egafd.com

Planeterotica: you logic is sound and (in theory) very sensible, but I presume we all know we are nucking futs if we think any party - except perhaps the Monster Raving Loonies - would let out public assets to assist in making porn films. Not even for an Executive Producer credit.

What is annoyingabout this article, though, is that this MP is suggesting that renting out hospital space (even to a "normal" film company, or for meeting events, conferences etc) "cannot be said to be contributing to the objectives of the primary care trust". I thought a Tory MP in particular would endorse the exploitation of assets on a market-led, commercial basis, such that the profits could be reinvested in treating the old, ill and infirm (ie ultimately to fund the core objectives). She'd be the very person moaning if the NHS had a conference suite that "wasn't used to full capacity". Indeed, this actually happens (Education bodies own commerically-trading subs, as just one of many examples) - pick up most public body accounts and it's clearly on the face of their financial statements.

This suggests to me she is using the media-loving titillation of porn-related stories to get her mug in the papers and boost her political profile rather than understanding this actually happens in the real world. And she's not even prepared to do it with her baps out, like all Sun readers would expect.

alicia_fan_uk

thealtruist wrote:

> Did anybody else think that the MP that brought it to the attention of the media was fit because I bloody well did.

I'd say she's definitely crumpet.

Of course she's not doing it with her baps out, alicia. She knows full well that by associating herself with the 'story', as a very horny-looking MP whose flesh we'll never see, she's got most of the men in this country fantasising about what she'd look like with her arse in the air, butt naked and plugged at both ends by a couple of ten-inchers. Good on you, Penny Mordaunt.

I'll buy that for a dollar !happy!

does anyone know?