Having just read the BBC's summary of her track record in shafting MPs previously, I am amazed that anyone with half a brain would consider working with her if they had skeletons in the closet. Hancock clearly falls short of this, then.
Guardian got her spot on. https://www.theguardian.com/politic...t-the-journalist-who-turned-over-matt-hancock
I heard on a podcast that he was at the Carabao Cup final the other week, wearing a signed Newcastle United shirt, that he was supposed to auction off a few months ago to raise money for charity. He's such an unlikeable person.
I'm a bit uncomfortable with it all if I'm honest. The way private conversations between colleagues and difficult times are being taken literally isn't right - dark humour and taking the piss is how lots of ppl talk and often deal with situations. He's still a pr1ck, but I dread to think what ppl would think of me if my WhatsApp messages were shared.
It's also another reason why normal, ordinary ppl will never end up in politics. The internet has been kicking about for twenty years - everybody has said or done something daft in that time, often growing up or not really understanding the permanence of stuff. Why would you ever put yourself up for that level of public scrutiny? And as such you end up with the type we get - rich, powerful, friends in high places. Put in under the watch of their mates. It's all ****.
I don't think it's dark humour. He talks of wanting to scare the public, of deploying a variation, of trying to lie about his affair etc
Reform party. Career politicians telling the masses that politicians have failed them. A certain type of person will absolutely lap this up.
He has, these messages are effectively state secrets (as are all informal discussions between government ministers and officials) and subject to the 30-year rule.