Indeed.Why should any of this depend on an individuals memory?
Are cabinet or Cobra meetings not minuted? At least to the level that there's a high level record of what was agreed and who has to do what?
The simple answer here is because any messages that relate to government business are not, in fact, "theirs". They are actually government records / documents that *should* have been backed up / copied across to official records.I don't see why they should be made to surrender their WhatsApp messages
The simple answer here is because any messages that relate to government business are not, in fact, "theirs". They are actually government records / documents that *should* have been backed up / copied across to official records.
How about an electorate who might expect a prime minister to tell the truth, particularly when under oath?Of course he was lying about what he could recall and indeed what he thought and said, but who can blame him.
The phones used were government issue not personal. In any court of law, it is admissable evidence, and could be applied for by warrant.Indeed.
And while I have no time for Sunak or Johnson, I don't see why they should be made to surrender their WhatsApp messages.
I thought Sunak sounded confident and assured yesterday. Of course he was lying about what he could recall and indeed what he thought and said, but who can blame him.
"Yes, I always thought Johnson was a ****, but I was a member of the cabinet and I had two choices - play with the team, or flounce. I decided to play with the team."
This is exactly what Starmer would say if questioned about his role in the Corbyn shadow cabinet (well, he wouldn't use those words, but...), and would be something else I would be entirely sympathetic with.
ooh, how oddThe phones used were government issue not personal. In any court of law, it is admissable evidence, and could be applied for by warrant.
Somehow the rule of law isn't being applied.
Would we have enough bullets?Can’t we just shoot all these slimy out for themselves idiots.
I can't rememberWould we have enough bullets?
I can understand about emails. I am under the same strictures - when I use my XX.AC.UK account. And have been bollocked for gobbing off via it. But WhatsApp is private, even if you use it to chat about work, surely?The simple answer here is because any messages that relate to government business are not, in fact, "theirs". They are actually government records / documents that *should* have been backed up / copied across to official records.
From memory this is all laid out in an official policy somewhere (which also encompasses emails etc). Government ministers / officials are required to ensure that anything (whatsapps, SMS, emails, etc) that relates to government business, decision making, etc is added to the official records.
Really? OK, then I stand corrected.The phones used were government issue not personal. In any court of law, it is admissable evidence, and could be applied for by warrant.
Somehow the rule of law isn't being applied.
The fact (that I now accept) that they were using work-issue phones aside, 'I can't remember' is incontestable.How about an electorate who might expect a prime minister to tell the truth, particularly when under oath?