services, don’t see why I should pay for all 25."

"Isn’t Britbox a subscription service to watch BBC repeats we have already paid for? "

"I agree (with regret) that the BBC ‘s time is up"

"I haven’t watched or listened to the bbc for years, but like most people are still having to pay up"

"I enjoy a lot of the BBC output, R3, R4 BBC1,2,4, local radio stations, etc. and I’d happily subscribe to hear/see them.
I’ve come to despise BBC News though, it is clearly biased against the current centre/right government and intent in smearing it whenever they can."

"They show so many repeats they could fit the content onto one or two and get rid of the crap."

"Scrap local radio. The staff very often IS the audience, and yet even here I can pick up nine BBC local stations."

"I have to agree, I do pay a lot of money to Sky as in my opinion it is the best product out there at the moment but the point is that is my decision to do so. I could cancel anytime."

"They don’t get it do they….I don’t watch so I don’t want to pay. It’s that simple."

"I don’t watch any of them. Haven’t for years. apart from Top Gear. So I need to pay £150 a year for one show?"

^ I'm getting old and clearly out of touch ;)

David Miliband tweeted (about the BBC license announcement)
@DMiliband
·
5h
It’s the casual, brazen vandalism - no plan for an alternative, let’s just smash things up - that gets me. It’s the opposite of “conservative”. It just pulls the country apart for nothing except the thrills (and some profits).

There are also plans being talked about to give the military responsibility for stopping immigrants crossing the channel in boats. It will no longer be a Border Force responsibility.

It's all part of 'Operation Red Meat' a plan by Nadine Dorries to pacify the back benchers by throwing some 'red meat' proposals.

Contrary to the myth he wants to create, Boris was never a popular PM

These are the Ipsos MORI net rating figures for PMs after 2 months in office.

Blair + 59
Major + 46
May + 27
Cameron + 22
Brown + 20
Thatcher +2
Johnson -18

Further down that report: So... this whole kerfuffle will disappear in a few weeks' time?? ;)

All from the one source, "close to the government"?? Is his name Nigel F?

Surely not "target practice"?

Channel migrants: Military set to take over English Channel operations

The armed forces are set to take charge of operations looking to limit migrant crossings in the English Channel within weeks, a government source has said.
This move could free up the Home Office to focus on the government's reforms to the asylum system, the source adds.

The news follows reports in the Times that Prime Minister Boris Johnson will give the Royal Navy authority over government vessels in the channel.
A government spokesperson said the public have "rightly had enough of the blatant disregard of our immigration laws by criminal people smugglers" and ministers were "bringing in necessary long-term changes".

They added: "The UK armed forces already work closely with Border Force in these operations, providing expertise and assets as part of our processes in the Channel. It is right that we pursue all options to prevent illegal crossings and protect life at sea."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60021252

There you go.

I didn't know it was the actual Home Office staff that were manning the Border Force boats. You would think the people working on reforms to the asylum system wouldn't actually be the ones chasing boats up and down the channel!

I'm not understanding the need to connect the one of the Downing Street parties to Prince Phillip's funeral.
There's a lot of very good reasons for having a go at Boris regarding the illegality, hypocrisy, moral turpitude etc. associated with these events, but the fact the queen was burying her husband the next day doesn't seem to be one of them.

I think it's the contrast between the way that the Queen scrupulously kept to the rules for the funeral, whilst Johnson et al flagrantly ignored them, that is being noted.

And of course this will outrage a section of the Tory base who could care less about Johnson's other failings.

Exactly, and in so doing she also reminded the public of all the funerals, weddings and birthdays they missed while they were following the rules and called to mind those relatives who died alone because we followed the rules while the people who set the rules, flouted them but didn't even have the guts to own up to it.

But... Brexit is done!
Which is why the UK is now a country of milk and honey with gold paved streets and high international standing.

Surely that counts for something?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ohnson-to-quit

The comments are depressing even as they are turning on Johnson

Twitter thread here:

https://twitter.com/jamesjohnson252/...582863877?s=20

For example