- entry 2023/06/15

Still, the celebrity obsessed Mail is a far cry better than The Express who's top story headline reads: "Priti Patel and Rees-Mogg rally behind Boris with blistering attack on Remainer stitch-up." Yes, it's Remainers Wot Did It. I wonder how many decades they'll keep on blaming those who didn't vote to flush the country down the toilet for all of the flushing sounds that can be heard?

Don't worry, I glance at that shit so you don't need to sully your browser history. Suffice to say, I'm aiming my sights at Johnson and Dorries today.

Bye, Boris.

Problem is, he's part of a much bigger picture, and that picture is what brought Brexit upon the country. So Johnson's allies have to do what he did - lie and bully - now with threats to deselect MPs who don't back Johnson when the report is voted on. It's either that, or people will have to start analysing the scale and scope of the lies, and then the entire false edifice will collapse.

Now in any sane normal democracy, those threatening deselection should, themselves, be automatically deselected due to interference with sovereign democratic process, but alas Westminster is far from a sane normal democracy these days.

Johnson, of course, dismissed the findings (which would recommend him suspended for 90 days and barred from having a parliamentary pass) as "tripe" and "beneath contempt" and "protracted political assassination".
And, yet, he himself bailed out before the report was released (and in doing so broke privilege by referring to what the report said).
He now cannot be suspended as he is no longer a serving MP.

He also raged against the Labour chairperson, Harriet Harman despite the fact that, as chairperson, she didn't even vote (she would only have voted if there was a tie). But there was no tie, the cross-party committee with a Tory majority, unanimously decreed that Johnson was a lying sack of shit who deliberately misled the House, and the committee, and then also being complicit in a campaign of abuse and attempted intimidation of the committee.

That being said, so far only 13 Tories (out of ~300) have stepped up to defend the lying sack of shit. You probably won't be surprised:

• Dame Andrea Jenkyns
• Brendan Clarke-Smith
• Esther McVey
• Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg
• Jake Berry
• James Duddridge
• Justin Tomlinson
• Lia Nici
• Marco Longhi
• Mark Jenkinson
• Matt Vickers
• Nadine Dorries (who sort of quit)
• Sir Simon Clarke

Now, of course, the bloodbath with start with the Tories taking sides as to whether they are interested in working for the benefit of the country, or for themselves. I suspect a fair few will find "important things to do elsewhere" on the day of the vote, but given the number of people who died during the pandemic and the number who couldn't even attend the funeral of loved ones, this whole thing could blow up in their faces come the next election.

Those who back a notorious lying sack of shit are clearly only in it for themselves.

Which brings us right on to...

Dame Dorries

Interestingly, a Daily Express poll suggests 42% think she should have received a peerage, while 57% think she should not (and 1% don't know).
Personally, I think peerages should be reserved for people who have done important things for the country. They should not be handed out to career politicians as a thank you for supporting a corrupt mendicious lying sack of shit. In fact, to be honest, they should not be handed out to career politicians at all, unless that person did something to cement their status as the crème-de-la-crème of British citizens. Winston Churchill, yes. Dorries... did what exactly? She spent two years as Minister of State for Patient Safety, Suicide Prevention and Mental Health followed by a year as Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media, and Sport. Both of which, honestly, sound like made-up positions in order to put people who aren't useful at actual MPing. But, then, since this Brexit nonsense there's even a Secretary of State for Levelling Up (surprise! It's Michael Gove).

Dorrie's wikipedia article makes interesting reading. She has essentially done nothing other than get elected, and have various indiscretions: failing to attend sessions of committees she was on, employing her daughter as an "office manager" even though the daughter was 96 miles away (subsequently dealt with by a £10,000 drop in salary (to 30-35K) and renaming it to "senior secretary", isn't nepotism great?), irregularities with expenses (and again, and again), using the official Commons Portcullis emblem on her personal blog, going onto the "I'm a celebrity" reality nonsense without telling the chief whip or chairman (she lost the whip for about six months, and it's possible that it was only given back to stop her defecting to UKIP), to which she floated the idea of joint Tory-UKIP candidates (to a negative reaction from the Tories). It's quite clear, then, that she is very pro-Brexit.

As the MP for blah blah and Mental Health, it might come as a surprise that she rejected an offer of cross-party talks to sort out a mental health support package for front-line NHS/care workers during the pandemic. She also supported the pathetic 1% pay offer made to NHS workers.

So, tell me, what the bloody hell has Dorries done that would in any way justify her being made a peer? Her unremarkable parliamentry record is notable only in that it demonstrates that she doesn't exactly have the sort of moral fibre that one would hope for in a person who will be entitled to sit in the House of Lords (and be elegible to claim a £323/day tax free attendance fee, plus some travel expenses without having to actually speak or vote on anything).

Dorries, of course, ranted in a now-deleted set of tweets (thanks to Edwin Hayward for preserving these):

• Isn't it amazing, given the size of the party, how many LibDems sit in the Lords? Cronyism at its 'gis a job' worst.
• Maybe so many of them they can't get called? Lords could sit 24/7 and still couldn't get everyone in. Way too big/many. Time to reform.
• The Lords have just messed up once too often. I for one will be lobbying for a bill to massively reduce the Lords in size, for positions to be elected to fixed terms equal to Parliament and for powers to be reduced.
• And, of course, the Daily Mail diatribe: Nadine Dorries: Sinister forces that stopped this girl, born into poverty in Liverpool, from reaching the Lords.

In other words "waaaaaah!".

Let me just correct a few things. She accuses LibDems of cronyism. This word is defined as "The appointment of friends and associates to positions of authority, without proper regard to their qualifications" (like, you know, Johnson making Dorries a peer). Well, exactly how is that supposed to work, given that the closest the LibDems have ever been to power is a coalition government with the Tories (who called the shots)?
Secondly, to complain about the size of the Lords who you get overlooked in being made one... Yes, Nadine, thank you. Your absence will make that oversized chamber (from Tony's cronies to Dave's faves) that little bit smaller. As for Tory admissions into the house? Well, they're going through Prime Ministers faster than I'm going through jars of cherry jam so...

Thirdly, yes, reform is needed. But it should be done as part of an overhaul of the electoral system, such as proper Proportional Representation, and re-examining all electoral boundaries that have been modified in the past twenty years to ensure the reasons are justified and that it wasn't done simply to strengthen the number of Tory seats.

Finally? Let me rephrase: Nadine Dorries: Fate intervened to prevent this woman, born in Liverpool and having a lengthy political career in which she did absolutely nothing of note, from reaching the Lords. As it well should have.

The future?

Honestly, piss of Johnson, and everybody who supports that lying sack of shit. There are so many actual problems right now that actually matter to actual people that - okay we can briefly clap now that Johnson has gone (but not dead in a ditch as he once suggested, so he could always do a Farage and stir up a storm from outside) but, really, how about some actual governing instead of this pathetic pantemime? Let's start with the Junior doctors...

Your comments:

Please note that while I check this page every so often, I am not able to control what users write; therefore I disclaim all liability for unpleasant and/or infringing and/or defamatory material. Undesired content will be removed as soon as it is noticed. By leaving a comment, you agree not to post material that is illegal or in bad taste, and you should be aware that the time and your IP address are both recorded, should it be necessary to find out who you are. Oh, and don't bother trying to inline HTML. I'm not that stupid! ☺ ADDING COMMENTS DOES NOT WORK IF READING TRANSLATED VERSIONS.
 
You can now follow comment additions with the comment RSS feed. This is distinct from the b.log RSS feed, so you can subscribe to one or both as you wish.

Anon, 16th June 2023, 02:40

As a life-long Tory voter (and only because the alternative was always so unpalatable), the only thing I have to say is this:    F**k the Tories.    Yes, ok, for the first couple of years (2010-2012) the Tories (or should I say the Tories / Lib Dem coalition) probably could have legitimately blamed the appalling mess left behind by Blair and Brown. But once they'd had a couple of years to sort things out it should have improved.    It didn't.    It still hasn't.    I am so relieved that last year I received a fair whack of inheritance after losing my last remaining grandparent (she was at nearly 3 figures so not unexpected). I'm now mortgage-free. Just as well, before the rates shot up I was paying £499 a month. If I hadn't cleared it when I had, that would now be about £850 a month, possibly more. No idea where I'd have found another £350 a month, particularly with the cost of things like, y'know, food, electricity, gas etc? Oh, and petrol and diesel of course (although they're coming back down again and are almost at a sensible price).    I also cashed in an investment which wasn't getting any return, took the £5,500 or so out of it and used it to get solar panels installed on the house. My electricity bill for May this year was about £40. The same time last year it was about £115. June's should be even lower. Definitely a better return. I'm also getting a few quid back every month for the spare electricity which goes back into the grid (about £20 in December and about £60 for May). So definitely a wise investment.    Plus of course because I'm now sourcing at least half of my electricity from solar, Greta Thunberg WILL want to marry me and have my babies. (I wish.)    Anyway, I digress. I had a bit of inheritance and some investments, so was able to mitigate things. Which means that as I'm no longer paying a mortgage and most of my electricity is covered by solar, I can afford to buy a few little luxuries. Like food, for example. Others are not so fortunate. Apparently even middle-class people are having to use food banks now. That would suggest to me that there's something wrong.    Mind you, once the middle classes start getting affected by it, they'll stop voting Tory.    Whatever happens at the mandatory General Erection (typo intentional as they're all a bunch of dicks!) next year, it's not going to be pretty.

C Ferris, 16th June 2023, 10:40

Rich seems upset that politicians lie :-|

C Ferris, 16th June 2023, 10:43

Whoops - that should be Rick- is there anyway of correcting a post?

Rick, 16th June 2023, 14:26

No, there's no way to edit a previous comment (nor will there be one).    No, we all know politicians tell fibs, but Johnson was a whole different level. If that's the calibre of the man to look up to as the leader of the country, well, we're screwed...

C Ferris, 16th June 2023, 14:39

Err - they all give porkers a bad name.    Curry and beer not a party - cheese and wine party!

J.G.Harston, 18th June 2023, 12:46

Before interest rates went up my mortgage was £423 a month, it's now £485 a month. How does yours (Anon) go from £499 to £850?

Anon, 19th June 2023, 10:56

I'd been on an interest-only mortgage with investments to cover the capital repayment. Whilst interest rates were low, it was the most financially secure option. However once they went up (and that was always a risk) the monthly payment will skyrocket.    So with £129k capital, interest rates going from 0.25% up to 4.5% on that sum is a helluva whack.    I'm guessing yours is a repayment mortgage, so you only get charged interest on the outstanding balance?

Add a comment (v0.11) [help?] . . . try the comment feed!
		Your name
		Your email	(optional)
		Validation	Are you real? Please type 01613 backwards.
		Your comment