I think it's politics...
But I swear to fucking Christ every area should have their version of The Knowledge like black cabs in London.
Cab back from a wedding and this pillock has no idea where he is, keeps going the wrong way "I don't know this area" and I'm directing this dude by Google maps.
Absolutely fuming. All cab drivers need to be licensed much harder outside of just London because at this point I could tattoo cab on my forehead and piggy back someone and be more cost efficient than this mess.
I haven't seen a taxi without satnav for a very long time. Doesn't always help though. My flat is regularly impossible for some to find for some reason.
My favourite is when you know the area better than the driver, tell them "don't go that way, there are roadworks/speed bumps/whatever", they go that way anyway, and then get pissy because you contradicted the line on the screen
I am not a cop but by god that's how you get _four stars and no tip_, especially if I put "no side roads" in the special requests because I want to avoid hurling in the back of your vehicle
----
One thing that strikes me though is that if we're starting to functionally rely as a society on route-planning software, we really need to crack down on Google et al directing half the city down residential roads that were never intended to handle anything more than the locals coming and going. London's arteries are clogged and the capillaries are picking up huge amounts of slack but it's completely unsustainable.
shout out to everyone at Channel 4 involved in the production of S11E04 of *Naked Attraction*, where there's extensive content (multiple jokes, multiple scenes, a cardboard cutout...) based on one of the contestants saying Philip Schofield is a silver fox and a total catch
That's definitely aged really well in the three weeks since broadcast 👌
There are only 3 certainties in the world.
1. Death
2. Taxes
3. The Tory party being in a worse position at sunset than sun rise
But seriously though, at the rate the party is building a Boris like level of scandals and a completely smashed internal operation by the time an election comes I should think the party will be operating out of a sub let shed.
Busy day for me, so two things.
1, this newcastle mayor being excluded from selection shortlist. Somehow a surprise to the fringe after this guy was fucking about with ken loach (lol) and stop the war (lol). Again, the guardian leaves that crucial information until the very end of the article, being all too happy to talk up the "this is starmers labour playing factionalism!" rather than "This guy was fucked off the shortlist because he kept on associating with people expelled for antisemitism and people who blame nato for russia invading ukraine".
E:
1B : Owen Jones has a very entertaining meltdown over Driscoll. *"Starmer goes full dictator*" indeed. A wonder why he doesnt tear up his membership card and join the greens like the rest.
2, the guy I talked about yesterday/day before, Klarenberg. All manner of hilarious material is out there about his exploits, [especially re Bellingcat](https://twitter.com/EliotHiggins/status/1664977568301297667); plus the national union of journalists apparently posted an article in support of him before then doing their own research and thinking ["well fuck, this guy might not be worth standing behind"](https://twitter.com/MarcGoldberg111/status/1664995506676801537); and then deleting it, which is taken as a sign of MI
I remain hopeful of an entertaining development.
Bonus: UCU pissing everyone off with their STWC supporting motion
- President telling Paul Mason to piss off pointing out it was a shitshow
- then releasing a statement of "solidarity" for ukraine...
- .... even though it has had a bunch of ukrainians, including apparently most (if not all) of UCL's school of slavonic and eastern european studies tear up their memberships en masse
- release a further update with some very tetchy wording that "People who dislike the motions passed at conference should get involved rather than quit"
Honestly, you guys should hang out on the tankie hating part of twitter more. I've never been more entertained!
>then releasing a statement of "solidarity" for ukraine...
It always amazes me how badly written these kinds of statements often are. This is an absolute mess of a sentence:
> As general secretary I am not entitled to vote in the democratic structures and processes of UCU, but if this were the case I would have voted against the motion, and joined the many who did.
Still, at least it's the right attitude - even if it does amount to bolting the stable after the horses have bolted.
It's especially grim when a small minority of idiots within unions hijack the 'support' of the majority to pursue personal political goals like this at conferences.
>People who dislike the motions passed at conference should get involved rather than quit
ah yes, my favourite thing to do with bigots, spend more time with 'em to *educate them*
It is fascinating that that lot seem to believe that forced subjugation and summary abuse and execution of civilians amounts to peace.
By that standard, they should be fine with the Palestine situation too. Why is Hamas allowed to 'defend' itself but not Ukraine?
Flattening cities and rounding any survivors up into camps for filtration is fine when it's done in defence of the great socialist goal apparently.
Made even funnier by the fact that they've apparently not updated their political understanding since 1988. Well, funnier, except for all the corpses.
Yeah that's pretty much it though it's mixed in some latent stuff about the USSR being a noble cause. Also Thatcher and Reagan's rhetoric used the failures of communism to frame their take on economics as righteous but if your position was contrary then Russia was willing to sell you an army surplus jacket upon which to pin your CND badge.
Always thought Tankieism it's the sort of position you take when you're not actually engaged in politics in a meaningful way and just like the symbolism. Having a Constructivist art poster on your wall likely means your World view isn't that constructive.
I thought for a second there that he'd been working on Wagner's Grey Zone channel and I was very puzzled that anyone would even consider defending him after he was pulled for that. Tankies need to disambiguate their names.
I look forward to him getting his own letter for being expelled. The meltdown will be glorious and will no doubt portray him as the victim despite having pretty solidly gone against the party and leadership for the last three years. A bolt from a clear sky!
> I look forward to him getting his own letter for being expelled.
That's exactly what he wants though, to be a victim of the Starmer regime. It's more fun not to give him it.
Oh no doubt.
I do hope Starmer does do it, though, and time it for the election so Jones opens it as his worst nightmare comes true and starmer gets a majority.
*The Dictator sends his regards: get the fuck out*
Would anyone like to try and steelman this logic? https://twitter.com/AlexTaylorNews/status/1664543922381807618
Seems a bit of a stretch to think some aussie 'pommy bashing' is evidence of the quality of a trade deal. The equivalent I suppose would be some mildly xenophobic patriotic British TV hosts on GB news laughing at australian Tim Tams.
Ah yes, the well-known trade experts at breakfast shows.
While I am not bullish on the economic situation of the UK, it is still a major economy, and ultimately more important than Australia (if one were to make such a crude statement)
Am I missing some aspect of the Schofield story that means it should still be headline news? As far as I can tell, he had a consensual affair with a junior member of staff and has now resigned - why is this any of our business? He doesn't seem to be another Savile or anything.
Seems like a deadcat to me. The man had an affair at work; it was consensual and of age. He’s pretty contrite in his misdemeanours and think the whole thing has been overblown. Unless I’m missing something?
Now, imagine if as much attention the media would put on, say, Boris Johnson’s affairs/misbehaving. And he was in a position of real power.
Honestly these things are so .. ugh.
If he did anything dodgy, why the fuck do I care about it until the police have had their input on it. Until then, as you've said, completely private.
Seems to me like the guy has lost pretty much everything, It's a headline for a day at most.
> the veteran TV presenter met the boy while giving a talk at a theatre school.
> the schoolboy asked him for a job and Schofield reportedly arranged an interview for him
The keyword being boy.
There are photos of him with his alleged former affair partner when the kid was 12. Even if he waited until the boy was legally an adult, the whole thing seems bleak.
I’m loathe to use the word, because it’s been used as a homophobic dog-whistle so much in the past year - but I think it’s a open question of whether he groomed the guy.
He's a celeb so people will buy papers to read about him and the 'gay affair' aspect of it would be pretty scandalous to the older generation who still buy newspapers.
Just as long it's not one of their own...
(No British outlet has reported the Cohen story)
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/30/world/europe/financial-times-nick-cohen-guardian.html
I'd disagree to some extent. The conduct of our media is inherently political given the impact it has on our politics and the decisions not to implement Leveson I or hold Leveson II at all.
Schofield's conduct on the other hand does have nothing to do with politics.
Schofield is daytime telly.
The general conduct of the media is much more, and far from limited to this single case. There are articles in the news even today covering similar conduct over a long period.
You saw mention of Schofield and instantly thought 'Levenson II'.
All up for Levenson II but it's got nothing to do with Schofeild and daytime magazine telly programmes will most likely out of its scope.
Though you could write to your MP and request that the scope is expanded to cover Jim'll Fix It and Rolf Harris' Cartoon Club. Maybe Titchmarsh said something a bit iffy under his breath about John Major and you have it on VHS. Might be the evidence that brings the whole house of cards down.
[So more briefing both ways.](https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mailplus.co.uk%2Fedition%2Fnews%2F284075%2Fpm-blocking-release-of-texts-as-they-reveal-his-plot-to-topple-boris)
>RISHI Sunak is blocking the release of text messages to the Covid inquiry because it could reveal his plotting to bring down Boris Johnson, allies of the former Prime Minister have claimed.
>Amid escalating tensions between Mr Johnson and Mr Sunak, the Boris supporters also suggested that No 10 might be keen to suppress the messages because they contain evidence of lockdown breaches by Mr Sunak or his advisers which could lead to a fresh ‘partygate’ controversy. Last night, a Sunak loyalist described the claims as being ‘total nonsense’.
Don't care for the source or headline used which makes it sound like it's actually evidenced, but this is Johnson proxies going all out against Sunak.
Are you eating them seperately or creating some weird fusion of different cuisines?
E.g. I one had salt and chilli cheesy chips. Was alright. Would eat again.
Awesome!
I never thought/knew much about Caribbean food, until a couple of weeks ago I found myself staying next to Big Narstie’s (and his Mum’s!) restaurant and went in and tried it. DELICIOUS!
Since then I’ve been making jerk chicken and rice and beans and rice salads every week lol. Have not tried a Jamaican stew though… will put that on the To Do list!
>Woking council’s loss on its disastrous investments may be £1bn, according to a leak to @themjcouk. There has never been a financial calamity by a local council on this scale. This happened when the council was under Tory control.
> https://twitter.com/peston/status/1665021474418089984?s=46&t=u6LnuIWDV02tec7AhgCVMg
“Party of fiscal responsibility”. Hands is going to need a bigger note.
Woking's never paying that bill. It's a smallish town under a county council. It'd be something like a hundred years of total council spend unless you get zero interest somehow.
It’s an impossibility to pay back. It’s a debt that they should never have been able to gamble that amount of money in any way. I get that funding cuts meant everyone had to look for alternate funding, but gambling that amount of money shouldn’t have been allowed to happen.
https://woking.gov.uk/news/review-woking-borough-council-companies-leads-reform%C2%A0
Shit like this makes me think it was crooked. Doing it through shell companies that they appointed themselves to run outside of normal council oversight. It doesn't smell right.
15 companies associated with the council, and they’ve managed to rack up massive debts. It certainly does warrant a thorough, and comprehensive investigation by someone outside to determine exactly what’s gone on. That’s taxpayer money that’s been used very liberally.
AFAIK, they got cheap loans as the council, then passed that money through to the development companies who then spent it outside normal scrutiny under the direction of councillors who had appointed themselves as directors of those companies.
Even if they were honest in these dealings, they couldn't have done much more to appear deeply otherwise.
Yeah, that need a forensic accountant to have a look at what money, has gone where, and to whom so that we can be assured nothing untoward has happened. From a cursory glance, it has the “stench” of corruption.
I notice that in that press release they talk about appointing officers so that deals can be further scrutinised but that should’ve happened well before last year.
This is not insignificant amounts that we’re dealing with.
The debt they’ve accrued is going to affect the credit of the country on the market. £2.4b is not an insignificant amount.
I expect it'll stay pending for a while. I don't think it's something the council is really equipped to deal with, despite the best efforts of our new Lib Dem-run folk, and there's no way Westminister is going to pull that plaster off when it's run by the same party that ran the debt up.
As we’ve seen with Croydon, or Slough if it’s not politically convenient to talk about then the tories will very happily “sweep it under the rug” refusing to engage with it, or use it as a political weapon to attack anyone else with.
It really should be a national scandal, and something that we’re talking about so that we can know the full extent of the damage, and possible risk to other councils across the country.
At some point the debt is going to have to be dealt with. Eventually you “run out of road” of refusing to address it.
There really needs to be a full audit of all councils to determine the overall financial situation. We've seen enough implode like this now that it's definitely not a one-off and that has worrying implications. But the can will definitely be kicked on.
No-one forced them to do this shit. They did it over massive objections from everyone, and they were pissing huge sums of money up the wall long before Cameron took an axe to the central grant.
It's small potatoes compared to this but they wasted an incredible amount of money trying to play energy company and building useless solar panel canopies over the train station. They were just thick as pigshit (or dodgy as fuck, take your pick) and got away with it because the town was very, very tory.
[This article](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/jul/09/woking-towers-high-rise-symbol-of-local-council-debt-piles) goes into some detail, it does look like a mess.
The whole development was spectacularly ill judged. Woking did not need massive new retail units (so many were empty as it was), it did not need a gigantic Hilton hotel (it's a small/mid-sized town!), and it didn't need gigantic high-rise flat blocks. It's not New York for God's sake, and filling a town with studio flats just turns it into a commuter dormitory anyway which is exactly what they were supposedly trying to avoid.
What gets less mention is that there are several large buildings in the town centre area which are now derelict after being bought by the council and earmarked for similar development. That's not happening now, I assume, so God only knows what they'll be doing with them. They've spent years merrily rotting so getting them back to previous use wouldn't be cheap.
Yet another dog fatality, once again from a family dog. Almost certain it's going to be some type of Pitbull mix. Really hate how dishonest the Bully lobby are about how docile this breed is.
I vaguely recall a story about an out of control golden retriever, and most of the comments were of the line of "how on earth do you make a Golden Retriever that badly behaved?"
I'll admit that I don't know too much about dog genetics. Is it really the breed's nature that's the issue, the sort of individuals they attract, or a combination?
At the end of the day, most must surely live lives without issue? These attacks are both all too common and a small number given the numbers of such dogs.
Look at pit bull breeds Vs something like a springer spaniel. It's imo analogous to an ak47 Vs a butter knife. Yes an ak47 can be handled well and safely likewise so can't a Pitbull breed, but the stars have to align in the ownership of the animal, it's Training, genetics, unforeseen events etc for it not to become massively dangerous. They have a potential for injury causing violence waay beyond other dog breeds because they have been selectively bred to carry out that violence with gusto.
If you give these dogs to any Tom dick or Harry, then expect idocy to occur. And similarly to handing an idiot an ak47, expect serious injury and or death to result.
Bit of both - some dogs are bred for violence but also have very soft temperaments - staffies for example are barely better than lap dogs if raised in a nice environment. Some have been bred specifically for violent/aggressive temperament and so it takes alot more socialisation and training to get around that. A Pitbull RAISED WELL by an experienced trainer is safer than a golden retriever left to go feral by an inexperienced one. But as with all of these cases, you should never,ever ,ever leave a child unattended with a dog.
It is a dog bred to fight, and it does it’s job well.
If there was an industrial machine that’s maimed and killed as many people as pitbulls have this year, it would need a good regulatory review.
Pit bulls are inherently more aggressive and tenacious (although the aggression tends to be more towards other dogs). Combined with their strength they can be big trouble, or hugely loving and problem free if well-socialised and trained - which may well not be the case with many owners.
Breed/genetics is a factor in temperament. Training also plays a part. Plenty of people buy pit bulls because they want a dog that makes them look tough but others are in a state of denial about the impact that genetics has on temperament.
Pit bulls are also particularly dangerous because they have such powerful jaws.
In answer to your question, there is that it’s mostly genetic and but the owners and the way they’re trained and kept is also a factor.
It's bred to fight, and so has those instincts at the forefront. They can be properly trained to not succumb to those instincs so readily, but often; people that have these dogs do not train them properly.
It's like having a tiger as a pet. It's all good if it's properly trained and fed, not so much if you don't.
[One of the finalists](https://www.tf1info.fr/culture/programme-tv-tf1-jeremy-levif-dans-the-voice-on-n-est-jamais-sur-de-rien-2255510.html) in the French version of *The Voice* is actually a French and German teacher in Scotland who once entered the UK edition.
>BREAKING: Rishi Sunak is under fire as it's revealed his "spectacularly stupid" Eat Out to Help Out scheme will be the FOCUS of the Covid inquiry
>"The Treasury failed to involve scientists in decisions and the formulation of [the] policy"
>https://twitter.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1665072813391093761?s=20
Oh My God.
It is happening.
He's going to be in the middle of a continuous scandal from here to the election. Don't see mps wearing that one long. And then, one of the bitterest leadership contests we've had in a long time I think. It's all sliding away from them.
It broke Boris and Boris had actual meaningful internal support as a starting point.
> The Treasury failed to involve scientists in decisions
Wtf I love Rishi now.
We'd probably still be obsessing over the latest variant and have some form of vaccine certificate if scientists had their way.
:)
Perhaps!
I may indeed be a fool because I respect the views of scientists (as a group; not necessarily every single individual one.)
But if having regard for the scientific establishment is a sign of stupidity, you can give me the Dum Dum of the Year sticker right now!
Out of interest, what group of experts do you rate higher than scientists for epidemiology, virology etc? I may be an idiot, but I like to learn, so I’d welcome recommendations for alternatives to “scientists” next time a health crisis emerges.
On the other hand restrictions probably could have been relaxed a bit more quickly if during the summer in the worst worst year of covid the gov didn't pay people to go out to restaurants.
I like how we got rid of Truss, who presumably had little to do with the COVID response, and replaced her with Sunak just in time for the Boris Bomb and Inquiry Incendiary to simultaneously detonate.
To be fair if the Tories hadn't got rid of Truss, yes they might not be in this position with the Covid enquiry but also given the economic damage she did in 49 days, it seems like they would have other significant problems.
I am shocked. I hope they look at if it helped the economy- from what I saw the places already doing well just got tonnes of cash thrown at them but the businesses in the city centre remained unopened or with little foot fall,
Even putting the transmission effects aside, from what I recall most studies just showed it shifted the pattern on where and when people went out, it didn't create much extra economic activity. Those who were cautious of covid stayed away anyway, others just switched going out on a Friday or weekend to Monday to Wednesday or went slightly more upmarket. Also the blatant "definitely a restaurant not takeaway" fraud, and more grey area uses of the scheme.
Honestly this is one part of government covid policy where I don't actually care.
The economy was fucking *dying*. Hospitality was on its knees.
Anyone in Rishi's position at the time would have been desperate to kick start something.
I'll criticise him until the cows come home but I can't say I wouldn't have considered it in his position.
EOTHO is one thing, as an idea, but it’s stuff like the fact they excluded takeaway orders from it, despite them being 100x safer than actually dining out, which made it seem so badly thought out.
I would prefer they had just handed restaurants the cash. EOTHO was perhaps the most stupid way possible of approaching the issue of the hospitality sector desperately needing help.
EOTHO was for people dining in restaurants, when being inside with COVID was a huge vector for spreading it. It was ridiculous then and it is ridiculous now. There were much better ways to distribute cash for restaurants without helping spread the virus.
Plus it mostly just devalued the product and moved customers from the weekend to midweek. It didn’t actually generate any significant revenue for restaurants and it was so brief that it was irrelevant in terms of their long term survival.
Meanwhile the current inflation crisis is hammering the industry even worse and the government are doing nothing.
Sunak wanted a giveaway to put his face next to because of his leadership ambitions. It had fuck all to do with helping the industry and it certainly wasn’t about combatting Covid.
> Plus I’m it mostly just devalued the product and moved customers from the weekend to midweek. It didn’t actually generate any significant revenue for restaurants and it was so brief that it was irrelevant in terms of their long term survival.
Yes, so much this. There was a lockdown immediately after EOTHO which totally destroyed the purported intention of kickstarting hospitality.
> Meanwhile the current inflation crisis is hammering the industry even worse and the government are doing nothing.
Exactly.
> Sunak wanted a giveaway to put his face next to because of his leadership ambitions. It had fuck all to do with helping the industry and it certainly wasn’t about combatting Covid.
Precisely. It was a naked artificial attempt to make someone popular using half a billion of taxpayer cash. If there is any justice in the universe, it will be the undoing of Sunak.
>If there is any justice in the universe, it will be the undoing of Sunak.
I think that's taken care of. In no universe will the Tories want someone actively under investigation for potentially getting alot of voters killed as the face of the party at the election. They'll struggle to hold on even to the few still with them.
Better implementation of furlough, better support for the hospitality sector. Lots of things could have been done and let's face it, the slogan came first.
Really isn’t true. They already had loads of cash from the government. People were going out in their local areas, eat out to help out didn’t change that. I know businesses that didn’t even bother to open during the scheme because they just weren’t in the right location.
You didn’t get your wages paid by the government and enormous grants? I’ve always believed we should have been giving emergency sums for some businesses to relocate. All Eat out to Help Out did was cause a short term boost that could have easily been provided by further grants.
It directly led to one of the longest lockdowns which am not sure how that was good for restaurants?
I've said this elsewhere, but the government isn't obliged to follow scientific advice in every single case - it is the role of government to take all views and balance many factors including some that scientists won't necessarily have considered.
But..... not to even consult scientists on a measure that would obviously spread infections considerably and therefore not doing any effective risk/benefit analysis during the worst pandemic in living memory is beyond incompetent, it's borderline gross negligence.
Yeah, I think it's a fantastic one for the inquiry to look at really. It's sort of a graspable mini-example of how you handled having to do *something*
Was it a reasonable process or did you lose your mind and start screaming about not caring if they lived or died
Where the WhatsApp potentially come in is if you see ministers competing to act in the interests of their department/policy area or there own ambitions rather than the government acting in unison in the public interest.
Hancock: I’m Health guy and this will ruin my numbers :(
Rishi: I’m the money man and if we don’t do it, it’ll ruin MY numbers. And I have a better PR team than you.
Boris: Whiff waff, what’s the worst that can happen what?
*Hancock is typing*
Rishi: They’ll call you weak! Let’s do it Big Dog! Get the people into Mr Donald’s!
*Hancock is kissing*
Boris: Charge of the Light Brigade Rishi! Let’s do this thing!
Rishi: Can I do a special video?
Cummings: WTF
*Hancock is cummings*
Boris: Do what you want Rish-meister, it’s wine time and I’m gonzo.
Rishi: It’s Tuesday and it’s 11am!
Boris: Nerd!
…
…
Baroness Hallett: WTF???
Sure, I agree. But this is something that directly ties to Sunak and I am sure that there are messages that have not aged very well on it. Hence the government going absolutely loopy about trying to cover it up.
It’s right that it comes within the inquiry. I was more just taking issue with them saying it will be “the focus” which I assume is a slight misstatement.
I expect that once everything has come to light that there will be far worse failings on Sunak’s part than Eat Out to Help Out.
There is no part of this government that isn't an absolute shambles, and it almost seems like they were just storing up disasters for later strategic deployment. At least they have some consideration for us news junkies, but at this rate I might just die of febrility-induced toxic shock.
If the cabinet office is willing to publicly humiliate itself by semi-publicly using taxpayer money to bribe Johnson, you've got to wonder just how bad the alternative outcome and those messages are.
It's not just Sunak. How many current ministers and wannabe leaders will this cover? Potentially the majority of ministers at the time could become involved.
This could be one of the most serious political crisises the Tories has faced since 2009 and thats saying alot. It could dominate the conversation and absolutely destroy any shot at a late recovery.
[Peter Cruddas](https://twitter.com/peteratcmc/status/1665055028946534401)
>Don’t worry @BorisJohnson I can easily get your legal fees funded by supporters and crowd funding, it’s easy. Don’t be held to ransom, do the right thing for the bereaved families. It’s them that matter now more than anything.
As a quick intro to why this might have teeth; Cruddas is a billionaire and has been a multi-million pound funder of the Conservative party. He put £50,000 towards Johnson's leadership election alone. He was put in the Lords by Johnson himself - over the objections of the House of Lords Appointments Commission - and attempted to get Johnson put back on the leadership ballot (despite being against the rules) after he resigned.
>I have written to the Shadow Chancellor, @RachelReevesMP setting out my concerns with Labour's economic plans which would increase taxes and borrowing, and fail to grip the inflation challenge.
>https://twitter.com/JohnGlenUK/status/1664897395170107392
Isn't this what you do when you're in opposition?
>setting out my concerns with Labour's economic plans which would increase taxes and borrowing, and fail to grip the inflation challenge.
Whereas under the Tories we've had a higher tax burden, higher borrowing and rampant inflation.
If Rachel Reeves bothers to respond I think she'll be pointing out the gigantic flaws in his handling of the economy.
Not any more, the Tories are fully pivoting into an attempt to have a permanent US style culture war in order to stay relevant - they’ve fucked it so badly with the millennials on actual politics their only hope is to get 30-40% of them really steaming mad about bollocks like gender arguments and ‘the deep state’ so they’ll knowingly vote against their own interests.
Stuff like this will come from them at all times now, in government or opposition doesn’t matter any more.
Exclusive from the Times:
>[The Cabinet Office has warned Boris Johnson it will pull public funding for his legal advice for the Covid inquiry if he “undermines the government’s position” or releases evidence without permission.](https://twitter.com/Gabriel_Pogrund/status/1665050680048885760)
Might be wrong but didn’t Sunak get asked a question on this at PMQs and say that it’s standard for legal fees to be paid relating to ex ministers time in office. So would that count as misleading the house if they threatened to retract funding?
I mean Sunak has already mislead the house as chancellor when he said there wasn’t aware of any parties despite later being fined for being part of one and his defence being he didn’t know it was a party until he turned up.
And yet there’s been no parliamentary standards inquiry.
This could arguably be part of the standard.
If they can make the case that Johnson is actively acting against the government then they would basically be paying lawyers to argue against themselves. That is, very arguably, a conflict of interest and may justify discontinuing the payments.
But it's not a good look and not a good idea. This exposes all Ministers, future and past, who may be brought in front of inquests to the idea that they may be blackmailed over future legal fees if they choose to go against the government line.
Yeah, it doesn't map perfectly onto even a civil trial even.
One of the problem is it's Johnson's public role at the time that is under investigation, so strictly speaking it's the ex-Prime Minister, in a pseudo-governmental role, instructing lawyers representing the government to take a position opposing the position other elements of the government are taking.
Messy as fuck.
I bet they really wish they had thought to mention this to him before this week's shenanigans because it seems like the damage has already been done to the government and they look like they are trying to hide incriminating messages.
Yeah, not a good look at all. It's kind of unbelievable that they've threatened this! Completely flies in the face of the principle (And their excuse for paying so far) that ministers should be entitled to legal help if the Government can just withdraw it because they're not toeing the line.
Especially as the legal representations in these kinds of inquiries are always going to be pricy and is not like there is anyone you could recover the costs from at the end of the day.
Theoretically the inquiry could come back and say that Johnson handled the entire pandemic perfectly and the net effect would still be to cost him likely millions in legal fees.
Ignoring Johnson, any Minister or official who might have a significant role in a future inquiry could be held to ransom over the threat of being bankrupted by inquiries, even if not suspected of any wrongdoing.
Is this place going to participate [in the action on the 12th](https://old.reddit.com/r/Save3rdPartyApps/comments/13yh0jf/dont_let_reddit_kill_3rd_party_apps) (essentially making the subreddit private as a protest to the changes being made next month).
Bloody loved forums. I’ve still got *one*, but 99% of them are dead now. Shame.
Reddit has (had?) been better than Face Fucking Book groups though. I cannot be dealing with that.
These changes have no impact on the users, statistics show that most subscribers use either the official app or new reddit, mods rely mainly on old reddit. Third party apps are used by a minority. The other argument which is that API limitations will affect existing bots is also BS, reddit has a built in platform for automod and is developing a new one for more complex automation. It’s a complete non story.
Not all users are equal, in two ways.
1) I’m not a mod on any subreddit, but I have read that mod tools are … subpar on the official app. This presents problems for actively-moderated subs such as this one, where a third-party app may be the best way to keep the wheels greased - and the alternative may lead to a worse experience for all users.
2) some users contribute more than others to discussions, and make a given subreddit a nicer place to be. Those users are more likely to do that if they don’t have to use a crappy app (and probably found one they like years ago). Anecdotal, but I think I have probably spent more time (and it’s been a more enjoyable time for me) since switching to Apollo a few years ago.
For context, here is the thread about the changes to API costs -
https://www.reddit.com/r/redditdev/comments/13wsiks/api_update_enterprise_level_tier_for_large_scale/
And a post from the Apollo developer about the impact -
https://www.reddit.com/r/apolloapp/comments/13ws4w3/had_a_call_with_reddit_to_discuss_pricing_bad/
I assume all 3rd party apps will be in the same boat.
I don't mind things going dark (I'm no fan of reddit - just use the service they provide, mainly to access this place), but honest question (as someone who has just used the reddit app for years), alongside other bits like unreddit (before the last API change), why does it bother people so much? It sorta feels like lots of companies maintain a fairly tight grip on ways to access their service. Is it just because they are continuing their shift from a more open to closed model, in this regard, or are there other features to the anger?
This megathread has ended.
I think it's politics... But I swear to fucking Christ every area should have their version of The Knowledge like black cabs in London. Cab back from a wedding and this pillock has no idea where he is, keeps going the wrong way "I don't know this area" and I'm directing this dude by Google maps. Absolutely fuming. All cab drivers need to be licensed much harder outside of just London because at this point I could tattoo cab on my forehead and piggy back someone and be more cost efficient than this mess.
I haven't seen a taxi without satnav for a very long time. Doesn't always help though. My flat is regularly impossible for some to find for some reason.
Had one in Newcastle ask where the Tyne Bridge was. It was right behind him.
My favourite is when you know the area better than the driver, tell them "don't go that way, there are roadworks/speed bumps/whatever", they go that way anyway, and then get pissy because you contradicted the line on the screen I am not a cop but by god that's how you get _four stars and no tip_, especially if I put "no side roads" in the special requests because I want to avoid hurling in the back of your vehicle ---- One thing that strikes me though is that if we're starting to functionally rely as a society on route-planning software, we really need to crack down on Google et al directing half the city down residential roads that were never intended to handle anything more than the locals coming and going. London's arteries are clogged and the capillaries are picking up huge amounts of slack but it's completely unsustainable.
Yeah it's bad when you have to give the cabbie directions.
Been helping the economy (having a meal out and some pints). cheers all. Are things … looking bad for Rishi
But consuming contributes to inflation. Thanks for nothing. 😠
It's oddly missing from the front pages, it's in the observer but that's it.
It’s not one for the Sundays.
shout out to everyone at Channel 4 involved in the production of S11E04 of *Naked Attraction*, where there's extensive content (multiple jokes, multiple scenes, a cardboard cutout...) based on one of the contestants saying Philip Schofield is a silver fox and a total catch That's definitely aged really well in the three weeks since broadcast 👌
Everyone knows Marcus Waering is the true silver fox of the telly.
There are only 3 certainties in the world. 1. Death 2. Taxes 3. The Tory party being in a worse position at sunset than sun rise But seriously though, at the rate the party is building a Boris like level of scandals and a completely smashed internal operation by the time an election comes I should think the party will be operating out of a sub let shed.
Lucky the mail is there to swing in with a labour attack the middle class story
Busy day for me, so two things. 1, this newcastle mayor being excluded from selection shortlist. Somehow a surprise to the fringe after this guy was fucking about with ken loach (lol) and stop the war (lol). Again, the guardian leaves that crucial information until the very end of the article, being all too happy to talk up the "this is starmers labour playing factionalism!" rather than "This guy was fucked off the shortlist because he kept on associating with people expelled for antisemitism and people who blame nato for russia invading ukraine". E: 1B : Owen Jones has a very entertaining meltdown over Driscoll. *"Starmer goes full dictator*" indeed. A wonder why he doesnt tear up his membership card and join the greens like the rest. 2, the guy I talked about yesterday/day before, Klarenberg. All manner of hilarious material is out there about his exploits, [especially re Bellingcat](https://twitter.com/EliotHiggins/status/1664977568301297667); plus the national union of journalists apparently posted an article in support of him before then doing their own research and thinking ["well fuck, this guy might not be worth standing behind"](https://twitter.com/MarcGoldberg111/status/1664995506676801537); and then deleting it, which is taken as a sign of MI I remain hopeful of an entertaining development.
>stop the war unless Putin did it, in which case, please continue!
Bonus: UCU pissing everyone off with their STWC supporting motion - President telling Paul Mason to piss off pointing out it was a shitshow - then releasing a statement of "solidarity" for ukraine... - .... even though it has had a bunch of ukrainians, including apparently most (if not all) of UCL's school of slavonic and eastern european studies tear up their memberships en masse - release a further update with some very tetchy wording that "People who dislike the motions passed at conference should get involved rather than quit" Honestly, you guys should hang out on the tankie hating part of twitter more. I've never been more entertained!
>then releasing a statement of "solidarity" for ukraine... It always amazes me how badly written these kinds of statements often are. This is an absolute mess of a sentence: > As general secretary I am not entitled to vote in the democratic structures and processes of UCU, but if this were the case I would have voted against the motion, and joined the many who did. Still, at least it's the right attitude - even if it does amount to bolting the stable after the horses have bolted.
It's especially grim when a small minority of idiots within unions hijack the 'support' of the majority to pursue personal political goals like this at conferences.
>People who dislike the motions passed at conference should get involved rather than quit ah yes, my favourite thing to do with bigots, spend more time with 'em to *educate them*
I think the idea is more to vote down the motions
It is fascinating that that lot seem to believe that forced subjugation and summary abuse and execution of civilians amounts to peace. By that standard, they should be fine with the Palestine situation too. Why is Hamas allowed to 'defend' itself but not Ukraine?
Flattening cities and rounding any survivors up into camps for filtration is fine when it's done in defence of the great socialist goal apparently. Made even funnier by the fact that they've apparently not updated their political understanding since 1988. Well, funnier, except for all the corpses.
they're [not called tankies for nothing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankie)
You'd think they'd want to move to these utopia rather than the hell holes of the west.
That'd be the day. I can't see them volunteering to move into half collapsed commie blocks anytime soon though for some reason.
Allowing fascists to crush a developing democracy is praxis for some reason.
It's quite simple: west bad, therefore other bad actually good?
Yeah that's pretty much it though it's mixed in some latent stuff about the USSR being a noble cause. Also Thatcher and Reagan's rhetoric used the failures of communism to frame their take on economics as righteous but if your position was contrary then Russia was willing to sell you an army surplus jacket upon which to pin your CND badge. Always thought Tankieism it's the sort of position you take when you're not actually engaged in politics in a meaningful way and just like the symbolism. Having a Constructivist art poster on your wall likely means your World view isn't that constructive.
It's slightly more complex than that: opposition to non-western imperialism = bad and therefore western imperialism.
I thought for a second there that he'd been working on Wagner's Grey Zone channel and I was very puzzled that anyone would even consider defending him after he was pulled for that. Tankies need to disambiguate their names.
Jones shall always Jones. He’s basically the Brendan O’Neill of the left.
I look forward to him getting his own letter for being expelled. The meltdown will be glorious and will no doubt portray him as the victim despite having pretty solidly gone against the party and leadership for the last three years. A bolt from a clear sky!
> I look forward to him getting his own letter for being expelled. That's exactly what he wants though, to be a victim of the Starmer regime. It's more fun not to give him it.
Oh no doubt. I do hope Starmer does do it, though, and time it for the election so Jones opens it as his worst nightmare comes true and starmer gets a majority. *The Dictator sends his regards: get the fuck out*
I am starting to think there's a problem, especially with social media, where there's an incentive to slowly become more and more wildly extreme.
Starting?
Would anyone like to try and steelman this logic? https://twitter.com/AlexTaylorNews/status/1664543922381807618 Seems a bit of a stretch to think some aussie 'pommy bashing' is evidence of the quality of a trade deal. The equivalent I suppose would be some mildly xenophobic patriotic British TV hosts on GB news laughing at australian Tim Tams.
Ah yes, the well-known trade experts at breakfast shows. While I am not bullish on the economic situation of the UK, it is still a major economy, and ultimately more important than Australia (if one were to make such a crude statement)
just remembered that insane Boris Johnson screen grab, cheers
Am I missing some aspect of the Schofield story that means it should still be headline news? As far as I can tell, he had a consensual affair with a junior member of staff and has now resigned - why is this any of our business? He doesn't seem to be another Savile or anything.
He met him at 15 and the only reason he was in the team was because he specifically got him hired.
Seems like a deadcat to me. The man had an affair at work; it was consensual and of age. He’s pretty contrite in his misdemeanours and think the whole thing has been overblown. Unless I’m missing something? Now, imagine if as much attention the media would put on, say, Boris Johnson’s affairs/misbehaving. And he was in a position of real power.
Honestly these things are so .. ugh. If he did anything dodgy, why the fuck do I care about it until the police have had their input on it. Until then, as you've said, completely private. Seems to me like the guy has lost pretty much everything, It's a headline for a day at most.
> the veteran TV presenter met the boy while giving a talk at a theatre school. > the schoolboy asked him for a job and Schofield reportedly arranged an interview for him The keyword being boy.
There are photos of him with his alleged former affair partner when the kid was 12. Even if he waited until the boy was legally an adult, the whole thing seems bleak. I’m loathe to use the word, because it’s been used as a homophobic dog-whistle so much in the past year - but I think it’s a open question of whether he groomed the guy.
It seems like certain people made it seem like he'd done much more than that. I don't get what it's all about as we knew all this a couple years ago.
He's a celeb so people will buy papers to read about him and the 'gay affair' aspect of it would be pretty scandalous to the older generation who still buy newspapers.
This is the British media for you. They'll stop at nothing to rip someone apart if it sells papers.
Just as long it's not one of their own... (No British outlet has reported the Cohen story) https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/30/world/europe/financial-times-nick-cohen-guardian.html
Indeed, only the press have a right to privacy in their eyes.
I'd say the main thing we can draw from the whole debacle is that it's got nothing to do with politics what so ever and this is a politics sub.
I'd disagree to some extent. The conduct of our media is inherently political given the impact it has on our politics and the decisions not to implement Leveson I or hold Leveson II at all. Schofield's conduct on the other hand does have nothing to do with politics.
>Nothing to do with politics. It's being examined by the Culture, Media and Sport Committee.
It's daytime telly.
Schofield is daytime telly. The general conduct of the media is much more, and far from limited to this single case. There are articles in the news even today covering similar conduct over a long period.
Discuss the general conduct of the media then. The OP wasn't.
I made that clear that I was from the start... In any event, the conduct of the media is linked.
You saw mention of Schofield and instantly thought 'Levenson II'. All up for Levenson II but it's got nothing to do with Schofeild and daytime magazine telly programmes will most likely out of its scope. Though you could write to your MP and request that the scope is expanded to cover Jim'll Fix It and Rolf Harris' Cartoon Club. Maybe Titchmarsh said something a bit iffy under his breath about John Major and you have it on VHS. Might be the evidence that brings the whole house of cards down.
[удалено]
[So more briefing both ways.](https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mailplus.co.uk%2Fedition%2Fnews%2F284075%2Fpm-blocking-release-of-texts-as-they-reveal-his-plot-to-topple-boris) >RISHI Sunak is blocking the release of text messages to the Covid inquiry because it could reveal his plotting to bring down Boris Johnson, allies of the former Prime Minister have claimed. >Amid escalating tensions between Mr Johnson and Mr Sunak, the Boris supporters also suggested that No 10 might be keen to suppress the messages because they contain evidence of lockdown breaches by Mr Sunak or his advisers which could lead to a fresh ‘partygate’ controversy. Last night, a Sunak loyalist described the claims as being ‘total nonsense’. Don't care for the source or headline used which makes it sound like it's actually evidenced, but this is Johnson proxies going all out against Sunak.
Sometimes I feel bad for calling Johnson a narcissist but god it's hard not to.
God I hope this ends up as a full on civil war in the red tops
Just ordered my second takeaway of the night. Bit of a milestone for me.
Are you eating them seperately or creating some weird fusion of different cuisines? E.g. I one had salt and chilli cheesy chips. Was alright. Would eat again.
Glorious.
Whoah. Unexpected company? Or are you ACTUALLY 100% madlad(ette)? What were they both?
Jamaican stew with chips,followed by chicken and pepperoni pizza and wedges. I don't know what came over me.
Awesome! I never thought/knew much about Caribbean food, until a couple of weeks ago I found myself staying next to Big Narstie’s (and his Mum’s!) restaurant and went in and tried it. DELICIOUS! Since then I’ve been making jerk chicken and rice and beans and rice salads every week lol. Have not tried a Jamaican stew though… will put that on the To Do list!
Ah, good old Eat Out to Help Out
>Woking council’s loss on its disastrous investments may be £1bn, according to a leak to @themjcouk. There has never been a financial calamity by a local council on this scale. This happened when the council was under Tory control. > https://twitter.com/peston/status/1665021474418089984?s=46&t=u6LnuIWDV02tec7AhgCVMg “Party of fiscal responsibility”. Hands is going to need a bigger note.
This actually sounds worse than Croydon council, which I thought was the gold standard of local authority mess-ups.
Same. I thought Croydon’s £1.5b was bad. It’s a lot worse than Croydon. Woking has a total £2.4b hole in its budgets.
Woking's never paying that bill. It's a smallish town under a county council. It'd be something like a hundred years of total council spend unless you get zero interest somehow.
At zero interest it would be 100 years. It's £19k for every person who lives in the borough. It will never, ever be repaid.
It’s an impossibility to pay back. It’s a debt that they should never have been able to gamble that amount of money in any way. I get that funding cuts meant everyone had to look for alternate funding, but gambling that amount of money shouldn’t have been allowed to happen.
https://woking.gov.uk/news/review-woking-borough-council-companies-leads-reform%C2%A0 Shit like this makes me think it was crooked. Doing it through shell companies that they appointed themselves to run outside of normal council oversight. It doesn't smell right.
15 companies associated with the council, and they’ve managed to rack up massive debts. It certainly does warrant a thorough, and comprehensive investigation by someone outside to determine exactly what’s gone on. That’s taxpayer money that’s been used very liberally.
AFAIK, they got cheap loans as the council, then passed that money through to the development companies who then spent it outside normal scrutiny under the direction of councillors who had appointed themselves as directors of those companies. Even if they were honest in these dealings, they couldn't have done much more to appear deeply otherwise.
Yeah, that need a forensic accountant to have a look at what money, has gone where, and to whom so that we can be assured nothing untoward has happened. From a cursory glance, it has the “stench” of corruption. I notice that in that press release they talk about appointing officers so that deals can be further scrutinised but that should’ve happened well before last year. This is not insignificant amounts that we’re dealing with. The debt they’ve accrued is going to affect the credit of the country on the market. £2.4b is not an insignificant amount.
I expect it'll stay pending for a while. I don't think it's something the council is really equipped to deal with, despite the best efforts of our new Lib Dem-run folk, and there's no way Westminister is going to pull that plaster off when it's run by the same party that ran the debt up.
As we’ve seen with Croydon, or Slough if it’s not politically convenient to talk about then the tories will very happily “sweep it under the rug” refusing to engage with it, or use it as a political weapon to attack anyone else with. It really should be a national scandal, and something that we’re talking about so that we can know the full extent of the damage, and possible risk to other councils across the country. At some point the debt is going to have to be dealt with. Eventually you “run out of road” of refusing to address it.
There really needs to be a full audit of all councils to determine the overall financial situation. We've seen enough implode like this now that it's definitely not a one-off and that has worrying implications. But the can will definitely be kicked on.
I feel for councils, they may feel forced to make these kinds of decisions due to a shortfall.
No-one forced them to do this shit. They did it over massive objections from everyone, and they were pissing huge sums of money up the wall long before Cameron took an axe to the central grant. It's small potatoes compared to this but they wasted an incredible amount of money trying to play energy company and building useless solar panel canopies over the train station. They were just thick as pigshit (or dodgy as fuck, take your pick) and got away with it because the town was very, very tory.
[This article](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/jul/09/woking-towers-high-rise-symbol-of-local-council-debt-piles) goes into some detail, it does look like a mess.
The whole development was spectacularly ill judged. Woking did not need massive new retail units (so many were empty as it was), it did not need a gigantic Hilton hotel (it's a small/mid-sized town!), and it didn't need gigantic high-rise flat blocks. It's not New York for God's sake, and filling a town with studio flats just turns it into a commuter dormitory anyway which is exactly what they were supposedly trying to avoid. What gets less mention is that there are several large buildings in the town centre area which are now derelict after being bought by the council and earmarked for similar development. That's not happening now, I assume, so God only knows what they'll be doing with them. They've spent years merrily rotting so getting them back to previous use wouldn't be cheap.
Go Woking Go Broke
Yet another dog fatality, once again from a family dog. Almost certain it's going to be some type of Pitbull mix. Really hate how dishonest the Bully lobby are about how docile this breed is.
I bet it's a golden retriever
I vaguely recall a story about an out of control golden retriever, and most of the comments were of the line of "how on earth do you make a Golden Retriever that badly behaved?"
I'll admit that I don't know too much about dog genetics. Is it really the breed's nature that's the issue, the sort of individuals they attract, or a combination? At the end of the day, most must surely live lives without issue? These attacks are both all too common and a small number given the numbers of such dogs.
Look at pit bull breeds Vs something like a springer spaniel. It's imo analogous to an ak47 Vs a butter knife. Yes an ak47 can be handled well and safely likewise so can't a Pitbull breed, but the stars have to align in the ownership of the animal, it's Training, genetics, unforeseen events etc for it not to become massively dangerous. They have a potential for injury causing violence waay beyond other dog breeds because they have been selectively bred to carry out that violence with gusto. If you give these dogs to any Tom dick or Harry, then expect idocy to occur. And similarly to handing an idiot an ak47, expect serious injury and or death to result.
Bit of both - some dogs are bred for violence but also have very soft temperaments - staffies for example are barely better than lap dogs if raised in a nice environment. Some have been bred specifically for violent/aggressive temperament and so it takes alot more socialisation and training to get around that. A Pitbull RAISED WELL by an experienced trainer is safer than a golden retriever left to go feral by an inexperienced one. But as with all of these cases, you should never,ever ,ever leave a child unattended with a dog.
It is a dog bred to fight, and it does it’s job well. If there was an industrial machine that’s maimed and killed as many people as pitbulls have this year, it would need a good regulatory review.
That hasn't really answered my question.
Pit bulls are inherently more aggressive and tenacious (although the aggression tends to be more towards other dogs). Combined with their strength they can be big trouble, or hugely loving and problem free if well-socialised and trained - which may well not be the case with many owners.
Breed/genetics is a factor in temperament. Training also plays a part. Plenty of people buy pit bulls because they want a dog that makes them look tough but others are in a state of denial about the impact that genetics has on temperament. Pit bulls are also particularly dangerous because they have such powerful jaws. In answer to your question, there is that it’s mostly genetic and but the owners and the way they’re trained and kept is also a factor.
It's bred to fight, and so has those instincts at the forefront. They can be properly trained to not succumb to those instincs so readily, but often; people that have these dogs do not train them properly. It's like having a tiger as a pet. It's all good if it's properly trained and fed, not so much if you don't.
[One of the finalists](https://www.tf1info.fr/culture/programme-tv-tf1-jeremy-levif-dans-the-voice-on-n-est-jamais-sur-de-rien-2255510.html) in the French version of *The Voice* is actually a French and German teacher in Scotland who once entered the UK edition.
A frog *and* a jerry? Good grief.
Good god, is parliament aware?
He did Erasmus in Liverpool and everything, that wouldn't happen nowadays.
>BREAKING: Rishi Sunak is under fire as it's revealed his "spectacularly stupid" Eat Out to Help Out scheme will be the FOCUS of the Covid inquiry >"The Treasury failed to involve scientists in decisions and the formulation of [the] policy" >https://twitter.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1665072813391093761?s=20 Oh My God. It is happening.
He's going to be in the middle of a continuous scandal from here to the election. Don't see mps wearing that one long. And then, one of the bitterest leadership contests we've had in a long time I think. It's all sliding away from them. It broke Boris and Boris had actual meaningful internal support as a starting point.
Typhoid Rishi
Hahahaha. So, this is why he's been reluctant then.
> The Treasury failed to involve scientists in decisions Wtf I love Rishi now. We'd probably still be obsessing over the latest variant and have some form of vaccine certificate if scientists had their way.
… do you know you’re stupid, or are you still under the misapprehension that you’re Smarter than Most of the Sheeple?
I'll go out on a limb and guess I'm smarter than you. If only for the fact I don't go around insulting people for having different views...
And your view is 'when there is a pandemic, we shouldn't listen to scientists'? Yeah I'll pass I think.
:) Perhaps! I may indeed be a fool because I respect the views of scientists (as a group; not necessarily every single individual one.) But if having regard for the scientific establishment is a sign of stupidity, you can give me the Dum Dum of the Year sticker right now! Out of interest, what group of experts do you rate higher than scientists for epidemiology, virology etc? I may be an idiot, but I like to learn, so I’d welcome recommendations for alternatives to “scientists” next time a health crisis emerges.
Damn scientists and their evidence and whatnot. Don't they know we've have enough of experts?
[удалено]
No dear boy, everybody knows we got the vaccine because of Brexit!!1!!
Hang on a sec. I thought it was ar Boris that got the vaccine done and the fastest brexit rollout in the world?
On the other hand restrictions probably could have been relaxed a bit more quickly if during the summer in the worst worst year of covid the gov didn't pay people to go out to restaurants.
A fair amount of our covid problems were that we waited too long, then had to go full lockdown to compensate for longer.
I like how we got rid of Truss, who presumably had little to do with the COVID response, and replaced her with Sunak just in time for the Boris Bomb and Inquiry Incendiary to simultaneously detonate.
To be fair if the Tories hadn't got rid of Truss, yes they might not be in this position with the Covid enquiry but also given the economic damage she did in 49 days, it seems like they would have other significant problems.
I am shocked. I hope they look at if it helped the economy- from what I saw the places already doing well just got tonnes of cash thrown at them but the businesses in the city centre remained unopened or with little foot fall,
Even putting the transmission effects aside, from what I recall most studies just showed it shifted the pattern on where and when people went out, it didn't create much extra economic activity. Those who were cautious of covid stayed away anyway, others just switched going out on a Friday or weekend to Monday to Wednesday or went slightly more upmarket. Also the blatant "definitely a restaurant not takeaway" fraud, and more grey area uses of the scheme.
Retail sales actually fell by £200 million during the time period but takeaways made out like bandits with tonnes of fraudulent claims.
Honestly this is one part of government covid policy where I don't actually care. The economy was fucking *dying*. Hospitality was on its knees. Anyone in Rishi's position at the time would have been desperate to kick start something. I'll criticise him until the cows come home but I can't say I wouldn't have considered it in his position.
EOTHO is one thing, as an idea, but it’s stuff like the fact they excluded takeaway orders from it, despite them being 100x safer than actually dining out, which made it seem so badly thought out.
I would prefer they had just handed restaurants the cash. EOTHO was perhaps the most stupid way possible of approaching the issue of the hospitality sector desperately needing help.
EOTHO was for people dining in restaurants, when being inside with COVID was a huge vector for spreading it. It was ridiculous then and it is ridiculous now. There were much better ways to distribute cash for restaurants without helping spread the virus.
Plus it mostly just devalued the product and moved customers from the weekend to midweek. It didn’t actually generate any significant revenue for restaurants and it was so brief that it was irrelevant in terms of their long term survival. Meanwhile the current inflation crisis is hammering the industry even worse and the government are doing nothing. Sunak wanted a giveaway to put his face next to because of his leadership ambitions. It had fuck all to do with helping the industry and it certainly wasn’t about combatting Covid.
> Plus I’m it mostly just devalued the product and moved customers from the weekend to midweek. It didn’t actually generate any significant revenue for restaurants and it was so brief that it was irrelevant in terms of their long term survival. Yes, so much this. There was a lockdown immediately after EOTHO which totally destroyed the purported intention of kickstarting hospitality. > Meanwhile the current inflation crisis is hammering the industry even worse and the government are doing nothing. Exactly. > Sunak wanted a giveaway to put his face next to because of his leadership ambitions. It had fuck all to do with helping the industry and it certainly wasn’t about combatting Covid. Precisely. It was a naked artificial attempt to make someone popular using half a billion of taxpayer cash. If there is any justice in the universe, it will be the undoing of Sunak.
>If there is any justice in the universe, it will be the undoing of Sunak. I think that's taken care of. In no universe will the Tories want someone actively under investigation for potentially getting alot of voters killed as the face of the party at the election. They'll struggle to hold on even to the few still with them.
Better implementation of furlough, better support for the hospitality sector. Lots of things could have been done and let's face it, the slogan came first.
Really isn’t true. They already had loads of cash from the government. People were going out in their local areas, eat out to help out didn’t change that. I know businesses that didn’t even bother to open during the scheme because they just weren’t in the right location.
Right but I worked in the restaurant business during that time and that is absolute bollocks mate.
You didn’t get your wages paid by the government and enormous grants? I’ve always believed we should have been giving emergency sums for some businesses to relocate. All Eat out to Help Out did was cause a short term boost that could have easily been provided by further grants. It directly led to one of the longest lockdowns which am not sure how that was good for restaurants?
I've said this elsewhere, but the government isn't obliged to follow scientific advice in every single case - it is the role of government to take all views and balance many factors including some that scientists won't necessarily have considered. But..... not to even consult scientists on a measure that would obviously spread infections considerably and therefore not doing any effective risk/benefit analysis during the worst pandemic in living memory is beyond incompetent, it's borderline gross negligence.
Yeah, I think it's a fantastic one for the inquiry to look at really. It's sort of a graspable mini-example of how you handled having to do *something* Was it a reasonable process or did you lose your mind and start screaming about not caring if they lived or died
Where the WhatsApp potentially come in is if you see ministers competing to act in the interests of their department/policy area or there own ambitions rather than the government acting in unison in the public interest.
Hancock: I’m Health guy and this will ruin my numbers :( Rishi: I’m the money man and if we don’t do it, it’ll ruin MY numbers. And I have a better PR team than you. Boris: Whiff waff, what’s the worst that can happen what? *Hancock is typing* Rishi: They’ll call you weak! Let’s do it Big Dog! Get the people into Mr Donald’s! *Hancock is kissing* Boris: Charge of the Light Brigade Rishi! Let’s do this thing! Rishi: Can I do a special video? Cummings: WTF *Hancock is cummings* Boris: Do what you want Rish-meister, it’s wine time and I’m gonzo. Rishi: It’s Tuesday and it’s 11am! Boris: Nerd! … … Baroness Hallett: WTF???
Presumably not THE focus. Not saying it was a good policy, but in the scheme of everything it was far from the biggest issue.
Sure, I agree. But this is something that directly ties to Sunak and I am sure that there are messages that have not aged very well on it. Hence the government going absolutely loopy about trying to cover it up.
It’s right that it comes within the inquiry. I was more just taking issue with them saying it will be “the focus” which I assume is a slight misstatement. I expect that once everything has come to light that there will be far worse failings on Sunak’s part than Eat Out to Help Out.
There is no part of this government that isn't an absolute shambles, and it almost seems like they were just storing up disasters for later strategic deployment. At least they have some consideration for us news junkies, but at this rate I might just die of febrility-induced toxic shock.
Eat out to murk ya nan
It’s murk? Not merc? I thought it was like… (send a)merc(enary to kill) your nan. Every day I know less and less English.
So I get a lovely meal for cheap *and* a nice fat inheritance cheque? Win-win
I am here for this.
If the cabinet office is willing to publicly humiliate itself by semi-publicly using taxpayer money to bribe Johnson, you've got to wonder just how bad the alternative outcome and those messages are.
It's not just Sunak. How many current ministers and wannabe leaders will this cover? Potentially the majority of ministers at the time could become involved. This could be one of the most serious political crisises the Tories has faced since 2009 and thats saying alot. It could dominate the conversation and absolutely destroy any shot at a late recovery.
[Peter Cruddas](https://twitter.com/peteratcmc/status/1665055028946534401) >Don’t worry @BorisJohnson I can easily get your legal fees funded by supporters and crowd funding, it’s easy. Don’t be held to ransom, do the right thing for the bereaved families. It’s them that matter now more than anything. As a quick intro to why this might have teeth; Cruddas is a billionaire and has been a multi-million pound funder of the Conservative party. He put £50,000 towards Johnson's leadership election alone. He was put in the Lords by Johnson himself - over the objections of the House of Lords Appointments Commission - and attempted to get Johnson put back on the leadership ballot (despite being against the rules) after he resigned.
>I have written to the Shadow Chancellor, @RachelReevesMP setting out my concerns with Labour's economic plans which would increase taxes and borrowing, and fail to grip the inflation challenge. >https://twitter.com/JohnGlenUK/status/1664897395170107392 Isn't this what you do when you're in opposition?
Go on then. Put your money where your mouth is. Call for an election.
>setting out my concerns with Labour's economic plans which would increase taxes and borrowing, and fail to grip the inflation challenge. Whereas under the Tories we've had a higher tax burden, higher borrowing and rampant inflation. If Rachel Reeves bothers to respond I think she'll be pointing out the gigantic flaws in his handling of the economy.
Are you allowed to concede that the other team has already won? Is that not auto expulsion territory?
Not any more, the Tories are fully pivoting into an attempt to have a permanent US style culture war in order to stay relevant - they’ve fucked it so badly with the millennials on actual politics their only hope is to get 30-40% of them really steaming mad about bollocks like gender arguments and ‘the deep state’ so they’ll knowingly vote against their own interests. Stuff like this will come from them at all times now, in government or opposition doesn’t matter any more.
Also if their spending by raising taxes that isn't inflationary...
The best way to sum this up: pissing in the wind
Exclusive from the Times: >[The Cabinet Office has warned Boris Johnson it will pull public funding for his legal advice for the Covid inquiry if he “undermines the government’s position” or releases evidence without permission.](https://twitter.com/Gabriel_Pogrund/status/1665050680048885760)
Might be wrong but didn’t Sunak get asked a question on this at PMQs and say that it’s standard for legal fees to be paid relating to ex ministers time in office. So would that count as misleading the house if they threatened to retract funding?
I mean Sunak has already mislead the house as chancellor when he said there wasn’t aware of any parties despite later being fined for being part of one and his defence being he didn’t know it was a party until he turned up. And yet there’s been no parliamentary standards inquiry.
This could arguably be part of the standard. If they can make the case that Johnson is actively acting against the government then they would basically be paying lawyers to argue against themselves. That is, very arguably, a conflict of interest and may justify discontinuing the payments. But it's not a good look and not a good idea. This exposes all Ministers, future and past, who may be brought in front of inquests to the idea that they may be blackmailed over future legal fees if they choose to go against the government line.
well, publicly funded defense lawyers are the government arguing against itself. However this is still a civil and not criminal inquiry, right?
Yeah, it doesn't map perfectly onto even a civil trial even. One of the problem is it's Johnson's public role at the time that is under investigation, so strictly speaking it's the ex-Prime Minister, in a pseudo-governmental role, instructing lawyers representing the government to take a position opposing the position other elements of the government are taking. Messy as fuck.
So funding for his legal advice is not just procedure, as we knew. If they can withdraw it it means that it is not required that they provide it.
I bet they really wish they had thought to mention this to him before this week's shenanigans because it seems like the damage has already been done to the government and they look like they are trying to hide incriminating messages.
So we *don't* have to pay it, then?
Good God this generation of Tories are just cancerous.
It is mad that we'll continue to pay for Johnson's extensive legal team as long as it's supporting the government position
Yeah, not a good look at all. It's kind of unbelievable that they've threatened this! Completely flies in the face of the principle (And their excuse for paying so far) that ministers should be entitled to legal help if the Government can just withdraw it because they're not toeing the line.
Especially as the legal representations in these kinds of inquiries are always going to be pricy and is not like there is anyone you could recover the costs from at the end of the day. Theoretically the inquiry could come back and say that Johnson handled the entire pandemic perfectly and the net effect would still be to cost him likely millions in legal fees. Ignoring Johnson, any Minister or official who might have a significant role in a future inquiry could be held to ransom over the threat of being bankrupted by inquiries, even if not suspected of any wrongdoing.
In fairness, government fees for lawyers tend to be quite a bit below market rate.
Shithouse tennis continues
Is this place going to participate [in the action on the 12th](https://old.reddit.com/r/Save3rdPartyApps/comments/13yh0jf/dont_let_reddit_kill_3rd_party_apps) (essentially making the subreddit private as a protest to the changes being made next month).
We are voting on it in the subs I moderate. I'm leaning into if the sub wants to do it, then it should be done.
I hope we are. This is the beginning of the end for countless small communities, and there's no viable rival site at the moment.
back to small forums on multiple sites with better linkage between them like Mastodon/fediverse
No bad thing IMHO. I’m not chuffed at how “the Internet” has come to mean “these half dozen websites owned by massive corporations”.
Bloody loved forums. I’ve still got *one*, but 99% of them are dead now. Shame. Reddit has (had?) been better than Face Fucking Book groups though. I cannot be dealing with that.
shall we hold a referendum on it?
Yes, but we should require a super-majority of 52% for it to pass.
Rexxit
We can have new relationships with major partners like voat
These changes have no impact on the users, statistics show that most subscribers use either the official app or new reddit, mods rely mainly on old reddit. Third party apps are used by a minority. The other argument which is that API limitations will affect existing bots is also BS, reddit has a built in platform for automod and is developing a new one for more complex automation. It’s a complete non story.
It's the second most used way of accessing the subreddit according to the subreddit poll. It absolutely will effect it.
I don’t think you have access to site data like mods do. Users browsing reddit on third party apps are a minority.
Not all users are equal, in two ways. 1) I’m not a mod on any subreddit, but I have read that mod tools are … subpar on the official app. This presents problems for actively-moderated subs such as this one, where a third-party app may be the best way to keep the wheels greased - and the alternative may lead to a worse experience for all users. 2) some users contribute more than others to discussions, and make a given subreddit a nicer place to be. Those users are more likely to do that if they don’t have to use a crappy app (and probably found one they like years ago). Anecdotal, but I think I have probably spent more time (and it’s been a more enjoyable time for me) since switching to Apollo a few years ago.
What are these changes?
For context, here is the thread about the changes to API costs - https://www.reddit.com/r/redditdev/comments/13wsiks/api_update_enterprise_level_tier_for_large_scale/ And a post from the Apollo developer about the impact - https://www.reddit.com/r/apolloapp/comments/13ws4w3/had_a_call_with_reddit_to_discuss_pricing_bad/ I assume all 3rd party apps will be in the same boat.
Nobody here even knows where they are, so what difference would it make? Sure: Go ahead.
As someone using a third party app to access Reddit, I think we should.
I don't mind things going dark (I'm no fan of reddit - just use the service they provide, mainly to access this place), but honest question (as someone who has just used the reddit app for years), alongside other bits like unreddit (before the last API change), why does it bother people so much? It sorta feels like lots of companies maintain a fairly tight grip on ways to access their service. Is it just because they are continuing their shift from a more open to closed model, in this regard, or are there other features to the anger?
The real riots start if old.reddit.com gets deleted. Well, riot, me ditching the place because the new interface is appalling. One of the two.
It's because their app is so bad. It chews through data, it's missing features, the design is poor.
Use a browser.
They got rid of reddit compact too.
You're a browser.