Yes, and it's being used so badly. It's as if No 10 is run by people stuck in a 1990s satire.

omg, and more so to it going unchallenged. What a terrible programme!

It's incredible, isn't it. What is wrong with these ridiculous journalists? Is that that they're on 6-figure salaries and having to pay more tax?

Embassy No 1s, it would have been for me. (Then Rothmans. Then Silk Cut. Then Camel Lights. Then patches. Then Camel Lights again. Then patches again. etc.)

I just got it today... Looking forward to tonight (with hot water bottle).

I agree. And its implications are dangerous. This policy legitimises the dehumanisation you mentioned above, and opens the door to ratcheting it up – and dehumanisation in the 1930s was a process. It's pernicious.

Same. I've been tribally Labour since '79. Now, though I see the pressures on Labour in govt, I'm struggling to understand wtf is going on in Downing St - or, more precisely, how to stop it.

Same. I first voted in 1979 & joined in 1981. While I've had issues with the PLP, I've been tribally loyal because of a sense of belonging at grassroots. Now, although I can see the pressures on Gvt, including BBC bias that beggars belief, I'm struggling to understand wtf is going on in Downing St.

A Poussin sky!

The Cameron govt is getting off lightly (in general). As part of their assault on the BBC I think they replaced the Trust with the Board? Cameron/Osborne are getting an easy ride beause Johnson's destructiveness was so garish, but they did huge damage.

Yes. But while i want this Govt to use its influence to remove Gibb [and his people], I don't understand the mechanisms by which it can do so. And ironically, what's really needed is the removal OF governmental ability to wield influence on the BBC, which Cameron intensified.

No. I'm so confused I want to thank you for being able simply to articulate that.