I started to read this article by Damien Gale in the Guardian about a pub in Westminster thinking typical politicians, want the public purse to pay and then ban the public that have used it for years.
Was rather surprised when i read the reasons behind it. Can that even be legal?
It’s a good sensationalist title, and I congratulate you for it.
However, doesn’t the rather more boring and rather more abstract “Not under my roof” cover this?
They’re all fuckers. Make 'em buy their own cans on the way to work and make them drink them on Parliament Green. Arseholes, thinking to take over a boozer, which you often find an MP and lobbyists any time of the day or night anyway. Fuckers.
I would imagine it would be incredibly difficult for that condition to be enforced by law, sour relations yes but enforcable? Probably not.
Yeah, sorry about that(maybe i should be a headline writer for the Mail). It just seemed to be what the article was saying. Find it hard to see how it’s enforceable. Not that i’m claiming to know the law, hence the question.
That’s a good enough solution for me. Of course they will just put it their expenses and demand that parliament green is upgraded for their needs.
Fuckers indeed.
I just think they should make them drink in the locals that are still left. The ones that somehow survived the smoking ban, and now play host to concentrated populations of hardened drinkers and cokeheads, formed as the rats left their sinking ships and went for the nearest safe harbour.
New Labour killed pubs. Twats.
Pap - do you get down to Westminster often?
There are no pubs that have the regulars you describe…actually you’ve just described most MP’s and their hangers-on so well played Sir!