Partygate

Wrong on two counts:
1. They never had to be parties - any gathering above the maximum number permitted was unlawful.

2. They actually were parties

 

Labour should be begging for Boris to stay in power until the next GE, if they can’t win with that clown in charge doing even more damage to the tories by the day then they all want to face a firing squad and be never allowed to run for election again!

A pig dressed in red should win the next GE, what an absolute farce this country is.

 

Mark Harper was on the TV saying there are plenty of decent people in the Tory party who could lead them to win the next election. He also pointed out that getting minister to go out and face the music might work for Boris but backbenchers, especially in marginal seats are unlike to do the same, as they are not on the "payroll".

This happens in all walks of life, when someone feels they have been hard done to they break ranks and put their side of the story across. Be it a football player under a manager they feel they have been hard done to, clearly up to junior Civil servants at Westminster.

The junior staff have run off to the BBC because they have been fined for working in an establishment where all this was given the OK by people higher up the food chain who appear to have got away scott free. It is no surprise that in these circumstances these people have started to sing.

Boris's plan from the start was to have Simon Case whitewash an investigation, but as Simon Case was present at these breaches it fell to Sue Gray, who appears to have had various obstacles put in her way, including now being asked not to go with the report on the basis the Police have already done theirs.

At this stage it really isn't about what was done and when, what rules were broken and if they were technically parties. It's the fact the PM of this country feels no reason to be truthful with what happened.

Remember the Christmas gathering in the Department for Education? Well it happened but it's not talked about because they put their hands up, accepted they shouldn't have done it, apologised and moved on. Boris has not made one apology that he actually meant nor has he been honest at any step about what happened.

This shitshow still rumbles on because of his attempts to cover it up and kick it down the road. We really should be focusing on other things but we will have another day at Westminster if not week taken up by all this just as news that heat and light prices will be likely to go up another £850 a year come October.

 

An apology isn't really an apology when you walk into the 1922 committee show absolutely no remorse at what you said in the commons earlier. Various Tories like Steve Baker have said they were willing to accept that apology until it was clear from the actions of Boris that he didn't mean a word of it.

The oldest of those stories was 6+ weeks after the story broke and 5+ week after Alegra Stratton had resigned. The Depn of Education apology was as soon as it came to light.

 

Is there anyone inside the Tory party who wants Johnson gone? You would have thought if someone was wanting to take the mantle they would have made themselves known by now. All it looks like at the moment is some Tories are being vocal against Johnson just to curry favour with their constituents making sure their positions are safe.

Even Philip Davies has made it known he opposes what Johnson has done with his eye on re-election on Shipley rather than any desire to see Johnson replaced.

I'm from the same school of thought as you, I opposed these measure, questioned what the hell was the science behind rubbish like cloth masks, rule of 6, not being able to see people in gardens in one BD postcode but being ok in another.

Clearly those in power knew this was all bollocks and that raises a smile for me to see those who wanted such daft rules being tied up in knots from all political sides for breaking them.

 

You have a very weird perspective on this. You seem obsessed about the 'original ideas', as though situations can't develop beyond what is originally reported.

Who says no one cared at the time? That's not my experience at all. From the point that these gatherings were first reported, many people have been saying 'it's disgraceful', 'one rule for us and another for them' etc.

When were they reported and no one cared? You may not have cared, but lots of people did, especially those who had weddings cancelled (as both my kids did), couldn't hold normal funerals or birthday celebrations on significant birthdays (as my wife couldn't), etc, etc.

Whether or not these things were 'proper parties' (to use your phrase) is irrelevant. The question is, were there social (ie not work) gatherings that exceeded the permitted number of people at the time they happened? If there were, they were illegal. The fact that some of them actually were obviously parties merely rubs salt into the wounds, but it's not the primary issue.

Of course the media have called it 'Partygate' - because they always want a snappy name for any scandal - but it's not the fact of being a party that's the point; it's the fact that there were regular unlawful gatherings that broke the rules which they had imposed on the rest of us.

 

Damn right I do.

It has confirmed that there was serial law-breaking at the heart of government - that whilst the vast majority of the population were diligently obeying draconian rules, the people telling us to comply were taking the piss out of us plebs.
The only problem with it is that it hasn't gone far enough. It's blatantly obvious that the Met has shied away from issuing further fixed penalties to Johnson for events that he clearly attended where others have been fined. Also the Abba party in his flat and the garden event with the cheese and wine have been excluded for no obvious reason.
The Met bottled it, so it's a partial whitewash. But it absolutely should have happened.

 

It’s no coincidence that Sajid Javid’s brother was the senior Met Officer assigned to oversee the Partygate investigations.

 

But the way those two things were reported in those screenshots gives no clue about what was really happening. The impression is given that these were just two minute occurrences while people were sitting at their desks going about their normal work.

People only didn't care because the circumstances were massively underplayed in those reports. Once it became clear that they involved people who didn't work there, booze, significant periods of time and were part of a much bigger culture of social events, when such things were banned, then people started caring. Had people been aware of the full circumstances at the time then they most certainly would have cared about it.

 

Really? Wow. Have you got a link for that?

 

Just google Sajid Javid’s brother.

 

Oh FFS. Stopping work at your desk for a couple of minutes while the PM delivers a quick farewell to someone is one thing. But that's not what happened. We now know that there were 30+ people in a room that was so crowded that some people were sitting on laps; there were assorted bottles of alcohol; that the PM was there for 20 minutes and led the toasts, and that this was part of a regular Friday night drink culture that had nack-all to do with bonafide work.
All of that is very different from an isolated occurrence of having a quick beer with a curry during a meal break from working through the evening.
Your dislike of the rules that were imposed appears to make you blind to the obvious and systematic lawbreaking that was going on for months and the obvious differences between that and what happened in Durham.