In the news

the Speaker

He cant risk doing a Bercow, poor sod would be in the lords by now

Gunboats.

We need gunboats.

Indeed - Teresa May, well known for her light and sympathetic treatment of immigrants, finding it too much really hammers home how brutal it is.

With the likes of Lord Botham and Baroness Fox, I’m not sure it’s a ‘honour’ worth pursuing (although I can see that you’d want to distance yourself from having the same designation as Sir Gavin Williamson)

“A honour”? For fucks sake, standards are through the floor

Exactly, when the person who brought in the Hostile Environment policy says what you are proposing is a bit much, you should take a pause for thought

The problem is the Priti Protocol is what would an arsehole do in this situation and then do something worse. Asking her to pause for thought is just allowing her time to come up with something even worse.

Battle Royale for immigrants with James Corden and Mrs Brown as the commentators.

pause for thought

Oh, it’s a thinking machine? Daft of me to assume there was anything going on in there beyond selfish cruel calculation.

Wasn’t my suggestion.

Exactly, and given that she's also been given the decision on Julian Assange's extradition flight I wonder what ideas are whirring through her mind.

Given that she thinks Guy Fawkes got off lightly, I wish him all the luck in the world.

This just in from my MP (took 4 emails, is obviously standard as does not address the points raised).

“ Thank you for your email regarding the Prime Minister.

I have received, read and listened to many differing and interesting points of view from constituents concerning gatherings at Downing Street.

As I have previously written, I reserved making my comments public until all the facts of the matter had been established.

That I why I have waited in the past for the findings of the Sue Grey report and of the Metropolitan Police investigation, which have not yet concluded.

However, the Speaker has determined that the House will vote tomorrow on whether to refer the Prime Minister to the Committee on Standards.

I shall be making my decision on how to vote based upon the currently available information.

Whatever your views on the details as you see them, I accept that that those who make the law must not break the law.

This appears to be the case, although the Prime Minister says he did not knowingly break the rules.

He ordered the enquiry, gave it evidence and accepted the role of the Police which has led to him being issued with a fixed penalty notice.

Therefore, I hope you agree that it is right that the Prime Minister has accepted the ruling of the police, paid his fine and apologised.

I do not believe that the Committee on Standards is fit for purpose, and have recently given evidence to them on improving the processes.

Whatever one’s view on the matter, the crux of the issue now is whether we should accept the Prime Minister’s apology or not.

I know that many people will not accept his apology.

I went to Church on Easter Sunday, and I find it helpful when making decisions to know what Jesus said :-

Luke 17 vs 3-4: “If your brother or sister sins against you, rebuke them; and if they repent, forgive them. Even if they sin against you seven times in a day and seven times come back to you saying ‘I repent,’ you must forgive them.”

While I understand that many people will not, I accept the Prime Minister’s apology and will therefore continue to support his leadership.

I shall not vote to refer him to the Committee on Standards.

Thank you for taking the trouble to share your views with me.“

The bible quote is a lovely touch, both sad/glad that Ukraine was not referenced.

Wonder how many variants of this were sent out by Tory MPs…

I wonder if there's much Christian compassion in their voting record?

If in doubt hide behind the biggest grift in history.

He’s ERG so a hard no.

He also recently raised a query about “immigrants in rubber boats” and said we should limit those while letting in more Qataris. Just after his all expenses trip to Qatar.

An absolute class act

I accept that those who make the law must not break the law. But despite that, I'm going to ignore it completely. Even if he broke the law he made up to 7 times. Because Jesus said so.

WAC.

Indeed.

And it’s taken them the best part of 6 months to come up with that shit.

Still, good to confirm that law breaking and habitual lying aren’t an issue although as my thunderer of an MO has a 23k+ Majority he really isn’t going to give a single fuck

Isn't the vote to refer him to the Privileges Committee? So the Committee on Standards has no bearing here. Nice that someone knows what they are voting for.

And why can none of these cunts spell Sue Gray's name?

Otherwise ^ all of what was said above also.

I take it the MP in question isn't on the list here (fairly sure this isn't exhaustive though):
https://www.indy100.com/politics/tory-mps-boris-johnson-fine

Why do they get it wrong? I’d say a heady mix of entitled ignorance, arrogance and lack of interest as it doesn’t impact on their grift (my MP has a day a week consultancy fir £100k/year with a financial company in the British Virgin Islands. Who knew dairy cattle farmers in North Herefordshire had such in demand financial smarts. And that’s just what is declared).

Seriously thinking of standing at the next election just to participate at hustings and, whatever question is asked, respond with “what people want to know is that the sitting MP supports habitual law breaking and lying at the heart of government”. If that gets old then reference to said MPs huge and erroneous over claiming on expenses may be deployed. Obviously this is as pointless as tilting at windmills but with such a huge majority it feels like the only way to have a say in our broken democratic system. Crucially though, what would I call my party (of one)?

could go classic Monty Brewster "none of the above"
or straight down the middle "sick of the lot ov em"

Not sure it would be allowed but “Never Trust a Tory” would fit in with my laser focused manifesto

From the Home Office document that specifies the "good character" tests that are applied to people applying for asylum, refugee status, residency or citizenship. This is from the section on FPNs.

Receiving one does not form part of a person’s criminal record. A fixed penalty
notice will not normally result in refusal unless the person has failed to pay or has
unsuccessfully challenged the notice and there were subsequent criminal
proceedings resulting in a conviction. In such instances, they should be treated in
line with the sentence imposed by the court.
However, multiple fixed penalty notices over a short period of time could
demonstrate a disregard for the law and therefore demonstrate that someone is not
of good character.

next election just to participate at hustings

If he's got a 23k majority I bet he doesn't even turn up to the husting, my MP Sue Braverman has bothered in the last 3 elections.

Even better as he won’t be able to rebut my carefully crafted indignation

Shall we have a whip-round for your deposit?

Johnny Depp tells court about when his wife threw a vodka bottle at him:

"Depp said he “felt heat” and saw blood dripping from the exposed flesh and bone: “I went into some sort of, I don’t know what a nervous breakdown feels like but that’s probably the closest I’ve been.”

He added: “I started to write with my own blood on the walls, little reminders from our past that essentially represented lies she had told me, lies I had caught her in.”