Good news for Sunak. He can give her an ultimatum to apologise then sack her, like Starmer sacked first Long-Bailey and eventually Corbyn. It’s a purge opportunity, the start of the end of the Nat-Cs.
If he doesn’t he’s frit.
Sacking her leaves her pissing into the tent.
There are just people that piss, and those that don't.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to being with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Why was she even driving, is my question?
Unless the offence was more than ~9 months ago, before she became hs?
Good news for Sunak. He can give her an ultimatum to apologise then sack her, like Starmer sacked first Long-Bailey and eventually Corbyn. It’s a purge opportunity, the start of the end of the Nat-Cs.
If he doesn’t he’s frit.
Sacking her leaves her pissing into the tent.
There are just people that piss, and those that don't.
??
He's referring to what the Germans call Sitzpinklers
Sunak is terrified of the drama Braverman could cause on the backbenchers if he grew a spine and fired her . It’s bizarre how Starmer is accused of being weak when he’s like Dirty Harry compared to the gimp Sunak .
From this month’s musical flavour of the month K.S. Rhoads (of kids favourite jams by their dads favourite bands), a rebuttal from a couple of years ago to anyone who thinks 90s music was substandard.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
Sunak is terrified of the drama Braverman could cause on the backbenchers if he grew a spine and fired her . It’s bizarre how Starmer is accused of being weak when he’s like Dirty Harry compared to the gimp Sunak .
Starmer is like someone straight out of a right royal cockney barrel of monkeys. His ruthlessness is worthy of a Guy Ritchie film.
Good news for Sunak. He can give her an ultimatum to apologise then sack her, like Starmer sacked first Long-Bailey and eventually Corbyn. It’s a purge opportunity, the start of the end of the Nat-Cs.
If he doesn’t he’s frit.
Sacking her leaves her pissing into the tent.
There are just people that piss, and those that don't.
No doubt that her piss would end up spraying back up into her own face and all over her weird C-Nat mates.
Someone needs to make an intervention as it’s now becoming rather tragic ! No ones interested Kemi . Over hyped over promoted and delusional .
The subeditor seems to have removed the end of the sentence..”will be successful, on another planet, in an alternative reality, for certain sub-species of slugs”.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
Sunak is terrified of the drama Braverman could cause on the backbenchers if he grew a spine and fired her . It’s bizarre how Starmer is accused of being weak when he’s like Dirty Harry compared to the gimp Sunak .
Starmer is like someone straight out of a right royal cockney barrel of monkeys. His ruthlessness is worthy of a Guy Ritchie film.
And yet much of the public seem to just think he’s weak when he’s been merciless at times .
SF 141 seats DUP 120 Alliance 65 UUP 53 SDLP 39 Independents 19 Traditional Unionist Voice 8 Greens 3 People Before Profit 1 Progressive Unionist Party 1
Seats left: 12 (19 in Belfast and 3 in Causeway Coast)
Couseway Coast 1 seat between DUP and TUV 2 seats to be filled with DUP, TUV, FS, Alliance and SDLP left in the race
Belfast In Botanic...3 seats to be filled with 2 SF, 2 Alliance and 1 Green left In Collin...1 seat to be filled with People Before Profit, SDLP, Aontú and Alliance left In Odlpark....3 seats to be filled with 2 SF and 2 DUP left In Ormiston...2 seats left with 2 UUP and 1 Green in the race
Amis was a heavy smoker, but still shocking news. Someone one always thought of as of the younger generation.
An extraordinarily vivid writer. As distinctive as Anthony Burgess of whom he wrote a famous account in one of his books of essays. Very sad to think that there won't be any more books from him unless something comes out posthumously.
Maybe Suella is auditioning to be part of the next Top Gear team. From about a month ago;
Home Secretary Suella Braverman asked on her first day as an MP whether she could claim a speeding ticket incurred during the course of Parliamentary duties on expenses - meaning taxpayers would fund it - a Conservative MP has claimed.
William Wragg, MP for Hazel Grove in Greater Manchester, recalled the incident in posts on social media last night in which he described the 'lamentable hopelessness of the Home Secretary'.
That’s proper tragic. Worthy of one of those Russian state TV stand up debates with footage of explosions in the background.
The photo-caption next to it, in a Paul Merton Have I Got News For You-style accident, gives the idea some sort of otherworldy feel.
A cross between a spacesuit and 2001, or a headline from outer space, and on the other hand, as mentioned, some sort of more innocent childhood fantasy with Winnie-the-Pooh.
I feel like this is not quite a sackable offence for Braverman.
But Sunak might sack her anyway. The fact that is leaked now is a clue that he might. Although the risk of his being ousted would increase significantly if he did.
I agree, the emergence of this story is not entirely bad for Sunak's agenda. Braverman has never seemed a great fit with his cabinet, and she seems to have grown increasingly frustrated about the watering down of her small boats bill. Sunak Hunt are clearly trying to float throwing their hands up and letting everyone in. For his part, Sunak has clearly sanctioned his rottweilers to brief the press with negative stories about Braverman, and this looks like one of those stories. The problem is, he no longer really has the political capital to sack her and abandon her bill. He isn't a new broom any more; he's a proven election loser. That leaves them in a stalemate position.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
a) She didn't 'have to attend' a course - she could have taken the points.
b) If she decided to attend the course, so what - she could have turned it to her advantage, promoting the awareness courses.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
As she is someone who hates Elites who look down on the common man, you can understand why she wouldn't want to mix with those sort of people.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
Aye, that's it. She didn't want the perp walk. Bad optics. But instead of leaning into it with good humour and accepting that she should be treated the same as anyone else, she started asking around for who could make it disappear.
On topic. No this isn’t a sacking. Exploring if she could avoid appearing with the plebs like a common criminal herself is a fair ask and exploration, a lots being made of no big deal in my opinion, just like with Boris she’s marmite, means opponents big things up far too much.
In yes minister Jim gets away with drink driving by showing the police his ministerial pass or something, and later asks why the Home Secretary couldn’t have got away with it too, but it turned out the HomeSec was unfortunate to have crashed into a train carrying nuclear waste.
Brexit is not a tragedy, because there’s been no catharsis.
It’s a just a loon-encrusted shit-show.
Increasingly, I find many of your diagnoses of the UK's issues to be sound and pithy - 'Brexit' stands increasingly at odds amongst them as a cause and it's reversal as a solution. I am pretty sure it must be obvious to you that disruptions caused by Brexit have done little except highlight far deeper seated problems.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
Yep I did. You get a choice whether to take the point or attend the course. I had such an option myself. I attended the course. If she is so up herself to attend a course with others then take the points, which she eventually did. She wanted to avoid the points and have special treatment regarding the course and tried to abuse her position to do so. She should be fired.
SF 141 seats DUP 120 Alliance 65 UUP 53 SDLP 39 Independents 19 Traditional Unionist Voice 8 Greens 3 People Before Profit 1 Progressive Unionist Party 1
Seats left: 12 (19 in Belfast and 3 in Causeway Coast)
Couseway Coast 1 seat between DUP and TUV 2 seats to be filled with DUP, TUV, FS, Alliance and SDLP left in the race
Belfast In Botanic...3 seats to be filled with 2 SF, 2 Alliance and 1 Green left In Collin...1 seat to be filled with People Before Profit, SDLP, Aontú and Alliance left In Odlpark....3 seats to be filled with 2 SF and 2 DUP left In Ormiston...2 seats left with 2 UUP and 1 Green in the race
Causeway Coast and Glens finished now 1 TUV and 1 DUP and 1 Alliance
Someone needs to make an intervention as it’s now becoming rather tragic ! No ones interested Kemi . Over hyped over promoted and delusional .
*raises hand*
I'm interested in anything lovely Kemi has to say...
When she's PM in 2030 remember GIN was one of the first to tip her on PB (I'll probably be pushing up daises by then so won't be around to remind you myself)
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
Yep I did. You get a choice whether to take the point or attend the course. I had such an option myself. I attended the course. If she is so up herself to attend a course with others then take the points, which she eventually did. She wanted to avoid the points and have special treatment regarding the course and tried to abuse her position to do so. She should be fired.
Is talking about the possibilities a sackable offence? She should be taken aside and told that it is not proper to engage civil servants in conversations which could compromise them
Someone needs to make an intervention as it’s now becoming rather tragic ! No ones interested Kemi . Over hyped over promoted and delusional .
*raises hand*
I'm interested in anything lovely Kemi has to say...
When she's PM in 2030 remember GIN was one of the first to tip her on PB (I'll probably be pushing up daises by then so won't be around to remind you myself)
Hopefully you’ll be here to bask in the glory ! I don’t mind if you laud it over me .
On topic. No this isn’t a sacking. Exploring if she could avoid appearing with the plebs like a common criminal herself is a fair ask and exploration, a lots being made of no big deal in my opinion, just like with Boris she’s marmite, means opponents big things up far too much.
In yes minister Jim gets away with drink driving by showing the police his ministerial pass or something, and later asks why the Home Secretary couldn’t have got away with it too, but it turned out the HomeSec was unfortunate to have crashed into a train carrying nuclear waste.
On topic. No this isn’t a sacking. Exploring if she could avoid appearing with the plebs like a common criminal herself is a fair ask and exploration, a lots being made of no big deal in my opinion, just like with Boris she’s marmite, means opponents big things up far too much.
In yes minister Jim gets away with drink driving by showing the police his ministerial pass or something, and later asks why the Home Secretary couldn’t have got away with it too, but it turned out the HomeSec was unfortunate to have crashed into a train carrying nuclear waste.
In today's shock news, Tory Rabbit defends a Tory
I’m merely standing on the side of fair play and justice, my sword of truth cutting through the spin from biased parties. If she did bully her way to a 1:1 I would call it wrong - but it’s merely enquiring if it’s possible due to her celebrity status, being told no it’s not, so going along with the reply and not getting it. She got no special treatment at all from this, and you call it a scandal. In fact this is a big win for Suella, coming across as a dogged and inventive barrister, fighting her corner by pushing to the limits - someone everyone would want on their side.
Someone needs to make an intervention as it’s now becoming rather tragic ! No ones interested Kemi . Over hyped over promoted and delusional .
*raises hand*
I'm interested in anything lovely Kemi has to say...
When she's PM in 2030 remember GIN was one of the first to tip her on PB (I'll probably be pushing up daises by then so won't be around to remind you myself)
The Sunak lap dog approach has done for her. If course if she reads the writing on the wall and decides to be the one who pushes him down the figurative stairs of office, that could change.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
Yep I did. You get a choice whether to take the point or attend the course. I had such an option myself. I attended the course. If she is so up herself to attend a course with others then take the points, which she eventually did. She wanted to avoid the points and have special treatment regarding the course and tried to abuse her position to do so. She should be fired.
Is talking about the possibilities a sackable offence? She should be taken aside and told that it is not proper to engage civil servants in conversations which could compromise them
Yes. A quiet word. I'm sure that will encourager les autres.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
Yep I did. You get a choice whether to take the point or attend the course. I had such an option myself. I attended the course. If she is so up herself to attend a course with others then take the points, which she eventually did. She wanted to avoid the points and have special treatment regarding the course and tried to abuse her position to do so. She should be fired.
Is talking about the possibilities a sackable offence? She should be taken aside and told that it is not proper to engage civil servants in conversations which could compromise them
I don't think asking a question can in any way be considered a sackable offence. Interestingly, those who consider that it is a sackable offence seem to be the ones that wanted Braverman to be sacked anyway.
Someone needs to make an intervention as it’s now becoming rather tragic ! No ones interested Kemi . Over hyped over promoted and delusional .
*raises hand*
I'm interested in anything lovely Kemi has to say...
When she's PM in 2030 remember GIN was one of the first to tip her on PB (I'll probably be pushing up daises by then so won't be around to remind you myself)
The Sunak lap dog approach has done for her. If course if she reads the writing on the wall and decides to be the one who pushes him down the figurative stairs of office, that could change.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
Yep I did. You get a choice whether to take the point or attend the course. I had such an option myself. I attended the course. If she is so up herself to attend a course with others then take the points, which she eventually did. She wanted to avoid the points and have special treatment regarding the course and tried to abuse her position to do so. She should be fired.
Is talking about the possibilities a sackable offence? She should be taken aside and told that it is not proper to engage civil servants in conversations which could compromise them
Yes. A quiet word. I'm sure that will encourager les autres.
A quiet boot out of the Cabinet is the only course open to the PM
Brexit is not a tragedy, because there’s been no catharsis.
It’s a just a loon-encrusted shit-show.
Increasingly, I find many of your diagnoses of the UK's issues to be sound and pithy - 'Brexit' stands increasingly at odds amongst them as a cause and its reversal as a solution. I am pretty sure it must be obvious to you that disruptions caused by Brexit have done little except highlight far deeper seated problems.
I don’t believe it is likely that Brexit is reversed. I’m not even sure it’s desirable.
I agree that Brexit uncovers more deep seated problems.
In that sense Brexit is a bit like the Schofield-Willoughby falling out.
Someone needs to make an intervention as it’s now becoming rather tragic ! No ones interested Kemi . Over hyped over promoted and delusional .
*raises hand*
I'm interested in anything lovely Kemi has to say...
When she's PM in 2030 remember GIN was one of the first to tip her on PB (I'll probably be pushing up daises by then so won't be around to remind you myself)
The Sunak lap dog approach has done for her. If course if she reads the writing on the wall and decides to be the one who pushes him down the figurative stairs of office, that could change.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
Yep I did. You get a choice whether to take the point or attend the course. I had such an option myself. I attended the course. If she is so up herself to attend a course with others then take the points, which she eventually did. She wanted to avoid the points and have special treatment regarding the course and tried to abuse her position to do so. She should be fired.
Is talking about the possibilities a sackable offence? She should be taken aside and told that it is not proper to engage civil servants in conversations which could compromise them
I don't think asking a question can in any way be considered a sackable offence. Interestingly, those who consider that it is a sackable offence seem to be the ones that wanted Braverman to be sacked anyway.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
Yep I did. You get a choice whether to take the point or attend the course. I had such an option myself. I attended the course. If she is so up herself to attend a course with others then take the points, which she eventually did. She wanted to avoid the points and have special treatment regarding the course and tried to abuse her position to do so. She should be fired.
Is talking about the possibilities a sackable offence? She should be taken aside and told that it is not proper to engage civil servants in conversations which could compromise them
Yes. A quiet word. I'm sure that will encourager les autres.
A quiet boot out of the Cabinet is the only course open to the PM
He should do it. If that brings things to a head, so much the better. Time for the sensible people to start fighting back against the nutters. Might as well choose an opportunity when one of the nutters is so clearly in the wrong.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
Yep I did. You get a choice whether to take the point or attend the course. I had such an option myself. I attended the course. If she is so up herself to attend a course with others then take the points, which she eventually did. She wanted to avoid the points and have special treatment regarding the course and tried to abuse her position to do so. She should be fired.
Is talking about the possibilities a sackable offence? She should be taken aside and told that it is not proper to engage civil servants in conversations which could compromise them
I don't think asking a question can in any way be considered a sackable offence. Interestingly, those who consider that it is a sackable offence seem to be the ones that wanted Braverman to be sacked anyway.
The allegation is not that she asked a question, it's that she asked civil servants to do something, and in so doing she broke the Ministerial Code:
"Suella Braverman asked Home Office civil servants to help her avoid a speeding fine and points on her licence by arranging a private one-to-one driving awareness course"
Amis was a heavy smoker, but still shocking news. Someone one always thought of as of the younger generation.
An extraordinarily vivid writer. As distinctive as Anthony Burgess of whom he wrote a famous account in one of his books of essays. Very sad to think that there won't be any more books from him unless something comes out posthumously.
I don't think I've enjoyed any novel more than I did Money. It had me in absolute stitches.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
Yep I did. You get a choice whether to take the point or attend the course. I had such an option myself. I attended the course. If she is so up herself to attend a course with others then take the points, which she eventually did. She wanted to avoid the points and have special treatment regarding the course and tried to abuse her position to do so. She should be fired.
Is talking about the possibilities a sackable offence? She should be taken aside and told that it is not proper to engage civil servants in conversations which could compromise them
Yes. A quiet word. I'm sure that will encourager les autres.
A quiet boot out of the Cabinet is the only course open to the PM
Someone needs to make an intervention as it’s now becoming rather tragic ! No ones interested Kemi . Over hyped over promoted and delusional .
*raises hand*
I'm interested in anything lovely Kemi has to say...
When she's PM in 2030 remember GIN was one of the first to tip her on PB (I'll probably be pushing up daises by then so won't be around to remind you myself)
The Sunak lap dog approach has done for her. If course if she reads the writing on the wall and decides to be the one who pushes him down the figurative stairs of office, that could change.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
Yep I did. You get a choice whether to take the point or attend the course. I had such an option myself. I attended the course. If she is so up herself to attend a course with others then take the points, which she eventually did. She wanted to avoid the points and have special treatment regarding the course and tried to abuse her position to do so. She should be fired.
Is talking about the possibilities a sackable offence? She should be taken aside and told that it is not proper to engage civil servants in conversations which could compromise them
I don't think asking a question can in any way be considered a sackable offence. Interestingly, those who consider that it is a sackable offence seem to be the ones that wanted Braverman to be sacked anyway.
The allegation is not that she asked a question, it's that she asked civil servants to do something, and in so doing she broke the Ministerial Code:
"Suella Braverman asked Home Office civil servants to help her avoid a speeding fine and points on her licence by arranging a private one-to-one driving awareness course"
I think this paragraph is very skewed.
As I understand it, she had a choice between points or a course. She merely tried to get a private rather than public course.
Her mistake was to ask Civil Servants at all. Doubly inappropriate for a Home Secretary.
At least two clear breaches of the Ministerial Code:
5.1 Ministers must uphold the political impartiality of the Civil Service, and not ask civil servants to act in any way which would conflict with the Civil Service Code...
7.1 Ministers must ensure that no conflict arises, or could reasonably be perceived to arise, between their public duties and their private interests, financial or otherwise.
I disagree
5.1 is arguable. Perhaps a scheduling or security issue? Yes there were personal political benefits but we don’t know if she stated those as a reason. All she asked for was the civil service to look into it. They declined so she asked a spad. That happens all the time.
7.1 where’s the conflict? She was convicted and given a choice of punishment like everyone else. She asked if it was possible to do it privately (perhaps marginally favourable treatment but not a conflict). It was not possible so she took the points instead.
On topic. No this isn’t a sacking. Exploring if she could avoid appearing with the plebs like a common criminal herself is a fair ask and exploration, a lots being made of no big deal in my opinion, just like with Boris she’s marmite, means opponents big things up far too much.
In yes minister Jim gets away with drink driving by showing the police his ministerial pass or something, and later asks why the Home Secretary couldn’t have got away with it too, but it turned out the HomeSec was unfortunate to have crashed into a train carrying nuclear waste.
In today's shock news, Tory Rabbit defends a Tory
I took it that MoonRabbit was embracing irony somewhat.
No. I’m with Gardenwalker, this is getting bigged up too much because she is party political enemy number 1. In terms of scandal, sleaze and corruption, it’s not even in the same pond as the dodgy covid contracts for example, loans for BBC chairmanships is far worse than this too, bullying civil servants by throwing fruit at them is worse than this too etc etc
The dodgy UK incomes destroying FTA’s this government is signing is proper scandal, as is the sewage being pumped into rivers and coastlines.
Rather missing the point. She's part of a government responsible for all that - but they're hardly going to resign en masse. It's precisely the petty personal stuff that's fatal, as it doesn't touch the rest of the crew.
Amis was a heavy smoker, but still shocking news. Someone one always thought of as of the younger generation.
An extraordinarily vivid writer. As distinctive as Anthony Burgess of whom he wrote a famous account in one of his books of essays. Very sad to think that there won't be any more books from him unless something comes out posthumously.
I don't think I've enjoyed any novel more than I did Money. It had me in absolute stitches.
Yes, the bit about wanting to go for a pee at the opera had me floating around the kitchen in a kind of trance, it was that funny.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
Yep I did. You get a choice whether to take the point or attend the course. I had such an option myself. I attended the course. If she is so up herself to attend a course with others then take the points, which she eventually did. She wanted to avoid the points and have special treatment regarding the course and tried to abuse her position to do so. She should be fired.
Is talking about the possibilities a sackable offence? She should be taken aside and told that it is not proper to engage civil servants in conversations which could compromise them
I don't think asking a question can in any way be considered a sackable offence. Interestingly, those who consider that it is a sackable offence seem to be the ones that wanted Braverman to be sacked anyway.
The allegation is not that she asked a question, it's that she asked civil servants to do something, and in so doing she broke the Ministerial Code:
"Suella Braverman asked Home Office civil servants to help her avoid a speeding fine and points on her licence by arranging a private one-to-one driving awareness course"
I think this paragraph is very skewed.
As I understand it, she had a choice between points or a course. She merely tried to get a private rather than public course.
Her mistake was to ask Civil Servants at all. Doubly inappropriate for a Home Secretary.
But I maintain this not necessarily sackable.
I agree . She should however be nowhere any cabinet given her past behaviour.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
Yep I did. You get a choice whether to take the point or attend the course. I had such an option myself. I attended the course. If she is so up herself to attend a course with others then take the points, which she eventually did. She wanted to avoid the points and have special treatment regarding the course and tried to abuse her position to do so. She should be fired.
Is talking about the possibilities a sackable offence? She should be taken aside and told that it is not proper to engage civil servants in conversations which could compromise them
I don't think asking a question can in any way be considered a sackable offence. Interestingly, those who consider that it is a sackable offence seem to be the ones that wanted Braverman to be sacked anyway.
The allegation is not that she asked a question, it's that she asked civil servants to do something, and in so doing she broke the Ministerial Code:
"Suella Braverman asked Home Office civil servants to help her avoid a speeding fine and points on her licence by arranging a private one-to-one driving awareness course"
If she has to resign over this it'll be like Al Capone finally going down for tax evasion.
At least two clear breaches of the Ministerial Code:
5.1 Ministers must uphold the political impartiality of the Civil Service, and not ask civil servants to act in any way which would conflict with the Civil Service Code...
7.1 Ministers must ensure that no conflict arises, or could reasonably be perceived to arise, between their public duties and their private interests, financial or otherwise.
I disagree
5.1 is arguable. Perhaps a scheduling or security issue? Yes there were personal political benefits but we don’t know if she stated those as a reason. All she asked for was the civil service to look into it. They declined so she asked a spad. That happens all the time.
7.1 where’s the conflict? She was convicted and given a choice of punishment like everyone else. She asked if it was possible to do it privately (perhaps marginally favourable treatment but not a conflict). It was not possible so she took the points instead.
Again, according to the Times tweet:
"Suella Braverman asked Home Office civil servants to help her avoid a speeding fine and points on her licence by arranging a private one-to-one driving awareness course"
5.1 You say 'all she asked was for the civil service to look into it'. The Times' Harry Yorke says she asked them to arrange it. I'm assuming he's right unless you have better information?
7.1 It's clearly to her personal political advantage to arrange a private course that no one else knows about. As it happens I have a course coming up in a couple of weeks, I don't think I am likely to be offered the option of a private course.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
Yep I did. You get a choice whether to take the point or attend the course. I had such an option myself. I attended the course. If she is so up herself to attend a course with others then take the points, which she eventually did. She wanted to avoid the points and have special treatment regarding the course and tried to abuse her position to do so. She should be fired.
Is talking about the possibilities a sackable offence? She should be taken aside and told that it is not proper to engage civil servants in conversations which could compromise them
Really? She is the Home Secretary. She should know better.
Is talking about it sackable? Yes, because it wasn't hypothetical. It was something she wanted to do, and presumably would have done so if either individual concerned had knuckled under from being put under pressure by the Home Secretary or her Spad. This must have been intimidating for those concerned.
I mean is she really that stupid not to realise this was wrong because she was asking for treatment that others could not have and that those she was asking would be conflicted?
At least two clear breaches of the Ministerial Code:
5.1 Ministers must uphold the political impartiality of the Civil Service, and not ask civil servants to act in any way which would conflict with the Civil Service Code...
7.1 Ministers must ensure that no conflict arises, or could reasonably be perceived to arise, between their public duties and their private interests, financial or otherwise.
I disagree
5.1 is arguable. Perhaps a scheduling or security issue? Yes there were personal political benefits but we don’t know if she stated those as a reason. All she asked for was the civil service to look into it. They declined so she asked a spad. That happens all the time.
7.1 where’s the conflict? She was convicted and given a choice of punishment like everyone else. She asked if it was possible to do it privately (perhaps marginally favourable treatment but not a conflict). It was not possible so she took the points instead.
There's no security issue with an online course.
You don't think there's a potential conflict of interest between asking for special treatment in a prosecution and superintending the CPS? You can't think of any adverse circumstances that might flow from that?
Botanic ward 1 Alliance excluded at Stage 9 1 Alliance, 2 Sinners and 1 Green left for 3 seats 1 Alliance, 1 Sinn Fein and 1 Green likely to be elected based on the numbers so far
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
Yep I did. You get a choice whether to take the point or attend the course. I had such an option myself. I attended the course. If she is so up herself to attend a course with others then take the points, which she eventually did. She wanted to avoid the points and have special treatment regarding the course and tried to abuse her position to do so. She should be fired.
Is talking about the possibilities a sackable offence? She should be taken aside and told that it is not proper to engage civil servants in conversations which could compromise them
I don't think asking a question can in any way be considered a sackable offence. Interestingly, those who consider that it is a sackable offence seem to be the ones that wanted Braverman to be sacked anyway.
The allegation is not that she asked a question, it's that she asked civil servants to do something, and in so doing she broke the Ministerial Code:
"Suella Braverman asked Home Office civil servants to help her avoid a speeding fine and points on her licence by arranging a private one-to-one driving awareness course"
If she has to resign over this it'll be like Al Capone finally going down for tax evasion.
Once again, this is showing the problem of trying to police ministerial behaviour by a written code. It creates a sense that, if it's not explicitly and unambiguously forbidden in the code, it's fine. The same thinking that it's OK to do cartwheels across the quad, because the sign just says "do not walk on the grass". Whilst Boris was a master of that attitude, it didn't start with him, or with Brexit, or with the long Conservative government. But now is when the pan is boiling over.
The reality is, if the reports of Braverman's behaviour are correct, she has brought shame and disgrace on the government she is part of. That ought to be enough for her to tender her resignation.
At this point it's not a question of whether she broke the rules. We all know she will have done.
Keir Starmer really has got to clean up public life, it's an all time low.
Chris Huhne gives Starmer a perfect basis to press this one home. I know the cases aren’t exactly comparable, but it creates some sort of precedent.
Chris Huhne committed perjury.
They are in no way comparable
They are because the motives are exactly the same. Where they do differ is the actions taken were different and perjury is far more serious, but nobody is asking that she be sent to prison. However there are consequences in abusing your position.
The original mistake was putting Braverman back in the Home Office in the first place.
I get it, Rishi was rewarding her for her support. But he didn't have to give her the same position as before, which not only looked stupid after only a week, but was risky when she was a ticking timb bomb.
ConHome's survey of party members had rated her fifth from bottom at the time, so it is not the case that she was super popular and he needed to mollify that wing by keeping her in post - he could have mollified that wing with someone willing to be just as hardcore in rhetoric on immigration, which I doubt would have been a challenge, and given her DHLUC or something.
Amis was a heavy smoker, but still shocking news. Someone one always thought of as of the younger generation.
An extraordinarily vivid writer. As distinctive as Anthony Burgess of whom he wrote a famous account in one of his books of essays. Very sad to think that there won't be any more books from him unless something comes out posthumously.
I don't think I've enjoyed any novel more than I did Money. It had me in absolute stitches.
Yes, the bit about wanting to go for a pee at the opera had me floating around the kitchen in a kind of trance, it was that funny.
Lol yes. One of so many virtuoso scenes. "Garfield". The tennis match. "That was a long piece of New York". Every page a total delight. Funny, dark, true, moving, beautifully constructed, just a stone cold killer of a book.
Can someone clarify whether (1) she asked for advice on whether a 1-2-1 course was possible or (2) she asked civil servants to help facilitate one? I’m getting both from the comments on here
Looks like she toast - it's obviously coordinated from No 10:
Someone in central office has decided to press the button this evening. They had the speeding story for weeks I reckon. Suella was getting too big for her boots.
Can someone clarify whether (1) she asked for advice on whether a 1-2-1 course was possible or (2) she asked civil servants to help facilitate one? I’m getting both from the comments on here
It's the latter according to Harry Yorke's tweet in the header.
Looks like she toast - it's obviously coordinated from No 10:
Someone in central office has decided to press the button this evening. They had the speeding story for weeks I reckon. Suella was getting too big for her boots.
Surely true. Sunak must feel he has no choice but to get rid of her if he is going to pull a Major.
How fast was Braverman going when she was caught speeding? I don't know the exact proportions, but I am reasonably sure that more than 99 percent of American drivers have driven over our speed limits*.
(*Including me, and years ago I picked up two speeding tickets to prove it. In both instances, I think I was driving safely, perhaps 10 miles over the speed limit on an uncrowded highway.)
The speeding is not the issue; the issue is trying to influence, and asking civil servants to influence, the way her speeding offence was dealt with.
Why didn't she just take the points to begin with? Does she have points already, is the question...
Even if she has, so what. I raised this on the last thread. This is Chris Huhne all over again. Even if banned due to points accumulated both can/could afford alternative transportation. The evasion just digs a bigger hole, if and when it goes pear-shaped. Stupid. Take the points and if necessary a ban and suck it up.
If you read the tweet you'll see that her problem was this: she would have to attend an in-person course with other motorists, or an online one where her name and face would be visible to other participants
Yep I did. You get a choice whether to take the point or attend the course. I had such an option myself. I attended the course. If she is so up herself to attend a course with others then take the points, which she eventually did. She wanted to avoid the points and have special treatment regarding the course and tried to abuse her position to do so. She should be fired.
Is talking about the possibilities a sackable offence? She should be taken aside and told that it is not proper to engage civil servants in conversations which could compromise them
I don't think asking a question can in any way be considered a sackable offence. Interestingly, those who consider that it is a sackable offence seem to be the ones that wanted Braverman to be sacked anyway.
The allegation is not that she asked a question, it's that she asked civil servants to do something, and in so doing she broke the Ministerial Code:
"Suella Braverman asked Home Office civil servants to help her avoid a speeding fine and points on her licence by arranging a private one-to-one driving awareness course"
If she has to resign over this it'll be like Al Capone finally going down for tax evasion.
The reality is, if the reports of Braverman's behaviour are correct, she has brought shame and disgrace on the government she is part of. That ought to be enough for her to tender her resignation.
Ahahahahahaha. Sorry. Ahem. Ahahahaha. The very idea anyone in government might think the same was too much for me to take in.
But being serious, your point about the problems of written codes is a well made one, and something worth bearing in mind when people do try to adopt more prescriptive standards regimes. Some want light touch codes (where they cannot get no code whatsoever) intentionally to avoid censure, but others, in trying to be more explicit can run the risk of the type of argument you outline, where people argue it is not specifically mentioned and so is fine, because by the nature of starting to list things if anything is then left out, which it will be, that 'must' have been the intention. Of course it usually wasn't, and I don't think the answer is an easy one, but it's worth bearing in mind.
Can someone clarify whether (1) she asked for advice on whether a 1-2-1 course was possible or (2) she asked civil servants to help facilitate one? I’m getting both from the comments on here
Given that it's unlikely her request/enquiry was transcribed or recorded, we're unlikely to get that clarification. All we know is that it didn't happen.
Can someone clarify whether (1) she asked for advice on whether a 1-2-1 course was possible or (2) she asked civil servants to help facilitate one? I’m getting both from the comments on here
Given that it's unlikely her request/enquiry was transcribed or recorded, we're unlikely to get that clarification. All we know is that it didn't happen.
Looks like she toast - it's obviously coordinated from No 10:
Someone in central office has decided to press the button this evening. They had the speeding story for weeks I reckon. Suella was getting too big for her boots.
Maybe, but it's not much of a way to corral someone, is it? I mean, there was talk in the last week that Braverman wanted to get fired or resign so she could set herself up for a future contest.
If she went now over this it's not like a minor driving offence (and actions around it) are going to bother those who think she has the right attitude on migrants and woke liberal Sunak does not. As mwadams notes, that means she is not much diminished, nor her positions, and instead just wrathful.
So for all of those defending her why couldn't she:
a) Just take the points if she didn't want to attend the course
b) Just attend the course. She probably wouldn't be recognised anyway and if so, so what. If she got offered a course she was borderline anyway. Nobody cares. Rishi is collecting trivial offences like there is no tomorrow and nobody cares
Can someone clarify whether (1) she asked for advice on whether a 1-2-1 course was possible or (2) she asked civil servants to help facilitate one? I’m getting both from the comments on here
Given that it's unlikely her request/enquiry was transcribed or recorded, we're unlikely to get that clarification. All we know is that it didn't happen.
Unless she emailed it of course. Stupid but...
Emails can get you in trouble but they can also cover your arse.
So for all of those defending her why couldn't she:
a) Just take the points if she didn't want to attend the course
b) Just attend the course. She probably wouldn't be recognised anyway and if so, so what. If she got offered a course she was borderline anyway. Nobody cares. Rishi is collecting trivial offences like there is no tomorrow and nobody cares
So for all of those defending her why couldn't she:
a) Just take the points if she didn't want to attend the course
b) Just attend the course. She probably wouldn't be recognised anyway and if so, so what. If she got offered a course she was borderline anyway. Nobody cares. Rishi is collecting trivial offences like there is no tomorrow and nobody cares
So for all of those defending her why couldn't she:
a) Just take the points if she didn't want to attend the course
b) Just attend the course. She probably wouldn't be recognised anyway and if so, so what. If she got offered a course she was borderline anyway. Nobody cares. Rishi is collecting trivial offences like there is no tomorrow and nobody cares
Umm .. she did take the points when it was clear the alternative was unpalatable to her. I fail to see the story here
So for all of those defending her why couldn't she:
a) Just take the points if she didn't want to attend the course
b) Just attend the course. She probably wouldn't be recognised anyway and if so, so what. If she got offered a course she was borderline anyway. Nobody cares. Rishi is collecting trivial offences like there is no tomorrow and nobody cares
It'd take a really unusual member of the public to particularly care if a politician got some points on their licence for speeding. I guess being Home Secretary Labour might have had a go of it, or if it was a PCC candidate, but loads of people will have been there - you get pinged, you pay a fine and you move on.
Could have been worse, at least there was no going full Huhne.
So for all of those defending her why couldn't she:
a) Just take the points if she didn't want to attend the course
b) Just attend the course. She probably wouldn't be recognised anyway and if so, so what. If she got offered a course she was borderline anyway. Nobody cares. Rishi is collecting trivial offences like there is no tomorrow and nobody cares
Makes no sense to me at all. Getting a speeding ticket is no big scandal. Why on earth try and cover it up?
Comments
Honestly, what a bunch of fucktards. They don't seem to have the least understanding of the sport they're meant to be running.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=J1u42p4rN-g
Although to be honest, the guy was over 18.
I wouldn’t call that grooming.
Often brilliant, if sometimes a bit too conscious of his brilliance.
(“Sam! No pissy biscuits!”)
Anything above 2/10 is a resignation/sacking issue imo.
SF 141 seats
DUP 120
Alliance 65
UUP 53
SDLP 39
Independents 19
Traditional Unionist Voice 8
Greens 3
People Before Profit 1
Progressive Unionist Party 1
Seats left: 12 (19 in Belfast and 3 in Causeway Coast)
Couseway Coast
1 seat between DUP and TUV
2 seats to be filled with DUP, TUV, FS, Alliance and SDLP left in the race
Belfast
In Botanic...3 seats to be filled with 2 SF, 2 Alliance and 1 Green left
In Collin...1 seat to be filled with People Before Profit, SDLP, Aontú and Alliance left
In Odlpark....3 seats to be filled with 2 SF and 2 DUP left
In Ormiston...2 seats left with 2 UUP and 1 Green in the race
It’s a just a loon-encrusted shit-show.
Home Secretary Suella Braverman asked on her first day as an MP whether she could claim a speeding ticket incurred during the course of Parliamentary duties on expenses - meaning taxpayers would fund it - a Conservative MP has claimed.
William Wragg, MP for Hazel Grove in Greater Manchester, recalled the incident in posts on social media last night in which he described the 'lamentable hopelessness of the Home Secretary'.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12001971/Home-Secretary-Suella-Braverman-asked-speeding-ticket-claimed-expenses.html
A cross between a spacesuit and 2001, or a headline from outer space, and on the other hand, as mentioned, some sort of more innocent childhood fantasy with Winnie-the-Pooh.
b) If she decided to attend the course, so what - she could have turned it to her advantage, promoting the awareness courses.
It's the same old "one rule for us" attitude.
1 DUP
1 Alliance
1 TUV Causeway Coast and Glens finished now
1 TUV
and
1 DUP and 1 Alliance
Just imagine the boost of adding 4.0% to GDP.
What sort of idiocy flushes that down the toilet only then to go around the world begging for scraps from the buffet table !
I'm interested in anything lovely Kemi has to say...
When she's PM in 2030 remember GIN was one of the first to tip her on PB (I'll probably be pushing up daises by then so won't be around to remind you myself)
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/explore/public_figure/Kemi_Badenoch?content=all
Not very high, but showing no evidence of recent damage either.
I agree that Brexit uncovers more deep seated problems.
In that sense Brexit is a bit like the Schofield-Willoughby falling out.
"Suella Braverman asked Home Office civil servants to help her avoid a speeding fine and points on her licence by arranging a private one-to-one driving awareness course"
As I understand it, she had a choice between points or a course. She merely tried to get a private rather than public course.
Her mistake was to ask Civil Servants at all.
Doubly inappropriate for a Home Secretary.
But I maintain this not necessarily sackable.
5.1 is arguable. Perhaps a scheduling or security issue? Yes there were personal political benefits but we don’t know if she stated those as a reason. All she asked for was the civil service to look into it. They declined so she asked a spad. That happens all the time.
7.1 where’s the conflict? She was convicted and given a choice of punishment like everyone else. She asked if it was possible to do it privately (perhaps marginally favourable treatment but not a conflict). It was not possible so she took the points instead.
She's part of a government responsible for all that - but they're hardly going to resign en masse. It's precisely the petty personal stuff that's fatal, as it doesn't touch the rest of the crew.
I think it’s touch and go whether the party still exists as a meaningful electoral force by the following election.
I’d hypothetically price it up as;
Conservative Party MPs on 1/1/2031:
326+ 4/1
226-325 4/1
126-225 4/1
26-125 4/1
0-25 4/1
…and I recon the value would be on 0-25.
They are in no way comparable
"Suella Braverman asked Home Office civil servants to help her avoid a speeding fine and points on her licence by arranging a private one-to-one driving awareness course"
5.1 You say 'all she asked was for the civil service to look into it'. The Times' Harry Yorke says she asked them to arrange it. I'm assuming he's right unless you have better information?
7.1 It's clearly to her personal political advantage to arrange a private course that no one else knows about. As it happens I have a course coming up in a couple of weeks, I don't think I am likely to be offered the option of a private course.
Is talking about it sackable? Yes, because it wasn't hypothetical. It was something she wanted to do, and presumably would have done so if either individual concerned had knuckled under from being put under pressure by the Home Secretary or her Spad. This must have been intimidating for those concerned.
I mean is she really that stupid not to realise this was wrong because she was asking for treatment that others could not have and that those she was asking would be conflicted?
You don't think there's a potential conflict of interest between asking for special treatment in a prosecution and superintending the CPS? You can't think of any adverse circumstances that might flow from that?
1 Alliance excluded at Stage 9
1 Alliance, 2 Sinners and 1 Green left for 3 seats
1 Alliance, 1 Sinn Fein and 1 Green likely to be elected based on the numbers so far
The reality is, if the reports of Braverman's behaviour are correct, she has brought shame and disgrace on the government she is part of. That ought to be enough for her to tender her resignation.
I get it, Rishi was rewarding her for her support. But he didn't have to give her the same position as before, which not only looked stupid after only a week, but was risky when she was a ticking timb bomb.
ConHome's survey of party members had rated her fifth from bottom at the time, so it is not the case that she was super popular and he needed to mollify that wing by keeping her in post - he could have mollified that wing with someone willing to be just as hardcore in rhetoric on immigration, which I doubt would have been a challenge, and given her DHLUC or something.
If he's wrong Braverman could sue the Times.
Sunak must feel he has no choice but to get rid of her if he is going to pull a Major.
But being serious, your point about the problems of written codes is a well made one, and something worth bearing in mind when people do try to adopt more prescriptive standards regimes. Some want light touch codes (where they cannot get no code whatsoever) intentionally to avoid censure, but others, in trying to be more explicit can run the risk of the type of argument you outline, where people argue it is not specifically mentioned and so is fine, because by the nature of starting to list things if anything is then left out, which it will be, that 'must' have been the intention. Of course it usually wasn't, and I don't think the answer is an easy one, but it's worth bearing in mind.
Which means a seething mass of spite and revenge on the backbenches.
If she went now over this it's not like a minor driving offence (and actions around it) are going to bother those who think she has the right attitude on migrants and woke liberal Sunak does not. As mwadams notes, that means she is not much diminished, nor her positions, and instead just wrathful.
1 DUP and 1 SF elected
Last seat likely to go SF too
a) Just take the points if she didn't want to attend the course
b) Just attend the course. She probably wouldn't be recognised anyway and if so, so what. If she got offered a course she was borderline anyway. Nobody cares. Rishi is collecting trivial offences like there is no tomorrow and nobody cares
Could have been worse, at least there was no going full Huhne.