On 09/07/2022 13:14, Recliner wrote:
> One thing with all these ministerial resignations/sackings is that they all get three months' pay in compensation, even
> if they've only been in office for a day, and even if they're back in office a month later. So, Johnson's refusal to go
> quietly on Wednesday has cost the taxpayers hundreds of thousands of pounds. Carrie could have had a few more rugs and
> chairs in the flat for that price!

Same when Labour MPs resign (or sacked).

Some of the Ministers have said they will give the money to charity.

At the end of the day, they are employees and entitled to the payment.
Even the unions would have to agree on that.

On 09/07/2022 13:15, Recliner wrote:
> What legally binding treaties (with penalties) did we sign after that COP26?

Can anyone remember anything that came out of FLOP26 except a very large
bill.

On 09/07/2022 17:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
> Lies, damned lies and statistics! 52% of the people who backed the
> Conservatives last time? That’s a shade under 23% of voters. If the
> Conservative vote share goes down in the next election, which it might
> well, notwithstanding a bounce back post-BJ, then that will be even fewer.

What percentage of the 32% who voted Labour? Could easily be well below
20% of the electorate or even single figures.

On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 17:33:40 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 16:28:30 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
>> <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>>>> On 08/07/2022 15:44, Tweed wrote:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <ta96rh$n9gj$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:10:24 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>>>>> 2022, MB <MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>>>>>>> On 08/07/2022 09:49, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>> And as failing Grayling once said "who needs to get to Sheffield one
>>>>>>>> minute sooner".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Perhaps a better question would be "how many billion pounds should
>>>>>>> taxpayers pay to get you to Sheffield one minute earlier?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The question at the time was electrifying the remainder of the MML
>>>>>> (Kettering northwards perhaps) which should not cost billions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well I?m no SNP supporter, but the devolved government up in Scotland seems
>>>>> to be quietly getting on with electrification. It has perhaps predated
>>>>> devolution, as an impressive amount seems to have been achieved even way
>>>>> back when. Perhaps sufficiently far away from DfT (and its forebears) to
>>>>> avoid meddling?
>>>>
>>>> It's funded. The Barnett formula gives Scotland about 10% of the cash
>>>> poured into London, a luxury not available to north or central England.
>>>>
>>> But looked another way, Scotland is a relatively large but sparsely
>>> populated (on the average) country. There?s a lot of expensive
>>> infrastructure that need to be kept going. Ferries, loss making air routes,
>>> roads, power etc etc.
>>>
>> There is plenty of loss-making stuff in England as possibly
>> demonstrated on the frequent occasions when I have a whole bus or
>> railway carriage to myself at night.
>>
>
>Indeed there are, but I suspect the costs per head of what might be loosely
>termed infrastructure are higher in Scotland than England. Mind you, I’m
>not complaining. Recently I did Glasgow to Dunoon and back via train
>(electric!) and ferry (half an hour for the ferry ride) for the princely
>sum of £14.
>
<statistics>
That is about twice what it would cost you in Greater London for
roughly the same distances from e.g. Harrow to Upminster by train and
using the Woolwich Ferry.
</statistics>

MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 09/07/2022 17:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
>> Lies, damned lies and statistics! 52% of the people who backed the
>> Conservatives last time? That’s a shade under 23% of voters. If the
>> Conservative vote share goes down in the next election, which it might
>> well, notwithstanding a bounce back post-BJ, then that will be even fewer.
>
> What percentage of the 32% who voted Labour? Could easily be well below
> 20% of the electorate or even single figures.
>

The chart in the article says that the general public would vote 46:16 to
scrap HS2; Tory voters were 52:17, so only marginally more anti-HS2.

I can see a scenario developing this week where the candidates are
competing with each other to promise tax cuts (or cancelling planned tax
rises), both personal and corporate. They're bound to then be asked how
they'd fund them. Would they cut defence spending? No, they want to
increase it. Would they cut health and social care funding? Definitely
not. Education? Of course not. But HS2, with so little public support,
would be an easy target.

On 09/07/2022 21:08, Recliner wrote:
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 09/07/2022 17:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was one
>>>>>>> of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't necessarily
>>>>>>> have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or whoever) rather
>>>>>>> than people you hire permanently now there's the political will to have
>>>>>>> a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>>>>> the next right wing leader.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's in danger is HS2. Johnson loves big, expensive infrastructure
>>>>> projects, but most right-wing Tories don't. I bet several of his potential
>>>>> successors would happily either cancel HS2 altogether, or cut it back
>>>>> further.
>>>>
>>>> And, right on cue:
>>>> <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/09/hs2-rail-project-should-scrapped-voters-tell-conservative-leadership/>
>>>>
>>>> Extract:
>>>>
>>>> The HS2 rail project must be scrapped by the next prime minister, voters
>>>> have said in a new poll that will put Conservative leadership candidates on
>>>> notice.
>>>>
>>>> Almost half of the public would like to see work on the £100 billion high
>>>> speed line linking London to the Midlands and the north stopped, after
>>>> costs spiralled out of control.
>>>>
>>>> Only 17 per cent of those who backed the Conservatives at the last election
>>>> think the highly controversial scheme should go ahead, compared with 52 per
>>>> cent who now oppose it.
>>>
>>> Lies, damned lies and statistics! 52% of the people who backed the
>>> Conservatives last time? That’s a shade under 23% of voters. If the
>>> Conservative vote share goes down in the next election, which it might
>>> well, notwithstanding a bounce back post-BJ, then that will be even fewer.
>>>
>>> I’m not saying the numbers aren’t significant, just that they aren’t what
>>> you might think if you just scan the text.
>>>
>>
>> It is the Telegraph.
>
> Yes, and guess which paper will have the most influence on the Tory
> leadership campaign? Which paper do Tory party members and all the
> candidates read?

The Daily Express

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 09/07/2022 21:08, Recliner wrote:
>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 09/07/2022 17:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>>>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>>>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>>>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was one
>>>>>>>> of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't necessarily
>>>>>>>> have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or whoever) rather
>>>>>>>> than people you hire permanently now there's the political will to have
>>>>>>>> a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>>>>>> the next right wing leader.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What's in danger is HS2. Johnson loves big, expensive infrastructure
>>>>>> projects, but most right-wing Tories don't. I bet several of his potential
>>>>>> successors would happily either cancel HS2 altogether, or cut it back
>>>>>> further.
>>>>>
>>>>> And, right on cue:
>>>>> <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/09/hs2-rail-project-should-scrapped-voters-tell-conservative-leadership/>
>>>>>
>>>>> Extract:
>>>>>
>>>>> The HS2 rail project must be scrapped by the next prime minister, voters
>>>>> have said in a new poll that will put Conservative leadership candidates on
>>>>> notice.
>>>>>
>>>>> Almost half of the public would like to see work on the £100 billion high
>>>>> speed line linking London to the Midlands and the north stopped, after
>>>>> costs spiralled out of control.
>>>>>
>>>>> Only 17 per cent of those who backed the Conservatives at the last election
>>>>> think the highly controversial scheme should go ahead, compared with 52 per
>>>>> cent who now oppose it.
>>>>
>>>> Lies, damned lies and statistics! 52% of the people who backed the
>>>> Conservatives last time? That’s a shade under 23% of voters. If the
>>>> Conservative vote share goes down in the next election, which it might
>>>> well, notwithstanding a bounce back post-BJ, then that will be even fewer.
>>>>
>>>> I’m not saying the numbers aren’t significant, just that they aren’t what
>>>> you might think if you just scan the text.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It is the Telegraph.
>>
>> Yes, and guess which paper will have the most influence on the Tory
>> leadership campaign? Which paper do Tory party members and all the
>> candidates read?
>
> The Daily Express

I very much doubt it.

On 10/07/2022 09:38, Recliner wrote:
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 09/07/2022 21:08, Recliner wrote:
>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 09/07/2022 17:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>>>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>>>>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>>>>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>>>>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was one
>>>>>>>>> of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't necessarily
>>>>>>>>> have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or whoever) rather
>>>>>>>>> than people you hire permanently now there's the political will to have
>>>>>>>>> a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>>>>>>> the next right wing leader.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What's in danger is HS2. Johnson loves big, expensive infrastructure
>>>>>>> projects, but most right-wing Tories don't. I bet several of his potential
>>>>>>> successors would happily either cancel HS2 altogether, or cut it back
>>>>>>> further.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And, right on cue:
>>>>>> <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/09/hs2-rail-project-should-scrapped-voters-tell-conservative-leadership/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Extract:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The HS2 rail project must be scrapped by the next prime minister, voters
>>>>>> have said in a new poll that will put Conservative leadership candidates on
>>>>>> notice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Almost half of the public would like to see work on the £100 billion high
>>>>>> speed line linking London to the Midlands and the north stopped, after
>>>>>> costs spiralled out of control.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only 17 per cent of those who backed the Conservatives at the last election
>>>>>> think the highly controversial scheme should go ahead, compared with 52 per
>>>>>> cent who now oppose it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lies, damned lies and statistics! 52% of the people who backed the
>>>>> Conservatives last time? That’s a shade under 23% of voters. If the
>>>>> Conservative vote share goes down in the next election, which it might
>>>>> well, notwithstanding a bounce back post-BJ, then that will be even fewer.
>>>>>
>>>>> I’m not saying the numbers aren’t significant, just that they aren’t what
>>>>> you might think if you just scan the text.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is the Telegraph.
>>>
>>> Yes, and guess which paper will have the most influence on the Tory
>>> leadership campaign? Which paper do Tory party members and all the
>>> candidates read?
>>
>> The Daily Express
>
> I very much doubt it.
>

Carry on doubting, just remember the final say is with the rank and
file, not all of whom will be reading the Telegraph and many just want
their prejudices confirmed which the Express does with a will.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 10/07/2022 09:38, Recliner wrote:
>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 09/07/2022 21:08, Recliner wrote:
>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 09/07/2022 17:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>>>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>>>>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>>>>>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>>>>>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>>>>>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was one
>>>>>>>>>> of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't necessarily
>>>>>>>>>> have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or whoever) rather
>>>>>>>>>> than people you hire permanently now there's the political will to have
>>>>>>>>>> a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>>>>>>>> the next right wing leader.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What's in danger is HS2. Johnson loves big, expensive infrastructure
>>>>>>>> projects, but most right-wing Tories don't. I bet several of his potential
>>>>>>>> successors would happily either cancel HS2 altogether, or cut it back
>>>>>>>> further.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And, right on cue:
>>>>>>> <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/09/hs2-rail-project-should-scrapped-voters-tell-conservative-leadership/>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Extract:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The HS2 rail project must be scrapped by the next prime minister, voters
>>>>>>> have said in a new poll that will put Conservative leadership candidates on
>>>>>>> notice.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Almost half of the public would like to see work on the £100 billion high
>>>>>>> speed line linking London to the Midlands and the north stopped, after
>>>>>>> costs spiralled out of control.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Only 17 per cent of those who backed the Conservatives at the last election
>>>>>>> think the highly controversial scheme should go ahead, compared with 52 per
>>>>>>> cent who now oppose it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lies, damned lies and statistics! 52% of the people who backed the
>>>>>> Conservatives last time? That’s a shade under 23% of voters. If the
>>>>>> Conservative vote share goes down in the next election, which it might
>>>>>> well, notwithstanding a bounce back post-BJ, then that will be even fewer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I’m not saying the numbers aren’t significant, just that they aren’t what
>>>>>> you might think if you just scan the text.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It is the Telegraph.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, and guess which paper will have the most influence on the Tory
>>>> leadership campaign? Which paper do Tory party members and all the
>>>> candidates read?
>>>
>>> The Daily Express
>>
>> I very much doubt it.
>>
>
> Carry on doubting, just remember the final say is with the rank and
> file, not all of whom will be reading the Telegraph and many just want
> their prejudices confirmed which the Express does with a will.
>

The MPs get to choose the final two, so it's they who are the target of the
current campaigns. And they all read the Telegraph, which is clearly trying
to shape their manifestos. It looks like this stage of the leadership
election is going to be unusually vicious, with Team Boris playing an
active role in score-settling:
<https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/09/conservative-leadership-battle-shapes-one-bloodiest-ever/>

The grass roots, paid-up party members who get to choose from the final two
probably read a mix of (mainly) the Telegraph, with some Express and Mail.
It appears that their preferences are already fairly well known, so the
MPs' focus in the next week will be on stopping the grass roots' favourites
from making the final two. Wallace apparently saw that, and so pulled out,
and Truss will probably do badly in the MPs' ballots as well.

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 17:33:40 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
> <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 16:28:30 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
>>> <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 08/07/2022 15:44, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <ta96rh$n9gj$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:10:24 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>>>>>> 2022, MB <MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On 08/07/2022 09:49, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>> And as failing Grayling once said "who needs to get to Sheffield one
>>>>>>>>> minute sooner".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Perhaps a better question would be "how many billion pounds should
>>>>>>>> taxpayers pay to get you to Sheffield one minute earlier?"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The question at the time was electrifying the remainder of the MML
>>>>>>> (Kettering northwards perhaps) which should not cost billions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well I?m no SNP supporter, but the devolved government up in Scotland seems
>>>>>> to be quietly getting on with electrification. It has perhaps predated
>>>>>> devolution, as an impressive amount seems to have been achieved even way
>>>>>> back when. Perhaps sufficiently far away from DfT (and its forebears) to
>>>>>> avoid meddling?
>>>>>
>>>>> It's funded. The Barnett formula gives Scotland about 10% of the cash
>>>>> poured into London, a luxury not available to north or central England.
>>>>>
>>>> But looked another way, Scotland is a relatively large but sparsely
>>>> populated (on the average) country. There?s a lot of expensive
>>>> infrastructure that need to be kept going. Ferries, loss making air routes,
>>>> roads, power etc etc.
>>>>
>>> There is plenty of loss-making stuff in England as possibly
>>> demonstrated on the frequent occasions when I have a whole bus or
>>> railway carriage to myself at night.
>>>
>>
>> Indeed there are, but I suspect the costs per head of what might be loosely
>> termed infrastructure are higher in Scotland than England. Mind you, I’m
>> not complaining. Recently I did Glasgow to Dunoon and back via train
>> (electric!) and ferry (half an hour for the ferry ride) for the princely
>> sum of £14.
>>
> <statistics>
> That is about twice what it would cost you in Greater London for
> roughly the same distances from e.g. Harrow to Upminster by train and
> using the Woolwich Ferry.
> </statistics>
>

OTOH a return ticket on Thames Clipper for a half hour east way journey
will cost you £17.40.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 17:54:40 +0100, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On 09/07/2022 14:10, Roland Perry wrote:
>> Various appointees have been shamed into spurning those payments,
>> including the two-day education secretary.
>>
>> Nevertheless, the cost to the public is orders of magnitude less than
>> the damage inflicted by the chaotic not-resignation of the greased piglet.
>
>What is this greased piglet meme?

He's been called that since at least 2019. Ironically, Johnson himself used the phrase about Blair in 2004, long before
Cameron used it about Johnson. Maybe it's an Etonian expression?

“It is just flipping unbelievable. He is a mixture of Harry Houdini and a greased piglet. He is barely human in his
elusiveness. Nailing Blair is like trying to pin jelly to a wall.”

https://quotepark.com/quotes/1904803-boris-johnson-it-is-just-flipping-unbelievable-he-is-a-mixture/

> I thought it was Cameron that
>(allegedly) had an unhealthy relationship with pigs.

Isabel Oakeshott invented that story in her semi-fictional 'biography' of Cameron.

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 17:33:40 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
> <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 16:28:30 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
>>> <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 08/07/2022 15:44, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <ta96rh$n9gj$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:10:24 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>>>>>> 2022, MB <MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On 08/07/2022 09:49, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>> And as failing Grayling once said "who needs to get to Sheffield one
>>>>>>>>> minute sooner".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Perhaps a better question would be "how many billion pounds should
>>>>>>>> taxpayers pay to get you to Sheffield one minute earlier?"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The question at the time was electrifying the remainder of the MML
>>>>>>> (Kettering northwards perhaps) which should not cost billions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well I?m no SNP supporter, but the devolved government up in Scotland seems
>>>>>> to be quietly getting on with electrification. It has perhaps predated
>>>>>> devolution, as an impressive amount seems to have been achieved even way
>>>>>> back when. Perhaps sufficiently far away from DfT (and its forebears) to
>>>>>> avoid meddling?
>>>>>
>>>>> It's funded. The Barnett formula gives Scotland about 10% of the cash
>>>>> poured into London, a luxury not available to north or central England.
>>>>>
>>>> But looked another way, Scotland is a relatively large but sparsely
>>>> populated (on the average) country. There?s a lot of expensive
>>>> infrastructure that need to be kept going. Ferries, loss making air routes,
>>>> roads, power etc etc.
>>>>
>>> There is plenty of loss-making stuff in England as possibly
>>> demonstrated on the frequent occasions when I have a whole bus or
>>> railway carriage to myself at night.
>>>
>>
>> Indeed there are, but I suspect the costs per head of what might be loosely
>> termed infrastructure are higher in Scotland than England. Mind you, I’m
>> not complaining. Recently I did Glasgow to Dunoon and back via train
>> (electric!) and ferry (half an hour for the ferry ride) for the princely
>> sum of £14.
>>
> <statistics>
> That is about twice what it would cost you in Greater London for
> roughly the same distances from e.g. Harrow to Upminster by train and
> using the Woolwich Ferry.
> </statistics>
>

There’s a premium for the nicer scenery :)

London does very well for cheap and frequent public transport. Round where
I live it costs £4.60 for a 5 mile return bus journey into the city centre.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>> On 09/07/2022 17:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>> Lies, damned lies and statistics! 52% of the people who backed the
>>> Conservatives last time? That’s a shade under 23% of voters. If the
>>> Conservative vote share goes down in the next election, which it might
>>> well, notwithstanding a bounce back post-BJ, then that will be even fewer.
>>
>> What percentage of the 32% who voted Labour? Could easily be well below
>> 20% of the electorate or even single figures.
>>
>
> The chart in the article says that the general public would vote 46:16 to
> scrap HS2; Tory voters were 52:17, so only marginally more anti-HS2.
>
> I can see a scenario developing this week where the candidates are
> competing with each other to promise tax cuts (or cancelling planned tax
> rises), both personal and corporate. They're bound to then be asked how
> they'd fund them. Would they cut defence spending? No, they want to
> increase it. Would they cut health and social care funding? Definitely
> not. Education? Of course not. But HS2, with so little public support,
> would be an easy target.
>
>

The trouble with HS2 is the arguments for it are marginal at the best of
times. The immediate benefits are for a relatively restricted geographic
population, whilst the rest of the country sees overcrowded short formation
trains. Even the population that will benefit probably suspects that the
tickets will be priced out of reach of many. If the HS2 money were to be
spread around the rest of the network a lot more people would be happier.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 10/07/2022 09:38, Recliner wrote:
>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 09/07/2022 21:08, Recliner wrote:
>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 09/07/2022 17:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>>>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>>>>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>>>>>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>>>>>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>>>>>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was one
>>>>>>>>>> of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't necessarily
>>>>>>>>>> have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or whoever) rather
>>>>>>>>>> than people you hire permanently now there's the political will to have
>>>>>>>>>> a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>>>>>>>> the next right wing leader.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What's in danger is HS2. Johnson loves big, expensive infrastructure
>>>>>>>> projects, but most right-wing Tories don't. I bet several of his potential
>>>>>>>> successors would happily either cancel HS2 altogether, or cut it back
>>>>>>>> further.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And, right on cue:
>>>>>>> <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/09/hs2-rail-project-should-scrapped-voters-tell-conservative-leadership/>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Extract:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The HS2 rail project must be scrapped by the next prime minister, voters
>>>>>>> have said in a new poll that will put Conservative leadership candidates on
>>>>>>> notice.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Almost half of the public would like to see work on the £100 billion high
>>>>>>> speed line linking London to the Midlands and the north stopped, after
>>>>>>> costs spiralled out of control.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Only 17 per cent of those who backed the Conservatives at the last election
>>>>>>> think the highly controversial scheme should go ahead, compared with 52 per
>>>>>>> cent who now oppose it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lies, damned lies and statistics! 52% of the people who backed the
>>>>>> Conservatives last time? That’s a shade under 23% of voters. If the
>>>>>> Conservative vote share goes down in the next election, which it might
>>>>>> well, notwithstanding a bounce back post-BJ, then that will be even fewer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I’m not saying the numbers aren’t significant, just that they aren’t what
>>>>>> you might think if you just scan the text.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It is the Telegraph.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, and guess which paper will have the most influence on the Tory
>>>> leadership campaign? Which paper do Tory party members and all the
>>>> candidates read?
>>>
>>> The Daily Express
>>
>> I very much doubt it.
>>
>
> Carry on doubting, just remember the final say is with the rank and
> file, not all of whom will be reading the Telegraph and many just want
> their prejudices confirmed which the Express does with a will.
>

From the data I can find, which admittedly is from a book written in 1994,
the Express is in third place behind the Mail and lead by the Telegraph
amongst Tory party members. The Telegraph had about double the Express
readership.

On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 11:37:26 -0000 (UTC), Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>> On 09/07/2022 17:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>> Lies, damned lies and statistics! 52% of the people who backed the
>>>> Conservatives last time? That’s a shade under 23% of voters. If the
>>>> Conservative vote share goes down in the next election, which it might
>>>> well, notwithstanding a bounce back post-BJ, then that will be even fewer.
>>>
>>> What percentage of the 32% who voted Labour? Could easily be well below
>>> 20% of the electorate or even single figures.
>>>
>>
>> The chart in the article says that the general public would vote 46:16 to
>> scrap HS2; Tory voters were 52:17, so only marginally more anti-HS2.
>>
>> I can see a scenario developing this week where the candidates are
>> competing with each other to promise tax cuts (or cancelling planned tax
>> rises), both personal and corporate. They're bound to then be asked how
>> they'd fund them. Would they cut defence spending? No, they want to
>> increase it. Would they cut health and social care funding? Definitely
>> not. Education? Of course not. But HS2, with so little public support,
>> would be an easy target.
>>
>>
>
>The trouble with HS2 is the arguments for it are marginal at the best of
>times. The immediate benefits are for a relatively restricted geographic
>population, whilst the rest of the country sees overcrowded short formation
>trains. Even the population that will benefit probably suspects that the
>tickets will be priced out of reach of many. If the HS2 money were to be
>spread around the rest of the network a lot more people would be happier.

I think the main problem is that the immediate benefits only go to (usually international) construction companies. The
potential benefits to ordinary citizens from its speed and capacity will probably come only after the new PM has retired
from politics, so s/he won't get any political benefits from it. But the disbenefits are being experienced already
(cost, disrupted roads, cut-down trees, compulsory property purchases, etc). A lot of voters would rejoice if that all
stopped, and resulted in tax cuts, or spending on more popular things.

So, for a would-be PM who wants to get through the next two financially challenging years and hopefully then win a
difficult general election, HS2 is all bad news, with any potential good news for a few voters two or three parliaments
away. The telegraphy has long opposed HS2, and is obviously trying to pressure the candidates to put cancelling it in
their manifestos.

On 10/07/2022 10:38, Graeme Wall wrote:
> Carry on doubting, just remember the final say is with the rank and
> file, not all of whom will be reading the Telegraph and many just want
> their prejudices confirmed which the Express does with a will.

Is it relevant now with newspaper readership being so low?

On 10/07/2022 12:52, Recliner wrote:
> I think the main problem is that the immediate benefits only go to (usually international) construction companies.

But irrepairable has already been done to the environment and many
beauty spots, SSSI etc and of course many people's lives have been
ruined by the construction and having to move to a new home.

In message <tadq1h$1ab18$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:02:22 on Sun, 10 Jul
2022, Matthew Geier <matthew@sleeper.apana.org.au> remarked:
>On 9/7/22 20:47, MB wrote:
>> On 09/07/2022 11:06, Graeme Wall wrote:
>
>>He asked why and was told they were always
>> late settling accounts.  So back in his office he asked the accounts
>> people, they asked if it (something like) a "Preferred Supplier".  He
>> asked what that was and was told that if a company was on that list then
>> their bills would be paid immediately.  If not they wait for the maximum
>> time before paying.
>>
>Our 'preferred IT supplier' gets paid 60 days (to the day I gather)
>after we 'receipt' the goods in the system.
>Every thing is paid for 2 months AFTER receipt.
>
>I software supplier I deal with won't send the next years activation
>codes till payment is cleared. Our system won't pay them will X number
>of datys after the goods are receipted and the invoice received. I keep
>getting into the 'we won't pay till we receive' hitting 'we won't supply
>till paid'.

Don't leave us in suspense - who usually blinks first?
--
Roland Perry

On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 13:07:03 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:

>On 10/07/2022 10:38, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> Carry on doubting, just remember the final say is with the rank and
>> file, not all of whom will be reading the Telegraph and many just want
>> their prejudices confirmed which the Express does with a will.
>
>Is it relevant now with newspaper readership being so low?
>

The Tory party membership demographics suggest that they probably still read printed newspapers. And Tory MPs are
certainly influenced by the Telegraph, just as Labour MPs are influenced by the Guardian.

On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 13:12:12 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:

>On 10/07/2022 12:52, Recliner wrote:
>> I think the main problem is that the immediate benefits only go to (usually international) construction companies.
>
>But irrepairable has already been done to the environment and many
>beauty spots, SSSI etc and of course many people's lives have been
>ruined by the construction and having to move to a new home.

True, but promising to put a stop to it would probably be popular.

In message <I%vyK.96221$A665.51321@fx08.ams1>, at 08:23:04 on Sun, 10
Jul 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>> On 09/07/2022 17:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>> Lies, damned lies and statistics! 52% of the people who backed the
>>> Conservatives last time? That’s a shade under 23% of voters. If the
>>> Conservative vote share goes down in the next election, which it might
>>> well, notwithstanding a bounce back post-BJ, then that will be even fewer.
>>
>> What percentage of the 32% who voted Labour? Could easily be well below
>> 20% of the electorate or even single figures.
>
>The chart in the article says that the general public would vote 46:16 to
>scrap HS2; Tory voters were 52:17, so only marginally more anti-HS2.
>
>I can see a scenario developing this week where the candidates are
>competing with each other to promise tax cuts (or cancelling planned tax
>rises), both personal and corporate. They're bound to then be asked how
>they'd fund them. Would they cut defence spending? No, they want to
>increase it. Would they cut health and social care funding? Definitely
>not. Education? Of course not. But HS2, with so little public support,
>would be an easy target.

What would they (the electors) do with the Curzon St site (as a
microcosm of works which would be abandoned half-built).
--
Roland Perry

On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 13:49:01 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <I%vyK.96221$A665.51321@fx08.ams1>, at 08:23:04 on Sun, 10
>Jul 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>> On 09/07/2022 17:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>> Lies, damned lies and statistics! 52% of the people who backed the
>>>> Conservatives last time? That’s a shade under 23% of voters. If the
>>>> Conservative vote share goes down in the next election, which it might
>>>> well, notwithstanding a bounce back post-BJ, then that will be even fewer.
>>>
>>> What percentage of the 32% who voted Labour? Could easily be well below
>>> 20% of the electorate or even single figures.
>>
>>The chart in the article says that the general public would vote 46:16 to
>>scrap HS2; Tory voters were 52:17, so only marginally more anti-HS2.
>>
>>I can see a scenario developing this week where the candidates are
>>competing with each other to promise tax cuts (or cancelling planned tax
>>rises), both personal and corporate. They're bound to then be asked how
>>they'd fund them. Would they cut defence spending? No, they want to
>>increase it. Would they cut health and social care funding? Definitely
>>not. Education? Of course not. But HS2, with so little public support,
>>would be an easy target.
>
>What would they (the electors) do with the Curzon St site (as a
>microcosm of works which would be abandoned half-built).

Assuming that HS2 was cancelled altogether, and not just cut back to Phase 1, it would become a prime development site.
But I suspect that HS2 would not be cancelled altogether, but cut back and phased over a longer period, so short term
expenditure is heavily curtailed. The site would therefore be protected, even if building work ceased. Euston and OOC
are in a similar position.

It might depend on which candidate is making the decision; some are long-term HS2 opponents who would happily kill it
stone-dead; others would sorrowfully cut it back or slow down work, as a post-Covid economy. And, yes, I'm well aware
that slowing down work makes the ultimate bill higher.

On 10/07/2022 14:06, Recliner wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 13:49:01 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> In message <I%vyK.96221$A665.51321@fx08.ams1>, at 08:23:04 on Sun, 10
>> Jul 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>> On 09/07/2022 17:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>>> Lies, damned lies and statistics! 52% of the people who backed the
>>>>> Conservatives last time? That’s a shade under 23% of voters. If the
>>>>> Conservative vote share goes down in the next election, which it might
>>>>> well, notwithstanding a bounce back post-BJ, then that will be even fewer.
>>>>
>>>> What percentage of the 32% who voted Labour? Could easily be well below
>>>> 20% of the electorate or even single figures.
>>>
>>> The chart in the article says that the general public would vote 46:16 to
>>> scrap HS2; Tory voters were 52:17, so only marginally more anti-HS2.
>>>
>>> I can see a scenario developing this week where the candidates are
>>> competing with each other to promise tax cuts (or cancelling planned tax
>>> rises), both personal and corporate. They're bound to then be asked how
>>> they'd fund them. Would they cut defence spending? No, they want to
>>> increase it. Would they cut health and social care funding? Definitely
>>> not. Education? Of course not. But HS2, with so little public support,
>>> would be an easy target.
>>
>> What would they (the electors) do with the Curzon St site (as a
>> microcosm of works which would be abandoned half-built).
>
> Assuming that HS2 was cancelled altogether, and not just cut back to Phase 1, it would become a prime development site.
> But I suspect that HS2 would not be cancelled altogether, but cut back and phased over a longer period, so short term
> expenditure is heavily curtailed. The site would therefore be protected, even if building work ceased. Euston and OOC
> are in a similar position.
>
> It might depend on which candidate is making the decision; some are long-term HS2 opponents who would happily kill it
> stone-dead; others would sorrowfully cut it back or slow down work, as a post-Covid economy. And, yes, I'm well aware
> that slowing down work makes the ultimate bill higher.
>
I would like to see HS2 cut back to it's original purpose which was to
relieve the southern part of the WCML.

On 10/07/2022 11:02, Recliner wrote:
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 10/07/2022 09:38, Recliner wrote:
>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 09/07/2022 21:08, Recliner wrote:
>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 09/07/2022 17:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>>>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>>>>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>>>>>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>>>>>>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>>>>>>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>>>>>>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was one
>>>>>>>>>>> of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't necessarily
>>>>>>>>>>> have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or whoever) rather
>>>>>>>>>>> than people you hire permanently now there's the political will to have
>>>>>>>>>>> a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>>>>>>>>> the next right wing leader.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What's in danger is HS2. Johnson loves big, expensive infrastructure
>>>>>>>>> projects, but most right-wing Tories don't. I bet several of his potential
>>>>>>>>> successors would happily either cancel HS2 altogether, or cut it back
>>>>>>>>> further.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And, right on cue:
>>>>>>>> <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/09/hs2-rail-project-should-scrapped-voters-tell-conservative-leadership/>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Extract:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The HS2 rail project must be scrapped by the next prime minister, voters
>>>>>>>> have said in a new poll that will put Conservative leadership candidates on
>>>>>>>> notice.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Almost half of the public would like to see work on the £100 billion high
>>>>>>>> speed line linking London to the Midlands and the north stopped, after
>>>>>>>> costs spiralled out of control.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Only 17 per cent of those who backed the Conservatives at the last election
>>>>>>>> think the highly controversial scheme should go ahead, compared with 52 per
>>>>>>>> cent who now oppose it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lies, damned lies and statistics! 52% of the people who backed the
>>>>>>> Conservatives last time? That’s a shade under 23% of voters. If the
>>>>>>> Conservative vote share goes down in the next election, which it might
>>>>>>> well, notwithstanding a bounce back post-BJ, then that will be even fewer.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I’m not saying the numbers aren’t significant, just that they aren’t what
>>>>>>> you might think if you just scan the text.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is the Telegraph.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, and guess which paper will have the most influence on the Tory
>>>>> leadership campaign? Which paper do Tory party members and all the
>>>>> candidates read?
>>>>
>>>> The Daily Express
>>>
>>> I very much doubt it.
>>>
>>
>> Carry on doubting, just remember the final say is with the rank and
>> file, not all of whom will be reading the Telegraph and many just want
>> their prejudices confirmed which the Express does with a will.
>>
>
> The MPs get to choose the final two, so it's they who are the target of the
> current campaigns. And they all read the Telegraph, which is clearly trying
> to shape their manifestos. It looks like this stage of the leadership
> election is going to be unusually vicious, with Team Boris playing an
> active role in score-settling:
> <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/09/conservative-leadership-battle-shapes-one-bloodiest-ever/>
>
> The grass roots, paid-up party members who get to choose from the final two
> probably read a mix of (mainly) the Telegraph, with some Express and Mail.

From recent photographic evidence quite a lot of the mail :-)

<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-62104576>

> It appears that their preferences are already fairly well known, so the
> MPs' focus in the next week will be on stopping the grass roots' favourites
> from making the final two. Wallace apparently saw that, and so pulled out,
> and Truss will probably do badly in the MPs' ballots as well.
>

Interesting that she is still wavering, perhaps she's going for the long
game, wait till they lose the next election and then proclaim herself as
the King over the water[1] they should have had, untainted by the
infighting of the current debacle.

[1] Or Gin.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 10/07/2022 12:20, Recliner wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 17:54:40 +0100, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 09/07/2022 14:10, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> Various appointees have been shamed into spurning those payments,
>>> including the two-day education secretary.
>>>
>>> Nevertheless, the cost to the public is orders of magnitude less than
>>> the damage inflicted by the chaotic not-resignation of the greased piglet.
>>
>> What is this greased piglet meme?
>
> He's been called that since at least 2019. Ironically, Johnson himself used the phrase about Blair in 2004, long before
> Cameron used it about Johnson. Maybe it's an Etonian expression?
>
> “It is just flipping unbelievable. He is a mixture of Harry Houdini and a greased piglet. He is barely human in his
> elusiveness. Nailing Blair is like trying to pin jelly to a wall.”
>
> https://quotepark.com/quotes/1904803-boris-johnson-it-is-just-flipping-unbelievable-he-is-a-mixture/

Thanks, hadn't really noticed it before but it has surfaced several
times in the last week.

>
>> I thought it was Cameron that
>> (allegedly) had an unhealthy relationship with pigs.
>
> Isabel Oakeshott invented that story in her semi-fictional 'biography' of Cameron.

AIUI she claimed the source may have been deranged!

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.