Yes Minister Fan Fiction 433


I have been rather unwell this last week with atrial fibrillation, and at 5am last Sunday morning had the paramedics out and puzzling over the ECG results. This particularly severe episode was a result of being out in the cold and storm for hours on the AUOB march, and I felt so guilty at being a self-inflicted drain on the NHS that I declined their offer to take me into hospital and decided to recover at home.

I did however get to thinking about whether, had I indeed toddled off on my next great adventure, I would regret holding information which I had not imparted to you. Well, I couldn’t in those circumstances regret not having imparted it as I would be deid, but you know what I mean. As it happened the thing I found I was most worried about not being able to impart was not, at least on its surface, a case of world sweeping importance, but rather of individual injustice. Though the surface often hides a great deal.

Anyway, having recovered I was saddened by the death of Derek Fowlds, who to me was always Mr Derek of Basil Brush. In fact I remember my confusion when Mr Derek replaced Mr Rodney, who I only learnt this week was in fact Rodney Bewes, another great comic actor of whose wider work I was at primary school unaware. Derek Fowlds of course became most famous in his brilliant role as Bernard in Yes Minister. Lying in bed getting better, I decided to while away the time by writing some Yes Minister fan fiction in tribute.

As with the original series, although based on a realistic civil service scenario dealing with similar events to those the civil service actually deals with, this conversation between a Minister and Permanent Secretary is purely fictional. No real situation is alluded to and any resemblance between the people and situations portrayed here and anything that is happening in real life is entirely accidental. Please do not attempt in the comments section to relate this entirely fictional hommage to Yes Minister to any actual events involving any actual court cases. Because you might wander into contempt of court.

This is of course my first Yes Minister effort.

FIRST YES MINISTER

Perm Sec. You see Minister, all you have to do is destroy your predecessor’s reputation. In the modern “Me Too” atmosphere, you accuse someone of sexual offences and politically they are finished. In fact you can do what you like to him.
Minister Like Julian Assange?
Perm Sec Exactly, Minister. Like Julian Assange. We yelled “rape” at him and then had to do nothing else. The left themselves destroyed him, led by the feminists of course. You see Minister, we feminists can be useful sometimes. (Canned Laughter)
Minister Yes, by the time they had finished with him, the government could torture him to death in plain sight and nobody cared.
Perm Sec Precisely Minister, and the hilarious thing was that there never was any rape and we never had to produce any evidence in court.
Minister Yes, brilliant. But it’s not an exact parallel with Orpheus though, is it Permanent Secretary? We don’t have any extradition request for Orpheus once any sexual charges fall.
Perm Sec The charges won’t fall, Minister, they won’t fall. We will get him found guilty.
Minister But he isn’t actually a rapist, you know. Not one of these incidents looks anything like rape. In fact they are all very flimsy. There isn’t one single independent witness and I don’t think any of them could be proven in court.
Perm Sec Please don’t worry yourself. It doesn’t matter, Minister. All we need is the word “rape” in the newspaper headlines. “Attempted rape” will do. You just tell the prosecutor to get the word out there, spread it in the media and Orpheus is finished.
Minister Even if he is not guilty?
Perm Sec He will be guilty. Whether he is guilty is irrelevant, he will be found guilty. This is where we use “more of”.
Minister “More of”?
Perm Sec Yes, “More of”. It’s not an official legal term, but all the lawyers know it as the oldest trick in the prosecutor’s book.
Minister What do you mean, Permanent Secretary?
Perm Sec Well look, we have the canoodling episode, the kiss in the office and a couple of suggestive remarks about sexy clothes.
Minister The sexy remarks are hardly illegal, are they?
Perm Sec Good God, Minister, what century are you in? (Canned Laughter). Sexual harassment, Minister. Kiss someone at the office party and tell someone else their figure looks good in that blouse, and you have established a pattern of behaviour. “More of” you see, Minister. The “more of” this stuff you throw, the better chance some of it will stick.
Minister But we don’t have that many instances. We went through absolutely everything. We had a team of 24 policemen working on it for 10 months and this was all we can find.
Perm Sec It is time to get creative then, Minister. We need more women to make allegations. In these circumstances it is always best to keep things close. Activate the women you know, Minister, activate the women you know.
Minister I don’t have that many friends, Permanent Secretary. I spend all my time reading books. (Canned Laughter).
Perm Sec Oh really, Minister, think. You must have some women very close to you.
Minister Well, there is Miss Barclay, my own Private Secretary.
Perm Sec Perfect, Minister perfect! Miss Barclay should be good for at least four allegations! Get her to say he tried to kiss her. Often.
Minister But surely nobody will believe my own Private Secretary – and she was involved in putting the dossier together and in discussions on handling the case. Nobody is going to believe her. And (gasps in horror) it really leads straight back to me being behind it, doesn’t it?
Perm Sec It can’t be traced back to you, Minister.
Minister Phew, that’s a relief. It can’t be traced back to me you say. How does that work?
Perm Sec Accuser anonymity, Minister.
Minister Accuser anon… oh yes! Oh yes! I am beginning to see!! They are sexual allegations so…
Perm Sec The identities of the accusers can be kept hidden by the court under penalty of severe jail sentences for anybody who reveals them so…
Minister …the accusers can just be my closest political cronies and the public will never be aware of that! That’s brilliant, Perm Sec!
Perm Sec Thank you, Minister (Canned Laughter)
Minister And thank God for that, because if the party faithful thought that I was trying to stitch up my predecessor they would have my guts for garters (Canned Laughter).
Perm Sec Heaven forfend, Minister!
Minister What? Oh too right. I was just thinking, Permanent Secretary, you know I am starting to get the hang of this. What about old Marmalade? He is very keen to get back into parliament and sees himself as a potential successor.
Perm Sec Marmalade? Well I suppose if we start adding in gay allegations, it does give a slightly more exotic tinge for the tabloids.
Minister I was thinking more of his wife, Permanent Secretary. If the old Marmalade family want a nice safe seat in the capital, let them do something to earn it.
Perm Sec Indeed, Minister. And is the wife not a former Special Adviser?
Minister Yes, is that a problem?
Perm Sec On the contrary, Minister. You see it is very useful. A SPAD is of course only a particularly spotty political hack whom politicians have conned the taxpayer into paying, but technically a SPAD is still a form of civil servant.
Minister Yes, and what of it?
Perm Sec Well, the words “civil servant” convey integrity, honesty and trustworthiness. (Canned laughter). We can leak to the tabloids that one of the accusers is a civil servant, and people will believe it must be genuine and independent. Very cunning idea if I may say so, Minister.
Minister Was it? Oh yes, I am cunning, aren’t I. (Canned laughter). But I still worry that none of the accusations is going to be individually convincing.
Perm Sec Doesn’t matter, Minister, doesn’t matter. Remember “More of”. Quantity not quality, Minister, quantity not quality. They don’t have to be individually convincing, just to give the impression of no smoke without fire.
Minister Oh well, I understand that now. In that case I can think of three or four more women very close to us indeed who can make allegations, if independence or credibility are not important and nobody will ever know who they were.
Perm Sec Volume is important, Minister, volume. It does not have to be heavy stuff. Just get them to allege an attempted kiss here, a brush of the hand on the bum as they were going out the door there.
Minister To build a pattern of behaviour.
Perm Sec Precisely, Minister, precisely. To build a pattern of behaviour. I see you have got it.
Minister But isn’t there a problem here, Permanent Secretary? If this man was a sexual predator on a large scale, there would be whispers for years and people in political circles would surely know. But he doesn’t have that reputation at all.
Perm Sec Don’t worry, Minister, he soon will have that reputation. (Canned Laughter). The media will believe it because we will tell them to believe it. And once the media believe something, the population will believe it too. Every politician has enemies, Minister, Orpheus more than most.
Minister But isn’t there a potential danger here, Permanent Secretary? I mean all of this is nonsense, so won’t he be acquitted and emerge possibly stronger than before?
Perm Sec Don’t worry, Minister, he won’t be acquitted. We have a legally invincible alliance on our side. “More of” is powerful, but “more of” combined with “home” becomes an irresistible force.
Minister (puzzled) “More of” and “home”.
Perm Sec Yes Minister. Answer me this. What does a jury want more than anything?
Minister To do justice?
Perm Sec Wrong, Minister, wrong. Home. A jury wants to go home. (Canned Laughter) Jurors are ripped away from their homes, jobs and families for weeks. At the end of it they are locked in a stuffy room with other jurors they don’t like, and not allowed to go home until they have all reached a verdict. So what do they do to reach agreement?
Minister Aaah, I see now. They compromise.
Perm Sec Exactly, Minister. They will compromise. It’s a natural human instinct to avoid conflict. There will be some people who think him totally innocent as nothing was individually proven, but there will be others who will think he must have done something wrong or there could not possibly be so many accusations. The power of “more of”. Of course they will chuck out the “attempted rape” very quickly as obvious nonsense. In the end they will find him not guilty on nearly all counts, but as a compromise will convict him of stroking someone’s hair, patting their bum or saying they look sexy.
Minister But surely he will hardly be jailed for that?
Perm Sec Doesn’t matter, Minister. “Rapist” will already be firmly printed on the public mind, and so long as we have the magic word “guilty” it does not matter what he is guilty of. And it can’t fail. With so many charges, the jury is simply bound to find him guilty of something so they can compromise and all go home.
Minister Brilliant, Permanent Secretary, brilliant.
Perm Sec Thank you.
Minister So that’s finally going to put a stake through his heart. No more Frank Sinatra comebacks and no more Quixotic campaigns chasing unicorns.
Perm Sec Yes, Minister.


433 thoughts on “Yes Minister Fan Fiction

1 2 3 4 5
  • Giyane

    Well done Craig. The old fart in power has only to tighten his pallet into posh mode at the despatch box for everybody to believe his every word.

    ” What century do you live in ? ”
    In the Muslim community that can be a problem because we have Salafists pretending they live in 500 AD , own slaves and fight by hand, who can switch in a heart beat to being 21st century .

    Cunts. But cultivated antiquity is not the monopoly of British politics.. cultivated pomposity is the ingredient of every culture and society against its political rivals.
    The Asian community loves its word Gora , white man, as a description of universal and primeval corruption.
    The Sikh I was working with last summer answered my objection to the word gora by naming me gora gora.
    As you say, , ” more ” and “home”. You say nothing because you wannago home.

    Thank you for your observations and I hope your heart beats flourish. A very clever consultant discovered that my mum’s heart fad been damaged all her life , possibly from exposure to smallpox when she was young..

  • Steve Ambartzakis

    Craig, take care of yourself, atrial flutter is really no joke, mine was caused by an overactive thyroid and i have undergone to inversions. my cardiologist says “once a flutterer always a flutterer’ so please treat it seriously. There are medications which can prevent the re-occurrence, I use one, and it works. Please see a cardiologist as soon as you can.

  • John Robertson

    I think this is a fine allegory for the Alex Salmond case and I claim my £10 prize! Professor John Robertson

    • RevStu

      Jesus fuck.

      “Please do not attempt in the comments section to relate this entirely fictional hommage to Yes Minister to any actual events involving any actual court cases.”

  • stuart brown

    brilliance itself,,pathos , logos, and ethos allin one with a wee bit of Penache thrown in.

  • Pol Clem

    Unsubstantiated nonsense Craig – There are ten complainers in this case. Suggesting that these folk are in some kind of cabal – and forced / tricked / politically motivated to come forward is again, more nonsense. Best get back to your Night Nurse and take a wee rest. You will, of course, get all the conspiracy mob out to back you up – but these are historical allegations and not a political construct. Bravo, ex-minister!

    • craig Post author

      How would you wish me to substantiate it without breaching the law on contempt of court? Serious question.

      • Pol Clem

        I know exactly what you are referring to – and have the same information as you – I just don’t agree with your take on it – ie the backstabbing … if anything it’s a mess of his own making, yes)

    • pete

      Re “a cabal”

      Ah, I see we are in dog whistle territory again, cabal is a code word for all kinds of nonsense, see: https://www.gaia.com/article/what-is-the-cabal.
      By classing Craig’s post thus you suggest he is amongst the conspiracy theorists, you suggest something dark and arcane. Whereas you will find that a conspiracy can be as little as some kind of vague agreement, a nod and a wink, people have been convicted in court on such flimsy legal evidence.
      Politicians have enemies and they can be motivated by things as simple as envy, greed and ambition. An otherwise unrelated faction can find common cause and join the like minded herd when an opportunity occurs to exploit a perceived weakness. This is what Craig’s post is about, it is why we concern ourselves with wild accusations in the social media and elsewhere. It is sad that he had to resort to parody in order to explain a case before the courts and why your comment is pitifully short of understanding.

  • BabsP

    Just watched your interview with George Galloway on YouTube – absolutely brilliant. Calm, informed, persuasive. You didn’t put a foot wrong. Hats off to you Craig – every time George challenged you, you dissected his point and provided a different and more compelling argument. I was disappointed in George’s insistence that everything -schools, health service etc – was worse in Scotland. Just goes to show it takes a lot of effort to avoid contamination by media propaganda. Being a lot less well-informed than you I find Talkingupscotlandtwo.com gives some good statistics to challenge these claims.

    • Cubby

      Babsp

      Galloway showing the signs of a classic Britnat. Spouting the Britnat media propaganda as if it is correct.

      In the Britnat Pyramid of Lies I would place Galloway in the second layer. A Britnat who knows fine well he is spouting lies but is happy to do so because it reinforces his beliefs. Galloway is intelligent enough and capable enough to know he is spouting lies. I also suspect he does not like to accept he is wrong so keeps spouting the lies to reinforce his ego.

      Labour and Conservative the two cheeks of the British Nationalist ARSE.

    • Vivian O'Blivion

      Note for future reference to Mr. Murray:
      I would lay off the claim that the trajectory of Scotland having one third of the population of England in 1707 to having one tenth the population in the present day is attributable to “colonial status”.
      The “Great improvement” that preceded the Industrial revolution will have brought a far greater percentage of the English landmass into productive, agricultural use than was the case with Scotland. Interconnected to this, the plough and the threshing machine would have supplied a far larger number of farm labourers (or cotters in Scotland) to the mills and foundries of England than was the case with Scotland.
      Going back further to pre-date the Norman imposition of serfdom, due to the universal application of primogeniture in Scotland, second and subsequent sons in Scotland were habitually accustomed to immigration to continental Europe. The gavelkind inheritance practices of England ensured an ever increasing number of peasant farmers (which applies to population trends post 1707 only in as much as it sets a folk memory).
      Note for future reference to Mr Galloway:
      What kind of a twat wears a hat indoors?

      • Cubby

        Vivian o’Blivion

        Have you ever looked at a graph of the populations of England ,Wales, Scotland and Ireland both before the union of 1707 and thereafter?

        I have and Craig is correct – it is just another example of how the precious most successful union was only precious and successful for England and in more recent times for the SE of England. London is now a blackhole for money and people.

        In all of the EU countries the UK is by a massive margin the most geographically unequal member state

        • Vivian O'Blivion

          The trends are not in question, it’s the why’s.
          The Great improvement impacted all of agricultural England, which includes all but a tiny fraction of moors, uplands and forest. The Great improvement in Scotland was restricted to the Central belt, the East coast and Ayrshire and Galloway.
          Scottish second and subsequent sons took the Act of Union as an opportunity to colonise North America and ran with it, quickly establishing a near monopoly on tobacco over the established English traders. At the same time, second sons continued to migrate Eastward to the Baltic coast and Russia where they were ridiculously successful as mercenaries. The continental European trade as mercenaries was established as far back as the Emperor Charlemagne (and that’s as far back as records go).

          • Cubby

            Vivian oblivion

            It’s not a trend it’s actuality. It’s real. The whys are the crux of the matter and it is being part of the UK is why.

            I noticed you just ignored the unequal comment. London is a blackhole for Scotland revenues and its people.

            The union has been nothing but a disaster for Wales Ireland and Scotland. Just like the British Empire has been a nightmare for most of the world.

      • Gavin C Barrie

        T
        Suggest you examine Scotland vs England population ratio circa 1910+. Not such an easy academic explanation via industrial evolution, black satanic mills an’ all.More likely colonial,military misadventures.

    • Tony_0pmoc

      BabsP, Why didn’t you post a link? Despite the headline, the interview was pretty low key. They both showed a lot of respect for each other, as they should do, but I thought the result was a 0-0 draw. They both looked well. Personally, I would prefer Scotland to remain a part of The UK, unless it is completely obvious that a majority of Scottish people, want to become independent, but I’m really not that bothered. I don’t think it would make any significant difference to anything.

      “‘THE UK HAS TO BE DESTROYED’ – So says Craig Murray, Author and human rights activist.”

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elavIgziBjE

      Tony

      • Gavin C Barrie

        That 62% of Scots voted to remain in the EU indicates their preference and yet, “PM” Johnson is sufficiently bothered to attempt to deny that preference. Typing Johnson as “PM” to indicate he isn’t a valid PM, he is a media/establishment construct, that benefits by a FPTP election system. That Scotland has never voted for a Tory government in 60 years I suggest, should be bothersome, if you believe in democracy.

    • JOML

      Galloway looked like he was chewing a wasp, as every point he made was dismissed with ease. Surprised how much Galloway sounded like a Tory, spewing out the routine tabloid rubbish, only for Craig to say that it was more important to him that Scotland doesn’t get sucked into illegal imperialistic wars – ouch, another wasp for George!

      • Cubby

        JOML

        “…Galloway sounded like aTory”

        All Britnats have a lot in common with Tories.

        Labour and Tories the Two cheeks of the British arse with the LibDems the arseholes in the middle. All of them British Nationalist parties with a sprinkling of English nationalist members.

    • michael norton

      Today the employment figures are out, less people out of work than ever before and Scotland is doing well.
      One of George’s points was that it is not yet six years since the last Indyref, at the moment we are going through Brexit, why not wait until that is concluded, then the people of Scotland can better judge if they think they will be worse or better off, split off from the rest of the U.K.
      The trade between the U.K. and the rest of the World has been increasing for the last thirty year but the trade between the U.K. and the E.U. has been decreasing for the last thirty years?

      • Cubby

        Michael Norton

        Why would anyone want to stay in partnership with someone who rips you off and abuses you. JK Rowling said in 2014 that we should give the UK one last shot at being a decent partner rather than an exploitative partner. Well we did and our abusive partner has got worse in the last 6 years.

        Ain’t gonna take it any more.

        All this bumff about wait and see if things get better is just more crap. The UK has had 313 years to convert a forced union into a modern democratic union. I think we have waited long enough.

        What bit of Scotland did not vote to leave the UK do you not understand. What bit of saying our votes do not count is fascist.

  • ianmc

    What would be the motivation for the minister to destroy the previous one’s reputation, particularly if they had already abdicated?

    • Cynicus

      “ I don’t know the answer”
      ———-
      If Orpheus were cleared under the previous investigatory régime, only to be re- accused under the new “zero tolerance” policy of a successor keen to burnish her #metae credentials?

      This, of course, is speculation and fiction.

      • Kathy

        That’s my take on it. Although I can’t for the life of me work out how her legal mind would not see the trouble that could be caused by the retrospectivity in the document she signed. I think she was momentarily distracted by flattery perhaps and was conned.

    • Tom Welsh

      Revenge pure and simple should never be discounted. The English word “power” derives from the French “pouvoir”, which – as well as meaning “power” – has the simple meaning “to be able to”.

      Power is the ability to do what you want, to whom or what you want, when you want – without let or hindrance. The uninhibited exercise of such power is one of the things that political psychopaths enjoy most.

      The slightest resistance to the free exercise of power spoils the enjoyment, and is bitterly resented. Pyschopaths have long memories and no mercy or scruples, so if you have offended one you have a sword of Damocles over your head for the rest of your life.

      Julian Assange is a convenient and dramatic case in point. He disobliged and annoyed powerful people – perhaps even prevented them from doing some things they wanted to do – and therefore they intend to destroy him utterly. Slowly, painfully, in full view of the whole world. As well as being fun for them, this serves the dual purpose of being a warning to others.

    • M.J.

      I understand that across the Atlantic, one of Trump’s motivations may have been to destroy Obama’s legacy, in revenge for the public humiliation that Obama inflicted on him at the White House correspondents’ dinner in 2011. Brilliant man though I believe Obama is, this may turn out to be his biggest mistake.

    • Jaggy

      perhaps because they have been advised by someone who is unhinged and has made a career out of being a senseless destroyer of all forces and organisations for good in our country. The bitterness with which this person lies for political gain and for so long, puts me in mind of that late demented Blue Handbag…

  • Jim McWilliam

    An interesting piece, although I’m sure that no parallels could be drawn between it and the ‘cases’ against Julian Assange and Alex Salmond. ‘Heaven forfend!’

  • Fredi

    It’s shocking how most of both the left and right have abandoned Assange. At various times they liked him for their own selfish partisan reasons but now they’ve left him to the wolves. Gary Gary McKinnon got 100 times the support, where’s Bob Geldof and his aging crew? Obviously the sanctimonious luvvies don’t think he’s worth a song.

    It wouldn’t surprise me if babylon somehow conflate Assanges extradition for Anne Sacoolas dramatic appearance in a dreary English magistrates court. The issue will be she will face a small fine and some press interest for manslaughter while Assange will face a lifetime in a corporate American super max torture institution for efficient and accurate journalism. What a mad world we live in. It’s hard to make that funny. Deek Jackson ought to try.

    Why Americans—and the World—Ought to Be Concerned About Julian Assange’s Extradition Case
    The indictment of Assange is recognized by many free speech groups as the most important press freedom case of our time. Yet, with mainstream media blackout and utter silence of political leaders on this important issue, criminalization of journalism goes on without much of the public being aware of

    https://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/01/19/why-americans-and-world-ought-be-concerned-about-julian-assanges-extradition-case

  • Vivian O'Blivion

    And the hypothetical Minister has had their contract extended to 2022. And no, I can’t even begin to guess as to the implications of this.

  • Bill Laing

    I wrote a Bird and Fortune type spoof interview a few years back when I was questioning UK immigration policy and sent it to the Home Office.

    I got a reply saying it was very funny but did not change their decision.

  • N_

    But how long will civil servants Leslie Evans and Mark Sedwill stay in their jobs? Tony Hall is out from the BBC; Brenda Hale is out at the Supreme Court. Who else will fall?

    Dominic Cummings should sack a few perm secs. Move ’em sideways if necessary on the same salaries. But sacking them would be better. Show ’em a few tapes, or tell them their Panamanian bank account numbers.

    February will be one hell of a month, and the feeling is that there will be much more than a “reshuffle”.

    Thought experiment: imagine if the House of Commons moves to Edinburgh or Glasgow while the building in London is refurbished. The SNP could go full-on whackball and refuse to refer to where it’s located in one of those cities by any other name than “Westminster”. They could no longer sell the line that the location of the British parliament in London implies English rule. They would have to denounce 500 MPs who flew or caught the train up from various places in England to take part in the televised chimpfest as bad bad foreigners hellbent on telling Scots and the local council Sturgeon administration what to do. The hotel companies in Edinburgh would do a roaring trade, though. It would be like an all-year-round fe$tival.

    Moving the Commons north of the border wouldn’t be anything like as unfeasible as the London luvvies think. In South Africa, parliament is in Cape Town, the government administration is in in Pretoria…

    … and the judiciary is based in Bloemfontein. So if Dominic Cummings doesn’t want to go as far as resiting the legislature, he could at least send the Supreme Court up to Edinburgh.

      • N_

        @Cubby – So it’s thoughtcrime even to ask what happens if the House of Commons moves north of the border? Do you realise you’ve shown how right I am that the Scotnat response would be to kook out?

        • Republicofscotland

          Who’s proposing that, I’m under the impression Johnson wants the HoC to move to York or Birmingham. Not to Scotland, thank heavens.

          So for Evans, who is almost certainly a unionist agent, working in a Fifth Column style, she is appointed by London, not by Holyrood.

        • Cubby

          N

          More pish from you. You don’t like criticism do you. Got away with posting a lot of pish on this site in the past have you.

          “So it’s thoughtcrime”. Where did I say that – away with your pish. I never said it was a crime just more of your pish. Do you realise you have shown you do not understand the difference between pish and a crime. I know what Britnats post – pish like you.

          • N_

            @Cubby – You said in your eight-word contribution that my suggested thought experiment was “pish”. True, you didn’t say “crime”. But expanding your vocabulary would be advisable. I’m getting bored with reading how you think that whatever cuts against your preferred brand of nationalistic take on everything is “pish”.

          • Hatuey

            “Got away with posting a lot of pish on this site in the past have you.”

            No, he didn’t. I myself took him to the cleaners about 74 times. Then I got bored.

    • N_

      Lord Hall said the decision had been hard, adding: ‘If I followed my heart I would genuinely never want to leave.’ But he said he felt it was important the BBC had the same leader for the BBC’s mid-term review in 2022 and the renewal of its charter in 2027.

      In other words he got the sack.

      Could have been Cummings, or it could have been “the Palace”.

      • N_

        That nobody in the media has asked in print “Why did the BBC director-general really go?” tells you a lot about the media.

        Priti “sacked for links with Israel, then reappointed” Patel is trying hard to keep her job as Home Secretary. She’s trying to reprise Winston Churchill at Sidney Street! I overheard somebody today who loved the “say no to releasing terrorists early” stuff too. We’ll have to wait to find out whether Patel impresses Dominic Cummings enough. It won’t surprise me if she doesn’t, but somebody has to do that job, and Patel has probably got a bigger Israeli Order of the Brown Nose in her cabinet than even Theresa May.

        Then there’s chancellor of the exchequer Sajid Javid. Cummings humilated him by sacking Sonia Khan without giving him prior notice, and I suspect Cummings has as much contempt for fans of Ayn Rand (Javid being one) as I do. The Budget is scheduled for 11 March, the “reshuffle” (inverted commas used because it’s likely to be much bigger than a reshuffle) is foreseen for before the Commons breaks up on 13 February, so there is time to throw Javid out before the Budget, just about. But if he’s a very good boy and he does exactly what he’s told (and the indications are that he will), he may keep his job, because Cummings won’t want Jacob Rees-Mogg in Number 11.

        At the very least, Rees-Mogg will probably be told he’s not welcome at Cabinet any more. At the moment he’s not a cabinet minister; he’s one of the 10 who “also attend cabinet meetings”. Let’s hope he puts on some ear protectors before he gets thrown out on his ear’ole.

        Transport? The two huge issues are HS2 and Heathrow’s 3rd runway. Both may well bite the dust.

        “Defence”? The aircraft carriers… Tricky one, this one. It’s hard in any country for a senior government figure to tell defence contractors to eff off. Dwight Eisenhower couldn’t. Cummings may have to concede on this one.

        Expect surprises…

  • N_

    How many former government ministers (devolved or otherwise) – even if until four years ago they oversaw an annual budget somewhere around 60% of the size of the British defence ministry’s huge budget – are important enough for a large amount of money to be spent on rustling up 10 fake allegedly direct-evidence accusers?

    Very few.

    An answer to the question “Who on earth is this man a threat to?” that takes the form of “His enemies are insane” is unconvincing.

  • M.J.

    Surely you aren’t allowed to use bad words like rap* and t*rture in a Yes Minister scene? Children might be seeing it!

  • Dungroanin

    Now I am reminded of the commonality of orgasmic celebratory faces of Sturgeon and Jess Phillips on election night.

    That Gorgeous George take down is professional and on point – Craig had him wiping a tear everytime he hit a point.

    GG would be an easy fish at a poker table..

  • Republicofscotland

    So Ian Murray MP agrees with Lisa Nandy on how to deal with us referring to Catalonia, in which the voters were beaten shot and tear gassed, and the leaders were imprisoned or had to flee into exile.

    Meanwhile the unions messiah Gordon Brown will be wheeled out as usual, to hold a series of unionist get togethers around Scotland starting this week, to boldly proclaim that the union is far better than making our own decisions, and that nasty nationalism (unless its British) is not the way forward.

    Staying on Labour, has been, Corbyn is to nominate John Bercow and two others for peerages in the House of Lords, you know the same HoL, that Labour have said they’ll abolish if in power, they’ve been saying that for a hundred years.

    As for the House of Lords Johnson wants them to go touring around the country (England) beginning up North (again Northern England) not that I want them to come to Scotland heaven forbid.

    Finally SNP MP Hannah Bardell, has had what police are calling a serious and credible threat aimed at her, on the back of the disgraceful Lord Maginnis comments concering her.

    Maginnis was formerly a Ulster unionist MP, so it doesn’t take too much of an imagination imagination to have an idea where the threat lies.

  • Mike Annis

    Frightening stuff indeed, it reflects some things alleged by some pets Aunty’s Uncle’s friend ( you get the idea) suggested. The Likely Lads were a classic too.

  • Republicofscotland

    “Northern Ireland Assembly motion recommends refusing consent for the EU Withdrawal Agreement Bill; Welsh govt also recommending rejection on Tuesday, while Holyrood already did so the other week.”

    “The Brexit bill could be on track to be rejected by all the devolved parliaments…”

    It won’t matter a jot that three of the four nations parliaments reject the WAB, Westminster will push ahead regardless.

    The sooner the UK dissolves the better.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCPhilipSim/status/1219190150602817536

  • Kim Sanders-Fisher

    I am sorry to hear you were unwell, but I hope you are on the road to recovery now. Take your ticker seriously; we would miss your thought provoking posts if you went away to prop up the heather.

    “…and I felt so guilty at being a self-inflicted drain on the NHS that I declined their offer to take me into hospital and decided to recover at home.” If paramedics had really wanted to take you in they would have been quite persuasive, so I hope you were guided by their assessment. I think you are probably far too intelligent to make a purely guilt fuelled decision.

    A&E itself can be very stressful and it’s full of sick people! Hospital is never a great place to hang out at time when your immunity might be at a low ebb. However, treatment postponed can become treatment too late… I hope you went to see a Cardiologist pronto. Such important medical issues are always best dealt with sooner rather than later and I hope you have got things sorted now.

    What is good for the head is invariably good for the heart too. Writing a humorous post for a change probably lowered your stress, getting your heart back on the mend by allowing your mind to drift clear of the complex and dangerous issues confronting us today. We all need a break, but your knowledgeable posts have created a strong following of avid readers, so we want you to take care and keep us posted.

  • Hatuey

    Nice little story, Craig. It’s very similar to one that I was working on myself. My story had a happier ending — I’m a bit old fashioned. In my story the persecuted one makes a dramatic comeback and those who conspired against him are destroyed.

    ————————————————————

    Getting back to reality, I’m expecting NS and the circle of love to opt for some sort of stunt in the next week or two. By “stunt” I mean something theatrical, like a walk-out in the Commons, something that will achieve absolutely nothing in terms of securing indyref2 but give the impression they have spines and give a fuck.

    I was very interested to hear that the Scottish Tories were willing to provide support for the Scottish Government’s budget. I haven’t had time to look into that but I have predicted on here that the British Government and the SNP might cosy up to one another. The dynamics of that sort of relationship are interesting but far from unusual.

    I see so many loyal independence supporters on twitter and in the real world are close to throwing in the towel with the SNP. It’s quite sad but I’m strangely optimistic. I have said a few times that if the SNP didn’t exist to contain feelings in Scotland, the British government would need to step in and do something. I think that day is getting closer, and that’s a good thing.

    The SNP is almost a distraction today as far as independence is concerned. Until recently I thought a change of leadership might fix things but it’s clear to me that we need a whole new party devoted singularly to the cause of independence. It might take that to save the SNP, as paradoxical as it seems.

    Here’s the thing the SNP and their loyal supporters don’t understand; better to lose an honest fight for something you believe in (like independence) than win a fight that you don’t believe in. Politicians would naturally struggle with that, there’s no wages and expenses in it for them, but I think that’s how a lot of people in Scotland feel right now.

    Like I said, I’m optimistic. The real campaign for independence is going to start soon, without the careerists and their bullshit. Those sunken hearts we see everywhere now are going to be lifted to new heights when they see real politicians at work, arguing and fighting honestly for the Scottish cause that we believe in.

    • d w kemp

      Kinda sums up my current thoughts. I’ve been slavishly pro SNP for 45 years. Time for change, real change to take our future into our own hands.

      • Hatuey

        That change is inevitable now.

        What you need to remember is that a large majority in this country support independence. The polls are rigged — you can’t tell me a poll in the context of all the lies and propaganda we are subject to in Scotland means a thing. It’s actually quite staggering that even with all the lies in the media (state broadcaster, etc.), support for indy is so high at around 50%.

        In an honest debate with both sides of the argument represented, I’d be amazed if support was less than 70%. And that’s the trick that straight-laced Sturgeon missed. Had she gone down a different road early in 2017, had she done everything possible to agitate and mobilise the indy movement, with strikes, politicians resigning, causing uncertainty & instability, etc., etc., that honest debate would naturally have taken place.

        Anyway, at least now if things get a little agricultural we can say we tried the constitutional route. If we didn’t have the moral high ground before, we sure as fuck have it now.

        Time to mobilise. We have nothing to lose but our chains.

        • N_

          @Hatuey

          What you need to remember is that a large majority in this country support independence. The polls are rigged — you can’t tell me a poll in the context of all the lies and propaganda we are subject to in Scotland means a thing.

          1. What grounds do you have for your belief that a large majority support independence? A “large majority” means what, 65%+?

          2. Propaganda does mean something. It affects opinions. So if there’s huge propaganda for A and not so much for not-A, one would expect A to be more popular. I’d be interested if you could spell out what cause you think is having what effect, yielding what you believe to be the result that a large majority “support” independence and only a small minority support any kind of continued role for Scotland inside the union.

          Bear in mind that in an election last month the support for unionist parties was 54% and the support for the pro-independence SNP + Greens was 46%. How people actually voted was in line with polls on whether or not they support independence, the average of the last nine being Union 49%, Indy 41%; or if we discount the undecideds, then it is Union 53.3%, Indy 46.7%. So the appearance is that you’re kidding yourself, unless you think the SNP “really” won 65% in last month’s election rather than 45%.

          • Cubby

            N

            You really really do post a lot of crap.

            1. Elections are not referenda. I thought it would be obvious to even the most rabid of Britnats – but obviously not

            2. Polling shows that 40% of People who vote for Labour in elections would vote for independence. It also shows that a much smaller percentage of Conservative and Lib Dems would vote for independence.

            3. Some people who vote SNP would not vote for independence.

            In summary your silly analysis that takes votes in an election as a strict replica of a referendum means you aint that clued up or as I suspect you are a Britnat propagandist. But not very good at it.

          • N_

            @Cubby,
            I take it you agree with @Hatuey that a “large majority” in Scotland support independence. Would it be possible for you to support that statement without insulting me, preferably addressing the evidence I refer to that undermines it?

            * 55% voted in 2014 against independence

            * 53% of respondents in recent polling have said that they oppose independence. (I have averaged nine polls conducted since August 2019, each with more than 1000 respondents, giving each poll equal weighting. The smallest and largest figures were 50% and 59%.)

            * 54% voted in last month’s general election for parties which oppose independence.

            I assume you accept that if there is a “large majority” for a proposal then that means that 65%+ support it. If you want to define the phrase differently, please say what figure you’re using. Please then adduce support for the statement that a large majority support independence, which it should be possible to do without using namecalling, insults, or sarcasm. Thanks.

    • Tom Welsh

      One of the interesting features of the pseudo-democracy of which the West seems so proud is that nothing can be done without money and organisation.

      Yet once the money rolls in and the organisation is set up, it is colonised by the wrong kind of people: bureaucrats and power-seekers. They find, in most cases, that the status quo suits them very well. So you cannot expect them to make any serious efforts to change it.

      Trying to fight bureaucracy with bureaucracy is like trying to put out a fire with petrol.

  • .BrianFujisan

    Great writing Craig
    It’s amazing the way the mind works when confined to bed..as I was recently too…

    I conjured up a tale of a First Nations Chief ..dressing as a white eyes for Halloween… ended up chuckling to myself
    And had to get up to write it all down..

    George Galloway..is a wee shit at times..on Sunday night’s show.. He cut off a caller from Glasgow…Telling him ” I’m coming back ( to Scotland )..” so put that in your nationalist pipe, and smoke it ”

    Arsehole… Craig did a great job of combating his MSM mantra bullshit

    Mind the ticker Craig… get some more walking done

    • Node

      Brian, I think GG deserves praise for that interview, not criticism. Sure he framed his questions to reflect his own Unionist views, but he allowed Craig all the time he needed to respond and never once interrupted. George has interviewed Craig before so he knows that Craig is knowledgeable and eloquent. Yet he invited this powerful political opponent onto his Show and respectfully allowed him to present a persuasive case for independence.

      I very much disagree with George’s views on this subject but I applaud him for his generosity and integrity.

      By way of contrast, imagine how that other Scottish Unionist, Andrew Neil, would have handled the interview.

      • Cubby

        Node

        You make a fair point but I’m glad you didn’t refer to him as Gorgeous George. Now that I would take exception to.😂😂😂😂😂😂

      • .BrianFujisan

        NODE

        Yes, you do make a very fair point.. and I certainty noted that GG let Craig talk at length without interruption. .
        And as you rightly point out…imagine it was ANY BBC propagandist doing the interview.

        Cubby is correct too… George ain’t as Hansome as me

  • .BrianFujisan

    Giyane
    Interesting. . And coming at the worst possible time – The 40 Day Spring Festival – When hundreds of millions of people are traveling. . The biggest Migration on the Planet

    Worth keeping an eye on

  • Gary

    The fan fiction sounds horribly realistic, and somewhat familiar. Perhaps this was actually an episode of Yes Minister? The only thing I don’t get about the story is IF the predecessor is the same party it would damage said party’s credibility and thus the likelihood of them returning members to parliament etc.

    Makes MORE sense if this is initiated by another group who, perhaps, have leverage on the witnesses/complainants? Perhaps even people they’ve managed to place there for such a purpose? The kind of people who aren’t JUST seeking short term political advantage but are seeking to destroy the aims of said party, whatever they happen to be. Although, looking at the previous few years and the constant smear campaign against Jeremy Corbyn (who, despite being a Labour man I greatly admire) which undoubtedly came from within his own party in the PLP’s bid to oust him against the will of the membership of the party. Political avarice is a great motivator and politicians aren’t known for their long term thinking (the ones I’ve dealt with anyway)

    Otherwise this is excellent fan fiction, just the kind of thing that really COULD happen in real life…

  • Republicofscotland

    So now we know why the Hub, the unionist staging post in Scotland has the only cabinet office outside of London. Johnson and his band of merry men are intent on holding office more frequently in Scotland, as the push to interfere and syphon Holyroods powers away and towards the hub begins.

    A Ipsos MORI poll, has shown that Johnson is considered a toxic figure in Scotland, his approval rating stands at minus 52.

    Meanwhile Theresa May’s Dunlop review, on ways of strengthening the union will be published to coincide with Johnson’s assault on destroying the independence movement, and Michael Gove who runs the cabinet office, is to have much closer ties with the Scotland office.

    The British government are in my opinion lining up their dominoes and getting ready to carry out a political offensive in Scotland. I doubt we’ll have until 2021, without serious Westminster interference damaging our objectives.

    The Scottish government better get a move on.

1 2 3 4 5

Comments are closed.