Welcome To Zelo Street!

This is a blog of liberal stance and independent mind

Tuesday 9 November 2021

Camilla Tominey’s Inept Desperation

As alleged Prime Minister Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson sinks further into a mire of sleaze largely of his own making, cowardly chickening out of yesterday’s Parliamentary debate on standards, his former paper, the increasingly desperate and downmarket Telegraph, rallied to his rescue with a suitably pointless slice of false equivalence.

This is my article here, and as you can see, it's total shite

To no surprise at all, the hack charged with saving Bozo’s not insignificant bacon is “associate editor” Camilla Tominey, another of those who, in the days of Bill Deedes, would not have been allowed through the door at the Tel. The smearer of the Duchess of Sussex and the Greenfell cook book has today served upSir Keir Starmer: The self-styled bastion of democracy who made no fewer than 48 attempts to block Brexit”.

Yes readers, on the one hand we have Bozo The Clown, an irredeemably corrupt, unprincipled, dishonest, selfish, serially philandering and terminally inept scoundrel, and on the other, someone who casts his vote in Parliament in a way the Tel doesn’t like.

Worse, the headline cannot be stood up: “research suggests that the current Labour leader … made no fewer than 48 attempts to thwart Brexit”. RESEARCH SUGGESTS. And whose research is this? We are not told. Does this research even exist? We aren’t told that, either. Has Starmer done anything improper? Er, no. But needs must, eh?

So do go on: “amid all the pious hyperbole expressed in the House of Commons on Monday, Sir Keir’s own chequered history when it comes to respecting the democratic process appeared conspicuous by its absence”. APPEARED. “It may have been a wholly different set of circumstances, but”. Ja, und zis is a big but! There is more.

Starmer, she claims, “was at the forefront of attempts to overturn the mandate that 52 per cent of the British public voted for in 2016”. Overturn a vote? How could he do that? “By using every trick in the parliamentary book”. Ah, Parliamentary democracy. The thing that is OK when the Tories do it, but not the Rotten Lefties™. Have another go.

So show us the charge sheet: “repeatedly voting against the EU Withdrawal Act … twice voting against the Customs Bill … twice voted against the Trade Bill … As well as voting against the first, second and third Meaningful Votes in 2019 … supporting the Cooper-Letwin Bill … voting for the Surrender Act three times”. WHOOPS! The pass is duly sold.

Such is Ms Tominey’s desperation that she resorts to terminology no Telegraph hack should be using. We even get “Siding with the likes of Jean-Claude Juncker and Michel Barnier” and a conclusion of false equivalence: “Mr Johnson may have suffered a sharp drop in his personal ratings in the wake of the sleaze scandal - but when it comes to decrying attempts to subvert the parliamentary system, history proves his political rival doesn’t really have a leg to stand on”. Because Starmer did not attempt subversion.

Keir Starmer’s leadership of the Labour Party may be less than totally effective right now, but to pretend his legitimate use of Parliamentary democracy is in some way equivalent to Bozo’s corrupt and potentially lawbreaking premiership is beyond ridiculous. In God’s Own County, they’d say of Ms Tominey “I wouldn’t pay her in washers”.

The defence of Bozo’s bad behaviour is beyond desperate. No change there, then.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at



Anonymous said...

We don't have "a Parliamentary democracy".

The second chamber, the House of "Lords", is appointed not elected. Often because the appointee has done nothing more than pay or benefit the party in power.

By some weird coincidence the British head of state is also unelected.

This combination helps explain why Parliament is a decaying institution and building on the banks of an open sewer.

Pendragon said...

The Telegraph did not mention it and the Sun was slow to mention it (because they had to check first withMurdoch in the USA?). So why did the Daily Mail immediately turn on the Conservatives and brand the Paterson episode as a “sink back into sleaze”? It is easy to believe that if it were still being edited by Paul Dacre it would have taken the opposite stance from the one it took last week.

Would we have seen something similar to his "Enemies of the People" front-page, semi-inviting its readers to visit violence---hopefully only verbal---on the three judges who overturned the proroguing of Parliament? (Dacre did at least make it difficult for his readers to identify the judges in the street by publishing photographs of them semi-disguised in wigs and legal robes.)

My guess is that Geordie Greig took the long view that the Conservatives might lose the next general election because of "sleaze"and decided to campaign against it---with Rothermere's approval of course. Indeed Greig added to Johnson's woes today (9 November) with a front-page story on Conservative MP Geoffrey Cox's lucrative stay in the British Virgin Islands when Parliament was in session.

Could the Mail’s message to Johnson be summarised as “people are easily persuaded that the Conservatives are sleazy and your move over Paterson confirmed their view. Back off, or face a vote of no confidence from your MPs” ?

Mr Larrington said...

I was about to mention the Heil's front page on tax-haven fanboi Geoffrey Cox being seconded to the government of the BVI but Pendragon beat me to it. Of course, who better to advise about corruption than a former Tory cabinet minister? Who would you prefer to work on your car, a Rolls-Royce engine fitter or the wee work experience lackey from Kwik-Fit?

Burlington Bertie from Bow said...

'....mandate that 52 per cent of the British public voted for in 2016'

Camilla Tominey, or Camel Toe as I would like to think of you if I ever thought of you, please note:

'British public': 67,000,000
Leave vote: 17,000,000
Remain vote:16,000,000

(Daily Telegraph readership: 896 subject to hourly adjustment to allow for the extremely high attrition rate)

Anonymous said...

According to the ONS:

The December 2016 electorate totalled 45,766,000.

The vote to leave the EU totalled 17,410,742.

The latter is neither 52% of the electorate, the Britis population or the "British public".

All of which leaves Tominey looking like a right lying twat.

Anonymous said...

“was at the forefront of attempts to overturn the mandate that 52 per cent of the British public voted for in 2016.

Of all the Brexit lies "52%" is the one that really really grates because of the inevitable tagging on of "the British public" like their support is literally over half the country (circa 34m people) and not 37% of the eligible electorate, 17m people.

Literally doubling.

grim northerner said...

Has anyone noticed the striking similarity between Tominey and 'Skeleton' from 'SuperTed'?

Anonymous said...

As bad a case of 'Look over there!' as you're likely to see.

Anonymous said...

I am unable to give credence to a woman with the same kind of oblong head and opinions as the ineffable Jeremy Clarkson.

They must share the same kind of grotesque DNA.

Anonymous said...

The Brexit referendum was absurd. It was based on a ridiculous binary question which ignored complexities and possible outcomes. This required full and honest information from both sides. Instead, all we got was dishonest propaganda and lies.

In fact the voting pattern reflected uncertainty because of it. These are the approximate figures:

Total electorate - 45,766,000. (100%)
Vote Leave - 17,410,742. (38.04% electorate)
Vote Remain - 16,141,241. (35.27%)
DIDN'T VOTE - 28,356,258. (26.69%)

The last figure is crucial because, based on qui tacet consentire, it could have gone to either party.

This is uncertainty by any measure. And it is caused by the phrasing of the question.

Uncertainty is no basis for sound decision-making on a momentous issue.

Mick said...

You should be careful using Starmer and 'rotten lefties' in the same paragraph. It's enough to get yourself proscribed these days.

Mr Larrington said...

@Anonymous #1: that Trotskyite malcontent Gary Winston Lineker OBE was questioning the very existence of the House Of Lords on Twitter the other day, which just goes to show the depths to which (the likes of Camilla Tominey would have us believe) this once great nation has sunk.

[“You'll have to do better than that if you want a job at the Torygraph” – Ed.]

Anonymous said...

To 11:50.

So the dastardly Lineker lines up with the dastardly Rashford in opposition to a far right government.

Meanwhile, the spineless Starmer Gang run away from the House of "Lords" issue:

Unknown said...

Aye Camilla, the Royal Correspondent sent out to defend' Prince of Lies' Andrew, by throwing dead cats on the table about the survivors.

She's like her mate Laura, both just protect the Establishment despite the truth starring at them in the face.