Indeed. For someone who affirms himself to be a champion and connoisseur of Parliamentary bylaws and traditions (a fondness for which he knows that I share), today's outburst was a shocking lapse. I hope that the honourable gentleman will soon resume his former attitude and rejoin me amidst the number with a healthy regard for the history and future of this great institution.
Understood, Lord Mandelson. I daresay I could find internal party matters of my own to attend to on this particular day, were I not luckily in Singapore.
Hmmm... perhaps "Why do you need to talk to Chris?" would be a good way to open... No, no, it's obvious why he wants to see him... How about: "don't feel the need to start The Machine up again on my behalf"? Goodness, no, far too presumptuous; what if it is just about Bryant embarrassing the Party? "Go easy on him; after all, your lot have done far worse before"? Would that work? No that's not right either... "How much of your current desire to reprimand Bryant is to do with the impression he gave of Labour and how much, if any, is to do with the fact that it was me he was a completely disrespectful child towards?" ...Well it gets points for directness if nothing else I suppose...
Busy few days coming up at work - please try and refrain from any activity that would require my involvement in the cleaning up process in the immediate future.
As I am certain you are aware, Bercow has been one of the more generous Speakers towards the Labour benches. As I am certain you are also aware, he has taken considerable flak from the Tories, to the extent that several were at one point plotting to run against him - a fate unheard of for Speakers for many years.
Given these two facts, would you care to explain why you felt the need to be grossly discourteous to the Chair, forcing him either to publicly upbraid a member of our party during one of the most watched sessions in the House of Commons, or to let it slide and provide further ammunition for his detractors on the government benches, thus rendering it more likely that he will be removed at the next general election and replaced with a Speaker more amenable to Tory wishes?
I don't suppose you'll accept momentary insanity as an explanation? It was awful, I know. It's just- we've caught the Prime Minister lying to the House, Peter. This is massive, and it really would have been better if he'd taken the point of order then, while Cameron was still in the Chamber. I'm afraid I just lost my head for a moment.
Of course I would never want to do anything to hurt John.
If it's any consolation, I suspect the media have bigger targets in their sights right now than my discourtesy to the Speaker.
Actually, given previous shenanigans, momentary insanity sounds plausible for you.
You have a column, I believe, in the Independent within which you could call the Prime Minister a lying, cheating snake to your heart's content. It would be far more widely read and likely to incur the Speaker far less damage than attempting to go against Parliamentary protocol and communicate the same content before a ministerial statement.
I am frankly worried, Chris. You are exceedingly capable when you wish to be, but when you find a brief boring or are in possession of a particularly salacious tidbit, you act up and ensure that you remain consigned to a very minor frontbench role. It damages our party and it damages your career.
I'm glad to see that you've written an apology to Bercow. Please try and ensure that no more are necessary.
It would be widely read by people who read the Independent. Not exactly the audience who most need to hear that information. But I do take the point about damaging John. It was a daft thing to do, and I really am awfully sorry.
So Yvette tells me on a regular basis, although her glare is not quite as impressive as yours. I just don't seem to be able to get the balance right. When I was ambitious I was completely insufferable- I don't think any of us want to have to put up with the me from ten years ago, especially not me- but now that I've stopped obsessing over advancement it's hard to find the self-discipline to be dull and reliable. And really, Immigration? How did I wind up our spokesman for the one brief in the entire shadow government that neither I nor anyone in my constituency cares about in the least? I know the party has to win back ground on this, and I'm flattered to be entrusted with it, honestly, but it is so bloody boring.
I will, I will. Though I suspect you're a canny enough prognosticator not to hold your breath.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
chrisbrilliant, a word, if you please.
no subject
no subject
no subject
luckilyin Singapore.no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Peter,
Hmmm... perhaps "Why do you need to talk to Chris?" would be a good way to open... No, no, it's obvious why he wants to see him... How about: "don't feel the need to start The Machine up again on my behalf"? Goodness, no, far too presumptuous; what if it is just about Bryant embarrassing the Party? "Go easy on him; after all, your lot have done far worse before"? Would that work? No that's not right either... "How much of your current desire to reprimand Bryant is to do with the impression he gave of Labour and how much, if any, is to do with the fact that it was me he was a completely disrespectful child towards?" ...Well it gets points for directness if nothing else I suppose...Busy few days coming up at work - please try and refrain from any activity that would require my involvement in the cleaning up process in the immediate future.
Thanks.
-John
no subject
John
I will endeavour not to get the carpets dirty.
-Peter
no subject
Peter,
Your cooperation is, as ever, much appreciated.
-John
no subject
John,
I would write that I've put newspapers down, but it's copies of the D**** M***.
-Peter
no subject
Peter,
I do believe you may be one of the first people in living memory to find a use for that collection of racist, homophobic, sexist, bigoted scribbles.
-John
no subject
John,
I always use it when house training puppies.
-Peter
no subject
Peter,
...Right.
-John
no subject
John,
I don't expect you to remember Bobby, but you must have noticed Jack at some point, surely?
-Peter
no subject
Peter,
...Jack. Of course.
-John
no subject
And possibly turn me into something?no subject
As I am certain you are aware, Bercow has been one of the more generous Speakers towards the Labour benches. As I am certain you are also aware, he has taken considerable flak from the Tories, to the extent that several were at one point plotting to run against him - a fate unheard of for Speakers for many years.
Given these two facts, would you care to explain why you felt the need to be grossly discourteous to the Chair, forcing him either to publicly upbraid a member of our party during one of the most watched sessions in the House of Commons, or to let it slide and provide further ammunition for his detractors on the government benches, thus rendering it more likely that he will be removed at the next general election and replaced with a Speaker more amenable to Tory wishes?
no subject
Of course I would never want to do anything to hurt John.
If it's any consolation, I suspect the media have bigger targets in their sights right now than my discourtesy to the Speaker.
no subject
Actually, given previous shenanigans, momentary insanity sounds plausible for you.You have a column, I believe, in the Independent within which you could call the Prime Minister a lying, cheating snake to your heart's content. It would be far more widely read and likely to incur the Speaker far less damage than attempting to go against Parliamentary protocol and communicate the same content before a ministerial statement.
I am frankly worried, Chris. You are exceedingly capable when you wish to be, but when you find a brief boring or are in possession of a particularly salacious tidbit, you act up and ensure that you remain consigned to a very minor frontbench role. It damages our party and it damages your career.
I'm glad to see that you've written an apology to Bercow. Please try and ensure that no more are necessary.
no subject
So Yvette tells me on a regular basis, although her glare is not quite as impressive as yours. I just don't seem to be able to get the balance right. When I was ambitious I was completely insufferable- I don't think any of us want to have to put up with the me from ten years ago, especially not me- but now that I've stopped obsessing over advancement it's hard to find the self-discipline to be dull and reliable.
And really, Immigration? How did I wind up our spokesman for the one brief in the entire shadow government that neither I nor anyone in my constituency cares about in the least? I know the party has to win back ground on this, and I'm flattered to be entrusted with it, honestly, but it is so bloody boring.I will, I will.
Though I suspect you're a canny enough prognosticator not to hold your breath.