Thread 24, Sunak and the local elections aftermath

[DuncinToffee]

Previous thread

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/4793978-thread-23-sunak-unicorn-kingdom?page=1

The apostrophe shouldn’t be there at all.

Am I lost with this story?

I thought a few days ago the cabinet office gave this info to the police?

How did they manage that if they don't have the info and are saying they'd have to request it?

And if it's different info what info did they give the police?

Confused 🤯

I think everyone is confused because the story makes no sense.

As far as I can fathom the Cab Office gave 'some messages' to the inquiry in the last couple of weeks. Then the inquiry said 'where's the rest of them? You need to give us all of them.'
Then the Cab Office said 'we're not giving you the other ones, they're not relevant anyway.'
The inquiry then said 'we'll be the judge of that, hand them over by 4pm Tuesday' (then extended until Thursday)
The Cab Office said 'terribly sorry, we can't, we haven't got them, never had them, no siree, not us.'

In the meantime, Johnson threw a strop saying the Cab Office shouldn't have handed over his messages and sacked his Cab Office appointed and taxpayer paid for lawyers. He wants to appoint his own lawyers, but obvs still wants the taxpayer to pay for them. Then Johnson was caught by Sky News at a US airport (where he had been for a ££££ speaking gig, rather than serving his constituents) they said 'hey, what about these messages' to which he replied that he'd been nothing but helpful, but still it was a stitch up, and 'the rules were followed at all times' - where have we heard that one before?!

Is that about right?

Is that about right?

Yes, thanks for summarising it.

Ah

EXCLUSIVE: Bloomberg has obtained written legal advice from the government‘s top lawyer Sir James Eadie KC to the Cabinet Office

It advises them NOT to hand over “politically sensitive” material about ministers’ private discussions to the Covid inquiry

https://twitter.com/mrjamesob/status/1663626437683707904?s=20

How remarkable that Carrie Johnson’s close friend, reportedly godfather to one of their babies & apparently a Chequers guest during the period under scrutiny should have ‘obtained’ such helpful & selectively quoted ‘advice’…
How can @BloombergUK justify not mentioning this?

Ah, how helpful indeed 🙄

Sounds right.

But somewhere inbetween someone has given something to the police?

I'm sure I didn't dream that 🫣🤔

What have I missed? Is "politically sensitive" some kind of a protected category?
I mean it might be awkward but it's not threatening national security.

& if the messages are "unambiguously irrelevant" to the Inquiry they won't be used or relied upon.

From what I have read most legal people disagree with Eadie but I guess Wickham is being selective with his reporting.

What are the chances of something being political sensitive and simaltaneously irrelevant to the enquiry?

I'd have thought those are exactly the messages the enquiry needs to have.

But they'd be releasing the "politically sensitive" information to Hallett - she has the highest security clearance. It's not as if they'd be handing 1000s of messages to Oakeshott.

"What are the chances of something being political sensitive and simaltaneously irrelevant to the enquiry?"

Agree.
What a bloody farce.

Or is what he is saying that there are one or more other scandals that we don't already have some awareness of that are unrelated to covid that the messages would reveal?

Surely not?

What's the point of a workplace wa where people talk about personal stuff? In most places it would be so quiet, it would be a waste of space. You couldn't use a personal social group in work time surely, especially when taxpayers are paying for the time? That would be very unprofessional.

They must have a professional diary, if they are unavailable for an event people would look on there, no use for wa.

The only reason to have a work wa group is to discuss work. I know from experience of working for a company (for a short time, this was just one thing I disagreed with and refused to join amongst others), that the lines become blurred between acceptable use like bringing stock between branches and unacceptable like cust x needs private and confidential item. I have no doubts that this happens in every workplace, more so when it's on your personal device, so I think those messages are definitely needed to build a picture of what the fuck they were thinking when making decisions that affected the country.

We do seem to have pivoted from the messages are irrelevant to we don’t have the messages to they are about the private/social lives of government employees and giving the inquiry would be invasion of privacy to don’t release politically sensitive stuff since 8am this morning.

And how did nobody in the CO or anywhere inWestminster not realise there would be some sort of lessons learned inquiry after a global pandemic.

How can it be an invasion of privacy unless they were mixing business with pleasure?

I think it is important to remember that being in government is just a bit of jolly japes for the boys, who know what a woman is.

I think it is safe to assume that whatever it is, it will be damning.

And the usuals will be along to tell us not to worry our little heads about it.

Can we stick to one excuse a day though? It’s difficult to catch up otherwise. I’m assuming we’re now back to we do have the messages.

Apparently the Secret Tory will be revealing their identity tomorrow

Yes I saw! Interesting... I always thought it was a spoof account

Our Tory MP has announced he's not standing for re-election tonight (he was a 2019 intake) another one seeing the writing on the wall.

I thought it was a spoof account as well