[Politics] Tory meltdown finally arrived [was: incoming]...

[KZNSeagull]

Nicky Campbell made a very good point of 'legalese wrigglease'. The lawyer mixed up a lot of examples even bringing in Starmer (which was a year later when the law was different) and also mixing in guidance and law.

The law was different in Durham because it was changed in 2021. False equivalence

He did say that Starmer did not break the law. The other lawyer said that there is not enough information in the public domain to determine whether either broke the law. I thought that the most interesting points were that the law as written was poorly worded and left too much wriggle room, that guidance are not laws and have no standing, that they were confused as to why someone was fined at the pictured event and their general concern that there does appear to be one law for them and one for the rest of us ("Deputy heads will fall" as NC said)

 

[Thunder Bolt]

He did say that Starmer did not break the law. The other lawyer said that there is not enough information in the public domain to determine whether either broke the law. I thought that the most interesting points were that the law as written was poorly worded and left too much wriggle room, that guidance are not laws and have no standing, that they were confused as to why someone was fined at the pictured event and their general concern that there does appear to be one law for them and one for the rest of us ("Deputy heads will fall" as NC said)

So the student was fined £10K for organising a snowball fight, the nurse who was fined £10K for protesting in Glasgow, and the student who was thrown out of university can appeal their fines and punishments as it was only guidance?

 

[nicko31]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61566410

Extract from a BBC programme due out tonight at 7pm.

Why is no one speak out and show their face?

I find really concerning Johnson is still in position, is this the new standard for elected politicians?

I'm afraid the root is the B-word, the big lie that he got away with.

He's taken us to place i thought we'd never get to, post truth, post shame, unaccountable

 

[KZNSeagull]

So the student was fined £10K for organising a snowball fight, the nurse who was fined £10K for protesting in Glasgow, and the student who was thrown out of university can appeal their fines and punishments as it was only guidance?

No idea, I am not a lawyer and don't pretend to be one. My take from it is that if they only broke guidance then yes as they are not laws, but the snowball fight broke the law did it not as they were meeting people outside of their household or support bubble (which was a law I think, not guidance)?

 

[beorhthelm]

He did say that Starmer did not break the law. The other lawyer said that there is not enough information in the public domain to determine whether either broke the law.

so important and overlooked, people assume what they've read on twitter and newspapers is gospel. the Gray report will hopefully spell out some details and nuances, explain (not justify) some of the differences.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

No idea, I am not a lawyer and don't pretend to be one. My take from it is that if they only broke guidance then yes as they are not laws, but the snowball fight broke the law did it not as they were meeting people outside of their household or support bubble (which was a law I think, not guidance)?

You've fallen for the legalese wrigglease. It seems it is the law for ordinary people but only guidance for our betters.
One rule for us and one rule for them.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

so important and overlooked, people assume what they've read on twitter and newspapers is gospel. the Gray report will hopefully spell out some details and nuances, explain (not justify) some of the differences.

You are assuming that people assume. Dominic Cummings is awful, but he was crossed and he was the one who released the first two photos. He has over 300 of them. Death by a thousand cuts.

The thing about Twitter is that you can quote the person directly, rather than assuming. You can then make up your mind whether you believe that person or someone else. Journalists rarely quote directly and will print 'a source said'. (the trolley is for Johnson as he is 'out of control')
[tweet]1528859842282233857[/tweet]

 

[KZNSeagull]

You've fallen for the legalese wrigglease. It seems it is the law for ordinary people but only guidance for our betters.
One rule for us and one rule for them.

I have not fallen for anything, all I have done is read the BBC article on the incident. Third to last paragraph. "it is against the law to meet socially with anyone outside of your household or support bubble". https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-55845582

Or are the BBC wrong?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I have not fallen for anything, all I have done is read the BBC article on the incident. Third to last paragraph. "it is against the law to meet socially with anyone outside of your household or support bubble". https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-55845582

Or are the BBC wrong?

Quite likely. I caught them out in a news report about Calais in 2015, as I was there at the time waiting to return through the Tunnel. I saw the news a couple of hours later and couldn't believe what they were broadcasting. I emailed a complaint which was brushed off.
I only watch Channel4 news or Skynews now.

The Chairman and the non-executive members for the nations are appointed by HM The Queen on the recommendation of Ministers while the other members of the Board are appointed by the BBC through the Board's Nominations Committee.
The total number of members on the Board will be 14, consisting of: Ten non-executive members, including: the Chair.
Threaten to remove the licence fee and there you have it.

 

[beorhthelm]

You are assuming that people assume. Dominic Cummings is awful, but he was crossed and he was the one who released the first two photos. He has over 300 of them. Death by a thousand cuts.

good example, Cummings is not a reliable witness, and if he has 300 photos why are they not investigated by the police? he's priming enough information to create uncertainty and doubt, with any accountability. journallists are reporting their favoured version with their spin, with or without full details that they may or may not have - we just dont know. then people will say an investigation is a whitewash because it didnt conclude what they expected. because we dont have all the information or have been misdirected. or maybe the police, civil service and everyone who has little to gain helping Johnson is conspiring to protect him.

bottom line is Johnson his office lacked sobriety and engaged in drinking culture while the nation locked down, the moral argument is clear. we get tied up on the legal one which is distorted.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

good example, Cummings is not a reliable witness, and if he has 300 photos why are they not investigated by the police? he's priming enough information to create uncertainty and doubt, with any accountability. journallists are reporting their favoured version with their spin, with or without full details that they may or may not have - we just dont know. then people will say an investigation is a whitewash because it didnt conclude what they expected. because we dont have all the information or have been misdirected. or maybe the police, civil service and everyone who has little to gain helping Johnson is conspiring to protect him.

bottom line is Johnson his office lacked sobriety and engaged in drinking culture while the nation locked down, the moral argument is clear. we get tied up on the legal one which is distorted.

Even criminals can give evidence. The bottom line is that Johnson lied to Parliament when he said there were no parties. He should resign.

 

[KZNSeagull]

good example, Cummings is not a reliable witness, and if he has 300 photos why are they not investigated by the police? he's priming enough information to create uncertainty and doubt, with any accountability. journallists are reporting their favoured version with their spin, with or without full details that they may or may not have - we just dont know. then people will say an investigation is a whitewash because it didnt conclude what they expected. because we dont have all the information or have been misdirected. or maybe the police, civil service and everyone who has little to gain helping Johnson is conspiring to protect him.

bottom line is Johnson his office lacked sobriety and engaged in drinking culture while the nation locked down, the moral argument is clear. we get tied up on the legal one which is distorted.

Quite, that's really what this lawyer was saying on the radio - there is too much wriggle room in the laws but ultimately the court of public opinion will give it's verdict.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Quite, that's really what this lawyer was saying on the radio - there is too much wriggle room in the laws but ultimately the court of public opinion will give it's verdict.

Public opinion gave one verdict at the local elections with the government losing 502 seats.

 

[Is it PotG?]

Public opinion gave one verdict at the local elections with the government losing 502 seats.

How many of those went to Sir Madras?

 

[zefarelly]

Even criminals can give evidence. The bottom line is that Johnson lied to Parliament when he said there were no parties. He should resign.

we all know he will never do that, he will have to be forcibly removed.


I vote for fire.

 

[clapham_gull]

Habitual drinking on Friday afternoons or Wine Time Fridays (WTF) as they were known, during the lockdown.

I heard similar from someone recently who had a close relative inside.

It wasn't a number of parties, it was effectively just one long one.

 

[Bry Nylon]

How many of those went to Sir Madras?

Why do you keep attempting to make this about tribal party politics - and in such an infantile way too?

I have never voted Labour and can't envisage any circumstances under which I would. But even I can see this far wider than party politics. This is about standards in public life, misleading parliament, a complete failure to take responsibility and repeatedly lying in a manner that diminishes the office of PM in particular and our politics in general. Johnson is a toxic, corrosive cancer on our public life.

I've come to the view that the real fools in all this are no longer those of us who did our best to comply with the draconian restrictions on our freedoms whilst Johnson carried on regardless to serve his almost pathological need 'to be liked' and appear cool in front of his wife's friends; no - the real fools in all of this are those who insist on continuing to defend Johnson no matter what.

Still, you carry on making up hilarious curry-related names for the Leader of the Opposition. How about Keir Korma? You can have that one on me

 

[BBassic]

Still, you carry on making up hilarious curry-related names for the Leader of the Opposition. How about Keir Korma? You can have that one on me

Singha Beer Starmer.

 

[clapham_gull]

Why do you keep attempting to make this about tribal party politics - and in such an infantile way too?

I have never voted Labour and can't envisage any circumstances under which I would. But even I can see this far wider than party politics. This is about standards in public life, misleading parliament, a complete failure to take responsibility and repeatedly lying in a manner that diminishes the office of PM in particular and our politics in general. Johnson is a toxic, corrosive cancer on our public life.

I've come to the view that the real fools in all this are no longer those of us who did our best to comply with the draconian restrictions on our freedoms whilst Johnson carried on regardless to serve his almost pathological need 'to be liked' and appear cool in front of his wife's friends; no - the real fools in all of this are those who insist on continuing to defend Johnson no matter what.

Still, you carry on making up hysterical curry-related names for the Leader of the Opposition. How about Keir Korma? You can have that one on me

There is no equivalence.

The Labour party group were away from home with no restaurants available. Whether they should've have met up like that is a matter for the Police. At worst it's a technical breach and he's said he will resign. Their communications over it have been appalling.

At Number 10 the office hours drinking culture just continued through the lockdown and appears to have been encouraged.

Where there is equivalence is they were both single events, except the Number 10 went on for months.

 

[clapham_gull]

I see one MP is using the term "work bubble" again to excuse the behaviour.

No such thing existed in law.