The Queen’s Active Role in the Right Wing Coup 1159

Our obsequious media is actively perpetuating the myth that the monarch can do no wrong, and is apolitical. In fact the monarchy has been active and absolutely central to the seizure of power from the Westminster parliament in a right wing coup. Yesterday’s collaboration at Balmoral between the Queen and Jacob Rees Mogg is only the latest phase.

The monarch appoints the UK Prime Minister. The convention is that this must be the person who can command the support of the majority in the House of Commons. That does not necessarily have to be from a single party, it can be via a coalition or pact with other parties, but the essential point, established since Hanoverian times, is that the individual must have a majority in the Commons.

The very appointment of Boris Johnson by Elizabeth Saxe Coburg Gotha was a constitutional outrage. Johnson may have been selected by Conservative Party members, but that is not the qualification to be PM. Johnson very plainly did not command a majority in the House of Commons, proven by the fact that still at no stage has he demonstrated that he does. I do not write merely with hindsight.

Johnson’s flagship policy was always No Deal Brexit. Contrary to the monarchist propaganda spewed out across the entire MSM, not only is it untrue that the Queen had “no constitutional choice” but to appoint Johnson, the Queen had a clear constitutional duty not to appoint a Prime Minister whose flagship policy had already been specifically voted down time and again by the House of Commons.

The Queen has now doubled down on this original outrage by proroguing the Westminster parliament in conspiracy with old Etonians Rees Mogg and Johnson, specifically so that the House of Commons cannot vote down Johnson.

The monarchy will always be an extremely useful institution in promoting the political aims of the upper classes, not least because of the ludicrous media promulgation of its infallibility. When you have former Prime Minister John Major, senior Tories like Philip Hammond and Michael Heseltine, and the Speaker of the House of Commons himself all talking of “consitutional outrage”, it is plainly preposterous to insist that the monarchy cannot, by definition, have done anything wrong.

The Queen has appointed a Prime Minister who does not have the support of the House of Commons and then has conspired to prevent the House of Commons from obstructing her Prime Minister. That is not the action of a politically neutral monarchy. The institution should have been abolished decades ago. I do hope that all those who recognise the constitutional outrage, will acknowledge the role of the monarchy and that the institution needs to be swiftly abolished.


Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.

Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations


1,159 thoughts on “The Queen’s Active Role in the Right Wing Coup

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
  • John2o2o

    A few weeks ago I had rather a naive idea. In Craig’s interview with Alex Salmond he revealed that he had worked for the Queen in some capacity and had been offered some sort of honour, which he had turned down. (A principled personal decision).

    I would think, given the following quotation from last years Queen’s speech that this would not be something that she would necessarily hold against Craig:

    “Even with the most deeply held differences, treating the other person with respect and as a fellow human being is always a good first step towards greater understanding.”

    I thought at the time that this could be something that might work in favour of independence. In any negotiations Scotland would need to communicate with Buckingham Palace and who could be better than a republican who had not only worked for the Queen, but who had won sufficient respect to be offered an honour? Craig might have influence with the Queen.

    Yes, it was rather a naive idea. Anyone reading this article might be shocked. “Oops, well that’s Mr Murray off the shortlist for the negotiating team then!”

    It’s exasperating. Ad-hominem attacks are for the gutter press, and the baser elements of society who emerge from their lairs and onto comment threads such as this one, ready to spit their venom at those who disagree with them. Attacks such as this serve no real purpose in the real world.

    • fonso

      I’ve just read it. There is no ad hominem attack, much less a venomous one. Cannot say either I had any thought of Craig negotiating with the Queen while reading it. But that’s just me.

    • Republicofscotland

      “It’s exasperating. Ad-hominem attacks are for the gutter press, and the baser elements of society who emerge from their lairs and onto comment threads such as this one,”

      You mean like the British PM, who has insulted folk quite regularly? Or the Queens husband the Prince of Wales (Pity Wales having him) who quite often spouts racist remarks? Or Prince Harry wearing a Nazi uniform? or Prince Andrew and his now deceased seedy acquaintance?

      • michael norton

        RoS if you want a free Scotland you had better start getting your facts straight, I think you will find the Duke of Edinburgh is the husband of our Queen.

      • Republicofscotland

        Michael and Godolphin.

        So the main point gets pushed aside just for a wrong title, one more comment on that and we’ll have the three wise monkeys.

        • michael norton

          Look to home RoS
          Riot police, mounted officers, a helicopter and dog units have been called in following an Irish Unity march and counter protest in Glasgow.

          “It is extremely disappointing to see people acting in this fashion, causing fear and alarm to members of the public as well as putting many people at risk.”

        • Godolphin

          Ros, an ad hominem attack for agreeing with you and merely pointing out an obvious error, which dilutes your comments?

          If I have a choice? I’d take, ‘speak no evil’.

      • Hatuey

        Anyone that thinks monarchy has a constitutional place in 21st century Britain or anywhere is without a doubt sailing close to the wind of madness…

    • kathy

      “Even with the most deeply held differences, treating the other person with respect and as a fellow human being is always a good first step towards greater understanding.”

      Its’ a shame she doesn’t practice what she preaches. Where is the respect towards a fellow human being when she is signing their death warrant as she does personally in her former colonies in the Caribbean.

  • mark golding

    Billionaire Lelie Wexner was Epstein’s Mossad handler. In this relationship, Epstein was privy to Wexner’s financial support for precursors to the Iraq war. Epstein had become a liability. My in-depth study of Wexner and the whispers of ex British police officers engaged in security at his Foxcote House home will reveal much more detail.

    Meanwhile please read this document:

    and scrutinize this insider YouTube:

    I hope you conclude the Epstein ‘black book’ and Prince Andrew is a ludicrous diversion; the ‘British American Project’ is long overdue for a major cause revolution.

  • michael norton

    looks like Sajid might be half a step out of kilter

    The chancellor, Sajid Javid, was not informed in advance about the sacking of one of his senior advisers by Boris Johnson’s strategist Dominic Cummings, it has emerged.

    Sonia Khan, Javid’s media adviser, was escorted from No 10 by a police officer after being accused of misleading Cummings over her contact with individuals close to the former chancellor Philip Hammond, who has been trying to block a no-deal Brexit.

    Downing Street rebuffed speculation that she had leaked the government’s no-deal planning report, Operation Yellowhammer, to the press.

    Khan was the second adviser working for Javid to be sacked by No 10, leading to suggestions that Javid is becoming increasingly isolated from the core of the Johnson regime. This week, Javid’s first major speech on the economy was cancelled 24 hours before he had been due to deliver it in Birmingham. Downing Street, rather than the Treasury, announced a proposed cut to fuel duty that had been briefed to the papers over the weekend.
    A No 10 spokesman said: “We don’t comment on individual staffing and personnel matters.”

    Having two of your advisers sacked without your involvement, having your brief leaked, does not seem that our new chancellor is at the top of his game.

    • Jo1

      And yet the UK media, particularly the BBC, continue to ignore the fact that PM Johnson isn’t in charge, Dominic Cummings is.

    • Dungroanin

      I have long imagined Cummings to be what a young Dr Strangelove would have been like. Based on his personal testimonies.

      A demented pathological genius executive tool for the Pathocracy that employs him.

        • J Galt

          Well he must have some talent to get to where he is.

          I’m not saying he’s not a c**t.

          It is possible to have talented c**ts

          • N_

            He’s talented as well as being a c***, but he’s not a genius. For a man in his 40s to keep going on about what his tutors told him at university is pathetic.

            National revival based on a British moonbase as a central project and on management becoming much more highly efficient across the board strikes me as rather unlikely. Seriously, what do you reckon?

            Apparently while doing all this they are also, according to the cokehead prime minister, going to reduce the national debt each year too. Like yeah, right.

            Note that the moonbase isn’t a metaphor relating to George Mueller’s reorganisation of NASA in the 1960s. It is what Cummings has said he wants literally. That said, if you dig down and try to focus on the essential the idea does function in the same way that war did in the ideology of Italian fascism.

        • Dungroanin

          The unstable genius of Strangelove was my allusion.

          Not as in Da Vinci and other actual historical figures.

      • Ken Kenn

        Cummings and Gurus.

        No, more like Malcolm Whatshisname in the Thick Of It.

        Very sweary and faux frightening, but on contract and may as well be selling soap powder and believing in that ‘ product ‘ too.

        These people will sell anything for a fee.

        Meanwhile I hope to see Boris’s bleary eyed face as the realisation that he could go down in history as the UK’s shortest serving PM sinks in to his entitled brain.

        After that happens Cummings will be off on his next paid ‘ belief.’

        These types of people are legion in politics these days and is the main reason why it’s in the shape it’s in.

    • J Galt

      Never mind I’m sure the ministerial limo and being regarded as awfully, awfully important make up for it.

  • Republicofscotland

    Latest Westminster voting intention (28-29 Aug) YouGov.
    Con – 33%
    Lab – 22%
    Lib Dem – 21%
    Brexit Party – 12%
    Green – 7%
    Other – 6%

    • Hatuey

      That Tory vote plummets if boris fails to deliver on Brexit, as he promised. We know that already. This poll means nothing.

    • Vivian O'Blivion

      Averaging the Scottish sub-sample for the last 4 YouGov polls this month gets you.
      Con – 19%, Lab – 11.5%, LD – 13%, SNP – 45%, Bxt – 6.5%
      Unfortunately if I remember my lessons, aggregating small sub-samples and working out an average doesn’t overcome the unreliability of the individual small samples. Still would be nice if it did. Those numbers would be a fecking massacre.

      • Hatuey

        increasing the size of the “sub-samples” wouldn’t overcome unreliability either. That’s why we use things like standard deviation and margins of error in polling. They’re always unreliable to an extent. Anything involving people and their opinions is going to include a degree of chaos.

        And I think there’s a good case for averaging the sub-samples rather than relying on one single larger survey, given the difficulty of removing bias.

        • Sharp Ears

          Do you by any chance work for a polling company when you say ‘we use things like standard deviation..’

        • Vivian O'Blivion

          Although those numbers are “Westminster elects”, presumably the Holyrood numbers are similar. Sends a message to the naysayers who continue to insist that a “Wings” party in the regional lists runs a risk of an overall reduction in SNP seats.

    • michael norton

      RoS now I know it’s not your fault, you are only presenting somebody else’s research, it is not your own work but let’s put a little thought into these figures.
      Green 7%

      the Green people have only ever produced one member of parliament, so it is almost irrelevant how many people cross green on their cards.
      The LibDem lot have two senior M.P.’s saying this week, they will not stand, again.
      This make these seats much harder to retain.
      Two of the current 14 M.P.’s are turncoats, so the public will not vote for them.
      Quite likely the LibDems will be in single numbers again, after the forthcoming G.E.
      I have no idea how these pollsters could have imagined 21% would vote for LibDem, they probably did a call in Waitrose in Richmond , Surrey. Next question where are the S.N.P. in this poll?

    • N_

      If the Green Party’s voteshare really does quadruple in two years, from 1.6% to 7%, some at the centre are going to be congratulating themselves on a job well done.

      It could happen. Probably mainly because of postal votes which are hurriedly mixed in with ballot papers completed at polling stations.

      Current propaganda is saying that young people are flocking to the Liberal Democrats and the Greens because unlike “Jeremy Corbyn” those parties are clearly pro-Remain. Note the focus on that one individual, rather than on “Labour” or “socialism”. It’s being framed as one unsure man in his 60s against the yearning of young people for a happy future. That may give an idea of who is behind this stuff.

      A vote for the Liberal Democrats or the Greens is a vote that helps the Tories.

      • michael norton

        Of course we should also remember that the Changlings only now have five Remainer members of parliament who are all turncoats, these people are also very likely to be deposed by their Leave electorate, at the next G.E.

  • Old Mark

    Johnson’s flagship policy was always No Deal Brexit.

    What utter bollocks ! If that were the case, and knowing the commotion ANY prorogation would ignite, he would have gone for 1 November as the date to re-open Parliament.

    Did Craig and the doolally Remainers here not see the puppyish enthusiasm with which Merkel’s tentative offer to consider tinkering with the ‘backstop’ was greeted by Johnson only a week ago ? Have they forgotten that he, and Rees Mogg, when push came to shove, actually voted for May’s turd of a deal ?

    The choice of 14 October as the date for the opening of a new Parliament isn’t an arbitrary one- it is just a few days prior to the Council of Ministers meeting in Brussels later that week. It is plain to anyone with an ounce of political intelligence that that meeting will be the stage for some political theatre, where Johnson and the 27 ‘thrash out’ a few amendments to May’s deal (primarily to the ‘backstop’), and present this as a ‘triumph’ to the gullible electorates of Europe. Corbyn Swinson & co will then be forced into a corner- either eat this or yes, No Deal, that nightmare you were telling us all about a few weeks back, will truly be a reality. They will be made to look fools- and the electorate won’t forget it.

    • Hatuey

      You remind us that they voted for the “turd” of a deal then tell us their plan is to tweak it and reintroduce it…

      Of course, they also voted against it twice. And when they eventually voted for it it was with conditions regarding the trade negotiations and deal.

      Anyway, the most important thing you say is that Corbyn and Swinson will be cornered and forced to either support his new deal or face crashing out with no deal. May made that exact same argument, about 4000 times. How did that go?

      The best and most obvious route to a deal that gets something across the line would be for Boris to make an arrangement with the SNP. Give them their section 30 in return for abstaining on his EU deal. Scotland gets the choice of being involved or leaving, and isn’t put in a position where it’s scuppering English democracy and the right of the English people to Brexit.

      And it would be a fantastic way of sticking two fingers up at Swinson and Corbyn, both of whom I regard as slugs.

      What’s not to like?

      • Old Mark

        the most important thing you say is that Corbyn and Swinson will be cornered and forced to either support his new deal or face crashing out with no deal. May made that exact same argument, about 4000 times. How did that go?

        Since the Spring the rhetorical volume about No Deal has risen considerably- particularly this week, with wild claims that Bojo and Rees-Mogg have obtained Palace approval for ‘a coup to bring on No Deal’- when a cursory study of the dates shows it is no such thing. Now a prorogation until 1 November WOULD justify that theory… but the date chosen, mid- October, just before the Brussels’ meeting, suggests a different game is being played…and the Remainers are so consumed with red mist that they can’t see this.

          • J Galt

            However I don’t think that will prevent her being found a safe seat in the leafy ‘burbs – after a suitable interval of course – for services rendered.

        • Hatuey

          I’m not disputing that, old mark. I think boris is determined and likely to get a deal and that he’s also bluffing to an extent on the “no deal” front.

          It’s on that basis that I tend to talk about the prospects of getting any deal through parliament. I think labour, the libs, and tort rebels will vote against any deal he brings home. The SNP could be the way to break the deadlock.

          That all said, I think boris and those around him are, if it comes to it, prepared to crash out. Bluffing is a dangerous business, you end up going through with things that you really shouldn’t, just to prove a point…

          I speak as someone who has lost thousands playing online poker.

          • Old Mark


            I think the most likely reaction to Johnson pulling a rabbit out of the hat at Brussels just before the Leave date, and then presenting a re-packaged Maybot deal to the HoC is-
            1. Tories (minus 15-20 rebels) vote for it, along with the DUP.
            2. Corbyn Swinson & Blackford huff and puff, express remorse at leaving the EU blah blah.
            3. Swinson (and possibly Corbyn ) then reluctantly ask their flocks to vote for it, but don’t whip them into doing so.
            4 SNP and Plaid keep the faith, vote against it- Blackford on the grounds that only the SNP are following the clearly expressed Remain vote in his country in 2016- so vote for us , and independence, next time.
            5. Deal is affirmed comfortably and with a whisker of time left,

          • Hatuey

            All very plausible, old mark, but the ERG might not like it and I can’t see Labour or the Libs going for it. I’d say the chances of Lib Dem acceptance of that are less than zero.

            It will, as I said, come down to horse-trading in the commons. I’ve always believed the EU will do what they can to compromise. And I believe the backstop has been exaggerated in terms of its importance and complexity.

    • Deb O'Nair

      ‘It is plain to anyone with an ounce of political intelligence that that meeting will be the stage for some political theatre, where Johnson and the 27 ‘thrash out’ a few amendments to May’s deal (primarily to the ‘backstop’), and present this as a ‘triumph’ to the gullible electorates of Europe.’

      That’s the parallel ‘reality’ where Johnson goes on TV today talking about the UK being in the final stages of negotiations with the EU and how the opposition are trying to scupper his hard-fought for deal of the century – pure delusional bullshit from a proven pathological liar; there are no negotiations going on and the EU are not going to budge to accommodate Johnson, it’s a constructed narrative so that they can blame no-deal on the EU and setup the EU as the whipping-boy for the inevitable and dire consequences. How many times does this have to be repeated before people in the UK get it?

      • michael norton

        I think you are correct Deb O’Nair, Boris was the choice of The Donald,
        Donald wants to do the bigliest deal in history between U.S.A. and U.K.
        This cannot happen if U.K. remains in or semi-detached with the E.U.
        It was always going to be the hardest of hard brexit.
        This is the only option that gives freedom of choice for the U.K. government to do anything they like.
        Expect Huawei to be consigned to the dustbin.
        One aspect of the bigliest deal ever, could be for the U.K. to take on the role that had been assigned to Erdogen’s Turkey,
        all F-35 aircraft deep maintenance and repair for the Western Atlantic, Europe, Africa and the Middle East
        was to have been done in Turkey, now they have been removed from the programme, entirely, by Donald Trump.
        The USA officially removed Turkey from the Joint Strike Fighter programme – the international effort to develop and manufacture the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II stealth fighter – less than a week after the country received shipments of the first components of Russia’s S-400 anti-aircraft missile battery.

        • Dungroanin

          And they are going to buy Russian planes that actually work and don’t cost anywhere mear as much as the dogs dinner F35.

          The endgame in Syria is underway – Erdogan has abandoned his headchoppers and is stopping them running into Turkey. MoA has a great update on it.

    • RandomComment

      I am not sure that is the case. It’s possible, but people who really want a no-deal Brexit, do not trust him either.

      Willing to bet on the last minute fudge which attempts to save face all-round, is being hashed out as we write.

      • N_

        @RandomComment – Could be. What are you thoughts on what shape it might take?

        Some may favour a nominal exit which they can say satisfies the knuckledragging Powellites who voted Leave but which in practice leaves things more or less the same for 2 months “pending” a referendum rerun which they hope will result in a victory for Stay. But my feeling is they will get stitched up. There’s a lot of money in uncertainty, and even in the rate of change of uncertainty. Greeks (finance).

        • RandomComment

          I’m not exactly sure who/what Powellites are. But I agree there is a lot of money in uncertainty, and think some people will get very rich out of Brexit.

          Yet, Brexit was triggered by the working classes – with obvious and good reason,

          • Deb O'Nair

            “Yet, Brexit was triggered by the working classes”

            Brexit was triggered by the Tories who put political power ahead of national interest. Can’t see many member of the ERG, nor the Brexit Party, who would fit into a definition of “working class”. Many people who voted for Brexit took their cue from years of anti-EU hysteria whipped up in the oligarch owned media, like the tripe that Johnson used to dish up when working for the Telegraph and Times.

          • RandomComment

            You’re right, I should have said the working classes were triggered by Brexit.

            The idea that the Oligarch-owned media is pro-Brexit, is a peculiarly UK-centric analysis.

    • N_

      Johnson’s flagship policy was always No Deal Brexit

      @Old Mark – You are right. @Craig is mistaken about that.

      If “flagship” means what Boris Johnson has openly advocated and proudly flown his flag from, then No Deal certainly has not always been his flagship policy – or anyone else’s, as far as I am aware.

      1) During the referendum campaign Johnson implied that he wanted a Leave victory in the referendum so that there could then be a second referendum to stay in the EU on better terms which excluded participating in further centralisation.

      2) He also said there would be a deal, as did most of the other Leave leaders.

      3) Even now he says there can be a deal. Apparently achieving it by 31 October is like putting a man on the moon. I am not joking.

      From 23 July 2019, when he was running for the Tory leadership:

      Tory leadership frontrunner Boris Johnson has insisted Britain can leave the European Union with a deal at the end of October if the country has the ‘will’ and the ‘drive’ for Brexit. The former foreign secretary said if it was possible to get to the moon and back 50 years ago then the problem of frictionless trade on the Irish border could be solved.

      In the words of the Eton Boating Song,

      “Swing swing together
      With your backs between your knees”

      (How can you put your back your knees?)

    • Alyson

      Maybe I’m talking twaddle. Please correct me if I’m wrong. But what happens after? The Queen delivers the speech written by Rees Mogg, saying stay indoors and die quietly? Boris calls a General Election? This closes Parliament down for the next 25 days? Shops are empty? Lorries line the Motorways? Traffic stops? After 3 weeks Boris declares a State of Emergency? The election is cancelled? The army are called out onto the streets to kill more British citizens more quickly? And hooray henries cheer from their bunkers? Meanwhile evil rogue states do terrible things and the wrong people get blamed? Okay. Worst case scenario. But. This evil government is evil enough. I hope I am very wrong here.

      • Dungroanin

        More like once a national emergency is iniatiated Bobo lays down his premiership and spouts does his ‘far better than any other thing’ exit – to enable some wildebeest to be appointed with the Royal Family used to sell it – thus depriving us a general election and restricting the Corbynite Labour participants in the next government.

        It is the only way for them to stop a Labour victory.

        That is the real coup not this prorogation which is designed to introduce an EMERGENCY.

    • Dungroanin

      The brexiteers only policy was a hard brexit onto WTO – long planned.

      The unilareral red lines and added self destruct backstop bomb in the WA insured a deal that would be rejected by the TORIES themselves. The WA only came about aftet the first year of Davies buffoning around with no plan for WA because Labour were able to get a Meaningful Vote on any WA.

      You guys spinning such recent history like some dodgy stage mesmerists is woeful – look into my eyes…

  • N_

    There’s a lot of woo about right now, as celebrity politicians declaim that they can see the future: Johnson claims parliamentary opposition to Powellism, or to “Brexit” as it’s known, is “making No Deal less likely”, while Sturgeon says that whatever today’s event was (does it matter?) makes Scindependence “inevitable”. What a pair of pose-strikers in love with the media they both are.

    • N

      They both stay in character, though, so they should be able to get good deals for their memoirs when they retire from politics, which will probably within 12 months in both cases.

  • Laguerre

    Pretty well all theories presented here, and indeed elsewhere, suppose that if Cummings and Johnson manage to “get over the line” on 31st October, they’re home free, things will calm down and Johnson can win his election (if he doesn’t choose an election before, but that is thought to be not certain). This of course is not the case. If it’s no-deal, there’ll be a lot of trouble in the following weeks (empty shelves and all that). Even if there’s some kind of deal, there’ll still be quite a lot of disruption. Johnson won’t be able to call an election post-Brexit. He’ll still be stuck with no majority until next year at least. And a lot of lies passed under the bridge, when people figure out what’s happened to them. It’s not surprising that Cummings has only agreed to work until 1st November, if I recall correctly, and then he’ll be out and leave the resulting mess to others.

    • michael norton

      Laguerre, you may be correct and if another G.E. election is held and we have a very slim majority government in power, either Jeremy Corbyn or Boris Johnson, the the U.K. is probably stuffed.
      Either way we can not continue in this Limbo, we have to move for all in Stay or all in go, no half way measures, please.
      How are the Yellow Vests getting on crashing the Economy of France?

      • Laguerre

        The gilets jaunes have given up. You never hear anything about them any more. They’re dead. That doesn’t suit the far right in Britain, evidently.

        • Mr Shigemitsu

          “You never hear about them any more” *on mainstream media*


          That means nothing, and they clearly haven’t “given up”.

          Here’s the live stream link: “Acte42” on Sat 31 Aug at 15.00 local time doesn’t look like anyone’s “given up”.

          • Anthony

            Hmmm, how do we know that’s not faked? I’m sorry, but I continue to find Laguerre’s ‘reports’ [cough] on the gilet jaunes far more compelling than those of any cameraman or journalist and I’m very relieved to read today that this ‘far right’ movement is now dead, having given up.

    • Laguerre

      PS I wouldn’t be surprised if the French Douanes at Calais decide to do a work-to-rule, as they did the other week, as a result of the overload, being bolshy. Nothing to do with the French government. But confusion.

    • Republicofscotland

      Don’t be so sure, some leavers are prepared to suffer in the hope of capturing the old nostalgia of pre-EU/EEC Britain.

      One example as such, I can only call it deluded or brainwashed, was a woman who called into LBC’s Nick Ferrari show, a while back, she is a staunch leaver and was quite calm about it when she told Ferrari, that she’d lose her business if we left the EU, but it was worth it.

      Needless to say Mr Ferrari was momentarily stunned, before regaining his composure, and saying to the woman, you really feel that strong about leaving, of which she replied yes.

      Many, many leavers know fine well the shit is about to hit the fan big time, however leaving is more important to them than any economic disaster.

      • Laguerre

        Yes, of course there are people like you describe, and indeed a lot of them. “We won the war, and we’ll do it again”, even if they lose their businesses. The question is whether there are enough to assure Johnson his majority, post-Brexit. It’s possible, of course, if Johnson can whip up frenzy enough. I would have thought though, that there’s going to be some sober reflection when the figures don’t add up. Commercial people are like that. In the end it’s the figures that count.

        • Laguerre

          I should have explained that even if I wander in ideas about Brexit, my partner is the daughter of a shopkeeper, and she has kept me well in line about what business people do. That means that it is the basic line that counts. Not wild promises of being ready to lose their business.

      • Brianfujisan


        Aint it Amazing how just a few short years ago, we hardly ever heard any grumblings, complaining, Protests about the EU from the hoi polloi.
        Frightening how many people can be whipped up into a frenzy in a very short time.

        P.S Cheers for your post of August 29, 2019 at 13:07..Re the OilofScotland Link

        A lot of precious info in there.

    • Dungroanin

      As i say above the only way to avoid a ge is by installing a gnu – that is the real coup -ABC!

  • Tom74

    My reading of the situation is that Johnson is being sent on a wild goose chase by the EU with some kind of offer of a better deal which will never materialise, or which will be more unacceptable than May’s deal.
    So Johnson returns to the Commons in mid-October empty-handed and, his bluff called, brings May’s deal back unchanged. That is rejected, as the DUP, almost all of Labour and the Lib Dems for various reasons will never support it.
    Facing No Deal, and the ruin that means for the Tories (moderate voters will never forgive such reckless incompetence over Brexit, and Brexiteers will never forgive being ‘conned’), Johnson begs for another delay from the EU, which is refused or comes with strings.
    Johnson then either revokes Article 50 or there is a long delay, probably with the promise of another referendum to soften the pill.
    Interesting times.

    • Sharp Ears

      Revoking Article 50 and that timeline was included in the scenario presented by Auntie on the Six O’Clock News, scripted by Tory Central Office methinks.

    • Deb O'Nair

      Johnson is more likely to revoke a GE than A50. I don’t know where you get the idea that Johnson is not willing to leave the EU without a deal or that he has the any long-term concern about the country or even his own party.

      • Bramble

        Johnson says he wants a deal, Deb. An astonishing number of people I used to think were intelligent and informed, like Peter Oborne, seem to believe him. Ruth Davidson gazed into his eyes and came out similarly deluded. He really is the seducer nonpareil.

    • Johny Conspiranoid

      The EU has been clear for years about its position, meanwhile the UK political discourse revolves around the chances of the EU changing its position, which are zero. A world of delusion.

      • Shatnersrug

        Not one thing Boris Johnson has said he’d do has occurred – he has lied at every stage of his political career. He lied his way into the London Mayorship, he lied his way through the foreign office and he lied his way through numerous affairs.

        He is still lying now, so if Bozza says we’ll leave the EU on the 31st of October you can absolutely bet we won’t.

        You lot are all so worries about Brexit that you’ve all suddenly become Johnson believers. There will be no Brexit, Johnson wants to pass the Theresa May deal, that’s it. That’s why he’s closing parliament.

        He’s playing chicken.

        All parties know that Brexit can’t happen they’re just trying to figure out how to blame the other side for its cancellation. Boris’s one hope is that May’s deal can be tarted up and show to a parliament that have no time to debate it

        Please people don’t believe boris, he’s a serial liar.

  • Trowbridge H. Ford

    Wonder if anyone posted Walter Bagehot’s claim that the Queen had the right to warn her chief advisor in the Commons Boris Johnson that he was heading for a constitutional crisis.

    • RandomComment

      That’s a bit weird when people who love him and his music have to pay around fifty quid for the honour

      As a Barrett fan, I feel like Noriega 😉

      • Brianfujisan

        Cheers for that Video Mark..I hadn’t seen that one.. Very beautiful.. I seen Floyd live in Earl court, on the Division Bell tour, Great stuff.

        • Shatnersrug

          I worked on a secret show with David Gilmore not so long ago, it was some charity do that was undoubtedly funded by the national endowment for democracy CIA bullshit, but nevertheless Mr Gilmore rocked the house, opening with blistering version of Astronomy domine total surprise and absolutely mind blowing. If I was skeptical before hand I was blown away after.

  • Goose

    Difficult to know what’s going to happen. Could be the calm before the storm as many Tory MPs are still on their holidays, returning this weekend.

    If an election comes, just can’t envisage five years of govt under a Boris Johnson’s premiership. He’s too gaffe prone and controversial and not really suited to the disciplines of leadership. In normal times, the thought of him being PM would’ve been laughed at. Johnson has assembled a govt of naive rank amateurs; a cabinet that hold extremely right-wing views – both economic and socially – as Ken Clarke stated on Channel 4 news, views that are potentially very out of touch and unpopular with the UK people. Giving that lot a big majority would scare not just the country but the Tory party itself . Scottish independence wouldn’t be hard to achieve in that scenario, as a Johnson govt’s popularity would fall like a stone in a unhappy post-Brexit UK.

    • Laguerre

      Johnson hasn’t got the position for a victory, pre or post-Brexit. He’s stuck in the mud, as May was.

      • .giyane

        Johnson does not understand that we belong to a family, a family of European nations. With families you do not conduct yourself with arrogance and rebellion.
        May’ s political instinct was right in this and the right wing if the Tories are wrong.

        In a family you have to have humility and make concessions. The BBC is constantly trying to interest in US news.
        But the British people detest America and adore Europe.

        The rest of the family of Europe will not tolerate Johnson and Cummings bad behaviour. It is very bad for the UK to have such an emotionally, spiritually and intellectually bankrupt bully.

        • Godolphin

          .giyane, I don’t fit your simply defined British people definition, and I suspect I’m not alone. I admit to believing I belong in the European family but also have literal and figurative family and friends throughout the world. I’m more at one with my US family than my European or Asian, politically speaking.

          My belief is that Britain’s problem is that it is genetically tolerant. That said; BJ is just the latest politician to be letting me and my family down. It’s what they do. There’ll be another one along shortly.

          • giyane


            I regularly fly over Europe. It takes about 15 minutes to get to the continent.
            Am I thinking thank god I don’t have to see or mix with those evil scum down there?
            if i was flying over the US that is probably what I would be thinking , because they were so far removed from reality that their soldiers actually thought they could teach Iraqis civilisation.

            Since I’m naturally curious, what exactly is it about US disconnect from reality that you find you have in common with them please?

            BTW I’m not sure where the . came from

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Goose August 30, 2019 at 21:12
      He wouldn’t have to last five years in order to do an awful lot of damage, along with his fellow buffoon across the pond.
      He might well sign up to a bunch of horrendous ‘trade deals’, which may be impossible to get out of without huge financial losses, involving the NHS, below (our) standard foods, GMO’s, and whatever.
      Five years? Five days is way too long.
      On a number of occasions he has only just suppressed bursting out and laughing in some of his questioners’ faces, like he has pulled off something (a coup?) and there’s sod all anyone can do about it.
      Hopefully, he’s got another think coming.

  • Muscleguy

    I have long been of a republican bent simply due to inherited political power being an affront to natural justice. I am now of the opinion that relying on a hereditary head of state to guard democracy is like asking a hungry shark to look after a school of fish.

    The Spanish king might have berated the military in their attempted coup but the actions of that monarchy over Catalunya tells you all you need to know about their commitment to democratic principles.

  • Tatyana

    If someone is interested in my opinion, all your talk about the Queen makes no sense for me, because I do not understand what a Queen is. What are the duties of this figure? What is her competence? Some say that she has no political power, but at the same time some claim that she has some power. Strange creature she is.
    I grew up in a society whith no royals. The society where all power figures depend on the mood of the people. It is strange to me to hear that a person with a certain surname has a stronger opinion than another person. More valuable opinion simply by right of origin, but not due to her merits to the people, not because of her experience or knowledge. It’s really weird.
    In the history of my country there were many examples of rich heirs who tried to take power by right of ancestry, but that was stopped. And still in my society there is a dislike for modern “rich heirs.”

    *the current goal of the memes in Ru-net is the son of the Attorney General, whose surname by an unhappy coincidence is “Чайка” (“Seagull”).
    Enjoy the baby bird of Seagull 🙂
    ***how to build a business empire with a portfolio of orders in 300 billion rubles to your 30-th birthday***

    Back to your royals – the Russian news say that Brexit threatens the country with a shortage of medicines, food, government support for the poor and so on.
    The Royal family, and indeed the rich people in your country, have already promised to open their treasuries to support the people in difficult times. Have they? I guess, no.
    They are rather playing for time, trying to better invest their own capital at the eve of the big changes, to maintain their privileged position. The strangest thing about it – you do nothing to change it, but still believe you live in a democracy.

    I wonder, who you are, the people of UK? Are you just a collection of people who happen to temporarily live in the same territory? Do you feel like “the real hosts of the state” have the right to decide for you?

    • Dungroanin

      You have it right.
      You ask great questions.
      You havent had the same (related) royals for a hundred years.
      Lucky you russians. But …

      You are not quite free. Why reintroduce the patriarchy? For the people ??

      I say every few generations a revolutionary moment rises amongst the people.
      This is the UKs time.

      I hope we become great friends.

    • Observer

      Rich stuff. You strike me as a well-adjusted Russian in a highly rigid and controlled society, looking to unpick a rather free society. (Perhaps to console yourself on your own lack of freedoms.) You should visit Salisbury sometime this winter and also check out your oligarchs and other sundry crooks in Kensington.

      • zoot

        they enjoy the freedom of the world’s money laundering capital and the freedom to bribe the british conservative party.

    • Observer

      Are you able to see on your television live pictures of what is happening in Hongkong? Do you have the steely balls or ovaries to get out on the streets of Moscow or St P and fight for your freedom? And I mean fight, again and again and again, almost without fear.

      You may think you have a great leader in Putin. But you know what they say about Banyan Trees? Nothing grows under it. Don’t be complacent.

      I have long maintained that China is the biggest political experiment in modern times. We shall see where this one country, two systems goes. Is this just the tip of the spear? Biggest experiment because of the size of it’s galloping economy and population.

      Russia in that context? I don’t know, but from a distance it looks like a relatively lazy country. Except when it comes to it’s very own military industrial complex (is this the first time it’s been mentioned here in this blog?) and the energetic oligarchs, Putin fronts and puppets. All very strange for a country that leads in rocket-science-technology. Guns and/or butter.

      • Tatyana

        You describe your ideas about Russia in general abstract phrases (e.g. lack of freedom, need to fight, Putin puppets). You think that the russians need to fight, again and again and again 🙂 one question – for what? You probably forgot the fact that Putin with his politics is supported by the majority of the population? Thanks for your feedback, but we fought enough in 1917 and 1991, now we solve our problems through dialogue and compromise and most of the population is quite happy with it.

        It is surprising that you consider the favorable environment for money laundering in UK to be some advantage. Yes, in Russia it is inconvenient for oligarchs to do it, they are caught and put in prison. In the UK they live freely and spend stolen money. Just like your rich folks. But the number of such people in society is never the majority. If we talk about the standard of living of ordinary people, in Russia it is noticeably rising and rising, I can say it with confidence, because I am a native resident of Russia.
        I would even say that the standard of living rises every time Putin prevents an oligarch from withdrawing russian money to foreign banks. And rises every time “Putins fronts and puppets” catch another corrupt official and transfer the stolen billions back to the state Treasury. 🙂

        Perhaps in your opinion, it is the policy that russian people with steel balls should fight against? 🙂
        Thank you again for your valuable opinion, I understand that the flow of russian money into your country is beneficial to you… but not for me, sorry buddy, everyone’s on their own. We’ll figure out whom we support and what to fight against, without you.

    • Republicofscotland

      Yip your spot on Old Lizzie, (and she’ll get much older they have the best physicians someone else’s money can buy) and her wretched parasitic brood, (which gets bigger year on year) are an embarrassing drain on our society, they’re a quaint relic of times gone by.

      I recall her last Christmas message in which she asked the UK public to knuckle down, tighten our belts and we’d get through this Brexit uncertainty. Of course Old Lizzie was sitting in front her gold piano in her 770 odd roomed house, and secure in the knowledge that she and her parasitic brood would be flown off to saftey if Brexit saw the UK go into a violent meltdown. Whilst the rest of us faced economic armageddon. Of course Russia despatched its last parasitic monarch, and never looked back.

      • Ralph

        So, you would rather have something like president bliar?
        At least you don’t like that disasterous scotsman g brown. Just think, if scotland had been independent say in the early 90s, then we would never have had bliar & brown, and ALL the problems they have caused.

        • Republicofscotland

          “Just think, if scotland had been independent say in the early 90s, then we would never have had bliar & brown, and ALL the problems they have caused.”

          On that I wholeheartedly agree.

          • Ralph

            Wow, a Scot who actually agrees with me.
            Reminds me of this joke: When a Scotsman does something good, then I’m a Brit, but when a Scotsman does something bad, then I’m an Englishman.

        • Dungroanin

          Yup a president liar restricted to meeting and greeting and cutting ribbons and handing out medals for a fixed term of say 2 years would do just nice. Like a mayor.
          The Princes and Princesses could stand too? If they got enough nominations.

    • Goose

      The monarch is a ceremonial or decorative figure for the most part – the UK monarch being akin to Germany or Ireland’s non-executive President… however the powers of the monarch via the *royal prerogative are anything but ceremonial. These powers are vested in the govt and are capable of being abused to avoid scrutiny and accountability, like any other powers.

      *The royal prerogative is a body of customary authority, privilege, and immunity.

      • Tatyana

        a decorative position is an attractive hostess who greets guests in a restaurant. Or a young secretary that serves tea and coffee in a company. The decorative nature of their positions is that they do not have access to the internal affairs of the company, they stay outside of inner information and do not influence decisions.

        The head of the company, which is still recorded as the head of the company, whos ancestors were the heads of the company, whos children are expected to be the head of the company, who owns big money and has ties with the heads of other companies – can he/she be decorative figure? It is strange that in the eyes of outsiders there is something decorative in this.

        Because it is logical to assume that he just hired a manager, so he does not personally control the bussiness, as long as everything goes as planned. But he certainly has his finger on the pulse.

        • Goose

          The Queen is granted a weekly audience with the PM, the meeting lasts around an hour. it’s preceded by a meeting with the cabinet (which usually lasts half an hour). The meeting between PM and monarch isn’t recorded (no minutes) so what’s discussed remains a mystery.

          In the past there’s been concern expressed here in the UK, that Prince Charles, should he become King, will use such meetings to try to be a very interventionist monarch. These concerns stem from the content of his correspondence with ministers was very political – the govt was force to revel the correspondence after fighting a legal battle to withhold it. The govt exempted such correspondence from the FoI so we don’t know if it continues.

          *The monarchy is the only public body to enjoy a total exemption from the Freedom of Information Act. That means that members of the royal family – unlike politicians and civil servants – can carry out their roles in almost total secrecy.

          • Goose

            Maybe that should be , the PM is granted a weekly audience with the Queen, since technically it’s HM’s Govt.

    • Mr Shigemitsu

      “The Royal family, and indeed the rich people in your country, have already promised to open their treasuries to support the people in difficult times”

      The UK government owns the Bank of England, its central bank, which is the monopoly creator of Sterling, the UK’s sole currency.

      We do not need to depend on the wealth of the Royal Family, or on any other rich person or entity for that matter, in order to run our economy.

      We are constrained purely by the limits of the “real” economy (labour, materials, energy, land, etc), which dictates the capacity of the economy to absorb spending (both public and private) and not by how much currency the govt has at its disposal, the amount of which is infinite.

      By all means tax the wealthy to the hilt to curtail their money power and the unfair influence it bestows upon them, but unless we have a sudden desperate need for some fancy diamonds, emeralds, and the odd Leonardo cartoon or gold crown, the Monarch’s baubles are quite safe in their display cases, for the sycophantic viewer to gawp at.

      Buckingham and Kensington Palaces, however, could usefully be turned over to public housing, after some considerable renovation, perhaps with a Royal apartment or two in the mix?

      • Tatyana

        I’m not saying that you depend on this money, it’s just a marker, an obvious indicator of how rich people relate to the common people – whether they will offer their help, whether they will share the money.

        For example, in my region Sergey Galitskiy is most respected rich person. He founded a company and built a network of food stores, it is the largest food retailer in Russia. Also he built a network of football clubs which are free of charge to attend by children. And he also built the amazing park and stadium in my city

        Galitskiy said: “I’ll spend all my money in my lifetime” and “I’m successful in this city and with these people, I have to spend that money responsibly, and that takes a lot of my life, too. Otherwise there is no point in earning”

        • Baron

          Tatyana, please what’s кнопкодавство, the meaning of the word, is it something akin to an apparatchik, a bureaucrat?

          I’m trying to listen to Anatolij Sharij, the Ukrainian blogger, his Russian’s excellent, but he also uses words that are new, or made up from English. In google translate one gets the translation of кнопкодавство as button and push (or pushing), but the meaning must be different, no?

          You were kind in the past to translate another word for me, can you help again, please?

          On the Queen: The Monarch is the Head of State not unlike Presidents in systems of governance where the power of the the function is limited, but not fully absent. It may be unusual for a democracy to retain an institution from the distant past, but it has worked well for Britain because it’s the institution that matters, the individual is but the bearer of of the title. The institution itself is but a bridge between the past and the future, it furnishes a continuity, it links the present with the past, just as you may have your parents, grand and grand grand … parents you recall yourself, but in the case of the royal heredity it stretches way back for centuries.

          Other democracies have similar anomalies, in the Republic, people insist on bearing arms, in case of you, the Russians, there’s the preference for a strong-armed leader, a Tzar, wouldn’t you say?

          • Tatyana

            Baron, the translation is correct, the word is formed from the “button” and “pushing”. As always, it’s all in the sense of the term. This word denotes the “work” of parliamentarian who does not vote personally, but pushes the “right button” on command of his party.

            I can’t understand why you’re not happy with studying history and visiting museums to keep the bridge between the past and the future 🙂 Anywway, it is not my business, if you think it is ok, so it’s up to you.

            No, I wouldn’t say we prefer strong-armed leader 🙂 We prefer strong-armed Army (sorry for the tautology). Leaders come and go, but every healthy man in my country serves a year in the army. So, as you can easily guess, all the population of my country knows the current state of the army.
            As to leaders, we prefer clever intelligent sober persons with wide experience and clear understanding of the situation, decisive, patriotic, respecting the nation he serves to, and with good sense of humor 🙂

  • Hatuey

    “The EU wants to extend Article 50 to avoid a no deal Brexit, it has emerged, as Eurosceptic MPs said Brussels was starting to crack under the pressure applied by Boris Johnson.

    “Emmanuel Macron was said to be ready to “withdraw” the October 31 deadline, and the European Commission said another extension was “obviously a possibility” in a clear softening of its position ahead of intensive negotiations next week.

    “The EU believes that by offering an extension it will undermine Mr Johnson’s argument that Brexit has to happen in two months’ time “deal or no deal”, but Brexiteers cited the news as evidence that Brussels is starting to panic…”

    • .giyane

      Only a total arsehole like Johnson could conceive of European gestures of good will are Europe starting to crack. Total wanker.

      • Hatuey

        Boris is transformed from hero to zero instantaneously in the eyes of brexit voters if he doesn’t take us out by the end of October. The Tory party would be finished too.

        Those Europeans are clever.

      • J Galt

        Is it not the case that we are presented with two sets of wankers?

        Macron in particular would give Boris a run for his money for “Wanker of the Year”!

    • Deb O'Nair

      The Telegraph? Pah! Cheer-leading, they have the pig in the poke for £250,000 p.a.

    • Dungroanin

      Can’t take anything Macron says serously – he is the bankers tool and therfore would ve encouraging a hard brexit. He is the cuckoo in the EU nest.

  • Dave

    Parliament opposes No Deal, but most conservative MPs support a Deal, as a big majority voted for May’s Deal, but Parliament, 3 times, voted down May’s Deal. So what other Deal can be made?

    The Deal that has always been there, remain in the customs union, if it had been promoted by May with Labour support.

    The conservatives are in a panic fearing electoral meltdown for failing to deliver Brexit, but a compromise deal delivers Brexit, but leaves the custom union question for another time and I think such a compromise would be popular in the country and win a General Election for Labour or Conservative depending on who proposed it.

  • Ros Thorpe

    I think it will be abolished once the queen dies. The many sordid scandals of her children will ensure that.

    • Bramble

      The monarchy survives sordid scandals. It excels at them, after all. Check out, for example, Bertie, Edward VII. It may not survive her enabling of a far right coup. Though her biggest enemy in the media is Murdoch, and he is cheerleading for the buffoon.

    • Brian c

      I wouldn’t bet on that Ros. They are very cute strategists and shapeshifters par excellence. Witness the big push to frame the younger ones as open, affable and relevant to a modern diverse society. The royals have the support of virtually every voice in public life and a media that is more unabashedly reverential than ever. The propaganda iwill be ratcheted up to ear splitting levels once the old girl passes away, attempts at questioning laughed off or simply ignored. Charles won’t be around long enough to do them terminal discredit, so expect the farce to continue to run and run.

      • J Galt

        Well if her maj makes it to her centenary she may well see out Charlie, in which case they go straight to Willie – which I think would suit them just nicely.

    • Dungroanin

      The queen or king of the day represents the Crown which is the holder of the ancient powers and guarantees the aristos hold.

      They would just elect the next in line.

      They will NEVER give up – it has to be taken from them, always.

  • Republicofscotland

    Not an MP and with no political authority, closed shop speaker, Gordon Brown who’s wheeled out regularly and fawned over by the media, has said he believes the EU will withdraw its current 31st of October deadline.

    However the EU Council has said it cannot withdraw a deadline, and that only the member state can ask for a further extension.

    Brown of course is spouting his usual bollocks.

      • Republicofscotland

        Im just pointing out what a lying unionist ratbag Brown is, for the thousandth time.

    • N_

      @RoS – “However the EU Council has said it cannot withdraw a deadline, and that only the member state can ask for a further extension.

      That distinction is a matter of framing only.

      The important point is that a further extension is being painted as something that the EU27 wants, as something a bunch of nasty foreigners are trying to force on Britain.

      PS Where did you read that “the EU Council has said it cannot withdraw a deadline”? The Council only meets over 2 or 3 months.

      • Republicofscotland

        “PS Where did you read that “the EU Council has said it cannot withdraw a deadline”? The Council only meets over 2 or 3 months.”


        Try clicking on a link (provided) now and again and you’ll find the answers.

        • N_

          I did – I looked at that article by Kathleen Nutt in the National that you linked to. It doesn’t say anything about the EU Council. I also looked at recent EU Council press releases. I wonder whether Ms Nutt understands what the EU Council actually is.

          • Republicofscotland


            My article quota means I cannot access the full article, however I have the paper version in front of me, which says.

            “Article 50 says membership ceases to apply to the state which is leaving two years after the notification of departure, or unless the European council, in agreement, with the state concerned, decides to extend the departure period.”

            “It means the EU cannot withdraw any deadlines, and extensions have to be requested by the member state that is leaving and agreed by all other members.”

            Courtesy of the National newspaper.

  • N_

    Notes on the prorogation

    1) This very short prorogation is principally a preparatory run.

    2) It is a preparatory run for much more incisive government action. You think this is crisis? You ain’t seen nothing yet!

    3) For another example of a preparatory run, look at the campaign against the regional assembly in Northeast England in the referendum of 2004. Run by Dominic Cummings it was preparatory for the Brexit referendum campaign 12 years later. Many lessons were learnt. This time the gap will probably be less than 100 days, perhaps even 10 or 20 days.

    4) Who says what to whom inside the Westminter bubble and also outside it is being carefully watched. Think of how after real military coups or attempted coups a few very intelligent people make a detailed study of who picked up the telephone to speak to whom – which army and airforce generals, which politicians, which intelligence and security agency chiefs, which judges, which ambassadors – and of who returned from vacation, etc., and also of who was unavailable on the telephone, during the crucial few hours, in order to learn for the next time. There are signs that men based in 10 Downing Street are acting with such considerations in mind.

    5) “Climate of fear” is a phrase that trips easily off the non-thinking person’s tongue, but that does not mean the centre isn’t deliberately creating one. They are. I mean inside the administration. A few heads have already rolled. You will notice that the owners of said heads are too scared to blab to the media.

    6) The channels along which “criticism” of the prorogation has been caused to develop (“allowed” to develop, in naive parlance) have mostly been very strictly defined – in the MSM, the court system, the fringe media, clicktivism, and the open air.

    7) I don’t know what the next “political” rearrangement of pieces is in the plan, but the prorogation is enjoying success. Currently there is no “snafu”. Developments are being controlled at a higher than snafu level.

    8) Government lies are reaching an unprecedented level in the sense of senior government ministers including the prime minister standing there and telling obvious blatant lies. Donald Trump is mentally ill and has been a pathological liar all his life, but the fact that such an individual is now president of the United States is not just a matter of that individual’s derangement but it is pivotal to how the political state spectacle is being operated from the centre at the present epochal turning-point. Think about the “I really don’t care. Do U?” jacket that Melania Trump wore as she “helped the children”. They knew exactly what they were doing with that, and if you don’t think about properly you will NOT know what they were doing. Similar techniques are being used in politics in Brazil and now in Britain.

    9) It is also about time that anyone who is interested in social critique should take a look at the deliberate lowering of literacy levels brought about using smartphone addiction and also using big-budget cultural productions such as “Game of Thrones” which trivialise murder, a fact which nobody writing in the MSM and hardly anybody writing in the fringe media has the guts to notice. Fairly clear a cull is coming.

    • Doghouse

      “Government lies are reaching an unprecedented level in the sense of senior government ministers including the prime minister standing there and telling obvious blatant lies.”

      Unprecedented b/s. It is simply service as normal. They always lie, always have, not just now and again but every time they open their mouths, they have to because for the most part they are not working for the people or to the agendas on which they are elected. It’s all a charade yet somehow manages to keep the country ticking over for better or worse. Viewing it through one set of filters or another does not alter the fact that it is still filtered perspective.

      You state Trump has spent most of his life lying, I have no idea whether that is true but recent history indicates its a fair qualification for his office. Sadly Hilary wasn’t elected probably because her truthfulness and honesty really sets her apart eh? The question the American people should have asked themselves, the question the British people should be asking themselves, the same question people all around the world should be asking themselves, is not which one do we choose, which box for the X, but “how on earth did it come to this.”

      The most sensible thing I’ve read on this thread was the earlier quote from Burke, he was nailed on.

    • Hatuey

      “preparatory for the Brexit referendum campaign 12 years later”

      And with that you checked into the Twilight Zone…

      • N_

        Bear in mind that in 2004 at the time of the regional assembly referendum they did not expect the Brexit referendum to happen 12 years later – they expected it to materialise the following year, 2005, shortly after Tony Blair’s envisaged third general election victory.

        In Dominic Cummings’s words:

        In 2004 with James Frayne and my uncle I set up the campaign to fight the referendum on the North East Regional Assembly as a training exercise for an EU referendum (then envisaged after Blair’s 2005 victory).

        • Dungroanin

          It does explain Sunderland and the dark arts of FB personalised ads he commissioned. Another dot joined! Nice work.

  • Republicofscotland

    One of the real reasons for Brexit is to make a small group very wealthy at the expense of the UK public.

    “Crispin Odey, Brexit backer and Johnson donor, bets £300m in short positions against UK firms. Same man made £200m betting against sterling in 2016. And Johnson has the f’kin nerve to make speeches about Remainers “betting against Britain”. Should be on the front of every paper.”

    • Doghouse

      Don’t you think anyone with the inside track will be making a pretty penny whichever camp they sit in? They do it because they have the inside track, because they know how, and because quite simply, they cannot help themselves. Is it a world of honesty and moral integrity? Will the mighty powerful rich and influential remainers stand by their convictions and turn down the opportunity to make megamegapounds? May was a remainer, admitted to her husband being her closest and most influential advisor, he is also an investment banker. Does anyone seriously think he won’t be showing an incredibly tidy profit on the outcome or hasn’t been these last three years and more? Personally speaking, I don’t think I need the inside track on that bet……

      • Republicofscotland

        “Don’t you think anyone with the inside track will be making a pretty penny whichever camp they sit in? They do it because they have the inside track, because they know how, and because quite simply, they cannot help themselves. ”


        Yes I agree, however those in the know including wealthy Tories such as Rees-Mogg, are manufacturing chaos and uncertainty for financial gain.

        They’ve prevaricated on numerous occasions helped by some in the media blaming the UK’s woes on the EU, and eliciting a reaction from the public that its also all the fault of immigrants.

        Brexit isn’t about making the UK great again, it’s about making a select group of politicans and businessmen/women very wealthy indeed.

        • michael norton

          Wot Twaddle, Mr.&Mrs. Rees-Mogg are reported to jointly be worth one hundred afifty million pounds, why on Earth would they seek any more money RoS?

  • Hatuey

    Events today will be dominated by protests, both in the UK and Hong Kong. In both countries, the highly destructive forces of hypocrisy have been mobilised.

    In Hong Kong the protesters have been discouraged and told they are likely to be arrested and jailed. But in the UK the opposite has happened, the protesters have been encouraged by an establishment that is now openly calling for civil disobedience.

    Remainers have now given up any pretence of having the moral high ground in the Brexit debate.

    If Independence supporting politicians in Scotland had ever called for civil disobedience, people like Gordon brown, Ruth Davidson, Corbyn, and the rest, would be calling for their heads and threatening to send in the tanks.

    I’m frankly astonished by the political atmosphere of the last few days. I listened to LBC yesterday in amazement. I can’t remember a time when mainstream pundits and politicians were openly calling for and encouraging civil disobedience.

    This is playing with fire.

    • Courtenay Barnett


      When the Iraq war was looming – a million people marched in protest against it.

      Many MPs and establishment and anti-establishment members marched for reasons of principle.

      So – if Boris’ policy is perceived by many to be undemocratic in principle – then what is the great argument against protest?

      • Hatuey

        The Iraq War was a morally reprehensible exercise in butchery and theft. It’s your duty as a moral being to protest against stuff like that, not your right.

        To compare that with the boneheaded rabble-rousing we have heard over the last few days is not only dangerous but it undermines the moral foundations of protest itself.

        But let’s be clear, there’s a difference between civil disobedience and protest. I am predicting you will see the difference today on your TV screens.

        When you are telling people that Britain is the victim of a coup and openly fanning the flames of civil disobedience, you better have good reason. And the trouble is they don’t have good reason.

        The Remainer argument has collapsed. They have stopped calling for a second EU referendum. They have succeeded in making it impossible for Brexit to be realised as far as Parliament is concerned but only by engaging in underhand methods themselves.

        When the speaker announced a few months ago that ordinary members of the house could act as the executive and introduce government policy, he crossed a much more serious line than Boris crossed when he extended the prorogation period.

        I’m against Brexit but there are no grounds for negating the result. If you want another referendum, there’s a way of achieving that; you put it on a manifesto and vote for it in a General Election. That’s how the system works. That’s what the SNP are doing, for example.

        You can’t just trash the whole system when it doesn’t deliver the result you want.

        • Doghouse

          Hatuey 12.27.

          Bang on, well said. I’m right in the middle matters not to me in or out. But what we are seeing here – have been seeing here, is the real attempted coup whilst those behind it do all the finger pointing. Ever thus.

        • Doghouse

          Hatuey 12.27.

          Bang on, well said. I’m right in the middle matters not to me in or out. But what we are seeing here – have been seeing here, is the real attempted coup whilst those behind it do all the finger pointing. Ever thus.

          • Doghouse

            Sorry about the duplicate, not sure how that happened – it warned me about same thing on an earlier post that I hadn’t sent!?

        • Vivian O'Blivion

          Oh do get Bercow’s decision on control of the Order paper into some perspective. The Order paper continues to be normally under the control of the Executive. The Commons only wrests control of the Order paper when the Executive is behaving in an underhand manner. Remember, considerable effort was required to force May to permit a “meaningful vote”.
          In a practical sense Bercow’s decision does the Executive a favour. The alternative is a Vote of No Confidence.

          • Hatuey

            “The Commons only wrests control of the Order paper when the Executive is behaving in an underhand manner”

            As defined by whom?

          • Vivian O'Blivion

            Hatuey. You appear to be arguing in favour of an elected dictatorship. This is what May attempted in 2017 when she managed to form a government by bribing a handful of Calvinist gangsters. By attempting to refuse a meaningful vote on the Brexit arrangement she negotiated (in secret), she may as well said “I’ve chosen my Cabinet and my Ministers, the rest of you can fuck off back home for the next 5 years.”

          • Hatuey

            “You appear to be arguing in favour of an elected dictatorship.”

            If I’m arguing in favour of “elected dictatorship”, you are arguing for unelected dictatorship.

            I know what I’d rather have.

            This year they are trashing the Brexit vote with your support; next year they’ll be trashing the Scottish independence vote.

            You’re supping with devils and you don’t even know it.

    • Ian

      Oh tut tut. People protesting about the hijack of democracy, an alt-right coup, and you simper about how terrible that is. lol

      • Hatuey

        You have intelligence enough to come on here and type stuff, but you can’t accept the EU referendum result.

        It’s perplexing to me.

        • Observer

          You are lying H, it’s not perplexing at all. Just like you have the mainstream media, you also have mainstream commenters. Why would you expect anything different?

          Good comments btw, but i didn’t get your SNP angle.

          • Hatuey

            The SNP angle is simple.

            The result of the 2014 referendum on Scottish independence was “achieved” under much more dubious conditions than the Brexit result.

            Remainers moan about over-spending on Facebook adverts; in Scotland in 2014, the whole MSM system, newspapers, TV, the BBC, the big 3 political parties, The UK civil service, supermarkets, celebrities (many of whom were basically bribed to come out against independence), foreign dignitaries like Obama, all came out against us.

            There was also a lot of of seriously underhand manoeuvring and rule breaking. Purdah laws, for example, were completely ignored with the infamous “Vow” — we knew at the time this pledge amounted to a pack of lies and time has confirmed we were right.

            The term ‘project fear’ was coined in Scotland for good reason. They put the fear of God into us.

            Brexit voters don’t know what ‘project fear’ is. They had rich and powerful friends on their side, they had funding, half of the MSM on their side, celebrities, politicians across all parties, academics, you name it.

            When the independence movement was defeated in 2014, did the SNP say the result didn’t count? Did the SNP hijack parliament? Did they call for independence supporters to engage in civil disobedience? No, no, and no.

            We licked our wounds and picked ourselves up. The SNP pledged to go for another referendum only if the constitutional terms of the Union were fundamentally changed.

            When the SNP said in their manifesto of 2015 that they’d push for another referendum in the event of us being pulled out of the EU against Scotland’s will, nobody anywhere considered it a radical or controversial idea. It wasn’t. Indeed many in the independence movement were disappointed, but they accepted it.

            And that’s what the Remainers need to do. You can’t trash the whole system when it goes against you, even when dubious methods are used against you.

          • N_

            Project Fear is standard stuff from the status quo side in most plebiscites and general elections. There’s nothing new about it, any more than there is something new about the “time for a change” side selling sunshine. It’s called “better the devil you know”. Both sides were as dirty as each other. Do you ever stop whingeing?

        • Ian

          Sorry, Hatuey, I just think you don’t get it. This has morphed way beyond brexit and the referendum, into something quite different and more dangerous. Which I believe was the ultimate aim of the alt-right from the beginning. This isn’t just about brexit and the exercise of a flawed system trying to accommodate it – now being swept away – this is a first step. There are a number of good analyses around, Bannon is particularly open about what he and the groups he supports, including of course Johnson and Cummings, are trying to achieve.
          If you think that you can isolate brexit and what it is now a proxy for -absolutely nobody even bothers arguing for the ‘benefits’ any more – it is a rightwing putsch – from the hope for independence, as Craig rather complacently has been arguing, then I fear you are not paying attention, and failing to understand.

    • Doghouse

      It is indeed playing with fire. It takes the scream at the sky day called by the Hilary nerds to a whole new level. Another example of the people being used as a tool (including those doing the rousing) by an unempathic avaricious mostly hidden borg machine. It will do anything to get its own way. Sadly, things like this never end well when people cannot see they are being used and mobilised….. unimaginably so.

      Let’s hope nobody is harmed in coming times. Dangerous times indeed……

    • giyane


      If the elites want protest, why are they letting loose the dogs of EDL today on the stop the Coup protesters in central Birmingham? The answer is , darling meaning of giyane , is the elites want divide and rule .
      So the quickest way not to be ruled is not to be divided. So calm down.

      • Hatuey

        To be clear, the remainer camp have been calling for civil disobedience this week, not simply protest.

        And when I said they were playing with fire, it was based on the assumption that the other side would do likewise.

        • giyane


          You aren’t being clear at all. I want leave .I won’t join a Remain demonstration.
          But I don’t want No Deal or May’s Hard Brexit Deal.
          I want the benefits of free movement of goods and people without having to be told who to fight by Angela Merkel, organiser of the Syrian War.

          It’s so simple. We voted leave the EU and we leave under Jeremy Corbyn on the basis of Norway +
          after the Liar and imposter who has shut down Parliament is forced to stand down by Parliament for abusing the constitution by proroguing parliament at a key moment in our debate on Brexit.

          The reality is that the Tories have not been able to implement the extra taxes they want to impose on us to fund the NHS and Elderly care in the new Queens speech.
          Johnson is pretending by having a new Queen’s speech that he has a new mandate for increasing taxes.
          But we won’t pay the taves without a general election because Johnson’s faction in parliament
          destroyed the efforts of the lady in charge who did have a mandate to pass a Withdrawal Agreement.

          We the British public will never accept our parliamentary being hijacked by an aggressive wing of any party which then plunges the country into chaos with its extremist views.
          may has been forced out because of the Good Friday Agreement and Parliament has been closed down because of No Deal.

          The Queen should not have taken the advice of the coup leaders against Mrs May because her majority collapsed because the DUP opposed the backstop and Johnson has no majority for No deal.

          The remainers can just carry on crying into their pillows till Kingdom come. The only person who has a concept of Brexit that can take us through the first stage of brexit is Jeremy Corbyn.

          If at a later stage the racists want to kick out the Eastern Europeans and destroy British Industry, they can new referendums which ask those questions.
          Right now the only thing we have to do is to leave the EU.

          • Hatuey

            “We the British public will never accept our parliamentary being hijacked by an aggressive wing of any party which then plunges the country into chaos…”

            Giyane, you cannot see the hypocrisy dripping from your lips but it’s all over your best shirt.

            When Bercow gave ordinary MPs the right to introduce legislation and effectively determine government policy, he crossed a much more serious and dangerous line than that which Boris proposes to cross by extending the prorogation period by a few days.

            If you tolerate this, if you allow factions within the establishment to override elections and governments, you actually don’t even have the pretence of a democracy.

    • N_

      I listened to LBC yesterday in amazement. I can’t remember a time when mainstream pundits and politicians were openly calling for and encouraging civil disobedience.

      This is playing with fire.

      It’s orchestrated from within the government. They are getting the kind of “opposition” they want, having defined the lines it should think and develop along, and what it should focus on. Or how this appears to Dominic Cummings: put your opponents in a position where you can react faster than they do. The next three months will be dramatic.

    • Observer

      You’re slipping Sharpie, putting it bluntly. Brian has already told us about this. Please read before you jump.

      • Sharp Ears

        I am sure Brian won’t mind a bit. The Facebook link I gave from Roger Waters was dated yesterday!

        Tell us something interesting Observer.

    • Hatuey

      Nicely juxtaposed example of moral and legitimate protest as compared to the immoral and illegitimate civil disobedience of those who want to negate Brexit and democracy discussed above.

      Does everyone understand how it works now? In one context protest and civil disobedience may be appropriate, in another inappropriate. I’m sorry the world isn’t black and white for those of you who struggle with the nuances of reality.

      • giyane


        Are you speaking on behalf of the Liar in Chief when you conflate being anti Hard Brexit with being anti the dictator’s version?

        By comparison, when I got divorced I consulted a solicitor who wanted me to take aggressive legal action.
        The second i understood his letter I told him i didn’t need him and I found another solicitor who processed the divorce without completely destroying the goodwill that remained.

        The Tories use the same adversorial legalistic arrogance against us the people as they now want to do with our cousins in the EU. Turkey’s opposition’s success was garnered by refusing to accept the nationalistic populism of Erdogan. While the rump of the Tory insurrection, shoed in by Nick Ckegg in 2010 staggers through its last days I guarauntee to you that the only way out of the brexit impasse is to oppose nationalistic populism.

        From time to time I have a pop at Craig about Scottish nationalism. Nationalism is ALWAYS a total waste of energy and time. By definition. Regional administration is another thing, but it should never be pursued through nationalism or populism.

        • Hatuey

          I’m guessing you had a big pile of bits and pieces left over in your kitchen of understanding and decided to try and come up with some sort of cake here, Giyane.

          I’m against any form of brexit. I’m possibly the most pro-EU person who uses this forum. I love Europe and I love the idea of integration.

          And I despise Boris but I don’t think he’s any different to the other animals that the English electorate have forced on us over the last 40 years. He hasn’t killed anyone yet, as far as I know — although it’s early days — and comparatively speaking that makes him quite unique. So far, so okay.

          There are two types of people who refer to the Scottish independence movement as a nationalist movement: 1) idiots who have no idea what they are talking about, and 2) people who want to undermine the movement.

          Were the Eastern Europeans who wanted the Nazis out of their country nationalist? Were those same people nationalists when they opposed Soviet domination? Were the brutalised Indians who stood up to the Raj vile nationalists? How about the 50 million or so American indians that were wiped out, were they nationalists too? How about the Lech Wałęsa, Salvadore Allende, and say Fidel Castro — more stupid nationalists?

          Anyone that stands in the way of pillage and plunder is a nationalist. I get it now. Ireland, the middle east, South America, South East Asia, full of diseased nationalists. Everything makes sense to me now.

          And that makes me a vile nationalist too.

          • Republicofscotland

            There are two types of nationlism in the UK, British nationalism, which is something to be proud of and pushed incessantly by the British media.

            The other is Scottish civic nationalism, which is in the eyes of the former version, is evil and divisive and separatist in nature.

          • N_

            Were the Eastern Europeans who wanted the Nazis out of their country nationalist?

            How many Hungarians served at a senior level in any government of a united Germany from Bismarck to Hitler? Let’s ask Tony Blair or Gordon Brown.

            It must be hard, walking along Scottish streets fearing the St George Gestapo is about to drag you off and take you to an extermination camp. And it is you who mentioned the Nazis in Eastern Europe.. That’s the kind of thing they famously did there.

          • giyane

            Forgive me Hatuey for being confused . According to you , the people who chose the name Scottish Nationalist Party either didn’t know what they were talking about or wanted to undermine Scottish Independence.

            Why don’t they re-name their party the Scotland Independence Party so that bystanders like me don’t get confused. The answer is that politicians mangle language and use false slogans like Islamists use the word Islam when they are in fact murderous Nazi control freaks who are supported by very right wing Tory zionists like Boris Johnson and Pritti Patel.

            You say Johnson hasn’t killed anyone. What about the millions of homeless Syrians who have been forced out their homes and country fleeing from the terrorists for whom the USUKIS neo-cons built vast concrete bunkers. I would say he’s probably killed more that fellow Etonian Cameron already , before becoming PM. But I get deleted when I say that so we’ll just have to wait and see.

          • Hatuey

            Giyane, I’m sure you’ll be working on a retraction and apology once you’ve read that the “N” in SNP stands for National rather than Nationalist.

  • Doghouse

    An appropriate analogy would be the people of Scotland would it not. They embraced democracy, accepted a referendum result and have worked through the democratic process and peaceful demonstration to position themselves for another referendum opportunity. What could be more civilised and how big would the hoo-ha have been if Scottish politicians, media, establishment figures and people of influence had been calling for civil disobedience, violence, and what ultimately could transcend to civil war? Horrific scenarios.

    I’ve said it before, if you want democracy, consider yourself democratic then behave in a democratic way, a way which excludes conditional democracy which is another way of expressing petulance that could end in disaster and mass bloodshed. Which is what we are and have been seeing…..

    The forces behind the massive disruption these last three years will have no qualms about starting a war, any type of war as a tool of progression towards whatever they see as their goal. No qualms at all, they do not care about people, not a jot of empathy. None.

    If you do not want to see people no different from you bloodied in the street and worse, then behave peacefully and ignore these mad fools.

  • N_

    More on Dominic Cummings, including his business connections

    Above I referred to the Klute nightclub in Durham. Revelling in its reputation as one of Europe’s “worst” clubs, it was owned by Dominic’s hardman uncle, Phil Cummings. Dominic himself worked there for a time as an enforcer.

    Does anyone fancy arguing at the door with the owner’s nephew? Before you answer, please remember that according to this source the bouncers at the club “accidentally killed someone” in the late 1990s.

    Here is a 1987 Channel 4 piece on Durham area gangland. I am told the Klute club appears in that clip, but haven’t verified.

    Yesterday Dominic was reportedas telling special advisers at 10 Downing Street that if they didn’t like his “management style” they could “f*** off”. What a charmer. But how much “charm” do you need as a bouncer, even if your uncle doesn’t own the club? We know from how he keeps going on about his time at university, even now he is in his 40s, that this isn’t a man who has developed much emotionally in his life. “Don’t like me? Then f*** off!”

    Uncle Phil is the same guy who played an important role in the 2004 regional assembly referendum campaign. A nightclub owner turned man with political interests. Now there’s a thing.

    And…well, whaddayaknow? There is a company called Klute Limited , incorporated in 2010 and with company registration number 07472305. Its two directors are

    CUMMINGS, Dominic Mckenzie, born 1971, a “Political Adviser”
    JACOBS, Yomtov Eliezer, born 1970, a “Company Formation Agent” who has had more than 2000 other appointments registered at Companies House.

    Two thousand. That’s a lot. And Mr Jacobs is mentioned somewhere else too. He is mentioned in this press release by the government’s Insolvency Service:

    More multi-million pound carbon credit companies are shut down following Insolvency Service investigations.

    • Sharp Ears

      Jane Fonda (now aged 81) and Donald Sutherland (now aged 84) should sue for misappropriation of the name of the Pakula film ‘Klute’ in which they starred.

      The Cummings and their associates sound ‘well dodgy’ as the argot goes.

      Here is Cummings before the Treasury Committee.

      How did he and Johnson come together? Via Duncan Smith at Try Central Office and then with Gove at the Department for Education.

      It would appear that the conversion of state education to academies and free schools happened in Cummings’ time at the DfE. Our money flowed out like water to the projects and remember that the state had built, maintained and equipped the academies which are now in the hands of ‘boards’ consisting of local worthies and ‘entrepreneurs’.

      ‘Both are funded by central government and free from local authority control. While free schools are normally brand-new institutions set up by organisations, academies are usually created by converting existing schools run by local authorities.’

      We have been ripped off and done over.

  • MJ

    Anyone seriously interested in Scottish independence will be following the shenanigans surrounding Brexit closely and with growing alarm. What would happen if the Scottish people had the temerity to vote for independence? The blueprint is unfolding before your very eyes. It has two main strands.

    Firstly, a concerted propaganda offensive. Horror stories would be circulated telling the electorate how calamitous the consequences of their decision would be. Voters would be demonised as being stupid, racist and didn’t know what they were doing – the poor dears. How dare they contradict the will of their betters? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it!

    Secondly, a political and constitutional offensive in which Unionist politicians would seek to undermine the very process by which the democratic decision was implemented. Undeterred by the fact that they had ample opportunity to make their own little views known in the referendum itself, along with everyone else, they would stop at nothing to prevent independence happening at all. If a Nationalist came up with a constitutional device to stop the Unionists in their tracks then it is unlikely that Craig would call this a “right wing coup”. He’d be cock-a-hoop!

    Watch closely and learn the lessons. Forewarned is forearmed.

  • Sharp Ears

    Sajid Javid ‘voiced anger’ to PM over adviser sacking
    16 minutes ago

    ‘Asked about the sacking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Mr Javid said he would not talk about personnel issues, but said: “I think my views are well understood.” He insisted that he had a “fantastic” relationship with Mr Johnson and called assertions from the Labour Party that he lacks authority over the Treasury “nonsense”.’ What a weed and very anxious to keep his ministerial car, salary and perks. (excluding their MP’s salary)

    When I see ‘PM’ Johnson does not come to mind. Has anyone ever given him a good thump?

    • N_

      Sajid Javid was making far more money in banking than he now receives in salary and perks at the Treasury, although his current office doubtless brings financial benefits (ahem) that aren’t categorisable under either of those two headings.

      Agreed he has been humiliated in a way that I’ve never seen a government minister of such supposed superiority humiliated before, not by the prime minister but by a special adviser, by staff, and he has responded by wimping out rather than walking out, but I still wouldn’t bet on him staying in office much longer. Philip Hammond is still a player of some kind.

      For the time being Rees-Mogg probably wants to stay as Lord President of the Privy Council and as Leader of the House – in the latter role he is about to get huge public exposure, not only in Britain but around the world – but my hunch is that moving into either No. 11 or No. 10 is on his agenda.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Comments are closed.