clear a #stayontopic optional tag with Cat maybe in that case?
Oh lord, it’s just bashing our heads against a brick wall with you.You fight back but don’t give your analysis and reasons
Have I missed a reply somewhere?
I have been working and drop by to SF when I can.
How about calling Tory story, now that Buzz Johnson has gone to infinty and beyond when in reality he never really was on the same planet as the rest of us. Have we now got a Liz Johnson?
1 Like
What I’d like to know is why they (truss and Johnson) both flew to Aberdeen to see queenie, but in separate RAF planes?
2 Likes
Did you miss this fairly specific reply:
1 Like
shocking waste of money during a financial crisis… no better than the reports that de Pfeffle’s private RAF jet was used by officials for a boozy jolly up to the Lake District and back recently to “test it out” (they’ve been taking a leaf out of Cummings’ book re eyesight testing) and to save on parking fees, allegedly… the bloody plane is kept at an RAF base owned by HMG FFS… 
feeble excuses from Number 10 as usual…
They are very good replies but I don’t think it is really a give and take kind of conversation. Engagement is missing.
2 Likes
Not unknown for air crew to take a 747 out, stick it in a holding pattern and break out the booze.
Well yes I can actually 
.
8 Likes
Basically security protocol, if one plane crashes you have a still Priminister to lead the Country.
1 Like
What happens if the one in the substantive post gets wiped out?
Such a lovely boy… where did it all go wrong?
I know that “security reasons” has been quoted for the reason they took separate planes (I saw they used French planes too, not British ones 
) but I don’t buy it. If the plane crashed, yeah the PM is dead and either the incoming or the outgoing one too, but that’s why there’s a deputy PM.
I heard that Johnson, unlike Truss, didn’t head back to London after seeing the Queen. This to me sounds like a more plausible reason why they didn’t care about the financial cost (£10k p/hour each) or environmental impact (200kg of carbon per person per flight).
They each had a separate plane because… the same rule as my old firm had. They are the 2 most important people im the country right now and in the event of an air accident, the country couldn’t afford to lose both of them.
The Queen, as head of state, is surely the most important person in the country?(I’m anti-Royal so don’t really think this, but I also don’t think a prime minister is any more important than anyone else).
During the flight up, the incoming PM isn’t more important than any other politician. And on the way home, the outgoing PM is kinda irrelevant too.
I get the rationale behind the PM and deputy PM not traveling on the same flight, but incoming/outgoing PM (depending on flight) doesn’t really matter.
You seem to believe that one shouldn’t be able to criticise politicians, even proven incompetent and venal ones, without having developed alternative policies to theirs?
Do you apply the same logic to other parts of your life, an “accept crap because you cannot think of an alternative” philosophy? Or do you go around telling anyone you disagree with how to do their job, or how to design and/or deliver their product or service?
I just can’t seem to see you in Darty returning a defective product accepting them saying “well, how would you design and manufacture it Clever Clogs?” But, maybe that’s your, albeit bizarre, MO. Good luck with it.
On the other hand, you may just be another Tory supporting broken record, round and round and round, with nothing to say except the rather childish “well, (sound of foot stamping) what would YOU do different?"
2 Likes
Probably for security reasons. If they were on the same plane and it was to crash the Nation would loose two complete charlatans at the same time.
1 Like
Well one is, the other should just be given the bus fare
1 Like