In my book The Decade In Tory I recount reports of Mark Menzies hiring a Brazilian sex worker, showing him around the palace of Westminster, and asking him to buy them amphetamines.
... been accused of getting a dog drunk, then engaging in a massive street brawl. He wasn't charged cos he persuaded police he hadn't fed the dog alcohol - he'd just stood by and taken photos. So that's ok then.
My point is: this guy's behaviour is not new. He's been a ...
... human hand grenade for a decade, and the press knew it, the police, his constituency party and Tory HQ. And they've known about this latest seedy little episode for 3 months too.
And yet throughout all this, he kept being selected to stand. Constantly. For a decade...
My point is: it's the same people over and over again, being quietly pardoned by the same party bigwigs over and over again. And everyone in govt knows.
You can't keep claiming it's a bad apple. It's symptomatic of a party that is morally rotten to its very core.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Sunak won't call a GE cos the results predict a disaster. Any Tory winners had distanced themselves from the party, so nothing to boast about. He did *just* well enough to kill any rebellion and *just* badly enough to pause a GE...
So Sunak will remain in office, but not in power, his right wingers making his life a misery, his left giving up and resigning.
His Brexit voters flee to Reform. Moderate voters flee to LD or Labour. New voters repelled by the bigotry. His five pledges unmet.
Mordaunt, Badenoch and Braverman will make continuous manoeuvres. Rwanda, intended to save him, will turn into a biblical curse. Brexit consequences will deepen. The public will blame him. Every day will make the GE worse, but he's too weak to euthanise his terminal premiership
Here's why I think there should always be a by-election when an MP defects, like Dan Poulter did.
1. MPs (except independents) stand on a party manifesto. Those are the policies the constituency electorate voted for. Now, without a vote, the MP's policies have changed.
2. Research shows 75% of people can't name their local MP. Tragic, but true. So quite clearly they are voting for a party, not a person. It doesn't matter what the official version of events is: voting for a party is self evidently the reality.
3. "The people voted for a party, not a person" was the excuse for not holding a general election when PM changed between elections (see the last 4 PMs). Can't have it both ways! So: by-election for Poulter, or give us the GE we should have had when you changed to Sunak
Brexit
Partygate
Illegally proroguing parliament
Lying to the Quern
Unlawful PPE contracts
Austerity
Dominic Raab
Chris Williamson
Dominic Cummings
Mark Menzies
William Wragg
Owen Paterson
Chris Pincher
Scott Benton
1/2
Windrush
Tripling tuition fees
Tripling national debt
Trillions of gallons of raw sewage in our rivers
Banning onshore wind
Hundreds of scandals involving party donations
Lee Anderson
Frank Hester
Priti Patel's secret meetings with Israeli security services
2/4
Suella Braverman hate marches
Andrew Bridgen holocaust claims
Matt Hancock in the jungle
David Warburton's coke habit
Liz Truss ... everything
Michelle Mone
Robert Jenrick cash for favours
Sunak's tax arrangements
Zahawi's tax arrangements
Priti Patel bullying
3/4
A step-by-step guide to why saying "I want my country back" is inherently racist, sexist and homophobic.
1. Logically, "back" means there was an earlier time when the country was "ours"
2. The same people wanted it "back" from the EU in 2016 too, and won. Well done you!
3. So logically, the latest demand for "our" country "back" cannot mean "back from the EU". We've already left. So it must, logically, mean back from a time BEFORE we joined the EU. And that means going back to some time before 1973. So ... when?
3. Before 1973, 80% of white Britons regularly used racist terms. Now it is below 20%. So going "back" there means an increase in racism.
4. Before 1973, the gender pay gap was 27% higher than it is now. So going "back" there means worse conditions for women.
A friend lost her job before Xmas. She has no car - never needed one before. But now she does, cos there are no jobs nearby.
She just landed a job. In a car, it's 12 mins away. By public transport, almost 3 hours.
Cos (obviously, in a major economy!) there's no direct bus or train between 2 large neighbouring market towns in Cheshire. So she has to take 3 buses to another town, 20+ miles away, and then back again. Twice a day.
But she can't refuse the job, or she gets no benefits. And ...
... obviously the public transport is vastly expensive, even more so because she's needlessly traveling 40+ miles rather than 8. And our cheaper, efficient, private transport system is 5x more costly as a % of income than nationalised transport in France or Spain.
1. Let’s start with Jeremy Hunt’s budget, which had 4 requirements:
- Make us forget Liz Truss's unfunded £45bn borrowing
- Differentiate Tories from Labour
- Please voters
- And unite the party
2. So Hunt, one of the very best they've got:
- Promised £46bn of unfunded tax cuts
- Stole a major Labour policy
- Annoyed twice as many voters as he pleased
- And then Lee Anderthal defected to Reform