The PM has a budget of £30,000 per year to spend on refurbishing the flat. That's our money. Most people don't spend 10% of that per year (on average) refurbishing their home.
But, that wasn't enough for them. They "needed" a much more significant overhaul of their temporary digs.
People who voted for de Pfeffel won’t care. He can do no wrong in their eyes.
People, like me, who can’t stand the man or his policies, will shrug and say there’s bound to be far worse than this in his closet but what difference will it make? Even if he’s removed there are equally bad people (and worse) lining up behind him.
🤷♀️
Leadership, besides being a great creative force, can be diabolical
The PM has a budget of £30,000 per year to spend on refurbishing the flat. That's our money. Most people don't spend 10% of that per year (on average) refurbishing their home.
It seems reasonable that an incoming PM would redecorate to suit their taste, but it seems less reasonable that a PM would redecorate every year.
In terms of refurbishment rather than redecoration, one assumes it would require new appliances every now and then. I could imagine, for example, a situation where an incoming PM liked to cook, but their predecessor was a stranger to the culinary arts, and so an actual functional kitchen rather than a pretty but useless one could be seen as a requirement. A complete new kitchen isn't cheap.
The PM has a budget of £30,000 per year to spend on refurbishing the flat. That's our money. Most people don't spend 10% of that per year (on average) refurbishing their home.
It seems reasonable that an incoming PM would redecorate to suit their taste, but it seems less reasonable that a PM would redecorate every year.
Somewhat amusing that the 'John Lewis nightmare' they got rid of was in all probability put in place by Theresa May.
Or, in the case of Johnson, a destructive force ... destruction of the UK by dragging us from the EU, mismanaging the pandemic response, stoking violence in NI, boosting support for Scottish Independence (the one good thing he's done) ... and now spending a fortune on redecorating a flat he doesn't own in what is reported to be a style that is very unlikely to be to the taste of his successor.
Somewhat amusing that the 'John Lewis nightmare' they got rid of was in all probability put in place by Theresa May.
Probably. I'd have had her down as a Laura Ashley type.
Most likely, I'd have thought. She was the last incumbent and seems to have in other ways got rid of all traces of the Cameron club (famously taking relish in sacking Osbourne).
A lovely quote, that Boris plus bird thought their flat was a "John Lewis nightmare", hence redecoration. Some people would be glad of that. Aspirational, eh?
As I have worked for said department store for 21 years, I can only say Boris and Bird are causing enough nightmares of their own. Leave JL alone
I seem to recall that John Lewis was the suggested source of furniture acquisition for public servants, as being of a suitable standard and price range. So he is saying he is above the normal and deserves better than public servants in general. "Les idees au dessus de sa gare." (The not really French translation of "Ideas above his station", using the word for railway station rather than whatever the word is for status in life.)
I seem to recall that John Lewis was the suggested source of furniture acquisition for public servants, as being of a suitable standard and price range. So he is saying he is above the normal and deserves better than public servants in general. "Les idees au dessus de sa gare." (The not really French translation of "Ideas above his station", using the word for railway station rather than whatever the word is for status in life.)
I have pointed out before that the actual French expression for this concept is a thoroughly delightful one: péter plus haut que ses fesses (farting higher than one's backside).
The PM has a budget of £30,000 per year to spend on refurbishing the flat. That's our money. Most people don't spend 10% of that per year (on average) refurbishing their home.
It seems reasonable that an incoming PM would redecorate to suit their taste, but it seems less reasonable that a PM would redecorate every year.
In terms of refurbishment rather than redecoration, one assumes it would require new appliances every now and then. I could imagine, for example, a situation where an incoming PM liked to cook, but their predecessor was a stranger to the culinary arts, and so an actual functional kitchen rather than a pretty but useless one could be seen as a requirement. A complete new kitchen isn't cheap.
I would find it hard to believe that Teresa May left the kitchen in such an unusable state that it needed to be completely replaced!
But the issue isn't so much the how much, but the 'from whom', isn't it? Boris Johnson says he paid for the extra costs. But the accusation is that initially he got donations/loans from others. And the question is 'who'? Who would feel with some justification that the PM owed them a few special rewards, for favours granted? Eg, Any of them pals who benefitted from Government related contracts? Any beneficiaries from other pieces of Government preferment?
We know that sometimes top political figures don't stint themselves when it comes to skimming the cream off the top. For some folks it's not a question of living within their own means; that's for the little people like you and me. For these folk it's about making as much gravy out of the available means of as many others as possible, that become accessible to their grasp by way of their privileged position of power. It must be a great temptation.
Boris just said that Starmer is obsessed with wallpaper, but that ignores the charge of snobbery over the "John Lewis nightmare". I mean, that numbers don't really touch people, but looking down on John Lewis could really irritate the little people.
The PM has a budget of £30,000 per year to spend on refurbishing the flat. That's our money. Most people don't spend 10% of that per year (on average) refurbishing their home.
It seems reasonable that an incoming PM would redecorate to suit their taste, but it seems less reasonable that a PM would redecorate every year.
Sorry, I missed this in a cross post 'til I saw it quoted. I think the intention is that the incoming PM would do some redecorating when they move in, maybe a room or two that aren't up to scratch. But, the whole flat would only be done over several years as needed. Having £30,000 available gives a lot of scope to do a good job of a room or two each year.
The PM has a budget of £30,000 per year to spend on refurbishing the flat. That's our money. Most people don't spend 10% of that per year (on average) refurbishing their home.
It seems reasonable that an incoming PM would redecorate to suit their taste, but it seems less reasonable that a PM would redecorate every year.
Sorry, I missed this in a cross post 'til I saw it quoted. I think the intention is that the incoming PM would do some redecorating when they move in, maybe a room or two that aren't up to scratch. But, the whole flat would only be done over several years as needed. Having £30,000 available gives a lot of scope to do a good job of a room or two each year.
£30 000 for a room or two?! You could practically build a new room for that. I suggest the taxpayer should keep the flat as whatever the government considers an acceptable standard for rental properties, and PMs can lump it as far as decor is concerned. Paint the whole place magnolia and tell them not to attach anything to the walls.
Oh, I agree ... £30,000 is a lot of money for redecorating (normally that's the sort of money in a renovation that buys an extension or loft conversion). I'd accept the government paying to ensure the fabric is in good condition (eg: have a rolling programme of refurbishment that repaints walls, replaces flooring, replaces curtains, refits kitchen and bathroom over a 10-15 year cycle - base it on the pattern used for council housing) and then let each PM use their own money to furnish it with moveable items to their taste. Even cover the costs of a removal firm to move furniture in from wherever they'd been living before and to new home when they leave office (the government may need to approve the firm employed for security reasons).
I don't want to be optimistic but I just watched PMQs on iPlayer and I think Johnson's in trouble. Starmer was clearly cross examining him and all newly qualified barristers know not to ask a question unless you already know the answer.
Starmer in not a newbie lawyer but an experienced and very well regarded QC...
Johnson is now on record saying specific things at the dispatch box. I strongly suspect Starmer knows that many of the things said today are not true.
Johnson is unravelling in front of our eyes. How long will his sycophants prop him up?
Johnson is now on record saying specific things at the dispatch box. I strongly suspect Starmer knows that many of the things said today are not true.
I think the past few years have proved - if proof were needed - that when we talk about rules we are actually describing political expediency. That which is convenient for powerful people suddenly becomes permissible.
See the Electoral Commissions previous Greatest Hits - the Referendum, the Conservative Party in 2017 and 2019, but now they are going to get rid of the PM over a flat?
He'll go when the party and the media are good and ready, and not a moment sooner.
I may well be guilty of over optimism here but there was something about today's exchanges... like Trump, Johnson believes none of the rules apply to him. He is far more right about that than I would like and far more right than is possible in a properly functioning democracy... however, there was something about today...
Of course it will be the loss of support of the media that'll kill him off (which is further proof of how screwed our democracy is but...).
I expect the Tories will wait for the local election results before they jump one way or the other.
If they tank in the elections, someone's head is going to roll. I don't know what the polls down there are saying about whether the shenanigans are having an impact at local authority level. Johnson has largely stayed out of Scottish politics for the last month or so, someone has probably told him he's a liability for the Scottish Conservatives. I'm sure he'll take credit for a good result up here for the Tories, and play that especially if he needs to suppress talk about the local elections there - conversely, if the Tories do badly here he can distance himself and blame the Scottish Conservative leader whose name he forgot.
The colours - if they are to be used in Castle BozCaz - will surely clash horribly with Bozzie's haystack hair...
It's difficult to think of something which doesn't clash with his hair. Which suggests the problem is with the hair (without excluding options for problems elsewhere as well).
I actually quite like pink and green, but some of Ms Lytle's Stuff looks a bit *busy* to my minimalist eye.
The colours - if they are to be used in Castle BozCaz - will surely clash horribly with Bozzie's haystack hair...
The only one of those I could even perhaps live with is the one from House and Garden. I don't think "busy" is sufficiently strong to describe the others.
Comments
(By the way, Theresa May showed Laura Keunsberg round on camera, it was just fine. Pink sofas, but it wouldn’t be millions to get new sofas.)
But, that wasn't enough for them. They "needed" a much more significant overhaul of their temporary digs.
Google her work.
It seems reasonable that an incoming PM would redecorate to suit their taste, but it seems less reasonable that a PM would redecorate every year.
In terms of refurbishment rather than redecoration, one assumes it would require new appliances every now and then. I could imagine, for example, a situation where an incoming PM liked to cook, but their predecessor was a stranger to the culinary arts, and so an actual functional kitchen rather than a pretty but useless one could be seen as a requirement. A complete new kitchen isn't cheap.
Somewhat amusing that the 'John Lewis nightmare' they got rid of was in all probability put in place by Theresa May.
Probably. I'd have had her down as a Laura Ashley type.
The mistresses don't seem to last very long around Bozzie.
Most likely, I'd have thought. She was the last incumbent and seems to have in other ways got rid of all traces of the Cameron club (famously taking relish in sacking Osbourne).
Yes she will be his next wife
As I have worked for said department store for 21 years, I can only say Boris and Bird are causing enough nightmares of their own. Leave JL alone
Probably. But the old saying is also true: "When a man marries his mistress, he creates a vacancy.
AFZ
And yet knowing all of this, Behr would do exactly the same thing again.
I have pointed out before that the actual French expression for this concept is a thoroughly delightful one: péter plus haut que ses fesses (farting higher than one's backside).
I would find it hard to believe that Teresa May left the kitchen in such an unusable state that it needed to be completely replaced!
But the issue isn't so much the how much, but the 'from whom', isn't it? Boris Johnson says he paid for the extra costs. But the accusation is that initially he got donations/loans from others. And the question is 'who'? Who would feel with some justification that the PM owed them a few special rewards, for favours granted? Eg, Any of them pals who benefitted from Government related contracts? Any beneficiaries from other pieces of Government preferment?
We know that sometimes top political figures don't stint themselves when it comes to skimming the cream off the top. For some folks it's not a question of living within their own means; that's for the little people like you and me. For these folk it's about making as much gravy out of the available means of as many others as possible, that become accessible to their grasp by way of their privileged position of power. It must be a great temptation.
£30 000 for a room or two?! You could practically build a new room for that. I suggest the taxpayer should keep the flat as whatever the government considers an acceptable standard for rental properties, and PMs can lump it as far as decor is concerned. Paint the whole place magnolia and tell them not to attach anything to the walls.
Starmer in not a newbie lawyer but an experienced and very well regarded QC...
Johnson is now on record saying specific things at the dispatch box. I strongly suspect Starmer knows that many of the things said today are not true.
Johnson is unravelling in front of our eyes. How long will his sycophants prop him up?
“It's funny how the cutesy affected stammer disappears when he's angry.”
Indeed.
I think the past few years have proved - if proof were needed - that when we talk about rules we are actually describing political expediency. That which is convenient for powerful people suddenly becomes permissible.
See the Electoral Commissions previous Greatest Hits - the Referendum, the Conservative Party in 2017 and 2019, but now they are going to get rid of the PM over a flat?
He'll go when the party and the media are good and ready, and not a moment sooner.
Of course it will be the loss of support of the media that'll kill him off (which is further proof of how screwed our democracy is but...).
Yep, over optimism...
AFZ
I actually quite like pink and green, but some of Ms Lytle's Stuff looks a bit *busy* to my minimalist eye.
The colours - if they are to be used in Castle BozCaz - will surely clash horribly with Bozzie's haystack hair...
Then he wasn't so gurlie, even if camp.
But Greensil, Hancock, PPE contracts etc. There's plenty of dirt that *should* be investigated if standards were implemented properly.
How it's going: Johnson insists that leaseholders are going to have to bankrupt themselves to get flammable cladding replaced.
Home improvements? Of course, whyever not?
The only one of those I could even perhaps live with is the one from House and Garden. I don't think "busy" is sufficiently strong to describe the others.