I would venture to suggest that I have been closer to him in a work environment than many on this forum.
Yes he is a nightmare, but he was a better choice than Corbyn.
There is a difference between a nightmare and a disaster.
I am a Socialist, sorry Bread, get used to it.
There is a World of difference between my idea of Socialism and that of Corbyn and Co.
Even worse than that, I was also a Union Official, but never went on strike as I was in an Exempt Occupation.
Public Health and Public Safety, I worked but donated my income to Charity.
I am disgusted that Labour MPs will be on the picket lines this morning when all the strike is doing is punishing ordinary people and making their financial situation even worse.
I cannot condone that, it is back to the bad old days.
There are far more effective ways of annoying management than affecting the public.
Artangel has a point Omah, much as I dislike Boris he is not ruling my World and I certainly would not like him replaced by Labour as Starmer would be gone and Corbyn and Co would be back.
The Tories have some far better candidates than Boris to lead them
I don’t actually think you are a socialist. I think your someone who wants the most vulnerable and at a disadvantage to be treated better and more fairly, but that doesn’t mean your a socialist.
I would say you’re more centre right than socialist.
Omah … tell me what parliamentary code has been broken here ?
Apparently Boris asked if he could employ Carrie Johnson, he was advised not to and then didn’t. See how the left have created a huge fuss about nothing again.
According to The Daily Telegraph, Lord Geidt thinks that reports the PM tried to appoint his future wife to a plush taxpayer-funded government job should be looked into by his successor.
Downing Street denies the allegations. The PM has not yet replaced Geidt and has refused to commit to doing so.
Somehow, I don’t see any “successor” investigating allegations of nepotism …
The point is that Johnson wanted to use his influence to get Carries’ snout in the trough and had to be dissuaded from doing it
So, no principles, promotes the chumocracy and prepared to dole out favours and taxpayers money to his bits in the side. And stupid enough to think he’ll always get away with it
The story is important because it shows clearly what an unprincipled idiot we have as PM
Who has to be stopped by his advisors from doing what would be judged clearly be wrong by any normal right thinking person with a conscience
The decision to remove the story is understood to have been made by Tony Gallagher, the Times’ deputy editor, who was standing in while the editor, John Witherow, was on leave.
A News UK spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment on suggestions the company’s chief executive, Rebekah Brooks, was also involved in the discussions.
Guto Harri, the current Downing Street director of communications, was an adviser at News UK, the owner of the Times, between 2012 and 2015.
Contrary to online speculation, there is no super-injunction or specific legal issue preventing reporting of the story.
MailOnline published a rewritten version of the Times story on Saturday, only to also quietly delete it without explanation.
The story that the Times pulled was re-reporting an allegation that appeared in a critical biography of Carrie Johnson by the Tory donor and peer Lord Ashcroft. The original accusation remains available online as part of the serialisation of the book – which is still hosted on MailOnline.
In late 2017, civil servants at the Foreign Office advised Johnson to appoint a chief of staff. Installing somebody of the highest competence would, they believed, ease their collective post-Brexit burden. This suggestion seemed at first to fall on deaf ears.
But by the beginning of the following year, Johnson seemed keener on the plan. The person he had in mind for the plum, six-figure role? Carrie Symonds.
His allies were ‘aghast’, according to one source. She would have been out of her depth in such a senior post, they felt, with potentially disastrous consequences.
‘Everyone advised him not to do it,’ says a source. ‘They told him she had been over-promoted and that making her his chief of staff was ridiculous.’
By the spring of 2018, a small number of Johnson’s staff had become aware the couple were having an affair. Some were dismayed that he had betrayed his wife, Marina, whom they knew and liked. Others took the view that it was none of their business.
All now understood why Johnson had been so keen to hire Carrie as his chief of staff.
“In late 2017, civil servants at the Foreign Office advised Johnson to appoint a chief of staff. Installing somebody of the highest competence would, they believed, ease their collective post-Brexit burden. This suggestion seemed at first to fall on deaf ears.”
But I say again, he only didn’t employ her because he was stopped
He wanted to and thought it would be alright to, or at least that he would get away with it
If they hadn’t stopped him, he would have employed her
A clear example of how arrogant he is and how he doesn’t understand, or doesn’t care, that it’s wrong to use his power and position to dole out largesse to his girlfriends and chums
