Welcome To Zelo Street!

This is a blog of liberal stance and independent mind

Sunday 5 December 2021

Commons Drug Use - Press Hypocrisy

The Murdoch press carries a shocking revelation this morning: the Sunday Times has told readersSniffer dogs could prowl corridors of power amid claims drug abuse is rife … Speaker vows to crack down as fears grow that cannabis and cocaine is [sic] being used openly at Westminster”. Recreational drug use no shock horror. But there is more.

Sniffer dogs could be deployed across the Parliamentary estate under plans for a drugs crackdown by the Commons authorities … The Speaker has promised to call in the Police amid growing evidence of cocaine and other illegal substances being used in Parliament. Sir Lindsay Hoyle said he would investigate Westminster’s drug culture after traces of cocaine were detected in a number of places accessible only to people with Parliamentary passes”. He’s only the odd decade or two too late in waking up to the issue.

After all, alleged Prime Minister Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson has effectively confessed to past cocaine usage, Michael “Oiky” Gove has done so openly (and been seen in the Commons chamber in a state that gave the impression he was wasted), and former Chancellor of the Exchequer Gideon George Oliver Osborne, heir to the seventeenth Baronet, also appeared on the Government front bench looking out of it.

The ST’s political editor Caroline Wheeler, whose name is one of two on the by-line of that story, also had a quote to offer her followers. “Investigation by [the Sunday Times] exposes drug culture in Parliament as cocaine discovered across the estate. Sniffer dogs could be deployed under a new crackdown. Priti Patel says: ‘There is no place in our society for drugs and certainly not in our parliament’”. Ms Patel is first for mandatory testing, then.

But here a problem enters, in the shape of the H-Word, as in Hypocrisy. This is, after all, the Murdoch mafiosi pushing this story, an organisation that has significant previous when it comes to using the use of illegal drugs to smear others - as with the exploits of the so-called “Fake Sheikh” Mazher Mahmood, which came to an end so ignominiously.

The problem for News UK in constantly pointing the finger at others is that, in the meantime, the suspicion inevitably grows that they may not be whiter than white when it comes to friendships with Charlie. But no-one has - yet - examined the toilet facilities at the Baby Shard bunker for traces of cocaine, or, indeed any other illegal substance.

So the first reaction on reading the ST’s story should not be to raise an eyebrow at the activities of MPs and their staff, but to ask the Murdoch minions to show that their own house is in order. Which would mean random swabbing of washrooms, kitchens and toilets. Followed by the same random swabbing at the Northcliffe House bunker, and the offices of the increasingly desperate and downmarket Telegraph.

Not volunteering for random swabbing of the Baby Shard bogs, then?

After all, our free and fearless press has not been backward in coming forward with claims concerning their targets’ drinking habits, only for it to be later revealed that that same press has had an established drinking culture for some decades. Private Eye magazine did not have to invent Lunchtime O’Booze: he worked for every title across the old Fleet Street.

So, to the twinkle-toed yet domestically combative Rebekah Brooks, the response is straightforward: show us that you have your own house in order before sounding off about others. Random drug swabbing for the Baby Shard. Then you get taken seriously.

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...

"show us that you have your own house in order before sounding off about others"
Good point here, but I do wonder if this particular news has any mileage, a word to certain people, "if you expose us, we'll expose you"
Is why many things that should get off the ground with regards to various forms of corruption never does.

Anonymous said...

No surprise that the Parliament junk building is inhabited by junkies.

Goes with our Ruritanian junk culture, junk politics and junk society. Everything for sale when you mortgage your soul to greed.

It's what people want. Why be surprised when Murdoch/Rothermere slime attaches to it?

Mr Larrington said...

Seems Bloody Stupid Johnson wants to remove the passports of “illegal drug users” which will mean no more junkets to Spain or Mustique for you, Prime Minister. Although the interview in which he confessed to using Bolivian Nose Candy was conducted by colossal bellend Piers “Morgan” Moron, so he may not actually have said it all.

Arnold said...

There is no place in our society for drugs and certainly not in our parliament’”. Ms Patel is first for mandatory testing
Yes there is a place. Millions take "controlled" drugs. The "war on drugs" is a failure, and causes far more harm than good.
Why is only allowing criminals to sell a popular product thought to be a good idea?
For the record, I've never used any and am totally opposed tothem

Anonymous said...

Licence and tax "recreational" drugs in the same manner as tobacco and alcohol, both of which are far more mass-addictive and lethal than the powder muck. Making it illegal merely leads to a rise in organised crime, see the absurdity of Prohibition in the USA.

Incurable addictive personalities aside, widespread use of substances only demonstrates a deeply unhappy and fractious society. Which we are and have been for many years. There's no sign of an imminent change.

How right was Huxley and his Soma invention?

Mr Larrington said...

“Drugs Win Drugs War” said The Onion. In 1998.


Arnold said...

Mr Larrington. Bozo's already thought of that. He and his mates will be exempt.


Arnold said...

Party drug users are fuelling serious crime, says Sajid Javid
Health secretary says cocaine trade causes ‘suffering, violence and exploitation at every stage’


No argument there but if you choose to allow only criminals to supply a popular product, what do you expect?

Andy Foster said...

It's 'Back to Basics' again. I love it.