New Tory Leader

[SwindonCanary 455]

4 minutes ago, Well b back said:

But that’s how most Tories feel ( simply going on the way they have voted in previous votes ).

Not true I believe it's Labour supporters who do it more 

[Well b back 3,190]

7 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

Not true I believe it's Labour supporters who do it more 

Lol

A good start will be the PPE contracts, please show me one sleazed by Labour ( who I don’t support by the way ) and maybe you can tell me which Labour MPs voted to take away the £20.

I will start with Farage - fiddled EU expenses, Javid and a 6 million pound contract.

 

Edited November 17, 2021 by Well b back

[SwindonCanary 455]

I'm not writing about Labour MP's I'm was on about Labour supporters 

[Yellow Fever 3,744]

Has Johnson's trainer thrown in the towel yet?

Edited November 17, 2021 by Yellow Fever

[Well b back 3,190]

49 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

I'm not writing about Labour MP's I'm was on about Labour supporters 

Lots of Tories here jumped initial vaccine queues. Are you saying it’s ok to rob the taxpayers for millions if you are an mp ?

Farage isn’t an mp but fiddled his EU expenses and claimed an EU pension that we all have to pay for from our taxes.

[MooreMarriot 307]

Remember what one of his Eton masters wrote to his serial groper father about the young Boris :

" Boris sometimes seems affronted when criticised for what amounts to a gross failure of responsibility (and surprised at the same time that he was not appointed Captain of the School ) , I think he honestly believes that it is churlish of us not to regard him as an exception, one who should be free of the network of obligation which binds everyone else.”

Nothing has changed over the years.

[horsefly 4,287]

12 minutes ago, MooreMarriot said:

Remember what one of his Eton masters wrote to his serial groper father about the young Boris :

" Boris sometimes seems affronted when criticised for what amounts to a gross failure of responsibility (and surprised at the same time that he was not appointed Captain of the School ) , I think he honestly believes that it is churlish of us not to regard him as an exception, one who should be free of the network of obligation which binds everyone else.”

Nothing has changed over the years.

One can imagine Stanley reading the report, patting Boris on the head (for he is not an unrelated woman), and saying "Well done! you are your father's son".

[horsefly 4,287]

The wonderful Chris Bryant exposing Johnson for the corrupt idiot that he is at the Liaison Committee.

[Well b back 3,190]

25 minutes ago, horsefly said:

The wonderful Chris Bryant exposing Johnson for the corrupt idiot that he is at the Liaison Committee.

And now the end is near

[horsefly 4,287]

The wonderful Susie Dent strikes again:

 

 

 

 

Susie Dent 

 

@susie_dent

 

Word of the day is ‘circumbendibus’ (17th century): an answer or argument so convoluted and evasive that it isn’t really an answer at all.

[RobJames 880]

On 05/11/2021 at 18:12, Barbe bleu said:

my intention at this point is to carry on a discussion and not be forced away from a thread by the holiday cover guy

I don’t actually care much about HoC disciplinary processes and I am certain that I have never had such a lengthy discussion about  HR procedures 

I think an appeal process in some form or another would improve the process,  others think differently. Either way its not terribly important to me, or to anyone else here I bet.

But the place holder guy needs to be told to **** off every so often. I've been at a loose end the last couple of days abs do was determined that there would be a discussion and that the necessary advice was given to the poor imitation.

So, as was stated, by all. He did have an appeal.

Q: Do you think Owen Paterson was guilty?

Johnson says it was a very sad case. But there was no question he had fallen foul of the rules. The issue was whether he had a fair right to appeal.

Q: He had an appeal.

Johnson says, in forming the impression that Paterson had not had a fair hearing, “I may have been mistaken”. But many people thought that, he says.

[BigFish 1,986]

 

 

[horsefly 4,287]

20 minutes ago, RobJames said:

So, as was stated, by all. He did have an appeal.

Q: Do you think Owen Paterson was guilty?

Johnson says it was a very sad case. But there was no question he had fallen foul of the rules. The issue was whether he had a fair right to appeal.

Q: He had an appeal.

Johnson says, in forming the impression that Paterson had not had a fair hearing, “I may have been mistaken”. But many people thought that, he says.

Splendid point Rob! Not a surprise that those who can't be bothered to check the facts resort to lazy ad hominem insults. 

[A Load of Squit 5,127]

Did Johnson have a word with Viscount Rothermere?

 

[Barbe bleu 812]

1 hour ago, RobJames said:

So, as was stated, by all. He did have an appeal.

Q: Do you think Owen Paterson was guilty?

Johnson says it was a very sad case. But there was no question he had fallen foul of the rules. The issue was whether he had a fair right to appeal.

Q: He had an appeal.

Johnson says, in forming the impression that Paterson had not had a fair hearing, “I may have been mistaken”. But many people thought that, he says.

You really are up for a fight aren't you!?

I should ignore it really but as you wish to rake up old ground to score points I will comment

If you are sacked from work or you are denied asylum by the home office you can  appeal to a tribunal.  If you lose there you can further appeal to the appeals tribunal.  If the appeals tribunal believe you may have a case they can order a fresh hearing. The same applies in lots, if not all areas of law.   Parliamentary discipline is  bit of an anomaly in not having a third tier.

You can argue that a third tier in parliamentary proceedings isn't necessary, that a final vote is the equivalent of a third layer, or any number of things, but these are opinions to be discussed, not matters that are either right or wrong.  

In much the same way you can discuss whether there should be a third tier to asylum claims. Some would say the third layer only delays things moving on and that once your initial appeal against the home office decision is rejected this decision should be considered as final,  others say it provides protection to the claimant.  Neither opinion is inherently 'right' or 'wrong'. 

Let us be absolutely clear about this. I never said I thought paterson was innocent or that he didn't have an fair hearing. In fact i didn't comment on his case at all until much later where I said he likely was guilty and that I trusted the decision made.

You seem desperate to prove me wrong. Putting aside the problems with proving an opinion to be factually wrong, I wonder of this says more about you and what you want from forum than it does about what I see as an incredibly niche, highly technical and fairly boring topic?  I'll leave it there as I have no interest in fighting with you, and especially on the topic of HR, but before I go i do wonder with this fully formed fighting spirit after less than 2 months on these pages are you sure you are not the Lazarus Bill returned to us?

 

Edited November 17, 2021 by Barbe bleu

[Herman 9,712]

21 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

Did Johnson have a word with Viscount Rothermere?

 

That looks highly likely with MOS Ted Verity taking over. Our tax avoiding media moguls circling the wagon.

[A Load of Squit 5,127]

Looks like it's the beginning of the end.

 

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

3 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

Looks like it's the beginning of the end.

 

We can only hope......😊

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

This must be the thinnest ice Boris has encountered. And we know he was elected for one purpose. So who among the Tories is likely to be prepared to lobby to oust him? Gove might well do it for that person but I am struggling to think past Sunak as being the only one with the bottle to do it. Raab has as much personality as General Haig's pet tortoise Alan. Patel has too much personality. Truss is just a "disgrace". Surely Javid is not even in the running and Rees Mogg wouldn't want to be in the firing line.

[horsefly 4,287]

49 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

Putting aside the problems with proving an opinion to be factually wrong, I wonder of this says more about you and what you want from forum than it does about what I see as an incredibly niche, highly technical and fairly boring topic?  I'll leave it there as I have no interest in fighting with you, and especially on the topic of HR, but before I go i do wonder with this fully formed fighting spirit after less than 2 months on these pages are you sure you are not the Lazarus Bill returned to us?

 

"Putting aside the problems with proving an opinion to be factually wrong" 

Are you serious? Of course opinions can be proved factually wrong, those who think the earth is flat are factually wrong, or do you want to dispute that too. Johnson admitted he was factually wrong that Paterson had not had the chance to appeal the Commissioner's Report, just as you were factually wrong about that same issue but refuse to admit it. You are also factually wrong that this is an HR issue. The Commissioner for Standards is not an HR employee, and the Committee on Standards is not an HR committee. Neither make HR decisions.

I wonder of this says more about you and what you want from forum than it does about what I see as an incredibly niche, highly technical and fairly boring topic? 

Wow! The issue that has convulsed the country, that has undermined our parliamentary democracy with allegations of the deepest levels of corruption; so much so that Johnson had to use his speech at COP26 to deny to the world that the UK is a corrupt country, is regarded by you as a "niche, highly technical and fairly boring topic".  I needn't say any more. Should I provide you with the links to the report and committee proceedings again so that you have another opportunity to read them for the first time? Or will the audacity of me providing those links send you into another blood vessel bursting abusive rant?  

Edited November 17, 2021 by horsefly

[Barbe bleu 812]

15 minutes ago, horsefly said:

"Putting aside the problems with proving an opinion to be factually wrong" 

Are you serious? Of course opinions can be proved factually wrong, ....

I wonder of this says more about you and what you want from forum than it does about what I see as an incredibly niche, highly technical and fairly boring topic? 

Wow! The issue that has convulsed the country, that has undermined our parliamentary democracy with allegations of the deepest levels corruption; so much so that Johnson had to use his speech at COP26 to deny to the world that the UK is a corrupt country, is regarded by you as a "niche, highly technical and fairly boring topic".  

I didn't say that allegations of corruption are unimportant. I said that the Parliamentary mechanisms for dealing with them was niche, technical and boring. 

I think we have different definitions of 'opinion'.  By this I mean something subjective, something influenced by personal emotions and values as much as by the tangible and the measurable

 a 'fact'  I would say is objective and uninfluenced by personal feelings. A fact exists outside of values. 

In your example I wouldnt say that a  person is of the 'opinion that the earth is flat'. Instead I would say that they are of the 'belief that that earth is flat' and I fully agree that a belief can, in theory at least, be tested.

Isn’t language fascinating?! But I am not sure you contacted me for a discussion on semantics or linguistics or whatever you want to call it and i fear we are losing our audience here...

 

 

Edited November 17, 2021 by Barbe bleu

[horsefly 4,287]

3 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

Isn’t language fascinating?! But I am not sure you contacted me for a discussion on semantics or linguistics or whatever you want to call it and i fear we are losing our audience here...

On the contrary, language is of the first importance, if people don't express themselves clearly it leads to all sorts of confusion. So just to be clear, opinions are expressed in declarative sentences and as such are expressions that are candidates assigned a truth value (true or false). For example, It is my opinion that Johnson had not read the Commissioner's report before he entered upon his disastrous attempt to get his mate off the hook for having breached lobbying rules. Whether my opinion corresponds to the actual fact is one issue we may never get an answer to, but it remains the case that it is either a fact that he did read it or a fact that he didn't. "I believe that...", and "It is my opinion that..." are interchangeable in identical contexts.

[Well b back 3,190]

And now, the end is near and so we play the final curtain.

I wonder if Carrie will dump him when he is no longer PM.

After PMQs and the Liaison Committee, the PM then went to face his own MPs at the 1922 committee - one texts to say, he "looked weak and sounded weak" and "authority is evaporating".

Other MPs leaving the meeting of Tories where the PM was speaking: "He needs a lemsip", "excellent", "muted" and "fair to say it's been a rough couple of weeks".

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

On 10/11/2021 at 14:10, PurpleCanary said:

Not quite sure why but the Mail has been leading the anti-Tory and anti-Bojo charge on this. It initially fudged the issue by claiming the latest sleaze was an indictment of the whole political class, so trying to hold the 'they're all as bad as each other' line, but dropped that very quickly to aim all barrels straight at the Tories.

Geordie G. sacked as Mail editor today, but no entirely clear if that is because he has been orchestrating too much of an attack on BoJo or whether there are other less political internecine reasons.

[horsefly 4,287]

11 minutes ago, Well b back said:

And now, the end is near and so we play the final curtain.

I wonder if Carrie will dump him when he is no longer PM.

After PMQs and the Liaison Committee, the PM then went to face his own MPs at the 1922 committee - one texts to say, he "looked weak and sounded weak" and "authority is evaporating".

Other MPs leaving the meeting of Tories where the PM was speaking: "He needs a lemsip", "excellent", "muted" and "fair to say it's been a rough couple of weeks".

While he remains sleaze will always be at the forefront, plenty of enquiries ahead. The Cons will consider one variable, do we win if he stays or if he goes. It's that simple. They couldn't give a fig about standards, it's always the bottom line.

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

1 hour ago, horsefly said:

On the contrary, language is of the first importance, if people don't express themselves clearly it leads to all sorts of confusion. So just to be clear, opinions are expressed in declarative sentences and as such are expressions that are candidates assigned a truth value (true or false).

I'm pretty sure that @Barbe bleu understands that very well but, dissembler that he is, expressing himself clearly is the last thing he is aiming for.

He is a Johnson apologist trying to masquerade as the voice of sweet, unaligned reason and it is an act which has been wearing very thin for a long time now. I've generally found that he shies completely away from discussing anything based on fact (presumably because they are usually inconvenient from his perspective 😊) but his mask really slipped when he foolishly dashed in to defend Johnson's corruption and stupidity the other week and made a very obvious factual error in his argument. That he seems determined to die in a ditch of his own digging rather than simply admit he was wrong, again much like Johnson himself, I think tells us everything we need to know about BB's own motivation and character - maybe he and Johnson are one and the same, they certainly share an awful lot of opinions and character flaws 😂

Edited November 17, 2021 by Creative Midfielder

[Barbe bleu 812]

12 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

maybe he and Johnson are one and the same, they certainly share an awful lot of opinions and character flaws 😂

You've got me banged to rights young man.  I am indeed Boris Johnson. 

I thought the high point of detection was when horsefly, robjames and Bill all got identified as the same person, and in particular by SC as a guy called Christopher, but you've won first prize now!

[Well b back 3,190]

And the sleaze goes on

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59320858

[Yellow Fever 3,744]

2 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

This must be the thinnest ice Boris has encountered. And we know he was elected for one purpose. So who among the Tories is likely to be prepared to lobby to oust him? Gove might well do it for that person but I am struggling to think past Sunak as being the only one with the bottle to do it. Raab has as much personality as General Haig's pet tortoise Alan. Patel has too much personality. Truss is just a "disgrace". Surely Javid is not even in the running and Rees Mogg wouldn't want to be in the firing line.

Gove has practiced on Johnson before .....

Problem is the Tories are up s h i t creek without a paddle (or a viable alternative after the purge of all leading rational ones or those with standards a few years back). However they could hope to pin everything on Johnson as a scapegoat. He made us do it, honest gov (sic or perhaps pun intended)!

Edited November 17, 2021 by Yellow Fever

[horsefly 4,287]

27 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

You've got me banged to rights young man.  I am indeed Boris Johnson. 

I thought the high point of detection was when horsefly, robjames and Bill all got identified as the same person, and in particular by SC as a guy called Christopher, but you've won first prize now!

Oh dear! Didn't take long for more of your ad hominem bull sh*it did it! Just about every single Tory politician has admitted they screwed up dreadfully over the Paterson issue, but you can't even manage to admit you got it wrong on a little forum like this.

Edited November 17, 2021 by horsefly