Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Josquius]

You're still a virgin if its up the bum.

[HVC]

You're still a virgin if its up the bum.

It's called the poophole loophole

[Gups]

Not to say the met police stuff isn't bad and all. But that it dominates the news so much really does highlight how London centric our media is. I can't imagine there being half as much fuss if it was another police force facing such scandal.
Then again even having any police would be a positive these days.

What a load of bollocks. Policemen raping and killing women would be massive news anywhere as would the subsequent inquiry.

Police being badly in America is massive news here.

[Josquius]

Not to say the met police stuff isn't bad and all. But that it dominates the news so much really does highlight how London centric our media is. I can't imagine there being half as much fuss if it was another police force facing such scandal.
Then again even having any police would be a positive these days.

What a load of bollocks. Policemen raping and killing women would be massive news anywhere as would the subsequent inquiry.

Police being badly in America is massive news here.

A rape is not what the current news is about.
And as Sheilbh mentioned Cleveland police have been a mess for a while and that's barely reported even locally.

[Sheilbh]

This report was the one commissioned in the aftermath of Sarah Everard's murder.

[Josquius]

This report was the one commissioned in the aftermath of Sarah Everard's murder.

We all know what prompted it. It isn't too especially relevant to the current news. I'm seeing more mention of Stephen laurence.

[Josquius]

In other news. The Boris Johnson stuff.
I am coming to believe he may well resign - rather than suffer an embarrassing loss of his seat at the next GE, grasp victim status of being unjustly forced out by the establishment and try to use this in future to return.

[Sheilbh]

It's very, very over.

[HVC]

It's very, very over.

Come back story in the making, you just wait

[Sheilbh]

Flipped to Johnson's evidence and it doesn't look like it's going well. Interesting point, slightly inspired by CC's comments about identifying who appointed judges, is that (at least from what I've seen) when the BBC identify the committee members asking questions they don't identify the party. Instead it's just, for example, "Yvonne Fovargue MP, Member, Privileges Committee".

It has a Labour chair, but, as with other Committees membership reflects the make-up of the Commons so there is a conservative majority, all fairly senior and respected back benchers. Which doesn't help the case Johnson supporters are trying to make that it's a kangaroo court - which the Speaker also warned about earlier today. But as I say my impression is that it's not going well for Johnson.

Coincidentally the Commons voted for the Windsor Framework on the NIP - 515 MPs for, 29 against. It seems that only 22 Tories (including Johnson) voted against it. Sunak could have passed it without any opposition votes.

As I say - it's very, very over. And being live televised

[Sheilbh]

Alberto Costa's questions are very good. Johnson should have guessed he was going to be dangerous when Costa opened with an elaborately polite remark

[Sheilbh]

Very good again - from two Tory MPs. Sir Charles Walker pushing Johnson on getting him to disown comments from his supporters about the committee being a "kangaroo court" etc. Johnson ends up saying he "deprecates" that language etc will look at the final decision and hopes that it is "fair".

Costa again jumped in quite politely with "but do you accept that the committee could be fair and wrong, rather than be unfair and a 'witchhunt'?"

I think three of the Tories - Costa, Walker and Jenkin have been the most dangerous, with Harman. In particular on recklessness, with some very effective tag-teaming of lines of questions.

[Jacob]

Sounds like it'd be pretty interesting to watch.

[Sheilbh]

Couple of interesting clips (via BBC on Twitter I'm afraid) - by the by, all the MPs doing questioning here are Tory MPs. First on Johnson not getting proper assurances which seems to have Johnson pretty rattled - and definitely go to "recklessly" misleading the Commons:
https://twitter.com/BBCNews/status/1638593160967331864

That followed an earlier line of questioning by Alberto Costa had clarified that when Johnson said "he received assurances" they weren't from law officers, government lawyers or senior civil servants but appointed political advisers. But here's the bit on "kangaroo court" attacks on process - again Alberto Costa tag-teaming in, about two minutes in:
https://twitter.com/BBCNews/status/1638594108729040916

Edit: Maybe part of why I was impressed was that the Committee generally did a good job of asking useful questions. They were fairly short, generally closed, they generally didn't get into grandstanding (which must have been a temptation - and is normally the downfall of legislative committees). But also they hunted in a pack - they followed up each others questions and lines of inquiry (in part because it looked like they'd agreed together a lot of the focuses of questions which one MP would lead on). I mean this in a positive way rather than saying they were partisan, but they acted like litigators in my view.

[Josquius]

Turned on channel 4 and Rees Mogg doing his bit to win the most punchable man in Britain contest again I see.