My guess is a copy will be leaked to the press in time for the Sunday papers.
But they won't be able to publish it, legal issues.
Not so. It isn't sub judice unless they've charged someone by then
I just cannot believe how disgusting this is
And yet the opposition lead by Labour were demanding a police investigation and maybe they had not thought through the consequences
I have no idea how Starmer, especially with his lawyer hat on, deals with this
Why would Starmer want Johnson removed?
Labour would absolutely want him removed. There's a serious possibility now that Boris could stage the greatest comeback since Lazarus. That would reflect extremely badly on Sir Keir's abilities if it happened. Neil Kinnock never really recovered when he let Maggie off the hook over the Westland affair.
Westland was not in the same league as this. The public already have realised that Johnson is dishonest and incompetent. There is no way back from this IMO.
Westland was a Westminster bubble issue which had sod all relevance to everyday life.
Westland looks like a government in the grip of collective insanity in retrospect. So much angst and drama over something relatively inconsequential.
It all went Hezza's way in the end as Westland did merge with Agusta then Leonardo and, to this day, the MoD continues its 40 year campaign of buying anything but the UH-60.
This is why Boris Johnson should resign/be forced out.
First official estimate puts French growth in 2021 at 7% - the highest annual figure for half a century! And ahead of the previous forecast of 6.7 or 6.8%. If confirmed this would make France the fastest growing G7 country last year
EITHER The Met are conspiring to suppress investigation into and accountability of senior public servants.
OR The Met have reasonable suspicion of serious wrongdoing that Sue Gray cannot or will not investigate to a criminal standard.
Any other plausible explanation for the request to remove sections of the report?
Neither the Met not the Sue Gray mob know what they're doing?
Never attribute to conspiracy what can easily be explained as incompetence.
If there were evidence of law breaking, what could Sue Gray et al do?
1) Not tell the police, and publish a report accusing people (in effect) of law breaking 2) Tell the police.
I'm not sure what ethical rules etc she is working under, but there might well be a requirement to report potential offences to the police. Certainly, publishing the full details of such potential offences would make them unprocurable - I think (calling PB lawyers)
Once reported to the police, the police would be obliged (I think, again PB lawyers) to ask that the details of such offences be redacted while they investigate and until any charges go through.
In other words - did Sue Gray and the police have any other options?
The only way that I could see full publication taking place immediately, would be if the police (and prosecutors) decided that all offences involved would be NFA'd. Which would be a blanket pardon/cover up.
Hang on, if a gang of bank robbers rob a bank, then get one of their friends to investigate them and publish a report stating that they robbed a bank, are you saying that the police and courts could not prosecute them?
No.
It is my understanding that the nature, "officialness" and the distribution of such a report is what is considered.
So an official government report, which will be splashed in every newspaper and every news channel in the UK, would be seen as prejudicial.
Some stuff on a barely noticed website, by some random people, wouldn't have that effect.
Re: Sue Gray. Everyone is assuming that the Met is only investigating Cake Gate. What recent history tells us is that mobile phone loss and data deletion across the Westminster estate appears to be a lot higher than the national average....Perhaps there is a more serious issue?
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
How did the tactical commander who gave the erroneous order to blow away a Brazilian electrician going about his business on a crowded tube train, avoid having to clear her desk the following day?
Because it was unclear whether the surveillance team had given her a positive identification of the suspect. Either she or they were lying. On the balance of probabilites I thought it was the surveillance team. The fact that her career prospered subsequently suggests this was a widely held view.
EITHER The Met are conspiring to suppress investigation into and accountability of senior public servants.
OR The Met have reasonable suspicion of serious wrongdoing that Sue Gray cannot or will not investigate to a criminal standard.
Any other plausible explanation for the request to remove sections of the report?
Neither the Met not the Sue Gray mob know what they're doing?
Never attribute to conspiracy what can easily be explained as incompetence.
If there were evidence of law breaking, what could Sue Gray et al do?
1) Not tell the police, and publish a report accusing people (in effect) of law breaking 2) Tell the police.
I'm not sure what ethical rules etc she is working under, but there might well be a requirement to report potential offences to the police. Certainly, publishing the full details of such potential offences would make them unprocurable - I think (calling PB lawyers)
Once reported to the police, the police would be obliged (I think, again PB lawyers) to ask that the details of such offences be redacted while they investigate and until any charges go through.
In other words - did Sue Gray and the police have any other options?
The only way that I could see full publication taking place immediately, would be if the police (and prosecutors) decided that all offences involved would be NFA'd. Which would be a blanket pardon/cover up.
I know, I'm repeating myself. But as I said a few days ago.....
I remember sitting in Bishopsgate Police station with the DCI and his team on the Adoboli case. There were lots of investigations going on - by the FCA, the SEC, the Swiss regulator and others, internal investigation, ones by auditors etc. And the DCI just sat there and said that he had told all of these to "go and do one" because his criminal investigation took precedence. Nothing else mattered until this one was done and dusted. And nothing else would be published until it was. And they weren't.
Also as plenty of us have said, Tory MPs have long had all the evidence they need to take action against Boris. Waiting for Sue Gray was rationalising their own fear of taking action. Serves them right.
A bloody great shame for the rest of us that we have to put up with this shambles of a government.
Still, we get to hear our PM use phrases like "total rhubarb" when talking about saving pets.
So there is that, I suppose.
So it's what I thought - Sue Gray finds evidence of possible wrong doing, *has* to report to the police, police *have* to request redaction?
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
It would be a big mistake for Starmer to go after the Met. What we would have then? Labour vs the Police. Would play into Boris's hands. He needs to take care about messaging, and I suspect he will. He's not daft.
Yes. It's all very frustrating for everyone, but purely from a political point of view, having a police Sword of Damocles hanging over a weakened Number 10 is better for Labour than a quick denouement. At some point the police will report - either with charges or with what people will see as a whitewash. Neither outcome will be helpful to the Conservatives. The election isn't tomorrow, and playing it long is politically helpful.
For the country, though, not so much. We really need to have this resolved ASAP.
I'm not sure that this Met intervention is necessarily what people think it is. The assumption seems to be that the most serious revelations in the Gray report are about breaches of the Coronavirus regulations. That assumption might not be correct. For example, hypothetically:
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
It would be a big mistake for Starmer to go after the Met. What we would have then? Labour vs the Police. Would play into Boris's hands. He needs to take care about messaging, and I suspect he will. He's not daft.
But he did not need to publicly support her last year. He should have stayed silent. As should have Khan.
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
How did the tactical commander who gave the erroneous order to blow away a Brazilian electrician going about his business on a crowded tube train, avoid having to clear her desk the following day?
Interestingly I recently read Richard Henriques' book on cases he worked on, judged or reviewed, and he doesnt hold back on criticising police conduct and practice, particularly on Operation Midland, but in the de Menezes case in reference to Dick he is pretty light.
He describes her responses to questioning as 'honest, undemonstrative and at times in a humble manner', that she answered 'without evasion or any hint of truculence' and without implied criticism or resentment at being questioned.
He concluded she had a bright future and talks of the wisdom of the jury who asked to put a rider to exonerate her.
It's a great book and great read, though with hindsight I'm not as persuaded by his view at least as it stood at that time.
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
Starmer is from the same sleazy, incompetent establishment as Dick.
They always support each other.
On that basis there's no escape. Some people thought Brexit might be an escape from "the establishment", and look what we got.
I wonder whether some people's obsession with the "Establishment" is actually a little sinister. Without doxing myself I sometimes wonder if I am part of the "Establishment" in some people's eyes even though I went to a crummy comp. I have come to the conclusion that "The Establishment" is something that is whatever the cynic wants it to be; a kind of bogeyman, or at worst something akin to the Global Jewish Conspiracy.
That said it was hugely amusing that folk that were dense enough to vote Leave as a two fingered salute to "The Establishment" were voting in alignment with City boy Nigel Farage and old Etonians Johnson and Rees Mogg. Those three (and probably many others) must have been laughing so much they dropped their cummy biscuits at the thought that the plebs thought Brexit was "anti-Establishment"
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
No need to make a direct accusation, just say it's convenient that the Met has intervenes to save the PM here and it was the PM who saved the Met commissioner from the sack.
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
It would be a big mistake for Starmer to go after the Met. What we would have then? Labour vs the Police. Would play into Boris's hands. He needs to take care about messaging, and I suspect he will. He's not daft.
Yes. It's all very frustrating for everyone, but purely from a political point of view, having a police Sword of Damocles hanging over a weakened Number 10 is better for Labour than a quick denouement. At some point the police will report - either with charges or with what people will see as a whitewash. Neither outcome will be helpful to the Conservatives. The election isn't tomorrow, and playing it long is politically helpful.
For the country, though, not so much. We really need to have this resolved ASAP.
You're dreaming Nick. It will be a political triumph for Boris if he gets away with this. The British public loves a winner - even (or especially) a roguish one. Boris will now be looking to create the narrative of himself as the PM that bubble trivia couldn't touch.
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
How did the tactical commander who gave the erroneous order to blow away a Brazilian electrician going about his business on a crowded tube train, avoid having to clear her desk the following day?
Because it was unclear whether the surveillance team had given her a positive identification of the suspect. Either she or they were lying. On the balance of probabilites I thought it was the surveillance team. The fact that her career prospered subsequently suggests this was a widely held view.
The police management played the classic game.
1) The Police on the ground were left in front of the bus, inches from the wheels. 2) The people on the ground were informed that "we are all in this together". 3) With a subtext of "In my case I get early retirement on a full pension and write a book. You might go to prison and/or get fucked by lawyers for years" 4) Evidence starts vanishing. People at the shape end get memory problems.
Apparently the control room was a bit noisy, which confused things. Which apparently meant that any mistakes were forgivable.
The ability to shout "EVERYONE SHUT THE FUCK UP!" was not included in Police Senior Management capabilities, evidently.
I have very considerable sympathy for the team that actually shot De Mendes - they were given what they honestly thought was a lawful order, issued with due authority, in a matter of grave importance.
The fact that the game was played that "If you accuse anyone of incompetence, the front line guys *have* to get it in the neck" was disgusting.
I'm not sure that this Met intervention is necessarily what people think it is. The assumption seems to be that the most serious revelations in the Gray report are about breaches of the Coronavirus regulations. That assumption might not be correct. For example, hypothetically:
Edit: I see @TSE has just made the same point. Careful with your speculation, guys!
Whether it's an offence or not will depend on when the instruction was given and when you do it. Doing so after you've been told to preserve evidence - a bad move. Doing so beforehand in the absence of such an instruction is a different matter. The person giving such instructions, though, will likely have questions to answer.
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
LOL. No-one cared at the time, because there was really nothing to care about. It’s only a story now, because of Cummings being vindictive and the Lobby trying to find a story. So we have this rubbish leading the news for a week, and the Leader of the Opposition calling for the PM to resign because his wife bought a cake to the office on his birthday.
The Met Police is a complete and utter disgrace. Never been their biggest fan, but my god somehow my opinion of them has managed to get even lower than it was before.
Hope Sue Gray just released the report tbh and tells the Met to go and do one.
I think she'll be happy with this. It's a more comfortable position for her now.
Yes, unfortunately I think you may be right. Although apparently she cares a lot about her credibility….
I'm not sure that this Met intervention is necessarily what people think it is. The assumption seems to be that the most serious revelations in the Gray report are about breaches of the Coronavirus regulations. That assumption might not be correct. For example, hypothetically:
This is why Boris Johnson should resign/be forced out.
First official estimate puts French growth in 2021 at 7% - the highest annual figure for half a century! And ahead of the previous forecast of 6.7 or 6.8%. If confirmed this would make France the fastest growing G7 country last year
I'm not sure that this Met intervention is necessarily what people think it is. The assumption seems to be that the most serious revelations in the Gray report are about breaches of the Coronavirus regulations. That assumption might not be correct. For example, hypothetically:
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
Starmer is from the same sleazy, incompetent establishment as Dick.
They always support each other.
On that basis there's no escape. Some people thought Brexit might be an escape from "the establishment", and look what we got.
I wonder whether some people's obsession with the "Establishment" is actually a little sinister. Without doxing myself I sometimes wonder if I am part of the "Establishment" in some people's eyes even though I went to a crummy comp. I have come to the conclusion that "The Establishment" is something that is whatever the cynic wants it to be; a kind of bogeyman, or at worst something akin to the Global Jewish Conspiracy.
That said it was hugely amusing that folk that were dense enough to vote Leave as a two fingered salute to "The Establishment" were voting in alignment with City boy Nigel Farage and old Etonians Johnson and Rees Mogg. Those three (and probably many others) must have been laughing so much they dropped their cummy biscuits at the thought that the plebs thought Brexit was "anti-Establishment"
Well, I'm a half Jewish, lapsed Freemason and Elector in the City Of London. Who works in finance. Short of membership of the Trilateral Commission......
I recall a few years back, when some grads were going on about "The Man" ruining the world etc. One of my colleagues pointed out that "You are now The Man".
Boris has played a blinder. His MPs were clearly getting queasy about a VONC anyway and now they can just shrug their shoulders and forget about it. Cummings has been outplayed, Rishi humbled and Sir Keir is back to square one.
Not how I see it. I see a massively "damaged goods" PM limping on. As I said yesterday this is a win win for the opposition parties: Johnson stays that is good, Johnson resigns that would be also good. For the Conservative Party (of which I used to be an activist btw) it is a lose lose as the corollary.
The public will be understandably angry if they think there is a cover up. Many of us were unable to see dying relatives and friends during the pandemic and stuck to the rules by and large. That the government thought it ok for their employees to have frivolous knees-ups (for that is what the public believe) that was completely against the rules that they set is an outrage.
Three words: Blair, Hutton, report. I and many others were furious about the perceived cover up with that at the time, but Tone went on to have a very good general-election win. We're in a similar situation here.
This relates much more to personal experience - the Government told US what to do and then seemingly did something different. People react to that more viscerally than to "the PM made serious mistakes in regard to Iraq", even though it's actually more serious to fight a war on a mistaken premise than to hold some illicit parties.
I'm trying in my comments to separate my personal and political views from how most voters will react. I don't think suspended animation is going to be good for the Government or for the poor bloody infantry defending Tory seats in May.
The Met Police is a complete and utter disgrace. Never been their biggest fan, but my god somehow my opinion of them has managed to get even lower than it was before.
Hope Sue Gray just released the report tbh and tells the Met to go and do one.
I think she'll be happy with this. It's a more comfortable position for her now.
Yes, unfortunately I think you may be right. Although apparently she cares a lot about her credibility….
Her credibility is saved - had to trim it back, the rozzers made me.
This is why Boris Johnson should resign/be forced out.
First official estimate puts French growth in 2021 at 7% - the highest annual figure for half a century! And ahead of the previous forecast of 6.7 or 6.8%. If confirmed this would make France the fastest growing G7 country last year
I suggest we all let the investigations continue until the Gray and Met inquiries conclude in about 2050.
In the meantime let Boris continue with his work as PM until the next general election
Good to see the sense of humour @HYUFD. You should use it more. You really had me going for a moment until I saw the 2050. Sadly you may be right, although maybe a bit before 2050, maybe just 5 years.
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
Starmer is from the same sleazy, incompetent establishment as Dick.
They always support each other.
On that basis there's no escape. Some people thought Brexit might be an escape from "the establishment", and look what we got.
I wonder whether some people's obsession with the "Establishment" is actually a little sinister. Without doxing myself I sometimes wonder if I am part of the "Establishment" in some people's eyes even though I went to a crummy comp. I have come to the conclusion that "The Establishment" is something that is whatever the cynic wants it to be; a kind of bogeyman, or at worst something akin to the Global Jewish Conspiracy.
That said it was hugely amusing that folk that were dense enough to vote Leave as a two fingered salute to "The Establishment" were voting in alignment with City boy Nigel Farage and old Etonians Johnson and Rees Mogg. Those three (and probably many others) must have been laughing so much they dropped their cummy biscuits at the thought that the plebs thought Brexit was "anti-Establishment"
Well, I'm a half Jewish, lapsed Freemason and Elector in the City Of London. Who works in finance. Short of membership of the Trilateral Commission......
I recall a few years back, when some grads were going on about "The Man" ruining the world etc. One of my colleagues pointed out that "You are now The Man".
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
LOL. No-one cared at the time, because there was really nothing to care about. It’s only a story now, because of Cummings being vindictive and the Lobby trying to find a story. So we have this rubbish leading the news for a week, and the Leader of the Opposition calling for the PM to resign because his wife bought a cake to the office on his birthday.
You really are living up to the second part of your name this morning Mr Sandpit.
It really matters because most of this country went through hell during the lockdowns. We weren't able to visit loved ones. We weren't able to have birthday parties. In some cases we even had to endure loved ones dying alone.
Do you really not understand why this matters so much to us all or are you just trying the hardest to be the nastiest person on the forum?
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
I think this is an indication of the well known dynamic that people first make a subconscious judgement as to whether someone is one of "us" or one of "them", and then go on to make other judgements in that context.
In 2020, Johnson was widely seen by a majority of the public as one of us, and so people were more forgiving. That's now changed, Johnson is one of them, and so these sorts of things are seen differently.
I kinda agree with Stephen Bush here, heard the same about the focus groups and opinion polls.
Good morning. The Metropolitan Police have asked Sue Gray to remove references to the eight incidents the force is investigating from her report into lockdown-breaking parties, in order to avoid prejudicing their inquiries.
Relief for Boris Johnson? That’s the consensus among many Conservatives this morning: it means that Gray’s report will either be further delayed or published missing some of its biggest hits, and the Metropolitan Police’s investigation may not yet conclude their is sufficient evidence to prosecute.
Just one problem, though: are the British public really waiting for Sue Gray, or indeed for the Metropolitan Police, to tell them whether or not the rules were broken? The evidence from the polls and indeed every focus group I have seen is that the public is pretty clear that rules were broken. What they are waiting for is justice, and what they expect is a cover-up.
The Conservative party is doing what political parties in trouble often do: mistaking its own rhythms for the heartbeat of the nation. An abandoned investigation and a gutted report would, I’m convinced, combine all the political pain of the Owen Paterson vote with all the discomfort of the last few months.
The problem is that the public has short memories. Boris just needs to hold on. Media narratives change. This time next month we could well be discussing the misery of Sir Keir, Partygate being but a memory.
I think "ambushed by a cake" will stick in the public memory for a long time. Absurdist images are particularly powerful for memory formation and it will be deeply associated with powerful emotions of anger and frustration. And that is bad for the Tories.
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
Starmer is from the same sleazy, incompetent establishment as Dick.
They always support each other.
On that basis there's no escape. Some people thought Brexit might be an escape from "the establishment", and look what we got.
I wonder whether some people's obsession with the "Establishment" is actually a little sinister. Without doxing myself I sometimes wonder if I am part of the "Establishment" in some people's eyes even though I went to a crummy comp. I have come to the conclusion that "The Establishment" is something that is whatever the cynic wants it to be; a kind of bogeyman, or at worst something akin to the Global Jewish Conspiracy.
That said it was hugely amusing that folk that were dense enough to vote Leave as a two fingered salute to "The Establishment" were voting in alignment with City boy Nigel Farage and old Etonians Johnson and Rees Mogg. Those three (and probably many others) must have been laughing so much they dropped their cummy biscuits at the thought that the plebs thought Brexit was "anti-Establishment"
Well, I'm a half Jewish, lapsed Freemason and Elector in the City Of London. Who works in finance. Short of membership of the Trilateral Commission......
I recall a few years back, when some grads were going on about "The Man" ruining the world etc. One of my colleagues pointed out that "You are now The Man".
How does one lapse as a freemason?
Stop going. That and formally surrendering the keys to the mind control system that keeps the Lizard Men in line.
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
Starmer is from the same sleazy, incompetent establishment as Dick.
They always support each other.
On that basis there's no escape. Some people thought Brexit might be an escape from "the establishment", and look what we got.
I wonder whether some people's obsession with the "Establishment" is actually a little sinister. Without doxing myself I sometimes wonder if I am part of the "Establishment" in some people's eyes even though I went to a crummy comp. I have come to the conclusion that "The Establishment" is something that is whatever the cynic wants it to be; a kind of bogeyman, or at worst something akin to the Global Jewish Conspiracy.
That said it was hugely amusing that folk that were dense enough to vote Leave as a two fingered salute to "The Establishment" were voting in alignment with City boy Nigel Farage and old Etonians Johnson and Rees Mogg. Those three (and probably many others) must have been laughing so much they dropped their cummy biscuits at the thought that the plebs thought Brexit was "anti-Establishment"
Well, I'm a half Jewish, lapsed Freemason and Elector in the City Of London. Who works in finance. Short of membership of the Trilateral Commission......
I recall a few years back, when some grads were going on about "The Man" ruining the world etc. One of my colleagues pointed out that "You are now The Man".
How does one lapse as a freemason?
You die, Mr Bond.
When my maternal grandad died, they were far more efficient in collecting the regalia and jewels than the TV License people are.
And they didn't get £140m pa for doing the job.
Point of interest: Masonic symbols are quite common in the City Churches in the CoL.
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
It would be a big mistake for Starmer to go after the Met. What we would have then? Labour vs the Police. Would play into Boris's hands. He needs to take care about messaging, and I suspect he will. He's not daft.
Yes. It's all very frustrating for everyone, but purely from a political point of view, having a police Sword of Damocles hanging over a weakened Number 10 is better for Labour than a quick denouement. At some point the police will report - either with charges or with what people will see as a whitewash. Neither outcome will be helpful to the Conservatives. The election isn't tomorrow, and playing it long is politically helpful.
For the country, though, not so much. We really need to have this resolved ASAP.
Boris will now be looking to create the narrative of himself as the PM that bubble trivia couldn't touch.
The last political leader we saw go down this line was booted out by the people, although he and his supporters are still trying to claim that they weren't really booted out.
This is why Boris Johnson should resign/be forced out.
First official estimate puts French growth in 2021 at 7% - the highest annual figure for half a century! And ahead of the previous forecast of 6.7 or 6.8%. If confirmed this would make France the fastest growing G7 country last year
Curse of the new thread, so FPT: On the UK's recent Covid deaths numbers, does anyone know if there is any data on the split between those tested with Delta and those with Omicron?
Cases are not routinely sequenced, so that data does not exist. Only a sample of PCR tests are sequenced, for epidemiological purposes.
As Omicron is more than 90% of cases since 1st Jan then it is likely that most deaths are now Omicron.
Certainly it is quite a lottery. I am on day 2 and not bad at all, but one of our junior doctors (fully vaxxed and boosted, 30ish and pregnant) has been off for weeks, including a brief admission for oxygen and fluids.
I'd disagree a bit about your conclusion that most deaths are likely omicron. We know omicron is a bit milder, and we know there is less tendency for lung attack. We are seeing the stark reductions in MV bed occupancy. Its entirely possible that although 90% of cases are omicron, more than 50% of deaths are from the 10% delta.
But ultimately two things - 1) if you are dead, it doesn't matter if delta or micron killed you, you are still dead and 2) if we are not routinely sequencing these cases we won't ever know.
Lastly - we probably should be sequencing those most ill, but maybe there are other priorities.
Yes, it is possible, that the small amount of Delta is disproportionate amongst the deaths, but worth noting that covid doesn't just cause lung disease, and doesn't just kill that way. Certainly there is less ventilation needed, but current mortality is not trivial.
Yes you are right, and I guess elderly patients don't tend to get ventilated, so many of the current deaths (as throughout the pandemic) are in the 80+ categories.
BTW did I miss you testing positive?
Yes, strongly positive LFT yesterday, awaiting PCR result, so off until at least Tuesday.
Sore throat and a bit tired, some cough and chest tightness but not much when resting. No fever or muscle aches, or diarrhoea. Good O2 on pulse oximeter. Mrs Foxy having to be off work until negative PCR, but not required to isolate.
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
LOL. No-one cared at the time, because there was really nothing to care about. It’s only a story now, because of Cummings being vindictive and the Lobby trying to find a story. So we have this rubbish leading the news for a week, and the Leader of the Opposition calling for the PM to resign because his wife bought a cake to the office on his birthday.
You really are living up to the second part of your name this morning Mr Sandpit.
It really matters because most of this country went through hell during the lockdowns. We weren't able to visit loved ones. We weren't able to have birthday parties. In some cases we even had to endure loved ones dying alone.
Do you really not understand why this matters so much to us all or are you just trying the hardest to be the nastiest person on the forum?
Genuine questions. If you had known about this at the time from reading the article, would you have been outraged? Can you explain why there is outrage now but not back then?
I have felt recently that Boris ought to go. I am beginning to think that I have fallen to spin. I do not understand why it is apparently a resignation matter now but a story not even commented on 18 months ago.
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
Starmer is from the same sleazy, incompetent establishment as Dick.
They always support each other.
On that basis there's no escape. Some people thought Brexit might be an escape from "the establishment", and look what we got.
I wonder whether some people's obsession with the "Establishment" is actually a little sinister. Without doxing myself I sometimes wonder if I am part of the "Establishment" in some people's eyes even though I went to a crummy comp. I have come to the conclusion that "The Establishment" is something that is whatever the cynic wants it to be; a kind of bogeyman, or at worst something akin to the Global Jewish Conspiracy.
That said it was hugely amusing that folk that were dense enough to vote Leave as a two fingered salute to "The Establishment" were voting in alignment with City boy Nigel Farage and old Etonians Johnson and Rees Mogg. Those three (and probably many others) must have been laughing so much they dropped their cummy biscuits at the thought that the plebs thought Brexit was "anti-Establishment"
Well, I'm a half Jewish, lapsed Freemason and Elector in the City Of London. Who works in finance. Short of membership of the Trilateral Commission......
I recall a few years back, when some grads were going on about "The Man" ruining the world etc. One of my colleagues pointed out that "You are now The Man".
How does one lapse as a freemason?
You die, Mr Bond.
Since I am a member of the Immortal Conspiracy, I can no-longer die. Don't you read the right websites?
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
No need to make a direct accusation, just say it's convenient that the Met has intervenes to save the PM here and it was the PM who saved the Met commissioner from the sack.
Trouble is Labour are too bloody scared of attacking the police despite ample evidence for doing so. If there is one public sector institution that needs reform and how it is the police - but neither party will go near it, for very different reasons.
Why? What I wrote here may, partly, explain it -
"The police seem to think that because theirs is a critical public function everything they do is in the public interest and therefore it is impermissible to attack them. It is a “L’etat c’est moi” approach which does much to explain the defensive, “no true policeman” approach adopted in response to every scandal, an approach which appears to value protecting the police’s reputation above anything else."
Starmer's slow caution has much to commend it. But he lacks boldness I fear, which is why he will - I think - achieve much less than he could, should he get into power. Reform of the police is something that badly needs doing. The police have been second-rate in too many areas, in too many forces, for far too long. If a former DPP can't see that or think about doing something about it, who will? And so it will get slowly worse and worse until we no longer notice.
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
LOL. No-one cared at the time, because there was really nothing to care about. It’s only a story now, because of Cummings being vindictive and the Lobby trying to find a story. So we have this rubbish leading the news for a week, and the Leader of the Opposition calling for the PM to resign because his wife bought a cake to the office on his birthday.
You really are living up to the second part of your name this morning Mr Sandpit.
It really matters because most of this country went through hell during the lockdowns. We weren't able to visit loved ones. We weren't able to have birthday parties. In some cases we even had to endure loved ones dying alone.
Do you really not understand why this matters so much to us all or are you just trying the hardest to be the nastiest person on the forum?
I understand why people are angry, I’m saying that the anger specifically about the government is misplaced, and that events are being re-cast with the benefit of hindsight and a lack of knowledge as to what were actually the regulations at various times.
Talking of Times, the newspaper of record mentioned that the PM received a birthday cake, the day after it happened. Why didn’t everyone jump up and down about it at the time? Because at the time there was actually nothing wrong with it.
Curse of the new thread, so FPT: On the UK's recent Covid deaths numbers, does anyone know if there is any data on the split between those tested with Delta and those with Omicron?
Cases are not routinely sequenced, so that data does not exist. Only a sample of PCR tests are sequenced, for epidemiological purposes.
As Omicron is more than 90% of cases since 1st Jan then it is likely that most deaths are now Omicron.
Certainly it is quite a lottery. I am on day 2 and not bad at all, but one of our junior doctors (fully vaxxed and boosted, 30ish and pregnant) has been off for weeks, including a brief admission for oxygen and fluids.
I'd disagree a bit about your conclusion that most deaths are likely omicron. We know omicron is a bit milder, and we know there is less tendency for lung attack. We are seeing the stark reductions in MV bed occupancy. Its entirely possible that although 90% of cases are omicron, more than 50% of deaths are from the 10% delta.
But ultimately two things - 1) if you are dead, it doesn't matter if delta or micron killed you, you are still dead and 2) if we are not routinely sequencing these cases we won't ever know.
Lastly - we probably should be sequencing those most ill, but maybe there are other priorities.
Yes, it is possible, that the small amount of Delta is disproportionate amongst the deaths, but worth noting that covid doesn't just cause lung disease, and doesn't just kill that way. Certainly there is less ventilation needed, but current mortality is not trivial.
Yes you are right, and I guess elderly patients don't tend to get ventilated, so many of the current deaths (as throughout the pandemic) are in the 80+ categories.
BTW did I miss you testing positive?
Yes, strongly positive LFT yesterday, awaiting PCR result, so off until at least Tuesday.
Sore throat and a bit tired, some cough and chest tightness but not much when resting. No fever or muscle aches, or diarrhoea. Good O2 on pulse oximeter. Mrs Foxy having to be off work until negative PCR, but not required to isolate.
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
LOL. No-one cared at the time, because there was really nothing to care about. It’s only a story now, because of Cummings being vindictive and the Lobby trying to find a story. So we have this rubbish leading the news for a week, and the Leader of the Opposition calling for the PM to resign because his wife bought a cake to the office on his birthday.
You really are living up to the second part of your name this morning Mr Sandpit.
It really matters because most of this country went through hell during the lockdowns. We weren't able to visit loved ones. We weren't able to have birthday parties. In some cases we even had to endure loved ones dying alone.
Do you really not understand why this matters so much to us all or are you just trying the hardest to be the nastiest person on the forum?
Genuine questions. If you had known about this at the time from reading the article, would you have been outraged? Can you explain why there is outrage now but not back then?
I have felt recently that Boris ought to go. I am beginning to think that I have fallen to spin. I do not understand why it is apparently a resignation matter now but a story not even commented on 18 months ago.
The birthday cake one is irrelevant. Most of the others bar the Prince Philip one an early sincere apology would have been fine. The Philip one, the PM was not there so could have sacked the organiser and job done.
The real issue for me is the constant, obvious lying. Trust (not Truss) is vital, and if we accept a Trumpian world view of alternate realities for every event democracy itself will not last. The lying is why he should go.
This is why Boris Johnson should resign/be forced out.
First official estimate puts French growth in 2021 at 7% - the highest annual figure for half a century! And ahead of the previous forecast of 6.7 or 6.8%. If confirmed this would make France the fastest growing G7 country last year
The fundamental purpose of Brexit was to solidify the Establishment in place, not overturn it. Seems obvious to me.
Interesting. I've noticed a few people on the right, Dan Hannan in particular, recently arguing that it's the Establishment which wants Boris Johnson removed.
That's an another example of a Trumpesque parallel universe to the one in which the rest of humanity sanely exists.
Johnson is most certainly not an anti-establishment figure. The closest he came to it was probably in the pitch to red wall voters, but that bore all the anarchistic tendencies of the brains behind the project: Dominic Cummings.
Johnson is a hotch potch of conflicting and conficted chaotic 'ideas' (even the word ideas is too strong). I was trying to point out to HYUFD yesterday that much of the anger in Conservative circles is that so much of the policy in the current leadership is inconsistent and all over the place: it's a mess of policies often flatly in contradiction with one another, and certainly in contradiction of what it means to be a Conservative.
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
LOL. No-one cared at the time, because there was really nothing to care about. It’s only a story now, because of Cummings being vindictive and the Lobby trying to find a story. So we have this rubbish leading the news for a week, and the Leader of the Opposition calling for the PM to resign because his wife bought a cake to the office on his birthday.
You really are living up to the second part of your name this morning Mr Sandpit.
It really matters because most of this country went through hell during the lockdowns. We weren't able to visit loved ones. We weren't able to have birthday parties. In some cases we even had to endure loved ones dying alone.
Do you really not understand why this matters so much to us all or are you just trying the hardest to be the nastiest person on the forum?
Genuine questions. If you had known about this at the time from reading the article, would you have been outraged? Can you explain why there is outrage now but not back then?
I have felt recently that Boris ought to go. I am beginning to think that I have fallen to spin. I do not understand why it is apparently a resignation matter now but a story not even commented on 18 months ago.
If it was in isolation - the only thing that had happened - it would a shoulder shrug. Quite a few people had a birthday "party" like that.
With everything else that has happened, if BJ was revealed to have made himself a cup of tea, that would currently be a scandal.
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
No need to make a direct accusation, just say it's convenient that the Met has intervenes to save the PM here and it was the PM who saved the Met commissioner from the sack.
Trouble is Labour are too bloody scared of attacking the police despite ample evidence for doing so. If there is one public sector institution that needs reform and how it is the police - but neither party will go near it, for very different reasons.
Why? What I wrote here may, partly, explain it -
"The police seem to think that because theirs is a critical public function everything they do is in the public interest and therefore it is impermissible to attack them. It is a “L’etat c’est moi” approach which does much to explain the defensive, “no true policeman” approach adopted in response to every scandal, an approach which appears to value protecting the police’s reputation above anything else."
Starmer's slow caution has much to commend it. But he lacks boldness I fear, which is why he will - I think - achieve much less than he could, should he get into power. Reform of the police is something that badly needs doing. The police have been second-rate in too many areas, in too many forces, for far too long. If a former DPP can't see that or think about doing something about it, who will? And so it will get slowly worse and worse until we no longer notice.
"The police seem to think that because theirs is a critical public function everything they do is in the public interest and therefore it is impermissible to attack them.
So much agreement with this. And politicians play into that game by attacking each other for being insufficiently supportive. When given the power of the police we should be more critical of failings, not less.
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
LOL. No-one cared at the time, because there was really nothing to care about. It’s only a story now, because of Cummings being vindictive and the Lobby trying to find a story. So we have this rubbish leading the news for a week, and the Leader of the Opposition calling for the PM to resign because his wife bought a cake to the office on his birthday.
You really are living up to the second part of your name this morning Mr Sandpit.
It really matters because most of this country went through hell during the lockdowns. We weren't able to visit loved ones. We weren't able to have birthday parties. In some cases we even had to endure loved ones dying alone.
Do you really not understand why this matters so much to us all or are you just trying the hardest to be the nastiest person on the forum?
I understand why people are angry, I’m saying that the anger specifically about the government is misplaced, and that events are being re-cast with the benefit of hindsight and a lack of knowledge as to what were actually the regulations at various times.
Talking of Times, the newspaper of record mentioned that the PM received a birthday cake, the day after it happened. Why didn’t everyone jump up and down about it at the time? Because at the time there was actually nothing wrong with it.
If that's the case, why do we have supporters of the PM suggest there wasn't a cake? Or that Boris "popped in" to that party or this party, or was ambushed? That the obvious garden party was a work meeting?
I seem to recall the terms banana republic and one party police state being bandied about with gay abandon on here in the not too distant past. Careful what you wish for.
I kinda agree with Stephen Bush here, heard the same about the focus groups and opinion polls.
Good morning. The Metropolitan Police have asked Sue Gray to remove references to the eight incidents the force is investigating from her report into lockdown-breaking parties, in order to avoid prejudicing their inquiries.
Relief for Boris Johnson? That’s the consensus among many Conservatives this morning: it means that Gray’s report will either be further delayed or published missing some of its biggest hits, and the Metropolitan Police’s investigation may not yet conclude their is sufficient evidence to prosecute.
Just one problem, though: are the British public really waiting for Sue Gray, or indeed for the Metropolitan Police, to tell them whether or not the rules were broken? The evidence from the polls and indeed every focus group I have seen is that the public is pretty clear that rules were broken. What they are waiting for is justice, and what they expect is a cover-up.
The Conservative party is doing what political parties in trouble often do: mistaking its own rhythms for the heartbeat of the nation. An abandoned investigation and a gutted report would, I’m convinced, combine all the political pain of the Owen Paterson vote with all the discomfort of the last few months.
The problem is that the public has short memories. Boris just needs to hold on. Media narratives change. This time next month we could well be discussing the misery of Sir Keir, Partygate being but a memory.
I think "ambushed by a cake" will stick in the public memory for a long time. Absurdist images are particularly powerful for memory formation and it will be deeply associated with powerful emotions of anger and frustration. And that is bad for the Tories.
Agreed. Previously the government could reasonably have hoped that any misdeeds during the pandemic would have faded into the past by the time the next GE rolls around, and likewise public anger would have dulled over time.
Now, especially if Johnson stays in power, the opposition have been given this absolute gift of a piece of messaging to go into the next GE with. “Remember those toffs who partied whilst your loved ones suffered? Now you can finally do something about it” is a message that can be hammered over & over again on the doorstep.
Johnson staying in power makes this worse, not better.
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
LOL. No-one cared at the time, because there was really nothing to care about. It’s only a story now, because of Cummings being vindictive and the Lobby trying to find a story. So we have this rubbish leading the news for a week, and the Leader of the Opposition calling for the PM to resign because his wife bought a cake to the office on his birthday.
You really are living up to the second part of your name this morning Mr Sandpit.
It really matters because most of this country went through hell during the lockdowns. We weren't able to visit loved ones. We weren't able to have birthday parties. In some cases we even had to endure loved ones dying alone.
Do you really not understand why this matters so much to us all or are you just trying the hardest to be the nastiest person on the forum?
Genuine questions. If you had known about this at the time from reading the article, would you have been outraged? Can you explain why there is outrage now but not back then?
I have felt recently that Boris ought to go. I am beginning to think that I have fallen to spin. I do not understand why it is apparently a resignation matter now but a story not even commented on 18 months ago.
That is a fallacy. The cake story didn't come into it until a week ago, and doesn't change things a bit. It is amazingly clever if it was done deliberately: say you are defending Bluebeard against well-grounded charges of multiple wife murder, you leak a story saying AND he drove at 43mph in a 30 mph speed limit and everybody jumps on that because it is the latest news, then you say WTF is all this nonsense about a sodding speeding offence? It has worked on you, but think about it: does the triviality of the cake story just not add to existing charges, or actively detract from them?
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
No need to make a direct accusation, just say it's convenient that the Met has intervenes to save the PM here and it was the PM who saved the Met commissioner from the sack.
Trouble is Labour are too bloody scared of attacking the police despite ample evidence for doing so. If there is one public sector institution that needs reform and how it is the police - but neither party will go near it, for very different reasons.
Why? What I wrote here may, partly, explain it -
"The police seem to think that because theirs is a critical public function everything they do is in the public interest and therefore it is impermissible to attack them. It is a “L’etat c’est moi” approach which does much to explain the defensive, “no true policeman” approach adopted in response to every scandal, an approach which appears to value protecting the police’s reputation above anything else."
Starmer's slow caution has much to commend it. But he lacks boldness I fear, which is why he will - I think - achieve much less than he could, should he get into power. Reform of the police is something that badly needs doing. The police have been second-rate in too many areas, in too many forces, for far too long. If a former DPP can't see that or think about doing something about it, who will? And so it will get slowly worse and worse until we no longer notice.
"The police seem to think that because theirs is a critical public function everything they do is in the public interest and therefore it is impermissible to attack them.
So much agreement with this. And politicians play into that game by attacking each other for being insufficiently supportive. When given the power of the police we should be more critical of failings, not less.
Indeed - and note the other groups that try and take on this role as "A pillar of the Constitution" - not to be *spoken* against
- NHS.... remember when revealing lethal flaws in the NHS was bad? - Judges - etc
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
LOL. No-one cared at the time, because there was really nothing to care about. It’s only a story now, because of Cummings being vindictive and the Lobby trying to find a story. So we have this rubbish leading the news for a week, and the Leader of the Opposition calling for the PM to resign because his wife bought a cake to the office on his birthday.
You really are living up to the second part of your name this morning Mr Sandpit.
It really matters because most of this country went through hell during the lockdowns. We weren't able to visit loved ones. We weren't able to have birthday parties. In some cases we even had to endure loved ones dying alone.
Do you really not understand why this matters so much to us all or are you just trying the hardest to be the nastiest person on the forum?
I understand why people are angry, I’m saying that the anger specifically about the government is misplaced, and that events are being re-cast with the benefit of hindsight and a lack of knowledge as to what were actually the regulations at various times.
Talking of Times, the newspaper of record mentioned that the PM received a birthday cake, the day after it happened. Why didn’t everyone jump up and down about it at the time? Because at the time there was actually nothing wrong with it.
There is a difference between being given a birthday cake and having a party. The Venn diagram does show an overlap - but an overlap. Not congruence.
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
LOL. No-one cared at the time, because there was really nothing to care about. It’s only a story now, because of Cummings being vindictive and the Lobby trying to find a story. So we have this rubbish leading the news for a week, and the Leader of the Opposition calling for the PM to resign because his wife bought a cake to the office on his birthday.
You really are living up to the second part of your name this morning Mr Sandpit.
It really matters because most of this country went through hell during the lockdowns. We weren't able to visit loved ones. We weren't able to have birthday parties. In some cases we even had to endure loved ones dying alone.
Do you really not understand why this matters so much to us all or are you just trying the hardest to be the nastiest person on the forum?
Genuine questions. If you had known about this at the time from reading the article, would you have been outraged? Can you explain why there is outrage now but not back then?
I have felt recently that Boris ought to go. I am beginning to think that I have fallen to spin. I do not understand why it is apparently a resignation matter now but a story not even commented on 18 months ago.
Because the cake is irrelevant. It is the other numerous egregious breaches of the rules they made. Followed by a predictable farrago of obfuscation, whataboutery and outright lies.
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
LOL. No-one cared at the time, because there was really nothing to care about. It’s only a story now, because of Cummings being vindictive and the Lobby trying to find a story. So we have this rubbish leading the news for a week, and the Leader of the Opposition calling for the PM to resign because his wife bought a cake to the office on his birthday.
You really are living up to the second part of your name this morning Mr Sandpit.
It really matters because most of this country went through hell during the lockdowns. We weren't able to visit loved ones. We weren't able to have birthday parties. In some cases we even had to endure loved ones dying alone.
Do you really not understand why this matters so much to us all or are you just trying the hardest to be the nastiest person on the forum?
I understand why people are angry, I’m saying that the anger specifically about the government is misplaced, and that events are being re-cast with the benefit of hindsight and a lack of knowledge as to what were actually the regulations at various times.
Talking of Times, the newspaper of record mentioned that the PM received a birthday cake, the day after it happened. Why didn’t everyone jump up and down about it at the time? Because at the time there was actually nothing wrong with it.
The reason people didn't jump up and down at the time is because it was an isolated incident at the time. It either didn't matter or it is a case of 'you shouldn't really be doing that and nothing more to it'. Lots of the stuff that has been thrown at Boris in themselves are daft or minor, but it is the cumulative effect of constant incidents after incident, some of which other people were getting slapped with £10,000 fines for and the constant, unprecedented level of lying.
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
Starmer is from the same sleazy, incompetent establishment as Dick.
They always support each other.
On that basis there's no escape. Some people thought Brexit might be an escape from "the establishment", and look what we got.
I wonder whether some people's obsession with the "Establishment" is actually a little sinister. Without doxing myself I sometimes wonder if I am part of the "Establishment" in some people's eyes even though I went to a crummy comp. I have come to the conclusion that "The Establishment" is something that is whatever the cynic wants it to be; a kind of bogeyman, or at worst something akin to the Global Jewish Conspiracy.
That said it was hugely amusing that folk that were dense enough to vote Leave as a two fingered salute to "The Establishment" were voting in alignment with City boy Nigel Farage and old Etonians Johnson and Rees Mogg. Those three (and probably many others) must have been laughing so much they dropped their cummy biscuits at the thought that the plebs thought Brexit was "anti-Establishment"
It depends upon whether the term is being used generically to describe certain types of people, or whether to imply some sort of organisation or conspiracy.
Like many on this forum I've been in senior leadership positions in various organisations, and if there is an organised conspiracy running everything, I wasn't asked to join it.
That said, there are of course informal networks that people take with them from the leading public schools and universities, and the advantage this can convey later in life is easily seen, from the outside, as a conspiracy of sorts.
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
LOL. No-one cared at the time, because there was really nothing to care about. It’s only a story now, because of Cummings being vindictive and the Lobby trying to find a story. So we have this rubbish leading the news for a week, and the Leader of the Opposition calling for the PM to resign because his wife bought a cake to the office on his birthday.
You really are living up to the second part of your name this morning Mr Sandpit.
It really matters because most of this country went through hell during the lockdowns. We weren't able to visit loved ones. We weren't able to have birthday parties. In some cases we even had to endure loved ones dying alone.
Do you really not understand why this matters so much to us all or are you just trying the hardest to be the nastiest person on the forum?
I understand why people are angry, I’m saying that the anger specifically about the government is misplaced, and that events are being re-cast with the benefit of hindsight and a lack of knowledge as to what were actually the regulations at various times.
Talking of Times, the newspaper of record mentioned that the PM received a birthday cake, the day after it happened. Why didn’t everyone jump up and down about it at the time? Because at the time there was actually nothing wrong with it.
If that's the case, why do we have supporters of the PM suggest there wasn't a cake? Or that Boris "popped in" to that party or this party, or was ambushed? That the obvious garden party was a work meeting?
Who said there wasn’t a cake?
‘Ambushed’ is an interesting word, but I think it’s fair to say that the birthday gathering in No.10 was organised for Mr Johnson, rather than by Mr Johnson.
I seem to recall the terms banana republic and one party police state being bandied about with gay abandon on here in the not too distant past. Careful what you wish for.
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
No need to make a direct accusation, just say it's convenient that the Met has intervenes to save the PM here and it was the PM who saved the Met commissioner from the sack.
Trouble is Labour are too bloody scared of attacking the police despite ample evidence for doing so. If there is one public sector institution that needs reform and how it is the police - but neither party will go near it, for very different reasons.
Why? What I wrote here may, partly, explain it -
"The police seem to think that because theirs is a critical public function everything they do is in the public interest and therefore it is impermissible to attack them. It is a “L’etat c’est moi” approach which does much to explain the defensive, “no true policeman” approach adopted in response to every scandal, an approach which appears to value protecting the police’s reputation above anything else."
Starmer's slow caution has much to commend it. But he lacks boldness I fear, which is why he will - I think - achieve much less than he could, should he get into power. Reform of the police is something that badly needs doing. The police have been second-rate in too many areas, in too many forces, for far too long. If a former DPP can't see that or think about doing something about it, who will? And so it will get slowly worse and worse until we no longer notice.
"The police seem to think that because theirs is a critical public function everything they do is in the public interest and therefore it is impermissible to attack them.
So much agreement with this. And politicians play into that game by attacking each other for being insufficiently supportive. When given the power of the police we should be more critical of failings, not less.
EITHER The Met are conspiring to suppress investigation into and accountability of senior public servants.
OR The Met have reasonable suspicion of serious wrongdoing that Sue Gray cannot or will not investigate to a criminal standard.
Any other plausible explanation for the request to remove sections of the report?
Neither the Met not the Sue Gray mob know what they're doing?
Never attribute to conspiracy what can easily be explained as incompetence.
If there were evidence of law breaking, what could Sue Gray et al do?
1) Not tell the police, and publish a report accusing people (in effect) of law breaking 2) Tell the police.
I'm not sure what ethical rules etc she is working under, but there might well be a requirement to report potential offences to the police. Certainly, publishing the full details of such potential offences would make them unprocurable - I think (calling PB lawyers)
Once reported to the police, the police would be obliged (I think, again PB lawyers) to ask that the details of such offences be redacted while they investigate and until any charges go through.
In other words - did Sue Gray and the police have any other options?
The only way that I could see full publication taking place immediately, would be if the police (and prosecutors) decided that all offences involved would be NFA'd. Which would be a blanket pardon/cover up.
Still, we get to hear our PM use phrases like "total rhubarb" when talking about saving pets.
So there is that, I suppose.
Those of us of a certain age know that there was a Big Dog known as Roobarb who was always up to some jolly wheeze that backfired. Was Johnson trolling us?
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
Starmer is from the same sleazy, incompetent establishment as Dick.
They always support each other.
On that basis there's no escape. Some people thought Brexit might be an escape from "the establishment", and look what we got.
I wonder whether some people's obsession with the "Establishment" is actually a little sinister. Without doxing myself I sometimes wonder if I am part of the "Establishment" in some people's eyes even though I went to a crummy comp. I have come to the conclusion that "The Establishment" is something that is whatever the cynic wants it to be; a kind of bogeyman, or at worst something akin to the Global Jewish Conspiracy.
That said it was hugely amusing that folk that were dense enough to vote Leave as a two fingered salute to "The Establishment" were voting in alignment with City boy Nigel Farage and old Etonians Johnson and Rees Mogg. Those three (and probably many others) must have been laughing so much they dropped their cummy biscuits at the thought that the plebs thought Brexit was "anti-Establishment"
Well, I'm a half Jewish, lapsed Freemason and Elector in the City Of London. Who works in finance. Short of membership of the Trilateral Commission......
I recall a few years back, when some grads were going on about "The Man" ruining the world etc. One of my colleagues pointed out that "You are now The Man".
cf William Hague's conference speech:-
[Tony Blair] even claimed that 'the establishment' was holding the country back. He's a forty-something, public school-educated, barrister from Islington, with a two hundred seat majority in the House of Commons. Who does he think is the establishment? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/468183.stm
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
LOL. No-one cared at the time, because there was really nothing to care about. It’s only a story now, because of Cummings being vindictive and the Lobby trying to find a story. So we have this rubbish leading the news for a week, and the Leader of the Opposition calling for the PM to resign because his wife bought a cake to the office on his birthday.
You really are living up to the second part of your name this morning Mr Sandpit.
It really matters because most of this country went through hell during the lockdowns. We weren't able to visit loved ones. We weren't able to have birthday parties. In some cases we even had to endure loved ones dying alone.
Do you really not understand why this matters so much to us all or are you just trying the hardest to be the nastiest person on the forum?
I understand why people are angry, I’m saying that the anger specifically about the government is misplaced, and that events are being re-cast with the benefit of hindsight and a lack of knowledge as to what were actually the regulations at various times.
Talking of Times, the newspaper of record mentioned that the PM received a birthday cake, the day after it happened. Why didn’t everyone jump up and down about it at the time? Because at the time there was actually nothing wrong with it.
If that's the case, why do we have supporters of the PM suggest there wasn't a cake? Or that Boris "popped in" to that party or this party, or was ambushed? That the obvious garden party was a work meeting?
Who said there wasn’t a cake?
‘Ambushed’ is an interesting word, but I think it’s fair to say that the birthday gathering in No.10 was organised for Mr Johnson, rather than by Mr Johnson.
I post this simply to answer the question of 'who said?', rather than as some sort of proof that there wasn't a cake.
The issue of whether or not there is a cake seems a hilariously minor detail in the wider question of whether Boris should or should not be replaced as PM.
He’s been briefed the reports a disaster , it finishes him off , he’s not willing to let go, he’s doing everything he can to kick it down the road and stay in power. I never thought our country could be as bad as it is right now!
And that might be right. We are all sitting thinking Bozza holds a full house, but we do not know that Gray is not a straight flush. All still to play for.
Dodgy solicitor claims ‘kindness’ led her to exploit elderly client
A solicitor has been struck off for facilitating a house sale for an elderly client at £250,000 below its market value, in order to sell it to her own civil partner.
Julia Cooper worked as a solicitor at eponymous firm J Cooper Solicitors in East London. In 2010, an elderly woman, 'Ms S', instructed Cooper to obtain probate of her ex-husband's estate, where the main asset was a house. Mrs S did not have substantial wealth herself, and lived alone in a council flat.
Cooper drafted, witnessed and stamped an agreement for the property to be sold to her own civil partner, at the time, 'G'. The agreement included unfavourable terms stating that Ms S would have to pay G damages of £20,000, plus an onerous interest rate, if the property was not transferred to him. Cooper drafted the sale agreement knowing that Ms S had not received independent legal advice.
When probate was granted in 2014, Cooper listed the property sale price at £200,000 despite knowing that it had been recently valued at £450,000. Cooper also sought to prevent another potential buyer from getting the house, even though that person purported to have an agreement with Ms S back in 2011 to purchase the property.
In 2020, the solicitor drafted a new will for the elderly lady, which named her as the sole executor and beneficiary. Ms S died in 2021.
When the case came before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, Cooper said that she had been led astray by her own kindness, as she had supported Ms S by helping her with chores such as collecting her shopping.
Cooper claimed to the tribunal that the elderly lady was only her client in respect of the probate, but said that she had advised Ms S on the property sale, as a friend. She denied that Ms S was her client for that matter, as she had not opened a file or received payment.
However, the tribunal said Ms S was Cooper’s client, and the old lady had relied on the advice that Cooper had provided in her capacity as a solicitor, when entering into the unfavourable property agreement. The tribunal also found that Cooper herself had referred to Ms S as her client in correspondence.
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
LOL. No-one cared at the time, because there was really nothing to care about. It’s only a story now, because of Cummings being vindictive and the Lobby trying to find a story. So we have this rubbish leading the news for a week, and the Leader of the Opposition calling for the PM to resign because his wife bought a cake to the office on his birthday.
You really are living up to the second part of your name this morning Mr Sandpit.
It really matters because most of this country went through hell during the lockdowns. We weren't able to visit loved ones. We weren't able to have birthday parties. In some cases we even had to endure loved ones dying alone.
Do you really not understand why this matters so much to us all or are you just trying the hardest to be the nastiest person on the forum?
Genuine questions. If you had known about this at the time from reading the article, would you have been outraged? Can you explain why there is outrage now but not back then?
I have felt recently that Boris ought to go. I am beginning to think that I have fallen to spin. I do not understand why it is apparently a resignation matter now but a story not even commented on 18 months ago.
Because the cake is irrelevant. It is the other numerous egregious breaches of the rules they made. Followed by a predictable farrago of obfuscation, whataboutery and outright lies.
It's the lies which matter. And the fact that having put the country under some of the severest restrictions of our freedoms this country has ever faced, it was incumbent on those in charge to follow those restrictions scrupulously, try to be whiter than white and if mistakes were made to apologise not lie about them.
The PM does not get this. But, even more shocking to me, the head of the unit who wrote the bloody rules, Kate Josephs, did not get this either.
This is why Boris Johnson should resign/be forced out.
First official estimate puts French growth in 2021 at 7% - the highest annual figure for half a century! And ahead of the previous forecast of 6.7 or 6.8%. If confirmed this would make France the fastest growing G7 country last year
The UK data, when they are published, will probably show UK GDP growth in 2021 as slightly higher than that - around 7.3% I would expect - although UK GDP fell more than French GDP in 2020 (-9.4% vs - 8.0%). Both the decline and recovery in the UK are likely over-stated by the way the data are calculated. The big picture, as is often the case, is that differences between the two countries are much exaggerated, but France is probably marginally ahead taking 2020 and 2021 together, and that is probably down to Brexit.
There is a significant issue in relation to the police investigation which seems to be getting little attention. The penalty for breaches of the Covid regulations was a fixed penalty fine in the first instance. Pre-Covid the police/procurator fiscal/CPS had 6 months in which to intiate proceedings in respect of a fixed penalty. In Scotland, and presumably in England as well, that period was extended to 12 months in the Covid regulations.
This means, for example, that the police cannot charge anyone or issue any fixed penalties in relation to the alleged party on 20th May 2020. It is simply time barred. In which event why are the police investigating this at all and why is the supposed police investigation being allowed to interfere with Gray's report.
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
How did the tactical commander who gave the erroneous order to blow away a Brazilian electrician going about his business on a crowded tube train, avoid having to clear her desk the following day?
Because it was unclear whether the surveillance team had given her a positive identification of the suspect. Either she or they were lying. On the balance of probabilites I thought it was the surveillance team. The fact that her career prospered subsequently suggests this was a widely held view.
The police management played the classic game.
1) The Police on the ground were left in front of the bus, inches from the wheels. 2) The people on the ground were informed that "we are all in this together". 3) With a subtext of "In my case I get early retirement on a full pension and write a book. You might go to prison and/or get fucked by lawyers for years" 4) Evidence starts vanishing. People at the shape end get memory problems.
Apparently the control room was a bit noisy, which confused things. Which apparently meant that any mistakes were forgivable.
The ability to shout "EVERYONE SHUT THE FUCK UP!" was not included in Police Senior Management capabilities, evidently.
I have very considerable sympathy for the team that actually shot De Mendes - they were given what they honestly thought was a lawful order, issued with due authority, in a matter of grave importance.
The fact that the game was played that "If you accuse anyone of incompetence, the front line guys *have* to get it in the neck" was disgusting.
They didn't like Dick, that's for sure.
The whole unhappy saga commenced with the surveillance officer [there was only one?] watching the suspect going for a call of nature at just the very moment when the suspect left the building. What followed was a farcical chase with confused messages back and forth to the control room.
The inquiry couldn't find a clear culprit and I'm not going to say I can but if I had to take a wild stab at what happened I should say that there was a certain amount of messing about amongst the surveillance boys and when it got serious they tried to mess her around too. In the end she felt she had enough of an identification to issue an unambigous order which of course they obeyed.
The fact she kept contemporary notes helped her a lot but it will always be guesswork as to what really happened.
He’s been briefed the reports a disaster , it finishes him off , he’s not willing to let go, he’s doing everything he can to kick it down the road and stay in power. I never thought our country could be as bad as it is right now!
And that might be right. We are all sitting thinking Bozza holds a full house, but we do not know that Gray is not a straight flush. All still to play for.
Like I said, it's a secret service plot to remove an unreliable, unpredictable and unsafe prime minister. You heard it here first...
If only it were true. Taking a short term view, of course
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
LOL. No-one cared at the time, because there was really nothing to care about. It’s only a story now, because of Cummings being vindictive and the Lobby trying to find a story. So we have this rubbish leading the news for a week, and the Leader of the Opposition calling for the PM to resign because his wife bought a cake to the office on his birthday.
You really are living up to the second part of your name this morning Mr Sandpit.
It really matters because most of this country went through hell during the lockdowns. We weren't able to visit loved ones. We weren't able to have birthday parties. In some cases we even had to endure loved ones dying alone.
Do you really not understand why this matters so much to us all or are you just trying the hardest to be the nastiest person on the forum?
Genuine questions. If you had known about this at the time from reading the article, would you have been outraged? Can you explain why there is outrage now but not back then?
I have felt recently that Boris ought to go. I am beginning to think that I have fallen to spin. I do not understand why it is apparently a resignation matter now but a story not even commented on 18 months ago.
No.The spin you are now falling for is that he should stay.
So it's not even going to released at all for weeks and weeks now??
This is utter BS.
If (as seems likely) the Gray report calls Boris out for his leadership that resulted in multiple dubious parties you can see why suddenly Boris is throwing the Met police into play to delay things further.
Remember that's Boris's modus operandi, do whatever is necessary to get to tomorrow.
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
How did the tactical commander who gave the erroneous order to blow away a Brazilian electrician going about his business on a crowded tube train, avoid having to clear her desk the following day?
Because it was unclear whether the surveillance team had given her a positive identification of the suspect. Either she or they were lying. On the balance of probabilites I thought it was the surveillance team. The fact that her career prospered subsequently suggests this was a widely held view.
The police management played the classic game.
1) The Police on the ground were left in front of the bus, inches from the wheels. 2) The people on the ground were informed that "we are all in this together". 3) With a subtext of "In my case I get early retirement on a full pension and write a book. You might go to prison and/or get fucked by lawyers for years" 4) Evidence starts vanishing. People at the shape end get memory problems.
Apparently the control room was a bit noisy, which confused things. Which apparently meant that any mistakes were forgivable.
The ability to shout "EVERYONE SHUT THE FUCK UP!" was not included in Police Senior Management capabilities, evidently.
I have very considerable sympathy for the team that actually shot De Mendes - they were given what they honestly thought was a lawful order, issued with due authority, in a matter of grave importance.
The fact that the game was played that "If you accuse anyone of incompetence, the front line guys *have* to get it in the neck" was disgusting.
They didn't like Dick, that's for sure.
The whole unhappy saga commenced with the surveillance officer [there was only one?] watching the suspect's going for a call of nature at just the very moment when the suspect left the building. What followed was a farcical chase with confused messages back and forth to the control room.
The inquiry couldn't find a clear culprit and I'm not going to say I can but if I had to take a wild stab at what happened I should say that there was a certain amount of messing about amongst the surveillance boys and when it got serious they tried to mess her around too. In the end she felt she had enough of an identification to issue an unambigous order which of course they obeyed.
The fact she kept contemporary notes helped her a lot but it will always be guesswork as to what really happened.
Maybe...
But, to me, the fact that no-one in the control room shouted a "Shut up!" to get a re-set on the confused conversations was a sign that the chain of command had taken... a break.
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
How did the tactical commander who gave the erroneous order to blow away a Brazilian electrician going about his business on a crowded tube train, avoid having to clear her desk the following day?
Because it was unclear whether the surveillance team had given her a positive identification of the suspect. Either she or they were lying. On the balance of probabilites I thought it was the surveillance team. The fact that her career prospered subsequently suggests this was a widely held view.
The police management played the classic game.
1) The Police on the ground were left in front of the bus, inches from the wheels. 2) The people on the ground were informed that "we are all in this together". 3) With a subtext of "In my case I get early retirement on a full pension and write a book. You might go to prison and/or get fucked by lawyers for years" 4) Evidence starts vanishing. People at the shape end get memory problems.
Apparently the control room was a bit noisy, which confused things. Which apparently meant that any mistakes were forgivable.
The ability to shout "EVERYONE SHUT THE FUCK UP!" was not included in Police Senior Management capabilities, evidently.
I have very considerable sympathy for the team that actually shot De Mendes - they were given what they honestly thought was a lawful order, issued with due authority, in a matter of grave importance.
The fact that the game was played that "If you accuse anyone of incompetence, the front line guys *have* to get it in the neck" was disgusting.
They didn't like Dick, that's for sure.
The whole unhappy saga commenced with the surveillance officer [there was only one?] watching the suspect's going for a call of nature at just the very moment when the suspect left the building. What followed was a farcical chase with confused messages back and forth to the control room.
The inquiry couldn't find a clear culprit and I'm not going to say I can but if I had to take a wild stab at what happened I should say that there was a certain amount of messing about amongst the surveillance boys and when it got serious they tried to mess her around too. In the end she felt she had enough of an identification to issue an unambigous order which of course they obeyed.
The fact she kept contemporary notes helped her a lot but it will always be guesswork as to what really happened.
Maybe...
But, to me, the fact that no-one in the control room shouted a "Shut up!" to get a re-set on the confused conversations was a sign that the chain of command had taken... a break.
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
LOL. No-one cared at the time, because there was really nothing to care about. It’s only a story now, because of Cummings being vindictive and the Lobby trying to find a story. So we have this rubbish leading the news for a week, and the Leader of the Opposition calling for the PM to resign because his wife bought a cake to the office on his birthday.
You really are living up to the second part of your name this morning Mr Sandpit.
It really matters because most of this country went through hell during the lockdowns. We weren't able to visit loved ones. We weren't able to have birthday parties. In some cases we even had to endure loved ones dying alone.
Do you really not understand why this matters so much to us all or are you just trying the hardest to be the nastiest person on the forum?
I understand why people are angry, I’m saying that the anger specifically about the government is misplaced, and that events are being re-cast with the benefit of hindsight and a lack of knowledge as to what were actually the regulations at various times.
Talking of Times, the newspaper of record mentioned that the PM received a birthday cake, the day after it happened. Why didn’t everyone jump up and down about it at the time? Because at the time there was actually nothing wrong with it.
If that's the case, why do we have supporters of the PM suggest there wasn't a cake? Or that Boris "popped in" to that party or this party, or was ambushed? That the obvious garden party was a work meeting?
Who said there wasn’t a cake?
‘Ambushed’ is an interesting word, but I think it’s fair to say that the birthday gathering in No.10 was organised for Mr Johnson, rather than by Mr Johnson.
I post this simply to answer the question of 'who said?', rather than as some sort of proof that there wasn't a cake.
The issue of whether or not there is a cake seems a hilariously minor detail in the wider question of whether Boris should or should not be replaced as PM.
Cake-gate was clearly a no 10 leak to obfuscate and get people talking about the wrong things. Playing Cummings at his own games.
So it's not even going to released at all for weeks and weeks now??
This is utter BS.
If you are following this thread there has been suggestions that the Met may be investigating deletion of messages, e mails etc which apparently would be for the Crown Court and far more serious than a fixed penalty notice
There is a significant issue in relation to the police investigation which seems to be getting little attention. The penalty for breaches of the Covid regulations was a fixed penalty fine in the first instance. Pre-Covid the police/procurator fiscal/CPS had 6 months in which to intiate proceedings in respect of a fixed penalty. In Scotland, and presumably in England as well, that period was extended to 12 months in the Covid regulations.
This means, for example, that the police cannot charge anyone or issue any fixed penalties in relation to the alleged party on 20th May 2020. It is simply time barred. In which event why are the police investigating this at all and why is the supposed police investigation being allowed to interfere with Gray's report.
Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice wouldn't be time-barred, so if anybody gave out an instruction to delete emails and texts they are in the frame.
The first time I worked with him was at the start of Radio 4’s I’m Sorry I Haven’t a Clue in 1972. After the pilot, everyone was quite shellshocked and we went to the pub and solemnly said: “Never again.” The producer said it would be made into a one-off special and that will be the end of it. But the head of Radio 4 heard it, rather liked it, and commissioned a series. At the end of each series we all met in the pub and went “never again!” That became a tradition for the next 45 years.
There is a significant issue in relation to the police investigation which seems to be getting little attention. The penalty for breaches of the Covid regulations was a fixed penalty fine in the first instance. Pre-Covid the police/procurator fiscal/CPS had 6 months in which to intiate proceedings in respect of a fixed penalty. In Scotland, and presumably in England as well, that period was extended to 12 months in the Covid regulations.
This means, for example, that the police cannot charge anyone or issue any fixed penalties in relation to the alleged party on 20th May 2020. It is simply time barred. In which event why are the police investigating this at all and why is the supposed police investigation being allowed to interfere with Gray's report.
Perhaps the Met hasn't got round to reading those bits of the Covid Regulations yet? You could try sending them the reference. They seem to need all the help they can get these days.
Robert Peston @Peston · 6m In many eyes, the reputation of Cressida Dick and the Met Police will be significantly damaged by the timing of her decision to investigate. There was plenty of prima facie evidence of crimes in Downing Street weeks ago. Dick refused to investigate then. She is only…
A police investigation on this, with all the resources of he Met shouldn't take more than a couple of weeks; and those couple of weeks should have started a while back. These are not, in the grand scheme of things, particularly large crimes that have been potentially committed. They are somewhere between speeding and shoplifting. Absolubtely enough for the PM to go (With the lies about it all) but not worth wasting time investigating something that probably falls down - certainly for the PM - as it was technically perhaps his property. The Met is off it's trolley here.
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
Starmer is from the same sleazy, incompetent establishment as Dick.
They always support each other.
"Starmer is from the same sleazy, incompetent establishment" says a Johnson shill. Beyond parody!
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
Starmer is from the same sleazy, incompetent establishment as Dick.
They always support each other.
On that basis there's no escape. Some people thought Brexit might be an escape from "the establishment", and look what we got.
I wonder whether some people's obsession with the "Establishment" is actually a little sinister. Without doxing myself I sometimes wonder if I am part of the "Establishment" in some people's eyes even though I went to a crummy comp. I have come to the conclusion that "The Establishment" is something that is whatever the cynic wants it to be; a kind of bogeyman, or at worst something akin to the Global Jewish Conspiracy.
That said it was hugely amusing that folk that were dense enough to vote Leave as a two fingered salute to "The Establishment" were voting in alignment with City boy Nigel Farage and old Etonians Johnson and Rees Mogg. Those three (and probably many others) must have been laughing so much they dropped their cummy biscuits at the thought that the plebs thought Brexit was "anti-Establishment"
Well, I'm a half Jewish, lapsed Freemason and Elector in the City Of London. Who works in finance. Short of membership of the Trilateral Commission......
I recall a few years back, when some grads were going on about "The Man" ruining the world etc. One of my colleagues pointed out that "You are now The Man".
cf William Hague's conference speech:-
[Tony Blair] even claimed that 'the establishment' was holding the country back. He's a forty-something, public school-educated, barrister from Islington, with a two hundred seat majority in the House of Commons. Who does he think is the establishment? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/468183.stm
Not to mention that Blair had been "inside" politics for decades, at that point.
The Establishment is easily defined. One's own self is nearly never "In the Establishment"
Hence Hillary Clinton running as the anti-establishment candidate. And saying the same at a private speaking engagement to Goldman Sachs....
Hence Donald Fucking Trump running as the anti-establishment candidate. And saying the same to a room full of millionaires...
Labour need to go in hard on the corruption angle here. Show that after numerous failures in her role Dick was given a stay of execution by the Home Secretary and now Dick is returning the favour. Starmer needs to fight this with actual passion, not lawyerly boring technicalities.
Starmer is not going to accuse the Met Commissioner of corruption. He publicly stood by her after one of her previous cock ups last year. Big mistake in my view.
How did the tactical commander who gave the erroneous order to blow away a Brazilian electrician going about his business on a crowded tube train, avoid having to clear her desk the following day?
Because it was unclear whether the surveillance team had given her a positive identification of the suspect. Either she or they were lying. On the balance of probabilites I thought it was the surveillance team. The fact that her career prospered subsequently suggests this was a widely held view.
The police management played the classic game.
1) The Police on the ground were left in front of the bus, inches from the wheels. 2) The people on the ground were informed that "we are all in this together". 3) With a subtext of "In my case I get early retirement on a full pension and write a book. You might go to prison and/or get fucked by lawyers for years" 4) Evidence starts vanishing. People at the shape end get memory problems.
Apparently the control room was a bit noisy, which confused things. Which apparently meant that any mistakes were forgivable.
The ability to shout "EVERYONE SHUT THE FUCK UP!" was not included in Police Senior Management capabilities, evidently.
I have very considerable sympathy for the team that actually shot De Mendes - they were given what they honestly thought was a lawful order, issued with due authority, in a matter of grave importance.
The fact that the game was played that "If you accuse anyone of incompetence, the front line guys *have* to get it in the neck" was disgusting.
They didn't like Dick, that's for sure.
The whole unhappy saga commenced with the surveillance officer [there was only one?] watching the suspect's going for a call of nature at just the very moment when the suspect left the building. What followed was a farcical chase with confused messages back and forth to the control room.
The inquiry couldn't find a clear culprit and I'm not going to say I can but if I had to take a wild stab at what happened I should say that there was a certain amount of messing about amongst the surveillance boys and when it got serious they tried to mess her around too. In the end she felt she had enough of an identification to issue an unambigous order which of course they obeyed.
The fact she kept contemporary notes helped her a lot but it will always be guesswork as to what really happened.
Maybe...
But, to me, the fact that no-one in the control room shouted a "Shut up!" to get a re-set on the confused conversations was a sign that the chain of command had taken... a break.
My wife was in the police for thirty years. She wasn't in the Met but we know plenty of former Met officers, mainly at PC and Sergeant level. There is a very clear and consistent view among those as to who screwed up, and it won't take you many guesses to work out who that is.
A police investigation on this, with all the resources of he Met shouldn't take more than a couple of weeks; and those couple of weeks should have started a while back. These are not, in the grand scheme of things, particularly large crimes that have been potentially committed. They are somewhere between speeding and shoplifting. Absolubtely enough for the PM to go (With the lies about it all) but not worth wasting time investigating something that probably falls down - certainly for the PM - as it was technically perhaps his property. The Met is off it's trolley here.
I suspect the crime isn't the having a party bit.
The crime is deleting the evidence from phones and elsewhere that the party happened.
Remember it's the coverup that gets you never the minor issue that triggered it.
As with the PM’s birthday cake, the test serial numbers issue was something that was first mentioned a few weeks ago. Does look like the BBC have gone for a deep dive on it though.
How does Mr Djokovic ever get a visa for any country, at least until the end of all Covid regulations?
Comments
It all went Hezza's way in the end as Westland did merge with Agusta then Leonardo and, to this day, the MoD continues its 40 year campaign of buying anything but the UH-60.
First official estimate puts French growth in 2021 at 7% - the highest annual figure for half a century! And ahead of the previous forecast of 6.7 or 6.8%. If confirmed this would make France the fastest growing G7 country last year
https://twitter.com/Mij_Europe/status/1486991744524640258
In the meantime let Boris continue with his work as PM until the next general election
https://twitter.com/CrimeLineLaw/status/1486988350414274562
So this was just out there the whole time then?
https://twitter.com/Birdyword/status/1486982533690855424
Just did a quick Google and saw this article in The Times to confirm:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-settles-in-as-downing-sts-captain-sensible-t7xr2689g
The birthday gathering with cake was an article in The Times and no one even noticed.
For the country, though, not so much. We really need to have this resolved ASAP.
davidallengreen @davidallengreen
If true (and we don't know) the alleged directions to "clean mobiles" may not be summary offences
That is crown court stuff
https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1486976442831450114
Edit: I see @TSE has just made the same point. Careful with your speculation, guys!
https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/27/hmrc_ss7_hlr_lookups/
Seems obvious to me.
God knows
He describes her responses to questioning as 'honest, undemonstrative and at times in a humble manner', that she answered 'without evasion or any hint of truculence' and without implied criticism or resentment at being questioned.
He concluded she had a bright future and talks of the wisdom of the jury who asked to put a rider to exonerate her.
It's a great book and great read, though with hindsight I'm not as persuaded by his view at least as it stood at that time.
That said it was hugely amusing that folk that were dense enough to vote Leave as a two fingered salute to "The Establishment" were voting in alignment with City boy Nigel Farage and old Etonians Johnson and Rees Mogg. Those three (and probably many others) must have been laughing so much they dropped their cummy biscuits at the thought that the plebs thought Brexit was "anti-Establishment"
1) The Police on the ground were left in front of the bus, inches from the wheels.
2) The people on the ground were informed that "we are all in this together".
3) With a subtext of "In my case I get early retirement on a full pension and write a book. You might go to prison and/or get fucked by lawyers for years"
4) Evidence starts vanishing. People at the shape end get memory problems.
Apparently the control room was a bit noisy, which confused things. Which apparently meant that any mistakes were forgivable.
The ability to shout "EVERYONE SHUT THE FUCK UP!" was not included in Police Senior Management capabilities, evidently.
I have very considerable sympathy for the team that actually shot De Mendes - they were given what they honestly thought was a lawful order, issued with due authority, in a matter of grave importance.
The fact that the game was played that "If you accuse anyone of incompetence, the front line guys *have* to get it in the neck" was disgusting.
I recall a few years back, when some grads were going on about "The Man" ruining the world etc. One of my colleagues pointed out that "You are now The Man".
I'm trying in my comments to separate my personal and political views from how most voters will react. I don't think suspended animation is going to be good for the Government or for the poor bloody infantry defending Tory seats in May.
It really matters because most of this country went through hell during the lockdowns. We weren't able to visit loved ones. We weren't able to have birthday parties. In some cases we even had to endure loved ones dying alone.
Do you really not understand why this matters so much to us all or are you just trying the hardest to be the nastiest person on the forum?
In 2020, Johnson was widely seen by a majority of the public as one of us, and so people were more forgiving. That's now changed, Johnson is one of them, and so these sorts of things are seen differently.
When my maternal grandad died, they were far more efficient in collecting the regalia and jewels than the TV License people are.
And they didn't get £140m pa for doing the job.
Point of interest: Masonic symbols are quite common in the City Churches in the CoL.
Sore throat and a bit tired, some cough and chest tightness but not much when resting. No fever or muscle aches, or diarrhoea. Good O2 on pulse oximeter. Mrs Foxy having to be off work until negative PCR, but not required to isolate.
I have felt recently that Boris ought to go. I am beginning to think that I have fallen to spin. I do not understand why it is apparently a resignation matter now but a story not even commented on 18 months ago.
I just re-incarnate, into a new sleeve......
Why? What I wrote here may, partly, explain it -
"The police seem to think that because theirs is a critical public function everything they do is in the public interest and therefore it is impermissible to attack them. It is a “L’etat c’est moi” approach which does much to explain the defensive, “no true policeman” approach adopted in response to every scandal, an approach which appears to value protecting the police’s reputation above anything else."
The rest is here - https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/10/01/what-now/.
And this - https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/12/12/dont-tell-show-us/ is why Labour really should tackle the police. They won't. A very great pity.
Starmer's slow caution has much to commend it. But he lacks boldness I fear, which is why he will - I think - achieve much less than he could, should he get into power. Reform of the police is something that badly needs doing. The police have been second-rate in too many areas, in too many forces, for far too long. If a former DPP can't see that or think about doing something about it, who will? And so it will get slowly worse and worse until we no longer notice.
Talking of Times, the newspaper of record mentioned that the PM received a birthday cake, the day after it happened. Why didn’t everyone jump up and down about it at the time? Because at the time there was actually nothing wrong with it.
The real issue for me is the constant, obvious lying. Trust (not Truss) is vital, and if we accept a Trumpian world view of alternate realities for every event democracy itself will not last. The lying is why he should go.
That's an another example of a Trumpesque parallel universe to the one in which the rest of humanity sanely exists.
Johnson is most certainly not an anti-establishment figure. The closest he came to it was probably in the pitch to red wall voters, but that bore all the anarchistic tendencies of the brains behind the project: Dominic Cummings.
Johnson is a hotch potch of conflicting and conficted chaotic 'ideas' (even the word ideas is too strong). I was trying to point out to HYUFD yesterday that much of the anger in Conservative circles is that so much of the policy in the current leadership is inconsistent and all over the place: it's a mess of policies often flatly in contradiction with one another, and certainly in contradiction of what it means to be a Conservative.
With everything else that has happened, if BJ was revealed to have made himself a cup of tea, that would currently be a scandal.
So much agreement with this. And politicians play into that game by attacking each other for being insufficiently supportive. When given the power of the police we should be more critical of failings, not less.
Now, especially if Johnson stays in power, the opposition have been given this absolute gift of a piece of messaging to go into the next GE with. “Remember those toffs who partied whilst your loved ones suffered? Now you can finally do something about it” is a message that can be hammered over & over again on the doorstep.
Johnson staying in power makes this worse, not better.
He lied to parliament
- NHS.... remember when revealing lethal flaws in the NHS was bad?
- Judges
- etc
Followed by a predictable farrago of obfuscation, whataboutery and outright lies.
Like many on this forum I've been in senior leadership positions in various organisations, and if there is an organised conspiracy running everything, I wasn't asked to join it.
That said, there are of course informal networks that people take with them from the leading public schools and universities, and the advantage this can convey later in life is easily seen, from the outside, as a conspiracy of sorts.
‘Ambushed’ is an interesting word, but I think it’s fair to say that the birthday gathering in No.10 was organised for Mr Johnson, rather than by Mr Johnson.
Don't give SKS ideas
Giles Dilnot
@reporterboy
·
42m
It’s quite a journey from
“nah not really one for us unless the other thing turns up evidence & we don’t do retrospective”
to
“woah now this is serious stuff so you’ll not want to be referencing anything we might be looking into, after all we’re the law”
in a few weeks 🤷🏻♂️
https://twitter.com/reporterboy/status/1486998670348328967
https://youtu.be/9RSaqZR9Ajk
[Tony Blair] even claimed that 'the establishment' was holding the country back. He's a forty-something, public school-educated, barrister from Islington, with a two hundred seat majority in the House of Commons. Who does he think is the establishment?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/468183.stm
So it's not even going to released at all for weeks and weeks now??
This is utter BS.
I post this simply to answer the question of 'who said?', rather than as some sort of proof that there wasn't a cake.
The issue of whether or not there is a cake seems a hilariously minor detail in the wider question of whether Boris should or should not be replaced as PM.
https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1486982816810291205
He’s been briefed the reports a disaster , it finishes him off , he’s not willing to let go, he’s doing everything he can to kick it down the road and stay in power. I never thought our country could be as bad as it is right now!
And that might be right. We are all sitting thinking Bozza holds a full house, but we do not know that Gray is not a straight flush. All still to play for.
Dodgy solicitor claims ‘kindness’ led her to exploit elderly client
A solicitor has been struck off for facilitating a house sale for an elderly client at £250,000 below its market value, in order to sell it to her own civil partner.
Julia Cooper worked as a solicitor at eponymous firm J Cooper Solicitors in East London. In 2010, an elderly woman, 'Ms S', instructed Cooper to obtain probate of her ex-husband's estate, where the main asset was a house. Mrs S did not have substantial wealth herself, and lived alone in a council flat.
Cooper drafted, witnessed and stamped an agreement for the property to be sold to her own civil partner, at the time, 'G'. The agreement included unfavourable terms stating that Ms S would have to pay G damages of £20,000, plus an onerous interest rate, if the property was not transferred to him. Cooper drafted the sale agreement knowing that Ms S had not received independent legal advice.
When probate was granted in 2014, Cooper listed the property sale price at £200,000 despite knowing that it had been recently valued at £450,000. Cooper also sought to prevent another potential buyer from getting the house, even though that person purported to have an agreement with Ms S back in 2011 to purchase the property.
In 2020, the solicitor drafted a new will for the elderly lady, which named her as the sole executor and beneficiary. Ms S died in 2021.
When the case came before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, Cooper said that she had been led astray by her own kindness, as she had supported Ms S by helping her with chores such as collecting her shopping.
Cooper claimed to the tribunal that the elderly lady was only her client in respect of the probate, but said that she had advised Ms S on the property sale, as a friend. She denied that Ms S was her client for that matter, as she had not opened a file or received payment.
However, the tribunal said Ms S was Cooper’s client, and the old lady had relied on the advice that Cooper had provided in her capacity as a solicitor, when entering into the unfavourable property agreement. The tribunal also found that Cooper herself had referred to Ms S as her client in correspondence.
https://www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/dodgy-solicitor-claims-kindness-led-her-exploit-elderly-client
The PM does not get this. But, even more shocking to me, the head of the unit who wrote the bloody rules, Kate Josephs, did not get this either.
This means, for example, that the police cannot charge anyone or issue any fixed penalties in relation to the alleged party on 20th May 2020. It is simply time barred. In which event why are the police investigating this at all and why is the supposed police investigation being allowed to interfere with Gray's report.
The whole unhappy saga commenced with the surveillance officer [there was only one?] watching the suspect going for a call of nature at just the very moment when the suspect left the building. What followed was a farcical chase with confused messages back and forth to the control room.
The inquiry couldn't find a clear culprit and I'm not going to say I can but if I had to take a wild stab at what happened I should say that there was a certain amount of messing about amongst the surveillance boys and when it got serious they tried to mess her around too. In the end she felt she had enough of an identification to issue an unambigous order which of course they obeyed.
The fact she kept contemporary notes helped her a lot but it will always be guesswork as to what really happened.
If only it were true. Taking a short term view, of course
https://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co.uk/news/maidenhead/174380/theresa-may-responds-to-constituents-over-downing-street-party-disappointment-and-indignation.html
Remember that's Boris's modus operandi, do whatever is necessary to get to tomorrow.
But, to me, the fact that no-one in the control room shouted a "Shut up!" to get a re-set on the confused conversations was a sign that the chain of command had taken... a break.
This could go on for months
The first time I worked with him was at the start of Radio 4’s I’m Sorry I Haven’t a Clue in 1972. After the pilot, everyone was quite shellshocked and we went to the pub and solemnly said: “Never again.” The producer said it would be made into a one-off special and that will be the end of it. But the head of Radio 4 heard it, rather liked it, and commissioned a series. At the end of each series we all met in the pub and went “never again!” That became a tradition for the next 45 years.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comedy/comedians/graeme-garden-barry-cryer-will-miss-laugh-hugely-wont/
@Peston
·
6m
In many eyes, the reputation of Cressida Dick and the Met Police will be significantly damaged by the timing of her decision to investigate. There was plenty of prima facie evidence of crimes in Downing Street weeks ago. Dick refused to investigate then. She is only…
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1487010473065201664
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/tennis/2022/01/28/doubts-emerge-timing-novak-djokovics-positive-covid-test-centre/
40p to read the article and anything else of interest on the site is something I would actually do, and I will later.
These are not, in the grand scheme of things, particularly large crimes that have been potentially committed. They are somewhere between speeding and shoplifting. Absolubtely enough for the PM to go (With the lies about it all) but not worth wasting time investigating something that probably falls down - certainly for the PM - as it was technically perhaps his property.
The Met is off it's trolley here.
The Establishment is easily defined. One's own self is nearly never "In the Establishment"
Hence Hillary Clinton running as the anti-establishment candidate. And saying the same at a private speaking engagement to Goldman Sachs....
Hence Donald Fucking Trump running as the anti-establishment candidate. And saying the same to a room full of millionaires...
The crime is deleting the evidence from phones and elsewhere that the party happened.
Remember it's the coverup that gets you never the minor issue that triggered it.
How does Mr Djokovic ever get a visa for any country, at least until the end of all Covid regulations?