Boris has been fined - Tory voters, should he go?

[NewYorker80]

Both Johnson and Sunak have received fines for the lockdown parties. No further details as yet.

Do any Conservative voters here think Boris should resign?

People who feel strongly and have Tory MPs need to get writing those letters and emails then. The last thing MPs want is bulging postbags telling them that they won't be voted for.

Don't forget it wasn't many months ago that they all rallied round Owen Paterson, oh no, he didn't really do anything wrong, blah, blah. In the end he had to resign and the seat has been won by a LibDem. Whereas if the Tory MPs had all kept their mouths shut, and Paterson had taken his 30 day suspension, he would still be an MP.

I read that Claudine - I think the suggestion is that it was misheard or a mistranslation - should be fixed penalty fines, not six.
I don't know whether that's been confirmed.

That's odd isn't it, reported last night on 'euro news' but nowhere else.

'I think the suggestion is that it was misheard or a mistranslation - should be fixed penalty fines, not six.'

Ah.

@Peregrina

Could we ask what laws can be broken with impunity, because we don't feel like obeying them?

With specific regard to Johnson - are there any laws he is not above? If he killed someone with drunk-driving would that be OK?

Like the speed limit? Every single day the motorways are full of cars doing 80 miles an hour. No one thinks anything of it. People work longer hours than allowed by law, people buy drink and cigarettes under age, people use their driving insurance instead of buying a policy separately for their children.

A penalty fine in unusual circumstances is nothing like the same as killing someone. But you know that.

@Cornettoninja

I can never understand why interviewers don't challenge his defenders about this

Honestly @ancientgran? (Imho of course) bullshit baffles brains.

This cabinet have tied everyone in knots with excuses and whataboutary that a relatively simple debate has been turned into a fiasco. Note that they do not give a shit that there are more important things going on in the country - they’re happy for this bs to rage on and on as long as they come out on top. All this ‘getting on with it’ is diversion - they know that’s not possible whilst we’re all distracted by their clown show, they don’t care though because while we’re looking at this fuck up we’re not paying attention to their other fuck ups.

We’re all playing by different rules; integrity can no longer be relied upon to have the final say. Boris and his cabinet are brazen and aren’t abiding by the etiquette and culture we’ve come to take for granted in Westminster.

It was playing fair to call for the police to investigate, then that only happened under pressure, and now we’re in a position that the police have found wrong doing (Grays report hasn’t even hit yet) and that is minimised.

More and more outlandish excuses and flimsy reasons are held up as justifications and people (me included) get drawn into countering the preposterous instead of sticking to the basic foundation.

Yes you're right.

I think I hark back to people like Richard Dimbleby and Robin Day who seemed much sharper than the people we get today. Or is that just rose tinted glasses? Or maybe they had more freedom to say what they wanted then, no threats of defunding the BBC.

Maybe @ancientgran, I think there’s been a fundamental shift in society though I can’t quite put my finger on it. At a guess it’s a mixture of the internet/technology and the ‘emperors new clothes’ (by that I mean the ease in which you can lead a conversation if you’re not bound by convention) entering onto the playing field.

Some of its cyclical though. I’ve posted this pic before but I’ve never seen a strong argument against it.

I don't know why this so hard to understand.

We weren't supposed to gather in groups of more than two people - unless necessary for the purposes of employment.

30 people plus events staff and official photographer gathering for a birthday celebration seems to be very obviously outside the legislation.

Johnson should have owned up fast in November and it would have been brushed away. Instead he's lied repeatedly, mislead Parliament, and failed to correct the record.

If they (the Cabinet) didn't agree with the legislation they should not have introduced it.

@Notonthestairs

I read that Claudine - I think the suggestion is that it was misheard or a mistranslation - should be fixed penalty fines, not six. I don't know whether that's been confirmed.

Oh that would explain it!

Janille can you please answer the question you've been asked umpteen times about whether you really do believe it's a work event when his spouse attended and was fined for attending - considering she doesn't work there!

I respect you have a differing view but it would make a better debate if you'd be willing to engage in discussion when challenged like we give you the respect to do.

'can you please answer the question you've been asked umpteen times about whether you really do believe it's a work event when his spouse attended'

Oh I've answered this umpteen times maybe not on this thread but many others.

She lives there. In the same building, not the cabinet office obviously. I mean yes rule wise she was not allowed but I can see how if she lived there it wasn't seen an issue. For this 9min work non event.

Johnson should have owned up fast in November and it would have been brushed away. Instead he's lied repeatedly, mislead Parliament, and failed to correct the record

I honestly think he imagined he would just get away with it because he's got away with so much more.
If it wasn't for pressure being applied, there would not even have been an investigation.

Robert Peston says he has been told it was not 10 minutes. It was 30 minutes that he attended for.
I imagine he has the ear of some.

people use their driving insurance instead of buying a policy separately for their children.

Well, let's hope they don't have or cause an accident then. I know no one who has done this, unless you mean adding your child to your insurance as a named driver which is legal.

She lives there. In the same building, not the cabinet office obviously. I mean yes rule wise she was not allowed but I can see how if she lived there it wasn't seen an issue. For this 9min work non event

Now that's just ridiculous lol, and well you know it!

How do you explain the interior decorator? She doesn't live there.

See above. Possibly not '9min'

Morally, yes.

I mean yes rule wise she was not allowed

Not rule, law.

And that’s the only perspective that matters surely? ‘I see how’s’ aren’t relevant.

He's a scumbag with a long history of lies.

Also looks like he's got a bit of a coke nose too.

Yes he needs to go.

He won't though, we are struck with these tossers and they know it.

What I don't understand is....

People saying "was just a few drinks and some cake". Yes, for all intents and purposes it was just that. Not allowed, 9 minutes blah blah.
But that's not Johnson's view. Because when his staff were found having a few drinks and some cheese, he said he was "furious", ordered a cabinet office inquiry and accepted their resignations. Stratton resigned when she didn't even attend anything!

Robert Peston says he has been told it was not 10 minutes. It was 30 minutes that he attended for

Honestly the timings are only important to people looking to excuse this. Ten or thirty minutes makes no difference to the public being lied to for months and the legal outcome, it only makes a difference to those who can’t see an issue with having a serving prime minister found to have acted illegally and incapable of following the very law he signed off on and who thinks lying is acceptable.

If you’re just getting going, here’s a digest of how the police concluded Boris Johnson broke the law and how his previous assurances on lockdown parties turned out not to be true. The PM now says he didn’t realise he was breaking the rules in June 2020.

twitter.com/bbcrosatkins/status/1514122306888548352?s=21

@Roussette

What I don't understand is....

People saying "was just a few drinks and some cake". Yes, for all intents and purposes it was just that. Not allowed, 9 minutes blah blah.
But that's not Johnson's view. Because when his staff were found having a few drinks and some cheese, he said he was "furious", ordered a cabinet office inquiry and accepted their resignations. Stratton resigned when she didn't even attend anything!

Oh what a tangled web we weave eh?

And the Line of Duty one

twitter.com/jed_mercurio/status/1514140372880007169?s=21

@JaniieJones

'can you please answer the question you've been asked umpteen times about whether you really do believe it's a work event when his spouse attended'

Oh I've answered this umpteen times maybe not on this thread but many others.

She lives there. In the same building, not the cabinet office obviously. I mean yes rule wise she was not allowed but I can see how if she lived there it wasn't seen an issue. For this 9min work non event.

They both broke the law, its as simple as that.

Can't really see why you are defending them and belittling the time spent at this birthday party, unless you think laws in this country do not matter, which considering how much support BJ has, explains why we have so much anti social behavior in this country, people like you pick n mix which laws to obey.

Consider also, BJ praised the young child who went without her birthday celebration, whilst he, a fat privileged slug of a man had his party, so he certainly is a total hypocrite.

'Johnson should have owned up fast in November'

It was published in the Times in 2020! BJ had cake in the cabinet office for his birthday. As it was public knowledge he possibly thought there wasn't anything to 'own up' to.

@JaniieJones

'can you please answer the question you've been asked umpteen times about whether you really do believe it's a work event when his spouse attended'

Oh I've answered this umpteen times maybe not on this thread but many others.

She lives there. In the same building, not the cabinet office obviously. I mean yes rule wise she was not allowed but I can see how if she lived there it wasn't seen an issue. For this 9min work non event.

You admit yourself then she doesn't live in the office.

I live in the same building as my neighbours (flats) but we couldn't meet up. Technically no different.

We could T cross bubbles and classes in schools.

NHS staff couldn't mix wards.

It's a very loose argument to think because she lives in a flat on one floor of a huge government department she can mix outside the law without being held accountable anywhere within that building.

I'd also question security if she's wandering freely around whilst he's supposedly having work meetings which I'm sure contain confidential information.