“BBC acknowledges ‘mistake’ in Boris Johnson editing”

Fascinating that this article comes under the BBC’s “arts and entertainment” heading and NOT politics!

The BBC has said editing footage of Prime Minister Boris Johnson for a news bulletin was “a mistake on our part”.

The Prime Minister appeared on Question Time: Leaders Special on BBC One on Friday evening.

The audience laughed when he was asked a question about how important it is for people in power to tell the truth.

But the laughter and subsequent applause was absent from a cut-down version of the exchange on a lunchtime news bulletin the following day.

“This clip from the BBC’s Question Time special, which was played out in full on the News at Ten on Friday evening and on other outlets, was shortened for timing reasons on Saturday’s lunchtime bulletin, to edit out a repetitious phrase from Boris Johnson,” the BBC said in a statement.

“However, in doing so we also edited out laughter from the audience. Although there was absolutely no intention to mislead, we accept this was a mistake on our part, as it didn’t reflect the full reaction to Boris Johnson’s answer.

“We did not alter the soundtrack or image in any way apart from this edit, contrary to some claims on social media.”

On the original programme, an audience member asked the prime minister: “How important is it for someone in your position of power to always tell the truth?”

There was laughter and applause from the audience as Mr Johnson answered: “I think it’s absolutely vital.”

Mr Johnson then repeated the sentence once the laughter and applause had died down.

The second version was the one used in the BBC’s News at One bulletin on Saturday.

The BBC originally explained that the Saturday edit was “shortened for time reasons” in reply to a tweet later the same day, although did not acknowledge it was a mistake at that point.

The BBC’s statement follows an error on BBC Breakfast last month when out-of-date footage of Mr Johnson laying a wreath was broadcast due to “a production mistake”.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-50546115

Left-wing newspaper points out Swire’s extra income as MP

Will Swire find some nice part-time job for Jupp if he succeeds him? Will Dominic Raab (to whom he is said to be an adviser, though parlianmentary records do not show this) give his SPAD a leg up? As Swire organised Raab’s attempt for the Tory Leadership will they perhaps both offer Jupp their help?

Might we see even less of Jupp than Swire (if that’s possible?).

“TOP Tories stand to collectively lose more than £2.5 million a year under Labour’s plan to stop MPs moonlighting for extra money, the Morning Star can reveal.

Labour’s manifesto has set out plans to “tackle vested interests” in British politics — including a pledge to “stop MPs from taking paid second jobs” with limited exemptions to maintain professional registrations like nursing.

The move would hit around a fifth of Tory MPs, according to the Star’s analysis of the register of MPs’ interests.
More than 50 were topping up their £79,468 salaries with permanent second jobs on which they spent a combined 9,500 hours a year. …

… Mark Pritchard and Hugo Swire were also managing to hold down an extra four jobs outside of Parliament, making them £77,880 per annum and £104,996 (almost half of it in shares) respectively. …”

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/b/top-tories-lose-more-ps25-mill-year-under-labours-plans-stop-mps-moonlighting

Tory “manifesto” – “transactional not transformative “

“Theresa May’s manifesto launch two years ago was famously the moment her election campaign imploded. After unveiling her ‘dementia tax’ plans in a marginal Labour seat in West Yorkshire, her poll lead began to evaporate. Instead of gaining seats, she ended up losing them. A few weeks later, her majority went up in smoke.

Every Tory is still scarred by the experience. And, for all his British bulldog bonhomie, Boris Johnson is no exception. So, when it came to his own manifesto launch today (in a marginal Tory seat), caution was the watchword. After May’s hubris in Halifax, what we got was temperance in Telford.

Even the timing of the launch, on a soggy Sunday with the public’s attention elsewhere, felt deliberately low-key, and risk-free. Johnson’s speech was short (a mere 15 minutes) and his manifesto was brief too (59 pages and many of those had big print and big photos). Its contents were as safe as an episode of Antiques Roadshow. What was remarkable was how unremarkable it was.

Johnson twice used the phrase “sensible, moderate One Nation Conservatism”. Sensible is not a word you’d normally associate with the self-styled swashbuckler of the Tory party. If felt like this great gambler, having bet his career on a December election, was doing everything he could to avoid any slip-ups that could leave him as one of the shortest-lived prime ministers in our history.

In spending terms, this blueprint for government paled in comparison to Labour’s splurge. It would increase spending by a mere £2.9bn per year by 2023-24, (Labour’s plan is for £82.9bn over the same period). Compared to recent Tory administrations, there would be more borrowing and more state intervention. The IFS called the fiscal plans ‘very modest’ and the whole thing felt like an Autumn Statement rather than a vision of sunlit uplands.

On the toxic topic of social care, there was no detail at all, despite the fact that this is a huge generational challenge and despite Johnson’s famous summer pledge (“I am announcing now – on the steps of Downing Street – that we will fix the crisis in social care once and for all with a clear plan we have prepared”.) The tax cuts were tepid and the childcare offer was timid. Aides said that only £22bn out of their £100bn ‘headroom’ for spending has been allocated, and hinted more was to come. But no one was splashing the cash today.

Johnson himself tried to claim his would be “a new government, a very active and dynamic government”. Yet when you flick through his blueprint for government for the next five years, this doesn’t feel like a new departure from the May or Cameron eras. In fact, it feels like what it is: a third-term Tory administration that is not exactly brimming with ideas.

Yes more cash for potholes is important, but it still sounded as exciting as John Major’s motorway cones hotline. The ‘Australian-style points-based immigration system’ had virtually no detail. There’s no big bang to tackle the housing crisis, and (as future generations may remember most of all) nothing radical to tackle the climate emergency.

The contrast between the piecemal prospectus today and Johnson’s flamboyant usual rhetorical flourishes was striking. On today’s evidence, to paraphrase the insult once lobbed at Clement Attlee, he’s an immodest man with much to be modest about.

Of course, Johnson is undeniably a better salesman than May ever was. The usual gags were there (“let’s go carbon neutral by 2050 and Corbyn neutral by Christmas!” “Bonjour monsieur Corbyn comment allez vous?”), plus the linguistic gymnastics (in Telford 200 years ago “the phlegethontian fires of Coalbrookdale created the first industrial revolution”). There was also some neat phrasemaking (“from free trade to free speech to the freedom to love whomsoever you choose”).

He even tried his best to do The Vision Thing. “I want you to imagine what the country could be like in just 10 years,” he said. In fact he said “in ten years’ time” (scientists would benefit from more R&D cash, we’d have 40 new hospitals, the UK would still be the UK) so many times that it felt like this was a prospectus for a two-term, not a one-term, prime minister.

One reason Johnson likes talking about the future is because it’s so much easier for him than talking about the past. Holding an election before delivering Brexit has turned out to be an inspired move, simultaneously keeping attention on Corbyn’s confusing position while stressing only the Tories can get it ‘done’.

As many times as he says he’s only been PM for three months, in many places the manifesto only reverses cuts made in the past 10 years. From replacing 20,000 police officers to restoring the student nurse bursary, Johnson is hoping the public will forget he signed up to austerity as both an MP and as a member of the Cabinet. His sense of political responsibility feels like a Westminster remix of Shaggy’s ‘It Wasn’t Me’. Vowing never to extend the UK’s transition period beyond 2020 may prove to be a mistake, but that’s not his pressing concern. Winning this election is.

Simon Fletcher, Ken Livingstone’s former chief of staff, is someone who knows better than most how effective Johnson is as a politician. He warned earlier this year that Johnson “will obfuscate, avoid accountability, brazenly steal policies, play to the gallery and close down as many attack lines as he can.” And the Tory 2019 manifesto does all of those things.

It steals policies like free hospital parking (both from Labour itself and Tory backbencher Rob Halfon) and more nurses, albeit watered down version of both. It plays to the gallery on immigration and crime. It tries to shut down the NHS and schools cuts rows that caused Tories to lose seats two years ago. As with the Boris Bus £350m pledge, there’s less to many of the promises than meets the eye (50,000 ‘more nurses’ turns out to include current staff, just like 40 new hospitals means six fully funded projects).

Two years ago, Theresa May got indignant when asked whether her manifesto was a variation of Thatcherism. “There is no May-ism,” she said sternly. There is no ‘Borisism’ either. In fact the phrase is used to describe his one-liners, his scripted ‘unscripted’ gaffes, his un-PC jokes, rather than a political philosophy,.
But if there is a Johnsonism, it’s as old as conservatism itself: a recognition that Britons prefer evolution to revolution.

The Conservative party also has a knack for renewing itself in office as well as out of it. Johnson chose the seat of Leave-voting Telford today because it is a marginal the Tories hope to turn into a safe seat. But he also hopes to take nearby Labour seats in Stoke, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Wolverhampton and West Bromwich.

That’s the most important point about the Tory manifesto. It’s not transformational, it’s transactional. It offers an ‘oven ready’ Brexit to Labour Leavers, ‘no extension’ to Nigel Farage and slowly-does-it spending for everyone tired of austerity. And for a nation exhausted by the past three years, and those who just want to get on with their Christmas shopping, it may work.”

Source: Paul Waugh: Huffington Post

Questions for the Tory candidate as he rushes around East Devon

Claire Wright has been clear with her manifesto – protecting what is best about East Devon, standing up for the NHS am]nd social care, conserving the environment and improving education and inequality.

Click to access GEManifesto2019FINAL5.pdf

Unfortunately, the Conservative Party has not been so clear.
Other party manifestos are unimportant in East Devon.

A vote for anyone other than Claire Wright is a vote for the Tories.

Our parachuted-in, Tory apparatchik candidate is throwing himself around the constituency like a whirling dervish (mostly accompanied by the same old 5-6 people – who must be finding it quite tiring) But has anyone asked him these questions and, if so, has he given any answers?

If not, maybe hustings will provide a platform for him to answer.

What do you think of the Tory fake-news “factcheck uk” Twitter account? Is that acceptable?

What do you think of the “50,000 more nurses” which includes 19,000 that you think you might be able to persuade NOT to leave? Is this acceptable?

What do you think about the “20,000 more police” when you got rid of 21,000. Is this acceptable?

What do you think of the “60 new hospitals” when itis actually only 6 – the others to get minimal funding to plan new hospitals, not build them? Is this acceptable?

Why has social care been left out of the manifesto? Is this acceptable?

All the above is said to be taking 10 years to achieve – if at all? Is this acceptable?

“Boris Johnson under fire over ‘vague’ social care funding plans”

Yet millions of over 65’s will vote for them over an issue (Brexit) that will affect their children and grandchildren much more than them, and where those people often have very different views to them. THIS, and the state of the NHS, should be their main worry.

“Nicky Morgan has defended Boris Johnson over his decision to shelve plans to overhaul social care funding in the Conservatives’ manifesto launch.

The Conservative party has pledged to allocate an extra £1bn a year for the social care sector as part of a cautious manifesto, while guaranteeing that no one should have to sell their home to meet the costs.

But it falls short of Johnson’s rallying cry on the steps of Downing Street when he took office, claiming “we will fix the crisis in social care once and for all … with a clear plan we have prepared”.

Theresa May was forced into a U-turn when her 2017 manifesto social care plan was labelled a “dementia tax”, and Johnson has now committed only to saying the party will “build a cross-party consensus” on how it should be funded in the long term.

Sir Andrew Dilnot, the former chair of the commission on funding of care and support, said the Tory plans were “very vague”. And the head of a thinktank has said Johnson’s pledge is too little to plug the gap needed to cater for the country’s ageing population. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/nov/25/boris-johnson-under-fire-over-vague-social-care-funding-plans?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

No-one cares about social care: 74,000 over 65s have died while waiting for social care since last election

Covert euthanasia?

“A charity has blasted the government for the time it has “wasted” on drawing up a social care paper that still has not materialised.

Age UK called on the next government to spend £8bn over the next two years to prevent further decline in the adult social care sector.

The charity pointed out since the 2017 election 74,000 over-65s in England have died while waiting for the care they asked for, equating to a rate of 81 deaths per day, in analysis released yesterday.

Caroline Abrahams, director at Age UK, said the political system has “completely failed” to reform social care, despite it featuring heavily in the 2017 election campaign.

She said the last third months waiting for the promised social care green paper, which has now been delayed six times had been “effectively wasted ..waiting for the social care green paper that never was”.

“Social care is not some kind of nice-to-have optional extra, it’s a fundamental service on which millions of older and disabled people depend every day,” Abrahams said.

“Good care provided by kind and committed people, enriches lives and makes it possible to have dignity and hope. The reverse is also true: if you need care and you can’t get it then there are very serious implications for your health and your wellbeing – as the NHS knows all too well.”

Age UK estimates that between the 2017 and 2019 elections 1,725,000 unsuccessful requests have been – or will be made – by older people for care.

“It is appalling that one and a half million older people in our country now have some unmet need for care, one in seven of the entire older population. This is a shameful statistic, and older people are developing new unmet needs for care every day.”

https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2019/11/charity-demands-action-social-care
(pay wall)

Founder of World Wide Web attacks Tory dirty tricks – don’t trust people who impersonate he says

“The inventor of the World Wide Web has accused the Conservatives of spreading misinformation during the general election campaign.

Sir Tim Berners-Lee described the renaming of a Tory Twitter account as a fact checking body as “impersonation”.
“That was really brazen,” he told the BBC. “It was unbelievable they would do that.”

During a live TV leaders’ debate on Tuesday the Tory press office account @CCHQ was rebranded “factcheckuk”.

The renaming remained for the duration of the hour-long debate between Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn. The Conservatives have said “no one will have been fooled” by the move.

But Sir Tim said the renaming “was impersonation. Don’t do that. Don’t trust people who do that.”

He went on to compare what happened with someone impersonating a friend for the purpose of defrauding them. “What the Conservative Party has done is obviously a no no. That’s amazingly blatant,” Sir Tim said. …”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50539795

50,000 more nurses? Of course not!

“Breakdown of that Tory 50k new nurses pledge. Party sources say 14k from students, 12.5k from overseas 5k from new nurse apprenticeships. But bulk of increase will come from better ‘retention’ of existing staff (better childcare/management support)…..So 31,500 “new” nurses then and a pipe-dream about retaining staff who are growing more unhappy in their roles each day due to the 40,000 nurse vacancies that can’t currently be filled. This man really has a problem with the truth…….”

Tories retain candidate who took £54,000 in illegal dividends and repaid £2,000

“A Conservative parliamentary candidate who has been praised by Boris Johnson is facing questions over why he received an illegal dividend from a security firm that went into administration owing £271,000 in tax.

Stuart Anderson, who is trying to overturn a Labour majority of 2,185 in Wolverhampton South West, was a director and major shareholder of Anubis Associates for eight years until 2013 when the firm collapsed.

The firm, which trained security guards, was wound up by administrators who noted that Anderson had received more than £54,000 in unlawful dividends. He later repaid £2,000.

It comes amid criticism from unions that the Conservatives have failed to rein in malpractice in business.

When Anubis went under it owed £271,738 to HM Revenue and Customs in VAT, PAYE, national insurance and deferred taxation, documents show. Another 59 unsecured creditors were owed £179,330. Secured creditors received a portion of what they were owed.

Anderson, a former soldier and a Brexit supporter, had not mentioned his involvement with the firm in his online biography or during interviews. When approached by the Guardian, he said he complied with all his legal obligations. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/22/tory-candidate-got-illegal-dividend-from-firm-that-went-bust?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

“Leaders’ election TV debate cancelled after Boris Johnson refuses to take part”

Chicken – AND he’s refused to appear at the husting in his constituency!

Frit!

“A planned leaders’ debate between Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn has been cancelled after the prime minister refused to take part.

The Channel 4 debate, which was scheduled for Sunday, would have been the second direct clash between Mr Johnson and the Labour leader after a contest on ITV this week.

But despite agreement from Labour, a producer announced on Thursday evening that the programme had been cancelled just days before it was supposed to air.

“Gutted we’ve had to cancel a planned Leaders debate on Channel 4 for this Sunday. Jeremy Corbyn had agreed to take part but, after many weeks of intense discussion, we were unable to secure agreement from Boris Johnson team,” said Channel 4 producer Louisa Compton.

Channel 4 News anchor Krishnan Guru-Murthy, who would have presented the debate, added: “Boris Johnson said he was in favour of debates and his team have been in detailed talks with us for weeks about format and rules right up until yesterday.

“They insisted they were engaged and wanted to take on Jeremy Corbyn on our channel. Corbyn said yes. Offer still stands.”

It comes as the Labour candidate in Mr Johnsons’s seat said the prime minister was ducking out of a local hustings event there, leading it to be cancelled as well.

Ali Milani tweeted: “Name any time that works for you. My team will organise the venue, details and all logistics. All you have to do is show up. Show an ounce of integrity. Come debate me. What do you have to worry about?”

Channel 4 says it will still hold a live debate on 8 December featuring “representatives” of seven major parties taking questions from an audience of undecided voters. The politicians would be questions about everything except Brexit.

Another head-to-head clash is expected to take place on the BBC on Friday 6 of December, with Question Time specials planned for this Friday and further events potentially in the pipeline.”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/election-debate-boris-johnson-party-leaders-tv-cancel-corbyn-a9212926.html

AND YET MORE TORY DIRTY TRICKS AND FAKE NEWS!

“The Conservative Party has bought a website called “labourmanifesto.co.uk” and are using it to attack the opponent party on the day of their manifesto launch.

The website, which some commentators suggest may appear to be an official Labour Party domain, has appeared at the top of some people’s Google search results as a paid advertisement. …”

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/general-election-labour-manifesto-conservative-17293310

Fake news – Tories at it AGAIN!

Tory HQ Has Been Accused Of Misleading People On Twitter – Again:

“A video appears to show Jess Phillips criticising Labour’s new manifesto – but she isn’t.

The Conservative Party has been accused of misleading voters again on social media, this time by tweeting a video of Labour candidate Jess Phillips with the wrong date on it.

The edited video, posted by the @CCHQPress Twitter account and now deleted, showed the parliamentary candidate saying: “You can never, ever deliver all of those things that you are pretending to deliver when you go to the electorate.”

@CCHQPress has dated the video November 21, 2019, giving the impression Phillips was criticising Jeremy Corbyn on the same day he launched Labour’s general election manifesto.

But the clip has been taken from an old interview, when Phillips appeared on ITV’s Good Morning Britain on October 3 to promote her new book.

The video was reaired this morning during an interview with shadow education secretary Angela Rayner.

During the original interview, Phillips was questioned by Susanna Reid about keeping manifesto promises — before the general election was announced.

Phillips said: “I think there is an argument to be said that you can never, ever deliver all of those things that you are pretending to deliver when you go to the electorate.

“In reality, things change. Globally things change, situations change. Facts change.

″[We can’t deliver it] in all cases. I can’t control the trade war between America and China and I have to, each and every day, and at the moment it is on a day-by-day basis and it is not good, and I have to say: ‘What is the best thing, the best decision I can make today to make sure my constituents are better off?’”

The video also labels Phillips a “Corbyn ally” – in reality, the 37-year-old candidate for Birmingham Yardley has been a vocal critic of the Labour leader in the past, going as far as to say he wasn’t the “practical choice” for leader because people would not vote for him.

The edited video has been criticised on Twitter.

One person said: “You know she’s not just talking about Labour right, but all politicians? She’s speaking truth whereas you only pretend to use facts.”

Another added: “Edited and old. Get a grip.”

It’s not the first time the Tories have been accused of misleading the public with a video.

The same Twitter account came under fire just this week after it rebranded itself as “FactCheckUK” during Tuesday evening’s televised leaders’ debate.

The @CCHQPress page normally carries clear Tory branding and logos and is equally clearly named.

But as Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn went head-to-head on Tuesday, the account renamed itself “FactCheckUK” and minimised any references to Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ).

Twitter warned that a repeat of the incident would result in “decisive corrective action”.

On November 5, they were accused of unfairly editing a video of Labour’s Sir Keir Starmer, to make him appear unable to answer a question on Brexit. However, the party stood by the edit, PA Media reports.

The Tories have also purchased the website labourmanifesto.co.uk.

The website purports to showcase Labour’s manifesto but instead actually attacks the party’s policies. It accuses the party of promising “higher taxes” with “no plan for Brexit”.

The Conservatives came under fire for rebranding as a “fact-checking service” during Tuesday night’s televised election debate.

Twitter and the Conservative Party did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the video.”

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/tory-hq-twitter-jess-phillips_uk_5dd69210e4b010f3f1d3a842

Did our Tory candidate give his boss this advice?

A goid question for hustings?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/20/twitter-accuses-tories-of-misleading-public-in-factcheck-row?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

The fakest of fake (Tory) news

Was Owl the only one who found this reprehensible?

“Tories pretend to be factchecking service during leaders’ debate

The Conservatives have been accused of misleading the public after they rebranded their official Twitter account as “factcheckUK” during the televised leaders’ debate and used it to publish anti-Labour posts.

The public have increasingly turned to factchecking websites, such as the independent Full Fact, the BBC’s Reality Check, Channel 4 News’ FactCheck and the Guardian’s Factcheck, to verify claims made by politicians.

During Tuesday night’s debate between Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn, the Conservative party renamed their main media account as “factcheckUK”, changed its logo to hide its political origins, and used it to push pro-Conservative material to the public. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/19/tories-tweet-anti-labour-posts-under-factcheckuk-brand?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

A former Lib Dem urges people not to vote Lib Dem

Vote anything but Claire Wright (Independent) in East Devon, get Tory. Get Tory, get Putin and Trump.

” … the Lib Dems are again trying to lure voters from the centre left with big promises. This time, instead of talking about tuition fees, they say they will revoke article 50.

Everyone knows this will never happen: even the Lib Dems themselves. But they know this message will take votes away from Labour, and Lib Dem-friendly tactical voting tools are advising voters to vote Lib Dem in seats where, based on the 2017 election results, only a Labour candidate could beat the Tory. In many constituencies, a vote for the Lib Dems is in effect a vote for the Conservatives. …

… Her party is not focused on reversing generational injustice; on the contrary, it has enabled it. The Lib Dems – with Swinson as a coalition government minister – were happy to work with the Conservatives to slash benefits, cut social care and play havoc with the health service. Their political conscience only seemed to return when Brexit threatened their world view and their interests. Ideologically, they largely overlap with the vanishing “moderate” wing of the Tories – whose MPs are now defecting to the Lib Dem party. Many of my peers who fell for Cleggmania in 2010 say they’ll never vote Lib Dem again.

Today’s young people deserve better than we got. When I see younger people taking action on climate change, I feel proud. Your vote is powerful. So powerful that university lecturers who encourage students to sign up to vote are facing harassment.

A decade is a long time and also isn’t. I signed on for a bit, got a job, became a writer, got married. Loved ones died and new loved ones were born. Many of us are still in debt. Many of us don’t own a house. That’s life. But life intertwines with politics. And on 12 December you have a choice that could shape yours, for better or for worse.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/18/lib-dems-wreck-20s-young-voters-jo-swinson-tories?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

“Boris Johnson’s Conservative party has received cash from 9 Russian donors named in a suppressed intelligence report”

Vote Tory – get Putin!

“Boris Johnson’s Conservative Party has received a surge in cash from nine Russian donors, who have been named in a suppressed investigation into Russia’s attempts to undermine democracy in the UK. …

The report by Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee identifies close links between major donors to the Conservative party and the Russian government, the Sunday Times reports.

The report was due for publication this week but was blocked by Johnson, due to reported fears that the information would damage his chances of winning the upcoming UK general election.

Among those donors named in the suppressed report are Alexander Temerko, who worked for the Russian defence ministry and has previously boasted that the prime minister is his “friend”.

Temerko donated more than £1.2m to the Conservatives over the past seven years.

Other Russian donors to the Conservative party include Lubov Chernukhin, who is married to Vladimir Chernukhin, a former ally of Putin.

Chernukhin previously paid £160,000 for a tennis match with Johnson and former prime minister David Cameron and has donated more than £450,000 in the past year.

The committee also reportedly heard concerns about the former Russian spy Alexander Lebedev, who owns the Evening Standard and Independent newspapers.

Lebedev is not a donor to the Conservative Party. However, his son Evgeny is a close friend of the prime minister and has repeatedly hosted him for parties at his castle in Perugia Italy, while Johnson was mayor of London and Foreign Secretary. …”

https://www.businessinsider.com/boris-johnson-blocked-report-naming-tory-donors-linked-to-kremlin-2019-11?

Record number of adults living with parents

“Record numbers of young adults in their 20s and 30s are living with their parents, according to official figures, with critics blaming soaring house prices and rents.

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) said that over the last two decades, there has been a 46% increase in the number of young people aged 20-34 living with their parents. Over the same period, average house prices have tripled from about £97,000 to £288,000.

In total, 1.1 million more young men and women are now living at home, with the number increasing from 2.4 million in 1999 to 3.5 million in 2019. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/nov/15/record-numbers-of-young-adults-in-uk-living-with-parents?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other